Theory test for CBT

[Dudeofrude]

So just reading the news and it seems they are introducing theory tests as part of the CBT from 2018?
What do we think of this?
I personally think it's just another money making scam. I dont think The theory test adds anything to driving other than expense, proven by the fact that most seasoned drivers/riders couldn't pass it these days.
I also think this will dramatically reduce the amount of legal youths on mopeds/125s as if they fail it and get told No then theyll just think they may aswell risk riding without it?  After all its not as is they have a license to lose?

[scoobiemandan]

I'm kinda 50/50 on this one.

Everything's a rip off these days and everyone wants money for this and money for that.  On the flip side, education as preparation for going on the road can't be a bad thing can it?  As for failing youths, most that ride without a licence will most likely do so whether or not there is a theory test, it's an unfortunate side to humanity!

[pilninggas]

It stinks. I teach kids aged 15/16 and lots do their CBT (often the first saturday after their 16th birthday) and buy a moped so they can go to college or do an apprenticeship. They often ask me about the rules for doing this (not all parents understand how it works, for some it is the first vehicle the household has ever had). This will create more expense and another hurdle towards getting on the road. The CBT includes the highway code, and the kids do seem to know they need to read it before they go to do the CBT. There has been a surge in kids doing CBTs and getting on bikes, as running a car is prohibitive, putting more barriers up won't help them find employment or do the training that might be most suitable for them. The road safety lobbyists are too short sighted.

[davebike]

I think it will help encorage the repeat CBT riders to take training do a test
I seen the fast food delivery riders often imagrents no knolage of UK road rules OK some don't care but a grounding in the theory before CBT can only help

I wish this site had spell check or didn't block mine !

DW

[BBROWN1664]

Bikes used to be about cheap transport for the masses. Back in the 80's (OK I know it was a long time ago) there used to be a big row of bikes parked outside my school which grew as the year went on as more and more 5th year students turned 16. When I got to college there were even more as many of us used it as transport in from the villages where we lived rather than rely on the unreliable busses and trains.
Suddenly we hit a wall where, for reasons I haven't quite grasped, parents wouldn't let the kids ride bikes. Instead, more were ferried to school by car creating more and more traffic on the roads, making biking more dangerous in the parents eyes.
Around the same time, CBT was introduced making it harder and costlier to actually get on the road. When I was 16, all we did was wait for the clock to strike midnight before we were off riding into the distance. Because so many of our friends and family had bikes, we knew how to control a bike. Because we all rode pushbikes on the road, we all knew the rules of the road. Now, many kids have never ridden a pushbike on the road. Many have not got a friend with a bike to "have a go on down the woods" before they get the keys to the CBT provided bike meaning they wobble all over the place initially.

The other suggestion on the news today was to allow learner drivers on the motorway network and to have a minimum amount of driver training before they can take their test. How will the hours be logged? When I was 17, I never had any instructor based driving or riding lessons. Instead, I drove my own car with my dad or friends who had passed their test sitting beside me in the car. At 18 I knew it all. My dad on the other had thought his driving was superior and mine was a problem. I went away and did my IAM Advanced test then to prove him wrong. He has never complained about my driving in the 30 years since.
If they bring in the minimum 100+ hours they are talking about, that will cost parents £2000+ in driving lessons. Add this to the cost of buying and insuring a car, and bikes may actually make a comeback as the cheaper alternative.

[slappy]

Theory test does not seem to make car drivers any better so cannot see it helping in any way for bikes, just another hurdle to getting a bike license. People should be encouraged to get a bike license to reduce traffic and parking problems, there is a cycle to work scheme, a motorcycle to work scheme should be in place as well.
 
As for letting learners on the motorway isn`t that what PassPlus was meant to include?
 
 

[BBROWN1664]

and the hazard perception test is easy to fail if you have ridden/driven for any length of time as you see hazards earlier than the test will allow.

[darrsi]

Shows what i know, i already thought it was part of it?


I think it's a good thing, it encourages people to learn road signs and the do's and don't's of the road, how can that possibly be a bad thing?


I would imagine that due to the influx of outsiders coming into the country they have been thought about as well to learn everything about our roads and signs, which are no doubt different in every country.


And as suggested, if you're now gonna have to do the theory test and CBT then you may as well just go and take the full test and be done with it.


Gets a thumbs up from me, the more knowledge newer bikers can have can only be totally beneficial to them, and others.

[darrsi]

and the hazard perception test is easy to fail if you have ridden/driven for any length of time as you see hazards earlier than the test will allow.

Weird you should say that, 'cos i did an online hazard test years ago and the tests idea of a hazard were very different from what i was seeing.
The same as when i sit in the passenger seat of a car, squirming, with my feet firmly planted and one hand on the dashboard, because the driver seems totally oblivious to all the dangers ahead that i'm seeing. Some peoples blissful ignorance to their surroundings when driving simply scares the shit out of me, which as you can imagine makes me instantly sit in the back straight away, firmly seat belted up, whenever possible. 

[Dave48]

So many of the replies on here have struck a chord with me!
As youngsters in the distant past we all rode bicycles so by the time we were 16 already had some "road sense"-indeed quite a few of us did the ROSPA Cycling Proficiency Test(still got my certificate but lost the badge years ago).
In those heady days of the 60s with petrol at 30p a gallon & insurance for about £1-50 from the Co-Op man we hit the road(sometimes literally) without any training
& if we were lucky survived to learn what to do & what not to!
Training is only worthwhile if new skills are acquired and put into practice. I doubt like many on here that I could pass the hazard perception test without learning the "method" required.
The route to a full motorcycle licence has been made long,expensive & involved to the extent that many potential future riders are put off altogether,especially if they have never experienced the freedom of two-wheeling-either pedal powered or motor assisted, & wait until they re 17 & go for a car.
As the roads become increasingly congested you would think any right thinking government would do everything possible to encourage use of 2-wheeled transport[size=78%] . [/size]
[/size][size=78%]Car ownership has grown exponentially since the 60s,along with increased air pollution from traffic delays/jams. [/size]
[/size][size=78%]In my opinion the people I know who learnt to ride young turned into far better car/van/lorry drivers.[/size]
[/size][size=78%]I know we live in a risk averse culture but that doesnt stop people overeating/smoking/drinking to excess.[/size]
[/size][size=78%]If they can introduce a scheme which provides training for life on the roads which isnt beyond the pocket of the average citizen-lets go for it. Of course new/learner drivers need motorway tuition-these roads have been with us since the 50s.[/size]

[BBROWN1664]

Of course new/learner drivers need motorway tuition-these roads have been with us since the 50s.

Lets say for example, you live on the Isle of Wight, or in deepest darkest Cornwall, or West Wales, or in the North of Jockland etc etc. Would you want to spend all that time and money to get to a motorway so you can take a lesson?
If you live near the M25, would you want inexperienced drivers mixing it with all the foreign trucks on a dark wet evening when your trying to get home from work?

Motorways have been around a long time but before someone has passed their test is not the time to practise on them. I have nothing against teaching people on motorways (Pass Plus I thin it is called) but this is optional and not mandatory at the moment so maybe they should introduce a two/three/four stage practical car driving test too to make things more even with the bikes?

Phase 1 @ 17 years old, only allowed to drive cars up-to 50bhp and not allowed on dual carriageways or motorways. No audio systems allowed to be turned on in the car. You want more, do phase 2.
Phase 2 @ 21 years old or two years after Phase 1 pass, allowed up to 100bhp and now allowed on dual carriageways and motorways but still no ICE
Phase 3 @ 24 years old or two years after Phase 2 pass, unlimited power cars and ICE allowed

anyone caught driving a car too powerful or with the stereo on when they are not meant to have them will get instant driving bans and forced to retake test etc.

[darrsi]

I've no doubt most of us had push bikes when we were younger, but it was certainly different times back then.
I know that i would not personally want to get on a bike and ride out on the roads of London these days, it's just madness.

[Dudeofrude]

Of course new/learner drivers need motorway tuition-these roads have been with us since the 50s.

Lets say for example, you live on the Isle of Wight, or in deepest darkest Cornwall, or West Wales, or in the North of Jockland etc etc. Would you want to spend all that time and money to get to a motorway so you can take a lesson?
If you live near the M25, would you want inexperienced drivers mixing it with all the foreign trucks on a dark wet evening when your trying to get home from work?

Motorways have been around a long time but before someone has passed their test is not the time to practise on them. I have nothing against teaching people on motorways (Pass Plus I thin it is called) but this is optional and not mandatory at the moment so maybe they should introduce a two/three/four stage practical car driving test too to make things more even with the bikes?

Phase 1 @ 17 years old, only allowed to drive cars up-to 50bhp and not allowed on dual carriageways or motorways. No audio systems allowed to be turned on in the car. You want more, do phase 2.
Phase 2 @ 21 years old or two years after Phase 1 pass, allowed up to 100bhp and now allowed on dual carriageways and motorways but still no ICE
Phase 3 @ 24 years old or two years after Phase 2 pass, unlimited power cars and ICE allowed

anyone caught driving a car too powerful or with the stereo on when they are not meant to have them will get instant driving bans and forced to retake test etc.

The fundimental problem with that theory is the same as the current motorbike test, it's based on age, not experience.

I find it stupid that you can currently pass yourate bike test at 17 then again at 21, have 4 years experience and still not be trusted with anything stronger than 47bhp....... or pass your test on your 24th birthday and go out and buy a 200bhp superbike!!

I agree with the concept I just think it should revert back to the old system where in you are limited by experience rather than age.
15 bhp on a L plates, 30 after a test, 70 after 2 years, unlimited after 3?  Or something along them lines

After all who says a 24 year old is anymore capable ( or responsible) than a 17yo who's had the exact same amount of training?

[darrsi]

Just a matter of statistics i think, as you well know you're more likely to do something very daft through stupidity or inexperience as a teenager than you would a bit later on.
Everyone is different obviously but from an insurance point of view the figures probably speak volumes.

[mtread]

I agree with Darrsi. What's the problem ? Car learners cannot take their driving test and go out unaccompanied until they've passed the theory test and proven that they know the rules of the road. Why should bikers be able to go out unaccompanied without? The Theory test isn't difficult, is £23 and takes what - 30 minutes?


What looks worrying to me is the proviso for car drivers that they will have to have a minimum of tuition before taking their test, and they are talking about 120 hours. As an experienced biker, I passed my car test first time after 10 lessons. Some people will be ready way before 120 hours, and some will never be ready no matter how many ......

[BBROWN1664]

@agree Dude

the point I was making was obviously missed. The point was if the car test was as hard to do and get to "unlimited" status, there would be an outcry but as bikes are a minority transport they get picked on unfailrly. The reason used for picking on bike is related to the accident statistics for KSI's in bike accidents vs. car accidents and the fact that proportionally we are involved in more accidents than car drivers.
Some of this is true. Some is bollocks. Car drivers have a lot more accidents than recorded, its just that they can still drive away so goes unrecorded.

If drivers were made to spend 12 months (or more) on a bike before they were allowed behind the wheel of a car, the number of bike accidents would go down as the myopic ones would suddenly be more aware of their surroundings and look out for bikes.

how about this revised route then?

CBT @ 16 and a moped
Phase 1 @ 17 years old and a minimum of 12 months after CBT date, only allowed to drive cars up-to 50bhp and not allowed on dual carriageways or motorways. No audio systems allowed to be turned on in the car. You want more, do phase 2.
Phase 2. Two years after Phase 1 pass, allowed up to 100bhp and now allowed on dual carriageways and motorways but still no ICE
Phase 3. Four years after Phase 1 pass, unlimited power cars and ICE allowed

anyone caught driving a car too powerful or with the stereo on when they are not meant to have them will get instant driving bans and forced to retake test etc.

and for bikes
CBT @ 16 and a moped
At 17, a 125 on L plates but once test passed (lets call it phase 1 again) up to 50bhp and not allowed on dual carriageways or motorways
Phase 2. Two years after Phase 1 pass, allowed up to 100bhp and now allowed on dual carriageways and motorways.
Phase 3. Four years after Phase 1 pass, unlimited power bikes

If they levelled the playing field (as they used to have) then bikes will be a lot more popular.

[fazersharp]

and the hazard perception test is easy to fail if you have ridden/driven for any length of time as you see hazards earlier than the test will allow.

Weird you should say that, 'cos i did an online hazard test years ago and the tests idea of a hazard were very different from what i was seeing.
 

This was exactly my experiance a few years ago when my daughter was doing the on line practice ones I was seeing everything as a hazard and clikcing far too eairly than the "game " wanted me to but after a few gos I learnt how to play the game.
There was stuff like a bus in a layby with its indicater on to pull out, well for me that is not a hazard - that is a bus telliing me he is pulling out, however what I would call a hazard is a bus in a layby with no indactors on, cause you know the focer is going to pull out without warning.
Car drivers who wear a baseball cap or a flat cap whilst driving - hazard.
All Green, orange cars - hazard
All BMW, Audi - hazard
A wet leaf - time to go home

[mtread]

If drivers were made to spend 12 months (or more) on a bike before they were allowed behind the wheel of a car

But we all know that's not going to happen, don't we ?


As for restricting new car drivers to low powered cars, well insurance ensures that already happens (unless you are a young Premier League footballer of course). Causing an accident (to a bike) is usually determined by the blunt impact of the car, irrespective of power.

[tommyardin]

I think it will help encorage the repeat CBT riders to take training do a test
I seen the fast food delivery riders often imagrents no knolage of UK road rules OK some don't care but a grounding in the theory before CBT can only help

I wish this site had spell check or didn't block mine !

DW

You don't need a spellchecker Dave you need Knowledge and Immigrants .
There is nothing worse than Unknolagable imagents riding around on bikes.
Only joking mate    my spelling would be the same with out the jolly old checker keeping its beady eye on me.

[tommyardin]

If drivers were made to spend 12 months (or more) on a bike before they were allowed behind the wheel of a car

But we all know that's not going to happen, don't we ?


As for restricting new car drivers to low powered cars, well insurance ensures that already happens (unless you are a young Premier League footballer of course). Causing an accident (to a bike) is usually determined by the blunt impact of the car, irrespective of power.

The more powerful one are actually more dangerous as the bast---s can keep up with us 

[Dudeofrude]

Also it's worth noting that according to nearly every bit of research that's been done the most dangerous age group on motorbikes is 31-40 year olds. More riders of that age die on the road every year than any other, followed closely by 41-50 year olds.

Similar story with cars but with a higher age group. Over 70s are actually the most dangerous people on the road ( which we all know) probably due to the fact that most of them passed in the 60s and haven't had any kind of testing since.

So really what you can take from this is if you a driver/rider between the ages of 24 to 30 or 51 to 60 then your insurance should be free haha

[celticdog]

The fundamental problem is that we have too many people on this small island- mostly congregated in the south but around all UK city conurbations.
You can hardly get anywhere these days, cities and A roads, motorways in gridlock. The real reasons for all the hurdles to vehicle licences are
to slow down/reduce the number of people on the roads and as someone stated, a massive money earner for Gov UK. Don't get me started on public transport 
What we need is some kind of populist revolution . . . wait didn't we just have one!?!     And another thing, who's hoarding all the jet packs? The technology has been around for 40 years, why aren't we all on jetpacks?

[Bretty]

I think moped riders are the most dangerous things on the road and the CBT is a bit of a joke.


although I live in central London where experience and having your wits about you counts for everything. In towns and villages and out and about it's probably not such a big deal.


When I took my CBT, 7yrs ago the three other lads taking the course with me were all sent home at midday because they couldn't read a highway code!  The instructor refused to take them out because they could not recognise a sign for 'no bicycles', 'no entry' or 'no overtaking'.


I think street signs can tell you so much about what is coming up and I actually welcome this testing.

[Dudeofrude]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/dvsa-sets-out-proposals-to-improve-motorcycle-training


Seems there more too it that initially reported. Here's the full story.

[slappy]

Also it's worth noting that according to nearly every bit of research that's been done the most dangerous age group on motorbikes is 31-40 year olds. More riders of that age die on the road every year than any other, followed closely by 41-50 year olds.

Thats probably because the average age  for bikers is quite high anyway,  how many young bikers do you see at any bike meet?