Anger over motorbike 'swerve test'

[metalmonkey]

Found this on the BBC web site, any thought? Link is to a video report.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm

[husky03]

something on the news this morning with a women who came off during the swerve bit and ended up braking a few bones-she's gonna sue dsa!

[gruntygiggles]

Saw this on the news this morning. I think the main issue people have is that no concessions are made for bad weather and there are a number of reports of people being very badly injured after falls when doing this in bad weather. Now, put me on the test in bad rain or other poor conditions and ask me to do that where I don't think it's safe to do so and I'll say no and ride it a safe and steady pace that befits the conditions. If they then fail me, I'll see them in court. Not the examiners fault, but the DSA needs to iron this one out. It's good in principal to always be looking at ways of teaching new riders and drivers the reality of using the roads and the skills to cope with different situations, but this module is, at the moment potentially dangerous and so needs to be altered somewhat!

[yorkie_chris]

Well it's basically a load of b0llocks anyway. Why back down to the EU all the time?

[sinbad]

Examiners and instructors saying accidents happen when a rider grabs the brake when they shouldn't. Let's remember that you're making a conscious decision to ride a bike here, so you accept that any mistake on your part which leads to an accident is your own fault. Surely it's better for your mistake to happen on a car park than on the road.

[Hockeynut]

None Video article link >here< (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067212.stm)

I appreciate it's helping equip skills of motorcyclists. The problem is when they do it in the wet, apparently this part of the test is fine in the dry. But as they point out, car tests are postponed when it's bad weather....

New motorbike test is under fire


http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45633000/jpg/_45633115_photo.jpg The new test was introduced in April

The government is under pressure to rethink its new motorcycle test following a series of crashes in the first few weeks of its use.
Some instructors blame a new "swerve test", which they say is dangerous - particularly in the wet.
Bikers e-mailing BBC News said it could be difficult to safely achieve the 50km/h speed the manoeuvre requires.
The Driving Standards Agency (DSA) said the test was needed to help reduce deaths of motorcyclists on the roads.
It said the test was designed by professionals in conjunction with the motorcycle industry and 300 trials were carried out before it was brought in.
During the test, learners have to reach 50km/h (31.2mph), then perform a swerve, on special test centre tracks.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gif http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/start_quote_rb.gif A brake and swerve manoeuvre on a wet road is fraught with danger for even an experienced motorcyclist http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif


Jeff Stone
British Motorcyclists Federation

But some instructors say that if riders brake and swerve at the same time they are likely to come off, particularly in the wet.
The new test was brought in at the end of April and in the first three and a half weeks there were 15 incidents during the exam, with at least one rider left with broken bones.
The Motorcycle Action Group says it has warned the government that the test is unsafe and asked for changes.
Its national chairman, Paul Turner, told the BBC News website the new test had been brought in without enough consultation or consideration for riders.
"We don't mind improvements in the test which will make for better riders, but putting people at risk during the test is ludicrous."
He said the new test had been very poorly implemented as many test centres were not ready, and the number of centres had been reduced from 200 to 60.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gif http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/start_quote_rb.gif I have been riding for 30 years and I would not want to do the test they have to do http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif


Barry Kenward
Instructor

Jeff Stone, of the British Motorcyclists Federation, said: "There is no real argument with the actual test, but the DSA really do have to take note of 'real world' conditions.
"A brake and swerve manoeuvre on a wet road is fraught with danger for even an experienced motorcyclist, so there needs to be a safer option for inclement weather conditions."
Mr Stone pointed out that car driving tests were postponed in snowy or icy conditions.
"A motorcyclist's competency can be best judged in the dry," he said. "Wet conditions introduce a chance element that should not be part of the test."
Unsafe acceleration?
Phil Woolley, 28, of Liverpool, told the BBC News website that he recently failed his test after completing the swerve slightly below the required 50km/h.
But the size of test centre sites made it difficult to reach the speed without accelerating unsafely, he said.
"Do it at a controlled speed and you will almost certainly fail," he said. "Or you just floor it as hard as you can and there is a good chance you will pass, but also a risk you will come off."
The hazard avoidance manoeuvre was the only part of the test he had failed, Mr Woolley said.
"I know I can ride a bike, so it's frustrating," he said.
Barry Kenward, deputy chairman of the Driving Instructors Democratic Union, has put in a Freedom of Information request to find out how many accidents have occurred on the test so far.
He said: "In the dry the test is fine but the stopping distance is not enough for the stop to be carried out safely when it is wet.
"I have been riding for 30 years and I would not want to do the test they have to do."

[Brettus]

Personally I think asking a new rider to swerve is asking for trouble, as we all appreciate, finer control and better stability come with experience and countersteering, be it consciously done or subconscious but still it significantly improves the ride, but a new user will do what they THINK they should be doing, turn the handlebars one way then the other and add braking into that theres no wonder people fall off.

[sinbad]

Personally I think asking a new rider to swerve is asking for trouble, as we all appreciate, finer control and better stability come with experience and countersteering, be it consciously done or subconscious but still it significantly improves the ride, but a new user will do what they THINK they should be doing, turn the handlebars one way then the other and add braking into that theres no wonder people fall off.

Doesn't that just emphasise how dangerous it is to be on the road with just a CBT? Better attempting and failing this test element than thinking you know what you're doing on the road.

Playing devil's advocate a little there, but if the test was devised and meant to be run in all conditions then surely that means that rather than being too hard in the wet, it's simply too easy in the dry.

[Jamiebridges123]

While you and I may be able to this on our own bikes, you try doing it on a CG or a CBF125 or a YBR125... those little skinny tyres and bad enough in the dry, let alone the wet... they also have a top speed of 28mph so getting to 31 can be a bit of a problem..

[21QUEST]

+ 1 to all what Sinbad has written.

I have no problem with that part of the test. Current test is obviously too easy to pass. A lot of folks who probably shouldn't have a licence appear to have one.


Ben

[arcdef]

I am going to throw a spanner in the works here, you say the ability to swerve comes with experience, and yes i agree, however compare it to learning to drive a car, people take months and months learning to drive, people (including myself) take to a bike for the first time on a Monday and have a licence by Friday that same week. 1 week of experience compared to many months with a car?

Ive never understood that, and yes ill happily admit that after passing my test i was a very bad rider but would like to say im alot better in the few months i ahve been riding.

Ok so im not really sure where im going with this, but do you see where im coming from, how can you expect anyone to develop the skill required to safely ride a motorbike within 1 week, surely it should be spread out much more to build up a certain level of confidence before being unleashed on the road?

Hope that made sense!

[21QUEST]

I am going to throw a spanner in the works here, you say the ability to swerve comes with experience, and yes i agree, however compare it to learning to drive a car, people take months and months learning to drive, people (including myself) take to a bike for the first time on a Monday and have a licence by Friday that same week. 1 week of experience compared to many months with a car?

Ive never understood that, and yes ill happily admit that after passing my test i was a very bad rider but would like to say im alot better in the few months i ahve been riding.

Ok so im not really sure where im going with this, but do you see where im coming from, how can you expect anyone to develop the skill required to safely ride a motorbike within 1 week, surely it should be spread out much more to build up a certain level of confidence before being unleashed on the road?

Hope that made sense!

That is a different can of beans you have opened now...folks would complain of increased costs :p ;)


Ben

[Spiderman]

I'm with Sinbad on this. If all these learners are not learining the right skills to handle this maneouvre then far better for them to fall off in the safety of a test centre than in the road where the following bus or lorry wouldn't be able to stop. Who are they gonna sue then?

This attitude of "suing" the DSA is just madness tbh, after all they are learning a new skill, one which they know has its associated dangers. Its like learning an extreme sport, you go into it knowing that you will learn from experience and any expecrience you can gain in a safe and controlled environment is better than stuff you learn by filling your pants with brown stuff at the same time.

And ive never heard of car tests being cacelled for "bad weather" in my life, not unless its snowing so hard the road system closes down that is. Otherwise why cancel the tests? In a big box with heaters and wipers, what more could you need in bad weather?

[ranathari]

CBT could do what you want if you enforced a minimum length of time you had to be on L-plates. I took over a year between doing the CBT and finally taking the test and I learnt so much more that way, plus I had all my newbie crashes (mainly grabbing the front brake) on a cheapo CBR125 rather than on a bike I actually cared about.

Still wouldn't do anything about the mid-life crisis muppets who buy a gixxer/R1/fireblade and think they're ****-hot after a week's training.

[arcdef]

Lots of my friends had car tests cancelled due to heavy rain, wind and fog etc aswell as snow!

Stupid if you ask me, how can they expect you to drive freely no matter the weather if you cant do a test in it?

[Viney]

I am going to throw a spanner in the works here, you say the ability to swerve comes with experience, and yes i agree, however compare it to learning to drive a car, people take months and months learning to drive, people (including myself) take to a bike for the first time on a Monday and have a licence by Friday that same week. 1 week of experience compared to many months with a car?

Ive never understood that, and yes ill happily admit that after passing my test i was a very bad rider but would like to say im alot better in the few months i ahve been riding.

Ok so im not really sure where im going with this, but do you see where im coming from, how can you expect anyone to develop the skill required to safely ride a motorbike within 1 week, surely it should be spread out much more to build up a certain level of confidence before being unleashed on the road?

Hope that made sense!Agreed in this stement, hwoever put it into hours and you get around the same hourly experience rate as you do on a weeks DAS. Say the average person takes 25 lessons beofre thier test, thats 25 Hours. On my Das i was on the road/bike for 5 hours a day that would equate to 25 hours, so the same in riding experience. I know that you may do extra in a car with firneds.family, but its essentaily the same.

No one has noticed that they require you to accelerate to 50kph! When did we go metric in britan then? At 31.5 mph you would be breaking the speed limit on a urban road! Its typical european bol**. Remember this when you vote next week folks!

[ranathari]

This attitude of "suing" the DSA is just madness tbh, after all they are learning a new skill, one which they know has its associated dangers. Its like learing an extreme sport, you go into it knowing that you will learn from experience and any expecrience you can gain in a safe and controlled environment is better than stuff yourn by filling your pants with brown stuff at the same time.

I think it's reasonable to sue the DSA if you've broken a bone or two while crashing during the off-road portion of the test. Surely the examiner has a duty to assess if the conditions are safe for the test to proceed and should call it off if it's too wet, which seems to be what caused that rider to break her leg.

[fizzwheel]

IAnd ive never heard of car tests being cacelled for "bad weather" in my life, not unless its snowing so hard the road system closes down that is.

My brothers got cancelled, mind you it was really thick freezing fog and you couldnt see more than a few metres in front of you.

I agree with Sinbad to, its not the fault of the test its the fault of the people doing the instructing.

One instructor said all his pupils bar one had passed and the ones that he had seen falling off were pulling on the front brake whilst in the middle of the swerve procedure.

We all know what happens if you grab a massive handful of front brake whilst turning on a wet road. These people who are falling arent being taught properly or simply arent ready to take their test.

[arcdef]

yeah same amount of hours, but you have no time to reflect on what you have learnt in a week, at least with it split up more you can get home and think hmmm yeah next time i wont do this or il try that and you will improve.

The idea about having a cbt for a set amount of time before the test is a good one.

[ranathari]

yeah same amount of hours, but you have no time to reflect on what you have learnt in a week, at least with it split up more you can get home and think hmmm yeah next time i wont do this or il try that and you will improve.

The idea about having a cbt for a set amount of time before the test is a good one.

You could also do it the Finnish way where there's more than one test and they're also spread out over a period of time. My girlfriend said she had to do a skid test on a road that was hosed down before she got her licence!

[Spiderman]

Lots of my friends had car tests cancelled due to heavy rain, wind and fog etc aswell as snow!

Stupid if you ask me, how can they expect you to drive freely no matter the weather if you cant do a test in it?

That is just totally pathetic imo, as you say how are they supposed to do this by themselves if they aint given the courgae to do it in exam conditions.


No one has noticed that they require you to accelerate to 50kph! When did we go metric in britan then? At 31.5 mph you would be breaking the speed limit on a urban road! Its typical european bol**. Remember this when you vote next week folks!

yeh i noticed that too, as you say cos its a euro directive its been implemented in KPH. I for one cat wait till we start driving on the other side of the road too, will make the commute in the mornings far more interesting anyway. We can randomly play the "avoid the old git who forgot what side of the road we are supposed to use" game ;)

[sinbad]

The idea about having a cbt for a set amount of time before the test is a good one.

Is it?

If you couldn't pass this test on a 125 because you're under prepared or lacking tuition, then how would you be safer riding one on the road on your own? The "likely" mistake is only going to be all the more costly.

[hindle8907]

there asking you to do somthing to pass what on the on road part you would fail for !! i did it first go in the rain .... was fun acutally

and i passed on a 125cc

[Jayneflakes]

This both inspires me and worries me. I am hoping to take my test quite soon, not only do I face a long ride to the particular test centre to do this part one test, I have to ride through Bristol just to get there! That will be fun. :smt013

I have already learned the swerve move out on the roads due to rude, ignorant road users not allowing me the room to ride safely. I have been pushed into the pavement by Chavs speeding past, had to apply an emergency stop due to a tart on a phone not stopping at a give way and had people change lanes, pushing in front of me because they have forgotten how to look in a mirror. :smt120

When these things happened to me the first time, I got home shaking and I admit that I cried a bit because I was scared. A bit of confidence gained riding on L plates and I think I could swerve around an oil tanker now. :-dd

My partner was a motorcycle instructor for close to sixteen years and has trained me up to a suitable level, however even she has expressed concern about some of the tests requirements now. Not because difficult moves, but entirely because of the lack of specialist test centres. My back side is numb after a twenty mile ride on a CG125, having to complete a test and then ride twenty miles back home is more of a concern to me than swerving to avoid an obstacle. :smt088

I think I will be nailing a cushion to my seat... :smt077

[Spiderman]

I think it's reasonable to sue the DSA if you've broken a bone or two while crashing during the off-road portion of the test. Surely the examiner has a duty to assess if the conditions are safe for the test to proceed and should call it off if it's too wet, which seems to be what caused that rider to break her leg.
Disagree with you here, Fizz saved me typing my reason why....


I agree with Sinbad to, its not the fault of the test its the fault of the people doing the instructing.

One instructor said all his pupils bar one had passed and the ones that he had seen falling off were pulling on the front brake whilst in the middle of the swerve procedure.

We all know what happens if you grab a massive handful of front brake whilst turning on a wet road. These people who are falling arent being taught properly or simply arent ready to take their test.


And as for this, i was gonna refer to it earlier but didn't think anyone would know what i was on about. I saw this on Top Gear once, where they wanted to know if there was a reason why so many Finnish drivers are so good at the rallying. And they found out jusy why.
You could also do it the Finnish way where there's more than one test and they're also spread out over a period of time. My girlfriend said she had to do a skid test on a road that was hosed down before she got her licence!

Now apart from the costs being the possible restricting factor, why are tests not as all encompasing as this? Even to the simplest variations, like driving at night before you pass your test, or even driving on motorways.

[ranathari]

Disagree with you here, Fizz saved me typing my reason why....

Fair enough but I think it's fairly trivial to argue that the examiner has a duty of care towards people taking the test, so I'd be surprised if she doesn't win the case.


Now apart from the costs being the possible restricting factor, why are tests not as all encompasing as this? Even to the simplest variations, like driving at night before you pass your test, or even driving on motorways.

Because people regard driving as an absolute right rather than a privilege.

[Spiderman]

I disagree with the instructor having "a duty of care" since when you pass there aint gonna be no-one "caring" about you but yourself. So the instrutcor has a duty to educate you enough to pass the swerve part of the test in the same way he's educated you to pass the emergency stop part of the test.

I saw people fall off doing figure of 8s in the car park on 125s, does that mean the figure of 8 should also now be banned or a subject to sue over?

its learning a new skillthe instrutcors job is to give the training, guidance and confidence that you can do it. if you go into it and panic and grab the front brake too hard then you would do the same in real road conditions and end up having a crash. At least here you're only avoiding cones. Get it wrong too many times in the training and you may not want to be on a bike, get it wrong once on the road and you may not be around to make that decision again.

[Stu]

While you and I may be able to this on our own bikes, you try doing it on a CG or a CBF125 or a YBR125... those little skinny tyres and bad enough in the dry, let alone the wet... they also have a top speed of 28mph so getting to 31 can be a bit of a problem..I think you're getting very confused.
Am I not right in thinking this swerve test is part of the A1 licence for 500cc bikes not 50 cc bikes that are restricted to 30mph?

[Owenski]

reading through the posts Ive got;

+1 to Arcdef, Sinbad/Spiderman and ranathari's first posts lol.

Bottle and glass me if you will, but I think this test is actually a good thing. If you cant do a simple swerve wet or dry you shouldnt be on the roads on a bike. end of.
If you cant do it then you clearly need more time and practice on a cheaper less deadly machine simply getting used to avoiding manholes/white lines and just bad tarmac is essential in riding. As a city commuter I have to aviod these obsticals daily in year round conditions and I do so, so far with 100% sucess.

and I am certain that is because;
First I learnt to ride (I did my CBT to get on the road and then had the DT for a year)
Second I took my test (Even with the experiance I had I took a 3 day course so that I could iron out the bad habbits).
Third after passing I went out and got the SV. A year on and I've never even dropped it.

Now I dont think I'm better than anybody else I dont think Im more sensible than anyone else I sure as hell dont think I'm lucky. What I did was learnt to ride a bike, and get myself some road sense (I've noticed missing from most new riders).

These people IMHO cant ride, shouldnt ride and deserve to fail. These are the people who havn't ridden much these are the ones who wont ride much but will still buy powerful 750+cc motorcycle then go out and introduce themselves to a tree because they dont have the experiance to dodge a manhole and instead straightline the following corner. Or as I've heard them most affectionatly called, statistics!

[wizurd]

not sure whether asking them to do the swerve section in the wet at the same speed is truly representative of normal road riding. I'm a newbie so got a long way to go but the only way i'll get any better is by getting on with riding. Having them swerve around some cones once is almost pointless, they might get it right once but then bin it a week later. Being out on the ride and getting "road sense" is the only way. But then theres the added dangers of other road users. No test is ever going to be good enough, roads are always going to be dangerous and thats just the way it is

[Hockeynut]

The trouble is that I see. If it's OK at 50kph in the dry, but not in the wet, then why would you be riding at the same speed in worse conditions? Most of us would know to take it easier... but the people taking their test are forced to take it at a higher speed, they don't have that choice of the sensible speed. :(

[Kuze]

The trouble is that I see. If it's OK at 50kph in the dry, but not in the wet, then why would you be riding at the same speed in worse conditions? Most of us would know to take it easier... but the people taking their test are forced to take it at a higher speed, they don't have that choice of the sensible speed. :(

Exactly, imho i think the test is stupid because it lacks "common sense".

Who would take a turn at exactly the same speed in glorious sunny day conditions when compared with sheet rain and high winds? Answer only a bloody idiot. When i ride i use my common sense and adjust my riding to the conditions accordingly. Werent people arguing in another thread to let people drive at their own pace when out with friends? So why on a test to get your license should you be forced out of your comfort zone? While i'm confident i could pass a "swerve" test I'd rather not.

I'm so glad i passed my test 3 years ago and dont have to put up with this rubbish these days. If i were paraniod I'd say the governement just doesnt want bikers on the road :(.

(BTW thats 25k miles in all weather including getting caught out in a snow storm or two)

[ranathari]

The trouble is that I see. If it's OK at 50kph in the dry, but not in the wet, then why would you be riding at the same speed in worse conditions? Most of us would know to take it easier... but the people taking their test are forced to take it at a higher speed, they don't have that choice of the sensible speed. :(

It's a swerve: you don't get to choose what speed you want to swerve at in real life irrespective of what the weather's like.

[fizzwheel]

The trouble is that I see. If it's OK at 50kph in the dry, but not in the wet, then why would you be riding at the same speed in worse conditions? Most of us would know to take it easier... but the people taking their test are forced to take it at a higher speed, they don't have that choice of the sensible speed. :(

OK hows this scenario....

Your riding on a NSL ( 60mph ) your riding at a reduced pace because its raining say 40mph...

You approach a side road, you see a car there and you slow down some more, say to 31.5mph... car hasnt seen you and pulls out in front of you....

Now you've done the swerve part of your test on a wet road, so you turn the bike and then brake to a standstill all nice and controlled and you damage neither your bike, yourself or the other vehicle, but maybe your pants...

Or

You havent done the swerve test so you dont know how to avoid an obstacle, so you grab a massive handful of front brake then either fall off or hit the car..

Or are you going to ride everywhere in the wet at 20mph...

Or

Maybe you just dont go out if its raining or the forecast says its likely to rain...

[sinbad]

OK hows this scenario....

Your riding on a NSL ( 60mph ) your riding at a reduced pace because its raining say 40mph...

You approach a side road, you see a car there and you slow down some more, say to 31.5mph... car hasnt seen you and pulls out in front of you....

Now you've done the swerve part of your test on a wet road, so you turn the bike and then brake to a standstill all nice and controlled and you damage neither your bike, yourself or the other vehicle, but maybe your pants...

Or

You havent done the swerve test so you dont know how to avoid an obstacle, so you grab a massive handful of front brake then either fall off or hit the car..

Or are you going to ride everywhere in the wet at 20mph...

Or

Maybe you just dont go out if its raining or the forecast says its likely to rain...

Or maybe you do 45 through every busy town because it's dry and you managed to do the swerve test in the wet at 30.

The test has obviously been devised with wet conditions in mind. Yes it will be harder to drop the bike by snatching the brakes in the dry- logically they should make the course even tighter when it's dry rather than easier when it's wet. That would ruffle a few feathers with MAG and the like.

[Owenski]

Exactly, imho i think the test is stupid because it lacks "common sense".

Who would take a turn at exactly the same speed in glorious sunny day conditions when compared with sheet rain and high winds? Answer only a bloody idiot. When i ride i use my common sense and adjust my riding to the conditions accordingly. Werent people arguing in another thread to let people drive at their own pace when out with friends? So why on a test to get your license should you be forced out of your comfort zone? While i'm confident i could pass a "swerve" test I'd rather not.

I'm so glad i passed my test 3 years ago and dont have to put up with this rubbish these days. If i were paraniod I'd say the governement just doesnt want bikers on the road :(.

(BTW thats 25k miles in all weather including getting caught out in a snow storm or two)

I understand all the similar points to this one above but maybe you can explain something in case I am missing it.
The bike test is a test, its meant to be testing to single out those capable from those incapable. The test is surly aimed to take place at normal road speed. Hence the 30mph, that is acceptable wether it is wet or dry we'll all ride almost any road at 30mph. I dont believe anyone here would honestly ride along at 20/25mph I've certainly never seen a biker travel at that speed anywhere ever except maybe in snow. (but saying that I did my CBT in snow and took my test in icey conditions it was very alomst called off but we were given the final choice).
ANNYWAYYY
Point still remains, that the swerve test is what would be expected of a capable rider. Its already been said that its not a case of its too risky in the wet I just think its a piece of **** in the dry.

The previous test was far too easy and too many knuckle heads passed it. Now the test is more reasonable so some people are failing and everyone is jumping on the back of the DSA.
I think bravo DSA, better late than never making the bike test harder like this. It has no doubt saved lives and more importantly for us which have already passed its cut our insurance premiums. Now we wont have as many muppets claiming for the damage when they come off doing a simple manvourer.

[Stingo]

My view (not that I'll have to ever do a test again) is that the core issue here is that this thing is forming part of a complete test. We can all 'what if' for ever and a day. This thing is still part of a test where people are supposed to be trained. If they are getting hurt then there is a problem somewhere. Now, we can hypothesise up the bl00dy khyber till the sun comes down and goes back up the other side that the people doing the test are not up to it etc and that they shouldn't be allowed on the road.
But hang on for a moment. Maybe they aren't being taught properly. And maybe, just maybe, somebody's good idea hasn't actually been thought through properly. It's a training thing. People shouldn't be getting hurt...end of.

Me? I haven't got a scoody-do what this special 'swerve' is...and I've been on two wheels for 33 years. Does that mean that I should now get myself on a course and risk life and limb? I'd rather stick wasps up my jacksie!! You must be having a laugh.

People are getting hurt during training?

Stop doing the training and revise it.

Ok...I'll get back to sleep mode.:smt015

[SoulKiss]

Right - I don't think that the "swerve" is an issue.

What IS an issue is the mandated speed.

Think about it, you have just done a 180degree bend, while concentrating to make sure you are doing 50mph, then you have to swerve round a fixed point.

Fair enough in the dry, but these new test centres all have nice new tarmac down, which can be slippy due to oils coming to the surface while they bed down.

It is ridiculous to set a mandated speed that this MUST be done at - there should be a lower speed for bad weather.

All the examples above of real-life examples are totally invalid - how often do you have to take a 180degree bend at a fixed speed, then swerve and stop around an object you can see?

[sinbad]

Right - I don't think that the "swerve" is an issue.

What IS an issue is the mandated speed.

Think about it, you have just done a 180degree bend, while concentrating to make sure you are doing 50mph, then you have to swerve round a fixed point.

Fair enough in the dry, but these new test centres all have nice new tarmac down, which can be slippy due to oils coming to the surface while they bed down.

It is ridiculous to set a mandated speed that this MUST be done at - there should be a lower speed for bad weather.

All the examples above of real-life examples are totally invalid - how often do you have to take a 180degree bend at a fixed speed, then swerve and stop around an object you can see?

It's 50kph. :)

Have you actually seen video of the swerve or how gently you have to brake?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctIfIXlPmYk

Like I said earlier, it probably should be harder in the dry, not easier in the wet.

[hindle8907]

The tarmac on the Test Sites is race tarmac . it drains faster than normal roads/tarmac ( Just for info lol )

[SoulKiss]

It's 50kph. :)

You knew what I meant :)

[Spiderman]

All the examples above of real-life examples are totally invalid - how often do you have to take a 180degree bend at a fixed speed, then swerve and stop around an object you can see?

On almost every roundabout on the way home tbh SK. I have to travel round the 3 or 4 roundabout and i can see traffic thats supposed to wait till i'm past them before entering the roundabout continue to creep forward onto the roundabout itself. And then i have to swerve to avoid the one in my lane but also ensure i'm still within my own lane as i do it. Sometime it may not be a full 180 that i go round the roundabout other times its nearly 270 that i go round, point is that is does happen in real life riding and this is just one expamle. Many other who live out of towns will encounter this type of thing more often on their roads. And i dont think swerve test is any part of the previous 180 turn procedure, they just happen to follow each other in the test but are 2 seperate skills being tested.

I still see peeps on bikes on my commute who have very little road sense on their bikes, its as if they got out their car one day and decided to ride their bike instead...but in the same way they drive their cars. Riding slap bang in the middle of the mane they are in, no thought to other bikes behind them, making no attempt to filter thru a gap i could get 2 bikes thru but they also sit in the way of everyone else and stop them filtering thru. IMHO anything that makes a new biker more aware of the reality of riding a bike (and especially if they have spent years in car - the differences in road behaviour) can only be a good thing....so long as it doesnt become too costly and put people off enjoying bikes cos they cant afford the training.

[Ed]

I'm not really clear why we expect people to swerve. Shouldn't we be teaching people how not to get into these sort of situations in the first place - anticipation, anticipation, anticipation...

[SoulKiss]

On almost every roundabout on the way home tbh SK. I have to travel round the 3 or 4 roundabout and i can see traffic thats supposed to wait till i'm past them before entering the roundabout continue to creep forward onto the roundabout itself. And then i have to swerve to avoid the one in my lane but also ensure i'm still within my own lane as i do it. Sometime it may not be a full 180 that i go round the roundabout other times its nearly 270 that i go round.

The point being that you are not being measured as having to do 30mph.....

You get to contol how fast or slow you get according to your feel for the road and situation, unlike this test.

[DMC]

Shouldn't we be teaching people how not to get into these sort of situations in the first place - anticipation, anticipation, anticipation...

Agreed, but isnt the 'swerve test' more a demonstration of being able to handle/manouvre a bike? No matter how good someone is at anticipating & avoiding hazards, there is always going to be a risk that they will encounter a situation where avoiding action is required.

[Stu]

I reckon if they want to define the speed, then they should define the conditions and hose it down if it's dry :p

[ArtyLady]

Interesting interview on my local BBC radio channel today here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0034zcn/The_Midday_Show_on_BBC_Essex_26_05_2009/) at around 1 hour 8 minutes.

[ArtyLady]

I'm not really clear why we expect people to swerve. Shouldn't we be teaching people how not to get into these sort of situations in the first place - anticipation, anticipation, anticipation...

Absolutely agree Ed - I think its a total waste of time.

IMO if they want to make the roads safer they should -

Improve the apalling standard of most car drivers
Introduce a more extensive CBT (these are the most vunerable riders after all)
Once test passed nothing bigger than a 500 bike
Compulsory advanced training and assessment before being allowed a licence for any size bike.

[Sally]

A restricted 33bhp license for all wouldn't go down badly.
2 years experience before jumping on a faster bike.

Would have alot more experienced riders on the road.

[yorkie_chris]

Introduce a more extensive CBT (these are the most vunerable riders after all)



Statistically, no they aren't. And it would just take away the only accessible transport for young people.

As for being on a 500 after test, what a PITA and a liability on a motorway. What 500? ER5, GS500? RD500LC, RM500 motard? :-P

Looking for solutions to a problem that doesn't exist. Leave test how it was and save everyone a fortune.

[wizurd]

agree with that - leave it as it was. Its always going to be dangerous and thats something everyone has to accept i guess

[-Ralph-]

While you and I may be able to this on our own bikes, you try doing it on a CG or a CBF125 or a YBR125... those little skinny tyres and bad enough in the dry, let alone the wet... they also have a top speed of 28mph so getting to 31 can be a bit of a problem..

I could do that in the wet on a twist and go moped. With ease!

And 28mph top speed on a 125? A 125cc go-cart maybe, but even a 125cc custom style bike with barn door aerodynamics will hit 55-60 mph.

I agree with Sinbad to, its not the fault of the test its the fault of the people doing the instructing.

...the ones that he had seen falling off were pulling on the front brake whilst in the middle of the swerve procedure.

...These people who are falling arent being taught properly or simply arent ready to take their test.

+1, thats the first time I've seen a video of the swerve test and I had imagined something much more severe from the amount of fuss that's been made. People aren't low siding 'cos of lean angle trying to get between those cones. Crashes are down to someone seeing the second cone in front of them, thinking they are going to hit it, and grabbing the front brake in a panic.

It's 50kph. :)

Have you actually seen video of the swerve or how gently you have to brake?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctIfIXlPmYk

Like I said earlier, it probably should be harder in the dry, not easier in the wet.

+1, this thread is a lot of nonsense, thats not a difficult maneouvre in the wet or dry, and if you can't manage it then quite rightly your not ready to be given a motorbike license.

[Jamiebridges123]

Broken sarcasm detektorrr..

[-Ralph-]

What 500?

Honda NSR ;)

[-Ralph-]

Broken sarcasm detektorrr..

Broken winky button :rolleyes: ;)

Thought you may just be trolling but I wasn't sure...

[Bluepete]

Does anyone have the "plan" for the swerve test? I fancy trying it myself seeing as I have access to some cones!

Pete

[Sally]

http://www.network.mag-uk.org/oct06pic1.jpg.

Found on MAG site.
http://www.network.mag-uk.org/oct06p16.html

[wizurd]

try this as well - from dsa with measurements

http://www.dsa.gov.uk/Documents/MPTC/2009/dsa_mc_diagram_manoeuvring_layout.pdf

[-Ralph-]

Does anyone have the "plan" for the swerve test? I fancy trying it myself seeing as I have access to some cones!

Pete

Let us know how you get on.

[JohnMcL7]

It's a swerve: you don't get to choose what speed you want to swerve at in real life irrespective of what the weather's like.

Of course you do - if you're riding in wet conditions you know you have reduced grip and therefore you slow down in case you need to perform any emergency maneuvers. When you're out riding on your test you would be expect to reduce your speed if the conditions were poor so it seems odd they fix the speed for the swerve part of the test regardless of the conditions.

In fairness to the new test though I know of several people who fell off during the old test mainly due to grabbing the front brake, it wasn't a fault of the test as they shouldn't have been grabbing the brake. Even right at the start of my CBT the instructor kept saying never to grab the brake but some people are still going to go with an instinctive reaction.

John

[-Ralph-]

Of course you do - if you're riding in wet conditions you know you have reduced grip and therefore you slow down in case you need to perform any emergency maneuvers. When you're out riding on your test you would be expect to reduce your speed if the conditions were poor so it seems odd they fix the speed for the swerve part of the test regardless of the conditions.

John

Because its supposed to be a swerve test not a slow speed slalom test. I wasn't a fan of this concept and a DSA examiner told me he thought it was a bit too severe, but those videos certainly seem to tell a different story.

[Bluepete]

Thanks for the plans, I'll let you know how it goes.

Pete

[wizurd]

wouldnt mind trying it either - only cause i know ive passed already though. wonder how fast it can be done

[ethariel]

What i really want to know, is when the fuggers are adding this style of offroad test to the car test, make it harder for the masses and then watch people howl about it!

[seedy100]

The U turn is dead!
Long live the swerve!

[hindle8907]

i passed my test a month ago on a crappy old 1991 ybr i think, in heavy rain and found it simple the full course is simple to be honest but i have had a 2 years experince on a 125cc so that could play a part but still the swerve isnt that bad at all

[sinbad]

Of course you do - if you're riding in wet conditions you know you have reduced grip and therefore you slow down in case you need to perform any emergency maneuvers. When you're out riding on your test you would be expect to reduce your speed if the conditions were poor so it seems odd they fix the speed for the swerve part of the test regardless of the conditions.

John

I think having a fixed speed has left them open to (perhaps uninformed) criticism, but in the end I'm sure they realised it would be wet at least some of the time.

So let's assume for an optimistic but realistic moment they're not total imbeciles and accept that this entire element of the test has been devised for operation in all conditions short of snow and ice.

That's why it (the "swerve") looks so damned easy, if they were making one for the dry exclusively it would surely have to be harder. People are crashing because they're tugging the brakes too hard and at the wrong moment, and those people would be doing that on the roads too if they were unleashed.

[Dave20046]

I'm wondering if that old ginger wench has ever ridden a motorcycle....
In the wet I can see why it'd be daunting. In the dry I'm not massively concerned. Just glad I managed to cram mine in before it all changed.

Shall we start on our get well soon card for Magnum?

[Milky Bar Kid]

I personally, with not a huge amount of ridign experience don't think it's any worse that the U turn on a 125!

It's a test. If you can't do it you fail. If you fail, you practise and try again! People should stop mumping their gums and get on with it!

[Loz]

wouldnt mind trying it either - only cause i know ive passed already though. wonder how fast it can be done

My daughter did it at 54kph on a cg125 for her A2

Her friend doing his Das clocked 61kph on the bigger bike

both said it is easy...

[Dave20046]

ah that's a point I didn't even think as to whether you can do it faster than 50kph

[JohnMcL7]

Because its supposed to be a swerve test not a slow speed slalom test. I wasn't a fan of this concept and a DSA examiner told me he thought it was a bit too severe, but those videos certainly seem to tell a different story.

Driving at an appropriate speed for the conditions doesn't turn it into a 'slow speed slalom test' - while doing your on the road practical test regardless of whether it's car or bike if you don't slow down for the conditions you'll start getting minors and get a fail if you keep doing it. Yet in the off the road test it's the complete opposite where you are supposed to ignore the conditions entirely and keep a constant pace which is exactly what you shouldn't do in real riding conditions.

In the rain the grip of the bike is reduced therefore its ability to handle a swerve or similar is also reduced, we are always being told speed limits are limits not the speed you should be driving at therefore it doesn't make much sense to me to have a test where no consideration is given to the external conditions.

John

[kellyjo]

Did it today in the wet, yuk!, on 500cc reached 53kph, swerved no probs and pulled up just fine, unfortunately touched cone elsewhere so failed :(:(:( (oh why, oh why am i so stupid!!!) Instructor had thoroughly prepared me for 'swerve' and at no time did i feel too much was being asked of me. Having said that i have ridden a lot of miles in the 3 months since cbt and notched up a lot of experience, i wouldnt have been anywhere near as confident had i gone straight from cbt to mod1 on a big bike in a matter of days.

Note to examiner from this morning - Rode around peterboroughs roadworks all day and didnt tap one cone, any chance you might change your mind and make it a pass ;) cant wait for attempt no. 2 next week, things can only get better :)

[Dave20046]

good luck :)

Welcome to the forum.

[ArtyLady]

My daughter did it at 54kph on a cg125 for her A2

Her friend doing his Das clocked 61kph on the bigger bike

both said it is easy...

Is that you Loz? :smt039 or another Loz :lol:

[sinbad]

Driving at an appropriate speed for the conditions doesn't turn it into a 'slow speed slalom test' - while doing your on the road practical test regardless of whether it's car or bike if you don't slow down for the conditions you'll start getting minors and get a fail if you keep doing it. Yet in the off the road test it's the complete opposite where you are supposed to ignore the conditions entirely and keep a constant pace which is exactly what you shouldn't do in real riding conditions.

In the rain the grip of the bike is reduced therefore its ability to handle a swerve or similar is also reduced, we are always being told speed limits are limits not the speed you should be driving at therefore it doesn't make much sense to me to have a test where no consideration is given to the external conditions.

John

Have you got some documented proof that this test (which has obviously been intended for all normal conditions in the UK since that is its implementation) is designed specifically for dry surface riding? I'm tired of posting the same thing.
It's either a:
A - Test designed purely for dry conditions (dangerous in the wet), unlikely no?
or
B - Test designed for all conditions including the wet (probably a bit too easy in the dry), likely, no?

It's a test remember, it should be a challenge.

I'll laugh if the DSA change it so that the speed requirement for bone dry conditions are simply increased by 15kph.

[Jamiebridges123]

Or they force you to get your knee down or something :p

[JohnMcL7]

If you're tired of posting the same thing over and over again how about actually reading posts first before replying and you'd save yourself a lot of time? The test does not have to be as black and white as you believe and there is no 'documented proof' required (which is a nonsense claim anyway) as that's how the on the road test for both cars and motorbikes has worked for many years.

Look at it this way, for the emergency stop on the road do they measure your exact stopping distance which must be within the same limit regardless of the conditions? No of course they don't - your stopping distance is going to be based on various factors the main one of which is going to be the condition of the road. There is no fixed limit at all instead the examiner uses their judgement to decide whether you stopped within a reasonable distance for the conditions.

One of the key elements of a driving/riding test which has been exactly the same since I passed my car test back in 1997 is driving at an appropriate speed for the conditions and even outside of tests I see it regularly mentioned that speed limits are the maximum limit, not the constant speed everyone should be driving at. This swerve test goes completely against that - any rider (or driver) should be going slower when the conditions are such that the ability of their vehicle to carry out an emergency manuever is reduced.

Something for you to remember is that the examiner is not a computer which can only base its decisions on basic numbers (nor are you despite the claims in your post), instead they are qualified people who are capable of obsvervation and their own expert judgement. Trying to break everything down into simplistic, arbtirary numbers does nothing to improve safety or riding standards if anything it does the opposite. I dislike this approach in any field as it does happen everywhere but it's even dafter here.

John

[Spiderman]

It's a test remember, it should be a challenge.


so agreed.

And the second vid clip that was posted above shows it being done on a wet surface. It still looks safe and easy to me and clearly no problem for those showing how its done.

Bikes dont just go in straight lines and bank over to take turns, they also swerve when the rider wants them to so why not make that part of the education a rider gets? Dont forget before this "eeeevil" test comes the education part so if the instructor feels you're only good at going in straight lines and couldn't swerve your bike when the conditions need you to then he either gives you more tuition on that or suggests that riding a bike isnt really for you.

I'd rather that than people out on the road who need to make a simple swerve to to avoid a ball or something but end up hitting the tramc instead cos they justy aint aquired that skill yet.

[JohnMcL7]

The argument wasn't against the swerve test it was about arbitrarily fixing it at one value.

John

[Spiderman]

But its an exam and exams need parameters, no?

You dont go into your A levels without accepting you got 3 hrs to do it. What use would it be if everyone was given 6hrs to do it?

What good is a swerve test at an unrealistic speed. I guess they did a lot of testing and didn't just pick 50kph out the air. I'd imagine this is about the speed that you are at when an unexpected swerve is a reasonable course of action to take if the unexpected occurs.

[rowdy]

Driving at an appropriate speed for the conditions doesn't turn it into a 'slow speed slalom test' - while doing your on the road practical test regardless of whether it's car or bike if you don't slow down for the conditions you'll start getting minors and get a fail if you keep doing it. Yet in the off the road test it's the complete opposite where you are supposed to ignore the conditions entirely and keep a constant pace which is exactly what you shouldn't do in real riding conditions.

In the rain the grip of the bike is reduced therefore its ability to handle a swerve or similar is also reduced, we are always being told speed limits are limits not the speed you should be driving at therefore it doesn't make much sense to me to have a test where no consideration is given to the external conditions.
John
But out on the road is not a controlled environment, and the swerve is supposed to replicate what could happen. Its all very well saying that you adjust your riding to the road conditions but realistically your not going to ride everywhere at less than 50kph when its wet for fear of someone pulling out in front of you or any other hazard that might appear.
Maybe some learners are not being instructed properly in regards to vehicle control.
Imo up until your test (unless riding on L plates for some time) you are only instructed, it is when your on your own that you really start learning, be it car or bike.

[JohnMcL7]

No, an A-level is an on paper theory exam to test very specific knowledge whereas a riding test is a practical examination to assess the general ability to ride a motorbike. Applying the rules of differential calculus is exactly the same now as it was when I say my highers however the conditions I have ridden my motorbike on have varied significantly from the small amount of riding I had to do for my test.

As I said, the examiner should be someone capable of assessing riding capability and they always have been - portions of the old test didn't need hard numbers nor does this one, if the MPTC centres were all under cover and therefore the same every time then it's more reasonable to apply a specific speed limit. However one of the skills anyone sitting the test has to be able to demonstrate is to assess the road conditions and adjust their speed accordingly, if you plough on sitting just at the speed limit when the examiner thought should have been going slower due to certain conditions being present then you can fail the test.

If examiners are unable to assess a rider's abilities and need a fixed number to help them then that suggests to me there's something wrong with the training and ability of the examiners. In reality I don't think it's the case as both the instructors and examiners I've seen seem to be extremely good in their field, therefore I'd leave it to them to judge whether the speed was sufficient or not given the conditions at the time.

I agree with some of the comments posted earlier about intensive courses and direct access which to me seem to be more of a concern in terms of rider safety, I think it's absurd that you can sit an intensive course, pass your test on a low powered bike then go out and then ride a high powered sports bike which is easily affordable.

John

[-Ralph-]

wouldnt mind trying it either - only cause i know ive passed already though. wonder how fast it can be done

i passed my test a month ago on a crappy old 1991 ybr i think, in heavy rain and found it simple

My daughter did it at 54kph on a cg125 for her A2

Her friend doing his Das clocked 61kph on the bigger bike

both said it is easy...

Driving at an appropriate speed for the conditions doesn't turn it into a 'slow speed slalom test'

Doing this test at less than 50kph does turn it into a 'slow speed slalom test'.

The swerve is not severe, from what I can see in these videos, if done slower than 50kph it will become a turn, not a swerve.

Above are four examples of new riders who found it no problem or actually did it faster.

The argument wasn't against the swerve test it was about arbitrarily fixing it at one value

It isn't fixed at one value, it quite rightly has a minimum speed at which it must be performed in order to make it a valid test of a riders ability. Nothing says you must do it at exactly 50kph. This speed has been set to be appropriate in wet conditions. If the conditions are worse than this then the test will be cancelled.

This is exactly the same as the emergency stop in both car and motorcyle tests, if the examiner will only ask you to perform the stop once you have reached a certain speed. Below that speed it does not demonstrate your ability to perform an emergency stop.

[sinbad]

If you're tired of posting the same thing over and over again how about actually reading posts first before replying and you'd save yourself a lot of time? The test does not have to be as black and white as you believe and there is no 'documented proof' required (which is a nonsense claim anyway) as that's how the on the road test for both cars and motorbikes has worked for many years.

Look at it this way, for the emergency stop on the road do they measure your exact stopping distance which must be within the same limit regardless of the conditions? No of course they don't - your stopping distance is going to be based on various factors the main one of which is going to be the condition of the road. There is no fixed limit at all instead the examiner uses their judgement to decide whether you stopped within a reasonable distance for the conditions.

One of the key elements of a driving/riding test which has been exactly the same since I passed my car test back in 1997 is driving at an appropriate speed for the conditions and even outside of tests I see it regularly mentioned that speed limits are the maximum limit, not the constant speed everyone should be driving at. This swerve test goes completely against that - any rider (or driver) should be going slower when the conditions are such that the ability of their vehicle to carry out an emergency manuever is reduced.

Something for you to remember is that the examiner is not a computer which can only base its decisions on basic numbers (nor are you despite the claims in your post), instead they are qualified people who are capable of obsvervation and their own expert judgement. Trying to break everything down into simplistic, arbtirary numbers does nothing to improve safety or riding standards if anything it does the opposite. I dislike this approach in any field as it does happen everywhere but it's even dafter here.

John

Firstly it's 50kph, and off-road, so nothing to do with our speed limits or how we should ride to them and it isn't a minimum speed for the whole test, only for the brief moment through the speed trap.

I've read your posts which seem to hinge around the idea that 50kph is "too fast" in wet conditions and slower should be acceptable. Yet people are passing the test in wet conditions so obviously it is not too fast.

Some aren't, and some people (who would probably be a danger to themselves on the road) are falling off, but then it's a motorcycle test so that's always going to happen. If everyone passed it would be too easy, if no one fell off it would be a car test.

If the test is devised for the worst conditions yet operated in all then what's the problem? Only that it's "too easy" in the dry.

[rowdy]

I think its unfair to blame the examiner, its the instructors job to assess the ability, the examiners job to test them to a certain level.

edit; as sinbad states above it probably is too easy in the dry, but if they were to raise the speed and someone were to fall off and cause major injury to themselves then they'd been in the brown stuff.

[JohnMcL7]

But out on the road is not a controlled environment, and the swerve is supposed to replicate what could happen. Its all very well saying that you adjust your riding to the road conditions but realistically your not going to ride everywhere at less than 50kph when its wet for fear of someone pulling out in front of you or any other hazard that might appear.


You're right, out on the road is not a controlled environment hence riders should demonstrate the ability to correctly assess the conditions and adjust their speed accordingly. What exactly is 50kph, how does passing at that speed mean anything in the real world? You're right, I don't ride everywhere at under 50kph because I'd like to think I have the ability to judge the conditions I'm riding in and I still can't see how being able to swerve at an arbitrary speed ignoring all other conditions helps me there.

John

[-Ralph-]

how does passing at that speed mean anything in the real world?

a minimum speed at which it must be performed in order to make it a valid test of a riders ability.....This is exactly the same as the emergency stop in both car and motorcyle tests

:rolleyes:

[JohnMcL7]

Firstly it's 50kph, and off-road, so nothing to do with our speed limits or how we should ride to them and it isn't a minimum speed for the whole test, only for the brief moment through the speed trap.

It's an assessment of your ability to ride the bike on a public road, therefore not being on the main road is irrelevent.


I've read your posts which seem to hinge around the idea that 50kph is "too fast" in wet conditions and slower should be acceptable. Yet people are passing the test in wet conditions so obviously it is not too fast.

If you have read my posts you're still missing the point then.


Some aren't, and some people (who would probably be a danger to themselves on the road) are falling off, but then it's a motorcycle test so that's always going to happen. If everyone passed it would be too easy, if no one fell off it would be a car test.

Not really sure what point you're trying to make here, I suspect you're trying to agree with one of my earlier points.


If the test is devised for the worst conditions yet operated in all then what's the problem? Only that it's "too easy" in the dry.

As I've said multiple times now the whole approach of applying a fixed limit goes against how the practical test works and also how we are supposed to ride/drive test in the real world - simple as that. You are expected to be able to do an emergency stop in a shorter distance in the dry than the wet so why should there be no consideration of conditions given to other portions of the test? If you stop your bike in the dry within a distance expected in the wet, it's a fail - do you think that shouldn't be the case?

Admittedly we live in a society which sadly expects people not to have any common sense or judgement ability and this is a further extension of that culture.

John

[JohnMcL7]

:rolleyes:

So why don't we apply that to other portions of the test then? Why are riders expected to perform better in the dry than in the wet? Taking that same approach to the emergency braking out on the road gets you a fail.

John

[rowdy]

You're right, out on the road is not a controlled environment hence riders should demonstrate the ability to correctly assess the conditions and adjust their speed accordingly. What exactly is 50kph, how does passing at that speed mean anything in the real world? You're right, I don't ride everywhere at under 50kph because I'd like to think I have the ability to judge the conditions I'm riding in and I still can't see how being able to swerve at an arbitrary speed ignoring all other conditions helps me there.

John
your missing the point, the cones that are there to swerve around are supposed to represent an unexpected hazard, so its all very well saying that you adjust your speed to go around the cones that you can see infront of you but that isn't a representation of an unsighted hazard then.

[JohnMcL7]

your missing the point, the cones that are there to swerve around are supposed to represent an unexpected hazard, so its all very well saying that you adjust your speed to go around the cones that you can see infront of you but that isn't a representation of an unsighted hazard then.

According to the test layout, the rider has to perform two turns before the swerve which is what I'm basing my comment on because if I was out in wet conditions on a road with tight turns as that I sure as heck wouldn't be going particularly fast.

John

[Spiderman]

No, an A-level is an on paper theory exam to test

Lol, you dont say. Point i was making was about suitable parameters. But i think Ralph just said it far better than i did.

[sinbad]

It's a test of motorcycle operation. Go and do a moderate/gentle swerve in the soaking wet. Now ask everyone to do that same swerve regardless of conditions at the same speed. Yes it's asking you to ignore the conditions to some extent, yes it's saying "show us you can steer a bike" and nothing more, but then that's the point of that part of the test.

[rowdy]

According to the test layout, the rider has to perform two turns before the swerve which is what I'm basing my comment on because if I was out in wet conditions on a road with tight turns as that I sure as heck wouldn't be going particularly fast.

John
That is a fair point, but I think the people that have fallen off in the test so far have come unstuck in the swerve test (could be wrong).

[JohnMcL7]

Lol, you dont say. Point i was making was about suitable parameters. But i think Ralph just said it far better than i did.

No, Ralph made a different point to you (or appeared to, it's difficult to tell when someone tries to communicate without text) although I don't know if you're using the correct terminology to represent what you mean - I see nothing wrong with setting parameters or guidelines for expected performance which is how the tests have always worked but I do think there's something wrong with applying an arbitrary limit.

John

[-Ralph-]

So why don't we apply that to other portions of the test then? Why are riders expected to perform better in the dry than in the wet? Taking that same approach to the emergency braking out on the road gets you a fail.

John

We do, various parts of the test have a minimum speed at which they must be performed, including the cornering test (30kph) and the emergency stop (50kph).

They are not, the minimum speed is the same wet or dry. Sure it can be done quicker in the dry but riders are not expected to.

I don't follow. What approach and why does it fail you?

[ArtyLady]

Did anyone even bother to listen to the interview on the radio in the link I posted? :rolleyes:

[Holdup]

I cant believe they say that the surface is good in wet weather, surface might be good put still doesnt stop aqua plaining or the fact the bike might have s**t tyres, and the fact that you have to be doing 31 mph or what ever no matter what the weather and especialy on a 125 where its going to take forever to reach the spped, surely no one goes round a corner in the wet at the same speed as what they would in the dry. The DSA says its to make the biker safer in these situations or what ever but i like the coment i heard on radio 1 "Teach car drivers to be more aware"

[-Ralph-]

Did anyone even bother to listen to the interview on the radio in the link I posted? :rolleyes:

Nope, sorry, maybe if you hadn't told me how long it was I'd have listened to the first 10 minutes.