Anger over motorbike 'swerve test'

[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]

Originally Posted by JohnMcL7

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.

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

Originally Posted by wizurd

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

Originally Posted by hindle8907

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

Originally Posted by Loz

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...

Originally Posted by JohnMcL7

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.

Originally Posted by JohnMcL7

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.

Originally Posted by 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

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.

Originally Posted by rowdy

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

Originally Posted by JohnMcL7

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

Originally Posted by -Ralph-

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

Originally Posted by sinbad

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

Originally Posted by -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