2nd Driving Licence Directive

Anyone else heard about this-

The Second Driving Licence Directive is coming. But what on earth - or in heaven's name - is it? It sounds, rather scarily like some reincarnation of a lost deity. Unfortunately, however, it's rather more to do with European bureaucracy than heavenly bodies.

A new bike test is being introduced in October 2008. It sounds a long way off at the moment and, if you've already got your licence, then it might not bother you. But, this could have the same effect on motorcycling as the licence chances in the 1980s had and, ultimately, that could affect what you ride and how you ride it.

And there's also a Third Driving Licence Directive in the pipeline...

So let's have a closer look at 2DLD and what your friends or relatives are going to have to go through to get their motorcycle licence from next October.

According to the Driving Standards Agency, this new legislation is intended to ensure that 'motorcycle test candidates demonstrate that they are competent in control of their machines at a more demanding level than is currently the case'.

So, this new test will contain two practical elements. There'll still be the accompanied riding element on the road, taking in the test of stops and starts that we've come to expect.

But there will also be some higher speed manoeuvres and other exercises conducted off-road and candidates will have to demonstrate a standard of machine control here before they're allowed to proceed to the on-road part of the test.

When we say 'off-road' we don't mean a motocross track of course; just an expanse of tarmac on land away from the public highway. This will naturally lead to higher demands on motorcycle test centres, more of which later.

The EU has decreed - and the DSA has embraced that decree fully - that the extra part of the test will contain a set of more demanding manoeuvres, at least two of which will be carried out at low speed, including a slalom course.

According to the DSA's website, there will also be at least two higher speed manoeuvres, 'of which one should be in second or third gear, at a speed of at least 30 km/h (18.6 mph) and one avoiding an obstacle at a minimum speed of 50 km/h (31.1 mph)'.

Then there's the addition of a couple of higher speed braking exercises, with an emergency stop from a minimum 50kph.

Take a look a the diagrams to see the exercises in more detail. We're told that it'll be at the discretion of the examiner, whether the candidate is asked to do a left-hand or a right-hand circuit, so there's going to have to be lots of practice on both.

So, what about these 'off-road' requirements? Where are these new tests going to take place? And, maybe more importantly, where is training and practice going to take place? After all, the current requirements for CBT testing can be pretty much met by a quiet car park.

It was thought, perhaps wisely, that it wouldn't be safe to carry out these new test manoeuvres on public roads in built-up areas. And in the interests of uniformity of testing a pre-determined layout has been agreed using ground markings and cones.

We've been told that the new motorcycle tests will therefore take place at a series of new Multipurpose Test Centres or MPTCs, the first of which was opened in Gloucester last October. Three others are now operational in Ipswich, Newport and Shrewsbury with a further 11 currently under construction.

They will also incorporate car testing, with some also including Large Goods Vehicle and Passenger Carrying Vehicle licence testing.

The DSA says that the off-road manoeuvring area will be finished with high-spec surface with good grip in all weather and designed without such hazards as drainage gullies or manhole covers.

Can't say as I've heard of it, but by and large I'd concede that more stringent testing is probably a good thing. Of course that's easy for those of us who have already passed to say, but I think most of us recognize that when we'd passed the test we still had a hell of a lot to learn.

The first thing I forgot and had to relearn having taken just a three/four year break from biking was slow speed maneuvering (by slow speed I mean 30mph and down - ie. kinda what this extra testing seems to cover).

Can you cut and paste the diagrams its talking about too?

And there are threads on this somewhere about the EC directives where I think the general consensus is its not actually a bad thing. Unless youre an MCN editor and need a screaming headline that its going to kill off biking.

Did that get lifted out of anything remotely like MCN by any chance? I ask cos the third paragraph is scarily MCN'ish....

I mean really how accurate is: "But, this could have the same effect on motorcycling as the licence chances in the 1980s had and, ultimately, that could affect what you ride and how you ride it."??

I dont see how we arent riding what we want and how we want tbh as is. So I dont see the scaremongering of how the changes in the 80s impacted as anything other than a smokescreen of inaccuracies.

I got the info from suzuki via e-mail.
I've just done a straight copy and paste.
Personally I think the more harder the tests are for both cars and motorcycles the better.
As for the 80's comment I don't know what they are refering to

Sounds alot like the text from some magazine as i have read it before

Linky: http://www.lightningpass.com/jkcm/de...sp?pg=8&lang=1

Scroll down for the proposed off road layout. I was talking to a friend, who was on a course training to be an examiner and when they all tested it out. Apparently a good 20% of them could not do it! They all had full licenses and i would hope were decent riders, so maybe its not as straight forward as it might seem.

Ye thats the lay out alright

The new test centre here in S'bury is deffo built, I didn't know it was operational though. I will have to go have a look when I'm next up the north side of town.

a load of the bike journos have been going on about this for a while now, even in the telegraph

[Luckypants]

Wouldn't it be money better spent if current drivers were required to re-take their test periodically (5 years seems right) to ensure that the standards remain as high as when they passed their test?

sure making the tests more stringint might make the next generation of drivers better, but only at the point they pass the test. What about all the bad habits / cannot be bothered things we all do, starting immediately after the test? What about the current crop of drivers of all vehicles who fall woefully short of a decent standard?

I would prefer ongoing training to just raising the test standards for new drivers.

harder tests- not necessarily better. A test that isn't entirely based on luck/ the examiner on the day would be better. The problems talked about with the new test are that the test centers are so few and far between. If you live 100 miles from one its one hell of a journey for an unlicensed person to have to make. Whilst it sounds like the standard expected is being raised, realistically telling people to make an emergency avoidance of an object they already know is there is pointless. Teaching drivers traffic awareness and further training is what is needed (if anything is). Removing the unroadworthy cars and unlicensed drivers would be a better place to start.