Learner's Fudging Log Books

[kuzman89]

i think the best thing about the german system is that encourages young drivers to drive newer and safer cars... modern cars are getting more and more safety features to help prevent crashes and more and more airbags to limit damage if a crash does happen... older drivers in aus generally have either more money and/or are possibly better drivers so their less likely to crash even if they are in an older car and they can generally afford better cars as well... put a p-plater in a vl and if he hits a pole hes only got a nice solid metal door to protect him and usually thats what kills him

This often overlooked... Instead of "banning" cars on max kw they should be banning cars with say less then a 3-4 star safety rating. Give them an incentive (rebate etc), my mates all drive 20 year old pussbuckets, dont know how their parents let em drive it in the first place.

 

[Luke52]

Frankly the fact you went through the effort of getting them legitimately, makes you a fool. It still doesn't make you a good driver.

It makes me a fool? Really?

I don't know about you, but I certainly believe the more experience, the better. I'd rather have 120 hours under my belt instead of 20. Also, going back to that soldier analogy, there are SUPERVISORS (i.e. parents) and there are INSTRUCTORS. Obviously it's the instructor's job to teach. And I'm not saying the parents just need to sit there and watch, but the way I see it is the supervisor's job is to be a second set of eyes, and give advice on situations. It is, however, the instructors job to do the teaching.

Think of it like homework, at school. It's the teacher's job to equip the kids with the knowledge, but the kid can still ask mum or dad for help with their homework.

Obviously some parents are better than others, though. My step-dad used to be a truckie, so he's pretty good when it comes to supervising and teaching.

To add to that, you metioned 100 hours which could be flawed training, so to speak. Come on, everyone would have a few flaws here and there. But the fact is those 100 hours are not a waste, because skills such as car control have still been learned. 100 hours of flawed practice would be better than 10 perfect ones, becuase the student with 100 would be far more likely to have encountered a wider range of scenarios, and while they still may need refinement of skills, they'd be familiar with a certain situation, and haven't been thrown straight into the deep end.

I'm going to back to a sitation with a kid again, because it seems easy. You teach a kid to swim. First, you're with them in the water, teaching them the basics, like how to blow bubbles. Then, you get them a pair of floaties, and swim with them. Those stages are like being on L plates.

Then, you send them off still with their floaties on, but without anyone holding them up. There's your P plates.

Now that they have the basic skills and confidence to go out on their own, they will further practice and refine their skills, and be ready to go into the deep end, rather than being thrown straight into it.

 

[LS1FUN]

There are people who actually do the whole 120hrs? lol.

 

[Calaber]

The fact that parents are still allowed to teach their kids how to drive shows just how out of touch and backward our licensing systems are in this country. And having logbooks that the learner completes without proper supervision and certification is just further proof of the stupidity of our licensing systems.

 

[Grennan]

What most young people don't understand is that having a car licence is a privilege not a right. .

Most drivers seem to forget it. I almost get cleaned up by asians in camry's, old folks in camrys's. Mum's in 4wd's a lot more than Mr P Plater in a Commodore.

 

[GAMBLR]

Minux, with the new system they're looking at implementing, would that mean that all of the 120 odd hours have to be done with a qualified instructor? Or are they cutting down the hours a bit? Not only would that be a prolonged time and frequency to do it (average of more than 2 lessons a week for 12 months to have it done), but the costs would be quite phenomenal as well.

I've been teaching my younger brother to drive, and he finds it easier with me, as I seem to have a better understanding and tolerance of what the instructor teaches him. I passed my P's test about 5 years ago, where my parents made me take lessons, even though I wasn't having the logbook ticked off (technically with the old system, I didn't need to)

 

[Dz811]

if you have an interest and some form of ethic to it, it shouldn't be hard....

I didn't have to do a Logbook, but i didn't realise it till halfway, at which point i had written in over 100 hrs anyways (legit)... So i probably drove close enough to 180 before i got my P's.
And I also went for 6-7 lessons with an instructor towards the end of my learners to iron out any bad habits.

But that being said I also know many of my friends definitely didnt do 120 hours. I think the government should have a mimimum 10 hours or so with a qualified instructor, then minimum 120 total or something

 

[Drawnnite]

could they not just start with a day course or so on, at a proper venue to learn all about cars/car control etc.
then every so often come back at certain intervals to be retested, and trained more.
that way its not the parents who originally teach them. but qualified instructors. which could be a mandatory 10 hours or something (2 day course?) before your actually given the Learner licence. thus making it so you cannot drive on the roads before that.
after that, every say 2-3 months you have to go back, (which would be booked in advance) to see if your still driving right. and gives further, advanced driver training. like skidpans to simulate wet driving.
a minumum of say 10 of these would have to be attended to, before you can be able to go for your licence.
atleast you can then control a car. in many conditions. learn proper driving techniques. and have a reasonable idea how a car works.

i would even like to see that for when your on P-Plates to then be able to expand on the cars you can drive. or if not that, to get a reduced cost on insurance, as it shows you've gone out of your way to learn something new. thus trying to make yourself a safer driver. (for the record, the insurance for a lot of p plate cars, is more then the car is worth, if they insure it themselves.)

 

[Grennan]

Minux, with the new system they're looking at implementing, would that mean that all of the 120 odd hours have to be done with a qualified instructor? Or are they cutting down the hours a bit? Not only would that be a prolonged time and frequency to do it (average of more than 2 lessons a week for 12 months to have it done), but the costs would be quite phenomenal as well.

Thats the whole idea. The cost of it alone makes it something that you dont want to lose. It makes it harder to obtain, a bigger sense of accomplishment and you respect it more. I would even be for a case of mixed driver training, say for example more than half of your logged hours must be logged by a licensed instructor. This would bring the cost down but still give you atleast 60 hours of proper driver training, not driving mum to the shops.

You bring up the time period, people can have their L plates for ~2 years prior to going for their P's. To rack up 120 hours in 2 years is pretty easy. When I got my license the rule was you had to have your L's for atleast 6 months before going for your P's (its now 12 in Victoria).

I think spreading the lessons over the full 2 years will be a lot better on the driver.

However when...IF these new regulations come into place is another story. Ill believe it when I see it.

 

[CSP]

but the costs would be quite phenomenal as well.

Can't afford it? Don't do it! It costs around $20,000 Australian dollars in Denmark to become a fully licenced driver. A licence is NOT a right.