Swerve test

[phil w]

Was on BBC news this morn and it seems to me it aint all that bad, although the woman on the news from the dept of transport or whoever was a complete numpty who had never ridden a bike. BUT the test itself that seems to be causing so much controversey doesnt seem too much to get het up about.
The one thing I did wonder was they were showing the training being done on what looked like a school play groung that may be gravelly and not inspire confidence when they come to get on the roads for the first time.
Maybe the instructors need to be doing a better job??

[Lumiya]

Merged into a single picture

It's the green line at position #6

The rider shown on the news wasn;t meant to be good/bad but instead show what the swerve test is about so I don;t think it's fair to comment on her riding style.

What would be interesting is a full breakdown of the accidents including riding hours, whether on instruction or test and also bike type, tyres and weather.

[alterered picture to show the dimensions better]

[pdsquire]

Was on the Today programme too, though as the biker there said, what exactly are we swerving for? To swerve into on-coming traffic, or the kerb? Isn't controlled braking the more important thing, and as he also said, shouldn't the distances of the test be lengthened in the wet, just as good training teaches you to ride slower and with more planning in difficult conditions?

Having now watched the clip (always a good idea before commenting) I agree with other comments that this 'swerve' should not be enough to put a competent rider down, though I still maintain it is far more important to teach thinking ahead. Swerving you can pick up: really thorough planning often evades new riders until they have a crash, by which time they might be dead.

[BobA]

I can't imagine any of the policy making morons at the DSA have ever driven anything larger than a pen, however, I do take my motorcycling seriously (when required!) and just can't see the problem with this simple addition to the test.

OK, it might be a bit intimidating, but it's in a sterile area, away from pedestrians, trucks, and any other forms of danger.

Lets face it, if a silly swerve test is gonna trip someone up, are they REALLY ready for the road?

Every time I've had a "heart in the back of the throat" moment, when something sudden has happened in front of me, I've always thought I wasn't prepared enough for it, and my emergency reactions are not good enough. The swerve test will surely make riders think the same, and prepare them for those "sphincter clenching" moments in the real world?

I'm sure you don't learn to scuba dive, or fly a plane or space shuttle without practicing with "what could go wrong"?



Kymmy, I'm gonna kill you (well I probably won't cos you've got guns!! ) but this thread is going to change my mood for the whole day !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[AlanH]

I'd say it's better for someone to fail this by falling off than to find out they are rubbish on the road,fall off and get run over by a truck. It's not like the cones jump out in front of them!

The instructor I saw interviewed said that, as far as he was aware, it was applying the brakes during the swerve that caused the accidents and that pupils don't always do what they're told under test conditions

I'd say if someone can't do the swerve test, even in the wet, they are not yet ready for the road.

Couple of interesting points...

1) This is EU legislation

2) On the BBC news, they asked whether educating other road users so there is no need for motorcyclists to swerve would be the real answer and was targeting motorcyclists appropriate.

[BobA]

What would be interesting is a full breakdown of the accidents including riding hours, whether on instruction or test and also bike type, tyres and weather.

This point is VERY valid. I would hope that the "Swerve Test" is perhaps treated similarly to the "4 wheel Emergency Stop" and is not taught to green horns on day 1?

Was on the Today programme too, though as the biker there said, what exactly are we swerving for? To swerve into on-coming traffic, or the kerb? Isn't controlled braking the more important thing, and as he also said, shouldn't the distances of the test be lengthened in the wet, just as good training teaches you to ride slower and with more planning in difficult conditions?

Another valid point.

My feeling is, it is to initially teach the rider what "TARGET FIXATION" is, and how to overcome it and make an "EVASIVE MANEOUVERE" and avoid any object or pedestrian, yet at the same time, NOT ride into that oncoming milk float!!!!!!!!
Controlled braking is another area of the test I would have thought, and in my opinion a last resort to making an avoiding manouvere or "SWERVE"

Yes allowances should be made for the somewhat incliment weather we have here, but should they also be made for a diesel spillage by asking pupils to brake on ice!!?? You can't prepare for everything, so if it's raining, perhaps you should be travelling slower anyway?



I'm gonna go now... I've got to stop looking at this thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Lumiya]

Why do they always blame me??????

[ADE THE BLADE]

isn`t this just counter-steering? something most, if not all riders do subconciously anyway?.........or am i just talking throoo my a*se. i used to go to my local ind / est early morning and practice swerving at all different speeds using manholes etc as `cones/objects ` and yes in wet conditions too. i think its all down to confidence in yourself and the bike and having half decent boots fitted anyway. feel free to growl at me.......i can take it

[Charlie]

They swerve was a lot less than I expected, that is something I'd do to miss a man-hole cover. I think people with more than 10 hours experience on a bike would find that part of the test a lot easier. And from what I gather (someone I know off another forum, who took the new test) said that he had no problems with it and that the road test more a relaxed ride now.

At first it seem like a bad idea to me, but after watching that video it doesn't so bad. I was expecting a much bigger swerve. Although I think the area should be clean of loose stone, if I saw loose stone on the road and a potential hazard approaching I'd probably be going slow than 30mph, not a fan of loose stone.

[Whealie]

Isn't controlled braking the more important thing

I once had a car pull out from parked by the kerb to do a u-turn, right in front of me. As she pulled out she saw me, braked and froze in terror. I swerved round her and stopped the other side.

My heart was somewhere further down the road but I looked in the mirror and then behind me and she as still sat there realising what she had nearly caused. The cars behind me that had seen it were all sitting there in disbelief too.

I saw a dear jump out at a mate on the bike and to swerve was his only option. (dear jumped out in front of me on Monday in those woods as it happens but braking was appropriate then).

If you are riding down the road and you suddenly see the glisten of fresh diesel in the road, do you brake so you are entering the diesel slowing down with your brakes on or swerve to avoid it completely?

I think this level of bike control is useful. If you look at the MCN moaners most of them failed the previous test too and seem to think the world is against them "the government just want to stop us riding motorbikes".

If these people can't pass the test, I'm with the government on this one. I don't want them riding motorbikes either.