Quote:
Originally Posted by Akrapovic
I completely disagree with the idea that a modern vehicle is "de-skilling" current drivers. Given that decades ago, a driving test involved driving up and down a runway and knowing the basic controls, and todays test is FAR more comprehensive, I don't think that's fair.
|
Oh dear, my memory must be suffering badly.
Since I took and passed my driving test in 1959, I seem to have forgotten the bit about the runway??
Seriously, the driving test at that time was the same, in principle, as for many years thereafter. Car control ws critical, as automatic transmission ws only applied to a few luxury and large cars and then was mainly the US Borg Warner 3 speed unit with a torque converter and very inefficient. Manual boxes lack good synchromesh (Until the Porsche patent baulk ring system became ubiquitous).
Thus clutch control and smooth gearchanging were essential. And every test included a mandatory hill start. Included were three point turns, reversing around a corner and if you were unlucky, parking between two vehicles; followed by an emergency stop, under full control (and tests were conducted in heavy rain), etc. Finally, a viva voce (verbal) quiz on the Highway Code.
Most of today's drivers, who pull out in front of others, fail to give signals, swerve and swop lanes constantly, park in the wrong places, such as on the wrong side of the road at night with headlamps blazing away, etc would fail.
Even with manual gears, today's learners are taught to drive up to stop lines and use the brakes rather than gears: thus they are not in control.
In terms of statistics, such are, as always valueless when considered on surface, rather than drilling down and segmenting such into sub-sets.
The national speed limits was introduced in 1966, a statistical skew.
The road breath test (breathalyser) was introduced in 1967 as was the now cast in stone drink-drive limit: previously, it was an arbitrary process reliant only on a doctor deciding if the subject was unfit to drive due to alcohol.
In 1960, there were many older cars on the road: these were far heavier, many with solid chassis. The Kinetic Energy imparted on impact was far far greater; thus the damage far greater too. No seatbelts.
No collapsable telescopic steering columns: in a moderate to severe accident which involved sudden deceleration, drivers were invariably speared through the chest, mortally. Additionally, with no crumple zones, often driver and front seat passenger/s suffered the engine/gearbox unit slamming back onto their legs: look Mum, no legs!
Remembering, whilst the mass of the car had decelerated to zero velocity, the passengers hadn't...
Also critical in reduction of death and injury has been the introduction of safety standards which manufacturers have had to adhere to for their products to be "Type-Approved": without which they cannot sell them.
Also to be added into the mix are: cross-ply tyres: Drum brakes which faded: brake fluid which being hygroscopic absorbed atmospheric moisture and when hot, the water boiled, turned to steam and no hydraulic first principle. Fun: happened to me more than once.
Serious drivers on ice, snow and heavy rain conditions, has to learn Cadence Braking techniques: 'cos there was no ABS.
Steering was hit and miss and suspension, agricultural.
With Clean Air Acts and controls of industrial smoke pollution, the dreadful Smogs and Winter fogs of the 50s, 60s and early 70s have all but vanished.
Next skew: as traffic density has increased, but most road mileage still dates back to the 1930s, generally, speed has fallen considerably: I just wish I could have exceeded the bloody speed limit yesterday morning! it took me 2 hours to travel 22 miles: a journey which in the 1960s on a then winding country lane, mainly would have taken perhaps 25 minutes. And I left at 06.45 AM.
Modern Unit-Construction (monocoque) cars are designed to crumple: bumpers too. The passenger safety zone protects them from the engine landing on their legs.
Far lighter grades of mild steel and extensive use of alloys and plastics has significantly reduced vehicle weight: thus a car-to-car head on collision creates far less kinetic energy.
Inertia Reel seat belts and Air Bags have further reduced both serious injury and fatality. More statistical skews!
Tyres do not blow out as they used to. Modern High Hysteresis radial tyres, thanks to motor sport, rarely suffer from aquaplaning. If you have never experienced severe aquaplaning at 80 MPH, then believe me, you haven't lived!
An excellent cure for constipation!
Quote:
|
with no major advancements in car technology.
|
Automotive technology advances week by week.
Quote:
|
So I do not agree with the suggestion that we're deskilling drivers.
|
Forget the bare and thus unqualified and ergo, tenuous statistical arguments; and please consider the foregoing.