What's the current curriculum for drivers Ed look like? I would hope it would be at least a hundred hours in a high fidelity simulator like this with detailed scoring.
For example, merging into the right traffic lane of a freeway from an on-ramp. Most drivers think the correct way to do this is to accelerate to 50mph and use their left turn signal. Wrong. The speed of traffic on the freeway is 85mph and inadequate acceleration produces a huge hazard when other drivers have to make a sudden lane change to avoid your stupid Honda CRV. The correct action would have been to accelerate to 98mph while merging to minimize the probability of a collision with existing drivers on the road, no turn signal necessary.
There are numerous other examples, such as four Honda CRVs pulling up to a 4-way stop simultaneously, but the general solution to all roadway problems is aggressive acceleration and disregard for other drivers, since they’re probably dumb anyway.
Source: I learned to drive in California.
You're a BMW owner by any chance?
If you're planning to turn to the left/right, use your turn signal, even if someone would deem it unnecessary. Better to use the turn signal too much than too little.
Overall, highway on-ramps looks wildly different all across the world, and what you say would be impossible in lots of places around me as an example, where you need to be able to basically stop at the on-ramp if there is too much traffic, to find the right gap, otherwise you'd run straight into others.
> We need to be teaching kids offensive driving tactics
Hard disagree :) I think Spain where I live has a huge problem with too offensive driving, where even if the rules/laws says something, people act on the "first come, first served" basis when it comes to preference.
> The element of surprise is crucial to an offensive driving regimen.
Really is fun and games in the abstract. Unfortunately we lose the idea that the roadways are a communal space, instead everyone else is just an obstacle. I love that fore-sight, the ability to predict a mere _30_ seconds into the future disappears for so many drivers. Just observe what people will do to gain 1 or 2 car lengths of ground, as if they could not predict that they would do effectively nothing swerving around to the lane that happened to gain 10 feet of open concrete.
In other parts of CA, it’s pretty different. Even in LA, I used my blinkers like normal (but yes, sometimes you do have to start moving in your lane for others to take you seriously).
You're thinking of turn signals wrong. Generally you shouldn't be using them as a request, but rather a declaration of "this is happening". If another driver can act to thwart your action in "milliseconds", you didn't have the margin to do it in the first place.
And God forbid it snows. Even with a light dusting people just stop on HWY 17 halting traffic for hours until emergency services is able to tow everyone off the mountain.
(1) The right hand lane of any free-way should not be going that fast! The fastest speed limit I've seen I think was 80 in the middle of Kansas.
(2) 98mph is unsafe for a number of cars, it's a lot of momentum. You need to have decent tires, and be a bit lucky nothing goes wrong.
(3) Merging at +15mph compared to traffic flow is not going to be that smooth. You'll be running too fast and will need to brake or merge left too quickly. Either way, it's not being part of the flow of traffic.
(4) You mentioned, "accelerate to 98 while merging". I think that is also wrong. When changing lanes it is a good idea to accelerate by about +3mph. +15mph is overkill. Further, a merging car should be at speed before it even starts to move left. The acceleration ramp, the on-ramp, that is where you match traffic speed and then merge in.
Though, if I had to pick between merging at 15mph too slow vs too fast, I'd probably pick to merge too fast.
We also don’t use simulators, UK driving students are on standard roads with other road users.
You’ll struggle to book one less than 6 months in advance I believe, but in theory you could be driving at 17 years and a couple weeks.
1. A written exam, takes ~30 mins to 1 hour at the DMV 2. A 5 hour class (when I took this the 5 hour class clearly hadn't been updated for decades) 3. A driving exam that took ~30 minutes end to end
My understand is that most states are like this, though it gets a bit more stringent if you are under 18
I think some parents would if offered the chance. It gives the opportunity to see how your kid responds in situations (like red light running) that would not likely come up during the drivers test, or even during 50 hours of driving practice. You can throw things at a kid in a simulator that he won’t have seen in real life, and that you wouldn’t throw at him in real life testing.
In Indiana, for example, drivers education lets you get it about 6 months earlier than if a relative teaches you. Without drivers ed, you can get a learner permit at 16 as long as you pass the "knowledge test".