K53 No longer relevant for sa drivers - RTMC

Hopefully you do check your blind spot when changing lanes.
Next to a pavement? I see no reason to check for something that's less likely to happen than being hit by lightning, get caught in a flood and be swept up by a tornado all at the same time, while there's a real chance someone could walk over the road. I also see no reason to check left, right and behind me just because I stopped. Don't see what could possibly have changed that will cause me to have an accident in the opposite direction than the one I'm taking off to.

Checking the blind spot is also not fool proof to avoid an accident as there's certain areas around a car where it's impossible to see anything. I've avoided more where I couldn't see the car but knew it's there by observing my surroundings and having a mental picture of where every car should be at the time.
 
I also see no reason to check left, right and behind me just because I stopped. Don't see what could possibly have changed that will cause me to have an accident in the opposite direction than the one I'm taking off to.

Cyclists, runners, etc. At a stop street, yeah, you're right, no point, but if you've been stopped at a red light for a while a cyclist could be about to pass you or a runner might take a chance and try to beat the red light or whatever. It does help to be aware of the surroundings.

The problem, as I mentioned, is that K53 is a series of stupidly-taught exaggerated head-movements without any of the accompanying insights into actual road-safety and what you need to be aware of.

Checking the blind spot is also not fool proof to avoid an accident as there's certain areas around a car where it's impossible to see anything. I've avoided more where I couldn't see the car but knew it's there by observing my surroundings and having a mental picture of where every car should be at the time.
Yes this is true, if you glance in your mirrors from time to time then even if a car is in your blind spot you should know that because you saw it get there. Still I always check when I change lanes or turn corners in case I missed it earlier or someone is coming up stupidly fast (bikers often do on the M5 here in CT, stupid idiots).
 
Cyclists, runners, etc. At a stop street, yeah, you're right, no point, but if you've been stopped at a red light for a while a cyclist could be about to pass you or a runner might take a chance and try to beat the red light or whatever. It does help to be aware of the surroundings.

The problem, as I mentioned, is that K53 is a series of stupidly-taught exaggerated head-movements without any of the accompanying insights into actual road-safety and what you need to be aware of.
Wait a minute. K53 teaches you to check left and right next to your vehicle, not down the crossing road where the real danger is. You're right it's just some stupid head movements and not really being aware of your surroundings. That's the part that should rather be taught and it takes like 2 seconds before you know you're going to take off instead of 5 seconds of frustration doing all the movements while people are honking.
 
On the one hand, minibus taxis don't have a care in the world when running red lights.

On the other hand, having LED traffic lights with timers from the 80's and no battery back-up is retarded.

Smart lights would save money by utilizing the maximum capacity of the roads almost immediately. Even simple independent traffic-volume based switching with counters would do much better than what we have. Then add networked optimization and you have a bullet-proof system until all vehicles are autonomous.
 
Next to a pavement? I see no reason to check for something that's less likely to happen than being hit by lightning, get caught in a flood and be swept up by a tornado all at the same time, while there's a real chance someone could walk over the road. I also see no reason to check left, right and behind me just because I stopped. Don't see what could possibly have changed that will cause me to have an accident in the opposite direction than the one I'm taking off to.

Checking the blind spot is also not fool proof to avoid an accident as there's certain areas around a car where it's impossible to see anything. I've avoided more where I couldn't see the car but knew it's there by observing my surroundings and having a mental picture of where every car should be at the time.

I mostly agree with you (and @newby_investor). The one important exception, is when a cyclist approaches from behind while you are stopped at an intersection, and you are planning to turn. Pedestrians should not be wandering around intersections, though sometimes they do.

Having a mental picture of where other vehicles are at all times is an important part of smooth driving, though it is not foolproof, and requires a great deal of experience and mental focus, which not all drivers have.

If you drive the same route hundreds of times a year, you build up a history of which intersections are the ones where mistakes are made, and where to focus your attention. Driving in an unfamiliar area can be a nightmare, since you have no idea where the risks are, and you revert to a nervous K53 driver...

The saying goes: Rules are for dummies, experts know when to bend them. Unfortunately not everyone is an expert.

Edit: @GoB True, but verging off topic...
 
Motivation for K53: You need to be aware of your surroundings when you drive (situational awareness).

Implementation of K53: You move your head from side to side to satisfy examiners. Your face is pointed towards the blind spot but you aren't actually registering. When I did a couple of lessons for k53 with an instructor, I noticed afterwards that he never mentioned what sort of things I was checking for when I looked at my blind spot. No insight into the situation whatsoever.

In many ways I think the only way you're going to learn to drive is by driving, contrary to what @SauRoNZA asserts. That being said however - the Finnish model, where children in school are taught about car control and that kind of thing on dedicated tracks - there could be value in that. I recently had to teach someone to drive and the problem was that they were learning two things at once - car control, and situational awareness / how other idiots on the road behave. It can be traumatising for a young person to have to figure out why the car is stalling so easily on an uphill, while there are impatient drivers hooting and zooming past. So a 2-stage model, if you like, where people can learn the basics of car control, how not to stall, emergency braking, and yes - parking - away from normal traffic can have value. But you'd still need actual experience on the road to be able to drive properly around other drivers.

When I learned to drive, I had been on the roads for years already with my bicycle, so I had a solid idea of the road rules and how motorists behave in traffic. So I learned car control on deserted streets and parking areas, and didn't have much hassle adjusting to actual traffic. But recently, in Cape Town's Southern Suburbs, finding empty streets for my student to practise on was a severe challenge. Came right eventually, but it took months and many tears (and yes a few scratches on the car but fortunately it was a cheap one bought for the purpose. No one else's car was harmed, just the side of my garage...).

The Finnish model is exactly the way I see it.

They should have full muscle memory car control before going out on the road.

As you said the trauma of being on the open road while still learning the basics is a very big part of the problem.

Get that sorted at dedicates facilities and bam everyone is a better driver.

They can do this basic competency instead of a full license test every five years.

If you fail you get six months or whatever to re-test before needing to redo your license.
 
Having a mental picture of where other vehicles are at all times is an important part of smooth driving, though it is not foolproof, and requires a great deal of experience and mental focus, which not all drivers have.
/QUOTE]

I would argue the mental focus isn’t absent but rather wilfully ignored in favour of music/food/cellphone/newspaper/book/sex/etc.

People have no clue or concept of the machinery they operate because it’s the norm for everyone to do so.
 
I mostly agree with you (and @newby_investor). The one important exception, is when a cyclist approaches from behind while you are stopped at an intersection, and you are planning to turn. Pedestrians should not be wandering around intersections, though sometimes they do.

Having a mental picture of where other vehicles are at all times is an important part of smooth driving, though it is not foolproof, and requires a great deal of experience and mental focus, which not all drivers have.

If you drive the same route hundreds of times a year, you build up a history of which intersections are the ones where mistakes are made, and where to focus your attention. Driving in an unfamiliar area can be a nightmare, since you have no idea where the risks are, and you revert to a nervous K53 driver...

The saying goes: Rules are for dummies, experts know when to bend them. Unfortunately not everyone is an expert.

Edit: @GoB True, but verging off topic...
I do agree with that. It's a combination rather than a single solution. Know where all cars are and check the blind spot next to you just in case but not when next to the pavement.

Reason I don't see the purpose of checking behind me when going forward is that even if there's an accident I won't be the one making it so I won't be the one able to avoid it. Same for next to me. When turning you should be checking for cars, bikes and cycles who stupidly decide to overtake but the K53 doesn't teach how to do that properly yet it anticipates that someone could disregard the laws of physics and simply overtake me over a pavement.
 
This reminds me of how many people don't know what a yield sign is and wait and wait for the robot to turn green before turning. Like the days when they started putting red turn signals at all of the intersections and the opposite happened where people mistook it as being safe to turn. If only common sense was common.
 
If only common sense was common.
This is the tragedy of our times, I think...

Yeah, often road users do things that they're not supposed to do, but the general purpose of "driving defensively" is to avoid these kinds of accidents. Numerous times I've noticed when others are doing stupid stuff, and backed off to avoid accidents. Wouldn't have been my fault but doesn't matter whose fault it is if you're killed. You're still dead. I'd rather be alive.
 
There are some very valid point's being made all over this thread. My daughter has her learners at the moment and I am blessed with the job of teaching her how to drive.

You have to know the correct procedure before you can simplify things, it is like that with everything in life. Once you know what should be done you can then skip the steps that are not relevant to the particular situation.

Being in the car with her has let me observe other drivers carefully and in a different way to how I would normally when I'm driving myself and made me realise how much lawlessness I have actually adapted my driving style to accommodate automatically.

The other thing I have noticed is that the people with patience for a learner are the ones obeying road rules whilst the impatient and sometimes rude (hooting and sign language) motorist's have perhaps forgotten what it was like or have perhaps never been in a learners position, and once past us proceed to break some rule just down the road.

I do like the idea of a system like the German one (and now hearing about the Finnish one) where a person has a limited licence for a while and if, and only if, they behave themselves it gets converted to a full licence.
 
I do like the idea of a system like the German one (and now hearing about the Finnish one) where a person has a limited licence for a while and if, and only if, they behave themselves it gets converted to a full licence.

I think the Aussies have something a bit similar where if they pass the practical test they have to wear "P" signs and they're limited to a certain speed or off the motorways or something like that, I forget exactly. An Aussie friend told me about it at one stage. I forget if they have to do another test or if they can just ditch the limits after 6 months / 1 year without incidents.

In Germany and Finland, apart from simply being more professional as a whole, it's critical that they have good car control, especially for icy and snowy conditions. There's a reason that so many world rally champions / formula one champions have been Finns.
 
Being in the car with her has let me observe other drivers carefully and in a different way to how I would normally when I'm driving myself and made me realise how much lawlessness I have actually adapted my driving style to accommodate automatically.

The other thing I have noticed is that the people with patience for a learner are the ones obeying road rules whilst the impatient and sometimes rude (hooting and sign language) motorist's have perhaps forgotten what it was like or have perhaps never been in a learners position, and once past us proceed to break some rule just down the road.

Unfortunately 'attitude' is the most dangerous thing on the road, and something that is impossible to legislate for, or to monitor adequately. In the US these often fall under Moving Violations, which are the least effectively policed in SA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_violation#Examples_of_moving_violations

I don't have recent experience teaching a learner, but one thing that did alarm me was the tendency to see the road as a race to get there the fastest (particularly young males). Speeding up and then slowing down, without anticipation the upcoming flow of traffic, is both dangerous, and adds to wear and tear, and fuel consumption.
 
I think the Aussies have something a bit similar where if they pass the practical test they have to wear "P" signs and they're limited to a certain speed or off the motorways or something like that, I forget exactly. An Aussie friend told me about it at one stage. I forget if they have to do another test or if they can just ditch the limits after 6 months / 1 year without incidents.

Similar system here in NZ. You get your learner's licence first, then you get a restricted license where you would get a full license back in South Africa, and you have to do a further, more stringent practical test to earn your full license.

I'm going to go heavy into detail for the rest of this post, so please stop reading if you don't want to be presented with one of my infamous "walls of text" (people who raided with me in World of Warcraft back when I had the dual GM/RL role will know what I'm on about here). For those who actually want the detail, here it is:

The first stage in NZ is getting your learners licence, and it's conceptually exactly the same as back in South Africa. You need to be at least 16 years of age, meet the eyesight requirements, and have no health conditions that could impair your driving ability. You'll then book a time to do your theory test (entirely computerised, I observed some poor nervous sod taking the test on a computer set up for this purpose at the AA in Wellington while I was getting my RSA license converted to a NZ one) and, if you pass the test, you are issued with your learners license. The conditions imposed are similar to South Africa: must always drive with a supervisor in the front passenger seat, can only carry passengers with the approval of your supervisor, must display "L" plates, etc. The learners license has a 5 year validity period.

The second stage is gaining your restricted license, which you cannot do within 6 months of obtaining your learners license. This is done by passing a practical test, which appears similar to the South African practical test. The restricted license allows you to drive on your own, but not between 10pm and 5am. You can also carry passengers without a supervisor being present under very limited circumstances (only if the passenger is your spouse, a dependent child, or a relative that lives with you and is on a social security benefit). The restricted license is also valid for 5 years.

To then progress to a full license, if you are under 25, you must have held your restricted license for at least 18 months, which can be shortened to 12 months if you complete an approved advanced driving skills course. For those 25 and over, those time periods are reduced to 6 months and 3 months respectively. You have to complete a more advanced practical assessment (for example, you have to verbally describe to the testing officer what hazards you have identified and what action you are taking in response, without any input from the testing officer). Once this is successfully complete, your full license is issued.

Finally, you cannot progress to a heavy vehicle license without obtaining a full car license first.
 
Finally, you cannot progress to a heavy vehicle license without obtaining a full car license first.

This. Oh, so much this! I can't count the number of idiots that I've run into who do driving lessons and a licence in a Code 10 vehicle so that they can skip some of the parking tests. Then they ride little hatchbacks like a Yaris or something, which you'd imagine would be trivially easy, but they have no idea how to park or maneuver the thing properly, and hold up traffic and cause hazards to themselves and everyone else around. I wish we could have this here.
 
This. Oh, so much this! I can't count the number of idiots that I've run into who do driving lessons and a licence in a Code 10 vehicle so that they can skip some of the parking tests. Then they ride little hatchbacks like a Yaris or something, which you'd imagine would be trivially easy, but they have no idea how to park or maneuver the thing properly, and hold up traffic and cause hazards to themselves and everyone else around. I wish we could have this here.

Not only that, but you need to work your way through the various license categories if you want to drive the 18 wheelers.

We have six license classes: Class 1 is the car license, Class 2 is a "medium rigid vehicle", Class 3 is a "medium combination vehicle", Class 4 is a "heavy rigid vehicle", Class 5 is a "heavy combination vehicle", and Class 6 is the motorcycle license.

Once you have your full Class 1 license (as I detailed earlier), and you've held it for at least six months, you can obtain your Class 2 learners license, once you've passed the theory test. Then, after another waiting period (which I don't know offhand how long it is), you can either do an approved course or pass a practical test to obtain the full Class 2 license (there are no restricted licenses for Class 2-5, since you already did all of that stuff to get your Class 1).

From there, the license paths diverge, depending on where you need (or would like) to progress next. From having a Class 2 license, you can go to either a Class 3 or a Class 4. It's the same procedure: get a learners for the respective class after having the full license for the previous class for a prescribed period of time, and then after another prescribed period of time, do either an approved course or pass a practical test to get the full license. There is however no theory test for a Class 4 license since the Class 2 theory test already covers this. To do the Full Monty and get a Class 5 license, the prerequisite is having either a Class 3 or Class 4, and you're exempt from the Class 5 theory test if you have a Class 3 (since that covers all the combination vehicle theory already). Also, if you do the Class 2-3-5 progression, getting a Class 5 automatically gives you a Class 4 as well (and likewise, if you do the Class 2-4-5 progression, you'll get the missing Class 3 when you get your Class 5).

I'm not entirely familiar with the heavy vehicle license stuff since I have no intention of getting one myself, so some of the above may be slightly inaccurate -- through I think I've gotten the fundamentals right.
 
Someone needs to teach South Africans what ARROWS are. you know the things on the toys your parents bought you when you were three. If its RED with a RIGHT ARROW it means you can't turn right even if its Green on the STRAIGHT ARROW.

its not rocket science but seems to be beyond the grasp of many a South African.. :mad:

How are people going to see arrows if they've reclined the seats so far back that they barely see the road directly in front of them?
 
Last edited:
so nobody believes they can pull it off?

I mean if the laws are changed to require retesting after 5 years,
and all the rest of it,

according to you guys, its a pipe dream?

Yes I agree, corruption is the biggest issue, but also the carnage every holiday season is something that needs to be seen to be believed.
so maybe the fact that so many die every holiday season, will make the changes happen?

Too many drivers with no knowledge of rules and signs on the roads. Couple that with their "don't care" attitude, lack of appreciation for dangers associated with the machine they're operating, booze and you have a recipe for disaster
 
It's exactly like you're "supposed" to drive. I say that loosely because it doesn't actually show what you should be doing to be a real safe driver and there's a lot of redundant time wasting. Really who's going to overtake me over a pavement? That time checking my blind spot there's actually a really good chance I can hit a pedestrian. All of those redundant checks in directions where it's impossible to have an accident only causes frustration and congestion which are two major causes of accidents.

Taxis, dirt bikers, pedestrians, DC drivers, etc
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X