Last night, on BBC1, the Inside Out programme concentrated on older drivers. It paid specific attention to an accident in October 2015, when an 87-year-old male driver was driving the wrong way and going northwards on the south bound carriageway of the M1. He hit a Ford Transit van and the 27-year-old male passenger in the transit was fatally injured.
Angela Rippon and two others were each put through a 15 minute test in a simulator. The family of the deceased passenger are calling for older drivers to be retested.
As per normal for the BBC, the results were inconclusive. A middle aged woman came out on top , with Angel Rippon (oldest) 2nd., and a young male driver 3rd. But none were deemed in need of retesting. How can a 15-minute 'test' of three people in a simulator give any plausible guidance relating to older drivers' competence. The views of an insurance representative produced older drivers as the safest on the road - saying their responses were longer, but that they compensated for this by experience, driving more slowly and giving themselves more room for stopping. Insurers obviously base their opinions on statistics, but if they were not reasonably correct it would be costly in claims to the industry, would it not?
I don't know how retesting all older drivers could be economically achieved. I am 80, I still tow our caravan, and am taking it to France again this year. If anyone cares to check out caravanners/motorhomers they would find I am not the oldest, and by no means unique.
Personally, I would not object to being retested - when I see the antics of some drivers a lot younger than myself I conclude that I am definitely NOT among the dangerous ones.
One road death is one too many, and a nil result year on year would be Godsend to us all. But how could that be achieved?
If it would kick the criticisms into touch, let's have these retests ASAP!
However, based on known statistics, it is obvious that just concentrating on older drivers would make very little change to the overall accident/death rate.
Angela Rippon and two others were each put through a 15 minute test in a simulator. The family of the deceased passenger are calling for older drivers to be retested.
As per normal for the BBC, the results were inconclusive. A middle aged woman came out on top , with Angel Rippon (oldest) 2nd., and a young male driver 3rd. But none were deemed in need of retesting. How can a 15-minute 'test' of three people in a simulator give any plausible guidance relating to older drivers' competence. The views of an insurance representative produced older drivers as the safest on the road - saying their responses were longer, but that they compensated for this by experience, driving more slowly and giving themselves more room for stopping. Insurers obviously base their opinions on statistics, but if they were not reasonably correct it would be costly in claims to the industry, would it not?
I don't know how retesting all older drivers could be economically achieved. I am 80, I still tow our caravan, and am taking it to France again this year. If anyone cares to check out caravanners/motorhomers they would find I am not the oldest, and by no means unique.
Personally, I would not object to being retested - when I see the antics of some drivers a lot younger than myself I conclude that I am definitely NOT among the dangerous ones.
One road death is one too many, and a nil result year on year would be Godsend to us all. But how could that be achieved?
If it would kick the criticisms into touch, let's have these retests ASAP!
However, based on known statistics, it is obvious that just concentrating on older drivers would make very little change to the overall accident/death rate.