Direct Access, would you support changes?

[Grumpy Git]

I gave up instructing when CBT came in even though I had shelled out the money to do the instructors course at Cardington because I didn't agree with the system. but have continued to help anyone interested in road craft and used to write a safty collum in a magazine, until it went under

[BluBird]

I dont think it should be made the law but that is should be the option of the newly passed bike rider to restrict if they wish to.

If they apply this law to bike it should be the same for people who have just passed their car test - nothing to stop someone passing test in 1.2 corsa and going out and buying a 2litre Jag !!

Althrough that would stop me because i seem to have an inability to pass my car test !!??


Blu
x

[A_T]

You can't take a DAS test until you are 21 but you can take a restricted test on a 125cc at 17 which means at 19 when the restriction has ended you can ride any size bike anyway.....

Would make sense to get rid of DAS and introduce a 2 year restriction to every rider who passes and apply the same principal to c*r drivers too...

[speedy(delboy)]

If they apply this law to bike it should be the same for people who have just passed their car test - nothing to stop someone passing test in 1.2 corsa and going out and buying a 2litre Jag !!
x

But you are 20 times more likly to survive a car crash than you are a motorcycle crash. But i do agree with you

[ridenut]

So you probably know that the rules will be changing in the near future, a system whereby there are bhp limits etc. To cut it short no more passing your test in the morning and picking up a nice shiny new R1 in the afternoon.
So, let's imagine you passed your test years ago and are an experienced rider of high performance machines, with such a machine in your garage, and you have a next door neighbour, a decent sort who you have no problem in seeing living long and prospering. who has just passed Direct Access with no previous experience. Let us also assume that you are also a friendly type and you have an any rider policy for said bike.
Would you let that neighbour out on your shiny hypersport immediately they jump off a wheezy 500?
I would, providing that person had a life insurance policy with me named as the person to receive the proceeds upon ceasing of said life.

The way I see it is this.
Many moons ago when I did my test, most newbies were young riders who could never hope to afford the insurance on a big bike, let alone the new bike.
Consequently, we gradually scaled the CC ladder, gaining experience on a variety of machines before graduating to superbikes.
Todays new rider is a very different breed.
Mostly much more mature, with a decent disposable income, with kids now flown the nest.
They do not recoil in horror at the associated costs of running a high performance machine and can easily afford them.
This new breed started entering biking in the early 90's, and if you look at the accident statistics, that's where you see a big spike in the graph, as these people started falling off in their droves, often without any assistance from other road users.
In answer to the question.
I would like to see stricter laws, not for the young riders because they can't afford to own performance bikes anyway, but for the older ones who seem to have no concept of their own mortality.

[speedy(delboy)]

Shitting Hell, this thread was started 4.5 years ago, and someone still managed to find it and start it up

[greg]

Shitting Hell, this thread was started 4.5 years ago, and someone still managed to find it and start it up

As the thread originator, I agree

[Maver-Nick]

Yes, but take a closer look at who it is that's started the thread back up...

Eh... Stately... (Andyals...)... Now Ridenut...

You are certainly persistant if nothing else.

[billinom8s]

but just as easily disposed of if not wanted around, he is like the forum version of a warm kebab

[Smiler]

Shitting Hell, this thread was started 4.5 years ago, and someone still managed to find it and start it up

Wow, thats impressive...

[GIXXER KID]

one thing i find stupid is the 33bhp rule,

your restricted on a 600 say to 33bhp then 2 yrs up right full power, surely if it was say after 6 months 50bhp then a year 75bhp, year and a half 100bhp and then two years up full power. thus giving you time to adjust to the extra little bit of power rather than having up to about 100bhp jump after 2 yrs.

[ridenut]

one thing i find stupid is the 33bhp rule,

your restricted on a 600 say to 33bhp then 2 yrs up right full power, surely if it was say after 6 months 50bhp then a year 75bhp, year and a half 100bhp and then two years up full power. thus giving you time to adjust to the extra little bit of power rather than having up to about 100bhp jump after 2 yrs.

The fact is that sensible people tend to go down the restricted route.
The sort of people who don't want to jump straight onto crotch rocket and want to take it easy so I do not see them as a problem.

The people who just cannot wait for it tend to do direct access and the sooner we get rid of that and introduce a stepped licensing system, the better.

There are just way too many people, (mostly older) out there on bikes who just do not have the experience to ride them safely.

I'd be interested to know, out of all motorcycle accidents, how many involve older riders with little experience.

[Lady g]

I'd be interested to know, out of all motorcycle accidents, how many involve older riders with little experience.

Nice try and getting that old argument started up again.. Yaaaaawwwwwnnnnn.

Anyhoo - I thought you were 'Mr Statistics' when it came to this, so you should know all the answers - and no, we're not interested to hear them again, ta.