[olduser]

I found this, it's a shame it is badly reported;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mxk1v1m49o

As you will have gathered from other posts, I think, done intelligently, this approach will have some effect but to be sure we need to have someway of measuring the outcome.

[Lily]

@olduser I think that’s a great idea. As the article says, when young people first get their licences, it can feel like they’re invincible. A quick stop and a reminder of the rules could be just what’s needed to bring them back down to earth, and maybe even save their lives (and others’ too) in the long run.

Were you ever stopped when you were a teen¿

[Rolebama]

Isn't it amazing how time changes attitudes? I, along with thousands of others, joined the Army as a teenager. HMG via the MoD spent £thousands teaching us that we were invincible! The thing was, we already knew it. We were teenagers.
As much as I admire the intention, I only hope that the successes far outweigh the failures. We have far too many roadside shrines locally.

[Drivingforfun]

I can't empathise with the seemingly common mindset that the police is a faceless organisation and the individuals in it are to be feared ... Growing up with a dad who was a copper - in the old days so he could take us to the station, lock us in the cells for fun, and we'd meet his mates who were all human as well... but if it makes people realise most police are just people who want to help and do the right thing - i.e. see them the same way I've been fortunate to be able to all along - I'm for it 👍

[Drivingforfun]

@Rolebama

Not sure how serious your comment was r.e. taught invincibility but it's interesting!!

I was talking to a friend the other day about how some US troops in the Vietnam war had been indoctrinated to the point there were individuals who literally couldn't understand why they weren't winning. And despite having plenty of legitimate ammunition (pun intended) to use as a reason for assured victory - better equipment, more funding, or whatever.. the confusion was predominantly around "we always win because we're American"

[NMNeil]

@Drivingforfun I was invited to have a few drinks with other police officers celebrating the 4th of July. Some smarta**se started on me with "We really gave you Brits a beating back then didn't we?"
My response of "And what if I was Vietnamese, would you be happy to be reminded that despite supposedly having the best trained and equipped army in the world you got your as**s kicked by an army of farmers barely out of the stone age?" was not well received.

[Rolebama]

I think that the Vietnam was lost purely because it was being micro-managed by those in Washington. Eg, Admiral of the 6th Fleet was advised of a convoy of Missiles heading for Hanoi. This came from a Phantom F4 Wild Weasel. The Admiral had to ask Washington for permission to attack the convoy, because he was not allowed to go outside his working parameters. Nobody in Washington was willing to incur the wrath of the President by responding in his stead. The President (LBJ) was asleep and nobody was willing to wake him. Six hours later, the Admiral was advised to attack the convoy, by which time, of course, it had disappeared.
That is just one of many of these incidents.

[olduser]

Originally Posted by Lily

@olduser I think that’s a great idea. As the article says, when young people first get their licences, it can feel like they’re invincible. A quick stop and a reminder of the rules could be just what’s needed to bring them back down to earth, and maybe even save their lives (and others’ too) in the long run.

Were you ever stopped when you were a teen¿

Not for motoring offences but I lived in the country so drove tractors, motorbikes, and cars off public roads from around 10 yrs old. After I had frightened myself a few times I calmed down and learned to drive safely. I learned to plan, because when I got say a tractor and trailer into a mess, most times I was left to sort it out on my own! (red face and hard work)
So by the time I was able to take a test, in driving terms I was much older, and perhaps wiser.

[olduser]

Originally Posted by Drivingforfun

@Rolebama

Not sure how serious your comment was r.e. taught invincibility but it's interesting!!

I was talking to a friend the other day about how some US troops in the Vietnam war had been indoctrinated to the point there were individuals who literally couldn't understand why they weren't winning. And despite having plenty of legitimate ammunition (pun intended) to use as a reason for assured victory - better equipment, more funding, or whatever.. the confusion was predominantly around "we always win because we're American"

In reading about wars from the first war with Germany forward, one things that is apparent - we and America always start by fighting the last war not the new one, the generals use strategy's developed in the previous war or wars! And Britain expects the enemy to play by the rules.
Meanwhile, in peacetime weapons of war change, army's train with the new weapons but until used in anger, don't know how best to use it, and cannot respond quickly to any changes needed because of the bureaucracy.

I suppose it comes down to communication, the planners are not getting the right information to plan with. Unfortunately, most military organisations make sure they never do, the planners are talking down to lower ranks, and the lower ranks (who have the most up to date info) are not allowed to talk upwards to higher ranks.

[Lily]

@olduser My cousins grew up in the countryside and also learned to drive tractors and even cars when they were really young. Neither of them has ever been in a motoring accident, because they learned to be responsible early on.

So I can completely see @younguser being wiser than his years!

[Rolebama]

@olduser When British vehicles, armoured and otherwise, were brought back from Afghanistan, they were, for the most part, different from what originally went out there. Simply because our upper echelons of the military do listen to the ideas and suggestions of the people who use the equipment, and have been doing so for the past 60yrs or so.

[olduser]

Originally Posted by Rolebama

@olduser When British vehicles, armoured and otherwise, were brought back from Afghanistan, they were, for the most part, different from what originally went out there. Simply because our upper echelons of the military do listen to the ideas and suggestions of the people who use the equipment, and have been doing so for the past 60yrs or so.

That is a fair point Rolebama but how much effect did pressure from the media and general public have to do with that.

The point I was trying to make was - though there are developments between wars, our politicians tend to think the last event will be the last one ever, and run our forces down below a safe minimum, and even worse our industrial base.
As new equipment is developed in peacetime, forces get trained on it but in the context of the last war.

In Afghanistan the Taliban had learned how to damage, and defeat an army (Russian) designed to fight a face to face mechanised war.
The Taliban learned to use road side bombs.

In previous conflicts we, and the Americans, found Jeeps could be useful so we sent Land Rovers in spite of knowing about how the Russians had suffered from road side bombs. At least the Americans sent their men in in armoured vehicles.

The irony is, what caused the public uproar, was battlefield medical attention to injured soldiers has improved, so men who would have died lived but with limbs blown off etc.

In the public perception wounded men are different to dead - a man with visible horrendous wounds that will be with him for the rest of his life, is different to a dead man. We bury the dead then forget, when we see the wounded man it keeps reminding us of what he is suffering on our behalf.

I do remember, when the media was full of stories about our soldiers being blown up and injured, top brass appearing on TV and suggesting the Land Rover was appropriate, if the men would only use them properly, or words to that effect.

[olduser]

Jumping back to being or feeling invincible, is this a symptom of lack of experience?

There is nothing like driving into a situation, and realising, what happens next is out of my control!
That will, or should put a very big dent in your feelings of invincibility but then that can only work if you are mature enough to not be fooled by your own excuses. (the other party was speeding, didn't stop, I had the right of way, that bit of road was slippery, etc.)

I was going to suggest a session on a skid pan as part of driver training would help* but mentioning maturity has made me think the problem really stems from teaching youngsters to pass the test when they are just too young. (immature)

*
TC 1474, I assume you had training on a skid pan, if you can remember, apart from the obvious, did it affect how you drove after the training, bolder or more respectful? Or had you been riding motorbikes, and therefore already much more aware of the conditions you were riding in than your average car driver?

[NMNeil]

Originally Posted by Rolebama

I think that the Vietnam was lost purely because it was being micro-managed by those in Washington.

I think it was lost due to the one question being asked by the troops, "Why are we here?"

[olduser]

Originally Posted by NMNeil

I think it was lost due to the one question being asked by the troops, "Why are we here?"

Answer, "the presidents still asleep!"😏

At the time, it would be, "fighting communism."

[Nick]

Sometimes the problem is that we are taught how to pass the test, ot taught how to drive. Getting that experience of actual driving is so important - how to handle certain situations, what to look out for, how to look out for it, what being a considerate driver looks like, and the opposite of that. I've always felt the opposite of invincible as a driver due to losing several friends to one car crash whilst still at school - the effect it had on my approach to driving still rings in my ears to this day.

[Rolebama]

When I was taught to drive in the Army, I was lucky in a number of ways: We had our own, on camp, driver training circuit; there was a lot less traffic on the road (when we were considered proficient enough to go out there); and the course lasted three months and included night driving.
One aspect which I did not like was that we had to turn off windscreen wipers at the end of a stroke. No self-parking, no flick wipe or intermittents. It was part of the Test at the end of the course, and if the examiner decided that the wiper was not at the end of the sweep, or had started the next sweep when turned off, that was a fail.
What, in hindsight, I do appreciate though, was the much lower amount of traffic on the road, along with fewer roundabouts and traffic lights, so a journey time could be calculated almost to the minute.
Today, learning to drive is on a par with being thrown in at the deep end of the pool and being left to sink or swim.