How many points can you lose before you failYes, you have to do it even if you're going straight. It's a silly rule, just causes more confusion tbh. But make sure you do this in your test.
If you're on a double lane (like i drew ^) and you're on a Blue lane, DO NOT INDICATE LEFT WHEN GOING STRAIGHT. But if you're on the RED LANE, REMEMBER TO INDICATE LEFT WHEN GOING STRAIGHT.
If you're on a single lane and going straight through the roundabout, then you still need to indicate left when exiting the roundabout.
If I remember correctly, they take 2 points off if you fail to do this correctly or don't do it at all.
lol @ the post(s) above.
Faking Your 120 log book hours (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter -allen23-
- Start date
It depends. The test is out of /100, sometimes goes up to /101-105 or so if there's 'hazards' (such as pedestrian running across the road suddenly, etc). You need 90% or above with NO fail items to pass the test ( or 3 fails max, i can't remember sorry lol).
When you go for your test, you'll be taken through 25 different zones (streets/road). You'll be assessed in 5 areas : Speed management (S); road positioning (P); decision making (D); responding to hazards (H) and vehicle control (C). S, P, D and C are each worth 25 points each. H will be worth 1 each or whatever (like I said above) if you encounter any.
Note that even if you get 90%+ they can still fail you if you get an 'instant fail'.
Last edited:
lol you are a fucking idiot, go read your "A guide to the driving test" that you received when you got your L's and go to page 16i have to not speed.
I am generally over by 5km/hr
Question
I had this fucking stupid instructor from L trent, she was really bad couldn't speak english nor did she know of the area. Anyway she said I had to indicate left at a round a bout even if I am going straight
Is this legit, i thought she was a fucking idiot saying it
Alright here's the go all you little pathetic shits, im about to turn 20, ive lost my log book without photocoping it THREE TIMES i had my licence test book for 2 weeks from now and i lost it again, ive been driving for almost three years and im still going to start all over again by driving the hours...THERE"S A REASON THE RULES ASK YOU TO DO 120 NOW, BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE YOU THINK YOU KNOW EVERYTHING AND ARE TO DUMB SHIT LAZY TO DO SOMETHING RIGHT, WELL I CANT WAIT TO SEE YOU ON THE NEWS AFTER YOU"VE KILLED YOUR FRIENDS OR FAMILY AFTER A BAD LAST SECOND DECISION, IF YOU HAVNT NOTICED PEOPLE WHO"VE HAD THEIR LICENCE FOR DECADES STILL DIE BECAUSE OF LACK OF KNOWLEDGE , I HOPE YOU ALL GET CAUGHT FOR MISLEADING AND FRAUD!!!! THATS A GOOD 10-20 YEARS AND A LIFE TIME RECORD ON YOUR NAME , TRY GET YOUR BLOODY LICENCE THEN!!!!!!.
Azamakumar
bannèd
what a ridiculous post
If you're retarded enough to lose something like this then you have nobody to blame but yourself. Further, I'm fairly sure it's more than perfectly acceptable to just rewrite them all in (sure you may not be able to remember them all, especially if you can't even remember where you left your logbook but those drives to tafe/the mental hospital should be fairly regular), in fact I think if you contact the RTA or whatever it's called now you should find that it's actually encouraged, and any personal decision to redo them all is but a reflection on your esteemed character.
Also, surely, someone as objectable as you come off should realise that the reasons for changes such as that are politically motivated, and given the miracle that is hindsight i think it's safe to say that the extra 70hrs learners are forced to do has had absolutely no (at least statistically) significant effect on the road toll, or I'm willing to bet even accidents, where learners/p platers are involved. As for your remark about people who have been had their license for decades, well that's just not specific enough. It's not like everyone drives every day, once you pass your p's test as early as at the age of 17 there is no further practical testing and as such all skills developed would have to be under the 120 supervised hours. While this may instil good habits from the get go it more often than not doesn't as there is no requirement for professional training, only assessment (although to the state govt's credit they do incentivise it). Further to the point I doubt that it's a result of a lack of education, moreso a lacking skill set or minimal experience. Funnily enough it's the legal requirements for driver training which are to blame for that.
As for your comments about fraud and whatnot, proving such would be a very arduous process for the RTA, and is almost always neglected in favour of just cancelling your test booking and forcing you to come back later. Also generally criminal convictions in NSW (Australia) are spent after 10 years, which while they are permanent in a sense, will only need to be disclosed within the first 10 years of the conviction, or for certain positions where a duty of care is to be exercised (for instance as a police officer or a teacher). Aside from that, sex offences carry a conviction that does not become spent and are much closer to the definition of 'permanent'. But that's a bit of a long bow to draw from faking hours on your log book.
In short, $10 says you crash in the next 3 years.
zombie omie jay
Banned
schooled
Lolsmith
kill all boomers
yeah aren't most accidents due to lack of knowledge of how their cars actually operate and how to drive defensively (or w/e) as opposed to know how to reverse park and go around a roundabout for 60 hours straight
Didnt they knock off 20 hours lol?
And to further Azamakumars post, if the P instructor didnt find you to be a competent driver, he/she WILL fail you.
EDIT: just noticed you live in Vic.
Just a FYI, the asshats that run the RTA/vicroads BS most of their statistics. Motorcycle related deaths have been on a steady decline since the LAMScheme was introduced, and yet VicRoads still make out as if it is still rising.
Id take anything said from VicRoads with a grain of salt if I were you.
Last edited:
zombie omie jay
Banned
LAMs was introduced in july 2008
victorian motorcyclist deaths were 43 that year
38 in 2009
and 49 in 2010
gradual decline okay then (wrong)
Havox
Active Member
While I agree with you in principal, I'm against faking log book hours but seriously? How the heck do you manage to lose the book 3 times? That almost takes a deliberate act of failure. Honestly, that in itself is a bit pathetic.
Azamakumar
bannèd
I'm calling wrong
the number of actual deaths has remained somewhat constant apart from spikes in line with the road toll but they haven't taken into account the increase per capita of motorcycles in the population or the correlation between distance travelled per capita for bikes vs cars
glory of statistics they'll say anything you want
AMCN usually has an article about it and someone ties VicRoads in, ill get the next issue and see what they say.