Thread: off-road license (?)

Don't buy into it guys, it's another media hype thing, if the government brought this in there would be heaps of toysans rusting gently in paddocks as no one would have a license to drive.
then the amount of revenue that the government would miss out on would be massive from sales of brand spanking new motors ba humbug

Yes i agree with the idea why , because i have special licences for a motorbike and several types of trucks a forklift and as a shooter i have a licence for that as well , it will just be another hidden tax as in all the licences i already have

They don't need to bring in a special license. They don't need to bring in new laws. They just need to start policing the basic ones they have in place to protect us against ourselves already.

I was at an underground mine recently, and I looked through the assessment you need to do before driving an LV (4x4) on site. It was extremely detailed - including checking the battery fluid, checking the axles for leaks, keeping the vehicle in low range 4x4 underground, pointing it into a wall when parking, etc...

Most of the above applies to cars as well. I think the standard of the driving test could be improved (and standardised across Australia). I am not sure if a specific 4x4 licence is needed though.

We had this debate a few months ago when the last tourist hired Troopie rolled on Fraser Island.

Incidentally, here are the last few threads on the subject with dates...

8th September 2009
26th July 2009
18th April 2009
11th August 2008

Firstly, I am in favour of a specialised license classification for off-road vehicles. The problem however, is how to correctly define what specific vehicles should require this type of license endorsement. I have pasted my thoughts below from the last thread (along with some questions that were posed by other members) as I have given the matter considerable thought...

I've said it before and I'll say it again - introduce a license class for vehicles with a low-ratio gearbox. 18 months grace period for those of us who already have high/low ratio vehicles to get our licenses upgraded, then bring it into full force.

No way then can an unlicensed driver (especially one from overseas) be able to hire a 2 tonne Troopie and park it on it's lid on a beach somewhere!

• What about a 4x4s without low-range??? (Auto gearboxes do a very good job of compensating for a lack of low-range...)

The only 4x4s I can think of without low range are soft-roaders anyway (I'm sure someone will enlighten me if there are other, serious ones). These are generally designed with more of an on-road bias so pose less of a threat to inexperienced drivers. Also without the swags of available accessories there is less chance of someone trying to take one to Fraser Island, and no regular hire company would let them anyway.

• What about your 'lifestyle choice' family who want to own a Discovery but never select low-range??

Tough! The license class needs to be for the intended use of the vehicle. As far as I'm concerned, if you buy a "real" 4x4 you should be properly trained or get something more appropriate. We do it for motorcycles.

• I see where you're going but I think it would be somewhat open to abuse... It'll also instantly kill off the 4wd market in Oz!

I personally think it will improve it. Most 4x4s sold here are not dual range and not capable of crossing the Simpson. We are only really talking about 20-odd actual vehicle models (that I can count off the top of my head). Manufacturers of these vehicles would just have to promote safe off-road driving by offering the equivalent of a motorcycle "Q-Ride" (not sure what other states have) to get purchasers' licenses upgraded to include the new class.

• Most people would see those regs and say "Why would I want to upgrade my license?", the only people who would take up the option would be the more 'hardcore' 4x4 user. Then, if they don't have the option on their license, they will instantly discount anything with low-range as they won't want to take another test just to drive that type of car.

The point here is that tall, heavy, 4x4 vehicles pose a risk of injury or death to the inexperienced operator off-road which are different to risks faced by regular cars on-road. I would rather be forced to upgrade my license than have the government lock-up more and more bush tracks and interesting, 4x4 accessible wilderness areas because of litigation paralysis.

• Finally, that will then lead to the bottom falling out of the Oz market for all 4x4s with a low-range gearbox (wether people would be using it or not). In turn, that would push up the price through the good old rules of supply & demand.

Like I said, this legislation would not affect most soft-roaders and that's where the real volume sales are anyway. The companies like Land Rover & Nissan but more importantly Toyota who produce some volume of dual-range 4x4 sales should be smart enough to make this work to their advantage. After all, Land Rover already have their own driver training scheme and use this as part of their appeal.

Maybe the regulations would need to include a nominated kerb weight and vehicle height or ground clearance (thinking of Suzuki Jimnys here which should also require the license IMO).


So this is how I see it working...

Using QLD as an example, introduce a new license class C4 (general cars are C). This means the motorist is licensed to drive off-road capable 4WD or AWD motor vehicles with a dual-range or low ratio (includes single-range vehicles with ultra-low first or crawler gears)gearbox and a kerb weight inexcess of 1800kg OR ground clearance inexcess of 190mm with a greater than 1 height:width ratio.

ie. heavy or tall purpose built off-road vehicles.

I'm sure some boffins would be able to refine this so the legislation doesn't incorrectly cover the wrong cars but it is just an idea. The rules above would therefore cover the Suzuki Jimny but not Subaru Forester as an example.

I see it this way, if I am to take a vehicle out onto any road where the safety of others and myself is placed in my hands I am happy to have myself and others take a license test to do so.. a 4wd drives different to a regular road vehicle as we know so therefore is it not logical to take a seperate test to qualify you to drive it? ..or simply a combined test to qualify you for both.
the proof is in the pudding, its not like playing golf, yours and others lives depend on your ability to control the vehicle you are driving.

I would like some one to convince me that having a special license (4WD) would save lives. We have licenses now but ~1600 die each year on the roads. Now the reason may be speeding, stupidity or whatever but 99.99% of them have an appropriate class license for the vehicle they are driving.

Whether the test is 'proper' is a whole new debate.



Martyn

Originally Posted by QLDMIKE

Bring in licences for 4x4s, trailers, the whole lot.
Getting a licence for driving should be like getting a licence for flying.
.......

For private pilots, the requirement for licence endorsements for types of single engined aircraft was dropped years ago (still need endorsements for retractable, conventional undercarriage etc).

I don't think the situation is comparable. The problem is rarely skills, but usually attitude, and more bureaucracy won't help.

John