Not nice reading.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3954531.stm
E.g.from the above.
65% of those who failed a basic eye chart test were drivers. A third of the total sample who failed said they were not surprised and had suspicions their sight was not perfect.
|
Whats it say? cant see a damn thing.
Seriously tho, A lot of people get eyes corrected by laser surgery, perfectly acceptable for driving. Not accepted by Train companies for drivers or Airline pilots.
|
Not come across that many train companies that employ airline pilots... ;)
Seriously, this is more down to the fact the effects are not fully proven yet. I believe there are moves to change this on the railways now as there is more confidence that it does not cause significant long-term worries.
There is also the fact that in a car if you make a small mistake or miss a traffic signal the nature of the road-tyre interface means often mistakes can be corrected before they become serious. Trains take a lot longer to stop and train operators are persecuted far more for accidents than road users so they are naturally more careful - similar reasons apply to the airline industry.
|
|
|
|
|
This is available in larger font, should anyone require it ;o)
|
The report says that "Drivers must be able to read, in good light, a number plate from 20.5m (67.3ft)".
If this is true, who on earth came up with such an odd distance? 20m (or 21m) would be sensible. 20.5m is just plain odd.
--
L\'escargot by name, but not by nature.
|
|
It used to be a nice round 75ft until the size of the digits on number plates was reduced some years ago, and the reading distance was shortened by the same percentage.
|
|
TBH, I wonder how well this works anyway. I have trouble making out text at a distance (although my sight is good enough to do the numberplate thing) but I can still see clearly over a much longer distance - the problem is more my brain interpreting the text rather than my eyes being bad IYSWIM. I have no trouble making out objects which surely is far more important than being able to read text?
|
|
Same with me Steve, I can see objects clearly over long distances but would not have a clue what a number plate reads at the same distance - but what use is that to me? As a Dyslexic I get my letters mixed up anyway so dont think being able to read a plate at 67ft will be much benefit to me anyway.
|
|
|
|
Its 90ft for driving instructors, 67ft (20.5m) for older plates and 66ft (20m) for those with the smaller font from Sept 2001.
I wear glasses and over the years been to several opticians. Some of them don't even know what the distance is for reading number plates. Went to one and when I asked if my sight was adequate for driving they said just said "well you drove here didnt you?" so reasuring!!
|
There is a simple solution to this problem. Introduce a compulsory eye test for every driver, say every two years. As a person who is short sighted, I have had eye tests every two years since I was 10 years old. At least I know that my eyesight (with my glasses) is A1.
Any eye test should be able to tell what a person's eyesight is like over a range of distances.
|
I agree. We spend a fortune on Gatsos because speed is determined as the 6th most influential factor in causing accidents.
Lack of observation causes more accidents (according to the official stats) but we don't have compulsory testing!
I have bad astigmastism with short sight and would not dream of driving without my glasses, but I can just read a numberplate at 67ft!
|
|
|
|
|
|
_COLON_no_upscale()/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/fallback/coming-soon.jpg)
