Hazard Perception!

[Crash it for fun]

I've taken my theory and failed because of the hazard perception part of the test. I've been practicing long and hard with both the revision cd's from Focus media.

During the test I was convinced that I should have passed it. In each clip I could see each hazard clearly well before it became a danger e.g. cyclist on path forced to move out because of an instruction. Clicked once when I saw the cyclist approaching the obstruction and once when the cyclist actually went in to the road.

This is the second time I have failed and both times i have got 100% in the multiple choice side of the test and about 40 out of 75 for the Hazard perception. I'm quickly losing my patience with this pointless test. I don't think it is even vaguely useful. I know that if it were a person instead of a computer testing me I would get a much higher mark because I could just point and say "There is the hazard, that bus that is about to pull out" But no, I'm relying on a bloody computer that has no idea which hazard the candidate is clicking for.....nice job DSA!

Has anyone else had any problems or can offer any constructive advice?

[Crash it for fun]

Incidently, I've just ordered the Road Sense - Hazard perception cd which appears to be intended for Instructors and is the official DSA product.

[swifty_mcvay]

sorry to hear it man...that must be the b**chy part of the test..good luck on a re-sit
____________________
~..some say R][])? fast and l()s? half your life..~..][ say RidE Fa$tEr and get ThRU liFE in HALf the T][/\/\e..~

rs fiddie 02'tetsuya rep, Mk sp 75cc alloy kit, 21mm dellorto carb, pod air filter, Mk Clutch, Jolly Moto 80cc pipe

[Crash it for fun]

[ProXimaCore]

I just scraped through it and no more. I didn't really revise for it that much though. I did watch the example bit at the start when I went to the test centre and I think what it meant was you should click when you see the potential hazard and then click again when you have to take action. Well that was my understanding of it and I did pass, barely. Hope that helps a bit.
____________________
Honda NSR125R -> Suzuki GSXR400R GK76a -> Kawasaki ZX636 B1H -> Honda CBR400RR NC29 -> Nothing

[Dup]

You gotta be less on edge and more casual. I did it for the car first time around and fails becasue i was basically seeing them . something of a second too quick. I made them check it out. Thats becasue id ben riding my 125 for 18 months and expect everything to try take you out.

Well just relax. Your given a limit. The video quality is crap. So i advise making sure you see ahead as for bikers pulling out is a big thing. If theres a broken down car, car indicating to move out in the far distance click it once. Don't click too soon after another either.

Not a very good test in my opinion. Your background between biking and driving should be taken into consideration. But i take it your new to getting on the road so i say just take it in rythm. Not metal clicking and sudden mouse juddering. Just go at it slowly.

Think like you would be riding. You can't see in front and behind at the same time etc.

[Crash it for fun]

how did you make them check it out?

I've got about 5 years drving experience (car) and 1 years bike experience.

Are you supposed click when you see the hazard or when it actually causes you to react (brake/swerve/etc)?

[hush]

As I understand it, you are supposed to click when a hazard becomes apparent. However, there seems to be an issue with experienced drivers or just people who are plain alert becoming aware of a hazard developing far earlier than the system accounts for.

So for instance, a bicycle is on a path, and there is an obstruction on the path ahead of you. Now real world riding, as soon as I see a cyclist I think hazard (no offence to cyclists, I am one, but its just the context of this example). But the computer does not see the cyclist as the hazard. I see the obstruction in the way of the cyclist, I think bigger hazard - but the computer does not. Currently the computer sees a cyclists on a path, and further down is an obstruction - however, this is not yet 'perceived' as a hazard.

What you have is a situation which is very likely to become a hazard if it continues.

The cyclist arrives at the obstruction - now you have a hazard.
The cyclist moves to avoid the obstruction - another hazard.

Two clicks, when the cyclist is pretty much on top of the obstuction.

The biggest problem seems to be that the test is not about hazard 'perception' at all, otherwise the computer would percieve the cyclist on a path with an obstruction as a hazard. What it actually seems to test is whether you are aware of when a situation actually becomes a hazard.

I personally think if they are going to do this it needs to be more a case of you watching a video and saying:

"There is a cyclist on the path approaching an obstruction, this may become a hazard....... The cyclist is near the obstuction and may pull into the road - this is a hazard....."

But that requires either a very good team of computer programmers, or examiners to sit with you while you watch the video. What would be much better, IMHO is if a section of your practical driving test was used for hazard perception in the same way you do in the advanced test. The driver has to relay perceived hazards to the examiner for a short period.

Incidently, sometimes the examiners could do with being more aware. Someone I know failed their first test by one point, a final hesitation. Why? Well the examiner had him pull up to do a reverse round a corner. Told him to start. He prepared, and while he checked the road, saw a cyclist about to pass him, so waited and then backed round fine. The examiner claimed at the end of the test not to have seen the cyclist, and proceeded to fail him.

[grem543]

Had the same on me car theory .
passed 2nd time & was pi**ed right off the 1st time(thought i clicked on every hazard).
Got 100% on the questions each time & i just cant see the point of the hazard(clicked everything 2nd time, going past traffic lights that are green, zebra crossings, slowing down in traffic, couple of ants in the road .
ps. i failed the practical because, i went round a bus lane(it was busy road, 11.30, everyone else thought it was in operation, everyone else went round it, but the wa**er failed me saying i was allowed in it(even though there was 3 lanes in that road ).
ever since i have been a very angry monkey who just drives his car anyway(well to the shops round back streets ain't got the bottle to be cheeky in main roads).

[grem543]

Had the same on me car theory .
passed 2nd time & was pi**ed right off the 1st time(thought i clicked on every hazard).
Got 100% on the questions each time & i just cant see the point of the hazard(clicked everything 2nd time, going past traffic lights that are green, zebra crossings, slowing down in traffic, couple of ants in the road .
ps. i failed the practical because, i went round a bus lane(it was busy road, 11.30, everyone else thought it was in operation, everyone else went round it, but the wa**er failed me saying i was allowed in it(even though there was 3 lanes in that road ).
ever since i have been a very angry monkey who just drives his car anyway(well to the shops round back streets ain't got the bottle to be cheeky in main roads).

[Laura]

I passed third time for my theory failed twice on my hazard.
____________________
Good girls ride motorcycles bad girls thrash them.

[chrisyc]

in yer face i got 68 on it

[grem543]

oops posted twice(never hit back & refresh when yer just posted DOH).

[John]

When I did mine I just clicked everything, lots.

Think I got 59/75 on it.
____________________
TT600 neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeowwww!

[izzi81]

I passed first time but this was the area I lost out on most, despite thinking I saw all the hazards. I agree with those above who say it's a flawed test, because it's all about timing when you see the hazard, and what you class as a hazard. If you click too often, or when there isn't a hazard (according to the program) you can lose points. So you could sit there, be really alert and catch everything early and even being aware of things it didn't class as hazards and end up with a low score.
(I too had my 125 for quite a while before I sat my test - I seem to recall clicking for things I thought would be the hazard and then something hugely obvious would happen and I'd realise *that* was what they were meaning to look out for, not the far less obvious thing I'd seen)

I can't work out how they let a test with so many major flaws become a part of the test....

[fazed]

Mate i failed the hazard bit first time by 1 mark , passed second time and yes it does seem a bit pointless Anyways good luck with your next test

[Crash it for fun]

[Hex]

The company I currently work for had a hand in the developing of the hazard test.

I agree that it sucks! I never had to sit it but I have the cd's and when I tried it I failed miserably! It was just to artificial I found for me.

However, the amount of testing that went into the development of this program was quite phenomenal, had 1000's of people test it who could drive from lots of different walks of life etc. So it really was tested and tried.

Still shite though.
____________________
The BCF's very own Party boy! Though he's getting old and feeling it!
Monkey hanger, Born and bred
My little photo portfolio

[hush]

I'd be interested to know, out of all those thousands of testers, how many actually passed? Just a thought, but I wonder if the percentage of passes for each group, from the beginning to the end of development went up, or down...

[Hex]

The testers as such never sat the test, they where used to help identify when the hazard became obvious and when they should be noticed and rubbish like that I think.

Though I guess some of the testers will of sat the final test as it ended up.
____________________
The BCF's very own Party boy! Though he's getting old and feeling it!
Monkey hanger, Born and bred
My little photo portfolio

[Crash it for fun]

I've just got the official Roadsense DVD from the DSA with several hazard perception clips and explanations of what is a hazard. Remembering that this is intended to demonstrate what you would click/score for and what you wouldn't. One of the clips a dog was shown wandering about in the road just ahead and forces the car just ahead to brake sharply, in turn causing you to also brake quickly.......this was not considered a hazard??????? In the same clip the actual hazard was a partially sighted woman walking along the pavement and then waiting to cross. Fair enough on the blind women but the fucking dog was in the road in front of the car!!!! How is that not a hazard. Is the dog an accepted road user?

[Hex]

[DukeRed]

I reckon the hazard perception test is a ploy to get more money
from the public. First of all you just had to buy the theory book
but now you have to buy CD's, books and loads of other stuff if you've got the money. All in all its a scam.
____________________
Enjoy Life There's Plenty of Time to be Dead
https://www.janoner.com

[Craig_]

Right,

I'm glad this came up, I've got my Theory & Hazard test on the 6th of may, i just recently bought the FOCUS Media disc too, and think i am going to fail, do you think i should keep studying the disk or wait to the day, practicing theory is going well its just the hazard.

Any tips? Really only worry about this, as i feel i wont pass it at all, practical I'm not too bothered about.
____________________
VAG Cars - www.vagcars.co.uk - North East VAG Owners Club

[hush]

Keep practicing everything so it becomes automatic. For help on hazard recognition, (just a personal thought), as you ride along, and you notice hazards, rather than just "thinking" them, say them out loud. If you're being driven in a car (or driving the car) do the same. This way your mind should start to really register the hazards more.

I'm sure some of the others will know of good learning resources for the hazard perception test, and have tips for passing it...