See CA DMV report attached (how to interpret the Critical DrivingErrors) on this failed driving test

My kid went with the wife to take the California DMV driving test &
failed.

Neither the wife nor the kid seems to know WHY the DMV flunked them
(which I find hard to believe - but that's why I'm asking you).

Here is the test result (with personal information redacted):
http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/...g/12098708.jpg

I can't tell if the failure was due to one or two critical driving
errors, or if it was the combination of other things.

Can you?

Re-adding rec.autos.driving (since I'm subscribed to it and it's
on-topic for this newsgroup).

On 2/2/2013 12:23 PM, Zen wrote:
> My kid went with the wife to take the California DMV driving test &
> failed.
>
> Neither the wife nor the kid seems to know WHY the DMV flunked them
> (which I find hard to believe - but that's why I'm asking you).
>
> Here is the test result (with personal information redacted):
> http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/...g/12098708.jpg
>
> I can't tell if the failure was due to one or two critical driving
> errors, or if it was the combination of other things.
>
> Can you?

It looks like they failed him because he made a left turn without using
the center left turn lane. The "no marks in the CRITICAL DRIVING ERROR
section" statement at the top of the form and the mark in that section
for a "lane violation" makes it clear why they failed him.

On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 20:45:02 -0500, Arif Khokar wrote:

> Re-adding rec.autos.driving (since I'm subscribed to it and it's
> on-topic for this newsgroup).
>
> On 2/2/2013 12:23 PM, Zen wrote:
>> My kid went with the wife to take the California DMV driving test &
>> failed.
>>
>> Neither the wife nor the kid seems to know WHY the DMV flunked them
>> (which I find hard to believe - but that's why I'm asking you).
>>
>> Here is the test result (with personal information redacted):
>> http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/...g/12098708.jpg
>>
>> I can't tell if the failure was due to one or two critical driving
>> errors, or if it was the combination of other things.
>>
>> Can you?
>
> It looks like they failed him because he made a left turn without using
> the center left turn lane. The "no marks in the CRITICAL DRIVING ERROR
> section" statement at the top of the form and the mark in that section
> for a "lane violation" makes it clear why they failed him.

How can that be a violation?
The jurisdiction provided conenience by adding a second turn lane so the
volume of traffic could be handled better.
IMO, the examiner was wrong on that issue.

On 2/3/2013 10:58 PM, richard wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 20:45:02 -0500, Arif Khokar wrote:
>
>> Re-adding rec.autos.driving (since I'm subscribed to it and it's
>> on-topic for this newsgroup).
>>
>> On 2/2/2013 12:23 PM, Zen wrote:
>>> My kid went with the wife to take the California DMV driving test &
>>> failed.
>>>
>>> Neither the wife nor the kid seems to know WHY the DMV flunked them
>>> (which I find hard to believe - but that's why I'm asking you).
>>>
>>> Here is the test result (with personal information redacted):
>>> http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/...g/12098708.jpg
>>>
>>> I can't tell if the failure was due to one or two critical driving
>>> errors, or if it was the combination of other things.
>>>
>>> Can you?
>>
>> It looks like they failed him because he made a left turn without using
>> the center left turn lane. The "no marks in the CRITICAL DRIVING ERROR
>> section" statement at the top of the form and the mark in that section
>> for a "lane violation" makes it clear why they failed him.
>
> How can that be a violation?
> The jurisdiction provided conenience by adding a second turn lane so the
> volume of traffic could be handled better.
> IMO, the examiner was wrong on that issue.
>
http://apps.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21460_5.htm

"(c) A vehicle shall not be driven in a designated two-way left-turn
lane except .... A left turn or U-turn shall not be made from any other
lane where a two-way left-turn lane has been designated.

--
Idioten aangeboden. Gratis af te halen.
h/t Dagelijkse Standaard

ICBM Data: http://g.co/maps/e5gmy

On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 23:19:45 -0600, Larry Sheldon wrote:

> On 2/3/2013 10:58 PM, richard wrote:
>> On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 20:45:02 -0500, Arif Khokar wrote:
>>
>>> Re-adding rec.autos.driving (since I'm subscribed to it and it's
>>> on-topic for this newsgroup).
>>>
>>> On 2/2/2013 12:23 PM, Zen wrote:
>>>> My kid went with the wife to take the California DMV driving test &
>>>> failed.
>>>>
>>>> Neither the wife nor the kid seems to know WHY the DMV flunked them
>>>> (which I find hard to believe - but that's why I'm asking you).
>>>>
>>>> Here is the test result (with personal information redacted):
>>>> http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/...g/12098708.jpg
>>>>
>>>> I can't tell if the failure was due to one or two critical driving
>>>> errors, or if it was the combination of other things.
>>>>
>>>> Can you?
>>>
>>> It looks like they failed him because he made a left turn without using
>>> the center left turn lane. The "no marks in the CRITICAL DRIVING ERROR
>>> section" statement at the top of the form and the mark in that section
>>> for a "lane violation" makes it clear why they failed him.
>>
>> How can that be a violation?
>> The jurisdiction provided conenience by adding a second turn lane so the
>> volume of traffic could be handled better.
>> IMO, the examiner was wrong on that issue.
>>
> http://apps.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21460_5.htm
>
> "(c) A vehicle shall not be driven in a designated two-way left-turn
> lane except .... A left turn or U-turn shall not be made from any other
> lane where a two-way left-turn lane has been designated.

The only thing I can think of where such a turn would be a violation is
when the turning vehicle turns into the incorrect lane. Such as when there
is a third lane for the cross traffic. If the turning vehicle is in the
center turn lane, then turns into the curb lane of the cross traffic, that
would be a violation.
But, in many situations, you have a ramp to an expressway within 50 feet of
the turn. How else are you gonna access that ramp but to use the curb lane?
During a truck company driving test I did just that and was told I could be
cited for doing so. Just one problem, there was only one turn lane, not
two.

On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:01:15 -0500, richard >
wrote:

>On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 23:19:45 -0600, Larry Sheldon wrote:
>
>> On 2/3/2013 10:58 PM, richard wrote:
>>> On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 20:45:02 -0500, Arif Khokar wrote:
>>>
>>>> Re-adding rec.autos.driving (since I'm subscribed to it and it's
>>>> on-topic for this newsgroup).
>>>>
>>>> On 2/2/2013 12:23 PM, Zen wrote:
>>>>> My kid went with the wife to take the California DMV driving test &
>>>>> failed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Neither the wife nor the kid seems to know WHY the DMV flunked them
>>>>> (which I find hard to believe - but that's why I'm asking you).
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is the test result (with personal information redacted):
>>>>> http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/...g/12098708.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't tell if the failure was due to one or two critical driving
>>>>> errors, or if it was the combination of other things.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you?
>>>>
>>>> It looks like they failed him because he made a left turn without using
>>>> the center left turn lane. The "no marks in the CRITICAL DRIVING ERROR
>>>> section" statement at the top of the form and the mark in that section
>>>> for a "lane violation" makes it clear why they failed him.
>>>
>>> How can that be a violation?
>>> The jurisdiction provided conenience by adding a second turn lane so the
>>> volume of traffic could be handled better.
>>> IMO, the examiner was wrong on that issue.
>>>
>> http://apps.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21460_5.htm
>>
>> "(c) A vehicle shall not be driven in a designated two-way left-turn
>> lane except .... A left turn or U-turn shall not be made from any other
>> lane where a two-way left-turn lane has been designated.
>
>The only thing I can think of where such a turn would be a violation is
>when the turning vehicle turns into the incorrect lane. Such as when there
>is a third lane for the cross traffic. If the turning vehicle is in the
>center turn lane, then turns into the curb lane of the cross traffic, that
>would be a violation.
>But, in many situations, you have a ramp to an expressway within 50 feet of
>the turn. How else are you gonna access that ramp but to use the curb lane?
>During a truck company driving test I did just that and was told I could be
>cited for doing so. Just one problem, there was only one turn lane, not
>two.

In California, if there is a left turn lane (including a shared center
lane), it is indeed required to merge into and then make the turn from
it.

The same is true for right turns -- the proper procedure is to signal
and merge into the dashed-line-delineated bike lane (yielding to
cyclists in it, as with any other lane change) if there is one, and
then make the turn. In addition to not blocking the through lane,
this is actually safer for cyclists, as it's clear what the car is
doing and the bike doesn't end up to the right of the car as it hooks
the turn from the regular lane.

To the OP, as it says on the top, either of the Critical Driving
Errors mentioned (left turn not from lane, and not yielding to U
turner) are enough to fail. The latter is a particularly dangerous
nuance to know -- someone taking a right on red or facing a stop sign
must always beware that the person looking like they're taking a left
onto the street they're coming from their street could be taking a U
turn into their path...and has the right of way. That's why there's
never a green right arrow during the cross street's left turn time
unless there's also a "No U Turn" sign for the cross street.

Josh

On 2/4/2013 12:01 PM, richard wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 23:19:45 -0600, Larry Sheldon wrote:
>
>> On 2/3/2013 10:58 PM, richard wrote:
>>> On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 20:45:02 -0500, Arif Khokar wrote:
>>>
>>>> Re-adding rec.autos.driving (since I'm subscribed to it and it's
>>>> on-topic for this newsgroup).
>>>>
>>>> On 2/2/2013 12:23 PM, Zen wrote:
>>>>> My kid went with the wife to take the California DMV driving test &
>>>>> failed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Neither the wife nor the kid seems to know WHY the DMV flunked them
>>>>> (which I find hard to believe - but that's why I'm asking you).
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is the test result (with personal information redacted):
>>>>> http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/...g/12098708.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't tell if the failure was due to one or two critical driving
>>>>> errors, or if it was the combination of other things.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you?
>>>>
>>>> It looks like they failed him because he made a left turn without using
>>>> the center left turn lane. The "no marks in the CRITICAL DRIVING ERROR
>>>> section" statement at the top of the form and the mark in that section
>>>> for a "lane violation" makes it clear why they failed him.
>>>
>>> How can that be a violation?
>>> The jurisdiction provided conenience by adding a second turn lane so the
>>> volume of traffic could be handled better.
>>> IMO, the examiner was wrong on that issue.
>>>
>> http://apps.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21460_5.htm
>>
>> "(c) A vehicle shall not be driven in a designated two-way left-turn
>> lane except .... A left turn or U-turn shall not be made from any other
>> lane where a two-way left-turn lane has been designated.
>
> The only thing I can think of where such a turn would be a violation is
> when the turning vehicle turns into the incorrect lane. Such as when there
> is a third lane for the cross traffic. If the turning vehicle is in the
> center turn lane, then turns into the curb lane of the cross traffic, that
> would be a violation.
> But, in many situations, you have a ramp to an expressway within 50 feet of
> the turn. How else are you gonna access that ramp but to use the curb lane?
> During a truck company driving test I did just that and was told I could be
> cited for doing so. Just one problem, there was only one turn lane, not
> two.
>

What the **** are you talking about?

Can you read?


--
Idioten aangeboden. Gratis af te halen.
h/t Dagelijkse Standaard

ICBM Data: http://g.co/maps/e5gmy

On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 23:58:48 -0500, richard wrote:

> How can that be a violation?
> The jurisdiction provided convenience by adding a second
> turn lane so the
> volume of traffic could be handled better.
> IMO, the examiner was wrong on that issue.

I looked it up also and the examiner has the law on his side.

In California, you MUST first turn into the shared left turn lane
(suicide lane) and only after driving in that lane for a while, can you
THEN turn left.

You can't do it in one sweeping motion.

On Feb 4, 1:01*pm, richard > wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 23:19:45 -0600, Larry Sheldon wrote:
>
> > "(c) A vehicle shall not be driven in a designated two-way left-turn
> > lane except .... A left turn or U-turn shall not be made from any other
> > lane where a two-way left-turn lane has been designated.
>
> The only thing I can think of where such a turn would be a violation is
> when the turning vehicle turns into the incorrect lane. Such as when there
> is a third lane for the cross traffic.

You must be an alien from a perpendicular universe.
-----

- gpsman

Arif:

If you look at the handwriting on that exam page really carefully you'll see that the flunker was not the one making the U-Turn.