Annual Driving Tests for the Elderly?
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: Albm&ctd on 4 Jul 2010 01:11 In article <aeslue1k2wmq$.bpvlolgkndrd.dlg(a)40tude.net>, me(a)privacy.net says... > On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 12:50:09 +1000, Albm&ctd wrote: > > > In article <i0ebhk$9vn$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > > am9obmhAc2hvYWwubmV0LmF1(a)REGISTERED_USER_usenet.com.au says... > >> Neil Fisher wrote: > >>> > >>> On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 11:59:18 +1000, John_H <john4721(a)inbox.com>, after > >>> considering some belly-button fluf, wrote: > >>> > >>> > > >>> >I can recall being tested before I wore specs (Qld), but not since. > >>> >Presumably they reckon if you've gone to the trouble of buying a pair > >>> >of specs and aren't carrying a white cane you ought be able to see > >>> >well enough to drive. :) > >>> > >>> Nope. I've had glasses since before I got my license, and here in NSW > >>> at every renewal ( initially 12 months, but 5 years since they allowed > >>> it) I've had to do the RTA "eye test". > >>> > >>> > > >>> >My optometrist tends to agree. She says you don't need to be able to > >>> >see very well at all to meet the legal requirements for a driver's > >>> >licence. Nor has google been able to tell me exactly what the legal > >>> >requirements are (which suggests she's probably right). :) > >>> > >>> I dunno what the requirements actually is, but this is what I do know: > >>> My glasses are badly in need of replacement because my prescription > >>> has changed. I recently passed the RTA eye test easily. On previous > >>> occasions, my optomitrist has told me that I shouldn't be able to read > >>> the lowest line on her chart, although I always have been able to with > >>> corrective lenses (that is, machine shines image into you eyes, goes > >>> "whiz whiz", image is in focus perfectly, here's your prescription. > >>> That is, it's not the old "better or worse?" trick, but an objective > >>> reading by machine of what corrections you need - which for me is > >>> about -2.5 plus a small astigmatism) The RTA test is a complete joke - > >>> if you can read a street name sign from the other side of the > >>> intersection in broad daylight, you'll pass with no problem. > >>> > >>> On another note, I used to know a gentleman who proudly showed me his > >>> still current heavy vehicle license with a renewal date several months > >>> later than other card in his wallet that said he was legally blind! > >>> > >>> Neil > >>> --- > >>> Neil Fisher / Bob Young > >>> Thundercords > >>> personal opinion unless otherwise noted. > >>> Looking for spark plug leads? > >>> Check out http://www.magnecor.com.au > >>> > >>> > >> > >> RTA officer told me about 6 or 7 years ago that the requirement now is > >> only that you pass the vision test with *one* eye. It no longer has to be > >> both. > >> Optometrist confirmed that. > >> > > How sweet, a Cyclops can now get a NSW licence. > > > > Al > > Yeah - and they're only permitted to drive Cyclops cars. > Oh well, beats free gov-co transport with a black dyed hessian bag over their head. Now to get someone to make them monocle sunnies... or should that be sunni? BTW I'm typing shiite as usual. Al -- I don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone. http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html
From: hippo on 4 Jul 2010 01:47 Noddy wrote: > > > "hippo" <am9obmhAc2hvYWwubmV0LmF1(a)REGISTERED_USER_usenet.com.au> wrote in > message news:i0ct5b$f87$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > > > Specsavers or one of the other optical supermarket chains that email > > orders to China and get them back PDQ cuts your costs quite a bit, as long > > as you can get exactly what you want. You could probably go close to nil > > out of pocket. I'll drop into my optometrist tomorrow and get the name of > > the other lens range because I'm stuffed if I can remember it! > > No worries. Thanks. > > > I only turned 56 yesterday too! :( > > Many happy late returns :) > > -- > Regards, > Noddy. > > > > Sorry about the delay. Haven't been past the optometrist, but I *did* just remember the product. Google 'Varilux' and go to the international site which *is* in English. (If you want to amuse yourself afterwards, you can do the questionnaire that's still in French). You can select get a range of simulations for conventional single, bi & multifocal lenses and also their new progressive lens. Basically if it delivers, you're getting a photocromatic mutifocal with *no* peripheral distortion or dead spots. I need to talk to my optometrist soon and see if the 'around $900' he mentioned was just lenses or lenses & frames. Either way, if they deliver what they claim, I'd see it as money well spent, especially for driivng or riding. Cheers -- Posted at www.usenet.com.au
From: Noddy on 4 Jul 2010 08:59 "hippo" <am9obmhAc2hvYWwubmV0LmF1(a)REGISTERED_USER_usenet.com.au> wrote in message news:i0p79p$uk$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > Sorry about the delay. Haven't been past the optometrist, but I *did* just > remember the product. Google 'Varilux' and go to the international site > which *is* in English. (If you want to amuse yourself afterwards, you can > do the questionnaire that's still in French). Lol :) <German accent> "Guten tag mine Froggy" <Cheese eating surrender monkey accent> "Oui le Boshe, we surrender. Let's be friends". > You can select get a range of simulations for conventional single, bi & > multifocal lenses and also their new progressive lens. Basically if it > delivers, you're getting a photocromatic mutifocal with *no* peripheral > distortion or dead spots. I need to talk to my optometrist soon and see if > the 'around $900' he mentioned was just lenses or lenses & frames. Either > way, if they deliver what they claim, I'd see it as money well spent, > especially for driivng or riding. Cheers Many thanks. I'm due for my test next week I think, so I'll ask about them. -- Regards, Noddy.
From: OzOne on 4 Jul 2010 18:19 On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 05:47:37 +0000 (UTC), am9obmhAc2hvYWwubmV0LmF1(a)REGISTERED_USER_usenet.com.au (hippo) wrote: >Sorry about the delay. Haven't been past the optometrist, but I *did* just >remember the product. Google 'Varilux' and go to the international site >which *is* in English. (If you want to amuse yourself afterwards, you can >do the questionnaire that's still in French). > >You can select get a range of simulations for conventional single, bi & >multifocal lenses and also their new progressive lens. Basically if it >delivers, you're getting a photocromatic mutifocal with *no* peripheral >distortion or dead spots. I need to talk to my optometrist soon and see if >the 'around $900' he mentioned was just lenses or lenses & frames. Either >way, if they deliver what they claim, I'd see it as money well spent, >especially for driivng or riding. Cheers I've got 2 pairs of these. The photochromatic required exposure to UV to work so there is little change when seated INSIDE a car. They darken a little. $900 is a rip unless of course you're getting $600 designer frames. OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace.
From: OzOne on 4 Jul 2010 18:21
On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 22:59:22 +1000, "Noddy" <me(a)home.com> wrote: >Many thanks. I'm due for my test next week I think, so I'll ask about them. How can you do an eye test when you're eyes are so tightly closed? OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. |