Ridicoulous Theory Test Questions...

ironclaw

Just failed by one question... But I am outraged at two of the questions:

1) All warning lights (on your dashboard) are:

A) Red

Amber

C) Green

D) Blue

I have two manuals in front of me for two different makes and models of car. Both have a page "Warning Lights and Instruments" and guess what? It features both Amber and Red lights. Amber = Safety/Advisory Warning. Red = Critical Warning. But on the day only one is the acceptable answer. How can you answer a question when two out of the four are equally correct?

2) Adding too much oil to you car can:

A) Damage your filter

Damage your pump

C) Damage Your Catalytic Converter

D) Reduce Oil Pressure.

Now, can any one tell me if you don't work for the AA are you suppose to answer that? A friend is a mechanic and he has said that all are correct depending on the make or model of car.

So I would like to start a thread, the MOST ridicilous questions you've been asked

Zapp Brannigan

Would of answered Red to the first one. Tough break, but you can't fail by getting two questions wrong so you should put a bit more study in for the next try

Wishbone Ash

Hard luck ironclaw. Did you study the book before doing the test?

ironclaw wrote:

I have two manuals in front of me for two different makes and models of car. Both have a page "Warning Lights and Instruments" and guess what? It features both Amber and Red lights

I would have automatically chosen 'Red' as the obvious correct answer. Whether some vehicle manufacturers describe warning lights as 'Amber' and 'Red' is irrelevant as a warning light is 'Red' in ALL vehicles.

ironclaw wrote:

Just failed by one question

Therefore you answered six questions incorrectly. Plenty of room for improvement.

ironclaw wrote:

So I would like to start a thread, the MOST ridicilous questions you've been asked

The questions are taken from a bank of possible questions. All questions are drawn from the same bank.

SeanW

I remember doing my DTT, I was asked a couple of questions about tractors and farm, some stuff about offal loads or something, whatever that is. WTF was that all about? Never worked a farm, and I barely know one end of a tractor from the other.

Holsten

Worse when they ask Motorbike questions... stupid, stupid.

Wishbone Ash

SeanW wrote: »

I remember doing my DTT, I was asked a couple of questions about tractors and farm, some stuff about offal loads or something, whatever that is. WTF was that all about? Never worked a farm, and I barely know one end of a tractor from the other.

Presumably you were going for a Category B licence. A Full Category B Licence also allows the user to operate agricultural vehicles on a public road. The Department of Transport don't know which type of vehicles you intend to drive within your category hence the reason for some non-car questions.

Some counties don't have bus lanes, cycle lanes, dual carriageways, tunnels, level crossings etc. and many drivers go about their daily business without encountering traffic lights or roundabouts yet they are still required to answer questions on these.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Gauge

On my theory test I got a load of questions to do with tractors and trailers. Luck of the draw really

ironclaw

Oh I more than willing to accept I failed. But really, its border line ridicoulous. The amber and red question is very challengeable (But i neither have the money or time )

What it comes down to is a money making exercise. At €35 a shot and with the death tolls on our road, where is all the money going? It certainly hasn't made Ireland safer.

Wishbone Ash

ironclaw wrote: »

What it comes down to is a money making exercise

But if you had studied a bit for it, you would probably have passed first time.

Many of those who fail driving tests also consider them to be a "money making exercise"!

ironclaw

My entire family are Rally nuts I know the rules of the road backwards. If I had known I'd was going to be asked the above, I would have become a mechanic...

bigpinkelephant

ironclaw wrote: »

I know the rules of the road backwards. If I had known I'd was going to be asked the above, I would have become a mechanic...

You do realise that under the bonnet/technical questions are part of the practical test? How do you check your oil/coolant etc?

Saint_Mel

ironclaw wrote: »

... It certainly hasn't made Ireland safer.

Well if it stops people who dont have adaquate knowledge of the the rules of the road and car maintenance basics getting a provisional licence then it has made it a bit safer.

ironclaw wrote: »

...I know the rules of the road backwards.

Were the other 4 questions you got wrong related to the rules of the road?

By any chance did you just asssume that the theory test is handy and you already knew everything there is to know about the rules? Not being smart or anything but I've known of people who, like you, knew the rules inside out without ever looking at the book etc. "Only a moron can fail that" sort of attitde... Went in, failed, and then came out with the same "money making scam" feeling.

Maybe its because I come from a family who never drove but when I applied for the theory test I made sure that I knew the book inside out

Wishbone Ash

ironclaw wrote: »

My entire family are Rally nuts

Therein lies your problem! What has rallying got to do with it? Rallys (rallies?) are held on roads which are closed to the general public and the Rules of the Road obviously don't apply. A professional rally driver may not be competent in ordinary driving scenarios.

Saint_Mel wrote: »

By any chance did you just asssume that the theory test is handy and you already knew everything there is to know about the rules? Not being smart or anything but I've known of people who, like you, knew the rules inside out without ever looking at the book etc. "Only a moron can fail that" sort of attitde... Went in, failed, and then came out with the same "money making scam" feeling

Well said Saint Mel.

Gauge

You get the book of questions, you read it, you pass. It really is that simple. Hardly a money-making racket at all.

ManofMunster

Gauge wrote: »

You get the book of questions, you read it, you pass. It really is that simple. Hardly a money-making racket at all.

agree, gauge. if anything i'd say it was too easy.

read the book, ironclaw. it's hardly rocket science and the margin for error is generous.

wil

ironclaw wrote: »

My entire family are Rally nuts I know the rules of the road backwards. If I had known I'd was going to be asked the above, I would have become a mechanic...

Ah thats the problem, Time to learn the rules the right way around.
My experience of rally nuts is they tend to know their cars inside out, maybe you are not quite as nuts as you think.
The real money waster is people who assume they know everything and dont have to bother learning anything.
Whe you get to the real test, will you claim that is a money making scam too, or will you actually get some (I mean many) proper lessons (NOT from a rally driver)

ironclaw

I'll take all your comments on board. As I said, I'm willing to accept I failed. I'd just like to see some changes made. Here's another one (I bought the CD)

1) A motocycle accident, the rider is in shock. You should (Pick Two):

A) Remove the Helmet
Give the Rider a Drink
C) Not remove the helmet
D) Place the rider in the Recovery Position
E) Move the rider to the side of the road.

And the answer? C and D. Useless. You don't remove the helmet for fear of a spinal injury so therefore you should not roll into the recovery position.

Yakult

ouch.

I didnt get anything like that! Mine are actually really easy and stupid ones lol!

bonkey

ironclaw wrote: »

1) A motocycle accident, the rider is in shock. You should (Pick Two):

A) Remove the Helmet
Give the Rider a Drink
C) Not remove the helmet
D) Place the rider in the Recovery Position
E) Move the rider to the side of the road.

And the answer? C and D. Useless. You don't remove the helmet for fear of a spinal injury so therefore you should not roll into the recovery position.

Here in Switzerland, the first thing you have to do (before you can even sit a theory test) is a first aid course.Exactly this type of situation is covered and the reasoning behind it explained.

The answer is not useless. It is perfectly correct.

You are taking the minimum amount of necessary precaution to prevent unnecessary complications from advancement of shock. Any additional movement is unnecessary, and should therefore be avoided.

The logic goes as follows...the largest risk for someone in shock is advancement of shock. If they are not in the recovery position, advancement of shock could rapidly kill them. Dead is generally considered the worst outcome.

The next worst outcome is spinal injury leading to paralysation. Therefore, other than carefully taking steps to avoid the most likely cause of the worst outcome, you do nothing that will increase the chance of spinal injury.

Removing the helmet will do nothing other than perhaps make the injured party more comfortable. It puts them at additional risk because its quite difficult to remove a helmet without putting angular force on the neck. If there are additional factors that change this rationale, they would have been noted in the question.

Giving them a drink (safely) involves putting them in a sitting position. This is unnecessary movement, and is not a good position to have them in should shock advance. Its also a bad idea for someone in shock to take a drink, regardless of their position.

Moving them to the side of hte road...again, serves no purpose unless there were additional factors not mentioned in the question.

Thus, from either a process of elimination or a basic knowledge of accident-situation first aid, C and D present themselves clearly as the 2 correct answers being sought for.

I would suggest that you consider the possibility that rather than the answers being rubbish, useless or incorrect, there is also the possibility that your knowledge in the subject is lacking or incorrect.

Wishbone Ash

Excellent post bonkey.

Ironclaw - why not study the CD to improve your knowledge rather than nitpicking questions out of it that you don't agree with?

bonkey wrote: »

Giving them a drink (safely) involves putting them in a sitting position. This is unnecessary movement, and is not a good position to have them in should shock advance

The main reason for not giving an accident victim a drink is because they may require surgery. A person cannot safely be placed under general anaesthetic unless they have fasted.

Stark

bonkey wrote: »

Moving them to the side of hte road...again, serves no purpose unless there were additional factors not mentioned in the question.

Yes it does, it lets this guy get to work quicker : http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055155585

qz

Should you ever let a child stick their head out of the car window?
A) Yes
No
C) Yes, provided they are wearing protective eyewear.

Wishbone Ash

qz wrote: »

Should you ever let a child stick their head out of the car window?
A) Yes
No
C) Yes, provided they are wearing protective eyewear.

I presume your "confusion" is sarcasm!

ironclaw

If you removed the helmet or move a suspect spinal you run the risk of paralysing the patient. ABC. If their breathing, they are living. If not, you can jaw thrust them and stabilise the head (And begin CPR - Internationally one of the only reasons you can move a spinal patient). The only reason you should ever remove a helmet is to ensure breathing or to immobilse (When using a back board etc and only if it requires). So the answer of not removing the helmet is perfectly right.

However, if you then roll the casualty (recovery position) you are applying a force to the spine. Now, unless there are about 5+, trained, people present to roll a spinal patient you will do more harm than good. Personally, I would never do it. Not on the side of a road outside a hospital / EMFR / PHTLS scenario.

Any first aider will tell you this. And thankful I'm well above First Aid standard.

I'm not trying to nit pick or anything. I just feel there are some questions that genuinely over step the mark... Comments?

bonkey

ironclaw wrote: »

Any first aider will tell you this. And thankful I'm well above First Aid standard.

I'm not trying to nit pick or anything. I just feel there are some questions that genuinely over step the mark... Comments?

You seem to be ignoring that the patient is in shock, and are proposing that nothing be done about it.

ironclaw

The recovery position won't do anything for them because of the suspect spinal injury. All the recovery position does is maintain an airway. It doesn't nessisarily treat shock. Rasing the legs would but you can't because of the spinal injury.

bonkey

ironclaw wrote: »

The recovery position won't do anything for them because of the suspect spinal injury. All the recovery position does is maintain an airway.

You yourself mentioned the ABC priority. "If they're breathing, they're living" you said. Now you're saying that its wrong to take any steps to make sure they stay breathing. Why?

ironclaw

Because you can Jaw Thrust the casualty. Its a simply procedure that can be used in a spinal situation minimising damage to the spine. Its ensures the casualty remains breathing without the need for a unnessisary roll into the recovery position. It also helps support the head / C-Spine. Inline Immobilisation

bonkey

ironclaw wrote: »

Because you can Jaw Thrust the casualty. Its a simply procedure that can be used in a spinal situation minimising damage to the spine. Its ensures the casualty remains breathing without the need for a unnessisary roll into the recovery position. It also helps support the head / C-Spine. Inline Immobilisation

Good idea...except that its not a recommended practice, where the recovery-position is.

I would also point out that nowhere in the question asked did it say that there was a spinal situation. You don't take any unecessary action in case you aggravate any injury you haven't found....spinal typically being the worst of those.

Not taking an action because there might be something you haven't ruled out is a lose-lose game. No matter what action you decide to take, there is always some condition you can't rule out which may mean that this action is wrong.

You've been told what you know...the patient is in shock. You haven't been told that the patient is in shock and there is reason to suspect a spinal injury. You haven't been told to assume that you have more than the basic first-aid level of knowledge that is assumed as a given for the test.

Based on this information, the answer is correct.

Sure, you might react differently, but then again, a doctor who had a bunch of medics in the back of his car might react differently to both the answer and to you.

Unsurprisingly, the questions aren't framed knowing who is going to be answering them. Complaining that you know better is pointless.

Incidentally, ILCOR don't recommend the use of the jaw thrust technique, except by trained personnel. You may be so trained, but the average motorist in the situation most certainly would not be. So it would seem that ILCOR disagree with you.

pow wow

I failed the first time round because I couldn't answer a question about turning a corner on my motorbike...even though I have never nor will I ever ride one. I know you're allowed 5 wrong or whatever, but it was that 6th one (about the poxy motorbike!) that sent me over the limit.