My opinion, FWIW:
1. You should not be allowed to operate a Spyder on a car license. Too different. At the very least, the safety/responsibilities of riding an exposed vehicle should require separate education/testing. For example, the MSF BRC addresses those items, while auto education/testing does not.
2. You should be allowed to operate a Spyder on a 2-wheeler license. Learning to ride a motorcycle is harder than riding a Spyder, but the majority of the skills, safety considerations and riding laws translate. Yes, you need practice to become a good Spyder rider, but that's not an onerous requirement.
3. There should be a separate 3-wheel designation on licenses that can be obtained by testing on the Spyder. This should grant you the ability to ride 3 wheels, but not 2. You can go from two-wheels to three in an afternoon; going from three-wheels to two takes a LOT more work (FYI, I hope to have a big fun post on that topic in a few days
).
Virginia used to have one M license that covered everything. I got my M license in 2011 taking a 3-wheel course on a Spyder (Evergreen Motorcycle Training offered a class comparable to the MSF BRC). By Virginia law, I had a motorcycle license, I could legally operate two-wheels just the same as a Spyder (or conventional trike, or hack-- note, a hack doesn't ride like a Spyder either!).
In 2013, Virginia switched to three separate licenses: M, M2 and M3. M2 allows you to ride two-wheels, M3 allows three, and M allows both (you need to pass both a separate 2-wheel and a 3-wheel course/test, however).
Personally, I think that's overkill-- again, IMO M2 should cover bikes *and* trikes-- but that's the way the law works, so there ya go.
Bottom line: I support distinct licensing, at least in part, and I'd rather have the cumbersome distinct licensing like they have in Virginia versus no distinctions at all.
More to come on this, hopefully this weekend :doorag:
