I despair

John B said:

Then 50 metres before a T-junction that cyclists have been using for
many many years, was the sign - 'Cyclists Dismount'.

It's a suggestion, not a command; and moreover it makes no reference
anywhere to what you should do after you've dismounted. Personally I'd
dismount, immediately remount, and continue riding. If you're
particularly skilled you don't even have to come to a stop to do this.
[1] :-)

R.

[1] And if you're really, really skilled, you can cling onto one side of
your moving bike and take potshots at the baddies over the top tube.

John B said:

Well done Hampshire County Council.
You probably spent several thousands of my money in creating a signed
route then you tell everyone to get off their bikes.

How dumb.

Depressing indeed, but not particularly surprising unfortunately. The
principal effect of most cycle facilities seems to be to act as a
deterrent to cycling.

--
Dave...

dkahn400 said:

John B said:

Well done Hampshire County Council.
You probably spent several thousands of my money in creating a signed
route then you tell everyone to get off their bikes.

How dumb.

Depressing indeed, but not particularly surprising unfortunately. The
principal effect of most cycle facilities seems to be to act as a
deterrent to cycling.

I fear these kinds of signs will appear more and more, so when a motorist
pulls out in front of you, causing serious injury or worse, they can claim
that you shouldn't have been on a bike.

John B

On Thu, 18 May 2006 18:21:52 +0100 someone who may be John B
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Today I went along a residential road I use occasionally, and find it
has become part of a cycle route.

Nothing has changed other than a few rectangular blue signs with cycles
on them.
Then 50 metres before a T-junction that cyclists have been using for
many many years, was the sign - 'Cyclists Dismount'.

Well done Hampshire County Council.

Have you asked the mentally challenged individuals responsible for
an explanation?

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen said:

On Thu, 18 May 2006 18:21:52 +0100 someone who may be John B
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Today I went along a residential road I use occasionally, and find it
has become part of a cycle route.

Nothing has changed other than a few rectangular blue signs with cycles
on them.
Then 50 metres before a T-junction that cyclists have been using for
many many years, was the sign - 'Cyclists Dismount'.

Well done Hampshire County Council.

Have you asked the mentally challenged individuals responsible for
an explanation?

Of course this is being done.

John B

John B said:

Well done Hampshire County Council.
You probably spent several thousands of my money in creating a signed
route then you tell everyone to get off their bikes.

How dumb.

I attended the HCC's Cycle Training training (?) session the other day.
I asked the trainers if they could beat the designers of one
particular cycle lane (on the road from M27 J5 in to Eastleigh) with a
clue stick.

There seemed to be a general acceptance that the designers were morons,
but "what can you do?".

Al C-F said:

John B said:

Well done Hampshire County Council.
You probably spent several thousands of my money in creating a signed
route then you tell everyone to get off their bikes.

How dumb.

I attended the HCC's Cycle Training training (?) session the other day.

So what did you think of the 'training'?

John B

John B said:

I fear these kinds of signs will appear more and more, so when a motorist
pulls out in front of you, causing serious injury or worse, they can claim
that you shouldn't have been on a bike.

They have them at a lot of the Toucan crossings in Loughborough. Does
this mean that if you get knocked off when a car goes through on red
that you'll be in the wrong for not having dismounted?

peter

"naked_draughtsman" <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

John B said:

I fear these kinds of signs will appear more and more, so when a motorist
pulls out in front of you, causing serious injury or worse, they can claim
that you shouldn't have been on a bike.

Quoted message said:

They have them at a lot of the Toucan crossings in Loughborough.

I thought the whole point of a Toucan was that the cyclist *could* ride
over it. Am I missing something?

From the pedestrian POV I can see why it could be desirable for the
cyclists to dismount.

Quoted message said:

Does
this mean that if you get knocked off when a car goes through on red
that you'll be in the wrong for not having dismounted?

Possibly. Those silly rectangular signs are only advisory/informative,
aren't they???

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

Helen Deborah Vecht said:

"naked_draughtsman" <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

Does
this mean that if you get knocked off when a car goes through on red
that you'll be in the wrong for not having dismounted?

Possibly. Those silly rectangular signs are only advisory/informative,
aren't they???

Even though they are only advisory, contributory negligence could be
found for not having complied with the highways authority's advice.

I imagine it could be like much of the highway code - it's only
advice, but if you fail to comply with the advice, you might be held
liable for something bad that results.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

John B said:

Al C-F said:

John B said:

Well done Hampshire County Council.
You probably spent several thousands of my money in creating a signed
route then you tell everyone to get off their bikes.

How dumb.

I attended the HCC's Cycle Training training (?) session the other day.

So what did you think of the 'training'?

Most reasonable. I already know how to cycle, I needed to know what
they expected me to teach. There were plenty of discussions around the
'documented' way and the 'real' way for things like roundabouts and
cyclelanes.

Al C-F said:

Quoted message said:

So what did you think of the 'training'?

Most reasonable. I already know how to cycle, I needed to know what
they expected me to teach. There were plenty of discussions around the
'documented' way and the 'real' way for things like roundabouts and
cyclelanes.

I understood it was just two hours in a room and that instructors were
not tested on their own abilities - other than how to fill in a form.
I don't think they even have to be a cyclist and are not allowed to ride
a bike when with the children or even to fix their bikes.

tt

triddletree said:

Al C-F said:

Quoted message said:

So what did you think of the 'training'?

Most reasonable. I already know how to cycle, I needed to know what
they expected me to teach. There were plenty of discussions around
the 'documented' way and the 'real' way for things like roundabouts
and cyclelanes.

I understood it was just two hours in a room and that instructors were
not tested on their own abilities - other than how to fill in a form.

As I said, I just needed to know what I had to teach. One would hope
for a certain level of competence inherent in the self-selecting nature
of the post, and I'm sure if instructors don't pass muster the school
will soon let them know.

Quoted message said:

I don't think they even have to be a cyclist and are not allowed to ride
a bike when with the children or even to fix their bikes.

You don't need to ride a bike with the children - indeed it would be
counterproductive to do so.

The council doesn't insure its instructors to maintain the children's
bikes - blame the fear of an increasingly litigious society.

Al C-F said:

triddletree said:

I don't think they even have to be a cyclist and are not allowed to ride
a bike when with the children or even to fix their bikes.

You don't need to ride a bike with the children - indeed it would be
counterproductive to do so.

Just how can you prepare a child for riding on the road, without at least
exposing them to an accompanied ride in traffic? why do you think this would
be 'counter-productive'?

IMO is where the HCC falls down worst, as it cannot prepare a child for a
'real' cycling journey.
Parents who beleive it does are being seriously misled.

Quoted message said:

The council doesn't insure its instructors to maintain the children's
bikes - blame the fear of an increasingly litigious society.

Which can lead to an instructor denying training.
The child may then cycle home on a defective machine :-(

John B

John B said:

Just how can you prepare a child for riding on the road, without at least
exposing them to an accompanied ride in traffic? why do you think this would
be 'counter-productive'?

To have any chance of teaching, you would have to cycle behind the
pupil. The pupil would then be getting used to having the protection of
an adult.

Quoted message said:

IMO is where the HCC falls down worst, as it cannot prepare a child for a
'real' cycling journey.
Parents who beleive it does are being seriously misled.

So what's your answer?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The council doesn't insure its instructors to maintain the children's
bikes - blame the fear of an increasingly litigious society.

Which can lead to an instructor denying training.
The child may then cycle home on a defective machine :-(

And the parents advised why the machine is defective / dangerous. There
are some parents who would not know.

You can't train a child if the bike cannot be stopped, or does not
function in some other critcal way.

Al C-F said:

John B said:

Just how can you prepare a child for riding on the road, without at least
exposing them to an accompanied ride in traffic? why do you think this would
be 'counter-productive'?

To have any chance of teaching, you would have to cycle behind the
pupil. The pupil would then be getting used to having the protection of
an adult.

I still don't understand why you say this would be 'counter-productive'. What
harm can it actually do?
Riding behind a child is protective but that is only the start of on-road
training.
Gradually they can be trained until they are riding alone.
To a very limited extent they do ride alone on the turning manoevres in the HCC
scheme but in a very controlled environment and never in any real journey
situation.

Another advantage of having a cycle is that an instructor can also demonstrate
the various manoevres, rather than having to rely on diagrams and a verbal
explanation.

I understand one HCC instructor could not even ride a bike themselves :-(

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

IMO is where the HCC falls down worst, as it cannot prepare a child for a
'real' cycling journey.
Parents who beleive it does are being seriously misled.

So what's your answer?

National Standard training.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The council doesn't insure its instructors to maintain the children's
bikes - blame the fear of an increasingly litigious society.

Which can lead to an instructor denying training.
The child may then cycle home on a defective machine :-(

And the parents advised why the machine is defective / dangerous.

Yes, that's possible, and of course there is a sheet to 'tick' and pass to the
trainee.
But often you may find that the parent is not present at collection time and the
child may be making their own way home. In such a case do you let them leave with
a defective bike that they may very well ride?

Quoted message said:

You can't train a child if the bike cannot be stopped

Quite, but what do you do when they insist on riding home and you know that you
could have fixed the bike?

Don't get me wrong, the HCC scheme is OK as far as it goes, and it is certainly
better than nothing. I have a *lot* of respect for the volunteer parents who give
up their time, but the course does have some serious limitations.
IMO the main one is that it does not go far enough in preparing a rider
adequately for an 'average' unaccompanied road journey such as riding to school.

BTW, what school are you 'attached' to?

John B

Al C-F said:

Quoted message said:

I don't think they even have to be a cyclist and are not allowed to ride
a bike when with the children or even to fix their bikes.

You don't need to ride a bike with the children - indeed it would be
counterproductive to do so.

Eh!? I'm always riding a bike with the pupils I teach. We ride
together to the road training sites, I try to end each lesson with a
15 minute tour of the local area, and my series of lessons includes a
3 hour bike ride, crossing the Thames twice.

John B said:

Al C-F said:

John B said:

Just how can you prepare a child for riding on the road, without at least
exposing them to an accompanied ride in traffic? why do you think this would
be 'counter-productive'?

To have any chance of teaching, you would have to cycle behind the
pupil. The pupil would then be getting used to having the protection of
an adult.

I still don't understand why you say this would be 'counter-productive'. What
harm can it actually do?

OK. When I am riding, I control the traffic. The children need to be
able to do this for themselves - my presence stops them from doing this.

Quoted message said:

Riding behind a child is protective but that is only the start of on-road
training.
Gradually they can be trained until they are riding alone.
To a very limited extent they do ride alone on the turning manoevres in the HCC
scheme but in a very controlled environment and never in any real journey
situation.

Very true, and the route chosen - apparently to be visible to a
stationary instructor - leaves much to be desired.

Quoted message said:

Another advantage of having a cycle is that an instructor can also demonstrate
the various manoevres, rather than having to rely on diagrams and a verbal
explanation.

Diagrams, explanation, playground mock-up. Practise and practise.

Quoted message said:

I understand one HCC instructor could not even ride a bike themselves :-(

There's always one. But an instructor who taught children to 'stay out
of the way of the traffic' would cause me more concern.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

IMO is where the HCC falls down worst, as it cannot prepare a child for a
'real' cycling journey.
Parents who beleive it does are being seriously misled.

So what's your answer?

National Standard training.

One assumes that involves greater commitment by the trainers and the
trainees. For my own case, I shall be skiving off work early to give
the course. Much more commitment and I run the risk of being found out!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>The council doesn't insure its instructors to maintain the children's
>bikes - blame the fear of an increasingly litigious society.

Which can lead to an instructor denying training.
The child may then cycle home on a defective machine :-(

And the parents advised why the machine is defective / dangerous.

Yes, that's possible, and of course there is a sheet to 'tick' and pass to the
trainee.
But often you may find that the parent is not present at collection time and the
child may be making their own way home. In such a case do you let them leave with
a defective bike that they may very well ride?

I'll tell them what dangers they are running. I am not their parent.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You can't train a child if the bike cannot be stopped

Quite, but what do you do when they insist on riding home and you know that you
could have fixed the bike?

I'll tell them why they should not ride. I believe that children
respond well to reason.

Quoted message said:

Don't get me wrong, the HCC scheme is OK as far as it goes, and it is certainly
better than nothing. I have a *lot* of respect for the volunteer parents who give
up their time, but the course does have some serious limitations.

It does. But a grounding in the rules of the road, and how other road
users expect them to ride, and the advantages in riding as expected,
goes a long way.

Quoted message said:

IMO the main one is that it does not go far enough in preparing a rider
adequately for an 'average' unaccompanied road journey such as riding to school.

There are two things they need to know to ride to school here - stay out
of the door zone, and control the traffic at the pinch points.
Everything else is pure highway code. (I might offer a few pointers on
the correct way to negotiate a roundabout!)

Quoted message said:

BTW, what school are you 'attached' to?

Let's just say I'm in Hedge End.

Tom Crispin said:

I try to end each lesson with a
15 minute tour of the local area, and my series of lessons includes a
3 hour bike ride, crossing the Thames twice.

Then you're teaching to a different syllabus from me.