Unsafe at any speed?-Path beside Beach Rd

In article ,
rooman wrote:

Is not doing nothing, keeping your head in the sand?

Not necessarily -- it can sometimes mean keeping your head out of a hole.

And foolish...tell that to those who made the prgramme, not
me..positive instruction to those who want to ride which is structured
and considered thought through by many experts in the field much more
qualified than you or me is certainly not foolish IMO.

I'm saying the idea of compulsion is foolish, in my opinion -- not you,
not those offering training. The "idea".

We have got through so far without wide ranging courses, and maybe we
will continue to do so, but if you get great joy out of crucifying me
for telling you that it is on the cards in the minds of some who can
influence decisions about who does and doesnt get on our roads, I'm
tough, I can accept it, I'm happy to be your whipping boy, so go ahead
and shoot the messengers.

Don't take it personally -- again, I said I thought the idea of
compulsion is foolish. No whipping boy needed, no fixie-riders need be
shot.

Would it not be better to have some contriubution to this either by
suggesting positive alternatives or positive amendments from which we
can achieve outcomes for all road users benefit.

It would indeed. But sometimes rejecting a bad idea is a positive thing
to do.

Not many in this forum dont want more riders on the roads ( other than
lurkers from rec.auto etc. perhaps) so why enouragement to things
which enhance novice riders skills and confidence is not a positive
escapes me, you want to leave it to what it has been, Rafferty's rules,
learn the hard way, get out there, just do it...and wonder why some
sectors of the road users direct consternation at us all when things go
pear shaped.

You're attacking a straw man. I see decent training as a good thing.
Hell, I make a good proportion of my living as a trainer. But this is
what you actually said:

"I am not talking registration, but a simple level of approved
competency and skill that wouldnt hurt everyone, before they can ride
on the road ."

That's "before they can ride on the road". Mandatory. And mo

"Extend it to producing that qualification when you buy or hire a
bicycle of a capability for road use." That's no certificate, no can
even buy a bike.

And those ideas, in my opinion, are foolish. Moreover, I haven't see any
great acclamation for them here from others.

--
Shane Stanley

In article ,
cfsmtb wrote:

No you've missed the original point, you're simply making a spurious
assumption about some future scenario and playing the pedant police.

No, I'm replying to what rooman wrote. There's no pedantry involved: his
original statement was unequivocal.

Shane Stanley Wrote:
I don't know that anyone disagrees, although I'm still curious about
what, exactly, is being taught, and by whom.

Here's an existing Victorian service provider, ask them:
http://www.wilcareservices.com.au/

Thank you.

Your concentration is lapsing, it seems you are having difficulty
realising you are responding to different individuals.

Guilty as charged in this case.

--
Shane Stanley

On 2007-04-30, Paul Yates (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

"Shane Stanley" wrote in message
...
In article ,
cfsmtb wrote:

snip
Stranger things have happened. Rather than the good old days when it was
'look left, look right, look left again' before crossing the road it is now
'drive 40kph past schools' and if you are lucky a kid will not run in front
of your car inside the distance that driving at 40kph allows for you to
stop. I'd imagine being hit by a car at 40kph has much the same effect as
at 60.

Well you'd be wrong then, wouldn't you?

The canonical figure I seem to recall reported, that I have run out of
evening to be able to cite, is that the mortality rate for pedestrian
vehicle collisions below 40km/h is 5% or so, and for above 40km/h, 80%
or more. My google fu isn't strong enough tonight.

You could probably integrate under the curve in figure 2 of below to
come up with a sensible answer yourself:
http://www.raisethehammer.org/index.asp?id=073

1 tone of metal vs 50kg of squishy human is even fatal in drive ways
these days at way under 5kph.

If you manage to get under a wheel and the driver doesn't detect you
until too late.

We almost hit an echidna tonight. I'm going to spend the rest of the
week before going on nights, going home at in the early evening.
Always scares me on this road. Appanently the bus driver only just
missed an eagle feasting on a roo this morning, but I was too
engrossed in my book to notice.

--
TimC
ATC: Airliner 123, turn right 20 degrees for noise abatement.
A123: Noise abatement? We are at FL310.
ATC: Do you know how much noise it makes when two 737s collide?
A123: Airliner 123 is turning right 20 degrees. -- John Clear in ASR

TimC wrote:

I could swear last time I saw her, her seat height was further down
than I set it for her.

Err, have you taught her how to stop properly.
No 1 reason for seat being too low.

In aus.bicycle on Tue, 01 May 2007 01:40:08 +1000
Terryc wrote:
TimC wrote:

I could swear last time I saw her, her seat height was further down
than I set it for her.

Err, have you taught her how to stop properly.
No 1 reason for seat being too low.

Except peace of mind really. I can see how someone might want to feel
they can just put their feet down without having to lean over or get
off the saddle.

Sure - low seats are not good for pedalling, but how many prefer peace
of mind?

Zebee

On May 1, 5:38 am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
In aus.bicycle on Tue, 01 May 2007 01:40:08 +1000

Terryc wrote:
TimC wrote:

I could swear last time I saw her, her seat height was further down
than I set it for her.

Err, have you taught her how to stop properly.
No 1 reason for seat being too low.

Except peace of mind really. I can see how someone might want to feel
they can just put their feet down without having to lean over or get
off the saddle.

Sure - low seats are not good for pedalling, but how many prefer peace
of mind?

and broken knee?

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

Sure - low seats are not good for pedalling, but how many prefer peace
of mind?

Yawn.

rooman Wrote:
Incorrect again,

all qualified Coaches of the CycleSkill programme may offer instruction
in the Public Domain. many already do that. others also act under the
auspices of a club prgramme. If they do it under the guise of a club
and require participants to join, then they get CA insurance protection
automatically, is that a problem?. They also have the right to take this
structured course into the wider community and arrange their own cover
as required.

You are too CSV centric in that interpretation, and whislt no doubt
they ( CSV etc)would like to see clubs follow this through and grow
memberships of fee paying people ( and thereby people covered by their
insurance which is hellish cheap).

Not incorrect Rooman - you note yourself the bias in my reply,which was
totally correct for the context. Anyone, qualified or not, can coach in
the public domain. No need for a SkillCycle coach licence to do that.

Did Ron not teach you that when you run a SkillCycle program, there is
a fee involved for participants, that acts as temporary CA/CSV/NSWCA
(or whatever its called) etc membership and this allows insurance
coverage?

And yes, as the discussion was regarding CSV's coaching programs, then
naturally my response would be CSV focused. Is that a problem?????


--
warrwych

Paul Yates Wrote:
"EuanB" wrote in message
...

snip

I know that people very close to important decision makers in
Government are seriously looking at many aspects of cycling, its
benefits, limitations and effects across society, industry and the
economy. Part of their concern and advice is what needs to be done
to
improving cycling training.
snip
rooman Wrote:
those who are too lazy to take to the bike if they have to get
accreditation will also probably be too lazy to actually seriously
ride
a bike after they got one if they didnt have to get
accreditation...
they will be obese unfit souls anyway, no loss to the cycling
numbers
really, just a loss to their families and friends due to their own
level of inertia...

snip
rooman Wrote:
IMO it is worth it... offering skills and competence to build
confidence and awareness and encourage riders to ride is more
positive
than sticking ones head in the sand and saying "oh for f$csk sake
why
bother- we might get a few fat ar$e$ who refuse to do the course and
so
wont ride...ever..."
Please tell me you're not serious? You really want less people
cycling? That's the way to do it all right.

snip
All mandatory training will do is discourage people from riding. I
don't know of any other country where it's neccessary so why
Australia?

snip
Generic training? Bike specific? BMX, MTN, road, 8 speed, 30 speed,
dedcending at 70kph, track stands, foot brakes, hand brakes, shifters
on
down tube, STI shifters, grip ****s, recumbents, single speeds, single
track, time trial style bikes, dragsters, city riding, night riding?

Assuming somone can ride in a straight line and avoid obstacles, stop
effectively, bunny hop, track stand at the lights and chide aberent
motorists, then what more is there to learn for your average cyclist??

Licencing of cyclists would imply registration and number plates...

I think to go down that path is political suicide based on bicycle
sales
outstripping cage sales for the last x nuber of years.

P

turn left, turn right (cornering) turning your head to look behind you
both sides, riding one handed, riding one handed and turning your head
to look behind both left and right, riding one handed and
indicating/signalling, riding one handed to take a drink, adjust
clothing etc. Stay on upright and continue to ride ahead in a straight
line when bumped or leant upon.. o.. and how to dress properly

I am looking forward to Rooman's School of Bicycling, where he provides
free bicycling education for the masses. Wonder which insurance company
will cover him on his SkillCycle licence??


--
warrwych

In aus.bicycle on 30 Apr 2007 14:56:59 -0700
Bleve wrote:
On May 1, 5:38 am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
In aus.bicycle on Tue, 01 May 2007 01:40:08 +1000

Sure - low seats are not good for pedalling, but how many prefer peace
of mind?

and broken knee?


So you tell them... do they believe?

short term comfort against possible (but doubted) long term damage...
ask any smoker.

Zebee