Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Cycle train

12467

Comments

  • #92
    Shai
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭Shai


    Lord Glentoran wrote: »
    Simples.

    Parents teach kids from an early age to ride a bike safely.
    They then move from being supervised to riding on their own.
    All this on the basis that the kids know and use the Rules of the Road and are confident in differing levels of traffic.
    This involves a hands on and tailored level of supervision until the kid is responsible to travel on the roads themselves.
    It involves parents taking responsibility, and children learning responsibility.

    It couldn’t be any clearer than that.

    If you replace "parents" with "adults", have you not just described the cycle bus?


  • #93
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,350 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Lord Glentoran wrote: »
    This involves a hands on and tailored level of supervision until the kid is responsible to travel on the roads themselves.
    And what age do you think kids are generally responsible to travel on the roads themselves, given hands-on and tailored supervision in the early years?


  • #94
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Considering in the majority of cases it's driver behaviour causing accidents, perhaps it's drivers that need training and enforcement not the cyclists. But let's blame cyclists for traffic and accidents instead of what's actually causing it. Keep everyone in cars. Makes perfect sense.


  • #95
    Lord Glentoran
    Closed Accounts Posts: 876 ✭✭✭Lord Glentoran


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    And what age do you think kids are generally responsible to travel on the roads themselves, given hands-on and tailored supervision in the early years?

    Every child is different.

    It’s down to parents to judge how mature and capable their children are.


  • #96
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,350 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Lord Glentoran wrote: »
    Every child is different.

    It’s down to parents to judge how mature and capable their children are.
    Which is exactly what the parents in the cycle bus have done.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users Posts: 6,482 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    It’s a case of proving yourself wrong and still arguing that you are right. You seem confused. It might be all the extra fumes you are inhaling while in the car?


  • #98
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,283 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Lord Glentoran wrote: »
    Simples.

    Parents teach kids from an early age to ride a bike safely.
    They then move from being supervised to riding on their own.
    All this on the basis that the kids know and use the Rules of the Road and are confident in differing levels of traffic.
    This involves a hands on and tailored level of supervision until the kid is responsible to travel on the roads themselves.
    It involves parents taking responsibility, and children learning responsibility.

    It couldn’t be any clearer than that.
    'they shouldn't be doing what they are doing, they should in fact instead be doing what they are doing'.
    gotcha.


  • #99
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    And what age do you think kids are generally responsible to travel on the roads themselves, given hands-on and tailored supervision in the early years?

    We have to assume any age. Parents could decide age 2 is fine and people here have no problem with that if the parents say it's ok.

    I always thought even inexperienced adults would benefit from mentoring from experienced cyclists in modern traffic conditions.

    Some primary schools have cycling courses and the parents have to give permission for that.

    Some seen oblivious to all this.


  • #100
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    The Galway Cycle Bus does much more.

    It's also getting drivers more used to seeing kids & adults out cycling and thereby increasing their awareness of other road users.

    That, in itself, makes this project much more valuable to the average road user (drivers and cyclists).


  • #101
    Corca Baiscinn
    Registered Users Posts: 643 ✭✭✭Corca Baiscinn


    Hurrache wrote: »
    "Cycle buses are great but they shouldn't be on the road".

    That's why they should be trains:rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    Corca Baiscinn
    Registered Users Posts: 643 ✭✭✭Corca Baiscinn


    Twenty Grand wrote: »
    Eh no. Slow vehicles frequently pull in to allow cars to pass.

    You need to be considerate of other road users.
    A tractor driver was banned for causing a tailback in Mayo.

    I totally agree that cyclists should have segregated paths, but until then we all have to share the road.

    Have come late to this thread and had my bubble burst, was smiling to myself all weekend whenever i thought of the video and gobsmacked to see all the naysayers.
    The tractor analogy case is irrelevant as it occurred on an N or R Rural Road not a congested urban one at rush hour.

    As to "sharing the road" of course - with the proviso that the person driving the more lethal of the vehicles (hint: it's not the bike) carries by far the greatest responsibility

    To the poster who said its ok if it was a once-off, well numbers were up on Friday as it was a family day and politicians had also been invited but it's a DAILY occurrence to 2 primary schools and as Da Cor said there are plans to expand. I follow the Cycle Bus on SM and they plan to have the family days once a month.

    As for the post re drivers "going about their business" while pesky schoolchildren get in their way, this always intrigues me. In this case the "business" of the children was to get to school but the driver heading to the golf club/coffee-meet-up also often seem to think their right to the road is greater than that of the guy on a bike cycling to work say. in other words the unthinking assumption is that it stands t reason that the driver has superior rights


  • #103
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    There is an endless supply of threads where traffic is complaining about traffic.


  • #104
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    Lord Glentoran wrote: »
    Simples.

    Parents teach kids from an early age to ride a bike safely.
    They then move from being supervised to riding on their own.
    All this on the basis that the kids know and use the Rules of the Road and are confident in differing levels of traffic.
    This involves a hands on and tailored level of supervision until the kid is responsible to travel on the roads themselves.
    It involves parents taking responsibility, and children learning responsibility.

    It couldn’t be any clearer than that.

    Several posters on here and in the cycling forum have given adults cycling lessons about cycling in a group.
    Because learning to cycle in a group involves a tailored level of supervision until the adultis responsible to travel on the roads in a group themselves.


  • #105
    quietsailor
    Registered Users Posts: 1,428 ✭✭✭quietsailor


    Carawaystick wrote: »
    Several posters on here and in the cycling forum have given adults cycling lessons about cycling in a group.
    Because learning to cycle in a group involves a tailored level of supervision until the adultis responsible to travel on the roads in a group themselves.

    This sounds wrong, any other form of transport - car, truck, motorbike, bus you are required to have one on one supervision. Yet these cycle busses don't require it????? The most vulnerable (children ), least able to read the traffic arround them and take corrective action (again children ) are given the least training. How is that sensible or even safe?


  • #106
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,283 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    there's a *subtle* difference between learning to drive a truck and learning to cycle a bike.


  • #107
    quietsailor
    Registered Users Posts: 1,428 ✭✭✭quietsailor


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    there's a *subtle* difference between learning to drive a truck and learning to cycle a bike.

    I don't know if you thought that was funny but it bloody well isn't. It has nothing to do with learning to cycle, in fact only a complete ****wit would suggest children be taught to cycle on an open road. Children have no concept of the dangers on a road, neither do learner car drivers yet we insist that the 16+yr olds, the ones who have some hope of intuiting what's dangerous, get one on one supervision but the primary school ones don't.


  • #108
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    If its dangerous post some stats on how dangerous it is.
    ...Some 20,000 primary school children currently attend cycle training,....

    http://www.cycleright.ie/


  • #109
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,283 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    quietsailor wrote: »
    only a complete ****wit would suggest children be taught to cycle on an open road.
    grand so, i'm not a complete ****wit as these children clearly know how to cycle.
    they're being supervised in a mass cycle ride on an open road; what more 'protected' a manner do you think their cycle on an open road could be?


    and FWIW, i don't think it's funny. i actually think it's kinda tragic that for a child to cycling to school - even in a supervised cycle train - people think it's the ****ing child who is creating the danger.
    if it's that remarkably dangerous for a child to cycle to school, you're not even asking the wrong question to ask if the child is the one creating danger.
    you've decided the question is not even worth asking.


  • #110
    quietsailor
    Registered Users Posts: 1,428 ✭✭✭quietsailor


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    grand so, i'm not a complete ****wit as these children clearly know how to cycle.
    they're being supervised in a mass cycle ride on an open road; what more 'protected' a manner do you think their cycle on an open road could be?


    and FWIW, i don't think it's funny. i actually think it's kinda tragic that for a child to cycling to school - even in a supervised cycle train - people think it's the ****ing child who is creating the danger.
    if it's that remarkably dangerous for a child to cycle to school, you're not even asking the wrong question to ask if the child is the one creating danger.
    you've decided the question is not even worth asking.

    My god are you deliberately reading that post wrong to get a rise or are you really that dense - the child isn't the one causing the danger, the child is the one IN danger. But hey, what do their lives matter, you got one up on someone on the internet, you go keyboard warrior!

    No child of that age should be on an open road without an adult directly next to them, do you really think an adult a few meters back is going to be able to stop a child from swerving out around a pothole. It isn't Harry Potter land here, shouting at a child to stop doesn't make them stop, and please don't tell me " it's the cars responsibility to look out for them" it's legally is, but that's no use at all when the child gets hurt or killed.

    If you really want them to get exercise have a walking bus instead of a cycle bus where it is safe for them on a pavement. If you insist on them cycling to school it's a vanity project dressed up as a health initiative


  • #111
    Pinch Flat
    Registered Users Posts: 7,761 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    quietsailor wrote: »
    My god are you deliberately reading that post wrong to get a rise or are you really that dense - the child isn't the one causing the danger, the child is the one IN danger. But hey, what do their lives matter, you got one up on someone on the internet, you go keyboard warrior!

    No child of that age should be on an open road without an adult directly next to them, do you really think an adult a few meters back is going to be able to stop a child from swerving out around a pothole. It isn't Harry Potter land here, shouting at a child to stop doesn't make them stop, and please don't tell me " it's the cars responsibility to look out for them" it's legally is, but that's no use at all when the child gets hurt or killed.

    If you really want them to get exercise have a walking bus instead of a cycle bus where it is safe for them on a pavement. If you insist on them cycling to school it's a vanity project dressed up as a health initiative

    You’re right. All those kids should be safely belted into the back on mummies SUV so they can arrive nice and safe. What about it if there’s a few more dozen cars on the roads.

    It’s amazing how people justify the danger caused by Motor vehicles as a fait accompli. I’d much prefer if wills drive with more consideration and respect , particularly when there’s kids about. It’s done on other country countries, but we still see the car as king and everyone has to bow before it


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,350 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    quietsailor wrote: »
    Children have no concept of the dangers on a road, neither do learner car drivers yet we insist that the 16+yr olds, the ones who have some hope of intuiting what's dangerous, get one on one supervision but the primary school ones don't.
    quietsailor wrote: »
    This sounds wrong, any other form of transport - car, truck, motorbike, bus you are required to have one on one supervision. Yet these cycle busses don't require it?????


    I'm not sure why you're comparing kids on bikes to various forms of vehicular transport on the road? You might as well be comparing paracetamol and morphine, and questioning why people don't need a prescription for paracetamol.



    The answer in both cases is that they don't kill people - kids on bikes don't kill people and paracetamol (by and large) doesn't kill people.


    That's why you don't have the same kinds of controls for both.


  • #113
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    quietsailor wrote: »
    ..., the child is the one IN danger. ,..

    Back it up with some stats.....


  • #114
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,147 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    quietsailor wrote: »
    My god are you deliberately reading that post wrong to get a rise or are you really that dense - the child isn't the one causing the danger, the child is the one IN danger. But hey, what do their lives matter, you got one up on someone on the internet, you go keyboard warrior!

    No child of that age should be on an open road without an adult directly next to them, do you really think an adult a few meters back is going to be able to stop a child from swerving out around a pothole. It isn't Harry Potter land here, shouting at a child to stop doesn't make them stop, and please don't tell me " it's the cars responsibility to look out for them" it's legally is, but that's no use at all when the child gets hurt or killed.

    If you really want them to get exercise have a walking bus instead of a cycle bus where it is safe for them on a pavement. If you insist on them cycling to school it's a vanity project dressed up as a health initiative

    And yet they all somehow manage to arrive to and from school each day successfully.


  • #115
    quietsailor
    Registered Users Posts: 1,428 ✭✭✭quietsailor


    Hurrache wrote: »
    And yet they all somehow manage to arrive to and from school each day successfully.

    I skydived for several years and never had a major accident just some very rough landings, a sub set of that sport is swoop landings - the mad sods deliberately flying fast at the ground and pulling up at the last moment to skim the ground -there is plenty of videos of them successfully negotiating a jump yet their accident rate is ridiculously high - 34% serious injury or fatalities.

    I enjoyed skydiving yet I'll never try swooping. I've never been hurt by swooping yet I know the risks are there and refuse to risk it. In

    In the skydiving analogy your the fella who tells others to go on, give it a lash, what's the worst that can happen?

    I can't multi quote on this phone but someone asked for stats on children getting injured on bikes by cars - well in a sample size of one, me, the answer is 100%

    At the age of fourteen, when I was well able to cycle and strong enough to cycle off road around fields at the time my front wheel went into a pothole, jack knifed the handle bars and my head slammed into the car passing me, enough to dent the wing.

    I'm that one in a million "happy " accident where the car was not too near in, not too far away, not to far ahead and not too far behind. My friend (another teenager ,not a primary school child ) and the driver (an adult ) both saw the accident starting and could do nothing about it. How do you expect primary age children to cope in a similar scenario?
    I was a teenager;
    -physically fit enough to muscle a bike around offroad
    -actually traffic aware which primary children can never be
    and yet I only survived by pure luck. You're all saying accidents like that can never happen to primary school age children because an adult is close by. That's literally the safely factor you are applying to small children "an adult will be close by so they can shout and there will be no accident"

    And the 1.5m rule? The car behind the one I smacked off of was driven by a friend of the family who saw the whole thing and satisfied my father that the car I bounced off of was passing safely wide of me. They had no way of anticipating I would fall out that far. I was aware enough to try and pull the bike towards the ditch and I was helpless, what hope has a small child, if they even have the mental capacity to understand they're in a dangerous situation, to react quickly enough and correctly to avoid getting hurt in a similar situation


  • #116
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users Posts: 6,482 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    quietsailor wrote: »
    I skydived for several years and never had a major accident just some very rough landings, a sub set of that sport is swoop landings - the mad sods deliberately flying fast at the ground and pulling up at the last moment to skim the ground -there is plenty of videos of them successfully negotiating a jump yet their accident rate is ridiculously high - 34% serious injury or fatalities.

    I enjoyed skydiving yet I'll never try swooping. I've never been hurt by swooping yet I know the risks are there and refuse to risk it. In

    In the skydiving analogy your the fella who tells others to go on, give it a lash, what's the worst that can happen?

    I can't multi quote on this phone but someone asked for stats on children getting injured on bikes by cars - well in a sample size of one, me, the answer is 100%

    At the age of fourteen, when I was well able to cycle and strong enough to cycle off road around fields at the time my front wheel went into a pothole, jack knifed the handle bars and my head slammed into the car passing me, enough to dent the wing.

    I'm that one in a million "happy " accident where the car was not too near in, not too far away, not to far ahead and not too far behind. My friend (another teenager ,not a primary school child ) and the driver (an adult ) both saw the accident starting and could do nothing about it. How do you expect primary age children to cope in a similar scenario?
    I was a teenager;
    -physically fit enough to muscle a bike around offroad
    -actually traffic aware which primary children can never be
    and yet I only survived by pure luck. You're all saying accidents like that can never happen to primary school age children because an adult is close by. That's literally the safely factor you are applying to small children "an adult will be close by so they can shout and there will be no accident"

    And the 1.5m rule? The car behind the one I smacked off of was driven by a friend of the family who saw the whole thing and satisfied my father that the car I bounced off of was passing safely wide of me. They had no way of anticipating I would fall out that far. I was aware enough to try and pull the bike towards the ditch and I was helpless, what hope has a small child, if they even have the mental capacity to understand they're in a dangerous situation, to react quickly enough and correctly to avoid getting hurt in a similar situation

    I can think of only two solution for all of life’s problems. Firstly cover you in bubble wrap. Failing that then ban all motor vehicles.

    It’s the drivers that need sorting out, not the kids cycling.


  • #117
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,147 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    quietsailor wrote: »
    and yet I only survived by pure luck. You're all saying accidents like that can never happen to primary school age children because an adult is close by. That's literally the safely factor you are applying to small children "an adult will be close by so they can shout and there will be no accident"

    With this outlook on life, you're better off never leaving your bed.

    What a bizarre analogy, 'swooping' to kids cycling a bike. Do you not see all the car accidents in which cars end up on the footpath, or hit posts or poles that crash onto the footpaths?

    It's only a matter of luck that we don't have only 50% of kids that walk to school making it the whole way without being picked off by careering cars, crashing lamp posts and pesky swooping skydivers.


  • #118
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,283 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    quietsailor wrote: »
    I can't multi quote on this phone but someone asked for stats on children getting injured on bikes by cars - well in a sample size of one, me, the answer is 100%

    At the age of fourteen, when I was well able to cycle and strong enough to cycle off road around fields at the time my front wheel went into a pothole, jack knifed the handle bars and my head slammed into the car passing me, enough to dent the wing.
    this accident has nothing to do with you having been a child, though?
    you've seemingly posted it as a statistic on why kids shouldn't be out on the road, but it has nothing to do with lack of awareness of the ROTR or anything else you can say is endemic to being a child.


  • #119
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    quietsailor wrote: »
    ...but someone asked for stats on children getting injured on bikes by cars - well in a sample size of one, me, the answer is 100%...

    Actually you didn't die. So it's 0% you didn't mention injury so that's also 0%. You weren't even primary school age. Also 0%.

    How is any one expected to take you seriously...


  • #120
    quietsailor
    Registered Users Posts: 1,428 ✭✭✭quietsailor


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    You’re right. All those kids should be safely belted into the back on mummies SUV so they can arrive nice and safe. What about it if there’s a few more dozen cars on the roads.

    It’s amazing how people justify the danger caused by Motor vehicles as a fait accompli. I’d much prefer if wills drive with more consideration and respect , particularly when there’s kids about. It’s done on other country countries, but we still see the car as king and everyone has to bow before it

    Where did I say they should go to school in a vehicle of any kind? Go on, actually quote the line I said that.

    The point I made in an earlier post is that they should be walking to school. In that video they all talk about the benefits of an early start for exercise and how it wakes the children up. Walking answers all those points without the added risk of interacting with heavy moving machinery. The spokesman in that video even said it was dangerous - that there is no proper cycle infrastructure.

    Yet no one is willing to answer me - why have children cycle to school rather than walk? Walking gets is as healthy but has less risk - why use the mode of transport with higher risk to the children.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,283 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    quietsailor wrote: »
    Walking gets is as healthy but has less risk
    source, please.

    also, the blindingly obvious point is why we're debating if the children should walk, rather than debating if the drivers should get out and walk.


Advertisement