I’m sick of talking about helmets.

Should Bikeability courses be compulsory before you’re allowed to ride on the road?

Who’s going to enforce it? How will you prove you’ve taken the course? WHat about all of us who have already been riding on the road for decades – do we have to stop until we can get our (suddenly very busy) Bikeability instructor to examine us?

Unworkable, I’m afraid.

Impossible to enforce.

Not sure my Mum would be chuffed about having to do it, and what if you ‘failed’ – would you not be allowed on the road/public areas?

No.

Yes at school level.

Yeah I know. I just got so sick of helmets I wanted to see if there was some way of encouraging people to go on the courses.

I think bikeability courses would save far more lives than if every single person started wearing helmets tomorrow and yet the subject almost never comes up.

How do we encourage people to at least talk about it?

No.

Not compulsory, but heavily promoted politically with a suitably resourced campaign to back it up. The above responses have explained why it can’t (practically) be done, but there’s no reason why a lot more funds can’t be put into the promotion of it to both adults and children.

How many days of this type of nonsense do we have to endure now?

Something akin to a driving theory test would be a good idea at least I think. At least it ensures the cyclists know what to expect other people to do, and what other people expect them to do. Unless you drive there is nothing that makes sure you’ve actually read the highway code before heading out on the roads.

Well, I’d imagine this thread will die after a couple more posts and will never see the light of day again.

Helmets will continue forever, no doubt.

I’m just trying to understand why there is so little interest in the media and amongst cyclists about training. It seems to be something that everyone assumes they know everything there is to know about already.

To me it also seems to be something that would be 100% guaranteed to save lives.

suitably resourced campaign to back it up

This is important. Current funding in a London Borough that I worked in covered about 1/3 of the school children there for quiet roads. Virtually no funding for the advanced course on busy roads e.g. specifically covering not passing vehicles on the inside. Since it causes so many casualties, it’s something I always try to mention, but it’s not on the syllabus so if you are short of time or have badly behaved kids, it might not make it in there.

And the award of council contracts is a race-to-the-bottom on funding, driving anyone who has any sense to get out of being an instructor and do something where you can make a living.

Personally, I think it would be great to put all children on the course in Primary, and then again (for the advanced stuff) in Secondary.

Even with the modest resources we had, though, many parents didn’t want their children to take part. Either because they didn’t want them out of lessons, or they didn’t want to make the bike roadworthy (even though we would fix them), or maybe they just thought the whole thing was pointless.

I just got so sick of helmets I wanted to see if there was some way of encouraging people to go on the courses

+1000

Do primary schools still do swimming lessons for kids? This is another of those life skills that would greatly help I think so yeah get em on a bikeability course when they are at school. That ^^^ basic at primary, advanced at secondary sounds good idea too

Compulsion is unenforceable (how many times am I going to type that today 😉 ) but yeah get as many as possible doing them.

Impossible to enforce so compulsion not the answer.

But, they should be more promoted and more available. Local courses available to everyone, any age, publicised in every bike shop. Ideally free but at most nominally priced- it’d probably pay for itself. Pennies of prevention etc. The message shouldn’t be that cycling is hard or dangerous, but it should be that you can be more in control of your safety.

Commuting, I’ve seen more bad cycling as a percentage, than I have bad driving. In fact I’d say most commuters I’ve seen are bad cyclists. Some put themselves in danger, others just fail to avoid being put in danger. But every cyclist collision I’ve seen for ages was avoidable- and I’d say wouldn’t have happened to me.

Of course, bad driving is more dangerous to others than bad cycling, and it’s not good that cyclists have to be so cautious/reactive to improve their safety. But that’s the reality IMO and it can be made better.

Do kids still do Cycling Proficiency at school?

Do kids still do Cycling Proficiency at school?

Yes, its called bikeability

Stick it on the driving test.

I too have been involved with a handle full of school training days and it was very rushed no real time spent in one day.. Would definatley be nice if all schools had there own bikes for recreation and training use or even give every child a bike so they can ride to school then less cars.

no, but common sense should be

Driving test the initial way to check biker’s ability. For UK learners, it is necessary to pass DSA driving test. After passing the test learners can drive or ride on the road.

Yes, but only if Troll Awareness Courses are made mandatory for internet users.

Enforced cycle training & helmets put people off cycling.

I think cycle training in schools is a good thing depending on the quality of those who deliver it.

Some (not all) of the Bikeability trainers i’ve seen are dinosaurs who should be out of the game.

To me it also seems to be something that would be 100% guaranteed to save lives.

Really? So by that reasoning every cycle death is the fault of the cyclist! I’m sure that’s not what you meant…

“100% guaranteed to save lives” isn’t the same as “guaranteed to save 100% of lives” 🙂

Anyway – no.

And andrewhowell seems to be one of these spambots, hence the re-appearance of an old thread.

Yes.

But enforcing will be almost impossible. Like not use your mobile phone whilst driving or parking on the pavement etc. etc. etc.

Run them in schools and make them so accessible outside of schools that not having taken one would be weird. I did cycling proficiency at school, it was a bit rubbish. Training needs to be better than that.

When I first learned to drive (or motorcycle, in fact) my cycling changed dramatically, and for the better, because I’d been trained in how to use the road, on the road, and experienced life as a motorist. (An interesting counterpoint to the idea of drivers being required to experience what it’s like on a bicycle.)

brakes – Member
no, but common sense should be

Where do I aquire “common sense” ❓

+1 for Northwinds comments

I am a volunteer Bikeability instructor. The primary school “cluster” covered 8 schools. Last year we ran a pilot lev 3 course for one secondary school, the uptake being poor and the bikes even worse!!

See lots of adults, probably c2w types with no idea of how to position themselves on the road. I think bike shops are missing a trick on this. A good number of my work colleagues think it is daft to cycle through our small but busy town, some are just plain lazy 🙄

Not sure about making it compulsory for all cyclists but I certainly think it’s a good idea it’s introduced for all primary school kids. The issue is that an increasing number of kids are riding unsuitable or unroadworthy bikes, I’d like to see schools given access to bikes for their pupils to do bikeability on.

The issue is that an increasing number of kids are riding unsuitable or unroadworthy bikes

This has always been the case! I wasn’t allowed to do the cycling proficiency test at school cos my bike had no brakes. That was 20 odd years ago and i now commute 3 days a week and actually stop at red lights!! hasn’t done me any harm.

It should be encouraged in school and the idea of schools having access to decent bikes is a good one.

Op, are you gary lineker?

The issue is that an increasing number of kids are riding unsuitable or unroadworthy bikes

Yes, and sometimes the teachers don’t help – years ago, I was doing a lot of kids bike repairs for Cycling Proficiency, and got a lot of complaints that the bikes I repaired were being rejected as unsafe by the school.

Talked to the teacher in charge of CP, who said “Yes, they’re unsafe because you can skid the wheels – the brakes are too tight”

She was slackening all the brakes off so it was impossible to lock the wheel.

Roads aren’t things that anyone requires a qualification or permission to use. Pedestrians can cross, walk along or lie down in the road (I feel asleep in the middle of country lane once – I may have been drunk) without training or a license- they are free to do that even if they are two years old, or insane, of blind, or mad. Its not a privilege that can be policed or withheld, nobody has been banned from walking. Cyclists or any age or ability can ride as well or as badly as they like. Sheep and cattle can be herded along the road or can even be free to wander as anywhere they like without having to take a proficiency test. Cats, birds, worms, ants all have free and unhindered access to roads without having to ask anyone politely. Users of motorised vehicles need instruction and license to use them but the onus is on them to operate that vehicle on the understanding and assumption that they’ll meet any of those other road users and that they have to defer to them.

Thats the problem with the motor lobby- a presumption that roads are for cars and that any other uses encroach on their free use and enjoyment when in fact they are the only class of road user who have permission to use roads but not the right.

Kids in schools should do it in the same way you used to get the fire brigade come talk to you, taught how to swim etc.

It should also be offered (free/heavily discounted) to anyone who buys a bike on a cycle to work scheme since they will probably be about to start cycling on the roads.

I’d do one if it was cheap and local to me. I’d certainly do one if my company offered to pay and give me the afternoon off work to do it.

I imagine many new cyclists don’t even know it exists or think it is the old cycling proficiency course designed for kids not adults.

Thats the problem with the motor lobby- a presumption that roads are for cars and that any other uses encroach on their free use and enjoyment when in fact they are the only class of road user who have permission to use roads but not the right.

Absolutely. To answer the original question: no, but segregated facilities for cyclists should be. We already have them for pedestrians, they’re called pavements. Cyclists are just as vulnerable and deserve their own facilities.

It should be mandatory for anyone who wants to drive a car.

it should be part of the driving test to ride a mile in commute traffic.

And andrewhowell seems to be one of these spambots

Nice fella too.

And andrewhowell seems to be one of these spambots

knackers – you know what… I think its great that the Mods move quickly to remove spam posts – but I wish they’d leave evidence that they’d removed it so dead conversations suddenly appear fresh

(reports own post)

EDIT then realises that he can’t report his own posts. Dammit. – someone report me 🙂

No, obviously for the enforceability issue, but more importantly on the fact that Bikeability itself promotes an unsafe way to ride on the roads.

The idea that all the Primary Position / Claim the Lane stuff makes you safe when sharing the road with drivers, a significant minority of whom just don’t give a **** if you live or die, is not helping anyone.