Hampshire's misguided campaign
-
- Posts: 472
- Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:40pm
- Location: Hampshire
- Contact:
Hampshire's misguided campaign
Hampshire County Council have amended DfT material to show closer cycle/car interaction.
When will they get it right.
Meanwhile more cyclists get killed.
http://liveablewhitchurch.blogspot.co.u ... close.html
When will they get it right.
Meanwhile more cyclists get killed.
http://liveablewhitchurch.blogspot.co.u ... close.html
- Mr. Viking
- Posts: 371
- Joined: 6 Jun 2012, 9:29pm
- Location: Liverpool
Re: Hampshire's misguided campaign
I'm sure they aren't making a recommendation for road usage in their poster, surely the bike and the car are side by side to show that they are equal. Not sure why they drew the road markings in on the right hand side though.
Re: Hampshire's misguided campaign
It's just the person who made the poster, and the person who signed it off is probably equally clueless.
Re: Hampshire's misguided campaign
I think it is stretching things to portray it as a guide to the space you should leave between bikes and cars unless you also want to suggest that Hampshire are recommending switching to driving on the right (or alternatively that everyone will have to go backwards)!
Former member of the Cult of the Polystyrene Head Carbuncle.
-
- Posts: 472
- Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:40pm
- Location: Hampshire
- Contact:
Re: Hampshire's misguided campaign
RickH wrote:I think it is stretching things to portray it as a guide to the space you should leave between bikes and cars unless you also want to suggest that Hampshire are recommending switching to driving on the right (or alternatively that everyone will have to go backwards)!
There is a piece about cyclists overtaking parked cars, and not being in the door zone, which they do on the right, but I guess you didn't read that far.
Re: Hampshire's misguided campaign
keepontriking wrote:RickH wrote:I think it is stretching things to portray it as a guide to the space you should leave between bikes and cars unless you also want to suggest that Hampshire are recommending switching to driving on the right (or alternatively that everyone will have to go backwards)!
There is a piece about cyclists overtaking parked cars, and not being in the door zone, which they do on the right, but I guess you didn't read that far.
Yes I did see it - but that is on the blog, that you linked to, commenting on what Hampshire had produced rather than actually part of it. This topic is therefore commenting on comments rather than directly on what Hampshire are doing. I've not yet found anything direct from Hampshire council (but haven't looked that hard so far only on the council website).
Rick.
Former member of the Cult of the Polystyrene Head Carbuncle.
-
- Posts: 472
- Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:40pm
- Location: Hampshire
- Contact:
Re: Hampshire's misguided campaign
Mark1978 wrote:It's just the person who made the poster, and the person who signed it off is probably equally clueless.
Yep. There needs to be much more care from road safety 'experts' in the material they produce.
Probably this was just thrown together without any thought as to what some could interpret it as promoting as acceptable practice.
Never mind, it will tick another box and allow another Pat-Our-Backs press release.
Re: Hampshire's misguided campaign
People understand/interpret what they see in pictures/diagrams a whole lot more easier than they do text, hence why road signs are made such. I think it would be very very easy for a large portion of people to intepret that sign in the 'wrong' way. That the projection is meant to be about equal footing etc doesn't come over in the slightest.
What is does suggest is that the driver or cyclist is on the wrong side for real world road experiences and that the vicinity of the car to the bike is acceptable (which it isn't)
Good intention, very very poor delivery as per normal.
What is does suggest is that the driver or cyclist is on the wrong side for real world road experiences and that the vicinity of the car to the bike is acceptable (which it isn't)
Good intention, very very poor delivery as per normal.
Re: Hampshire's misguided campaign
keepontriking wrote:Hampshire County Council have amended DfT material to show closer cycle/car interaction.
Here's the DfT original: http://think.direct.gov.uk/assets/pdf/1 ... poster.pdf
I am inclined to agree that something's been lost in translation, I also note a magic hat seems to have been gained as well.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
Re: Hampshire's misguided campaign
Yes. & I notice the car doesn't have any mirrors. What sort of message does that send?
Re: Hampshire's misguided campaign
Ellieb wrote:Yes. & I notice the car doesn't have any mirrors. What sort of message does that send?
That the people who designed it think that all cyclists wear helmets or it's another push to show what is the 'norm' and/or some cockmamy tosh that is politically correct.
A person on a bicycle is easy to digest visiually on signs without a helmet, it is completely surperflous to the message but adds fuel to the fire.
-
- Posts: 4339
- Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
- Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties
Re: Hampshire's misguided campaign
gaz wrote:keepontriking wrote:Hampshire County Council have amended DfT material to show closer cycle/car interaction.
Here's the DfT original: http://think.direct.gov.uk/assets/pdf/1 ... poster.pdf
I am inclined to agree that something's been lost in translation, I also note a magic hat seems to have been gained as well.
I agree. The original poster conveys a different message.
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
I don't peddle bikes.