Motorhomers
Comments
-
If more information was given, where is the line drawn to say enough is enough? There must be lots of situations which might raise questions from a few members but I don't believe it is up to the club to have to answer these on site leaflets. What I do believe, though, is that any information given, and this applies to information about CLs as well, is that it is accurate. On a recent visit to Norfolk it was stated that there were shops and a pub within 1 mile. Wrong on both counts, 2 miles for the nearest shop and over three miles to the nearest pub. It's a good job we hadn't relied on the information with a view to walking to either of them.
2 -
Agree John. Some information goes out of date very quickly. We recently used a very nice CL where reviews had mention shop in village close by. It had in fact closed previous month. Not a problem though.
0 -
I make the assumption that unless a site says otherwise it will be suitable for motorhomes. That would certainly apply to Club sites which seem to be the subject of this discussion. Accepted that on some sites there is a length restriction but that tends only to apply to the very large motorhomes. Hardstandings might be another requirement for some motorhomers.
To me the description of a site suitable for motorhomes would suggest that it was either within walking distance of a town or village or had reasonable transport links which might answer your last point. I don't think I am alone in being a motorhomer that does not take his vehicle off site whilst staying there. So sites in the middle of nowhere without transport links are usually off limits unless overnight stops. It is actually surprising how many campsites there are that meet that requirement. Even when we caravanned we tended to stay at sites that met the same criteria .
David
1 -
I take the opposite view that if a site is described as suitable for MHs, it indicates the site isn't likely to be a mud swamp and will be pretty level.
As we all have different ideas of what off site facilities and attractions suit us, I don't see how the symbol could possibly encompass things off site. There are too many variables and personal preferences.
4 -
That obviously will vary for person to person and depend on their individual capabilities. For me I would say within a mile or a mile and half walk given that when I get there I will no doubt want to explore and then have to make my way back. But that is only me, someone with better knees will no doubt be able to manage further.
0 -
as there is more than one school of thought on this 'expression' perhaps the club could tell us what it is trying to acheive by adding it to its club notes for some sites?
0 -
For information - To know the topography around a site, which I guess is what the OP needs for sites, this can be done using streetmap & using Zoom bars to side after typing in the post code or location. Above is Scarborough West Ayton site.
1 -
It's easy over here as well, if you can cope without Club Sites! Like you, we just climb in and drive!
0 -
I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that Spriddler meant it's so much easier to move on 'over there' with sites never being full and no need to book.
0 -
but reversing is easier?
0 -
David
I am not sure you are really comparing like for like. From what I have read of your exploits you don't really tour but tend to spend a long time on the same site, perhaps 3/4 weeks, is that correct? In 37 years of caravanning and motorhoming I have never done that, usually a week is a long time and I think the longest I have ever spent on one site is two weeks. I can appreciate that spending so long on a site you would not want to rely on other means of transport but when you are spending, often, less than a week on a site the use of public transport, assuming it's available is no real hardship. Most shopping is done on route which is not quite as convenient with a caravan in tow but obviously not completely impossible.
David
1 -
I met a caravanner at Much Wenlock who had a T Shirt "Everywhere is walking distance eventually"
1 -
We go out in our MH almost every day when on holiday. That's why we bought it, to be able to tour around, stop off and shop, visit places, drive to the beach, up onto the Moors, etc..... we would do the same if we went overseas with it. We might even stop in the same place for a good few days, but we still use it like a car. It takes 15 minutes max to pack up and be on the road after breakfast, and that includes winding in canopy and throwing chairs inside. It really is that simple for us. Unplug, Gas off, check lockers, check all windows, handbrake off, drive away. No buses, no long walks or cycling unless that is our activity choice for the day, no relying upon favours from others. We just go. Very very simple.
2 -
It's very easy for us as well, as we have our tow car. So not even any packing up needed. However, we like to use public transport when available, or walk from the site to the nearest shops if practical. We also use the car, but normally for longer distances.
An information sheet that includes phrases like easy walk, or 20 minutes walk, is in my opinion a waste of paper. Information such as the actual distance, with an idea of gradient, either gentle, moderate, steep or very steep, would be of far more use, and so easy to provide. In 20 minutes on gentle gradients we would expect to cover a mile, others might do more, or less, depending on capabilities.
3 -
Yes, that was my point as I never book a site 'over there' nor have an itinerary and just wander, so if I see somewhere that looks interesting I find an Aire or a site and stop for one or a couple of nights. I may only travel 30 miles one day but 150 the next. I don't travel much in U.K. but when I have done I've found it necessary (and very tedious) to make firm bookings for sites a week or two ahead.
I don't do beaches or bicycles.
I gave up on an experimental tour of East Anglia this year (not in school hols) as I simply couldn't find consecutive nights (especially for weekends) on my notional route without back-tracking and gave up, hiring a boat on the Broads instead.
0 -
We have both van and MH, and tend to use them differently. At the end of the day, all that matters is enjoying them and getting the most out of whatever you do.
I don't think the Club should be expected to cater for every condition, ailment, disability, physical requirement in terms of information to be honest. It does have to be as inclusive as possible, removing obvious constraints and barriers where it can on sites, and have to say, it appears to meet this criteria very well in most cases. But to expect all things for all conditions beyond the site gates in depth is perhaps not realistic. It's just too big to cover everything. Having spent years caring for two people with serious disabilities, it always paid us to do some proper research when choosing holiday locations and ease of getting around and about. I never expected the cottage owners or hotel management to do in depth studies of inclines and pavement suitability for me.
3 -
+1
0 -
I am not sure many are asking for that level of detail in the site details leaflet. However some basic information, or just getting the facts right or meaningful would be nice. Otherwise just do away with it and save some money.
Just out of interest I looked at Cirencester, a site we know so well I have not looked at the information leaflet for years.
It states within walking distance of Cirencester. Is it? No distance is given, so very difficult for anyone to make up their mind. Yes I know we can look at a map, but surely the site leaflet should provide usable information.
On another page it mentions the open air pool as 15 minutes from the site. The shortest route is 0.96 miles which equates to 3.84 miles an hour average. I think rather fast for a lot of us. Why not just put a mile walk.
Perhaps I am in a minority of liking facts in information guides to be clear concise and usable. In my opinion the CC site leaflets fail on all three in far too many cases. They had a golden opertunity when they revamped them for the name change and they failed miserably.
1 -
All those questions you have just posed, how far into town, how far to swimming pool will vary from individual to individual, depending upon physical capabilities. A map, combined with your own intimate knowledge of your walking , jogging, cycling pace, is the way forward. The Club has no idea how fast or far you can do any of them. They can only use averages at best.
The other things about maps is they often give a not so subtle clues about terrain. West Ayton Site is close to somewhere called Mount Pleasant, which to me indicates a hill somewhere close.
Personally, using some form of map suits us fine, and we seldom have problems, so for us they work. Others my rely upon other information, and I hope it works for them.
0 -
I like maps as well TDL, I have the entire UK on 1:25000 digitally, however I think you are missing my point. How far to the swimming pool or Cirencester is a fixed quantity. Hence why they should be used rather than a time, or a generality like within walking distance. Then folk can make up there own mind. Some info on gradient, if applicable, would also be useful.
1 -
I agree distance is a fixed commodity, the rate of movement is the variable. Contour lines indicate the gradients on my maps. I think most information huts on sites usually have an OS map or part map displayed, although by then of course, it's too late, you are booked in and onsite!
0 -
I also accept that the Club can't or shouldn't be expected to provide every last detail. However if they are going to mention a town or village they should record the actual distance and a little information. After all that distance is unlikely to ever change. They should also say whether that walk is along a path or along a road. So a simple sentence saying something to the effect
"You can walk along a level path into the town from the site which is a distance of 1.2 miles." or it could be "The pub in the village of St Mary Mead is a half mile walk from the site along a country road"
Obviously you can change any of the variables to suit. I don't see how difficult that is? I suspect the problem is whether this should be in the handbook or just online. Rather than that information being in the handbook it should just say please check online for more information about the site and its environs. That then begs the question of how many members don't use the internet?
David
2
