Pilot Scheme
Comments
-
Yes that's right so no choice for some on the way they face and irate motorhomers trying to pitch on some awkward sloping pitches, impossible to level up etc. On the tarmac it could mean a view of the grandstand seating. Along the rails will that be more confusing? Who thought this one up?
0 -
I do wonder if the advice of ‘consider your neighbours’ with regard to pitching is being given to all LV users on arrival.
Mostly from what I see on sites caravans tend to reverse onto a pitch and motorhomes/campervans are able to choose according to their personal preferences. Thankfully choice of nose in or out is still allowed for all LV users.
1 -
I agree it certainly appears from the explanation given - which frankly I found less than over-brimming with clarity – that DK’s assumptions are correct. I wondered at first, when looking at the plan, if it meant that a pitch occupied by a motorhome would have the peg in a different place. I think someone else (above) assumed that when they spoke about another coloured peg being required. Assuming it isn't that, however, it surely means, as DK writes, that vans with their door on the off-side will have to pitch nose in. They might have done anyway – in my experience, although it can depend on the pitch and the outlook at the back, it is mostly continental vans that would chose to pitch nose in for the very reason that it avoids door-to-door pitching.
Now, however, imagine the alternative, under this trial, if they do not pitch nose in and reverse on to their pitch instead. All their space is on the opposite side of the van to their exit door. Moreover, as DK rightly points out, they would be exiting “onto the next-door pitch, or at least the divide between the two pitches”. Correct! I just cannot see how that can work.
Moreover, if they do pitch nose in, to get best use of their space, then this will mean that there is no door-to door pitching. The OP might have misunderstood that this was a rule, but it certainly will be the result - for the most part anyway. In a lot of cases, it will also mean facing hedges etc. – again as the OP surmised.
I admit that, like some others, I am not keen on door-to-door pitching, but I am not wholly averse to it. It happens very rarely in my experience anyway. What I do like is having space all around me and to be able to easily access both sides of my van for servicing and getting to hatches. I do not want to be pitched cheek by jowl with next door's car or closer than necessary to their awning. Pitching in one corner is not my ideal at all and if this is rolled out to all sites I, for one, shall be rather unhappy.
Assuming, that is, that this interpretation, which seems to have general acceptance, is correct.
0 -
I hope there is feedback via reviews as I feel some will be disadvantaged by this scheme and although the club states that users can still pitch either way there will be some who will find it impractical and their choice has been removed.
2 -
I think this latest move begs the question as to why the Club just does not put two pegs marking the extremities of the pitch and leave it up to members as to how they pitch and what they pitch between these markers as long as they do not go outside these boundries. Perhaps that is the idea?
peedee
0 -
See Ro's post and the detail shown below the Warwick site plan, PD.
0 -
Morning
So, as Ro states above, the idea of the trial at Warwick is for people to get full use of the whole pitch. The consequence of having the marker in the corner of the pitch is that euro vans will have to go forwards in. The reason for that is the grass "finger" or space to the left of the pitch as you look at it from the road is the fire separation, or no mans land. So the reviewer brue mentions is sort of correct.
The two marker roll out is completely different. Each pitch will have two markers placed 3 meters apart, one marker (to the left of the pitch looking from the road) will have the pitch number on it. You park your motorhome / caravan etc between those two markers, no changes to anything else, awning one side car the other etc. This has come about as there have been quite a number of outfits that park wrongly or the marker gets moved to suit!
JK
0 -
With regard to the Warwick experiment, Ro said units will still be able to pitch nose in or rear in. Are you saying this is not the case, JK, and that every unit will be required to pitch in the corner with its hab door to the centre of the pitch?
0 -
I'm just going by our normal fire regs. TW. I know what Ro said but I can't see how that can work being that as I said, the space to the left is that firebreak. Very confusing. I'm going to try and speak with Warwick to see how they're managing things.
JK
1 -
Life would be much easier if the club adopted the C&CC approach where people are helped to find a pitch and settle on it safely.
Arriving on a site, maybe tired, confronted by extra pegs or changed procedures etc it's just a messy way to treat customers. IMHO
Thanks for your input JK, it's useful to hear.
1 -
I would think fire regs would be maintained if a MH pitched nose in / door on the left in the centre of the pitch.
Thanks, JK. I wait to hear more and hope what initially appears to be an ill thought out plan is in fact something workable👍🏻
0 -
Thanks JK but to me it would make more sense to move the markers which are 3m apart to the pitch extremities. Where you put your van inbetween, front in, back in, extreme right or left should not matter as long as nothing was outside those boundaries.
peedee
0 -
The problem is insufficient space between pitches to allow that, PD, but I can quite understand why some folk think they can pitch as they like within their HS area.
I think the club is attempting to wreck a system which, on the whole, works well.
0 -
I think JK is just confirming my earlier post where I said it would not be practical to drive in/reverse in depending on what side the habitation door is on as you would be facing "no mans land" to use JK's term. Perhaps we have to take the pilot at face value as being a pilot a review will be made and no doubt any difficulties that arise will be noticed and adjustments made or the scheme abandoned?
David
0 -
Ten years ago a warden demonstrated his newly issued Dinky cars to me - wheeled them around his office counter, explained the new pegs to me and told me how to get car and caravan correctly on to a pitch. He was insistent about “left hand rear corner to the peg” There was only one in those days.
He stayed in the warm dry office and I went out into the rain to do my best to implement his instructions. He didn’t come out to help. It seems that’s how it still is - although pegs have proliferated in many colours since then and the instructions are ever changing.
But I gave up Club sites round about that time- too cramped, too confined and too many instructions - but I wish you all well.
1 -
Well thank you Euror,
in fact I feel much the same and am surprised to hear of yet another idea that doesn't really improve the customer experience. I read reviews and often think "why is this happening," I also agree with DK but fail to understand why CAMC felt the need to go ahead with this pilot scheme.1 -
Yes there some confusion about which way to park but that has been cleared up now.
So on the sites you use you're always helped onto your pitch, that is good.
0 -
Markers are not what you were suggesting in your previous post. You seem to have rather moved the boundary, so to speak, but isn’t pitching to a marker what we have now?
It’s a fact that there is not currently space between pitches to allow people to utilise their pitches in any way they choose as you detailed in your previous post. If there was, the pilot, pegs and this discussion wouldn’t exist.
0 -
You put your left wheel in, you put put your left wheel out. In, out, in, out. Turn it all about.
My brain hurts.
5 -
I beg to differ. You contradicted yourself, PD.
However, it doesn't matter a jot as your idea will not be considered by CAMC any more than someone else's. They will go their own sweet way regardless.
0
and as in many companies and government agencies has got worse with WFH 
