Electrical hook up safety!!!

[crinklystarfish]

Oooh, sorry Mel, forgot to explicitly point out that that wasn't aimed at you. I don't consider you personally to be pontificating, nor ill informed.

[crinklystarfish]

Inverters with floating earth anyone?

[lennyhb]

rupert123 - 2011-06-28 8:48 PM

 

Out of around 120 nights away last year I used hookup on, let me think, ah yes 120 nights, so what exactly is your point Lenny? I even use C.C. sites in the UK which you think is sad but that is a lot better than trying to save a few bob staying in laybys and carparks, how deprived you must feel. We will not stay on a site, aire or stellplatz etc unless it has hookup, why would you want to do without. I would rather carry a lead than have my van cluttered up with extra batteries, solar panels, and all the other junk you have to cart around just to save a couple of pound a night.

 

Trust Henry to take the bait.

 

If you think about it, it is you that is carrying all the junk around. My solar panel is on the roof not taking up any storage space, batteries reside under the cab seats again not taking any usable storage space. Don't have any lumps of metal (heating elements) in my perfectly good gas heater, no toasters, electric kettles, fan heaters & don't need to carry a heavy mains lead.

 

When will you get it into your head it's nothing to do with cost, in the past we have paid £35 a night in Italy when the exchange rate was 1.50, but we no longer require sites like that now there is just the two of us. I do object to paying for things I don't knead, showers, toilets, electricity. We didn't spend a fortune on a van with those facilities just to look at them.

 

As for Caravan Club sites we have been camping in one form or another for 45 years, tents, trailer, tents, caravans and finally a Motorhome and in that time we have spent 2 nights on CC sites and both of them rank in our top ten of worst camping experiences.

[Mel B]

We very rarely use campsites/CLs - last stay was when we were in Wales last year before attending a motorhome show later in the week. No EHU suits us fine thanks!

 

However .... back in 2005 when we had a gas joint come loose (and a subsequent blow torch! 8-) ... but that's another story) we couldn't use the gas at all so definitely needed the electric leads and made use of our electric kettle, hotplate and toaster, and fan heater/cooler, if we hadn't had them we'd have been in real trouble.

 

So now we carry the 2 electric leads (basically one long one what we cut into 1/3rd and 2/3rd sized pieces and put extra ends on), some connectors (UK and French, reversed polarity tester and converter cable), and the electric equipment. We also now have an aerosol-type canister powered BBQ/hotplate which we use for cooking outside and also as a back-up in case of problems with the gas. For the small amount of room they take up, I can't see the point in getting all hot and bothered about removing them. :-S

 

I forgot to mention that we have also let others borrow our electric lead etc when they've had problems - this happend to a couple on the site near Paris whose gas system had gone up the creek and their own lead was only of the 'French' type ends, but the site had the UK type ends, they were extremely grateful and we were more than happy to help, so for that alone, it is worth carrying some bits and pieces, if only to help others.

[crinklystarfish]

lennyhb - 2011-06-29 7:34 PM ...When will you get it into your head it's nothing to do with cost

I feel your pain Mr Lenny; some people just never will. It's probably better that way though, at least we know where they are - and whilst they're there, they won't be swan-necking or inviting us round for drinks and bloody nibbles. Or electrocuting us whilst wandering around with live wires / setting fire to our things with their coiled cables...

[bolero boy]

I didn't realise that there were two such polarised types of motorhomer - those that use facilities and those that don't.

This fact alone is perfectly fine, but what is all this inverted snobbery about 'doing without electric or certain kit or not using those nasty CLUB sites '. This seems far worse than the real 'look at my lovely van' snob brigade.

If people choose to use kit, electric, particular types of site this is all fine.

Also fine is for others to rely on gas/solar/wind etc to power their needs as is to 'camp' wildly wherever it takes you.

This is what choice means.

Just because you reside in one 'camp' or t'other you don't need to ram it down the neutrals' throats like a Party Political Broadcast.

As Tracker's strapline says..............there's no right way only different ways.

Enjoy this wonderful life!

[francisgraham]

If there's one thing that I'm learning about this motorhoming lark it's the snobbish and superior attitude of those who don't use camp sites and consider all others some kind of inferior beings.

Nevertheless I admit to being in awe of their sense of adventure as they bravely slip into a quiet spot in the depths of the wild European countryside and manage to survive with only a luxury motorhome keeping them from the terrors of the savage environment into which they have fearlessly wandered.

[bolero boy]

Oops! Snap, you beat me to it!

[Guest pelmetman]

francisgraham - 2011-06-29 11:08 PM

Nevertheless I admit to being in awe of their sense of adventure as they bravely slip into a quiet spot in the depths of the wild European countryside and manage to survive with only a luxury motorhome keeping them from the terrors of the savage environment into which they have fearlessly wandered.

 

Cor!.... edjercated posh people no owe to take thy pis aswel 8-).......................Just what is this forum coming to (lol) (lol)

[crinklystarfish]

francisgraham - 2011-06-29 11:08 PM

If there's one thing that I'm learning about this motorhoming lark it's the snobbish and superior attitude of those who don't use camp sites and consider all others some kind of inferior beings...

Not all, not even most. Just the tiny minority that perpetually default to the 'argument' that wildcampers wilcamp because they are too tight-fisted to pay for campsites. And then make their scurrilous views the subject of the public domain.

[francisgraham]

Comments such as this rather give the game away!

"I feel your pain Mr Lenny; some people just never will. It's probably better that way though, at least we know where they are - and whilst they're there, they won't be swan-necking or inviting us round for drinks and bloody nibbles. Or electrocuting us whilst wandering around with live wires / setting fire to our things with their coiled cables..."

How awful! Being invited to drinks and nibbles by the lower-middle-classes. How very 'Abigail's Party'. Even worse they may well talk about serviettes instead of napkins or the toilet instead of the lavatory. Best to keep well away eh?

[crinklystarfish]

That was an analogy used to demonstrate that it is unfair to denounce people on a distorted prejudice. The fact that you have been pricked by it indicates it worked, and might give you some sense of how it feels to be constantly accused of not staying on sites simply to avoid paying fees.

Not very nice is it?

It was about dismantling prejudice and assumption. Not an attack on people who choose to stay on sites.

And to assume this is somehow related to class is just silly.

[francisgraham]

crinklystarfish - 2011-06-30 9:26 AM

That was an analogy used to demonstrate that it is unfair to denounce people on a distorted prejudice. The fact that you have been pricked by it indicates it worked, and might give you some sense of how it feels to be constantly accused of not staying on sites simply to avoid paying fees.

Not very nice is it?

It was about dismantling prejudice and assumption. Not an attack on people who choose to stay on sites.

And to assume this is somehow related to class is just silly.

Actually mine was an analogy as well and was to demonstrate the superior attitude employed by some of those who seem to despise those of us who use camp sites. And of course the class reference was not about class at all but was meant to highlight what in your instance seems to be an intellectual snobbery about having to mingle with the great unwashed. I thought that you may have picked up on that.

In my short motorhoming career I have wild camped more than I've used sites. Mainly in the Highlands this Easter and, in a month of touring France recently, I used aires and wild camped, but only when there was a nice aire or a pleasant and unobtrusive wild-camping location. If there wasn't a pleasant spot to stay I would much rather use a small site than park on a trading estate or public road.

The difference between me and some others is that I am happy to use sites when the occasion demands and, I have to say, they have always been a pleasant experience. Mainly because I think I choose well and select small sites or municipals. I enjoy the social interaction and meeting others, which as a solo traveller can be welcome occasionally.

What I am not, and hope I never will be, is a proselytising bore for either camp (no pun intended). Not that I'm including you in that category of course. 

Edited to add: Whilst I am sure that your reason for not using sites is not financial I can assure you that for many people it is, and not because they are hard up. In conversations on aires I was amazed by the number of people who were so proud of the fact that they never spent money on sites and they really would stay on a supermarket car park rather than spend 8 Euro on a municipal site.

As Tommy Cooper once said when he was short-changed ten pence by a barman: "It's not the principle, it's the money."

But to repeat - I fully accept that many wild campers simply do not like sites and that it isn't always about the money and I have never claimed that it is.

[lennyhb]

WOW a bit of light hearted banter between Tony & myself about the merits of not having to cart all the gear around to make use of mains and it's gone totally OT to a them & us debate about wild camping verses sites.

 

One point on Francis comment on too tight to spend 8€ on a Municipal, obviously not camped in France in September in areas where all the campsites close at the end of August.

 

[robertandjean]

Some confusion here it seems. Aires are not wild camping; they are offical places where motorhomes can stay overnight. Also some aires provide electric hook-ups, often charged, but sometimes free. So it is possible to be not keen on sites, but not keen on wild camping either, but to have the "freedom" of the latter without the "regimentation" of the former, and even sometimes have an hook-up. (Yes we know many of you do not think aires offer "freedom", think main reason we use them is cost and we spend many nights on supermarket car parks!). Well we are off to France now in less than a weeks time and will report back on aires we use when we can get wi-fi; see how many supermarket car parks we stay on and if we appear to be experiencing this hard to define "freedom" idea or not.

[Big Momma]

robertandjean - 2011-06-30 8:30 PM

 

Some confusion here it seems. Aires are not wild camping; they are offical places where motorhomes can stay overnight. Also some aires provide electric hook-ups, often charged, but sometimes free. So it is possible to be not keen on sites, but not keen on wild camping either, but to have the "freedom" of the latter without the "regimentation" of the former, and even sometimes have an hook-up. (Yes we know many of you do not think aires offer "freedom", think main reason we use them is cost and we spend many nights on supermarket car parks!). Well we are off to France now in less than a weeks time and will report back on aires we use when we can get wi-fi; see how many supermarket car parks we stay on and if we appear to be experiencing this hard to define "freedom" idea or not.

 

"Freedom is in the life of the Beholder" :D

[crinklystarfish]

francisgraham - 2011-06-30 9:53 AM Actually mine was an analogy as well and was to demonstrate the superior attitude employed by some of those who seem to despise those of us who use camp sites. And of course the class reference was not about class at all but was meant to highlight what in your instance seems to be an intellectual snobbery about having to mingle with the great unwashed. I thought that you may have picked up on that.

In my short motorhoming career I have wild camped more than I've used sites. Mainly in the Highlands this Easter and, in a month of touring France recently, I used aires and wild camped, but only when there was a nice aire or a pleasant and unobtrusive wild-camping location. If there wasn't a pleasant spot to stay I would much rather use a small site than park on a trading estate or public road.

The difference between me and some others is that I am happy to use sites when the occasion demands and, I have to say, they have always been a pleasant experience. Mainly because I think I choose well and select small sites or municipals. I enjoy the social interaction and meeting others, which as a solo traveller can be welcome occasionally.

What I am not, and hope I never will be, is a proselytising bore for either camp (no pun intended). Not that I'm including you in that category of course. 

Edited to add: Whilst I am sure that your reason for not using sites is not financial I can assure you that for many people it is, and not because they are hard up. In conversations on aires I was amazed by the number of people who were so proud of the fact that they never spent money on sites and they really would stay on a supermarket car park rather than spend 8 Euro on a municipal site.

As Tommy Cooper once said when he was short-changed ten pence by a barman: "It's not the principle, it's the money."

But to repeat - I fully accept that many wild campers simply do not like sites and that it isn't always about the money and I have never claimed that it is. 

I don't think anyone claimed that you'd claimed that, you don't have to be so sensitive.

As I wrote Mr Graham, it was about dismantling prejudice and assumption. About not tarring all with the same brush; about trying to encourage a little less lazy thinking and perhaps encouraging a bit of tolerance. 

Lamentably though, phrases like "those who seem to despise those of us who use camp sites" indicates some considerable work remains to be done.

Of course, some who don't use paying facilities will do so to save money, and some who use sites would prefer solitude to social interaction. This shouldn't need spelling out, but so often does.

Incidentally, I have no difficulty in separating your metaphor and sarcasm from your purported earnest.

And I am of the great unwashed, as it happens.

[francisgraham]

I'm sorry if I was wrong in suggesting that there are some who despise those of us who use camp sites. It was phrases such as this, both of which are in this thread, that prompted my remark:

'Just don't understand the British obsession of wanting to power everything in the van from mains electricity, must be all the sad ones that stay on Caravan Club sites. Does have advantages though leaves all the nice spots free for us.'

'It's probably better that way though, at least we know where they are - and whilst they're there, they won't be swan-necking or inviting us round for drinks and bloody nibbles. Or electrocuting us whilst wandering around with live wires / setting fire to our things with their coiled cables...'

It would appear that I misunderstood, although I'm not sure how?

[lennyhb]

Too many things said light heartedly are taken by some too seriously what starts as a friendly bit of banter ends up a full scale war.

[Brian Kirby]

Agreed Lenny. The problem is that these things are written, and not said.

 

In conversation, meanings can be conveyed by facial expression or body language, so that the recipient knows (mostly! ;-)) whether the comment is a wind-up, a joke, or serious.

 

In writing, all we have is the bare words minus the expressions (with the possible exception of the smileys - which some just use to try to portray jibes as humour) and it is left for each reader to interpret as they will. How they react, is the author's risk.

 

So, if the intended joke goes sour, don't blame the recipient as being overly sensitive, or lacking humour, just apologise and explain (not directed at you, Lenny :-)).

 

In communication, the onus is on the author to get the message right, not on the reader to arrive at the correct interpretation.

[art338]

Cannot work out what all the fuss is about. Get out there and do some camping whatever site and way of life suits you, it matters nowt what anyone else does or thinks.

 

Any one who complains about others should stay at home and sell whatever they have for they are certainly not genuine camping people.

 

art

 

[Mel B]

if everyone would use smilies when they are joking it would make life a lot simpler! :-> No more trying to guess how a posting was meant to mean, whether it was a joke or serious matter. :-D

 

Today I wrote on a birthday car for a chap in our office who is 60 tomorrow. I put:

 

You look the same as you did at 50!

 

This could be taken two ways - was I saying he still looks like a 50 year old does ... or at 50 he looked like a 60 year old ...? In his case it is the latter ....... :D

 

I have a 'stamp' which is a smiley face so I put that on the card too so he can easily see that I'm pulling his leg; without the smiley face he could, if he wanted, take umbridge ... then I'd have to beat him up! (lol)

[thebishbus]

Anyway, back to my original post, handling hook up leads. I know people handle power tools in the garden, but that is not the same as retrieving a live hook up that has been laying in the grass, or as on some sites, across a road or driveway. We had an incident last year A crowd of us go to Emberton Park at some bank holidays, there are static vans the other side of the hedge from us, a rabbit chewed through a rubber gas hose. emptying the contents of a large gas cylinder into our field, could have been disastrous if any of us had been BBQ ing. Now if that had been a hook up lead, and retrived whilst still live, could have been very interesting, particulary as we packed away in the rain. What I am saying is, get into a safe routine and reduce risks

[Brian Kirby]

Mel B - 2011-07-01 5:06 PM..............................Today I wrote on a birthday car for a chap in our office who is 60 tomorrow. I put: You look the same as you did at 50!......................................

 

Blimey, hope you didn't use a permanent marker Mel! :D

[Mel B]

... I've also got him a mug which says "I'm sharper than I look"!!! :D