Ringing Forums

I've done it when there was no other option, to reattach pieces of shrouding that were inaccessible when the bell was down. I looped climbing slings through the spokes of the wheel and then used rope to tie the slings off to the frame. I did this on both sides starting with the side that resulted in the stay being held against the slider, then the opposite side. So even if the stay went the wheel wouldn't move. I also did all the work from the side of the wheel, keeping out of the the bell pit.

Because I was drilling the wheel there was a risk of accidentally pushing it off the stay, so tying it was definitely the lower risk option.

I'm sure you are right :roll: and if that's the case it's unlikely a commercial membership service will be around that long.

I don't disagree with your comments about the current territorial setup being outdated (I ring in 3 different associations most weeks), but I think you'd probably want 2-3 willing guinea pig assocs if there was to be any chance of success developing something.

1. To be eligible for election to the status of Qualified Member a ringer shall have rung to a method either
a) on tower bells 720 changes on either a working bell or the treble; or the tenor covering to 1260 changes; or
b) 720 changes on a pair of handbells.
2. Associate Members are those ringers who have not yet qualified for (1) above.

The choice of name seems a bit odd though, as not all of us are Residents of Gods Own County.

the one I linked to (Tendenci) has ridiculous hosting charges ($250 pcm) but it's Open Source so you could host it yourself. A more realistic price for hosting for it would be in the $25 - $50 range,

I've looked at membermojo's docs and it doesn't seem to support anything that looks like it could be used for multi-level membership, although some other similar systems do.

But I think the main problems with your suggestion wouldn't be technical ones...

where are the bells in relation to the opening panels? Our tenor used to "shout" terribly at one stroke, as it struck directly facing a louvre. We have two sets of louvres, both pretty large, so we've completely blocked up the lower ones which are in line with the bells and that's made a huge difference.

Perhaps try closing just the panel that's nearest the tenor to see if that helps and if it does, consider modifying it so the opening section is above the bells if possible?

From what I've seen something that is sometimes done is to re-profile the clapper, which means reducing the diameter of the shaft on a lathe. But from the description of yours, it sounds like that may not be an option, as it's been welded. I think you probably need to take professional advice.

We regularly use Musical Bell Combinations because we rarely have 8 ringers, we have the PDF version laminated and on the tower wall. The combinations for 5 bells are particularly useful, because an adjacent 5 out of 8 can sound rather strange. It also means that we can have light bells for those who need them, whilst still ringing the back bells (tenor is 17cwt).

One reason back bells are often not rung is because of the mystique and bullshit that surrounds them, with only the Ringing Gods being permitted to ring The Mighty Tenor. If people don't get a chance to ring heavy bells and thereby learn the necessary technique then surprise, surprise, they will shy away from them and they won't get rung.

I completely agree with all of that, if there was a "like" button, I'd have clicked it :wink:

The age range at our tower is 11 to 80, I used to participate in a different sort of group activity where the age range was also that wide. One of the big benefits was it gave young people the chance to form relationships with adults on their own terms and as peers, away from the usual parent or teacher ones. Over time you could see the youngster's interpersonal skills and confidence grow, and the wrinklies loved it as well. It was common to see a group with an age span of many decades "hanging out" together, eating lunch and generally shooting the breeze. There aren't many activities that can do that, I think ringing is one of them and we should recognise and promote that.

I do hope this comparison isn't suggesting that 62 is old! — Nigel Goodship

I hope not, otherwise I am :lol:

But it seems to be commonly regarded as "too old" in the ringing world...

ours was the same, the crown staple flapped around and couldn't be sufficiently tightened. During the 2018 rehang the headstocks were removed to be refurbished, so we took the opportunity to have twiddle pins fitted, so we could deal with any odd-struckness.

The shaft of ours is engineering plastic rather than wood, not exactly sure what. It's less than a year old so no idea about longevity, but we kept the old one under the bell so we have it it needs be. And AFAIK removing a clapper from the tower needs faculty approval.

We've just had one fitted on our tenor, which nobody could get up right (thanks G&J). It does seem to have fixed the problem - the crown staple was also dimensioned wrongly on the old one, so the whole lot was replaced. I haven't done the first maintenance on it yet, but as I had to crawl under the bell to grease the clapper bearing, having to crawl under it to check some bolts instead is no big deal. The clapper bearing is now a maintenance-free ball bearing rather than a plain bearing, so maintaining the tenor doesn't mean fighting with a grease gun.

I think determining what the root problem is first is best - it's not just the clapper that's important, it's the whole assembly, bell versus clapper swing times etc. I'm sure any competent bellhanger will assess all that anyway.

All I said was that it takes longer, which it does. — Simon Linford

Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't, I don't think sweeping generalisations help. I also think that progress isn't linear - some people can pick up the bell control stage very quickly and then top out soon after, others take longer to at the start but then pick up the pace later on.

We have an 11 year old who controls the bell beautifully, he's just starting to ring rounds. He started last May and if he sticks at it I'm sure will be an excellent ringer. We have a 62 year old who started in November and has almost caught up with him. Who knows how far each of them will go, I certainly don't. And why does it matter anyway, they are both assets to ringing and both deserve the opportunities they need to reach their full potential.

Will they get to Cambridge? I don't know - some of them would certainly hope so. On the other hand, the young Brumdingers rang a course of cambridge minor last week with two 10 year olds in the band. — Simon Linford

As a Minor-only ringer, after being berated for not being "Up to ringing on 8", 3 weeks later I rang Cambridge Major at a branch practice, because I had the prerequisites (and mysteriously, the sudden motivation) to do so. So what? The plural of "anecdote" is not "proof", either way.

you make some good points.

any strategy for supporting ongoing development should apply to all recent learners, gaining experience, wanting to ring more complex methods or to strike better (or to ring at more towers, etc) as age is not a defining factor then.

Agreed it should be a level playing field. And whilst in some places I'm sure it is, the truth is that the expectations of older learners are always lower, and that is inevitably reflected in the opportunities that are made available to them.

a little like the women in ringing focus you may need to be firmer that you do want to progress to avoid being pigeonholed as a happy, community minded ringer who will cover very well for the rest of their ringing career. — Lucy Chandhial

It's now widely and rightly considered that the issues that women face need to be addressed, and indeed that's happening. I've seen no recognition that ageism is also an issue.

The general concept of being open minded about why people want to ring and how people want to develop (or not) could well be a Ringing 2030 theme as ringers can be put off by any external expectations, pushing them forward or holding them back, when it’s based on assumptions rather than individual wants and needs. — Lucy Chandhial

I completely agree, but I see no sign of it. I think the concentration on recruitment as the top priority is a mistake, there's no point recruiting people if the infrastructure needed for them to reach their full potential isn't there, which in most places it isn't. Relatively speaking, it's easy to recruit, retaining and maximising the potential of recruits is much harder.

We met an adult ringer from a tower about 30 mins away from us at a branch meeting yesterday. He's been ringing for longer than I have and for the last 5 years, he's been trying to master PB6. Not only that, but he believes that once he has, he'll have cracked method ringing.

Firstly, nobody should be left struggling for that long, it's a good illustration of just how poor method teaching is in some places.

Secondly, there's no way a youngster would still be around, they'd have given up ages ago whereas adults are much more likely to stick at it. That reinforces the orthodoxy that youngsters are always "better" than adults. Some are, some aren't, it's not as clear cut as is generally claimed.

link is in the post above. Plenty about young recruits, which is great. But I've not found anything that specifically addresses the needs of older ringers, i.e. the majority of current recruits - it's almost as if they don't exist.

From the outside, the 2030 programme seems to be an attempt to roll things back to the way they were when the current "ringing hierarchy" were learning themselves, as youngsters. Those days are gone and are unlikely to return. Not only are the numbers used to justify the programme dubious, they fly in the face of demographics - we are a rapidly ageing population. Youth recruitment is important, but it is not the sole solution to towers going quiet. The CCCBR needs to cater for the requirements of the majority of people who are taking up ringing, and provide the support they need to progress as far as they can in the (as we are constantly reminded) limited time they have.

, @Penelope Bellis's experience mirrors mine - it's not that there aren't people who are supportive and encouraging of adult learner's, but there's enough of the opposite to make the the process far less pleasant that it should be.

Ringing also has an ageism issue, indeed it's now official CCCBR policy that adult learners aren't who ringing wants, despite the fact that they make up the majority of people interested in taking it up.

Seems like there's general consensus that 1.5x - 2x the number of bells is ideal, I think we'll settle towards the lower end as people's attendance is good. There also seems to be agreement that a steady flow of learners is better than "boom or bust", to get people ringing quickly and integrated into the band. And asking people to wait if necessary - which we've done.

Potato, Potato.

Perhaps you should agree to split the difference? :rofl:

https://www.engineering.com/story/pins-roll-pins-cotter-pins-and-keys-selecting-the-right-pin-for-mechanical-assembly