Shit on the tracks
 

Waiting at south tottenham station recently was not a pleasent experience (and
not just because of the locals) - there was **** and toilet paper all over the
northbound track. Its 2010 for gods sake, why is discharge from trains on the
line still allowed? Apart from the unpleasentness for passengers it must be an
appalling health hazard for track workers.

B2003

Shit on the tracks
 

Waiting at south tottenham station recently was not a pleasent experience
(and
not just because of the locals) - there was **** and toilet paper all over
the
northbound track. Its 2010 for gods sake, why is discharge from trains on
the
line still allowed? Apart from the unpleasentness for passengers it must
be an
appalling health hazard for track workers.

Try standing on a platform as a high speed **** spreader passes...

Shit on the tracks
 

wrote in message
...
Waiting at south tottenham station recently was not a pleasent experience
(and
not just because of the locals) - there was **** and toilet paper all over
the
northbound track. Its 2010 for gods sake, why is discharge from trains on
the
line still allowed? Apart from the unpleasentness for passengers it must
be an
appalling health hazard for track workers.

Were 158s the last .uk passenger stock to have non-retention toilets?
They're all over 20 years old now.

However, retention toilets have been a long time coming. Were the first in
the stock built for the through Ealing Broadway - Southend trains (via the
District Line, Campbell Road Junction, and the LTSR) in 1910?

Peter

Shit on the tracks
 

"Peter Masson" wrote in message
...

Were 158s the last .uk passenger stock to have non-retention toilets?
They're all over 20 years old now.

Probably. Of course retro-fitting of tanks has proved to be perfectly
possible on 158s, so it's a question of who funds it (and the necessary
depot work.)

Meanwhile back at South Tottenham - the OPs problem station - once the 150s
are no longer in use there shouldn't be a problem?

Paul

Shit on the tracks
 

"Paul Scott" wrote in message
...
"Peter Masson" wrote in message
...

Were 158s the last .uk passenger stock to have non-retention toilets?
They're all over 20 years old now.

Probably. Of course retro-fitting of tanks has proved to be perfectly
possible on 158s, so it's a question of who funds it (and the necessary
depot work.)

Meanwhile back at South Tottenham - the OPs problem station - once the
150s are no longer in use there shouldn't be a problem?

I thought the 150s on Goblin normally ran with the toilets locked OOU. The
only other passenger train booked that way is the 0528 SO Liverpool Street
to Enfield Town via Stratford parly, worked by a 315(?) which doesn't have
toilets (or passengers, I'd have thought, at that time on a Saturday
morning).

Peter

Shit on the tracks
 

On 25/10/2010 10:44, d wrote:
Waiting at south tottenham station recently was not a pleasent experience (and
not just because of the locals) - there was **** and toilet paper all over the
northbound track. Its 2010 for gods sake, why is discharge from trains on the
line still allowed? Apart from the unpleasentness for passengers it must be an
appalling health hazard for track workers.

All new trains (as in the past 20 years or so?) with bogs have retention
tanks. That leaves the older trains. We could replace them, but
taxpayers seem to be more bothered about funding schools and hospitals,
passengers already complain about fares as it is, and operators are
limited by the previous factors.

So, do we remove the bogs altogether, cut train services to the number
which can operated with new stock, or put up with it until new trains
arrive?

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Shit on the tracks
 

On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:27:59 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
So, do we remove the bogs altogether, cut train services to the number
which can operated with new stock, or put up with it until new trains
arrive?

These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station. Cambridge
is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to have toilets on
the train to be honest.

B2003

Shit on the tracks
 

On 26 Oct, 09:48, wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:27:59 +0100

Arthur Figgis wrote:
So, do we remove the bogs altogether, cut train services to the number
which can operated with new stock, or put up with it until new trains
arrive?

These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station. Cambridge
is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to have toilets on
the train to be honest.

B2003

Dover for the Continent, Cambridge for the Incontinent perhaps?

Shit on the tracks
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:27:59 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
So, do we remove the bogs altogether, cut train services to the number
which can operated with new stock, or put up with it until new trains
arrive?

These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station.
Cambridge
is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to have toilets on
the train to be honest.

????
Are you still referring to South Tottenham?

Paul

Shit on the tracks
 

These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station. Cambridge
is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to have toilets on
the train to be honest.

Have you ever traveled with a young child?

Peter

Shit on the tracks
 

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:55:13 +0100
"Paul Scott" wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:27:59 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
So, do we remove the bogs altogether, cut train services to the number
which can operated with new stock, or put up with it until new trains
arrive?

These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station.
Cambridge
is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to have toilets on
the train to be honest.

????
Are you still referring to South Tottenham?

Sorry, I meant tottenham hale. Getting confused with all my trips.

B2003

Shit on the tracks
 

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 05:42:52 -0700 (PDT)
peter wrote:
These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station.
Cambridge
is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to have toilets on
the train to be honest.

Have you ever traveled with a young child?

If kids can't hold it in for an hour then they should be in a nappy so
whats your point?

B2003

Shit on the tracks
 

On 26 Oct, 15:06, wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 05:42:52 -0700 (PDT)

peter wrote:
These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station.
Cambridge
is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to have toilets on
the train to be honest.

Have you ever traveled with a young child?

If kids can't hold it in for an hour then they should be in a nappy so
whats your point?

B2003

Similar points arose with the "Coastway" services.

It's not just the journey time. If you've had to wait for a bus
before arriving at a station with no toilets, plus arrive at a station
with no toilets before getting a bus somewhere else, the time it needs
to be held in for could be a lot more than an hour.

Shit on the tracks
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:27:59 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
So, do we remove the bogs altogether, cut train services to the number
which can operated with new stock, or put up with it until new trains
arrive?

These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station.
Cambridge
is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to have toilets on
the train to be honest.

B2003


They run to King's Lynn as well which takes two hours.

John

Shit on the tracks
 

On 26/10/2010 15:37, MIG wrote:
On 26 Oct, 15:06, wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 05:42:52 -0700 (PDT)

wrote:
These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station.
Cambridge
is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to have toilets on
the train to be honest.

Have you ever traveled with a young child?

If kids can't hold it in for an hour then they should be in a nappy so
whats your point?

B2003

Similar points arose with the "Coastway" services.

It's not just the journey time. If you've had to wait for a bus
before arriving at a station with no toilets, plus arrive at a station
with no toilets before getting a bus somewhere else, the time it needs
to be held in for could be a lot more than an hour.

I recall that one of the arguments used when the 4-VEPs were replaced by
455's on the Guildford via CObham line was that the journey was less
than an hour, and there were toilets at the stations.

However, our stations are only staffed single-shift now, so the ticket
office closes 13:00ish (14:00ish SO, closed all day SuO), and then the
toilets are locked. Mind you, so is the waiting room, so if you just
miss a train, and/or one is cancelled, with a half-hourly service you
could have a long wait in the cold.

Just my regular moan....

Kevin

Shit on the tracks
 

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 07:37:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIG wrote:
It's not just the journey time. If you've had to wait for a bus
before arriving at a station with no toilets, plus arrive at a station
with no toilets before getting a bus somewhere else, the time it needs
to be held in for could be a lot more than an hour.

You could say the same about a journey on the tube but I don't think anyone
would suggest installing toilets on tube trains.

B2003

Shit on the tracks
 

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:43:34 +0100
"John C" wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:27:59 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
So, do we remove the bogs altogether, cut train services to the number
which can operated with new stock, or put up with it until new trains
arrive?

These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station.
Cambridge
is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to have toilets on
the train to be honest.

B2003


They run to King's Lynn as well which takes two hours.

I thought the liverpool street services only went as far as cambridge?
Its the king X services that go to Kings Lynn isn't it?

B2003

Shit on the tracks
 

On 26 Oct, 16:31, wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 07:37:34 -0700 (PDT)

MIG wrote:
It's not just the journey time. *If you've had to wait for a bus
before arriving at a station with no toilets, plus arrive at a station
with no toilets before getting a bus somewhere else, the time it needs
to be held in for could be a lot more than an hour.

You could say the same about a journey on the tube but I don't think anyone
would suggest installing toilets on tube trains.

B2003

Journeys of an hour are extremely rare though.

Shit on the tracks
 

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 08:37:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIG wrote:
would suggest installing toilets on tube trains.

B2003

Journeys of an hour are extremely rare though.

On the rare occasion I go to work by tube it takes me 80 mins because I have
to go into the centre then out again. So not that rare.

B2003

Shit on the tracks
 

In message , at 15:42:23 on Tue, 26 Oct
2010, d remarked:
would suggest installing toilets on tube trains.

B2003

Journeys of an hour are extremely rare though.

On the rare occasion I go to work by tube it takes me 80 mins because I have
to go into the centre then out again. So not that rare.

This place in the centre that you change trains. Are there no toilets
anywhere nearby? That's the big problem with National Rail - generally
no toilets on the stations (or nearby) as well as none on the trains.
--
Roland Perry

Shit on the tracks
 

wrote

You could say the same about a journey on the tube but I don't think
anyone
would suggest installing toilets on tube trains.

The through trains between Ealing Broadway and Southend, which used the
District Line as far as Campbell Road Junction (and were available for local
passengers, e.g. between Ealing Broadway and Whitechapel) had (retention)
toilets. They ran from 1910 to 1939.

Did the Metropolitan Pullmans, Mayflower and Galatea, have toilets?

Peter

Shit on the tracks
 

On 26 Oct, 13:42, peter wrote:
Have you ever traveled with a young child?

Aside from cases of genuine need, often children will "demand" to be
taken to the toilet when in strange places because toilets outwith
their home facilities seem to exude to them a curiosity/adventure
value which forms an integral part of their train journey, visit to
the shopping centre or whatever.

--
gordon

Shit on the tracks
 

In article , d ()
wrote:

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:43:34 +0100
"John C" wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:27:59 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
So, do we remove the bogs altogether, cut train services to the
number which can operated with new stock, or put up with it until
new trains arrive?

These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station.
Cambridge is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to
have toilets on the train to be honest.

They run to King's Lynn as well which takes two hours.

I thought the liverpool street services only went as far as cambridge?
Its the king X services that go to Kings Lynn isn't it?

Uh-oh. There are still through peak services, three in each peak plus one
to and from Ely.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Shit on the tracks
 

On 26/10/2010 10:05, Mitdish wrote:
On 26 Oct, 09:48, wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:27:59 +0100

Arthur wrote:
So, do we remove the bogs altogether, cut train services to the number
which can operated with new stock, or put up with it until new trains
arrive?

These arn't exactly long distance services stopping at that station. Cambridge
is about as far as they go so I can't see a good reason to have toilets on
the train to be honest.

B2003

Dover for the Continent, Cambridge for the Incontinent perhaps?

Speaking of which, when if the Cambridgeshire Guided busway due to start
running, if ever?

Have Stagecoach threatened any legal action against either the council
or the contractor?

Shit on the tracks
 

In article , ()
wrote:

Dover for the Continent, Cambridge for the Incontinent perhaps?

Speaking of which, when if the Cambridgeshire Guided busway due to
start running, if ever?

Early next year, according to the County cabinet today.

Have Stagecoach threatened any legal action against either the
council or the contractor?

Not yet, unlike the council and their contractor who are at it hammer and
tongs.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Shit on the tracks
 

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:00:31 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:42:23 on Tue, 26 Oct
2010, d remarked:
would suggest installing toilets on tube trains.

B2003

Journeys of an hour are extremely rare though.

On the rare occasion I go to work by tube it takes me 80 mins because I have
to go into the centre then out again. So not that rare.

This place in the centre that you change trains. Are there no toilets
anywhere nearby? That's the big problem with National Rail - generally
no toilets on the stations (or nearby) as well as none on the trains.

Well I hadn't noticed toilets on the platforms at Holborn but anyone knows
otherwise.... And if I was to leave the station then come back in I'd get
stung for 2 journeys instead of 1 in LUs extremely fair fare system even
though I'd travelled the same distance.

B2003

Shit on the tracks
 

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:53:56 -0500
wrote:
In article , ()
wrote:

Dover for the Continent, Cambridge for the Incontinent perhaps?

Speaking of which, when if the Cambridgeshire Guided busway due to
start running, if ever?

Early next year, according to the County cabinet today.

Have Stagecoach threatened any legal action against either the
council or the contractor?

Not yet, unlike the council and their contractor who are at it hammer and
tongs.

One can only hope that the buffoons who dreamt up this absurd busway get
their comeuppence , but no doubt if they haven't had it already they'll
just get a golden handshake and be sent on their way.

B2003

Shit on the tracks
 

In message , at 23:19:51 on Tue, 26
Oct 2010, " remarked:
Speaking of which, when if the Cambridgeshire Guided busway due to
start running, if ever?

Current rumblings locally say maybe Spring 2011, but that may well
require the council to "blink first" and clean up the snag-list
themselves.

Have Stagecoach threatened any legal action against either the council
or the contractor?

I've not heard of any. It may even be in their interests to have a late
start because that will allow (apparently) a renegotiation of the
charging scheme, and the lack of house building along the corridor isn't
doing much for the passenger forecasts.
--
Roland Perry

Shit on the tracks
 

In message , at 10:25:18 on Wed, 27 Oct
2010, Roland Perry remarked:

Current rumblings locally say maybe Spring 2011, but that may well
require the council to "blink first" and clean up the snag-list
themselves.

The following has now appeared in the local paper:

"The council expects the project to be completed in mid-January,
and will then have to step in to fix the defects on the northern
section."
--
Roland Perry

Shit on the tracks
 

On 2010\10\27 09:38, d wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:00:31 +0100
Roland wrote:
In , at 15:42:23 on Tue, 26 Oct
2010, d remarked:
would suggest installing toilets on tube trains.

B2003

Journeys of an hour are extremely rare though.

On the rare occasion I go to work by tube it takes me 80 mins because I have
to go into the centre then out again. So not that rare.

This place in the centre that you change trains. Are there no toilets
anywhere nearby? That's the big problem with National Rail - generally
no toilets on the stations (or nearby) as well as none on the trains.

Well I hadn't noticed toilets on the platforms at Holborn but anyone knows
otherwise.... And if I was to leave the station then come back in I'd get
stung for 2 journeys instead of 1 in LUs extremely fair fare system even
though I'd travelled the same distance.

Since the escalators at Holborn are a bottleneck, why should people of
your ilk be allowed to ride up and down them at no cost?

Shit on the tracks
 

In message of Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:38:15
in uk.transport.london, d writes

[snip]

Well I hadn't noticed toilets on the platforms at Holborn but anyone knows
otherwise.... And if I was to leave the station then come back in I'd get

There are no public toilets in Holborn station.
As you leave the station, there is a narrow exit to the right to High
Holborn and another straight ahead to Kingsway. McDonalds used to have a
store opposite the High Holborn exit. I don't know if it is still there.
J.D.Wetherspoons runs the Shakespeare's Head. Turn left into Kingsway
and walk about 50m. It has male, female and RADAR-accessible toilets.

[snip]
--
Walter Briscoe

Shit on the tracks
 

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:44:39 +0100
Walter Briscoe wrote:
In message of Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:38:15
in uk.transport.london, d writes

[snip]

Well I hadn't noticed toilets on the platforms at Holborn but anyone knows
otherwise.... And if I was to leave the station then come back in I'd get

There are no public toilets in Holborn station.

Yes I know. It was a dismissive open ended question. There are no public
toilets in any deep level tube station AFAIK.

As you leave the station, there is a narrow exit to the right to High
Holborn and another straight ahead to Kingsway. McDonalds used to have a
store opposite the High Holborn exit. I don't know if it is still there.
J.D.Wetherspoons runs the Shakespeare's Head. Turn left into Kingsway
and walk about 50m. It has male, female and RADAR-accessible toilets.

Or there are plenty of bushes in lincolns inn fields.

B2003

Shit on the tracks
 

On 27 Oct, 16:56, wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:44:39 +0100

Walter Briscoe wrote:
In message of Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:38:15
in uk.transport.london, writes

[snip]

Well I hadn't noticed toilets on the platforms at Holborn but anyone knows
otherwise.... And if I was to leave the station then come back in I'd get

There are no public toilets in Holborn station.

Yes I know. It was a dismissive open ended question. There are no public
toilets in any deep level tube station AFAIK.

Not at deep level, for obvious reasons. I think there are some at
stations served by tube trains, eg Baker Street.



As you leave the station, there is a narrow exit to the right to High
Holborn and another straight ahead to Kingsway. McDonalds used to have a
store opposite the High Holborn exit. I don't know if it is still there.
J.D.Wetherspoons runs the Shakespeare's Head. Turn left into Kingsway
and walk about 50m. It has male, female and RADAR-accessible toilets.

Or there are plenty of bushes in lincolns inn fields.

B2003

Shit on the tracks
 

In message of Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:56:00
in uk.railway, d writes
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:44:39 +0100
Walter Briscoe wrote:
In message of Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:38:15
in uk.transport.london, d writes

[snip]

Well I hadn't noticed toilets on the platforms at Holborn but anyone knows
otherwise.... And if I was to leave the station then come back in I'd get

There are no public toilets in Holborn station.

Yes I know. It was a dismissive open ended question. There are no public
toilets in any deep level tube station AFAIK.

Not "in" but some "at". i.e.
Baker Street - in, but not in deep part
Bank - run by City of London
Canada Water - bus station, but closed due to "antisocial behaviour".
Canary Wharf
Earl's Court
Green Park - run by Westminster.
Old Street - run by Islington
Piccadilly Circus - run by Westminster
Vauxhall - bus station + ****oir in middle of road
Westminster - 0.50 in subway from exit 6 under Whitehall

I've used all of those, except the one at Westminster.
I ignore McDonalds, Starbucks, William Hill, etc. ;)
I also ignore mainline rail stations attached to Underground stations.
A RADAR key gives access to a more salubrious class of facility.

All arbitrary until caught short. I've occasionally persuaded staff to
let me skip out and back to use the facilities. I've also been allowed
to use staff loos on occasion.


As you leave the station, there is a narrow exit to the right to High
Holborn and another straight ahead to Kingsway. McDonalds used to have a
store opposite the High Holborn exit. I don't know if it is still there.
J.D.Wetherspoons runs the Shakespeare's Head. Turn left into Kingsway
and walk about 50m. It has male, female and RADAR-accessible toilets.

Or there are plenty of bushes in lincolns inn fields.

If you visit the Doric Arch, Euston Square has less cover. ;)
--
Walter Briscoe

Shit on the tracks
 

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 12:29:58 +0100, Roland Perry put finger to keyboard and
typed:

In message , at 10:25:18 on Wed, 27 Oct
2010, Roland Perry remarked:

Current rumblings locally say maybe Spring 2011, but that may well
require the council to "blink first" and clean up the snag-list
themselves.

The following has now appeared in the local paper:

"The council expects the project to be completed in mid-January,
and will then have to step in to fix the defects on the northern
section."

Late summer, maybe?

Mark
--
Blog: http://mark.goodge.co.uk
Stuff: http://www.good-stuff.co.uk

Shit on the tracks
 

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 17:42:21 +0100, Walter Briscoe
wrote:

I also ignore mainline rail stations attached to Underground stations.
A RADAR key gives access to a more salubrious class of facility.

Would you consider the toilet on platform 8 at Wimbledon?
I wouldn't. Not because it's kept locked and you have to
ask a member of staff to open it but because, iirc, there
is a brenton (padlock) bolt which anyone could slide across,
trapping whoever was inside.
--
Roger

Shit on the tracks
 

On 27 Oct, 17:02, MIG wrote:

Not at deep level, for obvious reasons.

There's no obvious reason why there shouldn't be any at deep level,
though to the best of my knowledge none exist, at least for public
use; are there any for staff?

Facilities were provided in the deep level shelter tunnels, which are
pretty similar to tube station tunnels, and I believe that remains of
sewage ejectors, used to lift the waste to the level of the sewers,
still exist at some of these.

Shit on the tracks
 

On 27 Oct, 15:14, Basil Jet wrote:

Since the escalators at Holborn are a bottleneck, why should people of
your ilk be allowed to ride up and down them at no cost?

Surely, they're not free to use; the fare paid to ride on the system
includes the right to use station facilities, such as escalators; you
can't use them without paying for a ticket.

Shit on the tracks
 

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT), Stephen Furley
wrote:

On 27 Oct, 17:02, MIG wrote:

Not at deep level, for obvious reasons.

There's no obvious reason why there shouldn't be any at deep level,

There is - try getting sh^H^Heffluent to flow upwards without a pump
or syphon. If such devices fail then there is potential to close not
just the station but the train services passing through it.

though to the best of my knowledge none exist, at least for public
use; are there any for staff?

Facilities were provided in the deep level shelter tunnels, which are
pretty similar to tube station tunnels, and I believe that remains of
sewage ejectors, used to lift the waste to the level of the sewers,
still exist at some of these.

Shit on the tracks
 

On 2010\10\25 10:44, d wrote:
Waiting at south tottenham station recently was not a pleasent experience (and
not just because of the locals) - there was **** and toilet paper all over the
northbound track. Its 2010 for gods sake, why is discharge from trains on the
line still allowed? Apart from the unpleasentness for passengers it must be an
appalling health hazard for track workers.

I like the fact that a thread about Boltar using the train should be
entitled "**** on the tracks".