On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 04:59:25 -0500,
wrote:
in class 450s I try to get in the marked bike space but passengers
don't
usually agree.

IMO tip-up seats in these areas are a bad idea. People like to sit
there; better to keep it as standing space.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:44:12 +0100, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
There are already various banned times on the Overground - but I
expect
there's little or no enforcement - especially on DOO routes.

"We aren't moving until the bike is removed" works for Manchester
Metrolink. It soon is, either by the owner or someone else. The
same tends to go for people who haven't paid on London buses.

Assumes they see it, of course.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:17:22 +0200
Neil Williams wrote:
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 04:59:25 -0500,
wrote:
in class 450s I try to get in the marked bike space but passengers
don't
usually agree.

IMO tip-up seats in these areas are a bad idea. People like to sit
there; better to keep it as standing space.

I agree , ditch those daft flip up seats - and fit proper seats instead.
Commuter trains are for transporting people, not equipment. If someone can't
fit their bike in thats just tough ****. People don't expect to fit a
non folding bike on a bus so why should they expect to fit one on a train?

B2003

In article , d ()
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:17:22 +0200
Neil Williams wrote:
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 04:59:25 -0500,
wrote:
in class 450s I try to get in the marked bike space but passengers
don't usually agree.

IMO tip-up seats in these areas are a bad idea. People like to sit
there; better to keep it as standing space.

I agree , ditch those daft flip up seats - and fit proper seats instead.
Commuter trains are for transporting people, not equipment. If
someone can't fit their bike in thats just tough ****. People don't
expect to fit a non folding bike on a bus so why should they expect
to fit one on a train?

And where would people in wheelchairs go? Or would you ban them from
trains too? Even commuter trains aren't just for sardines.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 04:10:18 -0500
wrote:
I agree , ditch those daft flip up seats - and fit proper seats instead.
Commuter trains are for transporting people, not equipment. If
someone can't fit their bike in thats just tough ****. People don't
expect to fit a non folding bike on a bus so why should they expect
to fit one on a train?

And where would people in wheelchairs go? Or would you ban them from
trains too? Even commuter trains aren't just for sardines.

Well most stations arn't wheelchair accessable anyway so its a moot point and
I'm sorry if someone is in a chair but public transport is not really for
them. The majority has to take precendence I'm afraid. There is something
called dial-a-ride you know. The recent move to make tube trains wheelchair
friendly is just idiotic pandering to political correctness.

B2003

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:54:58 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:
I agree , ditch those daft flip up seats - and fit proper seats
instead.
Commuter trains are for transporting people, not equipment. If
someone can't
fit their bike in thats just tough ****. People don't expect to fit
a
non folding bike on a bus so why should they expect to fit one on a
train?

The space is required for wheelchairs anyway. I assume you do not
propose to ban those.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:15:46 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:
them. The majority has to take precendence I'm afraid. There is
something
called dial-a-ride you know.

What kind of dial-a-ride offers long distance travel, then?

The space is not wasted on a busy train anyway - it can otherwise be
used for standing passengers. On a quiet train, bicycles or prams.
It's just tip up seats that work badly, as people choose to sit there
for legroom. It really needs to be a place occupied as last resort
to keep it free, so standing space seems an ideal choice.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

In article ,
d wrote:
Well most stations arn't wheelchair accessable anyway so its a moot point and
I'm sorry if someone is in a chair but public transport is not really for
them. The majority has to take precendence I'm afraid. There is something
called dial-a-ride you know.

Have you ever spoken to someone who relies on dial-a-ride or seen
the page about it on the TFL website? You keep on talking about
it, but the service is pretty poor for anything time-critical. It
couldn't replace /any/ of the journeys I have made by Tube this
year, for example.

The recent move to make tube trains wheelchair
friendly is just idiotic pandering to political correctness.

Rubbish. The aim is to make it incrementally more accessible to
more people - not just wheelchair users - what's wrong with that?

--
Mike Bristow

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:21:42 +0100
Mike Bristow wrote:
Have you ever spoken to someone who relies on dial-a-ride or seen
the page about it on the TFL website? You keep on talking about
it, but the service is pretty poor for anything time-critical. It
couldn't replace /any/ of the journeys I have made by Tube this
year, for example.

Why not? If something is time critical using the tube is a bad idea for
anyone, wheelchair bound or not, as it simply can't be relied on. For example
I never use public transport when going to an airport. Coming back from one
to go home is another matter since it doesn't matter if I'm delayed then.

The recent move to make tube trains wheelchair
friendly is just idiotic pandering to political correctness.

Rubbish. The aim is to make it incrementally more accessible to
more people - not just wheelchair users - what's wrong with that?

Because wheelchairs are an obstruction in confined spaces and could
potentially be highly dangerous if a fast evacuation is required in a tunnel.
And who is going to carry you out? Would you rely on the goodwill of other
passengers? Aside from that most tube stations arn't wheelchair accessable
and spending a billion on making them so for the tiny minority of people
who'd take advantage of it is a waste of public money.

B2003

On Apr 15, 11:48*am, wrote:

Why not? If something is time critical using the tube is a bad idea for
anyone, wheelchair bound or not, as it simply can't be relied on.

And London's roads can? Don't be silly. Most of my rail journeys are
pretty punctual these days.

Because wheelchairs are an obstruction in confined spaces and could
potentially be highly dangerous if a fast evacuation is required in a tunnel.

Like the people who think luggage, bicycles and standing passengers in
the way of doors are a serious safety issue, you're making the mistake
of comparing a train, an electric one at that, with an aircraft.

With an aircraft, due to the amount of fuel present, an accident very
often results in a serious and fast-burning fire. The safest option
in the event of an accident is therefore usually, subject to the
engines having stopped, to get out as quickly as possible. The rules
on operating aircraft, such as ensuring that the passengers in the
exit row are able-bodied so they will be able to open the door and not
get in the way, and ensuring that luggage may not be placed in the way
of said doors, are based on this.

With a train there is far less fuel (none in the case of an electric
train) and the bodyshell is generally more substantial, with proper
glass double-glazed windows rather than plastic ones, so any fire that
occurs outside is likely to stay outside for some time, and any
influence inside (even explosives) are unlikely to cause a serious
fire. Also, in the immediate aftermath of a problem, there are likely
to be trains moving on lines adjacent to the train concerned.

Therefore, one of the most dangerous things to do in the event of a
rail accident is to evacuate quickly[1]. You are better to remain on
board while the situation is assessed, moving to another carriage if
necessary. You'll note that all the safety posters in trains say
this, as distinct from the ones in aircraft that basically say "get
out"[2] and explain how.

By the time it has been decided to evacuate, therefore, any bicycles
or luggage could be thrown out of the doors if in the way, and there
will be plenty of time for a wheelchair passenger to be got out.

[1] There was the case of the runaway engineer's train a while ago
where this *might* have been an exception for those in the rear couple
of coaches. But this - and more important knowing this - is so rare
it's almost not worth considering.

[2] This has caused problems in the event of ditchings, where people
have panicked, opened exit doors and the water has come in. But
overall, as ditchings are fairly rare (just as serious fires on trains
are), this is still the best advice.

And who is going to carry you out? Would you rely on the goodwill of other
passengers?

People tend to help people in the event of disasters, yes.

Aside from that most tube stations arn't wheelchair accessable
and spending a billion on making them so for the tiny minority of people
who'd take advantage of it is a waste of public money.

I thought we were talking about mainline or LO railway stations, which
are mainly accessible and are far cheaper to make so. FWIW, to make
the District/Circle/H&C/Met line stations accessible is quite easy -
mostly it just requires adding short lifts. The deep Tube is harder
(except new build like the Jubilee Line). Though I don't recall
seeing wheelchair spaces on deep Tube trains (the standbacks on the
Picc are for luggage for Heathrow passengers!), but if there are they
will otherwise provide room to stand, not wasted space.

Neil