On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:01:31 +0000, Ian Jelf
wrote:

In message , Dave Arquati
writes
I do get concerned by way transport organisations are associating "step-
free" with ease of access for those of "reduced mobility". Step-free can
include very long walks - just look at the step-free interchange between
lines at Green Park for an example.

That is symptomatic of a general tendency to regard "disabled" and
"wheelchair bound" as the same thing. As you correctly point out, they
are not.

I know this group has been here before, but 'wheelchair bound' is a
term that is inaccurate and unhelpful (I bathe in a bath, I sleep in a
bed) and am not bound to a wheelchair with chains, silken cords or
rope. Neither am I 'confined to a wheelchair' as I drive a car. Only
8% of disabled people are wheelchair users, 92% are not. A proportion
of that majority have limited mobility and would be defeated at Green
Park!

A better (and more accurate) term is wheelchair-user, and for the
pedants, they can talk of full-time wheelchair users or occasional
wheelchair users. The latter group can generally climb a few steps and
walk a limited distance.

Paul

In message , Paul
writes
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:01:31 +0000, Ian Jelf
wrote:

In message , Dave Arquati
writes
I do get concerned by way transport organisations are associating "step-
free" with ease of access for those of "reduced mobility". Step-free can
include very long walks - just look at the step-free interchange between
lines at Green Park for an example.

That is symptomatic of a general tendency to regard "disabled" and
"wheelchair bound" as the same thing. As you correctly point out, they
are not.

I know this group has been here before, but 'wheelchair bound' is a
term that is inaccurate and unhelpful
If I caused offence by using it there, please rest assured that I did
not mean to do so.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK
Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for
London & the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

In article , Stevie writes
Southbound Thameslink trains nearly always arrive/depart from Platform
5 unless there's a problem on the platform.

I'm also pretty sure that the Canterbury services also use Platform 5.
It's either 5 or 4.

The lines from Charing Cross only connect to platforms 4, 5, and 6.
The lines from Cannon Street only connect to platforms 1, 2, and 3.

I can't remember off the top of my head which platforms are
bi-directional, but when you combine the directions with the above,
there's very little opportunity for variation.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Platforms 2 - 5 at London Bridge are Bi-directional, Platform 6 has
turnback facilities.

Southbound Thameslinks are booked to use Platform 5 but can use
Platform 4.

All other southbound trains will use either Platforms 1 -3 from Cannon
Street or Platforms 4 & 5 from Charing Cross.

Likewise Nortbound Thameslinks use Platform 6, but can use Platforms 4
& 5 too. As can all Northbound Charing Cross trains.

Cannon Street bound trains can only use Platforms 2 & 3

If platform 4 or 5 are used in the up/northbound direction it causes
conflict with down/southbound service to the London end of the
station.

Hope this helps, any more info, gladly help.

Christine



On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:08:25 +0000, "Clive D. W. Feather"
wrote:

In article , Stevie writes
Southbound Thameslink trains nearly always arrive/depart from Platform
5 unless there's a problem on the platform.

I'm also pretty sure that the Canterbury services also use Platform 5.
It's either 5 or 4.

The lines from Charing Cross only connect to platforms 4, 5, and 6.
The lines from Cannon Street only connect to platforms 1, 2, and 3.

I can't remember off the top of my head which platforms are
bi-directional, but when you combine the directions with the above,
there's very little opportunity for variation.


Life without sex just isn't life.
Make love not war!