If the train needed to be evacuated it would be helpful to be able to
announce that to all the passengers... Not just to disabled
passengers

The guard is quite capable of going down the train.

operating. What's wrong with getting off at East Croydon and getting
on the next service which stops at Gatiwck Airport? They are pretty
frequent, aren't they?

Ever tried to get a full train load of passengers + luggage into an
already
full train in the rush hour (or anytime for that matter)?

B2003

Un snip:
Jack taylor wrote:
Yes it is when a much larger majority of people are inconvenienced on
their
journey on the spurious excuse that a disabled person *may* want to
travel
and *may* be disadvantaged if PIS or PA systems are out of action.
The
responsible and sensible thing to do is to allow the train to
continue until
such point as a replacement set can be found to take over the
diagram, not
to take the set out of service at the first opportunity. Anyone who
thinks
otherwise must be a cretin.


Boltar wrote:
If the train needed to be evacuated it would be helpful to be able
to
announce that to all the passengers... Not just to disabled
passengers

The guard is quite capable of going down the train.

operating. What's wrong with getting off at East Croydon and
getting
on the next service which stops at Gatiwck Airport? They are pretty
frequent, aren't they?

Ever tried to get a full train load of passengers + luggage into an
already
full train in the rush hour (or anytime for that matter)?

B2003

A lot of people get off at East Croydon!

Also, I was responding to the point that there should be a spare set
sent out and saying how it doesn't sound like it will help if the
service is frequent anyway. Sending out a spare set or not, you will
still have people transfering between the two trains and I fail to see
how you can prevent people getting on to the new train that didn't get
off the old one.

Steve M wrote:
I've noticed the delay at Victoria has been shorter this week - has
anything changed or is it just my luck/imagination?

I have also noticed this. Still longer than a slammer or 455 though.
Not heard anything official about this but it seems to be nearer to
15-20 seconds.

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 12:04:12 GMT, Jack Taylor wrote:
"Chris Tolley" wrote in message
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:43:16 GMT, Jack Taylor wrote:
Disability Discrimination Act. Farcical, isn't it?
No.
Yes it is ... Anyone who thinks otherwise must be a cretin.

Well, it really is hard to take seriously someone's argument when they
load it with such abuse, but nevertheless I shall give you the courtesy
you seem disinclined to extend to others. The systems of the train are
there for everyone's benefit. If any system which has been specified as
part of the design as safety critical is defective, then by definition
the train falls below the minimum standard required to be in service.

Investigation of many of the worst railway accidents has made it clear
that people with opinions such as yours who have made their own personal
assessment that this or that safety system is unimportant have either
actually caused the accidents or made their consequences much worse.

And a lot of people get on at East Croydon too.

The simple solution is not to take the train out of service unless
theres an obvious safety or mechanical fault. As far as I can see a
broken PA doesn't fall into either category.

B2003

Well, it really is hard to take seriously someone's argument when they

load it with such abuse, but nevertheless I shall give you the
courtesy

To be honest I find it hard to take seriously all these tin pot
pressure
groups that seem to sprout up like weeds everywhere these days. Now
the disability taliban have managed to it into the rules that all new
train
toilets have to be wheelchair friendly. Great. So now some train
companies
have built trains without any toilets. How exactly has this helped
anyone?
No doubt the rule about PA systems was put in by some other bed wetting
pen pusher at the HSE under pressure from some left wing do gooder.
The amount of money spent on all the extra facilities for the disabled
would
have been far better spent just providing them with taxis as and when
they
needed them.

you seem disinclined to extend to others. The systems of the train are

there for everyone's benefit. If any system which has been specified
as

Thats a myth. Public transport is there for the benefit of the
majority. Some
people simply can't use it , eg , people in remote villages,
quadraplegics etc.
Unfortunate tho this may be , ultimately its just tough luck and if
public
transport had to deal with every whinger with a special travel
requirement it
would grind to a halt pdq and no one would be able to use it. Life
isn't fair. Deal.

B2003

Boltar wrote:
To be honest I find it hard to take seriously all these tin pot
pressure
groups that seem to sprout up like weeds everywhere these days. Now
the disability taliban have managed to it into the rules that all new
train
toilets have to be wheelchair friendly. Great. So now some train
companies
have built trains without any toilets. How exactly has this helped
anyone?

Really? The only trains in the UK I have ever been on which don't have
toilets are those ones with the rubber door buttons (like the ones
which used to do the Hounslow loop) and tube trains.

On 21 Apr 2005 08:11:09 -0700, Boltar wrote:

To be honest I find it hard to take seriously all these tin pot
pressure groups that seem to sprout up like weeds everywhere these
days. Now the disability taliban have managed to it into the rules
that all new train toilets have to be wheelchair friendly. Great. So
now some train companies have built trains without any toilets. How
exactly has this helped anyone? No doubt the rule about PA systems
was put in by some other bed wetting pen pusher at the HSE under
pressure from some left wing do gooder. The amount of money spent on
all the extra facilities for the disabled would have been far better
spent just providing them with taxis as and when they needed them.

You really ought to see someone about all this anger you are carrying
around. If you keep on getting this agitated about these wheelchair
facilities, you may end up having a stroke. And needing them yourself.

On 21 Apr 2005 08:11:09 -0700, Boltar wrote:
The systems of the train are there for everyone's benefit.
Thats a myth.
What is? It helps when answering to read what I wrote.

Public transport is there for the benefit of the majority.
Well, it's there for "the public" - er, the name rather gives that away.

Some people simply can't use it ... ultimately its just tough luck and
if public transport had to deal with every whinger with a special
travel requirement it would grind to a halt pdq
Like I said, the systems are there for everyone. If signs are made
clearer for someone who is visually impaired to read, then *I* gain too.
If PA systems are good enough for someone with a hearing defect to
understand, then *I* understand what is said too. If there is enough
circulation space inside trains for wheelchairs, then *I* don't have to
climb all over someone to pass them, nor they me. And so on. You've
proved you can moan. Maybe in future you could prove you can think.

In article . com,
Boltar wrote:
To be honest I find it hard to take seriously all these tin pot
pressure
groups that seem to sprout up like weeds everywhere these days. Now
the disability taliban have managed to it into the rules that all new
train
toilets have to be wheelchair friendly. Great. So now some train
companies
have built trains without any toilets. How exactly has this helped
anyone?

I suspect that those two facts aren't as related as you seem to
think; if I were a TOC running a short-hop service (eg: Silverlink's
NLL and Goblin services) where most passengers are on the train for
less than hald an hour tend to be on the train for half an hour or
so, then I would rather have a couple of seats than a toilet.

--
Mike Bristow - really a very good driver