In ,
Jack Taylor typed:

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...

It doesn't take a quarter of the coach, either. It takes about 2
bays (or 5-6 one-side rows of airlines) which is quite a bit less.

We weren't discussing the size of the disabled toilet - we were
discussing the area taken up by the disabled toilet, , which is the entire
area between one vestibule and
the corridor connection at the end of the vehicle.


How can it be that we are not discussing the size of the disabled toilet?
This part of the thread is in answer to and relates solely to your statement
that ".... there have been many complaints about the fact the the
Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version) devote one third of an entire
coach to the disabled-access toilet,"

If you want to add "the seating reserved for wheelchair passengers and their
companions and for bicycle stowage", you should have done so in the first
instance. But it still doesn't amount to one-third of an entire coach, does
it?

Your hole is big enough. Why don't you stop digging?

--
Bob

Bob Wood wrote:
Jack Taylor typed:
"Neil Williams" wrote in message
It doesn't take a quarter of the coach, either. It takes about 2
bays (or 5-6 one-side rows of airlines) which is quite a bit less.

We weren't discussing the size of the disabled toilet - we were
discussing the area taken up by the disabled toilet,
which is the entire area between one vestibule and
the corridor connection at the end of the vehicle.

How can it be that we are not discussing the size of the disabled toilet?
This part of the thread is in answer to and relates solely to your statement
that ".... there have been many complaints about the fact the the
Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version) devote one third of an entire
coach to the disabled-access toilet,"

Which YOU trimmed at that point. Jack added 'the five (or less,
depends on the specification by the train operating company) tip-up
seats that can be used as wheelchair spaces or for people travelling
with wheelchair passengers and the cycle stowage areas.'

The comma after toilet is a big clue.

If you want to add "the seating reserved for wheelchair passengers and their
companions and for bicycle stowage", you should have done so in the first
instance.

As he did!

Your hole is big enough. Why don't you stop digging?

I think you'll find it's you in the hole.

The bike and wheelchair space should, of course, be flexible, with
tip-up seats. It would be easy and cheap to provide more flexible
space, allowing more bikes to be carried when necessary, and more bums
on seats the rest of the time.

As it is, the operators have chosen to turn away useful off-peak
business. The rest of the time, they have a nice seat-free area for
crush-loading with commuters - and they can blame the lack of seats on
having to provide for cyclists.

Colin McKenzie

In ,
Colin McKenzie typed:

Bob Wood wrote:
How can it be that we are not discussing the size of the disabled
toilet? This part of the thread is in answer to and relates solely
to your statement that ".... there have been many complaints about
the fact the the Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version)
devote one third of an entire coach to the disabled-access toilet,"

Which YOU trimmed at that point. Jack added 'the five (or less,
depends on the specification by the train operating company) tip-up
seats that can be used as wheelchair spaces or for people travelling
with wheelchair passengers and the cycle stowage areas.'

The comma after toilet is a big clue.

If you want to add "the seating reserved for wheelchair passengers
and their companions and for bicycle stowage", you should have done
so in the first instance.

As he did!

Yes, he did. And I apologise for not understanding what he had written
correctly before criticising what he had written.

I think I read the comma as a semi-colon and missed the 'that' in the second
part of the sentence.

Again, apologies to Jack - and apologies to you for having had to take
the time to point out my error.


Your hole is big enough. Why don't you stop digging?

I think you'll find it's you in the hole.

Can you lend me a ladder?


--
Bob

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 12:54:51 GMT, "Bob Wood" wrote:

Yes, he did. And I apologise for not understanding what he had written
correctly before criticising what he had written.

I think I read the comma as a semi-colon and missed the 'that' in the second
part of the sentence.

I made the same mistake, but fortunately, for some reason I checked.

It's always a problem with the 'chinese whisper' type of environment you get
with this sort of discussion.

In ,
Colin McKenzie typed:

Bob Wood wrote:
How can it be that we are not discussing the size of the disabled
toilet? This part of the thread is in answer to and relates solely
to your statement that ".... there have been many complaints about
the fact the the Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version)
devote one third of an entire coach to the disabled-access toilet,"

Which YOU trimmed at that point. Jack added 'the five (or less,
depends on the specification by the train operating company) tip-up
seats that can be used as wheelchair spaces or for people travelling
with wheelchair passengers and the cycle stowage areas.'

The comma after toilet is a big clue.

If you want to add "the seating reserved for wheelchair passengers
and their companions and for bicycle stowage", you should have done
so in the first instance.

As he did!

Yes, he did. And I apologise for not understanding what he had written
correctly before criticising what he had written.

I think I read the comma as a semi-colon and missed the 'that' in the second
part of the sentence.

Again, apologies to Jack - and apologies to you for having had to take
the time to point out my error.


Your hole is big enough. Why don't you stop digging?

I think you'll find it's you in the hole.

Can you lend me a ladder?


--
Bob

In ,
Colin McKenzie typed:

Bob Wood wrote:
How can it be that we are not discussing the size of the disabled
toilet? This part of the thread is in answer to and relates solely
to your statement that ".... there have been many complaints about
the fact the the Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version)
devote one third of an entire coach to the disabled-access toilet,"

Which YOU trimmed at that point. Jack added 'the five (or less,
depends on the specification by the train operating company) tip-up
seats that can be used as wheelchair spaces or for people travelling
with wheelchair passengers and the cycle stowage areas.'

The comma after toilet is a big clue.

If you want to add "the seating reserved for wheelchair passengers
and their companions and for bicycle stowage", you should have done
so in the first instance.

As he did!

Yes, he did. And I apologise for not understanding what he had written
correctly before criticising it.

I think I read the comma as a semi-colon and missed the 'that' in the second
part of the sentence.

Again, apologies to Jack - and apologies to you for having had to take
the time to point out my error.


Your hole is big enough. Why don't you stop digging?

I think you'll find it's you in the hole.

Can you lend me a ladder?


--
Bob

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 13:02:13 +0100, Colin McKenzie
wrote:

The bike and wheelchair space should, of course, be flexible, with
tip-up seats.

In the Turbo- and Electrostar, or certainly all the versions of said
units I've come across, it *is*.

That said, there is a major benefit in *not* having flexible space, as
my experience is that people sitting on tip-up seats are reluctant to
move for a bicycle, so it ends up wedged in the vestibule anyway. In
the event that the train is busy and there is no bicycle on board,
there is more standing room. If it isn't busy, there's probably
enough seats anyway.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 13:02:13 +0100, Colin McKenzie
wrote:

The bike and wheelchair space should, of course, be flexible, with
tip-up seats.

In the Turbo- and Electrostar, or certainly all the versions of said
units I've come across, it *is*.

That said, there is a major benefit in *not* having flexible space, as
my experience is that people sitting on tip-up seats are reluctant to
move for a bicycle, so it ends up wedged in the vestibule anyway. In
the event that the train is busy and there is no bicycle on board,
there is more standing room. If it isn't busy, there's probably
enough seats anyway.

You obviously have a different view of flexible space. My view is
something more along th elines of that in the Oslo airport train
(Flytoget) where the flexible use space is not seated. but is an empty
space. For wheelchair users there could be a pair of flip down seats at
the door end of the space, provide 'bum rest' style seats which will be
above the height of chains etc., and then you have a space that copes
with pushchairs, suitcases, bicycles, tandems, wheelcharis, stuffed
hippos etc. and can be used to take more passengers during rush hour
than traditional seated accommodation.

...d

On 19 Jun 2005 11:02:18 -0700, "David Martin"
wrote:

You obviously have a different view of flexible space.

Sounds like I do; the typical British variant tends to include seats,
which in practice is not always a benefit.

I liked Merseyrail's approach pre-refurb, where they simply removed 4
seats from a pair of bays making a very wide bay, and fixed a
horizontal handrail in the middle. This space could then be used for
whatever was required. All that needed to be added was a bit of fixed
shock cord for holding bikes in place.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.