Elf' and Safety innit?Why is it that the night time National Express coach can switch to subdued lighting, for the comfort of passengers at night, yet train passengers are expected to endure blinding extream light as soon as the Sun goes down?
Why is it that the night time National Express coach can switch to subdued lighting, for the comfort of passengers at night, yet train passengers are expected to endure blinding extream light as soon as the Sun goes down?
Elf' and Safety innit?
No doubt because passengers are more likely to walk around on a moving train, the lighting must be suitable and allow for this without causing potential trip hazards if it's too dark (luggage in aisles, walking to buffet, trolley services, walking to toilet etc...)
I expect that on a train, it's neccessary for passengers to be able to evacuate quickly using the emergency windows (which would require passengers seeing where they are) whereas on a coach the driver can simply give instructions there and then (can't rely on announcements only for trains due to passengers with hearing difficulties etc...)
I expect this is the reasoning anyway. Whether it's actually needed is another thing entirely, but now more than ever, we life in a 'zero-risk' society.
Why is it that the night time National Express coach can switch to subdued lighting, for the comfort of passengers at night, yet train passengers are expected to endure blinding extream light as soon as the Sun goes down?
It’s a bugbear of mine as I prefer subdued, however there’s a number of reasons:
* It’s a good way to get better scores for ambience, as brighter lighting seemingly alters perceptions on cleanliness
* Improves CCTV output
* Cheap LED retrofits (this is more harshness than brightness).
Having said all this, there seems to be a divide among the population. My building at work has had some ferocious arguments over lighting levels, with there seeming to be a split between those who like dim and subdued, versus those who seem to want the full dentist chair ambience.
Ah, yes, wasn't it wonderful when people were murdered and robbed on trains on a regular basis, because their design lacked any security features at all?Oh how I miss tungsten bulbs.
A source of endless amusement on 1970s and 80s football specials...Oh how I miss tungsten bulbs.
Ah, yes, wasn't it wonderful when people were murdered and robbed on trains on a regular basis, because their design lacked any security features at all?
"Real train"?Yes, one couldn't step on a train in the 70/80's without being murdered in cold blood. That's why I'm not here - I'm actually a spectre, so can't hear any of your anti-real train diatribes.
"Real train"?
Oh, come on.
Murder of Deborah Linsley - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Still unsolved since 1988. Happened on an EPB. OK, not a common occurrence, I'll grant you, but the design of the train directly contributed to an opportunistic crime, and whoever did it simply got off the train undetected.
I'm just pointing out that this woman is dead due to an obsolete design of train trundling about long after it should have been replaced, and that's why modern trains have gangways, open saloons, brighter lighting, emergency communication systems and CCTV.And what about all the other thousands of carriages with tungsten lighting ?
The fact that murders on trains were so rare to make national news should suggest that non- extreme lighting isn't a major risk.
I'm just pointing out that this woman is dead due to an obsolete design of train trundling about long after it should have been replaced, and that's why modern trains have gangways, open saloons, brighter lighting, emergency communication systems and CCTV.
Tungsten lighting is unreliable and uses far more energy than newer systems anyway.
The life of bulbs is massively shorter, so they fail in service far more frequently. I remember some carriages having loads of failed tungsten bulbs in them when I was a kid, and it could create unsafe conditions. The SUB units had a very flawed design to them which resulted in half the lights in a carriage going out when one bulb broke, so potentially that was a serious safety issue - these things ran until 1983.Er, I've not known tungsten lighting to be more unreliable (surely less of an issue when there are twenty in a carriage)
It doesn't, but it makes trains more expensive to run and affects their environmental credentials. Only marginally, but it's an important consideration now.It uses more energy. How does that decrease safety exactly ?
I have to say that's rather well done, actually. That said, I don't get why people hate the lighting in 80x units, it seems fine to me. Worst offenders ever for harsh lighting were FGW's refurbished HSTs. Combine that with the dreadful cramped seating layout in Standard, and they made for a grim experience.Whateverone thinks of the Pendolinos, at least their lighting isn't operating theatre style.
The life of bulbs is massively shorter, so they fail in service far more frequently. I remember some carriages having loads of failed tungsten bulbs in them when I was a kid, and it could create unsafe conditions. The SUB units had a very flawed design to them which resulted in half the lights in a carriage going out when one bulb broke, so potentially that was a serious safety issue - these things ran until 1983.
It doesn't, but it makes trains more expensive to run and affects their environmental credentials. Only marginally, but it's an important consideration now.
I have to say that's rather well done, actually. That said, I don't get why people hate the lighting in 80x units, it seems fine to me. Worst offenders ever for harsh lighting were FGW's refurbished HSTs. Combine that with the dreadful cramped seating layout in Standard, and they made for a grim experience.
With modern lighting techniques it's very well possible to create a lighting atmosphere which is pleasant to the traveling public without making the vehicle look like a dentist's room. For example, you can have the colour temperature change subtly throughout the day, with the light being colder in the morning and warmer in the evening - as is the case with the 'night shift' mode on phones. Ambient light sensors can tune the light intensity so that it aligns with the exterior light level.
This is technology which exists today and which is being applied on trains. For example, Deutsche Bahn's ICE 4 units have such systems - and they fully comply with the very latest of regulations.
It depends what your definition of "extreme" is. Mostly I think it's fine on modern trains, the FGW HSTs standing out as having been (literally) glaring exceptions.The Pendolinos show that you can have decent, non-obtrusive lighting standards even without tungsten bulbs.
Why are we stuck with extreme lighting ?
Indeed. That's why first generation DMUs had blinds at the back of the cab.Lightning on a coach is probably dimmed so that the driver can see out of the windscreen in the dark. Service busses tend to have the first few feet of the vehicle dimmed or off when it's dark.
Train driver's don't have this problem
I wouldn’t have worried about stepping on a train. You couldn’t even set foot in the street in broad daylight in the Thatcher’s Britain without being murdered in cold blood, it was that bad back then.Yes, one couldn't step on a train in the 70/80's without being murdered in cold blood. That's why I'm not here - I'm actually a spectre, so can't hear any of your anti-real train diatribes.
A serious point though is, what do you do if “modern trains” when coupled together don’t have gangways? The lighting situation makes me think of the Manchester Metrolink, which seems to have an outside light detector, but all it does is turns the lights on when a tram enters a tunnel and turns them off when it goes back outside. In reality though, the lights come on when the tram is in the shadow of a building. Also passengers travelling in the rear portion of a double Metrolink tram are actually alone, unless there are revenue staff on board.I'm just pointing out that this woman is dead due to an obsolete design of train trundling about long after it should have been replaced, and that's why modern trains have gangways, open saloons, brighter lighting, emergency communication systems and CCTV.
Tungsten lighting is unreliable and uses far more energy than newer systems anyway.
Is the question here about the lighting on “night trains” specifically (ie the sleepers) or about any train that happens to be running after sundown?
In terms of safety, planes dim the lights at night so in case of an evacuation, passengers are not so disoriented when they leave the aircraft. This is in the landing phase when people are seated however.
Oh how I miss tungsten bulbs.
Indeed. That's why first generation DMUs had blinds at the back of the cab.