SETrainHub
New Member
- Joined
- 9 Oct 2018
- Messages
- 1
Many thanks for the share!Uploaded to YouTube by South East Train Hub. I presume the whine is from the unpowered motors?
Many thanks for the share!Uploaded to YouTube by South East Train Hub. I presume the whine is from the unpowered motors?
No plans. It would mean training all Clacton & more Colchester drivers on Stadler too.
No plans. It would mean training all Clacton & more Colchester drivers on Stadler too.
Of course as there's the Sudbury amongst others. I was just thinking of Tim's Peterborough linkAll Colchester drivers are getting Stadler training.
Don't the FLIRTs have extendable steps at each door?Are 755's likely to be used on Harwich and Walton / Clacton locals? If so I wonder how one would cope at Wivenhoe Colchester bound with their centre doors and the bend in the platform? Would be a hell of a gap
Of course as there's the Sudbury amongst others. I was just thinking of Tim's Peterborough link
I can't speak to the UK Flirt, but every other Stadler train I've seen has extendable steps at every single door. These steps are somewhat intelligent, i.e. they'll extend further on a curved platform, and less far for straight platforms (exception: some GTW's and some of the narrow-gauge trains use rotating steps that also form the lower part of the door).Don't the FLIRTs have extendable steps at each door?
I haven't gotten out to a curved platform yet, but here are some photos of steps on various Stadler's on straight platforms:
CFL - these are at the limit because the platforms are lower than the train:
http://rail.lu/materiel/cfl2300.html
SBB - nowhere near the limit because the platforms match the train:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/40826712@N00/13200336944
Indeed, this (coupled with low floor) is one of the great selling points - true equality for those of limited mobility, no need for assistance. And no more 2 foot chasms like Platform 17 at Clapham Jn.
Thank you for the video!Many thanks for the share!
Hell of an expense and a lot of hassle for equality.
Hell of an expense and a lot of hassle for equality.
not it isn't.Hell of an expense and a lot of hassle for equality.
Hell of an expense and a lot of hassle for equality.
Agree 100%It's really not expensive, and the money that can be saved by not having an assistance system in place is immense, not to mention the benefits to the personal freedom of those requiring it, and to others for whom the gap was an issue (elderly people, small children etc). Not to mention a reduction in PTI incidents.
TBH, I'm so strongly in favour of it that I think it should have been made mandatory for all new build stations to be a standard UK height, and all new build stock to have a floor at platform level and such steps fitted. This should have been done before the recent big orders, after which it's too late for another 30-odd years to get it right.
all new build stations to be a standard UK height
It's to late for that, not worth the colossal expense now. Also, the gap at least at my 7 or 8 local stations, is not all that much.
It's to late for that, not worth the colossal expense now. Also, the gap at least at my 7 or 8 local stations, is not all that much.
Which is why the suggestion is for new build platforms, not to spend millions refitting stations.
Only one door this commuter vehicle?Looks like it:
Intercity 745/0These trains are mostly for rural routes in East Anglia, not the London market, so not a huge concern. A new Stansted - Norwich train would need an appropriate dwell at Cambridge and Ely, assuming paths are found for these in the peak in the first place, but for most services they’ll be fine unless Norwich are at home, but that’s always going to be a problem.
morning rush hours on many lines in japanSorry, thought you were referring to the 755 in the video.
Yes the 745s have attracted comment about dwell times for the services they will operate. As you say impossible in Japan, but although the lines into Liverpool St are very busy, it’s nothing like certain parts of Japan.