Another paralympian delayed disembarking

[hwl]

I know I'm jumping in a bit late, but I find it surprising the guard or whatever it's called didn't see the passenger get on.

As covered above: 12car train, curved platform with 2 dispatchers and guard in the middle of the train and possibly arriving after the passenger was on board.

 

[AM9]

I do not really understand why anyone would think it matters whether it is railway staff or railway computers which are repeatedly attempting to close doors on PRMs.

Precisely, if assitance on the journey was pre-arranged as per the TOCs instructions, it's irrelevant whether the automation or the guard were responsible for repeatedly closing the doors, both are the responsibility of the TOC. There are so many posts here attempting to normalise this treatment of certain groups of passengers because of shortcomings in the railway's procedures/infrastructure/capacity which the 'great majority of passengers' (i.e. able bodied people) just get on with it. The only shortcomings are the TOCs' priorities, which are headed by profits at organisational level and personal liability at individual staff levels. What need to be changed are these priorities by concerted application of the law (through the courts) in the same way that health and safety was hammered into the skulls of industry including its staff once the Health & Safety at Work was implemented. Failing in corporate and individual responsibilities established in law should be addressed in order to make this happen.

 

[ashkeba]

Several people asking why the guard kept closing the door on the wheelchair, hence explaining that is is realistically a mix of guard and mostly automatic.

OK maybe such clarification should be posted in reply to one of those and not to me! But if the guard made any close attempt and the doors refused, surely they should have suspended closures and gone to investigate who or what was stuck, rather than allowing the auto-close to potentially cause further injury or damage.

 

[hwl]

OK maybe such clarification should be posted in reply to one of those and not to me! But if the guard made any close attempt and the doors refused, surely they should have suspended closures and gone to investigate who or what was stuck, rather than allowing the auto-close to potentially cause further injury or damage.

It had already been raised several times but not everyone reads through all the comments, you then brought it up again in one of your comments hence pointing it out again. You said:

repeatedly attempting to close the doors on a wheelchair user without thinking they should go check

 

[kevjs]

I still think the eventual answer is a complete rearrangement to allow unassisted wheelchair use, probably with ramps or raised platforms, but this doesn't seem to be on the cards.


Thought:

Use a radar (or equivalent) lockable three way switch to indicate

1) Turn Right -> Passenger is in disabled space/using a wheelchair

2) Turn Left -> Want to get off at next station


Could illuminate a light on the coach/train outside or inside or both to show that assistance is required.

I was thinking something along the same lines - our buses have a different colour light which illuminates in the drivers cab when the button next to the wheelchair accessible space is used, should be able to do something similar on a train - even if it requires an ITSO Smart Card (bus pass for people with disabilities) or RADAR key to reduce abuse.

I also find it hard to believe that in a day when you can summon food to your table in a pub using an app, that it's not possible to, in the National Rail app, do something similar to that too - e.g. "check in" when you've boarded a train and "book" your exit station and feed that information to the relevant destinations (e.g. guard, station staff, on board indicator(s)). With the roll out of free WiFi across the network there should be no issues getting a connection, and the relevant functionality can be like the "beam" service working locally on the train although in a standardised way. It's not perfect, and does require a charged phone (or tablet) which not everyone has (I have no idea if those who require assistance are more or less likely to have a smart phone).

 

[theironroad]

I know I'm jumping in a bit late, but I find it surprising the guard or whatever it's called didn't see the passenger get on.

Yes, "whatever it's called" (my emphasis). On SWR the person working on the train is known as a guard. They are also a human being, not an inanimate object referred to as 'it'.

The lady in the wheelchair got on the train at Waterloo in rush hour. Even if the guard was on the platform at Waterloo at the time, the sheer volume of people and length of trains using Waterloo means it would be pretty easy to miss a wheelchair boarding. The guard may not have arrived at the platform before boarding commenced for a whole host of reasons.

If a wheelchair user requires assistance to get off the train further down the line (and there are some who don't, either because they are more than capable of doing it themselves either in or out of the chair and others who may have someone travelling with them) , then whoever puts the chair on the train should ensure that the appropriate staff are informed.

In this case, staff were aware but there was a breakdown in the communication chain which meant no-one was immediately available to assist alighting.

Interestingly, the lady in this incident, Sophie Christiansen said in an interview on South Today afterwards that the staff she deals with are great and that her concerns are with the kit and communication system.

 

[ashkeba]

It had already been raised several times but not everyone reads through all the comments, you then brought it up again in one of your comments hence pointing it out again. You said:

I know what I said and what I did not say. I said someone should go check. I did not say a person was making the door closure attempts.

I think the door closure automatic system should fail safe after 3 attempts at most to prevent injury - does anyone think helping the air con or whatever is worth not doing that?

 

[OneOffDave]

The solution is to not cut staffing to the bone. But as that's not the interests of government or the TOCs, the problem is only going to worsen.

I'm amazed 90% of @OneOffDave 's journeys are ok, given my experiences travelling with a chair user for business meetings.

That's a function of how often I travel on the same services! For the first month SWT paid for a taxi from my home to Woking and back every day as they couldn't ensure I'd be able to get on the train at FNB

 

[OneOffDave]

It’s definitely best assistance is left to staff, if anything so the company can be held fully accountable when it doesn’t go right, and can hopefully then learn from it. The woman in this case did nothing wrong, but trying to get a time critical piece of information to a member of operational staff via Twitter or a remote call centre is a recipe for disaster.

But there's often no other way of contacting the guard as a wheelchair user as you can't travel the length of the train looking for them

 

[OneOffDave]

And they didn't get her off the train this morning at Waterloo either.

My experience this morning was brilliant. I was at the station slightly early so was on the platform when the earlier train arrived. The guard saw me, asked if I wanted to catch that one rather than my usual train, got me on and came to get me off first at Waterloo

 

[Monty]

But there's often no other way of contacting the guard as a wheelchair user as you can't travel the length of the train looking for them

I would implore you to use the 'Call For Aid' buttons provided in the wheelchair areas to contact the driver if you ever felt there was a risk you would be over carried or needed to alert the train crew to your presence. I say this as a guard myself and in my professional opinion it is a reasonable use of this facility and unlike other types of Passenger Communication Apparatus it will not activate the emergency brake. I just wish the TOCs would do a better job of making people aware that it's there and what it's for.

 

[Ianno87]

I would implore you to use the 'Call For Aid' buttons provided in the wheelchair areas to contact the driver if you ever felt there was a risk you would be over carried or needed to alert the train crew to your presence. I say this as a guard myself and in my professional opinion it is a reasonable use of this facility and unlike other types of Passenger Communication Apparatus it will not activate the emergency brake. I just wish the TOCs would do a better job of making people aware that it's there and what it's for.

I wonder if anyone has thought about a bus-style stop bell 'By the way I need to get off here' type button to alert the driver/train crew. Given the modern technology we now have, could send an alert to the conductor's phone, for example.

 

[ashkeba]

I would implore you to use the 'Call For Aid' buttons provided in the wheelchair areas to contact the driver if you ever felt there was a risk you would be over carried or needed to alert the train crew to your presence. I say this as a guard myself and in my professional opinion it is a reasonable use of this facility and unlike other types of Passenger Communication Apparatus it will not activate the emergency brake. I just wish the TOCs would do a better job of making people aware that it's there and what it's for.

Is that a big red button commonly called an "alarm" on most trains? It's most noticeable on the Turbostars, where it looks easy to hit with a cane when operating the "accessible" toilet.

https://www.greateranglia.co.uk/abo...ke-greater-anglias-new-“game-changing”-trains

The first of Greater Anglia’s brand-new trains have now entered service, with much improved accessibility features - thanks partly to an access and inclusion professional who tested wheelchair accessibility as one of the final performance and safety tests.

and maybe that involvement is why the Stadlers seem to have a GREEN call button with a bell symbol, although it looks like it may be labelled "SOS" above it, which still seems a bit discouraging.

 

[Mojo]

I would implore you to use the 'Call For Aid' buttons provided in the wheelchair areas to contact the driver if you ever felt there was a risk you would be over carried or needed to alert the train crew to your presence. I say this as a guard myself and in my professional opinion it is a reasonable use of this facility and unlike other types of Passenger Communication Apparatus it will not activate the emergency brake. I just wish the TOCs would do a better job of making people aware that it's there and what it's for.

I wonder if it’s to avoid confusion because on most trains a very similar looking button and handle is actually the emergency alarm which automatically applies the train brakes (unless overridden by the train’s driver on modern stock) and requires a staff member to go back and reset it before the train can leave the next station; causing delays. If there was a standardised positioning/design of the “call for aid” button that was noticeably different from the alarm then I would agree with you, but I would probably say the difference passes most people by, and there is a risk of people operating alarms rather than “call for aid.”

As an aside, I have operated the emergency alarm on a train that was stationary with the doors open where staff members have failed to meet the train with a ramp. In these circumstances I feel justified due to the distress and possible safety implications, as well as the lack of ability of being able to communicate with staff in any other manner.

 

[Delenn]

Is that a big red button commonly called an "alarm" on most trains? It's most noticeable on the Turbostars, where it looks easy to hit with a cane when operating the "accessible" toilet.

https://www.greateranglia.co.uk/about-us/news-desk/news-articles/specialist-helps-make-greater-anglias-new-“game-changing”-trains

and maybe that involvement is why the Stadlers seem to have a GREEN call button with a bell symbol, although it looks like it may be labelled "SOS" above it, which still seems a bit discouraging.

I worry about "an access and inclusion professional". Disabilities are all different, so you need to consult multiple people. Would be nice if they included their actual customers.
My wife is concerned about these new trains. We've been hearing all sorts of awful stuff. I might have to go for a trip to take a look before she tries to use one, but she is very nervous of them.

And just for info, we've done a number of trips on Greater Anglia and London Overground over the last few weeks, all on the day decisions about which train, and in each case, 100% success on the ramps. This is a big improvement on even 12 months ago. I made a point of contacting both GA and TfL to pass on my thanks. All too often something goes wrong on any trip, so to have multiple trips go perfectly is fabulous.

 

[theironroad]

I would implore you to use the 'Call For Aid' buttons provided in the wheelchair areas to contact the driver if you ever felt there was a risk you would be over carried or needed to alert the train crew to your presence. I say this as a guard myself and in my professional opinion it is a reasonable use of this facility and unlike other types of Passenger Communication Apparatus it will not activate the emergency brake. I just wish the TOCs would do a better job of making people aware that it's there and what it's for.

If the train is still in a station and at a stand , then using a CFA wouldn't be an issue.

However, I would be very careful about you advocating a liberal use of cfa as a means of communication as you well know it is not the guard who has to react to it but the driver. CFA s or passcoms and egresses used on approaches to signals and stations are a major cause of distraction for the driver and it's not helped by the fact that 99% are used wrongly and often there is no verbal response from the person operating it , often because it's done 'as a joke'.

A different way forward is needed to deal with the issue.

 

[Monty]

If the train is still in a station and at a stand , then using a CFA wouldn't be an issue.

However, I would be very careful about you advocating a liberal use of cfa as a means of communication as you well know it is not the guard who has to react to it but the driver. CFA s or passcoms and egresses used on approaches to signals and stations are a major cause of distraction for the driver and it's not helped by the fact that 99% are used wrongly and often there is no verbal response from the person operating it , often because it's done 'as a joke'.

A different way forward is needed to deal with the issue.

The CFA function should be nothing to do with the driver anyway imo. on 455s and 442s the CFA is answered by the guard. What should to be done is to modify it on Desiro stock so that the guard is responsible for answering it.

I take your point about distractions, I don't condone liberal usage of the button but I do encourage that wheelchair users should use it in a pinch, it is called a 'Call For Aid' afterall.

 

[Monty]

I wonder if it’s to avoid confusion because on most trains a very similar looking button and handle is actually the emergency alarm which automatically applies the train brakes (unless overridden by the train’s driver on modern stock) and requires a staff member to go back and reset it before the train can leave the next station; causing delays. If there was a standardised positioning/design of the “call for aid” button that was noticeably different from the alarm then I would agree with you, but I would probably say the difference passes most people by, and there is a risk of people operating alarms rather than “call for aid.”

I agree that the CFA button should be a stand distinct device, with instructions clearly explaining what it is for and how it is -not- an emergency alarm (aka a PCA/Passcomm).

 

[theironroad]

The CFA function should be nothing to do with the driver anyway imo. on 455s and 442s the CFA is answered by the guard. What should to be done is to modify it on Desiro stock so that the guard is responsible for answering it.

I take your point about distractions, I don't condone liberal usage of the button but I do encourage that wheelchair users should use it in a pinch, it is called a 'Call For Aid' afterall.

Yeah agree that something learnt in the 442 reintroduction is driver not being involved in CFA. The odds of desiros being modified, bearing in mind that drivers have wanted a mod since they were introduced 15+years ago?????

 

[Monty]

I know, it's unlikely sadly. The stupid thing is given the generation of the train it probably wouldn't be a big mod compared to the 455s and 442s..

 

[theironroad]

I know, it's unlikely sadly. The stupid thing is given the generation of the train it probably wouldn't be a big mod compared to the 455s and 442s..

Agree.

 

[mrmartin]

As far as I can see this really isn't a trivial problem to solve.

Either all platforms and trains have level boarding - but this would take many billions and many decades to do (plus potential drawbacks of reducing space on the train).

Alternatively you have some sort of communication/alarm system and humans involved at both ends of the train journey. Unfortunately considering the numbers involved even a 1% failure rate in any of the human/communication elements will quickly snowball into a lot of events, especially when trains only stop for a few seconds meaning any problems become critical immediately.

One option would be to assign a member of staff to meet them at the station, board with them (with ramp), and stay on the train until the desired stop and disembark them. This would reduce a lot of the problems but at pretty serious expense (again).

 

[ashkeba]

As far as I can see this really isn't a trivial problem to solve.

Either all platforms and trains have level boarding - but this would take many billions and many decades to do (plus potential drawbacks of reducing space on the train).

Today's trains and platforms will be replaced and new ones will be built and levelling could be incorporated at that time so it would not cost much more than would be spent anyway. Probably still billions but there are lots of them.

There are many possible solutions to the human failings which cause these problems. Any of them will take a long time but we have still not even started on any in general.

Could you explain how level boarding reduces space on the train? Do you mean the underfloor equipment having to go somewhere else like in roof space, a generator car or a locomotive if the train floor is lowered? That seems more like redistributing than reducing.

 

[AlastairFraser]

As far as I can see this really isn't a trivial problem to solve.

Either all platforms and trains have level boarding - but this would take many billions and many decades to do (plus potential drawbacks of reducing space on the train).

Alternatively you have some sort of communication/alarm system and humans involved at both ends of the train journey. Unfortunately considering the numbers involved even a 1% failure rate in any of the human/communication elements will quickly snowball into a lot of events, especially when trains only stop for a few seconds meaning any problems become critical immediately.

One option would be to assign a member of staff to meet them at the station, board with them (with ramp), and stay on the train until the desired stop and disembark them. This would reduce a lot of the problems but at pretty serious expense (again).

I wonder how much retrofitting automatic ramps would cost.That seems to be the most sensible option because that isn't open to human error.

 

[hwl]

I wonder how much retrofitting automatic ramps would cost.That seems to be the most sensible option because that isn't open to human error.

The reliability of ramps of various forms has been shown to be an issue in most places where they have been tried hence many operators globally are a a bit scared about the total delay impact of one failing extended.

 

[hwl]

Could you explain how level boarding reduces space on the train? Do you mean the underfloor equipment having to go somewhere else like in roof space, a generator car or a locomotive if the train floor is lowered? That seems more like redistributing than reducing.

The equipment has to go elsewhere and when you have fixed platform lengths (e.g. constrained to 240m by Waterloo platforms in this case) relocation to a locomotive /generator car or to within the passenger space reduces spaces total for passengers. Relocation to the roof also causes stability issues especially as the weight of the rest of the train is reduced to improve energy efficiency.
Low floor also involves split floor levels (the floor has to raise to go over the bogies) which then constrains seating to a certain extent (similar to lower floor of double decker bus along with narrow gangways and confines wheel chair users to a very small space near where they board. Also unsuitable for longitudinal seating like LO and Crossrail use. Extensive discussion of the Anglia Flirts page were forum users have started to notice the space inefficiency but in the Anglia case there is still more space than there was before with existing DMUs or the Norwich 90+MK3s so less noticable unlike on SWR where it would be a reduction. On a 345 /710 you can take a wheelchair from end to end of the unit but in a low floor unit they are confined to a 6-8m section of the train even if all the seats were removed.
Crossrail's solution in the tunnelled section is to raise the platform height to floor level and have a small gap but they don't have to deal with ISO shipping containers.
Level boarding with anything more than the the smallest gap also leads to a trip hazard for ambulatory users and it ends up being safer having a step up into the train (there is research on this) provided the step is within certain parameters.

See the current discussion on the GA flirt introduction here (started on the page before) as the penny has started to drop once people have been on them:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/abellio-greater-anglia-new-stadler-flirt-trains.148431/page-119

 

[Tetchytyke]

The stupid thing is given the generation of the train it probably wouldn't be a big mod compared to the 455s and 442s.

But it might be an expensive one. Siemens don't do extras cheaply.

 

[Monty]

But it might be an expensive one. Siemens don't do extras cheaply.

Probably a lot more cheaper than modifying platform heights or installing automatic ramps (if that latter is even possible).

 

[MarlowDonkey]

Crossrail's solution in the tunnelled section is to raise the platform height to floor level and have a small gap but they don't have to deal with ISO shipping containers.

On TfL sub surface lines, the S stock seems to offer level boarding at many stations. Again, no freight services to worry about.

 

[OneOffDave]

The problem with the CFA button (at least on the 450s I use) is that it's by the wheelchair space, not by the door. So if I'm waiting by the door for assistance/the guard to turn up and nothing happens, I'll have to leave the doorway and press the button. If the doors close while I'm doing that then it's possible and indeed probable that the guard will despatch the train. One question, how is the guard notified that the button has been pressed?

Edit to add

The last couple of days have been excellent. The guards on the trains have all made contact with me during the journey and been there on arrival at the destination station in case the station assistance doesn't turn up