Bike reservations

[voyagerdude220]

Hi all,

(apologies if already covered elsewhere)

I get the impression that passengers are more frequently these days encountering problems when trying to travel on a train with a bike.

I believe that TPE have recently made it compulsory to make a bike reservation in advance of travel, regardless of how busy the train is/how long the journey is etc.

I'm wondering if the transportation of bikes on trains is something which train companies could manage more efficiently, particularly with the rail network in general being very busy.

On the basis that trains often don't have enough seats onboard for everyone to be seated, I feel train companies should focus on this first, before allowing people to also take their bike on the train.

I'm not saying bikes should be banned completely, but I do think at a minimum, that bike reservations should be compulsory and maybe bikes banned completely at certain times when trains are particularly busy.

 

[CharlieSpotted]

As an aside, I witnessed a conversation between a West Midlands Trains guard and a commuter this morning on the issue of cycles. On this train there are 2 guys that get on the same train every day, and stand together with their bikes in the same doorway of the same carriage. The train gets busy during the journey with many standing in the doorways, but these guys get off about halfway along the line, when it's not quite so bad. They're quite considerate of other passengers and I've never seen them cause a problem really. Today, the second cyclist gets on the train and the guard speaks to him and tells him he should have asked him for permission. The cyclist responds that he's never had to do that before and he travels on the train every day. The guard tells him that there's a limit of 2 bikes on the train and there are already 2. (The 2nd, if it exists, must have been in a different carriage). The cyclist protests again that he does this every day (he does...) and the guard retorts "You just do what you want then, obviously you're right..." and huffs off to his cab, where he stays for the rest of the journey. The journey continues as uneventfully with the cyclists not causing any problems and getting off at their usual stop.

I certainly wouldn't want to be the cyclist in this position.

 

[Jonfun]

The problem on West Midlands Trains services, particularly 350s, is that there isn't a designated bike space. Thus, bikes are just thrown on anywhere and everywhere. Often they're left obstructing the wheelchair spaces, which also mean they're obstructing the tip down seats which mean passengers who are paying are stood in the vestibule and bikes which arent are taking up seats.

 

[CharlieSpotted]

I'm sure that can be a problem. In this case (which was a 350) the bikes were in the very large vestibule space.

 

[stut]

Very much depends on the route, the stock, all sorts of things. I used to frequently take a full-size bike for my commute (which was on a section of line outwith the peak restrictions), along with many others, and never saw a problem. The bikes were kept in the vestibules, where there was no standing, and the bike commuters all knew the pattern of which sides the doors were, and moved them accordingly.

When I've taken my bike on the Norwich Inter-City service, they've always been very pragmatic - priority to reservations, but they'll take bikes on if you ask nicely and there's space. The reservation system on East Coast (whatever incarnation) has always worked well for me too.

I do find it a shame that the current situation with cycle accommodation seems almost designed to make conflict, and that we lack the capacity to accommodate more where there's a clear demand (or to provide adequate, secure storage at stations to enable bike-at-both-end commuting). In Copenhagen's S-Tog system, when they saw too many bikes on board (you can carry them any time of day, it's just one rather cramped central station that has restrictions at peak hours) they added a carriage specifically for bikes. Here, if it's too popular, we ban it. Yeah, I know the different pressures on the systems, but still...

 

[yorkie]

There is no option to select the policy currently implemented by XC and formerly implemented by TPE, which was a very sensible policy of recommending reservations but anyone who did not have a reservation could still have their bike conveyed subject to space being available (ie. a 'common sense' approach).

I've ended up on late night TPE trains from Leeds to York with my bike, having arrived on EMT or XC HSTs. So far no-one has claimed that I should have a reservation for that specific service, so I was able to occupy the otherwise empty space. On both occasions TPE were running late and so I ended up on a train that was different to the one I would have originally been 'booked' on.

When a policy is ridiculous, it tends not to be enforced, in my experience.

 

[muz379]

I dont think you can apply a blanket policy to all TOC's . I think some commuter services perhaps should have a no bikes policy or a first come first served strictly enforced limit .But then at some tocs you have a mix match of stock so its not always possible to predict how many bikes can actually be accommodated .

Long distance TOC's on the other hand who use uniform stock for all services have a better ability to know how many bikes they can carry on a given service could operate a bike reservation system .Although I dont see why if someone turns up with a bike but not a reservation and there is space they should not be conveyed as for example with TPE at the moment in theory .

I dont think there should be any charge for bringing a bike on board any service though .

 

[LowLevel]

I work class 158 trains which have ridiculously limited luggage space to start with and the cycle space (while better now the phone booth wall has been removed) is still rather small without getting in everyone's way.

Consequently if you have passengers travelling with large items of luggage there ends up being a bun fight between them and any intending cyclists.

As a traincrew member I would find my life much easier if there were no bikes at all permitted, I'm not going to lie. There is nothing worse than finding a platform full of suitcases waiting when you then find 2 cyclists intent on taking priority over the storage space. However as a pragmatic person I try and make the best of it. The best thing would be to charge a reasonable sum (I believe in the Netherlands it is 5 euros) and actually make an effort to provide the service stated.

I will not allow bikes lying around the place to obstruct the toilets or other doors as I don't believe a minority making a choice to travel with their push irons for no extra charge should be able to inconvenience others. I would however make an effort to maintain the space if it was chargeable.

 

[WelshBluebird]

The problem with compulsory cycle reservations is what happens when there is disruption. Or when you have people with luggage who use the extra space to store their luggage. Or when the space is also shared with prams etc. Certainly I remember reading some issues when GWR HST's went to that (in preparation for the IET's) on routes that are shared between local services and HST's and the local service in cancelled with the HST picking up the slack.

There is nothing worse than finding a platform full of suitcases waiting when you then find 2 cyclists intent on taking priority over the storage space.

Wouldn't that be people with suitcases intent of taking priority over the cycle spaces?
At least on the GWR 158's that I have traveled on, the cycle spaces are clearly marked as such (and are available for reservation according to GWR). They certainly are not luggage storage places (those are located inside the carriage compartments at either end, and overhead).

However as a pragmatic person I try and make the best of it. The best thing would be to charge a reasonable sum (I believe in the Netherlands it is 5 euros) and actually make an effort to provide the service stated.

The thing is then, if you are paying for that reservations, surely that cyclist HAS to take priority as they have paid for that service? So you'd still have issues, but this time with telling the platform full of suitcases that they can't put their stuff there because someone has actually paid for the space.

I would however make an effort to maintain the space if it was chargeable.

But not right now as it isn't chargeable? Doesn't really seem fair that you sound like you'd be willing to let other passengers use the cycle space despite someone having a reservation for that space, just because the reservation isn't charged for.

 

[Flying Phil]

I have taken my bike quite often on EMT between Market Harborough and Loughborough and it has been no problem on either HSTs or 222s, except once, when there were already 3 bikes on (in a 222) and I just waited 25 mins for the next train. No reservation or asking the guard/conductor. Very pleased to be able to do that.

 

[marks87]

I wouldn't mind paying a reasonable fee for a cycle reservation if it guaranteed me a space (modulo disruption), not least because it should put an obligation on the guard to ensure the cycle space was free of luggage or any other obstructions.

A few years ago I had an issue on a ScotRail 170 where I had a reservation, but the bike space was packed with luggage despite not actually being a "dual use" area (which I believe is the case on some stock). The guard was exceptionally helpful and made sure the luggage was moved, but another guard on another day might not have been so accommodating.

 

[krus_aragon]

No option in the poll quite matches my opinion, so I'll give a narrative verdict:

Cycle reservations can be mandatory for long-distance journeys, because if travelling on an advance ticket (or otherwise unwilling to be told "sorry, you'll have to wait for the next service" ) any sensible cyclist should be getting one already.

Local or short-distance journeys should not have mandatory reservations imposed. If the cyclist is happy to risk being told there's no room, then let them turn up on spec and see. And similar to a wheelchair space on a bus, if someone with a cycle rerservation turns up later, you'll just have to move for them. If unhappy, get a reservation yourself next time.

Rush hour commuting is a different matter, and I can appreciate operators imposting limitations at such times. Though I'd prefer to see "reservations mandatory during rush hour" to "no bicycles at all during rush hour".

This is written from the perspective of travelling frequently on a class 175, where the cycle space is labelled "this space can be used for luggage if not required for cycles" or similar. Guards in my area tend to be quite forgiving of a few extra bikes in the gangways at rush hour for 20 minutes or so, on a line with 1tph.

My personal experiences are of having only been turned away from a train due to no bike space once (Swansea, HST luggage car already had at least 6 bikes in when we arrived), and my record for a rush hour 158 was five bicycles (2 folding) iirc. Not London loads (or frequencies), so please judge my comments accordingly.

Edit: Additionally, while Virgin "insist" on mandatory reservations on all their services, I've never sought one when commuting on their services. Then again, I've never travelled east of Chester on their services with a bike. Reservations into London, sure, but no guard's felt the need to object to my hanging a bike in the invariably empty bike space along the NW coast.

 

[telstarbox]

I agree with @krus_aragon's post above, although certainly on metro services in Greater London the current blanket bans in the rush hour are necessary and those trains are DOO so it relies on station staff being on the ball.

Clearly there isn't one policy that fits all. If I ride out to Kent on a weekday evening I'll often have a carriage to myself on a train back into London at 2100. On the other hand I'm permitted to put my bike on a 1900 departure from Charing Cross and that isn't easy because there are still plenty of commuters at that time.

If I was taking a bike long-distance (e.g. London to Manchester or Scotland) I'd probably want the peace of mind of a reservation anyway, not least because such a journey would usually involve travelling on Advance tickets for me.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

There is no option to select the policy currently implemented by XC and formerly implemented by TPE, which was a very sensible policy of recommending reservations but anyone who did not have a reservation could still have their bike conveyed subject to space being available (ie. a 'common sense' approach).

I'm not sure that is the most sensible approach: To my mind, the most sensible approach - at least on services that have very little space for cycles - would be to require reservations, but to allow cyclists to make the reservations at any time up to a few minutes prior to departure - which implies being able to make reservations on a train that has already started its journey (and, of course, to ensure that reservations can be made at any station, including by using ticket machines). But if you allow cycles on a train without a reservation, then you've lost the ability to track how many cycles are actually on a train, which means it's not then practical to allow last-minute reservations on a train that has already started its journey... And if you don't allow that, that becomes a bit harsh on - to take an extreme example - someone who wants to reserve from Exeter to Plymouth on an XC that started at Newcastle

Also, allowing unreserved cycles to be conveyed subject to space on those kinds of trains is only really workable if the person deciding whether to allow a bike on can easily check whether or not any cycles have been reserved to board later on in the journey, and I imagine that would be very difficult to do given that guards and platform staff tend to have other urgent duties when a train is about to depart.

 

[yorkie]

...To my mind, the most sensible approach - at least on services that have very little space for cycles - would be to require reservations, but to allow cyclists to make the reservations at any time up to a few minutes prior to departure -...

That is the LNER approach but it seems overkill for TPE, unless you allow booking through their website/app/text.

The other day I made a cross-platform connection from a HST to a TPE 185 late on a Saturday evening. It makes no sense to say I should exit to the ticket office and be forced to miss the train, when it had plenty of space.

 

[thelongestroad]

Unfortunately bikes are something TOCs can't really win with. We're told at my TOC reservations are compulsory on our intercity services but in reality it's very hard to police unless you have everyone queued up at every station for aircraft style boarding. Equally the policy inevitably leads to conflict because people don't bother reserving anyways.

Plus, the rolling stock owners don't want bike stickers on the side of their trains (supposedly) so no one knows where the bike space is so they end up dumped in the disabled bay or incorrectly stored in the bike racks blocking the doorways a bit.

 

[Basher]

This issue is very hard to get an answer to help all. We have recently purchased electrical assist cycles and as we now can cover more miles without overdoing it, we sometimes catch a train for the return journey. When we purchased the cycles the shopkeeper was saying that there is a more older people now taking up cycling, and in some cases returning to cycling, in particular electrical assist cycles are being purchased. As the demographic mix of people in society is changing and older people are more active than previously, the rail services will see a greater demand for cycle space on trains. Also cycling is very popular among the younger people as a commuting tool from stations to workplace and from home to the station. Train operators should be aware of this trend and plan for an increase in demand.

 

[bussnapperwm]

Cycles and pushchairs should be relegated to the guards compartment on intercity stock with cycles banned on non intercity stock (such as 168/170/172/323/350 stock)

Luggage should be kept with the passenger at all times. Even taken into the lavatory if the passenger requires it...for security purposes as luggage left unattended may be destroyed or damaged by the security services!

 

[skifans]

I agree with others here that I prefer the approach of allowing reservations (potentially with a small charge) but still allowing other bikes on-board for free if no reservation has been made.

One thing I dislike about TPEs policy is what happens if you add a bike reservation to an existing booking. You have to do this by phone and there is no way to collect the reservation coupons, so how do you prove to the guard that you have the reservation? The one time so far this has happened no guard came through but the people in their call centre said they didn't know. I also strongly dislike their must be 24 hours before departure - why?

 

[Pigeon]

Bring back guards' vans!

One of the biggest problems with railways is that the stations are never where you want them, so they can't be a complete journey solution in themselves. Some auxiliary conveyance is required at either end of the journey. That isn't too hard at the home end, but at the remote end it is. It ends up being easier to solve by driving all the way and not using the train at all.

If you can take your bike on the train, it makes the remote-end problem the same as the home-end one and you already have the solution. So I think the carrying of bicycles on trains should be encouraged. No reservations, no charge, no restrictions either temporal or spatial. Trains should be designed to facilitate this from the outset, with adequate space, not conflicting with either seating or wheelchair space, and conspicuously marked with something like a green stripe at cantrail height that won't be hidden by other passengers standing on the platform. Stations should also be designed with bicycles in mind - wheelchair access regulations help here, but a bicycle is longer than a wheelchair and lifts need to be made big enough to get them in.

 

[skifans]

Bring back guards' vans!

One of the biggest problems with railways is that the stations are never where you want them, so they can't be a complete journey solution in themselves. Some auxiliary conveyance is required at either end of the journey. That isn't too hard at the home end, but at the remote end it is. It ends up being easier to solve by driving all the way and not using the train at all.

If you can take your bike on the train, it makes the remote-end problem the same as the home-end one and you already have the solution. So I think the carrying of bicycles on trains should be encouraged. No reservations, no charge, no restrictions either temporal or spatial. Trains should be designed to facilitate this from the outset, with adequate space, not conflicting with either seating or wheelchair space, and conspicuously marked with something like a green stripe at cantrail height that won't be hidden by other passengers standing on the platform. Stations should also be designed with bicycles in mind - wheelchair access regulations help here, but a bicycle is longer than a wheelchair and lifts need to be made big enough to get them in.

Agreed defiantly in the longer time, to be honest I'd even be happy for a small charge on bikes if it encouraged the facilities to be installed. I remember being shocked on a local Deutsche Bahn train while in Germany and there was essentially the whole bottom of a double deaker carriage dedicated to them, easily space for a dozen bikes and maybe more - just like this:

 

[telstarbox]

Most station lifts are big enough for a bike.

 

[jopsuk]

I'm a cycling campaigner. I take bikes on trains quite a lot. Taking bikes on trains is excellent.

So, erm, this may seem a bit leftfield, but, I'd advocate for:

For IC trains where reservations are the norm with tickets, reservations should be required. Bike reservations should be available through all sites that offer reservations, and it should be possible to select trains based on whether there is capacity for your bike

For all other trains, I'd take the Dutch approach. Bikes banned from all non-reservable trains across the network before 9:30am. A charge (eg £5) after this time (also required for reservable trains) that gives you access for the rest of the day. I know some people will go "but what about the evening rush hour?" but I reckon the impact would be minimal, evening peak is usually more diffuse anyway and we've just effectively stopped commuters taking their bikes every day.
Exceptions on the time could be made on a line-by-line basis, eg Far North.

Very large bike spaces such as on the DB train pictured are only possible where you can happily run long enough trains to effectively have spare capacity- which certainly counts out the London & South East network (and isn't something NS do)

 

[LowLevel]

The problem with compulsory cycle reservations is what happens when there is disruption. Or when you have people with luggage who use the extra space to store their luggage. Or when the space is also shared with prams etc. Certainly I remember reading some issues when GWR HST's went to that (in preparation for the IET's) on routes that are shared between local services and HST's and the local service in cancelled with the HST picking up the slack.



Wouldn't that be people with suitcases intent of taking priority over the cycle spaces?
At least on the GWR 158's that I have traveled on, the cycle spaces are clearly marked as such (and are available for reservation according to GWR). They certainly are not luggage storage places (those are located inside the carriage compartments at either end, and overhead).



The thing is then, if you are paying for that reservations, surely that cyclist HAS to take priority as they have paid for that service? So you'd still have issues, but this time with telling the platform full of suitcases that they can't put their stuff there because someone has actually paid for the space.



But not right now as it isn't chargeable? Doesn't really seem fair that you sound like you'd be willing to let other passengers use the cycle space despite someone having a reservation for that space, just because the reservation isn't charged for.

Regrettably on the class 158s I have to suffer every week some dimwit decided it was a grand idea to remove almost all the internal carriage luggage racks to squeeze a couple more seats in yet still use them on trains that carry large amounts of luggage to the seaside or on busy student/weekend leisure routes. 158s due to their body profile also have ridiculously small overhead racks. The same dimwits also designed fitted tip up seats in the cycle areas despite the only trains they need to used on invariably having at least one cycle on board rendering them utterly useless.

Thus the only two options for larger luggage items which much the same as cycles are still within the parameters of the conditions of carriage are A) put them on a seat you covered over with bin liners or B) put them in the area outside the small toilet aka the cycle area/former phone booth.

Consequently if a train leaves for example Skegness full of luggage (as they do all summer) cyclists will usually be declined access until at least Grantham as there's no room. The alternative is to bar suitcases from class 158s which would impact far more people than a tiny minority of cyclists.

Curiously if you take a class 156 which has a large luggage area in the former parcels van, I'll bet you a fiver that the first area to have cases dumped in it is the cycle area, rather than the shelf or the huge open part which is ideal for.... storing suitcases.

Basically the current train fleet is poorly specified for the services operated and you're damned if you do or don't.

 

[cuccir]

We've heard mention of Copenhagen on this thread - a city where 40-50% of commuters cycle, depending on whose data you believe - but even there bikes are banned from the metro (as opposed to the s-train mentioned upthread) in morning and evening rush hour. The point being that of stock/infrastructure can't handle it, a ban is not inherently a sign of being anti-bike.

We can't correct what's been done in the past, but I'd insisit that the provision of decent space for bikes is a condition of all newly built stock. Wherever possible, we should push towards a 'turn-up-and-go' system; wherever not, a reservation-compulsory.

For IC trains where reservations are the norm

As always in the UK, it's worth noting that in some areas, IC services double-up as the only available 'local' trains. A solution would be to demand reservations for journeys over a certain duration (eg 1 hour), leaving empty some space for other bikes on those trains for shorter trips.

I note that luggage has been mentioned on the context of this space, and I think I'd be a fan of compulsory checking in of luggage over a certain size, where stock has room for a luggage storage area ('guard's van'), if this could create space for cycles.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I agree with others here that I prefer the approach of allowing reservations (potentially with a small charge) but still allowing other bikes on-board for free if no reservation has been made.

That sounds potentially unworkable to me. It would act as a huge incentive to people to just stick bikes on board without reservations, and then people who have made reservations will regularly find there's no room for their bike anyway because of all the unreserved bikes already on the train.

 

[marks87]

Cycles and pushchairs should be relegated to the guards compartment on intercity stock with cycles banned on non intercity stock (such as 168/170/172/323/350 stock)

Luggage should be kept with the passenger at all times. Even taken into the lavatory if the passenger requires it...for security purposes as luggage left unattended may be destroyed or damaged by the security services!

I live in Dundee. I take part in an annual charity cycle that starts in Glasgow. I have no method of transporting my bike by road, but even if I did it would be highly impractical to do so since the cycle ends in Edinburgh.

Until the ScotRail HSTs are introduced, how do you propose I get myself and my bike to where I need to be?

The 170 I caught this year was half empty, if that. But no, according to you the space where I put my bike should have been given over to non-existent luggage.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

The problem with cycle reservations is that, if you're out on a day's ride, an unexpected mishap such as a puncture can cause you to miss your booked train home. Even if there are no mishaps, why shouldn't cyclists travelling on open tickets have the same rights as non-cyclists? Often, if the weather's turned out nice and I'm feeling fit, I often decide to cycle a little bit further and get a later train back. So the common sense solution is surely to give cyclists the option of reserving to guarantee a place, but letting them turn up and go as well, subject to space being available.

The big issue here is not so much the presence of bikes on trains, but badly designed cycle spaces. Whoever thought "let's put tip-up seats in the cycle space so we can create needless conflict between cyclists and other passengers" wants shooting. Whoever subsequently thought that TPE class 185s (for example) would be ideal for Manchester Airpost services, where most travellers seem to be competing to see who can bring the biggest suitcase with them, wants shooting twice!

As I've mentioned on other cyclist-bashing threads, cycles take up far less space when stored vertically so carriages should be designed so that the cycle space is a) vertical and b) impractical to use for sitting or storing luggage. Possibly the only decent aspect of Cross Country's Voyagers is that they do have vertical cycle spaces and as a consequence it's rare to see anything but bikes in them!

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The problem with cycle reservations is that, if you're out on a day's ride, an unexpected mishap such as a puncture can cause you to miss your booked train home. Even if there are no mishaps, why shouldn't cyclists travelling on open tickets have the same rights as non-cyclists? Often, if the weather's turned out nice and I'm feeling fit, I often decide to cycle a little bit further and get a later train back. So the common sense solution is surely to give cyclists the option of reserving to guarantee a place, but letting them turn up and go as well, subject to space being available.

Several people have suggested that. But the problem that I've alluded to a couple of times is: You might see that space and think it's therefore OK to put your cycle on without reserving, but how do you know another cyclist hasn't reserved it from the next station? That's why I think it would be better to require reservations on those trains that really can only carry a couple of bikes, but ensure reservations can be made online or via ticket machines/offices etc. up to a couple of minutes before boarding.

I agree that it would be lovely if cyclists on open tickets had the same rights as non-cyclists (at least on off-peak services) but that's only practical if trains have spaces for quite a few cycles. Otherwise there's too much risk of turning up at the station and not being able to travel because the bike spaces are full.

The big issue here is not so much the presence of bikes on trains, but badly designed cycle spaces. Whoever thought "let's put tip-up seats in the cycle space so we can create needless conflict between cyclists and other passengers" wants shooting. Whoever subsequently thought that TPE class 185s (for example) would be ideal for Manchester Airpost services, where most travellers seem to be competing to see who can bring the biggest suitcase with them, wants shooting twice!

Sharing space may sometimes create conflict, but it is also arguably the most practical way of maximising space if most trains don't have many (or any) cyclists on them, since it means the space can be used by whoever actually needs it - whether cyclist, wheelchair user, person with luggage, or person who wants to sit down when the train is full. Of course, the ideal solution would be, longer trains so that there really is enough space for everyone - including a reasonable amount of cycle space. But that requires investment that doesn't seem to be forthcoming from the Government.

I would hazard a guess that noone thought the 185s were ideal for the Airport services - but someone figured it was the least bad way to make use of the not-nearly-enough carriages that are available.

As I've mentioned on other cyclist-bashing threads, cycles take up far less space when stored vertically so carriages should be designed so that the cycle space is a) vertical and b) impractical to use for sitting or storing luggage. Possibly the only decent aspect of Cross Country's Voyagers is that they do have vertical cycle spaces and as a consequence it's rare to see anything but bikes in them!

I've never seen those spaces. But I wonder... are they really suitable for all cyclists? Storing your bike vertically may be fine for the kind of fit, strong, keen cyclist who happily goes on 50-mile rides for the fun of it. It's probably less suitable for a not-very-fit person who uses their bike to go 3 miles to the shops and is not used to lifting up their fairly heavy city-bike. (Although admittedly, the latter type of cyclist probably doesn't take their bike on trains very often. And I can't argue with taking up less space on what are often very crowded trains).

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Several people have suggested that. But the problem that I've alluded to a couple of times is: You might see that space and think it's therefore OK to put your cycle on without reserving, but how do you know another cyclist hasn't reserved it from the next station? That's why I think it would be better to require reservations on those trains that really can only carry a couple of bikes, but ensure reservations can be made online or via ticket machines/offices etc. up to a couple of minutes before boarding.

I agree that it would be lovely if cyclists on open tickets had the same rights as non-cyclists (at least on off-peak services) but that's only practical if trains have spaces for quite a few cycles. Otherwise there's too much risk of turning up at the station and not being able to travel because the bike spaces are full.

Well, a paper card stuck in the cycle space showing it to be reserved from station A to station B would solve that problem in the same way that seat reservations are displayed.

But in my experience, whenever I've encountered another cyclist getting on when the cycle spaces are already occupied, it's something we cyclists sort out amongst ourselves. We ask each other how far we're going and the person going furthest puts their cycle at the back and the person getting off first puts theirs at the front. The idea that a cycle space is full if there are two bikes in it isn't really true; I've been on 158s on the Settle-Carlisle carrying 8 or 9 bikes before and people could still get past!