Can you take bikes on replacement buses?

[Wolfie]

The ideal solution would be to invent a bike storage rack that fits in the under storage lockers of all coaches. It needs to be easily removable so can be taken out of the coach when not on RRB work and foldable so doesn't take up lots of room when stored out of use at the coach depot. It needs to be very cheap for coach companies to buy, or funded centrally for them by TOCs of DfT. I think everyone would agree that is an excellent idea. All that is probably, relatively, easy to do. The hard part is getting someone to sign the cheque. And therein lies the issue. And that's why the rule is "Bikes can not be conveyed on Rail Replacement services" (paraphrased)

That rather assumes that all coaches have luggage lockers of the same shape and size...

 

[CentralTrainer]

And the cost of retro fitting existing coach stock with the, no doubt, differing styles and sizes of such devices on the off chance they get used on a few occasions per year?

Plus as shown in the study - the cost of developing some kind of safe system - or will they go with the type of device that might see members of the public getting impaled in the shoulder or head when the inevitable happens?

 

[Doctor Fegg]

The ideal solution would be to invent a bike storage rack that fits in the under storage lockers of all coaches.

It's called a strap.

 

[jon0844]

The ideal solution would be to invent a bike storage rack that fits in the under storage lockers of all coaches. It needs to be easily removable so can be taken out of the coach when not on RRB work and foldable so doesn't take up lots of room when stored out of use at the coach depot. It needs to be very cheap for coach companies to buy, or funded centrally for them by TOCs of DfT. I think everyone would agree that is an excellent idea. All that is probably, relatively, easy to do. The hard part is getting someone to sign the cheque. And therein lies the issue. And that's why the rule is "Bikes can not be conveyed on Rail Replacement services" (paraphrased)

An easier solution that could be implemented right now;

Planned RRBs; no bikes carried.
Emergency RRBs during disruption (e.g. fatality or OHLE issues etc); TOC can store the bike securely locally for collection another day, with authority to travel to collect, or at a push pays for an adapted vehicle able to take the bike onwards, if the former is impractical or impossible (like the person lives so far away that it would be ridiculous to expect them to travel back another day).

 

[unlevel42]

The ideal solution would be to invent a bike storage rack that fits in the under storage lockers of all coaches. It needs to be easily removable so can be taken out of the coach when not on RRB work and foldable so doesn't take up lots of room when stored out of use at the coach depot. It needs to be very cheap for coach companies to buy, or funded centrally for them by TOCs of DfT. I think everyone would agree that is an excellent idea. All that is probably, relatively, easy to do. The hard part is getting someone to sign the cheque. And therein lies the issue. And that's why the rule is "Bikes can not be conveyed on Rail Replacement services" (paraphrased)

This is not a universal solution for RRB work.
For example coaches cannot be used on Hope Valley line as RRB.
Are increased journey times needed for unloading/loading acceptable?
Are increased fares acceptable?

 

[ashkeba]

Don't let the facts get in the way of someone's hobby horse/personal preference...

And don't mention the obvious idea of a light softer front buffer/ faring/ bumper.

I believe that TRL is the Transport Research Laboratory (the privatised former Road Research Laboratory), an eminent body in it's field.

Notorious among cyclists for Boris Johnston commissioning TRL in 2010 to make a report explaining that there was limited potential for more cycling in London and cycle ways would not be improved further. I think they were commissioned by Guernsey to help support a helmet law too. So they deliver answers tasty clients want.

This is why most TOCs ban cycles at peak times. It is a leisure (or "positioning", i.e. taking a bike to your work city to keep it there) provision only in most cases.

Commuters still take bikes on trains, as long as they work shifts, flexitime or not in a restricted city.

 

[Llanigraham]

The ideal solution would be to invent a bike storage rack that fits in the under storage lockers of all coaches. It needs to be easily removable so can be taken out of the coach when not on RRB work and foldable so doesn't take up lots of room when stored out of use at the coach depot. It needs to be very cheap for coach companies to buy, or funded centrally for them by TOCs of DfT. I think everyone would agree that is an excellent idea. All that is probably, relatively, easy to do. The hard part is getting someone to sign the cheque. And therein lies the issue. And that's why the rule is "Bikes can not be conveyed on Rail Replacement services" (paraphrased)

Certainly around here there are plenty of rail replacement units that don't have under storage areas so that isn't going to work.

 

[CentralTrainer]

Certainly around here there are plenty of rail replacement units that don't have under storage areas so that isn't going to work.

Well then the ideal solution would be to invent an under storage area that fits on the bottom of all coaches. It needs to be easily removable so can be taken out of the coach/bus/horse drawn omnibus when not on RRB work and foldable so doesn't take up lots of room when stored out of use behind the microwave at the coach depot.

It needs to be very cheap for coach companies to buy, or funded centrally for them by TOCs of DfT (possibly via the Postcode Lottery draw).

I think everyone (including the Big 6 Clubs) would agree that is an excellent idea.

All that is definitely easy to do. The hard part is getting someone to sign the postal order.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Well then the ideal solution would be to invent an under storage area that fits on the bottom of all coaches. It needs to be easily removable so can be taken out of the coach/bus/horse drawn omnibus when not on RRB work and foldable so doesn't take up lots of room when stored out of use behind the microwave at the coach depot.

It needs to be very cheap for coach companies to buy, or funded centrally for them by TOCs of DfT (possibly via the Postcode Lottery draw).

I think everyone (including the Big 6 Clubs) would agree that is an excellent idea.

All that is definitely easy to do. The hard part is getting someone to sign the postal order.

Exactly my point!

 

[Llanigraham]

How is this miraculous invention going to work on coaches that are not high floored and where the passenger floor low?
I suggest the two members above have a very limited experience of RRBs in many rural areas. Thinking about it, the last RRB I used was a 25 seater with hardly any storage. Nothing bigger would have got to a couple of the stations we had to call at!

 

[ashkeba]

I'd say the rule is clear and easily understood. If you don't like it, don't travel by train.

It's this " can't do" attitude that has made British travel into the polluted congested mess of cars that it is today.

 

[zwk500]

It's this " can't do" attitude that has made British travel into the polluted congested mess of cars that it is today.

I'd say not offering a service you know you can't deliver is a reasonable business policy. Solutions should be available for those who need their bikes with them, but for the demand on essential cycle travel I wonder if it wouldn't be cheaper to simply book them a taxi and ask them to take the front wheel off. On busier routes maybe there's scope for adaptations like fitting tie-downs in a coach hold or using a double-decker with seats removed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd say not offering a service you know you can't deliver is a reasonable business policy. Solutions should be available for those who need their bikes with them, but for the demand on essential cycle travel I wonder if it wouldn't be cheaper to simply book them a taxi and ask them to take the front wheel off. On busier routes maybe there's scope for adaptations like fitting tie-downs in a coach hold or using a double-decker with seats removed.

TBH I think it's fine not to carry on planned RRB, but something better should be done for emergency RRB even if that is a free ticket to return and collect it having locked it up at the station.

 

[zwk500]

TBH I think it's fine not to carry on planned RRB, but something better should be done for emergency RRB even if that is a free ticket to return and collect it having locked it up at the station.

I don't think a free ticket to collect it later is really that helpful, it means a massive inconvenience at a future date. Considering it takes less than 10 seconds to take the front wheel off 90% of bikes and then it'll fit in the majority of car boots, for the odd person who's got a bike making sure both get home would be good customer service without breaking the bank.

For planned replacement, where you potentially have time to prep buses with something like tie-downs and maybe remove 2 rows of seats I think there's scope where there's demand to be better than it is at the moment. Not every route will need it and not every route can manage it, but there are places it would help.

 

[ashkeba]

Considering it takes less than 10 seconds to take the front wheel off 90% of bikes and [...]

I do not think that was ever true and with road bikes moving to disc brakes and through axles, it is becoming even less likely. It is possible but it is adding an extra requirement of being mechanically competent and maybe carrying tools.

But most bikes would fit in a minibus taxi, maybe even 3 per taxi, which would be fine for the occasional long emergency RRB. The probable delay in getting the taxi would probably encourage people to ride short RRB journeys instead.

This is all very possible. There are many ways which would be good enough. At the moment, it seems officially rail does not try and views passengers without cars as an irritation instead of their core market.

 

[zwk500]

I do not think that was ever true and with road bikes moving to disc brakes and through axles, it is becoming even less likely. It is possible but it is adding an extra requirement of being mechanically competent and maybe carrying tools.

With a quick release clamp, disk brakes are quicker than v brakes. Even high-end bikes nowadays have quick-release clamps - flip the lever, spin it around and it will be off before you know it. There may be very high performance bikes that require a spanner, but tbh if anybody is riding a bike they can't remove the wheel from to change the tyre they really need to consider if it's sensible for them to use a bike as a mode of travel (or acquire this very, very basic skill).

At the moment, it seems officially rail does not try and views passengers without cars as an irritation instead of their core market.

The rail industry focuses on offering the services it is required to by law and contract. Bikes are, at the moment, a 'nice to have' and therefore the first thing to be dropped when things get awkward. Whether this is right or wrong, I can't say.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

Many cyclists are not in the habit of fixing their own machines. Taking a wheel out might be easy enough, putting it back the wrong way, not tightening or adjusting correctly is easy too, possibly with disagreeable consequences

 

[al78]

I do not think that was ever true and with road bikes moving to disc brakes and through axles, it is becoming even less likely. It is possible but it is adding an extra requirement of being mechanically competent and maybe carrying tools.

It is, even without quick release, all that is required is the right size spanner or maybe allen key, which a regular utility cyclist will nearly always be carrying in case they get a puncture and need to replace the inner tube. My road bike has disc brakes and quick release, the only added minimal complication is to unplug the hub dynamo when removing the front wheel.

 

[zwk500]

Many cyclists are not in the habit of fixing their own machines. Taking a wheel out might be easy enough, putting it back the wrong way, not tightening or adjusting correctly is easy too, possibly with disagreeable consequences

If a cyclist can't take a wheel off and put it back on (not changing the tyre at all) then with all due respect they really shouldn't be riding any further than the end of their street. If you're going far enough that you will need a train back then you should certainly have the equipment to replace or repair a punctured inner tube, because if you don't you're stranded and in potential danger until somebody stops or comes to pick you up.

Car drivers with no mechanical qualifications are expected to be able to check their tyres, top up their oil and replace headlights. A cyclist being able to replace/repair a puncture is at an equivalent level.

 

[al78]

If a cyclist can't take a wheel off and put it back on (not changing the tyre at all) then with all due respect they really shouldn't be riding any further than the end of their street. If you're going far enough that you will need a train back then you should certainly have the equipment to replace or repair a punctured inner tube, because if you don't you're stranded and in potential danger until somebody stops or comes to pick you up.

Car drivers with no mechanical qualifications are expected to be able to check their tyres, top up their oil and replace headlights. A cyclist being able to replace/repair a puncture is at an equivalent level.

Not really. Drivers are legally required to maintain their vehicles in a roadworthy condition because the consequences can result in death or seriouis injury to a third party. Cyclists do not pose anywhere near the externalised risk onto others that motorists do, the consequences are virtually all on them, that is why motorists have the greater responsibility on the roads.

A cyclist ought to be able to remove/replace a wheel and repair a puncture but more for their own benefit to avoid a long walk home, not because it risks killing someone.

 

[zwk500]

Not really. Drivers are legally required to maintain their vehicles in a roadworthy condition because the consequences can result in death or seriouis injury to a third party. Cyclists do not pose anywhere near the externalised risk onto others that motorists do, the consequences are virtually all on them, that is why motorists have the greater responsibility on the roads.

A cyclist ought to be able to remove/replace a wheel and repair a puncture but more for their own benefit to avoid a long walk home, not because it risks killing someone.

I was more talking about equivalent level of mechanical knowledge required compared to the more complex tasks on the vehicle. I agree the reasons and consequences are rather different in severity.

 

[Robertj21a]

I don't think a free ticket to collect it later is really that helpful, it means a massive inconvenience at a future date. Considering it takes less than 10 seconds to take the front wheel off 90% of bikes and then it'll fit in the majority of car boots, for the odd person who's got a bike making sure both get home would be good customer service without breaking the bank.

For planned replacement, where you potentially have time to prep buses with something like tie-downs and maybe remove 2 rows of seats I think there's scope where there's demand to be better than it is at the moment. Not every route will need it and not every route can manage it, but there are places it would help.

What places are you thinking of?

 

[zwk500]

What places are you thinking of?

The Sussex Coast, for one. Also around the Chilterns, which are very popular on weekends for cyclists. But I wasn't going to come up with a complete list here and now.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Car drivers with no mechanical qualifications are expected to be able to check their tyres, top up their oil and replace headlights. A cyclist being able to replace/repair a puncture is at an equivalent level.

There is no onus on a car driver to have any mechanical knowledge at all. They must simply ensure it's in a roadworthy condition. This can be done by getting a mechanic to check it, or paying AA membership (other breakdown services are available) to come and change a bulb. The car owner themselves doesn't need to do it, or have the knowledge to do it.
Anyone with arthritis for example, would struggle to change a bulb, but can still drive even though unable to do so.
If I ride a bike, I don't need to take a toolkit with me, or have the knowledge to use it.

 

[ashkeba]

With a quick release clamp, disk brakes are quicker than v brakes.

You can write that but what I see with racers preferring to swap bikes instead of swap wheels like with rim brakes suggests it is not always so.

[...] tbh if anybody is riding a bike they can't remove the wheel from to change the tyre they really need to consider if it's sensible for them to use a bike as a mode of travel (or acquire this very, very basic skill).

That is elitism and not a requirement. I expect you would be horrified by the condition of bikes in many towns and cities across Europe, including London, Cambridge, Oxford and Bristol.

And how thin are your tyres? I change mine only every year or two and I think most shops would fit one for a few pounds extra, still costing less than refuelling a car of petrol for tyre and fit in total. So does it make economic sense for the unwilling and incompetent to learn to do it?

The rail industry focuses on offering the services it is required to by law and contract. Bikes are, at the moment, a 'nice to have' and therefore the first thing to be dropped when things get awkward. Whether this is right or wrong, I can't say.

I suspect you are correct. The market seems to have failed to encourage service of this core market and the public sector writing the laws and contracts seems to be setting the wrong requirements to deliver decarbonised transport, integrated transport or physical activity.

If you're going far enough that you will need a train back then you should certainly have the equipment to replace or repair a punctured inner tube, because if you don't you're stranded and in potential danger until somebody stops or comes to pick you up.

I do not understand what this has to do with removing a wheel, which is not required to repair a puncture. You can get enough tube out to patch it without removing one, except maybe on those race-style bikes with almost no gap between tyre and frame, or now many people just connect one of those £3 cans from the supermarket sports shelves that are like a mini version of what has replaced spare tyres in cars.

I also do not understand how they would be stranded or in potential danger any more than someone out for a walk.

Car drivers with no mechanical qualifications are expected to be able to check their tyres, top up their oil and replace headlights. A cyclist being able to replace/repair a puncture is at an equivalent level.

Car drivers are absolutely not expected to be able to remove a wheel or change a tyre. A web search also makes me think the tyre and oil top up questions were only added to the UK driving test in 2012, so I doubt most non-owner drivers could do it without the car instruction manual.

So to return, I think adding a dismantling requirement to bike transport would be an unreasonable extra expectation, especially when most fit in minibus taxis.

 

[lincolnshire]

As all ready been commented on who is going to pay for changes and alterations so as the private coach companies can transport cycles may be one day a week?
Should the train fares for rail replacement journeys be increased just to pay for cycle carrying changes to keep a few cyclists happy ? considering they don,t even pay for there cycles at the present time.
Also now lockdown is been eased you might find that rail replacement could be finding coaches a problem for weekends as coach companies get back to holidays , days out and running for holiday companies again as it is usually there main business activity.

 

[ashkeba]

As all ready been commented on who is going to pay for changes and alterations so as the private coach companies can transport cycles may be one day a week?

The state should pay for adaptation and service buses should have to carry bikes off peak. It seems like market failure this does not happen except a few exceptions.

Should the train fares for rail replacement journeys be increased just to pay for cycle carrying changes to keep a few cyclists happy ? considering they don,t even pay for there cycles at the present time.

No fares should not increase and it is not just to keep cyclists happy. It is necessary to make transport more sustainable.

Many cyclists would not mind buying a reasonable ticket, as in other countries. I think UK bike train tickets were removed from sale in the bike-hating 1970s to stop cyclists having contractual rights to carriage.

It is not within cyclists power to change this. If you offer to pay for your bike today, some crew accuse you of attempted bribes!

 

[Robertj21a]

Just a personal view but non-folding bikes are invariably a nuisance on trains, they take up too much space, get in the way of passengers who need to pass by and often leave dirt or mud behind. The last thing most people want is to replicate the problem on buses.
Rail replacements arrangements already state that bikes cannot be accepted, it needs to stay the same.

 

[zwk500]

It is not within cyclists power to change this. If you offer to pay for your bike today, some crew accuse you of attempted bribes!

Why would staff be able to accept money for a service/ticket that doesn't exist?

If you want bike tickets, you'd need to get talking to somebody in the head office of a TOC (and probably many TOCs) but that's a completely different thread.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And why would you offer to pay for a service that is free?