Disabled Tanyalee Davis - more rail travel woes.

[EM2]

There's nothing wrong with raising the issues, but do they need to run to the media every time something goes wrong?

Yes. Otherwise people that aren't affected forget, and think it's solved or it's gone away. In the same way that when multiple trains are stranded, people affected run to the media.

In the case of the Ryanair flight we don't even know if the problems occurred in this country let alone if they were the fault of the airline.

And that's OK? 'Oh, it happened somewhere else, so it's not important.'

Sorry but I am coming to the conclusion that she has now found herself a go to whenever something doesn't suit, and at the same time get some extra publicity. And the more she does it, the more people will draw the same conclusion as me.

I really hope that every time it happens, her and anyone else affected in a similar way keeps shouting. It's the only way that things will change.

 

[Bantamzen]

Yes. Otherwise people that aren't affected forget, and think it's solved or it's gone away. In the same way that when multiple trains are stranded, people affected run to the media.

If we are totally honest, media coverage or not most people don't care one way or another. Some will feign outrage to be part of something for a moment, especially if it appears popular on social media, but the next day they will forget. I'm not saying it's right by the way, but this is the reality of the modern world.

And that's OK? 'Oh, it happened somewhere else, so it's not important.'

No, despite the fact the loss could have happened elsewhere and have nothing to do with the airline, people quickly jump on the media bandwagon and expect someone here to take the blame.

I really hope that every time it happens, her and anyone else affected in a similar way keeps shouting. It's the only way that things will change.

Then expect the public to quickly tire of it. The answers to the problems faced by disabled and disadvantaged people don't lie in media stories that will soon fade from people's memories.

 

[Master29]

You need to seriously consider what you have said there. That’s abhorrent.

And I think you should read and quote the whole reply rather than the bit which seems offensive to you. A prime example of a misquote if ever.

 

[EM2]

If we are totally honest, media coverage or not most people don't care one way or another.

So what's the point of media then?

Then expect the public to quickly tire of it. The answers to the problems faced by disabled and disadvantaged people don't lie in media stories that will soon fade from people's memories.

And if they don't keep highlighting that this keeps happening, how will it change?

I'll be honest, I thought that after the accident at Alton Towers that left previously able-bodied people with life-changing injuries, public perception might change to 'Wow, it can happen to anyone at any time. It might be me next' and for there to be a bit more tolerance and understanding.
Sadly, it seems not.

 

[sportzbar]

I think it's absolutely fantastic that someone is bring this to light.....again....
But does anyone know why Northern (other TOCs are available) have this policy?

Northern have probably the most diverse fleet out there currently. Some can take scooters some can't. Surely the easiest thing to do is ban scooters (apart from folding, small, luggage carry on size).

So this is what Northern have done. For safety. It's policy and 99.99% of staff know that. If someone turns up for a service that cannot take a scooter then a taxi will be provided. This is common knowledge amongst regular travellers and indeed has been pointed out both personally and in writing to certain people.

But here lies the rub.

A small (very small attention seeking, so it seems) minority do not agree with this policy. So they publish edited videos of staff seemingly (we only see one side) refusing access for their scooter.

If I was a conductor and decided to break the rules because I was being accused of discrimination and an accident happened with said scooter who would be held responsible? Well it would be yours truly.

So please excuse me while I do my job and keep you safe but at least I'll know that the other people on my train who I am responsible for above all else including discrimination laws (which by the way means the taxi provided by the company will take you home) will not have to worry about a 200lb machine flying at them in the event of an emergency (dramatic licence intended).

Hope this clears a few things up....

 

[Bantamzen]

So what's the point of media then?

And if they don't keep highlighting that this keeps happening, how will it change?

I'll be honest, I thought that after the accident at Alton Towers that left previously able-bodied people with life-changing injuries, public perception might change to 'Wow, it can happen to anyone at any time. It might be me next' and for there to be a bit more tolerance and understanding.
Sadly, it seems not.

The point of the media? To bring us the news, not be a soundboard for people's everyday moans and groans of which Tanyalee Davis is far from alone in engaging in. Accessibility issues in general should be discussed, they absolutely need to be, but just lazily producing articles off the back of a Tweet or YouTube article without any research is not what reporters should be doing. As I said viewer / reader fatigue will quickly set in doing this, and she will move from being seen as an activist for disabled people to serial moaner and self publisist. The cynic in me notes on her Twitter feed that she has an upcoming tour, just at the time she is becoming visible on the BBC. I, like a lot of people had never heard of her before these threads. Hmmm...

How do things change? They already are, laws have been passed, hundreds of millions of pounds have been spent up and down the country by government, councils & business to increase accessibility. And more still will be spent in the future. But there is no magic button to make the disadvantages of disabled people go away, nor is there a solution for every problem. Sometimes sadly things will go wrong, as they do for all of us. And sometimes you have to find a way to just get on with it and find your own solution rather than demand that all your problems be solved by someone else.

Whenever I see interaction between rail staff and disabled passengers I see the staff doing their very best to try to accommodate their needs. And most disabled people go about their days without kicking up the kind of fuss we see on these threads. Indeed some, like the wheelchair using manager I worked under for some time get fed up of being constantly mollycodelled by colleagues and the wider public. His attitude was simple and elegant, if I need help I'll ask, otherwise I'm fine.

 

[EM2]

Sometimes sadly things will go wrong, as they do for all of us.

And when they go wrong for you, what do you do? Do you just go 'Ho hum' and lump it? Because I certainly don't.

And sometimes you have to find a way to just get on with it and find your own solution rather than demand that all your problems be solved by someone else.

How do you suggest that the disabled 'find their own solution'? Carry a ramp everywhere?

His attitude was simple and elegant, if I need help I'll ask, otherwise I'm fine.

This is the whole point! These cases are all where the disabled customer has asked for help and not got it, or a facility that should be available isn't, causing embarrassment and discomfort.
Would you accept it in your day-to-day life?

 

[whhistle]

You need to seriously consider what you have said there. That’s abhorrent.

I appreciate some people will be offended. But similarly, many people without a disability are also a burden.
Read the whole post and take it in context. I find people who are obviously not in need of help, or use their disability as some sort of "badge" abhorrent.
It's interesting though as would you say it's acceptable for someone with a disability to inconvenience someone without? I'm all for helping those who need help, for people with or without disabilities, but if someone who is riding a scooter on the road (for example) causes 2 miles worth of tailbacks, that then forces some poor lady to give birth to a child by the side of the road... that's not right.

It's also been widely noted on the internet that some adults find caring for their elderly parents a burden.

How do you know they are just lazy?
Or maybe they have a condition where they have "good times" and "bad times" so they thought they were able to make the journey without help but took a turn on the way and needed assistance by the time they got to the station.

Sometimes you can just tell that someone clearly can't be bothered - note, not most of the time, but some of the time.
You must remember, it's not a disabled persons right to be helped.
Don't read that wrong. I am all for helping those in need but there is a small minority of people that clearly don't need any help... think "I'm disabled, you must let me through, I can be at the front of the queue... because I'm disabled".

 

[Bantamzen]

And when they go wrong for you, what do you do? Do you just go 'Ho hum' and lump it? Because I certainly don't.

No, but I don't go running to the media every time something goes wrong.

How do you suggest that the disabled 'find their own solution'? Carry a ramp everywhere?

No, obviously where they are needed they should be provided, and indeed are. Most of this lady's complaints are around her mobility scooter where either they may not be allowed (e.g. Northern) alternative arrangements are made, and how individual staff may or may not have treated her (& we do only have her accounts for this). The latest incident involves a loss of part of the scooter, in which case whilst the airline investigate (and it may not be a simple one given the potential locations of loss, amount of baggage handled) ask for at least help at the airport then get onto the insurance company to get a replacement. Just as anyone else would do, most disabled people are not totally helpless and can make plans, deal with unexpected situations etc.

This is the whole point! These cases are all where the disabled customer has asked for help and not got it, or a facility that should be available isn't, causing embarrassment and discomfort.
Would you accept it in your day-to-day life?

Again no, but again I would not go running to the media. Sadly, and this is not just aimed at disabled people, we as a nation seem ever less able to cope with situations without seeking some form of instant validation. This lady has access to the internet as she demonstrates, so rather than focusing on filming what's making her unhappy or uncomfortable, why not use the time to get contact details of the TOC, and talk to them? She is an intelligent and articulate lady, so instead of trying to name & shame why not use that intellect to find a resolution? But again this is society's new goto, unhappy at something? Get it on social media! And to be honest in the case of the GWR situation, it seemed to me that she was offered a solution that she didn't want to take because she & her companion were more interested in getting into a conflict situation & posting it up online. Which leaves me still very cynical about this and subsequent online complaints I'm afraid. I sense the advice of an agent seeing a bit of free publicity which the BBC rushed to give her (perhaps they are making plans to offer her a show?).

 

[WelshBluebird]

This might mean collapsing a wheelchair and taking a few steps here and there. The same applies for pushchairs and heavy suitcases.

Sorry but no. People who are disabled or have conditions which limit their mobility etc should not be expected to end up having to "collapse in a wheelchair" because the railway cannot be bothered to comply with the law.

Assistance should be requested when it is absolutely the only way.

Why?
Should we force people to struggle in pain and severe discomfort then?

Going back to working in the ambulance service, we've carried people that actually can walk short distances but chose not to. I've seen notes from nurses and Doctors stating a patient should be walking but again refuse to.

Quite often that is because they can walk short distances, but that causes a great deal of pain and impairs their mobility for a while after that.
You are falling into the same trap the governments disability assessment things do: that just because someone can do something for a short period of time once and suffering pain or discomfort because of it, that somehow means that they can do it all of the time without consequence.

I actually don't think that this problem will ever solved. Mistakes will always happen somewhere and certain individuals like to have a moan at the first opportunity.

We aren't talking about mistakes. We are talking about a total failure of the systems in place. If it happened every now and again then yeah, mistakes. But for issues to pop up so often - there is more at play here.

There's always someone worse off...

Well yeah you could be dead.
Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make everyday life better and more accessible for those who need it though.

There's nothing wrong with raising the issues, but do they need to run to the media every time something goes wrong? In the case of the Ryanair flight we don't even know if the problems occurred in this country let alone if they were the fault of the airline.

If they don't "run to the media" then where do they go (considering customer services will usually just fob people off until the media get involved).

It's also been widely noted on the internet that some adults find caring for their elderly parents a burden.

First of all - so? It is still the right thing to do. Unless you want mass euthanasia.
Secondly, it is more the language used - calling someone a burden is very harsh, very blunt, and is of no help to anyone. Many people in such circumstances already suffer mental health issues partly due to feeling like a burden. You calling them that is going to do more harm than anything else.

Sometimes you can just tell that someone clearly can't be bothered - note, not most of the time, but some of the time.

No. You can't "just tell".
You have literally no idea what has been going on in someones life.
One of my friends has Leukemia and when she was getting treated for it, she was very pretty weak. Perfectaly able to get to and from places but carrying luggage or standing for long periods of time was tough. She lost count of the number of times she was told (not asked, but told) to move so someone could sit down as she looked like a perfectly fit and able 20 year old woman.

You must remember, it's not a disabled persons right to be helped.

Errrr yes it is. It is in law. If you do not make reasonable efforts to allow disabled people access to your services then that is illegal. Full stop.

Don't read that wrong. I am all for helping those in need but there is a small minority of people that clearly don't need any help... think "I'm disabled, you must let me through, I can be at the front of the queue... because I'm disabled".

Ok, and I'll ask you two questions based on that:

1. How big a minority do you think this is, because it seems like you are making a big deal out of a tiny number of people.
2. Why do you seem to think it is fair to essentially tar all disabled people with the same brush?

 

[Bromley boy]

Again no, but again I would not go running to the media. Sadly, and this is not just aimed at disabled people, we as a nation seem ever less able to cope with situations without seeking some form of instant validation. This lady has access to the internet as she demonstrates, so rather than focusing on filming what's making her unhappy or uncomfortable, why not use the time to get contact details of the TOC, and talk to them? She is an intelligent and articulate lady, so instead of trying to name & shame why not use that intellect to find a resolution? But again this is society's new goto, unhappy at something? Get it on social media! And to be honest in the case of the GWR situation, it seemed to me that she was offered a solution that she didn't want to take because she & her companion were more interested in getting into a conflict situation & posting it up online. Which leaves me still very cynical about this and subsequent online complaints I'm afraid. I sense the advice of an agent seeing a bit of free publicity which the BBC rushed to give her (perhaps they are making plans to offer her a show?).

I completely agree with this, especially in light of the latest incident.

 

[OneOffDave]

Again no, but again I would not go running to the media. Sadly, and this is not just aimed at disabled people, we as a nation seem ever less able to cope with situations without seeking some form of instant validation. This lady has access to the internet as she demonstrates, so rather than focusing on filming what's making her unhappy or uncomfortable, why not use the time to get contact details of the TOC, and talk to them? She is an intelligent and articulate lady, so instead of trying to name & shame why not use that intellect to find a resolution? But again this is society's new goto, unhappy at something? Get it on social media! And to be honest in the case of the GWR situation, it seemed to me that she was offered a solution that she didn't want to take because she & her companion were more interested in getting into a conflict situation & posting it up online. Which leaves me still very cynical about this and subsequent online complaints I'm afraid. I sense the advice of an agent seeing a bit of free publicity which the BBC rushed to give her (perhaps they are making plans to offer her a show?).

I suspect she's tried talking to the TOC and found that that achieves absolutely nothing. So the logical next step is going to the media. She was offered a solution that prioritised a non-protected characteristic against a protected one. She was also placed at risk by the actions of a member of train crew. Do you have any evidence to back up that her agent advised her to get it in the media? This show the BBC are planning to give her, do you know what that is? Based on a similar level of evidence I suspect you are being paid by the TOC to smear her and you have resorted to using an online platform to to this for your own publicity rather than taking the time and effort to contact her as ask her those questions directly. See how easy it is to make baseless accusations

 

[OneOffDave]

I completely agree with this, especially in light of the latest incident.

So when it happened again she is just supposed to shut up, touch her forelock and put up with it? Or should she complain (again) to the TOC, knowing full well that this will achieve absolutely nothing. How many times should she complain with no result before you will allow her to raise the issue with anyone other than the TOC?

 

[pt_mad]

Reasonable efforts in law to make services accessible is what tocs are doing. Ramps are provided and assistance can be booked. Ok there will be occasions when assistance arrives late or is missed due to operational pressures such as one train suddenly loses time, arrives late and two assists clashed with only one member of staff available. This is what can happen when there is disruption. A big Network Rail station might allocate all booked assists to staff members, then two trains go late and Pete has 3 trains with assists in a the same time allocated to him, so he's late arriving to one and the person has got themselves off. Example.


As someone else pointed out the DFT have missed the boat on the biggest issue which was to purchase platform level floored trains for these next generation orders. The HSTs lasted 40 years and they're replacing them with yet another train which requires a ramp. Same with all the Bombardier and CAF DMUs AFAIK. This could have been addressed this time around but it seems nearly all express services are destined to need ramps for wheelchair users for the next generation.

Another thing which baffles me is why this was not brought up as an issue in the 70s 80s 90s and especially the millennium. There were wheelchair users and people who couldn't do big steps back in the 20th century, yet the PRM regulations didn't exist, neither did the requirement for an accessible toilet in a lot of cases, which I can't understand. The train orders made around 2000 and in the late 90s for Turbostars, Pendolinos, Voyagers and Meridians should have looked at level boarding and platform level height. It seems to have been pushed aside for too long.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Reasonable efforts in law to make services accessible is what tocs are doing.

1. I would question if they are doing that based on how widespread issues with assistance are. Certainly the issues suggest an systematic failure rather than one off mistakes, with no attempt to actually fix those issue.
2. Some posters in this thread are suggesting ToCs shouldn't have to do that and that disabled people should struggle until they can't anymore and "collapse in a wheelchair".

 

[Bletchleyite]

As someone else pointed out the DFT have missed the boat on the biggest issue which was to purchase platform level floored trains for these next generation orders. The HSTs lasted 40 years and they're replacing them with yet another triangle which requires a ramp. Same with all the Bombardier and CAF DMUs AFAIK. This could have been addressed this time around but it seems nearly all express services are destined to need ramps for wheelchair users for the next generation.

Yes, that was me.

It's difficult to argue that branch lines should be kept open (for example) when the bus industry has low floor/level boarding already, and also has full electric operation very nearly ready for most routes.

In my view PRM-TSI should have mandated no-gap level boarding for all new rolling stock and a standard height, compliant with that, for all new and substantially modified stations (in the manner the energy efficiency requirements apply to the building regulations for both new and refurbished buildings). The benefits of that would outweigh almost every single one of the stipulations it actually does contain.

 

[Bromley boy]

So when it happened again she is just supposed to shut up, touch her forelock and put up with it? Or should she complain (again) to the TOC, knowing full well that this will achieve absolutely nothing. How many times should she complain with no result before you will allow her to raise the issue with anyone other than the TOC?

But there’s s difference between suffering detriment and deliberately engineering a confrontation in order to generate publicity, as was my take on the GWR incident.

Once the TOC’s complaints procedure has been exhausted where would a non-celebrity go from there? Transport Ombudsman?

 

[OneOffDave]

Reasonable efforts in law to make services accessible is what tocs are doing. Ramps are provided and assistance can be booked. Ok there will be occasions when assistance arrives late or is missed due to operational pressures such as one train suddenly loses time, arrives late and two assists clashed with only one member of staff available. This is what can happen when there is disruption. A big Network Rail station might allocate all booked assists to staff members, then two trains go late and Pete has 3 trains with assists in a the same time allocated to him, so he's late arriving to one and the person has got themselves off. Example.


As someone else pointed out the DFT have missed the boat on the biggest issue which was to purchase platform level floored trains for these next generation orders. The HSTs lasted 40 years and they're replacing them with yet another triangle which requires a ramp. Same with all the Bombardier and CAF DMUs AFAIK. This could have been addressed this time around but it seems nearly all express services are destined to need ramps for wheelchair users for the next generation.

On average, I get one issue with missed assistance a week. That's a 10% failure rate and that's on a journey I do regularly at the same time between busy staffed stations. This isn't the odd failure. The systems and infrastructure aren't up to the job and there seems to be no real will at senior levels in TOCs, NR and DfT to actually do anything about it.

 

[WelshBluebird]

But there’s s difference between suffering detriment and deliberately engineering a confrontation in order to generate publicity, as was my take on the GWR incident.

Once the TOCs procedure has been exhausted where would a non-celebrity go from there? Transport Ombudsman?

I really don't see why people are having a go at her for going to the media.
You do realise non celebrities can and do go to the media about customer service issues right? Indeed newspapers usually have sections devoted to people contacting them for that purpose! And you then usually find the company will then play ball when the media are involved.

 

[Bromley boy]

It's difficult to argue that branch lines should be kept open (for example) when the bus industry has low floor/level boarding already, and also has full electric operation very nearly ready for most routes.

I might have misunderstood what you mean here, but are you saying you think branch lines should be closed altogether in favour of buses due to lack of level access?!

That seems to be discriminating against the vast majority of able bodied travellers who use the lines!

 

[OneOffDave]

But there’s s difference between suffering detriment and deliberately engineering a confrontation in order to generate publicity, as was my take on the GWR incident.

Once the TOC’s complaints procedure has been exhausted where would a non-celebrity go from there? Transport Ombudsman?

You contact the media through some of the high profile disability reporters like Nikki Fox or contact one of the campaigning bodies like Transport For All who will use their contacts to get the story out there. Or as I did, start legal proceedings against the TOC. It's surprising what a couple of news articles and a solicitor's letter can achieve, esp when that firm has just had a big win in a disability related case

 

[Bletchleyite]

I might have misunderstood what you mean here, but are you saying you think branch lines should be closed altogether in favour of buses due to lack of level access?!

That seems to be discriminating against the vast majority of able bodied travellers who use the lines!

I am not advocating that branch lines should be closed. However, in a less pro-rail and anti-bus political climate to now, I think there could easily be proposals to close branch lines with the justification being "buses are 100% accessible and don't belch out filthy diesel fumes", and within a few years that will essentially be the case.

For another thread really, but this is why I think there should also have been an outright ban on new DMUs (as opposed to battery units or bi-modes with modular generation units that could be swapped easily such as those on 230s) before the latest set of orders, as that guarantees the burning of dead animals for at least another 30-40 years when it needs to be ceased entirely much sooner.

 

[pt_mad]

Yes, that was me.

It's difficult to argue that branch lines should be kept open (for example) when the bus industry has low floor/level boarding already, and also has full electric operation very nearly ready for most routes.

In my view PRM-TSI should have mandated no-gap level boarding for all new rolling stock and a standard height, compliant with that, for all new and substantially modified stations (in the manner the energy efficiency requirements apply to the building regulations for both new and refurbished buildings). The benefits of that would outweigh almost every single one of the stipulations it actually does contain.

Precisely. And that by itself would be the biggest improvement that could ever be made for passengers with disabilities. I would estimate up to half of passengers may not need assistance with level no gap boarding, and their reliance on a member of staff being available for them to actually board or leave the train would be eliminated in a lot of cases giving them their own independence.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Precisely. And that by itself would be the biggest improvement that could ever be made for passengers with disabilities. I would estimate up to half of passengers may not need assistance with level no gap boarding, and their reliance on a member of staff being available for them to actually board or leave the train would be eliminated in a lot of cases giving them their own independence.

Exactly.

Loss of independence is the biggest problem for people with disabilities, and we really should (as society) be doing the utmost we possibly can to enable independence rather than what should be the secondary option of providing care or assistance.

It's utterly ridiculous that as a high-platform country we still insist on building trains with the floor about 8" above the platform. It really isn't hard to sort that out; Switzerland have managed to make nearly all their regional stations level boarding, and they are a low platform country!

Even with trains like the Class 800 where some coaches would need (and have) a high floor due to the engines, you could have one or two low-floor coaches with the wheelchair spaces (after all, the 800 has end coaches with the floor lower than the intermediates, just not low enough). You don't need low floor throughout.

FWIW, much as I enjoy rail travel, if something put me in a wheelchair tomorrow (but otherwise fully able) I'd get an adapted Motability car with hand controls and switch to driving everywhere.

 

[pt_mad]

Even the Blackpool trams have level access. Yeah they had to rebuild a lot of the platforms along the prom, but so what? The advantages are huge.

On average, I get one issue with missed assistance a week. That's a 10% failure rate and that's on a journey I do regularly at the same time between busy staffed stations. This isn't the odd failure. The systems and infrastructure aren't up to the job and there seems to be no real will at senior levels in TOCs, NR and DfT to actually do anything about it.

I would be interested to know of there is some sort of target for delivery for booked assists, or a tolerated level of failure? Because it's doubtful staff are getting sacked, so presumably there may be some tolerance of assistance not being delivered due to various reasons, same way there is a level of tolerance for cancellations. I.e. daily performance targets for timeliness are often around 92 percent and a certain number of cancellations are allowed and targets can still be met. Obviously a lot of the public don't realise when their service is cancelled that there could be 20 cancellations (example) allowed that day on the TOC and they will still fulfil their obligations for the franchise. The figure may be significantly more or less than 20.

 

[OneOffDave]

Even the Blackpool trams have level access. Yeah they had to rebuild a lot of the platforms along the prom, but so what? The advantages are huge.
I would be interested to know of there is some sort of target for delivery for booked assists, or a tolerated level of failure? Because it's doubtful staff are getting sacked, so presumably there may be some tolerance of assistance not being delivered due to various reasons, same way there is a level of tolerance for cancellations. I.e. daily performance targets for timeliness are often around 92 percent and a certain number of cancellations are allowed and targets can still be met. Obviously a lot of the public don't realise when their service is cancelled that there could be 20 cancellations (example) allowed that day on the TOC and they will still fulfil their obligations for the franchise. The figure may be significantly more or less than 20.

I'd like to know that too. The interesting thing would be how many fails would actually get recorded. If no one turns up to get me off at a terminus station and the train crew have already gone so I get myself off (risky but 'fun'), unless I formally complain I suspect it wouldn't get recorded. Similarly if I have to crawl onto the train to avoid missing it and the Guard hasn't been sent the assistance message then that won't get recorded eitehr

 

[philthetube]

The latest one only really shows that...
1. Ryanair are cheap rubbish (and is there really anyone who doesn't know that, even if they accept it because they benefit from the "cheap" bit)?
2. Airport baggage handling is poor, particularly when anything other than a standard trolley suitcase is involved

One or the other but probably not both in this case.

It'll be a lot slower because a massive trick was missed in ordering stacks of Aventras and Class 800s with high floors. We could have got it right this time; all the manufacturers have low floor products for mainland European use.

Straighten all the platforms, ensure that all trains fit a loading gauge which allows running close to platform edges, work out what to do about platforms used by 125mph trains and stoppers and you have a chance. Since the introduction of S stock London underground have had massive numbers of people falling down the sides of trains at curved platforms.

Even the Blackpool trams have level access. Yeah they had to rebuild a lot of the platforms along the prom, but so what? The advantages are huge.

For the introduction of a common stock type, and they didn't need to rebuild platforms they just had to put in elevated footpaths next to straight track.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Straighten all the platforms, ensure that all trains fit a loading gauge which allows running close to platform edges, work out what to do about platforms used by 125mph trains and stoppers and you have a chance. Since the introduction of S stock London underground have had massive numbers of people falling down the sides of trains at curved platforms.

Moving steps are the solution to most of these (except the likes of Clapham Jn P17, but platforms *that* heavily curved are not that common).

 

[johnnychips]

What is it like in Europe? People keep quoting Switzerland, but the only country I’m very familiar with is Belgium, where getting on trains is often a mountaineering exercise precisely because of the low platforms.

 

[aylesbury]

I think that it is quite right for Northern to have this policy and if members of staff are abused for doing their job its wrong .Unfortunately there are a minority who see themselves as warriors for change and cause trouble whenever they can. The vast majority of disabled persons are just trying to move around and will be reasonable and deserve all the help offered.