On train noise and ambiance

[Bletchleyite]

I'm guessing here but I think it's a sort of "could the train manager contact the driver" code of some kind.

It's a fault notification, bog alarm or indeed the driver call. There are different sets of beeps that mean different things.

But I agree that nondescript beeps do add to the "wonder what that is" nervousness of some. The playing of a verbal announcement as in newer stock is therefore better.

 

[physics34]

Absolutely nailed it, all these noises and incredibly bright lights stress me out. If people have had a hard day at work, being on a packed train is bad enough. But when there are these ridiculously loud sirens blaring every time the doors open, digital doris blurting out the calling pattern for the 15th time and stupidly bright lights make it stressful.

I get the need for accessibility and catering for as many people as possible to use the train. But I do wonder if these characteristics of modern trains are slightly detrimental to the mental health of the vast majority of customers.Would it not be an idea to have hearing loops built into priority seats on trains for those hard of hearing for example?

Yeh well I think "overkill" comes into play a lot.

I think if you are not by the doors and you hear the "doors open chime" (now being installed in most sliding door stock) then that is overkill and is an annoyance .For example.

We have totally gone away from rail travel being enjoyable and relaxing just to cater for a small minority.......(I know people with disabilities find this things helpful).

 

[Bletchleyite]

As somebody else said, give me a tungsten lit compartment with bouncy seats and a window and/or heater control

I'd be happy with modern stock with subdued mood lighting, with additional warm white spots in the aisle and overhead reading lamps for those wanting more light. Yes, even on the Tube. Borismasters have a very atmospheric lighting setup, why not?

 

[greaterwest]

Sorry to digress but this has been really bothering me. All they seem to display nowadays is 00:00, not even messages on most trains, and it's been this way for a while. Anybody know why?!

This is an issue on the class 455 (and I think 456 trains) as the system used is the same as that of the Desiro trains, though they have been fixed recently.

For unknown reasons, the 455s have not received the same update.

I don't know what "drivel on the PA" that OP is on about, especially on SWT services as they have the fewest announcements!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's a fault notification, bog alarm or indeed the driver call. There are different sets of beeps that mean different things.

But I agree that nondescript beeps do add to the "wonder what that is" nervousness of some. The playing of a verbal announcement as in newer stock is therefore better.

On VTEC, the disabled passenger alarm is announced throughout the train, addressing "a member of train crew". I would assume the toilet alarm would have the same effect.

 

[physics34]

It's a fault notification, bog alarm or indeed the driver call. There are different sets of beeps that mean different things.

But I agree that nondescript beeps do add to the "wonder what that is" nervousness of some. The playing of a verbal announcement as in newer stock is therefore better.

ta for that

 

[phil281]

Forgetting your bags presents a security risk to the railway and can often cause delays to the service when reported to the authorities etc as they investigate it. Part of the reasons why the announcement was brought in was to address those security concerns.

The problem is that too many people do forget their luggage. A little reminder has probably saved many a laptop from being left behind.

The other problem is that passengers have been pushing for more and more information and communication. There was a thread a few days ago (and is still active) about PA announcements for when stopped at a signal. Passengers want such a glut of information and the more understandable ones know that the announcements are for everyone not just their own selfish requirements.

There are frequent travellers and ones that are using the railway for the first time. Shockingly enough we get tourists and god forbid that they may need reassurance and on board information.

All in all the increased PA usage has come from research and passenger demands rather from the TOC. In all my years I have never had a passenger complain about the plethora of announcements being made but I have lost count of the complaints where none are being made.

My issue at the moment is where we have automated the announcements now and they are meeting the legal requirements and that it reduces the workload on the Driver/Guards and can be announced with greater clarity to the passengers, yet people still want a human at the end of the PA. We are almost coming full circle :/

Bright, clean lighting is very much an improvement over the dingy and dirty fluorescent lighting. People feel safe when the lights are brighter.

The door bleeps etc are there for safety and yes the more litigious nature of society plays a part in this but also it is the passenger who is placing demands on the system. We do need to cater for disability, we do need to cater for the complainers and social media warriors and we also need to make the railway a better place for those who use it. To do that we need to keep pushing for better standards and better quality on train equipment etc.

Wait till the 700's come in. They look to have a crazy amount of information being given to the passengers. The onboard screens look incredible. Passengers want information and it should be provided.

I'm not saying don't have information, but make it credible and useful. When there are delays, often (not always) you often don't hear the conductor or driver give out any information on the TOC's I use, just more automated rubbish which just winds me up. People can't trust it anyway as often it's out of sync, so it actually doesn't serve any purpose. No-one needs to hear the out of sync calling pattern of the train 15 times during my journey, no-one needs to hear about needing a valid ticket every 2 stops but it would be useful if this flashes on the screen.

I suggest providing hearing loops for those hard of hearing or wants to listen to the automated announcements. Or have one carriage with air raid sirens for the doors, endless automated announcements, operating theatre lights etc and have the other 3 in peace with some calmer lighting but still with the onboard screens and scrolling messages. Everyone is catered for (which they should be by the way).

 

[D1009]

I'm guessing here but I think it's a sort of "could the train manager contact the driver" code of some kind.

Yes, as far as I know it's something peculiar to the 220, 221, 222 and 390 fleets. It's also used with a different tone if the catering bod needs the TM for any reason. In my opinion it's unnecessarily loud on the 222s and 390s.

 

[ComUtoR]

, just more automated rubbish which just winds me up.

Its not rubbish. Its clear, concise information provided FOR ALL. Not for individuals like yourself.

I suggest providing hearing loops for those hard of hearing or wants to listen to the automated announcements. Or have one carriage with air raid sirens for the doors, endless automated announcements, operating theatre lights etc and have the other 3 in peace with some calmer lighting but still with the onboard screens and scrolling messages. Everyone is catered for (which they should be by the way).

You cannot have a bespoke service for each and every individual on board. It would be ludicrous.

 

[Blindtraveler]

OK here is a visualy impaired person who is married to another

1. Opperating theatre lighting unhelpful with the normal warm lights being both adiquat and more relaxing and causing less stress and strain. The bright lights in the form of LED spots are only of use in doorways and flood or puddle lighting in doorways itself is helpful

2. Door chimes could be just that, a chime, bong or ding as demonstrated on networkers with SEs 465/9s being good in particular. Externally multiple repeats of this is essential but only 1 or 2 inside. The siron beeeeeeeeeeeps and wales are overkill. Hussle alarms similar to pendos or turbo/electrostars are in my mind the best going and the aformentioned doorway lighting going a different culler when the door is about to shut and lock for departure would be handy.

3. Lets have calling paterns at major stations only and none of the safety notices/remember your stuff and report suspicious items nonsence, it adds nothing. Telling us where ever doable which side doors open on like the Victoria Line would be worth a lot more than the safety/security/belongings ****
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Oh and in terms of a near perfect interior in terms of lighting etc, pendos and 222s will take a lot of beating

 

[lyndhurst25]

If you had a visual impairment you might quite appreciate "we will shortly be arriving at Clapham Junction". I think that is the point being made.

But I would agree with you that some of the endless "please take all personal belongings/ please read the safety instructions/ if you see anything suspicious" could be dispensed with.

I was about to start a thread on the subject of annoying automatic PA announcements when I found this one. I've taken to listening to audiobooks on an iPod shuffle while travelling by train and find the PA announcements on modern stock really intrusive. My brain can't concentrate on the audiobook while the PA is rambling on, so I find myself having to pause and rewind every time an announcement is made. Surely a brief "Next stop is xxxx" before arriving at a station would be enough? At the station, but only on lines with variable destinations and stopping patterns, "This train is for xxxx. The next stop is xxxx" is all that is required.

I agree that the safety information/report suspicious activity announcements, both on trains and at stations, are getting over the top. Is there any evidence that they do anything good?

Train travel used to be relaxing, but less so nowadays. All the doom-laden announcements remind me of some dystopian, Orwellian, 1984-like society. In 50 years time I wonder if preserved railways will be trying to recreate the atmosphere of the 2010s with PA systems constantly reminding customers that their unattended luggage will be removed and destroyed by the Security Services?

 

[phil281]

Its not rubbish. Its clear, concise information provided FOR ALL. Not for individuals like yourself.




You cannot have a bespoke service for each and every individual on board. It would be ludicrous.

How is having one carriage with louder door chimes, brighter lights and increased P.A. and/or installing hearing loops, any different from having one carriage with a disabled toilet and a wheelchair space?

 

[ComUtoR]

How is having one carriage with louder door chimes, brighter lights and increased P.A. and/or installing hearing loops, any different from having one carriage with a disabled toilet and a wheelchair space?

You need to factor in the technical limitations of the train and its various systems. You also need to factor in the numerous group standards and then you need to factor in the legal requirements.

The toilet isn't in a specific carriage either. It is often the only toilet. The change to the toilets is to make them comply with the need legal requirements. Again, it is a change that is done for everyone's use. Unless you are also suggesting that we should have able bodied toilets and separate disabled ones. To have a carriage dedicated to disabled people is not inclusive. You are treating them different and separating them from the rest of society. They too have a right to sit, stand, wheel etc anywhere on the train.

One standard suitable for all it much easier to implement and maintain. Cheaper too.

 

[phil281]

You need to factor in the technical limitations of the train and its various systems. You also need to factor in the numerous group standards and then you need to factor in the legal requirements.

The toilet isn't in a specific carriage either. It is often the only toilet. The change to the toilets is to make them comply with the need legal requirements. Again, it is a change that is done for everyone's use. Unless you are also suggesting that we should have able bodied toilets and separate disabled ones. To have a carriage dedicated to disabled people is not inclusive. You are treating them different and separating them from the rest of society. They too have a right to sit, stand, wheel etc anywhere on the train.

One standard suitable for all it much easier to implement and maintain. Cheaper too.

I'm not suggesting separate toilets, however in a station, a shop etc you have them. On a Class 377 for example you have one accessable toilet and one smaller one anyway. I'm also not saying that the carriage should be for disabled people only either. I'm just saying one could be set up to cater for everyone and the others to be set up to be quieter. Just like every carriage on the train doesn't have a wheelchair space.

How would dimming the lights a little cost any significant amount of money? And regarding the P.A. for a hearing loop, it would require a very small amount of rewiring into an audio jack vice a speaker or just a small bit of reprogramming reducing the amount of announcements in the other carriages.

It's not divisive, it's simply a choice. When I watch TV, I can choose weather I put the subtitles on or off or to have the volume loud or quiet. I can also have a lamp on or the main lights on or both. I don't see why people can't do the same on a train. Once again, I stress we should continue to make our transport system inclusive for all but that doesn't mean we all have to listen to deafening door chimes and endless automatic P.A. announcements if we are lucky enough to have good enough eyesight not to.

 

[antharro]

I'm a regular on 444s. I don't mind them generally, tho I hated them when they took over from the 442s. The 444s have a much higher colour temperature on their lights so less relaxing on the eyes in the evening, and the air conditioning fans are ridiculously loud. The 442s have much lower temperature lighting which is easier on the (my!) eyes, especially at the end of a long day and on a long journey home. And imo, better ride quality.

This difference in lighting was typical of BR stock in my experience. The overall ambience, including the lighting and type of seating was more relaxing. However this may have been because "colder", higher temperature lighting wasn't easily available when BR designed the trains!

Suburban stock, SWT's 455s for example have even higher colour temperature lighting, much bluer. It's a sharper light, closer to daylight, and better suited for that kind of usage than a lower temperature would be.

As for door chimes, I don't think I've heard louder than the 458s. I used to go out with a gal who lived close to the tracks on the Reading line; you could clearly hear the 458 chimes at night, where as the 450s were barely audible! I'm pretty sure you could damage your hearing if you stood too close to the chime unit on the 458s! (Joking.)

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Yes, as far as I know it's something peculiar to the 220, 221, 222 and 390 fleets. It's also used with a different tone if the catering bod needs the TM for any reason. In my opinion it's unnecessarily loud on the 222s and 390s.

Virgin specification when both fleets were introduced.

In all cases the tone increases but the codes are:-

3 ascending slow and low pitched beeps 3 times - driver calling traincrew - anyone can answer at any location and can confrence call
3 ascending fast and high pitched beeps 3 times - traincrew calling other traincrew - anyone can answer at any location and can conference call
2 ascending high pitched beeps 3 times - passenger alarm (door or toilet or disabled there is no difference)
2 ascending low pitched beeps 3 times -- TMS level 3 fault (and requires immediate attention)

When a passenger alarm is activated, first time the TMS alarm also beeps. This is to highlight the traincrew to look at the TMS to find the location of the alarm. The alarm beep will continue to sound but the TMS one doesnt.

 

[TheManBehind]

I'm not suggesting separate toilets, however in a station, a shop etc you have them. On a Class 377 for example you have one accessable toilet and one smaller one anyway. I'm also not saying that the carriage should be for disabled people only either. I'm just saying one could be set up to cater for everyone and the others to be set up to be quieter. Just like every carriage on the train doesn't have a wheelchair space.

How would dimming the lights a little cost any significant amount of money? And regarding the P.A. for a hearing loop, it would require a very small amount of rewiring into an audio jack vice a speaker or just a small bit of reprogramming reducing the amount of announcements in the other carriages.

It's not divisive, it's simply a choice. When I watch TV, I can choose weather I put the subtitles on or off or to have the volume loud or quiet. I can also have a lamp on or the main lights on or both. I don't see why people can't do the same on a train. Once again, I stress we should continue to make our transport system inclusive for all but that doesn't mean we all have to listen to deafening door chimes and endless automatic P.A. announcements if we are lucky enough to have good enough eyesight not to.

It's not a choice for someone who needs those features. We've only recently reached the stage where rather than being forced to remain at home and out of sight of society they're in a position where then can travel with minimal levels of assistance. Talking about confining them to one "disabled coach" - which is what you're suggesting - is a backward step worthy of the 1800s. I'll suffer the odd beeping, and slightly brighter lights, for everyone to have the right to travel as they please.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This difference in lighting was typical of BR stock in my experience. The overall ambience, including the lighting and type of seating was more relaxing. However this may have been because "colder", higher temperature lighting wasn't easily available when BR designed the trains!

Yeah, warm white was the only thing really available back then in the UK - cool/daylight white were mainly an Asian thing, don't know why, just local preference I guess.

Notably the Mk3 original lighting was warm white but *way* too bright. It was about right on the "dim" setting, which gave a similar level as the "full" setting of the different design of lighting used on Mk3b and 442s.

 

[phil281]

It's not a choice for someone who needs those features. We've only recently reached the stage where rather than being forced to remain at home and out of sight of society they're in a position where then can travel with minimal levels of assistance. Talking about confining them to one "disabled coach" - which is what you're suggesting - is a backward step worthy of the 1800s. I'll suffer the odd beeping, and slightly brighter lights, for everyone to have the right to travel as they please.

Should every carriage should have a wheelchair space then? Should every toilet on the train be accessible?

Let me state again, every train should be accessible for all (I still think there is more that can be done, more brail for example). But the number of people that need these facilities is very small in comparison to those that don't, so why not have a small area of the train for those that need them? Perhaps near the guard so there is a member of staff nearby to help. Then for everyone else's mental wellbeing (which is also important in this day and age especially) we can make the on board experience more pleasant and relaxing.

 

[TheManBehind]

Should every carriage should have a wheelchair space then? Should every toilet on the train be accessible?

Let me state again, every train should be accessible for all (I still think there is more that can be done, more brail for example). But the number of people that need these facilities is very small in comparison to those that don't, so why not have a small area of the train for those that need them? Perhaps near the guard so there is a member of staff nearby to help. Then for everyone else's mental wellbeing (which is also important in this day and age especially) we can make the on board experience more pleasant and relaxing.

Except that's not what you're stating. You're stating that only one carriage should have these features, and that these features should not inconvenience you in any way. That someone who is blind for example should not inconvenience your desire for silence on board. That limits the people that need those features to that carriage. That's the exact opposite of accessible. It doesn't actually inconvenience you to have these features built in - and if door chimes are, for you, an inconvenience such that it is affecting your mental health, then perhaps a visit to your GP for some advice?

Yes, every carriage should be accessible to wheelchairs - it's an unfortunate fact that the UK loading gauge prohibits this. Every platform should be flat-access. If there is no physical reason why accessible features cannot be built-in, then there is no reason for them not to be built in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Except that's not what you're stating. You're stating that only one carriage should have these features. That limits the people that need those features to that carriage. That's the exact opposite of accessible. It doesn't actually inconvenience you to have these features built in - and if door chimes are, for you, an inconvenience such that it is affecting your mental health, then perhaps a visit to your GP for some advice?

For Autism or Aspergers, which are just as much of a disability as being in a wheelchair, they are a genuine problem - sensory overload is one of the biggest problems for those people.

It's too easy to consider only the most visible disabilities.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes, every carriage should be accessible to wheelchairs - it's an unfortunate fact that the UK loading gauge prohibits this.

No, it doesn't. You can have a wheelchair space in every coach and a wheelchair-accessible bog in every coach if you like. Voyagers aren't far off.

But the problem is that that reduces the number of seats on the train, and that causes issues for people with other disabilities, e.g. those who can walk with a stick but can't stand for long. And having unreliable[1] accessible bogs only, and no traditional ones, means that there is more likely to be a problem for someone who needs frequent toilet access. Or, as I mentioned elsewhere, a continuous barrage of noise, useful to a blind passenger, may make that train unusable to someone who is severely autistic. Or a low-floor bus with a wide entrance door is more difficult for a walking disabled person to board than one with a single step and a central pole to hold onto. (The German arrangement of keeping the pole at the front door and having a wide unobstructed rear door seems to do this better).

[1] Why *aren't* they reliable? They seem to be broken more often than not. Is it a cultural problem in maintenance circles? "If it moves, send it out"?

It's a balance, and one too often struck solely in favour of visible disabilities - the easy option. Too many people think disability = wheelchair. Most disabled people do not use wheelchairs.

 

[al78]

Should every carriage should have a wheelchair space then? Should every toilet on the train be accessible?

Let me state again, every train should be accessible for all (I still think there is more that can be done, more brail for example). But the number of people that need these facilities is very small in comparison to those that don't, so why not have a small area of the train for those that need them? Perhaps near the guard so there is a member of staff nearby to help. Then for everyone else's mental wellbeing (which is also important in this day and age especially) we can make the on board experience more pleasant and relaxing.

You would need more than one small area of the train, to cater for the cases where the train is longer than the platform thus making leaving the train from some carriages impossible.

 

[TheManBehind]

For Autism or Aspergers, which are just as much of a disability as being in a wheelchair, they are a genuine problem - sensory overload is one of the biggest problems for those people.

It's too easy to consider only the most visible disabilities.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


No, it doesn't. You can have a wheelchair space in every coach and a wheelchair-accessible bog in every coach if you like. Voyagers aren't far off.

But the problem is that that reduces the number of seats on the train, and that causes issues for people with other disabilities, e.g. those who can walk with a stick but can't stand for long. And having unreliable[1] accessible bogs only, and no traditional ones, means that there is more likely to be a problem for someone who needs frequent toilet access. Or, as I mentioned elsewhere, a continuous barrage of noise, useful to a blind passenger, may make that train unusable to someone who is severely autistic. Or a low-floor bus with a wide entrance door is more difficult for a walking disabled person to board than one with a single step and a central pole to hold onto. (The German arrangement of keeping the pole at the front door and having a wide unobstructed rear door seems to do this better).

[1] Why *aren't* they reliable? They seem to be broken more often than not. Is it a cultural problem in maintenance circles? "If it moves, send it out"?

It's a balance, and one too often struck solely in favour of visible disabilities - the easy option. Too many people think disability = wheelchair. Most disabled people do not use wheelchairs.

Except I'm not not considering them - it's simply that the balance has been shifted towards a more middle ground rather than those with autism or Aspergers being catered to as a byproduct of poor accessibility for others, or a lack of technology. It's why TOCs should want announcements kept brief, and volumes in coaches kept at a certain level.

Fully accessible, incidentally, would be wheelchair-width aisles - something which the UK loading gauge doesn't permit (except perhaps for metro stock, which isn't suitable for other operations). Accessible areas in every coach is a decent middle ground that we can probably manage. This needs government policy to procure more coaches, improve signalling and capacity, TOCs to manage yields, and employers to manage working hours to have minimum detrimental effect on everyone else, whilst also making trains much more parent-friendly to boot.

The second point is something that the industry needs to manage, not disabled customers - if Germany is getting some things right, let's learn from that! If France does other things well, let's learn from those as well!

As for the loos, the TOCs are performance-managed on timekeeping, and in the peak, coaches provided in service. I think they should be managed on working facilities - accessible loos are very much not a deal-breaker when it comes to sending trains out, which is absolutely not right.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fully accessible, incidentally, would be wheelchair-width aisles - something which the UK loading gauge doesn't permit (except perhaps for metro stock, which isn't suitable for other operations).

But with that you fall into the trap again (not to mention that you can't, other than by using 2+1 seating in Standard and 1+1 in First, or very narrow seats, get that into UIC gauge either - it isn't much wider than the UK, maybe 10-20cm, it's just higher and squarer). A wheelchair width aisle doesn't have something to easily hold onto on both sides for someone who is not steady on their feet. Yet that person has to move through the coach to find a seat, the wheelchair user doesn't as their place is there for them.

Accessible areas in every coach is a decent middle ground that we can probably manage.

But is it necessary? All trains have at least one wheelchair space; rarely is it filled with anything other than luggage and bicycles. This could be because the processes need improving, or it could simply be that most wheelchair users prefer to travel by car, and indeed with Motability schemes are assisted to do so. If I became wheelchair bound and still able to drive an adapted car, I would certainly give up drinking alcohol and would drive everywhere - it'd simply be easier. Those people have enough challenges and there is no good reason to discourage them from driving. So you are left with a need for a residual provision for those who cannot drive or those who specifically enjoy rail travel.

I think I've seen two wheelchairs on a train once. Until then, 11 wheelchair spaces on a Pendolino would be an utter waste of space, and would mean fewer seats for those who need those, and fewer toilets for those needing urgent access to those.

It would be a negative development unless something significant changed. If most times I used a train I saw a wheelchair user on it, I'd agree with you, but I don't. Not even 1% of the times I use a train do I see a wheelchair user on it.

As for the loos, the TOCs are performance-managed on timekeeping, and in the peak, coaches provided in service. I think they should be managed on working facilities - accessible loos are very much not a deal-breaker when it comes to sending trains out, which is absolutely not right.

Agreed. A start might be to consider that the train is not wheelchair accessible unless the wheelchair toilet is functional, and to penalise accordingly. No toilets at all would give a higher penalty. But care would be needed to ensure they are properly motivated to fix the problem, not just cancel the train. (Though I think it should be mandatory, if a train runs without toilet facilities, for Advance and Off Peak restrictions to be lifted if a passenger does not wish to use that train, and this should be without them having to ask as this may be highly embarrassing).

 

[OneOffDave]

But is it necessary? All trains have at least one wheelchair space; rarely is it filled with anything other than luggage and bicycles. This could be because the processes need improving, or it could simply be that most wheelchair users prefer to travel by car, and indeed with Motability schemes are assisted to do so. If I became wheelchair bound and still able to drive an adapted car, I would certainly give up drinking alcohol and would drive everywhere - it'd simply be easier. Those people have enough challenges and there is no good reason to discourage them from driving. So you are left with a need for a residual provision for those who cannot drive or those who specifically enjoy rail travel.

I think I've seen two wheelchairs on a train once. Until then, 11 wheelchair spaces on a Pendolino would be an utter waste of space, and would mean fewer seats for those who need those, and fewer toilets for those needing urgent access to those.

It would be a negative development unless something significant changed. If most times I used a train I saw a wheelchair user on it, I'd agree with you, but I don't. Not even 1% of the times I use a train do I see a wheelchair user on it.



Agreed. A start might be to consider that the train is not wheelchair accessible unless the wheelchair toilet is functional, and to penalise accordingly. No toilets at all would give a higher penalty. But care would be needed to ensure they are properly motivated to fix the problem, not just cancel the train. (Though I think it should be mandatory, if a train runs without toilet facilities, for Advance and Off Peak restrictions to be lifted if a passenger does not wish to use that train, and this should be without them having to ask as this may be highly embarrassing).

I commute every day into London in my wheelchair and there are 4-5 other wheelchair users who do so regularly (2-3 times a week and often enough that the staff are on first name terms with them). In the last week I've been on a train twice where there have been 2 or more wheelchair users. For longer journeys it's often easier for a good number of wheelchair users to catch a train than drive as they don't have to take rest breaks.

Speaking to a number of wheelchair using friends, one of the main reasons they don't use the train is the unreliability of assistance. I have to get myself off the train at least once a month and luckily I'm fit enough to be able to do that. for other people they aren't and they find the thought of ending up miles away from home quite upsetting. There's also the fact that you have to book everything 24-48 hours in advance. I also know couples where both of them are wheelchair users and it's almost impossible for them to travel together on public transport. It should also be remembered that because of other issues, a significant number of wheelchair users can't drive and also don't have anyone who can drive a vehicle.

If wheelchair access was suspended when that accessible toilet wasn't available about 2/5 of the journey's I've made with London Midland wouldn't have happened, causing me significant disruption.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If wheelchair access was suspended when that accessible toilet wasn't available about 2/5 of the journey's I've made with London Midland wouldn't have happened, causing me significant disruption.

For clarity I don't mean to refuse access, I just mean they would be penalised as if they had.

 

[OneOffDave]

For clarity I don't mean to refuse access, I just mean they would be penalised as if they had.

That makes sense. On VTWC when the accessible loo is u/s they suspend the wheelchair space in that carriage and if there's room chuck you in the other one. That's only happened to me once in 10 months of daily commuting and luckily it was on the first train of a cluster of MKC to Euston services where there's 3 trains in 21 minutes.

 

[talltim]

It's not a choice for someone who needs those features. We've only recently reached the stage where rather than being forced to remain at home and out of sight of society they're in a position where then can travel with minimal levels of assistance. Talking about confining them to one "disabled coach" - which is what you're suggesting - is a backward step worthy of the 1800s. I'll suffer the odd beeping, and slightly brighter lights, for everyone to have the right to travel as they please.

Doing as suggested would limit those for whom the bright lighting etc is unpleasant to certain coaches too.

 

[D1009]

accessible loos are very much not a deal-breaker when it comes to sending trains out, which is absolutely not right.

Having difficulty with your wording there, are you suggesting trains should be cancelled if there is no accessible loo available?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Having difficulty with your wording there, are you suggesting trains should be cancelled if there is no accessible loo available?

Certainly I'm saying that not enough effort (be that engineering effort or procedural effort) is put into ensuring they are working.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Simples really...

Just build a train where every seat tips up so that wheelchair pax can get on anywhere; include a "noise" coach for the deaf and the blind, a "quiet" coach for those with sensory issues; a "mobile phone" coach where people can just spend their entire journey on their phones; a "café" coach for people to munch and eat for their journey; a "toilet" coach comprising solely of loos (connected via a side corridor) for the incontinent, and then leave the other carriages for the regulars.

Now would that appease every member of the travelling public ?