I hope that when they finally go the replacment isn't just more 2car units with a massive bog and bike space taking up most of one vehicle!
It'll be either that or (heaven forbid) trams with no toilet at all I'm afraid.
I hope that when they finally go the replacment isn't just more 2car units with a massive bog and bike space taking up most of one vehicle!
It'll be either that or (heaven forbid) trams with no toilet at all I'm afraid.
According to DDA rules in future
A train with no toilets is legal
A train with only a standard toilet/s is illegal.
A train with a ballroom size bog suitable for wheelchairs is legal.
They should have a warning in the timetable if there is no bog, to avoid drinking a large coffee before departure!
If I had a choice of a new train with no toilet, or a Pacer with toilet, it would be a Pacer for me every time!
I assume BOJ for a toilet stop would be ok?
The Pacers actually also look like they would be amazing for disability if the platforms were rectified so following these renovations, the Island Line 1938s can go back to London to work heritage and Pacers take over after a big renovation (provided it's cost efficient) and maybe they could start an Isle of Man line...
Sorry but once again there are some serious flaws here. Never mind the IL being electrified, hence the 1938 Stock running on it - the Ryde tunnel is too low for most stock to fit through it. This is why ex-LUL stock is used, and why it will remain this way. They are thought to be hoping for 1973 Stock when that becomes available (someone else will surely be able to confirm/deny this).
The Pacers actually also look like they would be amazing for disability if the platforms were rectified so following these renovations, the Island Line 1938s can go back to London to work heritage and Pacers take over after a big renovation (provided it's cost efficient) and maybe they could start an Isle of Man line...
Sorry but once again there are some serious flaws here. Never mind the IL being electrified, hence the 1938 Stock running on it - the Ryde tunnel is too low for most stock to fit through it. This is why ex-LUL stock is used, and why it will remain this way. They are thought to be hoping for 1973 Stock when that becomes available (someone else will surely be able to confirm/deny this).
I feel lucky that I have only rode ones with what I deem step-free to the platform
Surely there will be a use somewhere, maybe summer on the Cumbrian Coastliner could warrant one or two?
DDA compliant!!
I hope some dispensation will be given, so as not to cause a shortage of Rolling stock.
Probably cheaper to pay for taxis to ferry the wheelchair users around, and keep 'em Pacers running!!
Better still build a load of new stock!
They wouldn't be able to be DDA compliant because there isn't room for a disabled toilet.
Taxis don't have toilets. How would that be a proper solution?
But it's still not step free access between the platform and the passenger saloon.
There's only two viable options for the long term future of Pacers:
1. Heritage/Preserved Lines.
2. Export.
I've never seen these steps.
considering Northern own a bunch of Pacers, you don't know what to expect.
A taxi could stop at a public toilet en route though. Not that the taxi driver would be too impressed with loading and off-loading a disabled passenger twice.
Well, stock without toilets is hardly uncommon on some shorter routes, is it? None of LU's stock has toilets, and neither do the Merseyrail 507s/508s. If you needed to go to the toilet on the latter, you'd have to get off and wait up to 15 or possibly 30 minutes to get back on.
There aren't always going to be toilets everywhere - I think you have to be realistic. You can go for some distance on a motorway without seeing toilet facilities.
or the passengers can do what the dirty git at rush hour was doing at Gateshead Stadium under the ramp and get your ding dong out and slash on the platform
Pity he couldnt do it on the Merseyrail and get his todger zapped
Well quite, but there's a reason why metros/trams/buses/urban trains don't have toilets, because they would get wrecked!
I'm surprised TOC's here have not mooted removing toilets to get more bums on seats and replace them with a stock of those bags in the emergency tool cupbards. I'm also surprised Ryanair have not looked into them (charging them 5 euros each of course)
CrossCountry could certainly get some more seats in by removing all but one of those cavernous disabled toilets that they currently have in each Voyager carriage. Then stock some Travel John bags just in case!
You must use the step without noticing as you'd go up or down one every time you board or alight a Pacer.
Northern Rail don't own a single train. They are leasing Pacers off a leasing company called Angel Trains until the end of the franchise.
I actually haven't!
Oh right, thanks. Maybe Angel Trains could perform the upgrades and do swapsies then if such a thing is needed? (I think it's all fine for now)
neither do the Merseyrail 507s/508s. If you needed to go to the toilet on the latter, you'd have to get off and wait up to 15 or possibly 30 minutes to get back on.
Well, stock without toilets is hardly uncommon on some shorter routes, is it? None of LU's stock has toilets, and neither do the Merseyrail 507s/508s. If you needed to go to the toilet on the latter, you'd have to get off and wait up to 15 or possibly 30 minutes to get back on.
There aren't always going to be toilets everywhere - I think you have to be realistic. You can go for quite some distance on a motorway or primary A road without seeing toilet facilities.
I certainly think more toilet facilities is a good thing, but I don't think we should go over-the-top about these things.
I seem to remember that they wanted to but were unable to due to the structure of the train. I'm also not sure you'd be able to remove all except one as I'm not sure if there is a requirement for there to be a disabled toilet in First Class. If there is then you'd need to keep two of them.CrossCountry could certainly get some more seats in by removing all but one of those cavernous disabled toilets
An article in Modern Railways contemporary with the construction of the Voyagers; so in about 2000-2001; stated that the decision to install disabled accessible toilets throughout the train was solely on grounds of cost: It saved money only installing one type of toilet rather than having to create a design of standard "cupboard" style loo as well.I seem to remember that they wanted to but were unable to due to the structure of the train. I'm also not sure you'd be able to remove all except one as I'm not sure if there is a requirement for there to be a disabled toilet in First Class. If there is then you'd need to keep two of them.
An article in Modern Railways contemporary with the construction of the Voyagers; so in about 2000-2001; stated that the decision to install disabled accessible toilets throughout the train was solely on grounds of cost: It saved money only installing one type of toilet rather than having to create a design of standard "cupboard" style loo as well.
I'm sure Roger Ford said at around that time in his column in Modern Railways that the reason for so many toilets is that Virgin planned on having three classes
That's probably a more accurate analysis of the reasons behind it. That doesn't explain why a 221 has four though, so it's probably a combination of both sets of factors.I'm sure Roger Ford said at around that time in his column in Modern Railways that the reason for so many toilets is that Virgin planned on having three classes with each therefore requiring a disabled toilet. However by the time they changed their minds the construction was already under way and the costs of changing the design mid-construction would have been prohibitive.