Too many bikes on trains - ATW

[CC 72100]

Bikes are a health and safety problem if they stick out in the aisle, you only need someone to go arse over tit and they're in hospital with a broken neck!
.

To be fair that could also apply to any other obstruction in the aisle - folder bike, pushchair, luggage.

One can also argue that compulsory bike reservations are easier to do on long-distance TOCs.

 

[AM9]

Bikes are a health and safety problem if they stick out in the aisle, you only need someone to go arse over tit and they're in hospital with a broken neck!

Of course that's not an exaggeration!

 

[thelongestroad]

gloucester and newport
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


It is though. Surely the rule is there for a reason i.e. to ensure safety.

I dont see how you can argue against it if thats the rule even if it does cause arguments. Of course, I would expect your employer to stick up for you as well in enforcing this.

Its like saying I didnt make 10 people pay for their tickets today because they would have kicked off so I didnt bother.

No, it's not that simple. Until you do the job, don't try and comment on it.

We're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

If I start enforcing the two bike rule, how do you propose I deal with the fallout? Do you want to come along with me one day and help me explain to all those people going to work that there are already two bikes on? How do you think they will react? How delayed do you think my train will be? We could just stand on the platform all day arguing the toss with the cyclists?

I can understand where you're coming from, and of course I would not want to deliberately impede anyones safety. If I notice a unsafe bike I request it is moved or remains attended in a more suitable position. The majority of cyclists understand this. We work together and avoid unnecessary delays and confrontation.

Many of my guard colleagues will agree that the "two bike" rule is unrealistic. Those who enforce it are just out for an arguement, because they'll get one.

 

[route:oxford]

If I start enforcing the two bike rule, how do you propose I deal with the fallout? Do you want to come along with me one day and help me explain to all those people going to work that there are already two bikes on? How do you think they will react? How delayed do you think my train will be? We could just stand on the platform all day arguing the toss with the cyclists?

Customers are savvy. They are aware that delaying the railway costs the operator £lots and there is absolutely nothing the on-train staff can do if the customer is polite but firm.

It's neither hard to pick up a bike that has fallen nor difficult to clamber over one. A wheelchair or pram blocking the aisle/exit is far more dangerous.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

No, it's not that simple. Until you do the job, don't try and comment on it.

We're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

If I start enforcing the two bike rule, how do you propose I deal with the fallout? Do you want to come along with me one day and help me explain to all those people going to work that there are already two bikes on? How do you think they will react? How delayed do you think my train will be? We could just stand on the platform all day arguing the toss with the cyclists?

I can understand where you're coming from, and of course I would not want to deliberately impede anyones safety. If I notice a unsafe bike I request it is moved or remains attended in a more suitable position. The majority of cyclists understand this. We work together and avoid unnecessary delays and confrontation.

Many of my guard colleagues will agree that the "two bike" rule is unrealistic. Those who enforce it are just out for an arguement, because they'll get one.

Very true friend.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Forget the rants of selfish commuters, folding bikes are luggage. With the current NRCoC provide trains that are fit for purpose. If not then change the NRCoC, - that would be a big battle! I imagine that the 700s will be better for luggage for their first few years anyway.

There is an argument that...

1. Those folding bikes that are basically a mountain bike folding in half *do* take up too much space as they cannot be placed in a luggage rack. I don't think these should be permitted on peak time trains - a maximum wheel size of say 19" would solve that.

2. Folding bikes should perhaps be required to be encased such that they can be placed on a luggage stack instead of blocking the doors, where provided, without knackering the other luggage or damaging the bike. A simple case could roll up and go in a bag easily enough. Then they wouldn't get in the way of standing space by the doors. Sometimes this is unavoidable with other luggage, but commuter trains are often not full of luggage and this seems to have become the default location for them - and it *is* in the way of standing space.

I would also say that on arrival people should either not unfold their bike until they have passed through the ticket barrier, or they should hang back and allow other passengers through first. They *do* get in the way at places like Euston P8-11.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Trying to move a bike out of the way in an emergency will be easier said than done. In the highly unlikely (but entirely possible) example of a fire breaking out and rendering the passenger areas unsafe, getting people co-ordinated to lift a bike onto a set of seats will be a big enough challenge in just one instance, but try it for a whole train when there's a cycle event and loads of bikes onboard, and you have a disaster on your hands!

As for throwing a bike through a window...

The thing about trains vs. aircraft that comes up an awful lot is that with an aircraft, the default in an emergency is to get out ASAP - within 30 seconds is I think the rule. With a train the default is NOT to get out - even in a fire the preference is to move to another coach, not leave the train. So bikes in the way of the doors on a less busy service are just an inconvenience.

It's bikes in the way on busy services that present more of a problem. I remain amazed fGW allow them on evening peak services *into* Paddington which are often as busy as those heading out.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That would mean a change in the NRCoC. Passengers can carry two cases sized 300mmx700mmx900mm, which is quite large. Take services at Gatwick Airport. Mostly Electrostar, with virtually no low-level luggage space, no door setbacks and of course no brake van space.

And the cause of that is the idiocy of treating Thameslink, Southern and Gatwick Express as competitors rather than complementary.

The sensible thing to do is to have dedicated airport trains with huge luggage stacks and discourage, not encourage, Victoria to Gatwick traffic off the commuter services. People should only be encouraged to use SN and TL to Gatwick if their origin is *not* Victoria.

 

[Tracky]

I would accept the risk on a 150 of having bikes in the doorways on the track side in order to get from A to B and back again. You can have 8 or more easily at peak times with commuters or off peak with the leisure lot. If an evacuation is required the cess side would be used. If the track side is to be used, the doors are opened and the biked end up on the adjacent line.

And the same goes for prams and luggage.

I find the lycra more offensive on people who really don't have the figure for it.

 

[bramling]

There is an argument that...

1. Those folding bikes that are basically a mountain bike folding in half *do* take up too much space as they cannot be placed in a luggage rack. I don't think these should be permitted on peak time trains - a maximum wheel size of say 19" would solve that.

2. Folding bikes should perhaps be required to be encased such that they can be placed on a luggage stack instead of blocking the doors, where provided, without knackering the other luggage or damaging the bike. A simple case could roll up and go in a bag easily enough. Then they wouldn't get in the way of standing space by the doors. Sometimes this is unavoidable with other luggage, but commuter trains are often not full of luggage and this seems to have become the default location for them - and it *is* in the way of standing space.

I would also say that on arrival people should either not unfold their bike until they have passed through the ticket barrier, or they should hang back and allow other passengers through first. They *do* get in the way at places like Euston P8-11.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The thing about trains vs. aircraft that comes up an awful lot is that with an aircraft, the default in an emergency is to get out ASAP - within 30 seconds is I think the rule. With a train the default is NOT to get out - even in a fire the preference is to move to another coach, not leave the train. So bikes in the way of the doors on a less busy service are just an inconvenience.

It's bikes in the way on busy services that present more of a problem. I remain amazed fGW allow them on evening peak services *into* Paddington which are often as busy as those heading out.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


And the cause of that is the idiocy of treating Thameslink, Southern and Gatwick Express as competitors rather than complementary.

The sensible thing to do is to have dedicated airport trains with huge luggage stacks and discourage, not encourage, Victoria to Gatwick traffic off the commuter services. People should only be encouraged to use SN and TL to Gatwick if their origin is *not* Victoria.

Can't agree with this. For a start, a folding bike is quite heavy to carry. I can far more easily negotiate the unfolded bike off the platform than carrying it, and I can quite easily get this through the gateline without causing a problem.

If we're going for folding bikes not to be placed in standing areas, then let's go down the road of requiring all passengers not to have any bags or luggage with them when travelling. Whilst we're at it, let's ban children as well, as they get in the way and take up space and pay less than full-fare ticket holders so have less right to the space. Where do we end?

I don't see what difference it makes if the bike is covered or not; I can't speak for other designs, but the Brompton is designed so that virtually all of the dirty components are in the middle when the bike is folded.

 

[Tracky]

On full and standing trains I request children under five who do not pay sit on a parents knee.

 

[pdeaves]

To be fair that could also apply to any other obstruction in the aisle - folder bike, pushchair, luggage.

Children, people's legs, dogs (including guide dogs), computer charger wires plugged in the opposite side...

 

[Pigeon]

The problem has been getting worse and worse ever since the 80s when the default design for a new multiple unit was a bodged version of the Mk 3 bodyshell with a rubbish interior design that lacked the guard's-van area of older units, and all later designs repeated the mistake. With the proliferation of such deficient designs there is now very little stock left that has any decent bike space on it.

There is at least one class of DMU these days - I forget which, since I have only tried to take a bike on it once and that was a long time ago - where the so-called bike space is a completely pointless waste. "Put your bike in there", said the guard - only it was not possible because the space was only about half as wide as the handlebars, so there was no choice but to leave the front half of the bike sticking out and getting right in the way of anyone who needed to get past. A more idiotic piece of design I have seldom met.

When I used to catch the train to school there were always several bikes in the guard's van, including mine. The space was plentiful and people used it. I am sure many more people would bring their bikes on the train these days if they were not discouraged by the major hassle that the formerly straightforward business has become.

Being able to take your bike on the train is important because it solves one of the major problems with rail travel - that unless your actual destination happens to be right close to the station you have a long way still to go and no means of doing it other than your legs. (Don't say "taxi", we're not all made of money...) Especially when you have luggage - a heavy bag is much easier to deal with when it's strapped to the back of a bicycle than when it's bashing against your legs so you can't walk properly and pulling your arm off.

If the railways are to be a properly universal transport system then the lack of any decent bike space is something that needs to be sorted out. Of course the lack of people space also needs to be sorted out and more urgently, but the basis of a solution is the same - build more vehicles - just make sure not to repeat the design mistakes that have become endemic since the 80s.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Troble is the space taken up by a bike is space that could be used by a passenger (stood or seated). Say the average fare was £20 and you could get three passengers in that same space, that could be £60 that the TOC might miss out on.

If anything I wouldn't be surprised to eventually see all TOCs completly ban all non-folding bikes at all times

 

[Bletchleyite]

If anything I wouldn't be surprised to eventually see all TOCs completly ban all non-folding bikes at all times

Politically unsound to the point I think that is very unlikely - though tightening of peak restrictions is probably justified. In particular it is ludicrous that fGW allow unfolded bicycles on Turbo trains from Slough to London in the evening peak. My view is that the restriction on fGW should be that no full-sized bicycles should be carried on any fGW Turbo service in either direction east of Reading between around 1600-1900. But then I'd also apply that to ticketing - that there are no evening peak restrictions on the heaving Turbo services is ridiculous, IMO.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Can't agree with this. For a start, a folding bike is quite heavy to carry. I can far more easily negotiate the unfolded bike off the platform than carrying it

It isn't about what is easier for you, though. It is about what is easier for everyone. And it is a lot easier for everyone in the typical crush leading up to a gateline in the morning peak (ever tried Euston P8-11 when two trains arrive?) if we don't have to keep looking down to see if we're about to trip over your Brompton (other folding bicycles are available ).

So, I'd say two reasonable choices. Pick it up like a piece of luggage so you're not taking three peoples' space in the queue/mob/crush, or wait for the queue/mob/crush to clear and then proceed through the barrier. Or if you prefer, ensure you are at the door at the front of the train and alight first, so you are through the barrier before the crush occurs.

and I can quite easily get this through the gateline without causing a problem.

I find that most users of such bicycles *do* cause a problem. Perhaps you are skilled at manoeuvring yours, but most are not. Perhaps you don't use stations with a barrier crush like Euston, in which case fine, continue.

If we're going for folding bikes not to be placed in standing areas, then let's go down the road of requiring all passengers not to have any bags or luggage with them when travelling. Whilst we're at it, let's ban children as well, as they get in the way and take up space and pay less than full-fare ticket holders so have less right to the space. Where do we end?

Don't be ridiculous. If there are suitable luggage racks for luggage, it should be placed in those, not in the vestibule where it is in the way. Once those are full some give and take is required, but on a typical commuter train most people have little more than a laptop bag and a coat, so there is loads of space on the luggage racks (Electrostars with stupid small ones aside). Yet I have never seen someone place a Brompton in the overhead luggage rack where luggage should go, it instead goes in the vestibule, preventing someone from standing leaning against that partition. In the way.

Edit: Actually, a thought - if Brompton owners claim they are not in the way when parked in the vestibule, perhaps they should consider standing there leaning against their bicycle and leaving their seat for someone else rather than effectively taking up two peoples' space on a full and standing peak time train?

I don't see what difference it makes if the bike is covered or not; I can't speak for other designs, but the Brompton is designed so that virtually all of the dirty components are in the middle when the bike is folded.

Let's say I have a Brompton and you have a piece of luggage in the luggage stack. Are you happy for me to place my Brompton on top of your luggage, and are you happy for me to place my luggage on top of your Brompton? If you are, I guess that's fine. If you aren't, why not? I would suggest people would be happier with Bromptons being piled in amongst the general luggage if they were encased.

If they are luggage, they need to be able to be treated as luggage - the same as a suitcase of the same size. If they aren't, well, they're not luggage, they're in the way on peak-time trains, and their carriage should perhaps, as with full-sized cycles, be reconsidered.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

On full and standing trains I request children under five who do not pay sit on a parents knee.

I flew easyJet this evening. Their rule is that children under 5 can sit on the parents' knee[1], or they can purchase a seat. A parent quite openly asked the cabin crew if they could be reseated to have a spare seat next to them. The cabin crew did not oblige as the only spare seats were on the exit row where children may not sit, but I thought that a little cheeky. If you haven't paid for the seat, as you say, you can't take it.

[1] I never understood why that is permitted on aircraft. In the event of any kind of collision, even a survivable one, a lap child will certainly be crushed to death (or at least serious injury) as the parent's unrestrained upper body is thrown forward onto them.

 

[bramling]

Politically unsound to the point I think that is very unlikely - though tightening of peak restrictions is probably justified. In particular it is ludicrous that fGW allow unfolded bicycles on Turbo trains from Slough to London in the evening peak. My view is that the restriction on fGW should be that no full-sized bicycles should be carried on any fGW Turbo service in either direction east of Reading between around 1600-1900. But then I'd also apply that to ticketing - that there are no evening peak restrictions on the heaving Turbo services is ridiculous, IMO.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


It isn't about what is easier for you, though. It is about what is easier for everyone. And it is a lot easier for everyone in the typical crush leading up to a gateline in the morning peak (ever tried Euston P8-11 when two trains arrive?) if we don't have to keep looking down to see if we're about to trip over your Brompton (other folding bicycles are available ).

So, I'd say two reasonable choices. Pick it up like a piece of luggage so you're not taking three peoples' space in the queue/mob/crush, or wait for the queue/mob/crush to clear and then proceed through the barrier. Or if you prefer, ensure you are at the door at the front of the train and alight first, so you are through the barrier before the crush occurs.



I find that most users of such bicycles *do* cause a problem. Perhaps you are skilled at manoeuvring yours, but most are not. Perhaps you don't use stations with a barrier crush like Euston, in which case fine, continue.



Don't be ridiculous. If there are suitable luggage racks for luggage, it should be placed in those, not in the vestibule where it is in the way. Once those are full some give and take is required, but on a typical commuter train most people have little more than a laptop bag and a coat, so there is loads of space on the luggage racks (Electrostars with stupid small ones aside). Yet I have never seen someone place a Brompton in the overhead luggage rack where luggage should go, it instead goes in the vestibule, preventing someone from standing leaning against that partition. In the way.

Edit: Actually, a thought - if Brompton owners claim they are not in the way when parked in the vestibule, perhaps they should consider standing there leaning against their bicycle and leaving their seat for someone else?



Let's say I have a Brompton and you have a piece of luggage in the luggage stack. Are you happy for me to place my Brompton on top of your luggage, and are you happy for me to place my luggage on top of your Brompton? If you are, I guess that's fine. If you aren't, why not? I would suggest people would be happier with Bromptons being piled in amongst the general luggage if they were encased.

If they are luggage, they need to be able to be treated as luggage - the same as a suitcase of the same size. If they aren't, well, they're not luggage, they're in the way on peak-time trains, and their carriage should perhaps, as with full-sized cycles, be reconsidered.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I flew easyJet this evening. Their rule is that children under 5 can sit on the parents' knee[1], or they can purchase a seat. A parent quite openly asked the cabin crew if they could be reseated to have a spare seat next to them. The cabin crew did not oblige as the only spare seats were on the exit row where children may not sit, but I thought that a little cheeky. If you haven't paid for the seat, as you say, you can't take it.

[1] I never understood why that is permitted on aircraft. In the event of any kind of collision, even a survivable one, a lap child will certainly be crushed to death (or at least serious injury) as the parent's unrestrained upper body is thrown forward onto them.

Oh dear.

For a start, you won't find me arriving at Euston or any other terminus at that time. As it happens, my work allows me to travel at off-peak times, such that most of the time my definition of busy would be anything worse than not having a carriage to myself. Secondly, my place of work starts when I step off the train, so for work purposes I don't use the Brompton. What happens at other times of day is not my problem or concern.

I don't get the point about taking up 3 people's space in the queue, surely that just pushes the entire queue back in terms of space, but not in time? Would you also expect a fat person to wait for everyone else because they take up the space of 2 people? Far more gateline problem is caused by people turning up with invalid tickets, or waiting until the previous person has passed through before inserting a ticket.

If the Brompton is moved about unfolded, I can also have the pannier on the front, which can carry *very* heavy loads. If I have to carry both, I *will* be having to stop at intervals along the platform to give my arms a rest. I will also need to stop before the gates and put both objects down to get the ticket out, and again after passing through the gateline. You won't have to be looking down if the bike is unfolded because it will be at eye level, but you certainly will be tripping over if I am having to stop every now and again. Just like happens with people carrying the now-common wheeled suitcases which are far more of a hazard in my experience. I've never had to write a report for someone falling over a bike, but I certainly have for cases. Sorry, but you're wrong on this, your views may be shaped by observations of some people, however in general an unfolded Brompton is much less problematic to move than a folded one. If you're planning to ban Bromptons altogether then that's different, but you said they should be folded until the gateline. That *will* cause more hazards.

The Brompton doesn't always need to go near the doorway. On some trains it can fit between seat backs, and on some trains it can also fit beneath seats. Other times it may go in a luggage rack or near a doorway. If in a luggage rack I would expect it to be treated with respect, just as I would treat anyone else's belongings.

If, occasionally, I may be on a busy train where it's in a doorway preventing one person from using that as standing space, tough. That is the nature of the railway, space is first-come-first-served. On that occasion someone may not be able to use that space. It might be that the subsequent riding the bike means I avoid another busy train, releasing a space for someone who wouldn't otherwise have been able to board that one. The fact that I have arranged my life so that I do not generally travel at busy times (despite possessing an anytime season ticket) releases 10 seats or standing spaces every week. It's the nature of transport, different journey needs produce different requirements for space, obviously the most inefficient being someone who commutes by car and the least inefficient being a thin person who walks with no belongings.

Of course, if trains had sufficient capacity there wouldn't be a need for resentment over people taking up space. Likewise if a segment of the population didn't all choose to travel at the same time. Or, based on your consideration of others, let's have a policy of no belongings that can't be accommodated in racks, I can't see that proving pupular on a Friday service to the west country, as an example.

Would you ban suitcases from the Piccadilly Line? The average suitcase takes up the space of at least one potential standing passenger, and the 73 stock has no overhead racks - all potential luggage space is also potential standing space, and the trains are often crush loaded. If the answer is no then it seems to be just folding bikes which you have a downer on, in which case one can form the conclusion you have other motives behind your views.

 

[yorkie]

Bikes are a health and safety problem if they stick out in the aisle

And so are many other forms of luggage!

Also some people stick out in the aisle!

you only need someone to go arse over tit and they're in hospital with a broken neck!

Yes in theory some freak event can occur causing someone to have a broken neck, but by that logic you'd best ban all forms of transport!

CrossCountry enforce mandatory bike reservations; can't see why other TOCs can't do the same.

Most ATW services are non-reserveable.

Meanwhile, in the real world away from scaremongering and fantasy, I think ANorthernGuard's common sense approach is better and more practicable.

 

[bramling]

Troble is the space taken up by a bike is space that could be used by a passenger (stood or seated). Say the average fare was £20 and you could get three passengers in that same space, that could be £60 that the TOC might miss out on.

If anything I wouldn't be surprised to eventually see all TOCs completly ban all non-folding bikes at all times

Only if the three people don't make the journey. The most likely outcome is they wait for a later service, so then the TOC gets all four lots of £20.

It's not quite so simple. If unable to take the bike, that person may choose to drive to the station. That's a scarce parking space taken in the station car park, perhaps the family of three turn up and can't park and decide to drive instead. Now the TOC has lost £60.

Perhaps an effective way of avoiding wasted capacity would be to prohibit people from using station car parks if they arrive with only one person in the car. I wonder how well received that might be?

 

[Springs Branch]

Is this a problem to the same degree on busy trains in Europe?
How do they cope with it over there, where many countries have had a cycling culture for much longer than the UK?

 

[Greenback]

Meanwhile, in the real world away from scaremongering and fantasy, I think ANorthernGuard's common sense approach is better and more practicable.

I completely agree. I've travelled many times on ATW trains that have more than 2 bicycles without fearing for my life in any way. The 1705 from Swansea has regularly had five bikes on a 150, and I've seen 175's in the other direction with 3 bikes getting on at Llanelli.

The guard of one particular 1705 service decided to prevent another cyclist boarding, obviously feeling that one more bike was too much. I don't think there was an argument as such, but there was definitely a long discussion with platform staff, which was continuing as we departed. There was definitely no more room in our carriage, I don't know what it was like in the other one.

Although I don't cycle myself, I don't really understand the negativity towards them. As with every group, there are some that are less considerate than others, but I'd prefer that people took a bike than were forced off trains and into their cars.

What we need are trains fit for purpose, but I won't hold my breath waiting for that.

 

[TheEdge]

Is this a problem to the same degree on busy trains in Europe?
How do they cope with it over there, where many countries have had a cycling culture for much longer than the UK?

Well, because Europe has not gone for a race to the smallest possible units and still operates "proper" rolling stock they do have huge areas cleared out for bikes.

This for example is the lower floor of a DB Dostos (Double deck) carriage for bikes. And this is the bike area in a Talent 2 EMU.

 

[mike57]

I think the problem comes back to lack of luggage space for all forms of luggage, including bikes. I travel to and from Scarborough regularly, and during the summer the 3 coach train will be rammed with luggage on a Friday afternoon (and possibly at other times). Full luggage racks, suitcases in doorways etc. Add a few bikes into the mix and its a recipe for chaos.

I am a cyclist, I have a folding bike which I take regularly onto the train. A folding bike is fine for short 'commuter' journeys to and from the station, but you wouldnt want to ride miles on one, so if I am going on a 'lesuire' ride then I take my full size bike. I try to be responsible, and put it in the correct place, but when thats already filled with half a dozen large suitcases and a couple of buggies I have to find somewhere else.

The only answer is to design rolling stock to cope with worst case loads, but that costs money and with a privatised railway will never happen

 

[Bletchleyite]

For a start, you won't find me arriving at Euston or any other terminus at that time.

In which case what you are doing is not a problem. However if you don't do that (and even more so if you haven't done that) I'm not quite sure why you defend those who do?

I don't get the point about taking up 3 people's space in the queue, surely that just pushes the entire queue back in terms of space, but not in time?

If it were a queue that would be fine. It isn't - it is an unholy mob because of the poor design of the area. It will be improved when Euston eventually gets fully barriered, as I would imagine the barriers will move to the concourse under the departure board rather than the cramped area at the bottom of the ramp. Though the Tube "suburban tunnel" may prevent this - so far it has prevented moving the barriers along the tunnel to a less cramped location.

Would you also expect a fat person to wait for everyone else because they take up the space of 2 people?

The issue is more of it taking up floor space well below eye level and of it containing oily components which *are* exposed when unfolded. A more relevant example may be a pram - which if for nothing else other than the child's sake would do better waiting until the mob clears. However, a pram is pushed in front of the owner, a Brompton is trailed behind them, and that allows better control of what's happening to all of it.

Far more gateline problem is caused by people turning up with invalid tickets, or waiting until the previous person has passed through before inserting a ticket.

Not observably at Euston when most are on season tickets.

If the Brompton is moved about unfolded, I can also have the pannier on the front, which can carry *very* heavy loads. If I have to carry both, I *will* be having to stop at intervals along the platform to give my arms a rest. I will also need to stop before the gates and put both objects down to get the ticket out, and again after passing through the gateline. You won't have to be looking down if the bike is unfolded because it will be at eye level, but you certainly will be tripping over if I am having to stop every now and again.

Being considerate, you should surely step to the side of the flow if stopping? (I'm guessing you don't frequent the busy South East commuter operations ). But to be honest, I would say you'd be best either ensuring you wait by the door to get off first, or hanging back for a few minutes. I dislike the crush so usually hang back even without a bicycle - it costs me 2-3 minutes at most usually.

The Brompton doesn't always need to go near the doorway. On some trains it can fit between seat backs, and on some trains it can also fit beneath seats. Other times it may go in a luggage rack or near a doorway. If in a luggage rack I would expect it to be treated with respect, just as I would treat anyone else's belongings.

Certainly. However in a luggage stack, it is usual for luggage to be placed on top of other luggage. Once again, is this acceptable for your Brompton without a case, or would it be acceptable for a Brompton to be placed on top of your bag? If yes, fair enough. If no, it's not regular luggage and requires special consideration.

If, occasionally, I may be on a busy train where it's in a doorway preventing one person from using that as standing space, tough.

Do you ever take a full-sized bicycle on a train, and get cross if someone is enjoying the extra legroom of the side-facing seats in the cycle area? Your view is rather inconsiderate, and emphasizes again that Bromptons without a case require special consideration and as such are not regular luggage. But I think if the train is busy and you need to take up a standing space, you should stand there yourself and take the extra discomfort, in order to consider those others on the train. I wouldn't put my bag on one side of the vestibule and stand on the other, I'd put it between my feet. Why is a Brompton different? Why should you have special consideration?

Would you ban suitcases from the Piccadilly Line? The average suitcase takes up the space of at least one potential standing passenger, and the 73 stock has no overhead racks - all potential luggage space is also potential standing space, and the trains are often crush loaded. If the answer is no then it seems to be just folding bikes which you have a downer on, in which case one can form the conclusion you have other motives behind your views.

Find me all the suitcases on a typical South East commuter train? There won't be a lot - there are a few laptop bags (why do some people like to pull those along on a trolley with today's super-light laptops?) and jackets - always loads of room in the overheads.

Do I have a downer on folding bikes? Not directly, but I do have a downer on those who use them inconsiderately to others' disadvantage, which as you travel off-peak is probably not you (you could, after all, take a much bigger full-sized cycle instead in your case). There do seem to be a lot of such people on peak-time commuter trains into Euston, though. I definitely do have a downer on large-wheeled folding bikes on peak time services, as these take up a lot of space and I believe as such they should be considered to be full-sized bikes for the purpose of the rules, but Bromptons and similar small-wheeled bikes aren't included.

As for the Piccadilly Line - I disagree that the luggage space is all standing space, because of the shape of the train (unless you are 4' 6" tall). You can't stand by the sides of the train, which is where you will find the dedicated luggage space. If you put your luggage in the middle of the vestibule you are indeed being inconsiderate.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I think the problem comes back to lack of luggage space for all forms of luggage, including bikes. I travel to and from Scarborough regularly, and during the summer the 3 coach train will be rammed with luggage on a Friday afternoon (and possibly at other times). Full luggage racks, suitcases in doorways etc. Add a few bikes into the mix and its a recipe for chaos.

I am a cyclist, I have a folding bike which I take regularly onto the train. A folding bike is fine for short 'commuter' journeys to and from the station, but you wouldnt want to ride miles on one, so if I am going on a 'lesuire' ride then I take my full size bike. I try to be responsible, and put it in the correct place, but when thats already filled with half a dozen large suitcases and a couple of buggies I have to find somewhere else.

The only answer is to design rolling stock to cope with worst case loads, but that costs money and with a privatised railway will never happen

A further problem with TPE 185s in particular is that the cycle space has 4 pull-down seats which means of course that by the time you put your bike on - even if you have a reservation - there's people sitting there and you have to persuade them to move. It's a similar situation with Northern 142s; for some reason some people are irresistably drawn to sit in the cycle space even when there are other seats available.

I would also argue that the idea of making all cycle reservations compulsory is unworkable. If you're going out for a day's leisure cycling, you want the flexibility of staying out later if the weather's fine or finishing early if it isn't and if you have a mishap such as a flat tyre you may end up missing your reserved train anyway.

I would actually do away with cycle reservations altogether on all but the longest distance trains and allocate cycle space on a first come first served basis, with the number of cycles permitted at the guard's discretion.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

The only way to really get rid of any problems will probably be to have the cycle storage racks in a cabinet lockable by the guard with people reserving space and perhaps paying a token 10p fare for the bike, giving the TOCs a record of how many bikes were on a train at a given time. They'd need to ban bikes from elsewhere on the train. Does all stock that doesn't have a guards compartment at least have some sort of guards office which the cycle storage could be located next to?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The only way to really get rid of any problems will probably be to have the cycle storage racks in a cabinet lockable by the guard with people reserving space and perhaps paying a token 10p fare for the bike, giving the TOCs a record of how many bikes were on a train at a given time. They'd need to ban bikes from elsewhere on the train. Does all stock that doesn't have a guards compartment at least have some sort of guards office which the cycle storage could be located next to?

No. On most trains, the guard just uses the back cab.

 

[scott118]

No. On most trains, the guard just uses the back cab.

not on a 170, they wouldn't..

 

[Bletchleyite]

not on a 170, they wouldn't..

Guards on 170s use the back cab on most TOCs. Why would they not?

 

[scott118]

Guards on 170s use the back cab on most TOCs. Why would they not?

use the back cab to store cycles?

 

[CaptainHaddock]

use the back cab to store cycles?

TOCs that store cycles in a back cab are a nightmare from a cyclist's point of view. On at least a couple of occasions on an EM Meridian when it came to my stop, I went to take the bike from the back cab and found it locked with the Train Manager nowhere in sight! Call me paranoid but I'd rather have access to my bike at all times rather than have it locked away where I can't retrieve it without a member of train brew.

 

[Bletchleyite]

use the back cab to store cycles?

You wouldn't be able to use the back cab to *store cycles* on any train. But that wasn't the question he asked. He asked if there was a guard's office on trains, and I said (correctly) that there mostly is not, the guard uses the rear (or an intermediate) cab.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

TOCs that store cycles in a back cab are a nightmare from a cyclist's point of view. On at least a couple of occasions on an EM Meridian when it came to my stop, I went to take the bike from the back cab and found it locked with the Train Manager nowhere in sight! Call me paranoid but I'd rather have access to my bike at all times rather than have it locked away where I can't retrieve it without a member of train brew.

They aren't in the back cab. They are in the van area, which those trains have as (as they run at over 110mph) they can't have seats there. Though I agree that having the door not passenger-operable (as on Pendolinos) does cause issues.

 

[Flamingo]

I have heard tales of "can't pay won't pay" fare dodgers who had put their bikes in the locked cycle store areas of certain trains watching the train pull out with their bikes still locked in there, but I am sure these are urban myths...