Should the railways be nationalised?

[KarlMac]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Interesting fact for you, addition of UAT (universal access toilet), widening of aisles, dedicated zone for wheelchair storage and larger vestibles is all a direct result of PRM standards imposed by the EU.

One leasing company ran a study, for the volume of dissabled passengers using the trains it would have been cheaper for them to pay for a taxi to take the passenger onto thier end destination.

[AJS-]

Strange. How do disabled people manage when they're not on trains? I caught an intercity from York to Newcastle a couple of times last year and I've never been in such an expansive toilet in my life.

I thought it was some sort of business traveller mobile office where the time pressed exec could video conference and make important phone calls at first. Maybe even hold a small meeting.

[blueg33]

AJS- said:

Strange. How do disabled people manage when they're not on trains? I caught an intercity from York to Newcastle a couple of times last year and I've never been in such an expansive toilet in my life.

I thought it was some sort of business traveller mobile office where the time pressed exec could video conference and make important phone calls at first. Maybe even hold a small meeting.

wheel chair turning circles are mapped when designing disabled access toilets, we build homes for disabled people and the typical wet room (showeroom) will be at least 3m x 3.5m

[KarlMac]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

We spent a boatload of cash on R&D to develop a proper system, what they new units use doesn't have vents, the air cascades down through the ceiling and the hot air alis drawn from the vestibule. Seems to work (although not perfectly) on the demonstator.

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Agreed, the tech isn't as good as it needs to be, and is made obsolete by 4g coverage. TOCs insist customers want it though.

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Removal of seats is down to PRM legislation, there is a whole list of minimum spaces from various points.

anonymous said:

[redacted]

There is normally only one powered Vehicle, the rest are normally trailered vehicles. Unless there are a number of linked vehicles. You can tell if its the motor unit as there will be a sealed off column for the HV cable bringing power from the pantograph

anonymous said:

[redacted]

You can't just add coaches. Theres a list of technical reasons as to why but the main one is each unit carries its approval as a 'set'. You can't run with missing carriages either.

First class and catering areas are currently being reduced across all fleets.

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Not true. All the DMU thunderbird units are still in place.

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Again, driven by line access charges. NR charge TOCs for dumping st on the line. So it now goes in a tank. And is emptied once a month (!).

[AJS-]

Knock it off tonker. There are plenty of gimmicks already out there!

Karl with the greatest respect, I'm sure you're brilliant at your job, and improving the journeys of many commuters and travellers in innumerable ways but I wish they'd do less of this sort of thing. I'm one of those people who never fell out of a slam shut door, who can open or close a window all by myself, keep my head away from posts when it's open, relieve myself in an ordinary sized convenience and can put up with a non-ergonomic seat for an hour.

I can't help but feel that if just some of this effort and expertise was applied to making a functioning and affordable train system, even one with ugly seats, cramped toilets and danger doors, we'd be a lot better off as a result.

It's also hard to escape the impression that so much of this is papering over the cracks. That the various companies involved will say they've invested some impressive figure in "rolling stock" when what they really mean is that they've put bleep bleep doors on the bogs, and hiked up prices another 10%.

And again please don't take this as a personal or professional attack. I don't blame you at all for making your living nor even think you cynical for doing so. It's a matter of the structure of the industry and the priorities it gives.

[blueg33]

With regards wifi. 4g is not a suitable replacement as for some unknown reason telecoms operators do not have strong signals along railway routes. Eg Birmingham to Manchester - mostly zero signal and 4g only at Wolverhampton station when the train stops. Hereford to Paddington via Oxford and Reading, virtually no mobile signal after Reading. Etc

[legzr1]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

It's no coincidence that Railfreight in this country exploded and reliability massively improved just as the class 66 was introduced.
The Cl 56 and Cl 60 were due major (expensive) refurbs (some 60s were overhauled and then sold to Colas !!) and it made a lot of sense to replace them.

I know spotters don't like the 66 but, as you well know, a happy spotter doesn't pay the £45,000 TDA for another failed 60 or 56.
DBSchenker have recently gone on record saying their 'market' is now intermodal traffic - class 4 freight at 75mph with too much weight and length for a 56 to keep to timings and speed to high for the 60mph Cl 60.

Not all change is for the worse

[AJS-]

blueg33 said:

wheel chair turning circles are mapped when designing disabled access toilets, we build homes for disabled people and the typical wet room (showeroom) will be at least 3m x 3.5m

Oh I've no doubt that they're very convenient and far better than what is available elsewhere.

The thing is if you look at it from a point of view of a social good then you have to really ask if the benefit to a tiny number is worth the cost. As pointed out above you could send all the disabled people by taxi and make a saving so it's hard to see that this is worth the extra cost.

[KarlMac]

No offence taken

I was there for a year doing project cost engineering, moved on since then (outside the rail industry). Just thought people might be interested in a peek 'behind the curtain' so to speak.

The main problem is TOCs based customer feedback on Twitter, which is populated by idiots.

[blueg33]

AJS- said:

blueg33 said:

wheel chair turning circles are mapped when designing disabled access toilets, we build homes for disabled people and the typical wet room (showeroom) will be at least 3m x 3.5m

Oh I've no doubt that they're very convenient and far better than what is available elsewhere.

The thing is if you look at it from a point of view of a social good then you have to really ask if the benefit to a tiny number is worth the cost. As pointed out above you could send all the disabled people by taxi and make a saving so it's hard to see that this is worth the extra cost.

Its tricky, one of my work colleagues is wheel chair bound and going to meetings etc with him is an eye opener as to how difficult it is to operate in our society if you are disabled. Using taxi's etc does not work for long distance trips and journeys into busy city centres.

[Du1point8]

I think it should be nationalised and unionised, then we can expect more crap like this.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-ra...

[legzr1]

Du1point8 said:

I think it should be nationalised and unionised, then we can expect more crap like this.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-ra...

50% of all those eligible to vote voted yes for industrial action.

Maybe it's time to push through tough anti-union legislation....

[mph1977]

AJS- said:

blueg33 said:

wheel chair turning circles are mapped when designing disabled access toilets, we build homes for disabled people and the typical wet room (showeroom) will be at least 3m x 3.5m

Oh I've no doubt that they're very convenient and far better than what is available elsewhere.

The thing is if you look at it from a point of view of a social good then you have to really ask if the benefit to a tiny number is worth the cost. As pointed out above you could send all the disabled people by taxi and make a saving so it's hard to see that this is worth the extra cost.

assuming that the accessibility stuff only benfits wheelchair users and forgetting the aging population with their mobility, sight and hearing challenges ... plus of course the 'walkies' in the disabled community ...

[Du1point8]

legzr1 said:

Du1point8 said:

I think it should be nationalised and unionised, then we can expect more crap like this.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-ra...

50% of all those eligible to vote voted yes for industrial action.

Maybe it's time to push through tough anti-union legislation....

8 people work in the office, 6 of those in the union, 3 of those voted.

3 out of 8 people working there voted for this, can the 2 not in the union take action against those 3 people?

They just cost them 2 days pay through their greed and of no fault of their own.

[ewenm]

KarlMac said:

No offence taken

I was there for a year doing project cost engineering, moved on since then (outside the rail industry). Just thought people might be interested in a peek 'behind the curtain' so to speak.

The main problem is TOCs based customer feedback on Twitter, which is populated by idiots.

My main feedback (usually via Twitter!) to my most-used TOC, the ever-loved FGW GWR is that if they provide timely, accurate information to passengers they are generally more accepting of delays as they can plan appropriately. In general GWR are hopelessly optimistic and don't publicise delays until the last possible moment. A couple of regular examples:

• Train is shown as delayed by a few minutes a few stations back, but shown as on-time at my station - unless the train can suddenly double it's normal operating speed, it is impossible for it to claw back that delay in the distance between the stations. Why not just be honest about it?

• Train starts at this station, shown as on-time until it is actually past the departure time, and is then suddenly delayed/cancelled - surely they already know the train is not there or inbound train is late/cancelled. Earlier notification would allow travellers to plan their departure from home/work better. Why not just be honest about it?

I seriously doubt any of this would be improved by nationalisation, but the current TOC/NR/Gov combinations allows each party to blame the others so no-one takes responsibility for anything.

[iphonedyou]

legzr1 said:

50% of all those eligible to vote voted yes for industrial action.

Maybe it's time to push through tough anti-union legislation....

Could you imagine how the useless lot would squeal if we set the barrier higher?

You can't legislate for every lazy worker in the country.

[nc107]

A note on seating numbers which seems to have been overlooked:

The amount of seats and there layout on a train is largely dictated by two things; the DfTs crowding metrics (which are specified in the relevant ITT and Franchise Agreements) and the legislative requirement to meet the PRM legislation by 1st Jan 2020 (which reduces furnishable floor area by around 5% on a typical 4 car multiple unit).

The comments that the TOCs want to cram seats in is by and large not correct (a paying passenger is a paying passenger whether standing or seated). So, taking the Class 321 as already mentioned, the owner undertook market research which suggested (unsurprisingly) that people wanted a nice un-cramped seating layout (the research included departments within the DfT). Then the ITT for Greater Anglia came out, from another department within the DfT; it contained very stringent crowding requirements, basically saying that every passenger should have a seat within 20 mins (i.e. no one should stand longer than 20 mins). This is a franchise requirement and if not met (and it is monitored through out the franchise) then it could bring the TOC into default. So to meet this requirement the TOC has to provide a high density seating layout even if they don't want to. So when the owners of the Cl321 fleet met with the prospective bidders for the GA franchise they were somewhat surprised to see that the advice/information/requirements (call it what you will) by the DfT et al during their concept phase had been completely contradicted by the same DfT in the new franchise requirements. The same has happened on every franchise and with every ROSCO I have been involved with. So the fundamental seating density and layout has little to do with the TOCs.

And NR don't charge for effluent on the track; they tried about 5 years ago to do this in a similar way to VTAC but the ORR (IIRC) rejected it. I'm sure they recoup some of the costs through other means but they are not allowed to directly recover costs for it.

[ewenm]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I tend to use a combination of apps, but I don't understand how the information can be different between the station/platform boards and the information GWR are displaying on their app. How can they have different sources of information? It's often the GWR app that lies about is overly optimistic about delay catchups, but it rarely agrees on the size of the delay with the GWR platform boards anyway.

Working in IT obviously I understand how it can happen, but not how it is allowed to happen in this day and age. It just makes the TOC look foolish

[oyster]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Surely the historical volume of disabled users was so low because they couldn't get on the trains before, nor get to the toilet if they did?

[legzr1]

Du1point8 said:

8 people work in the office, 6 of those in the union, 3 of those voted.

3 out of 8 people working there voted for this, can the 2 not in the union take action against those 3 people?

They just cost them 2 days pay through their greed and of no fault of their own.

What are you talking about?

Facts:

The ballot was legal and the action is legal.
If you want a say in how democratic union ballots turn out do the democratic thing and join the union and have your voice heard.
The 2 non-union members will be in breach of contract if they don't turn up for duty - I'm sure they will report for duty and will not lose any pay.

Join the discussion and be heard or don't join and be quiet - it's quite a simple idea.