Which is exactly what will not be happening on these sets; you have explained very clearly why this is a problem in the same post you complain that others rightly highlight the breach this policy probably causes.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Transpennine Express decide not to use MK3's on limited services
- Thread starter pdeaves
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
BMIFlyer
Member
- Joined
- 13 Mar 2017
- Messages
- 723
Why are people still arguing over this??
The stock being used won't have any wheelchair accessible accommodation and certainly no disabled access toilet.
Not to mention the passage from vestibule to coach seating area isn't wide enough.
Can you all give it a rest?
The stock being used won't have any wheelchair accessible accommodation and certainly no disabled access toilet.
Not to mention the passage from vestibule to coach seating area isn't wide enough.
Can you all give it a rest?
Well of course the other alternative is they potentially cancel more services until Mk5's are available because they havent enough stock
BMIFlyer
Member
- Joined
- 13 Mar 2017
- Messages
- 723
Well, let me tell you this...
If they don’t run the Mk3’s there won’t be any drivers to drive the Mk5’s, so they will for sure be short of stock.
Well yes but they could run the MK3's ecs which is presumably what they will have do initially with the 802's anyway for driver training.
Last edited:
A big part of the issue is the mitigation- TP have said that wheelchair users need to see two trains they can't get on depart before they'll call a taxi and are being awkward about saying which services will be accessible leading to issues with wheelchair users even being able to book assistance.
dilbertphil
Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2018
- Messages
- 165
To be honest I think it will all be irrelevant as a rumour and I emphasize the word rumour from over the weekend was thst MK3's might not even see passenger service and only be used for driver training and TPE will wait for the MK5a's to arrive before using LHCS for passenger use.
Carriage C on a GWR HST, have a much bigger wheelchair space. The vestibule at that end of the Mk3 3 coach has been rebuilt with much more room to get in to the seating area. The UAT looks similar in size to those being fitted atm and the interior sliding door is much wider being between the UAT and the window. This door opens right onto 2 roomy wheelchair spaces with tables. So MK3s however old, can be wheelchair accessible.
That would be very disappointing.
berneyarms
Established Member
I think you might want to be a bit more thoughtful in your phraseology.
Telling wheelchair users to “give it a rest” is pretty insulting tbh and a throwback to older times. I’m not sure you’d appreciate reading that if you were in that situation.
I get what your saying re rolling stock (and the lack of it), but you could be more tactful I would suggest.
Couldn't agree more
Last edited by a moderator:
Won't a couple of extra queue-busting trains fitted in to a timetable allow easier access to the others? With a reasonably frequent service I would have thought the non-accessible train will be clear in the timetable(so to be avoided) and if the next train is too overcrowded then a taxi should automatically be provided. I would much rather see a decent-length accessible train, of course, but we're told the UK is now too poor to provide such things.
I see that clicking to access the full article reveals that the 'main rail worker's union' is revealed as the RMT, and that it is Mick Cash who is taking the opportunity to do some spouting.
It seems to me to be a sensible strategy, if unable to run a complete service with fully-accessible vehicles, to run as many as you can, although I'm not convinced it's necessary to run the two non-accessible rakes on consecutive diagrams. The two diagrams will only be consecutive, though, in respect of journeys involving travel between York and Scarborough, or boarding/alighting at Lea Green station.
Does Mr Cash think it would be better to simply not run the relevant journeys at all?
kingqueen
Member
The thing is they evidently can run a complete services l service with fully accessible vesicles. They are right now, and the timetables won't change when this stock comes into use.
Two extra sets of rolling stock will be required from 30 July.
Someone, somewhere, must think there's a need to run two LHCS sets. To add, it doesn't seem five minutes ago that people on this forum were crying blue murder because:
1) the LHCS sets wouldn't be available for use in the period 21 May to 1 June;
2) they might not be available from 30 July.
With regards to wheelchair accessibility and reasonableness I do think that TPE have a strong argument that their actions are reasonable (if not ideal).
Firstly, and perhaps most crucial, this is a short term change. The proposal is that these will be introduced in at the end of July (or even as late as October) and used for a handful of months prior to the arrival of the Mk5s which will be fully accessible. The introduction frees up additional rolling stock within TPE, avoids taking drivers/guards away from service trains for the entirety of their LHCS training and will help to relieve overcrowding. The cost of modifying the vehicles for that short period of time to meet the full requirements of the PRM TSI is unlikely to be seen as a reasonable expenditure.
Secondly, the mitigation. The staff briefing linked earlier (thanks to @kingqueen ) explains that for passengers between Liverpool and York they will be allowed to take the next available service. Between York and Liverpool there are two trains per hour (for a passenger wanting, say, Huddersfield there are four trains per hour) meaning that, worst case, a wheelchair passenger will have to wait thirty minutes for the next service (helpfully the trains are actually thirty minutes apart). Between York and Scarborough where the wait could be at least one hour then a taxi will be arranged. Again, this is far from ideal, but it does not seem an unreasonable mitigation considering the short term nature of the change being made. I would assume and strongly support that anyone who was delayed by at least thirty minutes as a result of this would also be entitled to Delay Repay.
If TPE were saying that from now on wheelchair passengers will have to put up with the above service then I would quite agree that seems wholly unreasonable and I would hope that TPE could be persuaded either on their own or via legal means to change their plans. However, that is not what's happening.
Looking at what is actually happening then it seems to me that weighing the options this is not an unreasonable change and neither is TPE's proposed adjustment unreasonable.
Firstly, and perhaps most crucial, this is a short term change. The proposal is that these will be introduced in at the end of July (or even as late as October) and used for a handful of months prior to the arrival of the Mk5s which will be fully accessible. The introduction frees up additional rolling stock within TPE, avoids taking drivers/guards away from service trains for the entirety of their LHCS training and will help to relieve overcrowding. The cost of modifying the vehicles for that short period of time to meet the full requirements of the PRM TSI is unlikely to be seen as a reasonable expenditure.
Secondly, the mitigation. The staff briefing linked earlier (thanks to @kingqueen ) explains that for passengers between Liverpool and York they will be allowed to take the next available service. Between York and Liverpool there are two trains per hour (for a passenger wanting, say, Huddersfield there are four trains per hour) meaning that, worst case, a wheelchair passenger will have to wait thirty minutes for the next service (helpfully the trains are actually thirty minutes apart). Between York and Scarborough where the wait could be at least one hour then a taxi will be arranged. Again, this is far from ideal, but it does not seem an unreasonable mitigation considering the short term nature of the change being made. I would assume and strongly support that anyone who was delayed by at least thirty minutes as a result of this would also be entitled to Delay Repay.
If TPE were saying that from now on wheelchair passengers will have to put up with the above service then I would quite agree that seems wholly unreasonable and I would hope that TPE could be persuaded either on their own or via legal means to change their plans. However, that is not what's happening.
Looking at what is actually happening then it seems to me that weighing the options this is not an unreasonable change and neither is TPE's proposed adjustment unreasonable.
This is exactly the issue, and this is the point I have been making that seems to have eluded certain people.
The legislation is not overly concerned with vehicles which can't be accessed by everyone until the end of next year. It is not running a train that isn't very accessible which is a breach - yet. Regardless of how a certain poster who claims to be 'in the know' continues to parrot that there is no access, the problem is the response to that lack of access. The question is, is it really appropriate to say 'wait for the next train' given that this doesn't happen elsewhere.
Of course, in some cases the wait might be 10 minutes. Most people would say that an alternative within 10 minutes probably is a reasonable adjustment. Other cases, such as an evening to Liverpool, the wait might be 60 minutes. It's not clear if that is or isn't a reasonable adjustment - that could need to be decided in court. But they key point is that telling people to wait an hour is treating disabled people quite differently to everyone else, and that's not something that I have ever known to happen at another TOC. Please correct me if it does...
Last edited:
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
To me, the issue is that a TOC which did have a fleet that was fully accessible (according to the 2020 standards) is introducing, albeit temporarily, stock which isn't accessible. If (to pick an example completely at random) Northern were introducing more LHCS it wouldn't be noticeable, as there's a fair chance that whatever turns up on Northern won't be compliant anyway- so it seems like a backwards step.
Given that TPE can't manage to show the accessible section of trains in the right place on the PIS displays (which won't help dwell times if anyone in a wheelchair needs to board and they have to fight through the crowds to get to the right place), it isn't the biggest issue (though I say that from a position of privilege as far as accessibility is concerned).
Mick Cash getting involved is just him trying to out-Crow the late Bob Crow. He'd do better sticking to his day job which is representing the interests of his members.
Given that TPE can't manage to show the accessible section of trains in the right place on the PIS displays (which won't help dwell times if anyone in a wheelchair needs to board and they have to fight through the crowds to get to the right place), it isn't the biggest issue (though I say that from a position of privilege as far as accessibility is concerned).
Mick Cash getting involved is just him trying to out-Crow the late Bob Crow. He'd do better sticking to his day job which is representing the interests of his members.
I might be missing a trick (which is always possible!) but I can't see any hour gaps between a Scarborough service to Liverpool (possibly non-accessible) and a Newcastle service to Liverpool (will be accessible) from York on-wards at any time during the day?
Although it’s temporary and only a small fraction of services, it does seem at the moment that every turn on the railways in the north is another PR disaster.
It’s yet another thing to bash the railways about, and another thing that almost ruins the good PR they should be getting with the forthcoming increase in services, seats and new trains.
It’s yet another thing to bash the railways about, and another thing that almost ruins the good PR they should be getting with the forthcoming increase in services, seats and new trains.
mike57
Established Member
But they havn't been running a full service, over the last two weeks there have been 2 or 3 cancellations a day on the York > Scarborough service alone, which on an hourly service is significant. Due to previous ineptitude/short termism we don't have enough rolling stock to run the level of service that is required, and therefore stop gap solutions are being applied. I totally agree that the disabled should have full access, but better to run the additional rolling stock than struggle on without it. Northern TPE are regularly overcrowded to the point of leaving passengers behind, there have been a number of occasions over the last 18 months where the train I am on heading for Scarborough has left people behind at Man Pic, under these conditions a disabled customer would probably be unable to board anyway, reservations or not.
BMIFlyer
Member
- Joined
- 13 Mar 2017
- Messages
- 723
Well I can assure you that there will be no changes. The rolling stock is not compatible with wheelchairs.
BMIFlyer
Member
- Joined
- 13 Mar 2017
- Messages
- 723
The policy is that a taxi will be provided. Can't really do much more than that. What do people expect, a limo?
TPE has received the appropriate derogation regarding the Mk3 stock not being used to carry wheelchairs or bikes. The DfT have approved it.
BMIFlyer
Member
- Joined
- 13 Mar 2017
- Messages
- 723
Thanks.
I don't speak for TPE so within reason I can say what I wish. But I appreciate the input. I'm not being offensive - I usually just prefer to say things 'as they are'.
It's not an ideal solution, but then the North TP is far from ideal at the moment. Providing staff are made aware of this, and I'm sure they will be, then this at least gives wheelchair users a choice. This is as you say a temporary solution which will increase capacity and allow drivers chance to get familiar with the 68s before the new MKV stock comes into service.
And as someone else said up thread, not so very long ago some were bemoaning the delay to the MKIIIs coming into use, proof that sometimes TOCS really can't win!
The policy is a taxi will be provided after the wheelchair user has seen two inaccessible trains depart. Given that anyone with accessibility issues needs to book their assistance 24hrs in advance, what wheelchair users really want here is the certainty that the train they're trying to travel is likely to be inaccessible and thus book a different train or have arrangements made ahead of time. What they really want is to be be able to turn up and just board trains without having to book help, of course, but that's a wider issue. For this specific issue, they just don#t want to be sat on the platform whilst the train that they booked assistance to use leaves, as does the next one. They're not after a limo
absolutelymilk
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,600
I haven't seen this in any official statement, surely they know in advance what trains are booked on these services so they can put people in taxis as soon as they arrive at the station?
berneyarms
Established Member
I never suggested you speak for TPE or not. But for your own sake try and be a bit tactful. That kind of crass approach isn’t acceptable any more.
Your comment came across to me as insulting towards a sector of the population who face real issues every single day.
As I said - I don’t disagree with you regarding the issues that TPE face and unfortunately this is probably the only solution.
- Status