Stansted Express bike ban

[Bletchleyite]

The “sensible reason” is probably that there are a lot of leisure travellers and a lot of cyclists in and around Essex and East Anglia. Bikes have grown exponentially in number post pandemic and my operator is increasingly finding this is causing issues, especially as leisure travel is now above 2019 levels on many services.

Trying to allocate the bikes away from busy airport tourist services seems reasonable enough to me!

That may have been true when they were 4 car 20m EMUs, but the FLIRTs are massive and have plenty of space.

The way to deal with excessive quantities of bikes is to require reservations.

 

[43066]

That may have been true when they were 4 car 20m EMUs, but the FLIRTs are massive and have plenty of space.

The way to deal with excessive quantities of bikes is to require reservations.

Well ultimately they clearly disagree with you, and it’s their operation so what they say goes! I suspect they know how their own trains are loaded rather better than people on here…

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well ultimately they clearly disagree with you, and it’s their operation so what they say goes! I suspect they know how their own trains are loaded rather better than people on here…

I suspect it's not occurred to them to change it. Never assume conspiracy...

 

[Trainbike46]

I suspect it's not occurred to them to change it. Never assume conspiracy...

that sounds very likely to be honest. It used to be necessary pre-745, and simply hasn't been changed since

 

[43066]

I suspect it's not occurred to them to change it. Never assume conspiracy...

If people complain/raise it they would surely change it, if that’s the case. It might be a reaction to just how many more bikes there are around these days, which is an extraordinary increase on only three years ago.

 

[Bletchleyite]

that sounds very likely to be honest. It used to be necessary pre-745, and simply hasn't been changed since

Probably that.

If people complain/raise it they would surely change it, if that’s the case. It might be a reaction to just how many more bikes there are around these days, which is an extraordinary increase on only three years ago.

The railway can, as usual, do no wrong, and is incapable of making a misjudgement or simply being too lazy to be bothered addressing a minor issue.

 

[43066]

The railway can, as usual, do no wrong, and is incapable of making a misjudgement or simply being too lazy to be bothered addressing a minor issue.

And as usual enthusiasts on here think they know best about everything in the industry .

I have no problem calling out errors or misjudgements when they occur. A TOC having a policy you personally don’t agree with doesn’t count as either, though.

 

[johncrossley]

I presume you are allowed to travel from London to Stansted via Audley End with a bike on a normal London to Stansted ticket as that is the shortest route with a bike.

 

[Watershed]

I presume you are allowed to travel from London to Stansted via Audley End with a bike on a normal London to Stansted ticket as that is the shortest route with a bike.

In theory, there is no easement allowing this route - and whilst it's permitted to go via Elsenham, services along the Stansted North Curve don't stop anywhere between Audley End and Stansted, so you can't actually use that validity in practice.

In practice, journey planners allow the route via Audley End anyway - as Elsenham and Newport (Essex) aren't mandatory timing points, so trains that don't stop there don't have them in their schedule, and so the double back can't be detected.

 

[Malaxa]

What they’re clearly trying to avoid is full size bikes (which have a risk of falling over/injuring people) being carried between intermediate stations on airport trains with passengers carrying lots of baggage.

That doesn’t seem too unreasonable to me? Various TOCs have restrictions on carrying bikes at certain times of day and on certain services etc.

Garbage. Bike spaces have restraining straps. I'd suggest that prams, pushchairs, even large suitcases pose a greater threat to "safety". And if we could get ride of wheelchair spaces from airport trains GA would have an even larger area for all that heavy. unrestrained wheeled luggage carted to and from Stansted.

 

[ashkeba]

If they’re branded as “Stansted Express” then clearly they’re going to get a lot more airport passengers (and baggage). Other trains also service the intermediate stations (and the airport) and will allow bikes to be carried, so what’s the issue with bikes being prohibited on the Express branded services?

The other services have 4 or 8 bike spaces. The express brand flirts have 18. It's a big cut in capacity that seems unnecessary.

When used on the Norwich route, only 6 reservations are allowed for the 18 spaces. Fortunately, most GA staff are liberal but a few aren't and the policy must deter some.

And GA are unwilling to use that capacity during bike events near the main line,
For example, allocating the 745/1 to peak event journeys and offering 18 bike tickets per train. Instead they ban bikes all day both ways anywhere near it, to encourage motoring as much as possible. They seem to have no motive to actually use the benefits of the new fleet fully.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Garbage. Bike spaces have restraining straps. I'd suggest that prams, pushchairs, even large suitcases pose a greater threat to "safety". And if we could get ride of wheelchair spaces from airport trains GA would have an even larger area for all that heavy. unrestrained wheeled luggage carted to and from Stansted.

Stansted is mostly Ryanair. Ryanair budget flyers usually go hand luggage only. Put it in the overhead.

 

[O L Leigh]

Stansted is mostly Ryanair. Ryanair budget flyers usually go hand luggage only. Put it in the overhead.

Mostly but not exclusively. In my years of going through the airport I have seen some VERY large items going by train, including full-size bikes in various states of packing, and ski equipment.

The railway can, as usual, do no wrong, and is incapable of making a misjudgement or simply being too lazy to be bothered addressing a minor issue.

I think that’s unwarranted. The suggestion that has been floated is that the policy is outdated and relates to less well provisioned stock that has since been superceded. Suggesting that highlighting this to the operator and lobbying for them to update their practice, or at least explain the rationale behind it, does not seem unreasonable. It certainly seems better to do this than simply to moan about it on a forum where nothing will change as a consequence.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think that’s unwarranted. The suggestion that has been floated is that the policy is outdated and relates to less well provisioned stock that has since been superceded. Suggesting that highlighting this to the operator and lobbying for them to update their practice, or at least explain the rationale behind it, does not seem unreasonable. It certainly seems better to do this than simply to moan about it on a forum where nothing will change as a consequence.

I don't disagree with the latter. The former was quite specifically targetted - the poster concerned has a history of defending the railway even when they are obviously getting things wrong.

 

[O L Leigh]

I don't disagree with the latter. The former was quite specifically targetted - the poster concerned has a history of defending the railway even when they are obviously getting things wrong.

… but not in this case, hence my post.

 

[43066]

Garbage. Bike spaces have restraining straps. I'd suggest that prams, pushchairs, even large suitcases pose a greater threat to "safety". And if we could get ride of wheelchair spaces from airport trains GA would have an even larger area for all that heavy. unrestrained wheeled luggage carted to and from Stansted.

Bikes do unfortunately cause more problems than most luggage due to the simple reality that they’re a lot larger and more awkwardly shaped than most items carried on trains. There’s also an unfortunate tendency for cyclists not to stow them correctly, block doors with them etc.

What’s really garbage is how in this post you also seem to be suggesting that banning bikes is somehow equivalent to banning wheelchairs. Last I checked use of wheelchairs isn’t an optional leisure activity.

The other services have 4 or 8 bike spaces. The express brand flirts have 18. It's a big cut in capacity that seems unnecessary.

When used on the Norwich route, only 6 reservations are allowed for the 18 spaces. Fortunately, most GA staff are liberal but a few aren't and the policy must deter some.

And GA are unwilling to use that capacity during bike events near the main line, allocating the 745/1 to peak event journeys and offering 18 bike tickets per train. Instead they ban bikes all day both ways anywhere near it, to encourage motoring as much as possible. They seem to have no motive to actually use the benefits of the new fleet fully.

What you mean is that the policy seems unecessary to you.

To be clear I don’t work for GA, it’s not me who makes their rules and I’m not privy to their decision making process here. I’m merely suggesting the possibility that GA might have perfectly good reasons for this policy, rather than it being part of a big conspiracy to annoy cyclists.

The fact certain people on here don’t agree with something doesn’t automatically mean the company is in the wrong, or has made an error, which seemed to be the extraordinary implication upthread.

I don't disagree with the latter. The former was quite specifically targetted - the poster concerned has a history of defending the railway even when they are obviously getting things wrong.

Can you please point to a post where I’ve “defended” the railway where it was “obviously getting things wrong”?

On the other hand you most certainly have a history of stating your own opinion as if it was the gospel truth. This thread is the latest example but there are usually many per day across the entire forum!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Oct 2022 ==

… but not in this case, hence my post.

Drawing from real world experience to explain why things might have been done a certain way, or why certain decisions might have been taken, is often conflated with “defending the railway” on here .

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bikes do unfortunately cause more problems than most luggage due to the simple reality that they’re a lot larger and more awkwardly shaped than most items carried on trains. There’s also an unfortunate tendency for cyclists not to stow them correctly, block doors with them etc.

But then you're getting into the wider question of why trains carry bikes at all and whether they should, which is very much for another thread.

The question here is simply "why are these trains different", and I dispute that luggage is a decent reason, as plenty of trains carry bikes and large amounts of luggage.

 

[43066]

But then you're getting into the wider question of why trains carry bikes at all and whether they should, which is very much for another thread.

I’m not? I’m simply pointing not why bikes aren’t the same as ordinary luggage.

The question here is simply "why are these trains different", and I dispute that luggage is a decent reason, as plenty of trains carry bikes and large amounts of luggage.

Well the opinion of the train operator is clearly different to yours, most likely for very good reasons. The fact you disagree with something does not make it wrong!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bicycles are (I just checked) carried on the Heathrow and Gatwick Expresses.

I'm intrigued why GA think the StanEx is different. Did it carry them in BR days, or is this just inertia?

 

[43066]

Bicycles are (I just checked) carried on the Heathrow and Gatwick Expresses.

I'm intrigued why GA think the StanEx is different.

Perhaps someone could ask them on Twitter and post the response (I’m not on it)?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Perhaps someone could ask them on Twitter and post the response (I’m not on it)?

I've just asked them, though I'm not sure their Twitterers are going to have the answer from whoever decided.

 

[ashkeba]

Perhaps someone could ask them on Twitter and post the response (I’m not on it)?

They have been asked many times since the new trains came in, on twitter and directly by cycling groups. I think no explanation has ever been given. Only people saying they will reply later.

It is very strange when the smaller flirts from the north do carry bikes in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They've yet to reply to me, which is pretty shoddy - most TOCs reply within a few minutes.

 

[43066]

They have been asked many times since the new trains came in, on twitter and directly by cycling groups. I think no explanation has ever been given. Only people saying they will reply later.

It is very strange when the smaller flirts from the north do carry bikes in.

They've yet to reply to me, which is pretty shoddy - most TOCs reply within a few minutes.

It’s a bit poor that they won’t even answer the question. I thought that was the whole point of having a Twitter team!

 

[Malaxa]

Conclusion: it's not about 'safety'. It's not about 'space'. Ergo it's an arbitrary policy based on nothing and which the underlings at GA are forced to defend with a 'because that's how it is' answer when questioned. Pathetic.

 

[Jim Jehosofat]

It’s a bit poor that they won’t even answer the question. I thought that was the whole point of having a Twitter team!

No point in the Twitter team giving out wrong information, they've probably raised it to a higher level or were prewarned by GA staff who frequent this forum!

 

[ashkeba]

Conclusion: it's not about 'safety'. It's not about 'space'. Ergo it's an arbitrary policy based on nothing and which the underlings at GA are forced to defend with a 'because that's how it is' answer when questioned. Pathetic.

But they don't defend it. The social media and PR teams simply don't answer and most train crew and station staff don't enforce it. And how can they? The trains are mostly driver only and use the same gates and platforms as trains that do allow bikes. Anyone caught on the train with a bike by the rare on board check has a plausible defence that they didn't see the web page and thought bikes were allowed on the bits with the green bike symbols on. As long as not aggressive if told to unboard, would any staff really be confident in penalizing them?

The bike ban now punishes people who plan their journeys and try to obey rules. Is that what we want to discourage? Do we want the railway to reward the inverse? I say no, so scrap this ban off peak.

 

[Malaxa]

But they don't defend it. The social media and PR teams simply don't answer....

They used to e.g.

https://twitter.com/Stansted_Exp/status/818492587044667392

https://twitter.com/greateranglia/status/760034147050094592

https://twitter.com/Stansted_Exp/status/1122068279583965185

https://twitter.com/Stansted_Exp/status/874567575249793024

https://twitter.com/Stansted_Exp/status/678358205853016065

although the message was sometimes a touch contradictory/confusing

https://twitter.com/greateranglia/status/884643854426804224

It awful to think that all [lol!] these leisure cyclists might get in the way on all [lol!] those non-leisure, business-class passengers dashing off to catch their carbon-offset Ryanair flights.

 

[ashkeba]

They used to e.g.

https://twitter.com/Stansted_Exp/status/818492587044667392

https://twitter.com/greateranglia/status/760034147050094592

https://twitter.com/Stansted_Exp/status/1122068279583965185

https://twitter.com/Stansted_Exp/status/874567575249793024

https://twitter.com/Stansted_Exp/status/678358205853016065

although the message was sometimes a touch contradictory/confusing

https://twitter.com/greateranglia/status/884643854426804224

It awful to think that all [lol!] these leisure cyclists might get in the way on all [lol!] those non-leisure, business-class passengers dashing off to catch their carbon-offset Ryanair flights.

The last tweet wasn't confusing. They told us the new trains would have lots of bike spaces, implying the ban would go once they entered service. It's far from the only expectation GA has not yet delivered, though.

I don't think any of those are after the new trains and when they were asked why. That's when they go quiet. When asked why.

The one where they were asked by a flight passenger how to get to Stratford with a bike was told to phone. I wonder whether they tried to sell the passenger two tickets. Extra income could explain why they keep the ban, at least.