I was thinking of the first egress on to the track. I had completely forgotten the people bailed out of 2M48 before it even cleared the platform. They probably took the view that walking or getting a bus would be quicker. As it turned out, they were right! It had already taken 29 minutes to move less than 200 metres. The first egress on to the track was 2M50 after 63 minutes. That train had no toilets and was metres from the platform ramp at Lewisham.According to Arthur D Little's report, 2 Passengers first Egressed on 2M48 which was nearest to Platform 4 albeit moving slowly. That was a Class 465 unit with toilet facilities although I do believe the toilet on one set wasn't working properly but was still useable for some time and this was the first set not the rear set where the two passengers first Egressed and might I add within 29mins of the train initially arriving at Lewisham.
View attachment 162957
View attachment 162958
The report quoted below:
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The 700s are a similar walk through high capacity unit with a universal access toilet. I have never considered it to be a problem. Some of the trailers on the 345s have very little underfloor equipment. So in theory, there is space for batteries and tanks under those vehicles.How about the people who want to actually get on a very busy train like the 345s in the COS during peak times, which would undoubtedly be displaced if the said amount of toilets required were to reduce capacity heavily?
Adding toilets to the 345s for a case of long stranding which isvery much a red herring, just doesn't make sense. There are other options you have toward Reading from the COS and toward Shenfield again from the COS that have onboard toilet facilities but also the speed for certain travels deemed long enough to "require" toilets on the Elizabeth Line.
Where would a toilet and its electronics and tank go? Assuming you put one toilet in Car 5, it would need to be a large, accessible toilet for wheelchair passengers to use but would undoubtedly make access to one of the three doors, let alone the walk-through space, dangerously cramped. The 720s have only two doors, as does most other stock with toilets, as they weren't expected to deal with the intensity of passenger flow the 345s do.
Assuming you do find a place for a tank and somehow logistically place the accessible toilet and one other toilet, it still doesn't cover that the trains' batteries will be much further depleted in a stranded situation of sufficient duration.
Adding more batteries on top of the added weight already from the toilets, their tanks, and electronics, plus the very reduced capacity for the options that already exist, in my opinion, doesn't make any sense, and I'm barely listing the issues.
But I agree with the general view of the discussion that getting people off the train more quickly is the better option. One post upthread mentioned that LU is generally faster at detraining because platform staff are PTS trained. So why not do the same with National Rail station staff?
Last edited: