Tip up seats - do they have value or should they be removed?

[Bletchleyite]

Quite a lot of trains seem to have tip-up seats, often in order to increase the nominal seated capacity of the train above a specific value to tick a box. These are often located in places where there is a potential conflict over the use of the space, such as in areas primarily intended for wheelchair users, bicycles, luggage or even door vestibules. This often causes unnecessary conflict between users, particularly as they are popular with some people in preference to normal seating because of e.g. not needing to sit next to someone or effectively having infinite legroom.

But are they more trouble than they are worth? My view is that they are, and they should all be removed and none installed on any new train.

Thing is, they only really have value overall when the train is at a very specific capacity range. If we say that a coach has 70 seats and 3 tip-ups, up to 70 on board there is a normal seat for everyone (some may choose the tip-ups, but that's then unnecessary conflict). From 71 to 73 passengers and the tip ups mean everyone gets a seat. But above 73 towards a crush load you can get more people in if the tip-ups aren't in use so people use the space for standing.

The one thing I could see a case for is that on trains where bicycles aren't carried in the peak, the cycle space tip-ups could be unlocked during the time bicycles aren't allowed, and locked when they are - but that relies on crew remembering to do it, and isn't it the case that at peak times the standing room would be more valuable?

Thus overall I think they should be removed (but at an absolute minimum clear signage should be present stating the primary use has priority and the seats must be vacated if requested for that purpose). What do others think?

That doesn't go to say that there shouldn't be companion seats in wheelchair/pram areas, but these are better fixed rather than tip-up (unless it needs to be tipped up to get the pram/wheelchair in and then dropped again) and should carry clear signage about who they are intended for and that they must be given up to those people. But on no account should they be placed such that if in use the space cannot be used for its intended purpose.

Note - this thread is not about whether things like bicycles or large luggage should be carried or not (I rather hope nobody would think wheelchair users shouldn't! ) - it's simply about the virtue or otherwise of tip-up seats in spaces which are primarily intended for other purposes, be that "stuff", wheelchair users or access via the doors.

 

[Jim the Jim]

I actually find them helpful when I have a big suitcase as it means I can keep it with me and still sit down, whilst minimising the obstruction caused to other people. I rarely use them otherwise.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I actually find them helpful when I have a big suitcase as it means I can keep it with me and still sit down, whilst minimising the obstruction caused to other people. I rarely use them otherwise.

I suppose one could add "should there actually be areas of Tube style side facing seats on all trains which are in areas not dedicated for other purposes?" - that would deal with your use-case.

The best place for your large luggage, however, is on a luggage rack, and sufficient of these should be provided as dedicated space - because you can stack luggage this is much more efficient. If you want to keep an eye on it, take a seat facing that rack. Things like mirrors and CCTV can improve the view (I seem to recall 185s having mirrors to increase the number of seats that can keep an eye on it).

 

[High Dyke]

Personally I'm not a fan of 'tube style' side seats on longer journeys. I like to look out the window. On a Cl.170 though I do try to aim for the single seat near the cab end, when travelling on my own. I don't require to take up so much space.

On shorter journeys I will sit on a tip-up seat, where I have to, namely those in vestibule ends of a Cl.158. IMHO, at least one tip-up seat near the accessible area should be kept. That could be used if a wheelchair user has a carer / family member with them.

 

[TUC]

Whilst I recognise it would be difficult to enforce, would a single tip-up seat next to each wheelchair space be helpful, with clear signage that they are solely for use by companions of passengers in wheelchairs?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Whilst I recognise it would be difficult to enforce, would a single tip-up seat next to each wheelchair space be helpful, with clear signage that they are solely for use by companions of passengers in wheelchairs?

This does seem to be one of the few valid use-cases (if it can't be a fixed seat as you'd not get the wheelchair in otherwise). Yes, it should have clear signage stating that it must (use strong language, not "please") be given up for a companion to a wheelchair user even if no other seats are available.

Another thread regarding such signage: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-signage-to-avoid-conflicts-on-trains.275510/

 

[Meerkat]

Whilst I agree with you in principle I do quite like them. If I am not going far they give plenty of leg room and are close to the door

 

[Dr Hoo]

Whilst I agree with you in principle I do quite like them. If I am not going far they give plenty of leg room and are close to the door

Yes, they’re ideal for short hops (if not needed for wheelchairs, bikes and parents with buggies - fair enough).

I’m not sure where ‘avoiding conflict’ comes into it. There may well be seats ‘free’ half way along the saloon but try waking up a sleeping passenger in an aisle seat, with their luggage or a dog on the window seat if you’re only going a couple of intermediate stops…

 

[Bletchleyite]

Whilst I agree with you in principle I do quite like them. If I am not going far they give plenty of leg room and are close to the door

Yes, they’re ideal for short hops (if not needed for wheelchairs, bikes and parents with buggies - fair enough).

I’m not sure where ‘avoiding conflict’ comes into it. There may well be seats ‘free’ half way along the saloon but try waking up a sleeping passenger in an aisle seat, with their luggage or a dog on the window seat if you’re only going a couple of intermediate stops…

And this is the problem - people like them, but they are then taking space which has a dedicated purpose and are often reluctant to move. That's why I strongly feel they should be removed. If side-facing seating is desirable for short hops, fit some of that in place of a couple of rows of airline seats, as e.g. 150/2s have. While the units were junk in many ways, the mixed layout in the Marston Vale 230s, with some normal 2+2 airline and facing seating and some side-facing seating retained, worked really rather well for a regional DMU on a local stopping service, and bears some resemblance to the excellent Met Line S8s which similarly have a mix.

It's particularly of note that the dedicated uses don't have alternatives, i.e. wheelchairs should only be placed in the wheelchair space, bicycles only in the bicycle space, whereas the passenger can in most cases stand instead of occupying those areas.

 

[bramling]

Quite a lot of trains seem to have tip-up seats, often in order to increase the nominal seated capacity of the train above a specific value to tick a box. These are often located in places where there is a potential conflict over the use of the space, such as in areas primarily intended for wheelchair users, bicycles, luggage or even door vestibules. This often causes unnecessary conflict between users, particularly as they are popular with some people in preference to normal seating because of e.g. not needing to sit next to someone or effectively having infinite legroom.

But are they more trouble than they are worth? My view is that they are, and they should all be removed and none installed on any new train.

Thing is, they only really have value overall when the train is at a very specific capacity range. If we say that a coach has 70 seats and 3 tip-ups, up to 70 on board there is a normal seat for everyone (some may choose the tip-ups, but that's then unnecessary conflict). From 71 to 73 passengers and the tip ups mean everyone gets a seat. But above 73 towards a crush load you can get more people in if the tip-ups aren't in use so people use the space for standing.

The one thing I could see a case for is that on trains where bicycles aren't carried in the peak, the cycle space tip-ups could be unlocked during the time bicycles aren't allowed, and locked when they are - but that relies on crew remembering to do it, and isn't it the case that at peak times the standing room would be more valuable?

Thus overall I think they should be removed (but at an absolute minimum clear signage should be present stating the primary use has priority and the seats must be vacated if requested for that purpose). What do others think?

That doesn't go to say that there shouldn't be companion seats in wheelchair/pram areas, but these are better fixed rather than tip-up (unless it needs to be tipped up to get the pram/wheelchair in and then dropped again) and should carry clear signage about who they are intended for and that they must be given up to those people. But on no account should they be placed such that if in use the space cannot be used for its intended purpose.

Note - this thread is not about whether things like bicycles or large luggage should be carried or not (I rather hope nobody would think wheelchair users shouldn't! ) - it's simply about the virtue or otherwise of tip-up seats in spaces which are primarily intended for other purposes, be that "stuff", wheelchair users or access via the doors.

In my view, remove them. They cause too much trouble.

The only exception might be on something like LU. On the Northern Line there are four “multi-use spaces” per car, which is over-provision. Here the tip up seats seem reasonable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The only exception might be on something like LU. On the Northern Line there are four “multi-use spaces” per car, which is over-provision. Here the tip up seats seem reasonable.

Every rule...

One thing that's unusual about the deep Tube is that children aside only roughly the middle third or so of the coach width is useful for standees because it's so low at the sides, so this is probably a reasonable exception.

 

[Dr Hoo]

So, the typical ‘railway’ solution to what I observe as an almost theoretical problem. Take away something that people like and make them stand.

For what it’s worth, the only time I’ve ever seen a person refuse to move was when a lady on a tip-up seat in the buggy area on the tube refused to to move when a couple with a toddler in a buggy and the mother actually nursing a tiny baby at the time got on at Green Park.
How often does “unnecessary conflict” actually occur? The great majority of passengers ‘make way’ as appropriate in my experience.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So, the typical ‘railway’ solution to what I observe as an almost theoretical problem.

It's not a theoretical problem. I've even had "will you move your bike so I can sit there?" to which the answer was obviously "no, it's the bike space, I'm not allowed to put it anywhere else". And getting people who were already there to move can be difficult.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

If you are a cyclist you can sit with your bike, rather than looking anxiously down the saloon in case it gets nicked. You are also on hand to negotiate with cyclists boarding later and how to stack said bikes.

 

[Dr Hoo]

It's not a theoretical problem. I've even had "will you move your bike so I can sit there?" to which the answer was obviously "no, it's the bike space, I'm not allowed to put it anywhere else". And getting people who were already there to move can be difficult.

This sounds like a reasonable conversation. You seem to have a rather low threshold for “conflict”.
On Northern Class 195s in the Hope Valley I see plenty of polite requests when people join with a bike at Bamford or wherever being met with ‘success’ rather than any difficulty.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This sounds like a reasonable conversation. You seem to have a rather low threshold for “conflict”.

Yes, I think systems are best designed when any form of negotiation between individual users is avoided. Because unfortunately a lot of people don't act reasonably, and many staff aren't willing to intervene either.

I also think people are a lot more reasonable away from London. On the south London DOO services if you ask someone to move for a bike the politest response you're likely to get is eff off, while the pulling of a knife or threatening of one isn't entirely outside the realms of possibility.

 

[LickeyIncliner]

I notice that nobody has defended tip-up seats in door areas. Those just seem to be an invitation to people to obstruct the doors. That includes people who should know better, such as an off-duty member of GA staff on a 755 recently who seemed to be deliberately delaying boarding and alighting - there were plenty of other seats available

 

[Dr Hoo]

You’re probably right that attitudes vary across GB.
I’m currently on a TfW Class 153 where a couple of ladies with heavy luggage ignored the luggage rack above the bike space and the pictograms pointing out that neither luggage nor feet should be placed on seats and them proceeded to block the aisle and delaying boarding as they lugged and struggled whilst trying to decide what to do with their cases in a four-seat bay. Eventually a young student, who was sitting in an airline pair opposite and had offered to help them eventually gave up her seat so that ladies could pile the luggage on it.
The ladies then monopolised the bay with their handbags, thus taking up six seats on a very small train!
Perhaps someone will suggest taking ALL seats out to avoid this sort of thing.

 

[Egg Centric]

As a fat person, I find them great as in standard otherwise I would inevitably be in someone else's seat as well when sitting down, which essentially means if I'm on my own then out of consideration to others I won't sit down on any busy service. Because of where tip up seats ususally are and the gaps between them this doesn't apply.

Bench seats are great too for the same reason but I can't think of anything with them still apart from the 72 Stock

 

[LittleRedTrain]

I notice that nobody has defended tip-up seats in door areas. Those just seem to be an invitation to people to obstruct the doors. That includes people who should know better, such as an off-duty member of GA staff on a 755 recently who seemed to be deliberately delaying boarding and alighting - there were plenty of other seats available

These should definitely be outlawed, all they do is cause trouble.

My (now) wife had an argument with an obnoxious drunk sitting on one of these seats on an EMR 222. Despite her being on crutches at the time and having real trouble walking, he refused to get up to allow her to alight from the train through the adjacent door, insisting she use another one.

The situation escalated and he ended up assaulting her. The train was delayed and he ended up being kicked off by the TM. The station staff were lovely but BTP were too overstretched to attend and the perpetrator ended up just wandering off to cause trouble elsewhere!

 

[Ashley Hill]

The tip up seats in the bike space on 150/2s are a pain. More often they are used by pram owners who are reluctant to move when a bike turns up. Those single ones by the doors aren’t too bad as the user generally has no choice but to stand when the doors are opened on a busy train with frequent stops. 143s suffered the same with prams,at least they’ve gone.

 

[JD2168]

I’ve used the tip up seats on Northern Class 195’s particularly when the train is busy, sometimes the location of them is awkward particularly near the toilet area.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The ones in doorways on the 158s are useful if you're doing a very short hop such as Dewsbury to Batley, the problem is when services are so overcrowded that you end up with people in them for much longer journeys such as Leeds to Sowerby Bridge and beyond. Unfortunately putting up signs saying they're only for use on shorter trips is probably unenforceable and impractical. If the established etiquette for using them was to get up and move out of the way during station calls, that would be fine in theory... But you just know that someone would try to nick the seat at every stop!

On balance they probably cause more trouble than they solve when placed in those areas. Get rid.

 

[LudwigTails]

i think the flip up seats have their advantages. If the space isnt used for wheel chairs and for some reason other seats are occupied? I would give those seats a try until it needs to be used for wheel chairs. Or weird thing, unless the main seats on the train is just uncomfortable I would rather sit in the flip up seats if said option is there.
Or like people said in previous posts. During busy times these flip up seats come in handy I have sat on those seats a lot during my trip to and from Loughborough, (and goodness EMR services are so overcrowded...)

 

[yorksrob]

It's a shame they didn't keep those in the Mk4 vestibules. Would have been ideal for hops from Leeds to Wakefield.

The ones on 158's are useful at busy times and times of disruption

 

[Failed Unit]

I found the downsides of them last week on the Elizabeth line, which removal does seem the only way forward. Train 1, when I pushed the wheelchair on the people moved. Train 2 they refused so the wheelchair needed to be in the doorway. This wasn't a problem for this journey because the platforms were always on the opposite side. But on DOO trains, if you get someone that refuses to move the wheelchair ends up getting in everyone elses way as it needs to be in doorway. Have no seat removes the problem. It is rare that they are the only fee seats on the train. On this occasion the people occupying them could have say down, but probably not together.

 

[A0]

Yes, I think systems are best designed when any form of negotiation between individual users is avoided. Because unfortunately a lot of people don't act reasonably, and many staff aren't willing to intervene either.

It's not a theoretical problem. I've even had "will you move your bike so I can sit there?" to which the answer was obviously "no, it's the bike space, I'm not allowed to put it anywhere else". And getting people who were already there to move can be difficult.

Mmmm. Think I can see the problem.....