Obliged to use cycle storage?

[CaptainHaddock]

Surely you just get rid of the tip up seats there? No massive loss, and people could stand there if they wanted.

Couldn't agree more! I've taken my bike on 185s many times and almost always find someone sitting in the cycle space even when there are many other seats available.

As a standard road bike when stored horizontally takes up the equivalent of 4 seats, surely the most sensible solution is to offer a dedicated cycle space where bikes can be stored vertically like on XC Voyagers or Northern 333s? Not only does this take up less space, but in my experience I've found other passengers don't tend to put their luggage there as it's obvious the space is for bikes only.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As a standard road bike when stored horizontally takes up the equivalent of 4 seats, surely the most sensible solution is to offer a dedicated cycle space where bikes can be stored vertically like on XC Voyagers or Northern 333s? Not only does this take up less space, but in my experience I've found other passengers don't tend to put their luggage there as it's obvious the space is for bikes only.

Yes, these do seem to work, and while a little awkward to use make very efficient use of space which is normally not used for anything at all.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Secondly, there is provision for cycles, in the form of a fairly standard (as found on most Bombardier EMUs and DMUs as well) multipurpose area by the disabled bog

It's possible to store a bike there, but the space is not specifically provided for bicycles and there is no way of securing the bike to prevent it falling over.

It's the equivalent of the disabled space on the 185s which the OP was referring to.

 

[marks87]

Looking at both extremes of this argument basically sums up the British attitude to cycling - you've got "cyclists are scum of the earth" at one end, "I'm a cyclist so I am God" at the other. The vast majority of people (cyclists or otherwise) sit in the middle ("I don't mind most cyclists" and "I obey the rules etc.").

If only we could get everyone into that middle ground, we might end up with an attitude to cycling that's more like continental Europe.

I was in Copenhagen a few months ago and their commuter trains have areas like this:

(Picture shows space for 6 bikes down one side of a carriage, with arrows pointing cyclists in one direction for unloading)

Everyone with a bike used it and followed the arrows in the correct direction; and every without a bike knew not to obstruct it. And yes those are tip-downs seats, but at least twice I saw someone get up when a bike got on.

Obviously the narrower loading gauge in the UK would make an exact replica impractical. But the general point is that 1) the train operators provide the space in the first place; and 2) people on both sides respected the rules.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

True, but not every cyclist want to respect the rules and just want to dump their cycle anywhere. Those of us who complain, or have to adhere to the rules are just big jessies, and that attitude unfortunately tarnishes reputations for ALL cyclists!


As i have said before, any cyclist struggling to get onto the train because people or other obstructions are in the way, see the train crew, we will sort it out. But dont just dump it anywhere and think it wont be a problem. This thread has shown that actually, it is! Yet i do have to agree, the provision of suitable accomodation does need to improve. But in the meantime we have what we have, so dont take it out on the traincrew who are justifiably doing their job!

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's possible to store a bike there, but the space is not specifically provided for bicycles and there is no way of securing the bike to prevent it falling over.

Can't say I've ever found it a problem, though I agree adding a seatbelt style strap would help matters a little. There is room to lean a bike over sufficiently that it doesn't fall over.

The space *is* specifically provided for bicycles on one side (unless a wheelchair requires it). There is a sign, though I forget precisely what it says. I have never found there to be a problem with the use of this space, though sometimes (rarely) you do end up with bikes in door vestibules this is helped by all platforms between Euston and MKC exclusive, except Tring P1 (or P2 in the rare case of a northbound train being looped, or a Bletchley starter/terminator), being on the same side.

It's the equivalent of the disabled space on the 185s which the OP was referring to.

That it is (or indeed the Class 150 multipurpose area), the key difference being that on TPE putting cycles there is not permitted, while on LM it is.

 

[marks87]

True, but not every cyclist want to respect the rules and just want to dump their cycle anywhere.

That's part of my point though - the two extremes combine to make cycling almost taboo in the UK.

When you go to many places in Europe (Scandinavia, The Low Countries etc.) cycling is widely tolerated because of mutual respect - cyclists respect the rules (of the road, on transport), and everyone else respects the cyclists' choice of transport.

Those of us who complain, or have to adhere to the rules are just big jessies, and that attitude unfortunately tarnishes reputations for ALL cyclists!

Which I think is wrong.

I'm sure you'll have encountered ordinary passengers who act like idiots for whatever reasons. So why not just lump all "awkward/moronic train users" together? Why single out those who happen to have a bike and use that to tarnish all others who have a bike?

 

[jon0844]

My hybrid bike weighs about 10kg, which is about the same weight as a toddler. Anyone who gets "crushed" by it is being a big jessie.

But on the flip side, my bike isn't lightweight and has lots of things that would very much hurt someone, or at the very least scratch them. I therefore don't take it on a train.

Some of the bikes put in the doorways, as I'm sure you've seen too, are not lightweight bikes. They can also be filthy, and I've certainly got dirt and grease on me when walking though and having to move, or move around, bikes blocking access to the vestibule.

I don't regard a bike, or two bikes, in a doorway that also blocks access to the aisles and requires the owner(s) to get up and move them, as being good in the case of an emergency where people need to exit quickly.

We can assume the chances of needing to evacuate quickly is a VERY slim chance thanks to our high safety standards, but the risks do still exist nonetheless.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's part of my point though - the two extremes combine to make cycling almost taboo in the UK.

It might be that the two places I spend most of my time in the UK are Milton Keynes and London, both of which have very high levels of cycling (though in very different ways) - but while I do recognise the issue the suggestion that cycling is somehow "taboo" seems rather extreme.

 

[jon0844]

Yes, these do seem to work, and while a little awkward to use make very efficient use of space which is normally not used for anything at all.

What if the tip down seats could be locked out of use somehow, so in the peak where bikes may not be allowed, they're in use, and then a member of staff locks them back when bikes ARE allowed so the area can only be used by bikes.

Then on the floor, TfL bus style, have a big picture of a bike so it's clear it's for bikes. Add a sticker to say that the area can be occupied by passengers between nn:nn and nn:nn and job done.

Not that expensive to do I'd have thought.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't regard a bike, or two bikes, in a doorway that also blocks access to the aisles and requires the owner(s) to get up and move them, as being good in the case of an emergency where people need to exit quickly.

We can assume the chances of needing to evacuate quickly is a VERY slim chance thanks to our high safety standards, but the risks do still exist nonetheless.

It is almost never the case that the best thing to do in the event of a train crash is to exit quickly. A train is not an aircraft. The emergency procedure posters make that very clear, and over time a number of people have been killed as a result of pulling the door release and self-evacuating when to stay put or move to another carriage would have been much safer.

In any case, having pulled the egress handle, it would be quick and easy to shove any obstructing bicycles or luggage straight out of the door prior to exiting yourself.

Aircraft are very different indeed. Small doors (particularly the overwing), huge amounts of fuel on board, little crashworthiness beyond minor landing incidents, massive fire risk. Were they not, I suspect rail luggage allowances would be much tighter, and bags in doorways would not be tolerated in the way they are.

Blocking the aisle is not really acceptable, as you say. The above refers to when only the vestibule is blocked on one side where there is no platform (I mentioned the south WCML as an example of very consistent platforming).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What if the tip down seats could be locked out of use somehow, so in the peak where bikes may not be allowed, they're in use, and then a member of staff locks them back when bikes ARE allowed so the area can only be used by bikes.

Then on the floor, TfL bus style, have a big picture of a bike so it's clear it's for bikes. Add a sticker to say that the area can be occupied by passengers between nn:nn and nn:nn and job done.

Not that expensive to do I'd have thought.

That seems a quite reasonable idea to me. In multipurpose areas like the 350s they could also be unlocked for a wheelchair passenger's companion.

To add to the above, as a cyclist who occasionally transports a bike by train (not often, though, it mostly just takes me to the station) I would be happy to pay a fee for carriage if that allowed enhanced facilities to be provided.

 

[marks87]

It might be that the two places I spend most of my time in the UK are Milton Keynes and London, both of which have very high levels of cycling (though in very different ways) - but while I do recognise the issue the suggestion that cycling is somehow "taboo" seems rather extreme.

Maybe "taboo" was the wrong word, but I think it's fair to say there isn't the same level of tolerance of cyclists that you find on the continent. Which, to reiterate the point, is brought about by two extremes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Maybe "taboo" was the wrong word, but I think it's fair to say there isn't the same level of tolerance of cyclists that you find on the continent. Which, to reiterate the point, is brought about by two extremes.

Yes, I would agree. I also (as I've posted before) dislike the "cars vs. cyclists" thing in and of itself. Honda summed it up wonderfully in their advertising - "aren't we all just trying to get somewhere?"

 

[jon0844]

I realise jumping off the train would only be in exceptional circumstances, but if that happens to be when you've just gone one or two stations along from Cambridge to London and a group of cyclists have boarded a 4 car 365 and put 2-3 bikes in every single vestibule, then you've got a problem.

Especially given where you need to get to in order to open the doors.

The chances are incredibly slim, and I won't pretend otherwise, but there are problems with bikes filling up vestibules on trains that aren't suitable for their carriage. I'm totally for refurbishments that give more space.

Indeed, I think the 700s have shown the right sort of idea and the way forward that will hopefully be emulated on other stock (and refreshes) in the years to come. Nice open areas that can take people standing when not busy but are designed for wheelchair users, those with luggage, buggies, bikes etc.

It's public transport and many members of the public will need room for these things at some time in their life.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I realise jumping off the train would only be in exceptional circumstances, but if that happens to be when you've just gone one or two stations along from Cambridge to London and a group of cyclists have boarded a 4 car 365 and put 2-3 bikes in every single vestibule, then you've got a problem.

Cambridge does seem to have a unique issue along those lines (not only that, from what I hear, 4 car is completely inadequate and 8 are required). Having that many bikes on LM trains, say, is completely unheard of.

I also remain of the view that you don't have a problem. If (and with an EMU it's even less likely as a serious fire in an accident is infinitessimally unlikely as there's no fuel there) I need to get off a train quickly, I will have no qualms at throwing any inanimate obstruction out of the way in order that I can do so, be that a bicycle, a piece of luggage or whatever.

 

[misterredmist]

The problem with the 185's is that such a short train should not be doing those distances, and the amount of times those sets are overcrowded with people, and if anyone has boarded from MAN Airport, all the luggage bays will be maxed out.......

Reading the posts above, there are obviously great differences of opinion, but when all is said and done, the cycles are carried FOC, the Train Crew have a difficult job to do and in this day and age HAVE to prioritise safety and err on the side of caution....

 

[gimmea50anyday]

I'm sure you'll have encountered ordinary passengers who act like idiots for whatever reasons. So why not just lump all "awkward/moronic train users" together?

Oh, we do! It would be a wonderful railway of it werent for those 'bloomin passengers!!!

The problem with the 185's is that such a short train should not be doing those distances, and the amount of times those sets are overcrowded with people, and if anyone has boarded from MAN Airport, all the luggage bays will be maxed out.......

Its a pity the newcastle route didnt get the 180's when there was a slim chance pre FGW taking them back!

Still the 442's should make a difference if configured sensibly.....

when all is said and done, the cycles are carried FOC, the Train Crew have a difficult job to do and in this day and age HAVE to prioritise safety and err on the side of caution....

Im grateful some people recognise this. Many thanks

 

[Bletchleyite]

The problem with the 185's is that such a short train should not be doing those distances

Indeed. The 185s have been utterly unsuited to their duties from day one, and the Government made this worse by refusing the proposal for a 4th car which, if fitted with Standard accommodation, would have significantly reduced the problems caused by overcrowding on TPE.

 

[Tetchytyke]

a group of cyclists have boarded a 4 car 365 and put 2-3 bikes in every single vestibule, then you've got a problem.

Where else can a cyclist put a bike on a 365? I can't recall any specific cycle areas on them.

Can't say I've ever found it a problem, though I agree adding a seatbelt style strap would help matters a little. There is room to lean a bike over sufficiently that it doesn't fall over.

There isn't a sign saying it is bike storage; both sides refer to wheelchairs only. I checked last time I was on the train with my bike, as that is where I put mine when on LM.

I don't find it a problem either- I hold on to it- but it does rather contradict the view that it is "dangerous" to put the bike anywhere else because it could "crush someone" when if falls over. And we're not talking about piddly little commuter trains on London Midland either.

I'd also agree about the "lack of tolerance", and it ends up being a circle of distrust and aggression. Cyclists get constant rubbish off people so they get defensive when anyone asks them to do anything, which ends up coming across as aggression, which makes people get more "assertive" when asking them to move, which makes them more defensive, etc etc...

I actively avoided the 185s when I regularly took the bike between Newcastle and Durham, getting people to move out of the bike space was more hassle than it was worth. The best for safe storage were the EC trains (though you got the odd guard who refused carriage without a reservation, most were good) and the most convenient were the Voyagers' bike racks that couldn't be used for anything else.

Those of us who complain, or have to adhere to the rules are just big jessies

That isn't what I said, as you well know.

Though it's interesting the "dangerous" wheelchair space on a 185 is the space that London Midland expect you to use on a largely identical 350.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Though it's interesting the "dangerous" wheelchair space on a 185 is the space that London Midland expect you to use on a largely identical 350.

It's not so much that it's dangerous on a 185, but more that it's safer to use the dedicated space as it is provided.

 

[Pigeon]

Sounds like the old boxed in storage area on a 158?

That is what I consider to be most likely; I just haven't been able to google up a picture to confirm it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That is what I consider to be most likely; I just haven't been able to google up a picture to confirm it.

Those areas were a right nuisance - they work much better on the TOCs that have opened them up.

 

[jon0844]

365s have space for one bike if there's no wheelchair. It's outside the accessible toilet.

It's not really big enough for anything and it's quite cramped. Probably one of only a few niggles about the stock.

 

[BurtonM]

Those areas were a right nuisance - they work much better on the TOCs that have opened them up.

Is it considered open or closed on an EMT set? I've used one with a bike before and I needed to use my own lock to secure my bike (official way of doing things too IIRC).

 

[yorkie]

Is it considered open or closed on an EMT set? I've used one with a bike before and I needed to use my own lock to secure my bike (official way of doing things too IIRC).

I've not seen a 158 with the infamous 'cupboard' for a long time. They were problematical because it was very difficult to fit more than one bike in them, and they were - theoretically - meant to store two!

 

[Jonfun]

Is it considered open or closed on an EMT set? I've used one with a bike before and I needed to use my own lock to secure my bike (official way of doing things too IIRC).

I don't know whether you mean physically locking the bike to the train, but if so it is very strongly discouraged. Not only does it mean that, if needs be, the traincrew can't shift it if for whatever reason it needs shifting, but also I've seen a train delayed because a bike was locked to the bike storage area, stored incorrectly so as to block pretty much any form of access through the vestibule and its owner wouldn't answer tannoy calls. I also know of an occasion whereby someone locked their bike to the train, and promptly broke their key in the lock, the result being their incredibly expensive, top of the range steed ending up in a depot on the other side of the country where someone had the tools to remove it. Add in a few occasions whereby a bike's been locked to the train and the owner has completely forgotten they were travelling with it and got off, and it starts to seem like a bit of a daft idea.

If you feel the need to immobilise your bike, chain one of the wheels to the frame.

 

[marks87]

If you feel the need to immobilise your bike, chain one of the wheels to the frame.

You assume that by "secure" he meant "prevent theft".

My reading of the post was he meant "prevent from moving at all". And if you're stowing a bike vertically, it absolutely needs to be secured in that way - and in the absence of a strap, the only alternative is your own chain.

 

[Jonfun]

I'm unfamiliar with the exact method of bike storage being referred to so I'll leave that to those who are, but the vertical ones I am familiar with, there's no need to add anything whatsoever additional to the mounting frame that's provided.

 

[LowLevel]

My TOC has started putting posters in cycle areas stating among other things that it's not permitted to lock a bike to the train.

Having had to get the help of the transport police to break a lock off when someone forgot his bike and we ended up 210 miles away from him I can see why. That's without the security issues as pioneered by the IRA related to cycle frames.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm unfamiliar with the exact method of bike storage being referred to so I'll leave that to those who are, but the vertical ones I am familiar with, there's no need to add anything whatsoever additional to the mounting frame that's provided.

Indeed, you put the wheel in the slot and hang the other wheel on the hook.

Preventing it from being nicked is done by sitting with the vestibule in view or standing in that vestibule if the train is quite busy. (I notice on Pendolinos the 4 seats nearest the bike area are marked "Reserved Cyclist" these days).