If the button on an internal door doesn't work it's very unlikely that you will be overcarried and miss your stop. If you don't press the button to open an external door hard enough you're at risk of being overcarried as you have far less time to react.
I thought we were mainly talking about exit door buttons (external) - though I am not too sure whether the original Class 385 concern was talking about external or internal buttons. As stated above, the reason is not that they are very reliable, but rather that it's not a big deal with internal buttons.
There's no need for a case study on the type of buttons. It is objective, that a sensor is less reliable than a physical button. Have you ever gone to a public bathroom and struggled to use the water/soap/dryer because there is a sensor to activate them? The issue with sensors is that their location needs to be extremely precise and clearly labeled. The distance from your hand to the button needed for triggering is not clear. The lack of tactile feedback is an issue for blind users. There is no reason to scrap physical buttons - it works, there is nothing to 'fix'.
Plenty of them in Sheffield, been around a fair few years, I'd guess at least 15.
You've obviously not tried to use the buttons that kept falling apart on the Class 379's.
Apologies - I wasn't too sure making my claim, as I don't normally pay attention to the types of buttons on crossings. Will edit my post.
Is it? In my experience capacitive switches are more reliable than physical ones.
We are still opening new lines without level boarding, I wouldn't be so confident the industry has the needs of the disabled as a priority.
And I wonder if they actually engage with groups who represent disabled users. They might, does anybody know for example if they asked blind people if a clickable physical button is essential to their needs? I suspect they would get a variety of answers from yes to don’t care as we use touch sensitive screens all the time now in iPhones. Its never one fits all unfortunately.
Not sure I like the sound of this, where can I read more? Thanks
Touch sensitive are a whole different issue as they don't work with most prosthetic's
What's the 'old style'? I wouldn't want to see a return of the pneumatic door buttons of the class 317. They take so long to actually do somehting that people who don't know them give a quick press then wonder why the doors aren't opening. So they give it another quick press, until a kind person helps them or the train leaves.
Sonetimes though the reason boils down to “this looks more modern and sexy”!
The last thing I want is more noise. The buttons on, for example, the 150s, 455s and 800s work perfectly well. What's to improve?
I don't like them either. The old ones, I could feel the button move and the wait sign lit up instantly. The newer ones have no feedback and it takes two or three seconds for the red light on or around the button to illuminate. Just long enough for me to wonder whether the button is working. Sometimes they don't work at all, far more often than the old design. In what way is this better? I'm going to guess that the new version is cheaper.
Anecdote or data?
Personal experience. Do they work at all with gloves? Massive oversight, if not.
Asthetics over usability
The ones used on Class 318/320/334/380 where you can press and hold the button before the train stops, and the doors open instantly once released by driver.
Erm, they break frequently. You probably just haven't noticed, which is unsurprising, because when they're broken the doors are isolated and left open. I don't need to point out why the external doors being isolated is rather more serious an issue. Perhaps be a tad more careful with your assumptions!
The slam doors were around very recently, and this was under regular discussion. Most people couldn't wait for doors that open without being incredibly heavy and awkward to unlatch. Many disabled people weren't able to open or close the door whatsoever without assistance. Many staff were also embarrassed by the awkwardness and risk of injury. It seems rather insensitive of you to argue that the new doors aren't better.
But that doesn't speak to the point being made - there's a claim that they fail more often than physical push buttons but without hard data to back it up.
The point being made was that the poster was, quite unsafely, relying on an availability bias. As to the availability of data about that question I don't have any access to any which is why I didn't address it.
That is a terrifying thought. I hope it's just a dodgy button you encountered and they do work with gloves almost all the time. Does anyone know?
