Use of ramp in trains?

[Howardh]

Dad wants a train ride. Which means Mum has to come too (long story).

Basically, with Mum's alzhiemers, she isn't in a wheelchair but becomes scared and has difficulty when trying to use an unfamiliar step (ie getting on/off train).

1. Could a ramp be used in this situation and
2. If so, how does a pax "book" a ramp? Do we have to ask in advance (how?) or simply approach the guard on arrival/departure?

many thanks.

 

[D365]

Get in touch with the train company (or companies) that you are planning to travel with. Make sure that you book assistance at least 24 hours in advance of when you are planning to travel.

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/disabled_passengers.aspx

 

[Howardh]

Get in touch with the train company (or companies) that you are planning to travel with. Make sure that you book assistance at least 24 hours in advance of when you are planning to travel.

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/disabled_passengers.aspx

Thanks! That rules out spur-of-the-moment travel then

 

[D365]

Thanks! That rules out spur-of-the-moment travel then

It's mainly so that staff are made fully aware of the situation and are ready to help you out.

 

[The Ham]

It's mainly so that staff are made fully aware of the situation and are ready to help you out.

Although my observation is that staff will always try and help where they can, but will politely point out that booking will always ensure a smoother operation.

 

[superkev]

I fail to see why even new trains don't have integral ramps adjacent to the cabs like buses have. London ones are powered too.
K

 

[Howardh]

I fail to see why even new trains don't have integral ramps adjacent to the cabs like buses have. London ones are powered too.
K

Would that be possible with the different height and shape of platforms?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Although my observation is that staff will always try and help where they can, but will politely point out that booking will always ensure a smoother operation.

*like*

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Me and my Mum also ring, book assistence, and tell station staff a week in advanced. We always get shouted at somewhere along the route for not telling them in advance when we did, despite there's a legal requirement for wheelchair users to be able to turn up and go just like everyone else.
It makes no difference except you'll get shouted at a little less, you're under no need to book though. So don't worry if you can't get hold of anyone after a 20min call.

 

[221129]

I fail to see why even new trains don't have integral ramps adjacent to the cabs like buses have. London ones are powered too.
K

Because the isn't a standard gap between a train and the platform...

 

[AnonymousUser1]

Because the isn't a standard gap between a train and the platform...

don't go confusing people with facts ...

 

[JamesT]

Because the isn't a standard gap between a train and the platform...

What's the standard gap for a bus then?

 

[TheEdge]

What's the standard gap for a bus then?

Perhaps a better way to put it is unlike a bus which can maneuver closer or further from the curb as needed or kneel down either as much or as little as needed a train can make no adjustments for the multitude of different heights and distances a platform can be.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

What's the standard gap for a bus then?

there is a standard height above the road surface for bus stops and standards which allow a bus to draw parallel to the standard height area assuming that the bus stop isn't blocked by illegally parked vehicles ...

as has been pointed out the lateral seperation of the bus and kerb is in the hands of the driver and the height of bus stops aobve the road is standardised ... this is before even considering the number of busses with front air suspension that can be 'knelt' to improve ramp graidents even with the raised kerb now standard at a bus stop

 

[Tio Terry]

there is a standard height above the road surface for bus stops and standards which allow a bus to draw parallel to the standard height area assuming that the bus stop isn't blocked by illegally parked vehicles ...

as has been pointed out the lateral seperation of the bus and kerb is in the hands of the driver and the height of bus stops aobve the road is standardised ... this is before even considering the number of busses with front air suspension that can be 'knelt' to improve ramp graidents even with the raised kerb now standard at a bus stop

There is a standard set of dimensions for platforms that will meet the TSI for PRM. If it's applied the maximum vertical difference between train and platform will be no greater than 50mm and the horizontal gap no greater than 100mm. From memory the standard within the UK is GIRT 7016.

However, it's not always possible to meet these requirements in an economical manner so derogation's are granted for existing infrastructure. All new infrastructure must comply.

If you take Waterloo platforms 1-4 which are to be lengthened for 10 car trains as an example. There is a pretty significant vertical step between train and platform but to reduce it would be extremely costly. To lower the track is not an easy option, the track has little ballast below it and is built upon brick arches, also it would affect the train/bufferstop interface. To raise the platform would cause interface problems with the existing stairways, lifts and the concourse which would require some sort of ramp between the platform and the concourse. The TOC (SWT) use ramps to allow PRM access to trains in this case and the RSSB grant a derogation against the Railway Group Standard because of this.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

There is a standard set of dimensions for platforms that will meet the TSI for PRM. If it's applied the maximum vertical difference between train and platform will be no greater than 50mm and the horizontal gap no greater than 100mm. From memory the standard within the UK is GIRT 7016.

However, it's not always possible to meet these requirements in an economical manner so derogation's are granted for existing infrastructure. All new infrastructure must comply.

If you take Waterloo platforms 1-4 which are to be lengthened for 10 car trains as an example. There is a pretty significant vertical step between train and platform but to reduce it would be extremely costly. To lower the track is not an easy option, the track has little ballast below it and is built upon brick arches, also it would affect the train/bufferstop interface. To raise the platform would cause interface problems with the existing stairways, lifts and the concourse which would require some sort of ramp between the platform and the concourse. The TOC (SWT) use ramps to allow PRM access to trains in this case and the RSSB grant a derogation against the Railway Group Standard because of this.

the very fact that these derogations are being allowed where the works are reasonably practicable if expensive is where the issues are arising

 

[6Gman]

Outside of London (I think they do things differently there) the (bus) ramp is within immediate sight and control of the driver. This would not be possible on a train, which would raise safety issues.

 

[plastictaffy]

Who even travels on buses anyway??

 

[najaB]

Who even travels on buses anyway??

Must... not.... feed... the... Troll.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

http://www.railway-technology.com/contractors/passenger/u_lift/u_lift3.html

Don't know if that would be viable in any UK trains

 

[edwin_m]

the very fact that these derogations are being allowed where the works are reasonably practicable if expensive is where the issues are arising

The legal definition allows for something to be deemed not "reasonably practicable" if the is cost is disproportionate to the benefit.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

The legal definition allows for something to be deemed not "reasonably practicable" if the is cost is disproportionate to the benefit.

however these costs are not disproprtionate , or if a refurbishment was more than few years away without the need for such compliance changes a time limited derogation should be issued .


cost is not a get out of jail free care for reasonably practiciable as the costs of not doing the changes also has to take into account the likelhood and scope of any fine resultign from criminal action or the costs associated with a high value personal injury claim ...

 

[TheEscapist_]

Me and my Mum also ring, book assistence, and tell station staff a week in advanced. We always get shouted at somewhere along the route for not telling them in advance when we did, despite there's a legal requirement for wheelchair users to be able to turn up and go just like everyone else.
It makes no difference except you'll get shouted at a little less, you're under no need to book though. So don't worry if you can't get hold of anyone after a 20min call.

I hope you're exaggerating when you say you're being shouted at. I treat someone who doesn't book the same way I treat someone who does book. Never would I talk down to them telling them to book. Everyone has the right to turn up and travel and if they need assistance to travel then the should be confident that they can travel without booking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[swt class 450]

Dad wants a train ride. Which means Mum has to come too (long story).

Basically, with Mum's alzhiemers, she isn't in a wheelchair but becomes scared and has difficulty when trying to use an unfamiliar step (ie getting on/off train).

1. Could a ramp be used in this situation and
2. If so, how does a pax "book" a ramp? Do we have to ask in advance (how?) or simply approach the guard on arrival/departure?

many thanks.

Just ask the Guard (as long as the train isnt DOO) and they should definitely be able to help with a ramp and provide any assistance needed. The TOCs always like to tell people to book assistance 24 hours in advance but you dont have to. You can just turn up (without booking assistance) and Guards will almost always help whether or not you have booked assistance.

 

[edwin_m]

however these costs are not disproprtionate , or if a refurbishment was more than few years away without the need for such compliance changes a time limited derogation should be issued .

cost is not a get out of jail free care for reasonably practiciable as the costs of not doing the changes also has to take into account the likelhood and scope of any fine resultign from criminal action or the costs associated with a high value personal injury claim ...

That is your opinion, evidently not shared by whoever has signed off the scheme, who I imagine would be fully aware of the legal requirements.

Being a terminus, trains spend some time in the platforms at Waterloo and there will be lots of staff, so I guess ramp assistance will be available even if not booked in advance. Hence the disbenefit of the step from the platform to the train may not be too great - and have you thought about the millions of taxpayers' money and extra disruption that would be needed to fix it? A bigger question to my mind is what they plan to do for somewhere like Vauxhall or Earlsfield where the frequency of trains using the same platform means using the ramp could cause a significant problem.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

That is your opinion, evidently not shared by whoever has signed off the scheme, who I imagine would be fully aware of the legal requirements.

no , the tens and hundreds of thousands of pounds spent elsehwere to ensure compliance indicate such things are obviously not reasonably practicable ...