Risk and reality

[phil-b259]

30 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

I thought safety signs on railways had to be in at least 4 EU languages ? (I know much of the continent on railways it is).

 

Similarly I thought disabled toilets was the reason why much of our stock is going for scrap right now.

 

As regards languages Nope!
 

There is no legal requirement for signs in the UK to be in any languages other than English (plus Welsh within Wales). Those 'Danger d Mort' signs you see on old photos of Dover Western Docks station, etc were not legally required and would have no legal force unless accompanied by English wording. Similarly I understand several stations in West London have some signs in Urdu due to the extensive Indian population locally - such things have no legal force unless the message is also written in English

 

The UK is very bad at provision of signs in other languages. You go to the Gare du Nord and you will find every single sign in the place is  bilingual. By contrast the only bilingual signage at St Pancras is a single one at the Eurostar arrivals exit saying 'Sorte'.

 

Of course the other factor is given the preference is to use internationally agreed pictograms alongside text rather than just wordy signs for lots of things (a tourist seeing a red circle with a person on it will probably get the idea that they must not go past it) from a safety perspective then only having English text is not such a problem

 

As regard toilets, it can be summarised thus:-

 

If there is NO toilet provided on the train it can continue to be used as nobody is being discriminated against.

If there is a single toilet on the train then it MUST be of the accessible type and sited close to the Wheelchair accommodation

If there is more than one toilet on the train then only one of them needs to be accessible (and close to the wheelchair accommodation).

 

In other words the 313s are fine because they don't have a toilet in the first place!

The 319s had to have one toilet converted into an accessible one (the other traditional one can stay)

If the train is a long one (i.e. a single Pendalino / IEP) then operators may want to consider installing a second accessible toilet* but I don't believe this is a legal requirement

 

 

  * Given a 12 car train formed of 3 Electrostars will have 3 accessible toilets, it makes sense to have 2 accessible toilets in a 12 car 700 unit.

 

 

Edited May 11, 2019 by phil-b259

[newbryford]

16 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Hypocrisy time, so after saying rules are rules, I had an argument today on platform 14 at Manchester Piccadilly.

 

I stepped over the yellow line three foot from the the platform edge today, was told by one of the station 'storm troopers' to get back behind the red line.  There is a second line 7 foot from the edge which when combined with its brother on platform 13 forms a box in which all waiting passengers must bunch together.

 

I asked why it was unsafe for me between the yellow and red lines, no train overhangs that far and actually there were no trains around even.  Was simply told it was unsafe.

 

Then as the train actually approaches everyone moves in past even the yellow line!!  So the red line is fr our safety when there are no trains about but as soon as a train approaches it is fine to get right up to the edge of the platform.

 

I then got on a train to Oxford Rd to get my Liverpool stopper where there isn't even a yellow line on the platforms and trains pass through faster that they would do at Piccadilly.

 

Being told it's "unsafe", I believe is a staff training/information  issue.

I was there a few weeks ago and there was an announcement to the effect that the red line is to enable passengers to move embark/disembark freely at busy times.

Something along the lines of "stay behind the red line unless it's your train".

 

Now that makes sense.

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

[woodenhead]

1 hour ago, newbryford said:

 

Being told it's "unsafe", I believe is a staff training/information  issue.

I was there a few weeks ago and there was an announcement to the effect that the red line is to enable passengers to move embark/disembark freely at busy times.

Something along the lines of "stay behind the red line unless it's your train".

 

Now that makes sense.

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

I'm beginning to wonder is this is part of a campaign to get the government to put in the money it promised for the extra platforms.

 

Smart trains won't solve any overcrowding on the platforms, only better platforms

[Reorte]

2 hours ago, newbryford said:

 

Being told it's "unsafe", I believe is a staff training/information  issue.

I was there a few weeks ago and there was an announcement to the effect that the red line is to enable passengers to move embark/disembark freely at busy times.

Something along the lines of "stay behind the red line unless it's your train".

 

Now that makes sense.

 

It's also the sort of thing those giving the training need to look at (and quite honestly for staff to question when they're getting the training) because it's another case of sending the word "safety" into disrepute. There's an attitude in some quarters that you shouldn't ever question anything done in the name of safety and they're passing that on, seemingly refusing to acknowledge that that sort of behaviour increases not just questioning but disregard for any rule, sensible or not. Sadly the response they give is always just "people should just do what they're told."

[Reorte]

13 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

When will folk 'get it' - NR or the TOCs do not make up these rules for fun - its ultimately driven by a desire to not be found wanting if the case ends up in front of a Judge. If you dislike such 'arse covering' then you need to sort out the judicial system - particularly the 'no win / no fee' culture which hasn't gone away (if anything its expanded massively as all those flipping adverts for PPI companies show).
 

I think that people do get it - complaints that might appear to be directed at individuals should probably be interpreted as being unimpressed with the entire system, right to the top.

[caradoc]

8 hours ago, woodenhead said:

I'm beginning to wonder is this is part of a campaign to get the government to put in the money it promised for the extra platforms.

 

Smart trains won't solve any overcrowding on the platforms, only better platforms

 

That has to be the eventual solution, quadrupling the route. In the meantime, Up trains use the south end of the Up side and Down trains the north end of the Down side, therefore the 'unused' portions of each platform could be walled or at least barriered off to give passengers more space to safely stand (and sit, if seats were provided !). It would of course render the platforms unusable for long trains, eg Pendolinos, but would that be a major issue ?