Crap respsonse from Connex about bikes on trains.

Zebee Johnstone wrote:
In aus.bicycle on Sun, 6 Jan 2008 20:13:29 +1100
DJ wrote:
I know when they first bought out those low floor wheelchair buses about 7
years ago, i think i have carried about 6 wheelchair passengers in 5 years.

I've seen elderly passengers being quite thankful for those. Ditto
people with prams.

Long ago when I was young, Perth buses used to carry prams on racks on
the back of the bus. They stopped it, I believe because of the hassle
the drivers had doing the loading and unloading as not all pram owners
could manage it.

When I was working in North Sydney I used to take the train home if I
was late home of an evening and couldn't be arsed facing the hills.

No point trying to get the bike on in peak hour though!

I expect the 'bent wouldn't fit on a bus bicycle rack anyway.

Zebee

Spot on Zebee... our feedback is that marginally mobile older passengers
(off peak mostly) absolutely love the newer low floor buses, and so do
mums with prams.

None of that is very relevant to peak hour bus usage, but that isn't the
pattern encountered with outer suburban/rural bus services anyway.

And as far as I can tell some bents would fit but others would not; long
wheelbase ones definitely not (the racks can after all be no wider than
a bus) but shorter wheelbase/larger wheel types should be ok.


G-S

On 2008-01-06, Zebee Johnstone (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
to me that makes it clear that a "bicycle" includes a folding one,
even folded. So presumably a large backpack is OK but a folder in a
bag is not... It also appears that a bike in a bike bag or box is
also banned on peak hours, but a bar fridge would be OK.

Ahhh, Chasers, how I love thee.

--
TimC
I'm sorry. The number you have reached is imaginary. Please rotate your
phone 90 degrees and try again. -- MIT's phone switch

AndrewJ Wrote:
Anyone got experience of riding the Bay bike path to and from
Mordialloc to the city? I tried to find information on ithe current
state, but nothing of substance on bv site. From the google images it
seems ok. Yes, I know it's slow, but I'm
not in a hurry.

IMO Nepean Highway is not only quicker, it's much safer.

I've ridden the Bay trail, the sight lines are poor and there's way too
many intersections where priority is not recognised. Add in joggers,
dog walkers etc etc and it can be an unpredictable enviornment compared
to the road.


--
EuanB

"Zebee Johnstone" wrote:
In aus.bicycle on Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:51:23 GMT
PeteSig wrote:

"DJ" wrote:

carriage and someone gets on the train with a wet bike with some mud
splashed up the side of it or just dirty water from the roads, rubbed up
against your suit or workclothes,

And say you had a need to take your bike on a train, and had chosen a
carriage that was not packed full?? And the bike was clean?

Except that the reason they are banned is because they are full.

But often they are NOT. Eg. before 4.30pm and after 6.00pm. But the ban
still applies.

Will you have an inspector who will check bikes for cleanliness before
they are allowed on? Will you agree that if there are more than X
people on the train at any one time all cyclists are thrown off at the
next station?

No. Leave it up to reasonable people to make a sensible decision. Like they
will with pram-users/people with lots of luggage.

One thing all our crap train carriages lack is overhead straps and rails,
so
that stops and starts are not such a threat. Why blame the cyclist? We
had
plenty of straps and open spaces in the old carriages of the 70s and 80s.

OPen spaces are usually about lack of people. What's the population
of the city and the numbers using trains now compared to them?

No, open spaces, where there were no seats. Standing room, with straps to
hold onto. FAR more people can be accomodated with standing room, and in
off-peak there's still more than enough seats, and space to carry bikes out
of the doorways. Talk to travellers overseas - most of the mass rail systems
in NY, Tokyo, London have carriages with standing spaces, some are almost
all standing room with only seats along the sides of the carriages.

And yes, bikes may well be banned there, but these cities have much greater
population densities and PT use. Personally I think the idea of paying a
concession fare for a bike in peak periods was a good one. But this was
dropped by the Met, for some reason. Maybe too hard to police ??


--
Cheers
Peter

~~~ ~ _@
~~ ~ _- \,
~~ (*)/ (*)

In aus.bicycle on Mon, 07 Jan 2008 06:12:12 GMT
PeteSig wrote:

"Zebee Johnstone" wrote:
Except that the reason they are banned is because they are full.

But often they are NOT. Eg. before 4.30pm and after 6.00pm. But the ban
still applies.

The problem is that sometimes they are.


Will you have an inspector who will check bikes for cleanliness before
they are allowed on? Will you agree that if there are more than X
people on the train at any one time all cyclists are thrown off at the
next station?

No. Leave it up to reasonable people to make a sensible decision. Like they
will with pram-users/people with lots of luggage.

Do they? NOt in my experience.

People are selfish. Some people will not be too selfish, some will.
And unclear rules lead to arguments and anger.


HOw much will new carriages cost, and who will pay?

Zebee

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

HOw much will new carriages cost, and who will pay?

Don't you have a 8 car limit on Sydney trains now because of the length of
the platforms. Adding a car to the train will be very, very expensive. On
the two-tier cars you will have to store the bike on the
level-with-the-platform section. Extending this area will reduce the
passenger capacity of the car.

"Yes Sir/Madam, you may take the velocipede on the train, please buy five
normal tickets and use the rear of car 6."

Or is the group concensus that the other passengers help pay for the bike's
transport? Why?

Theo

Theo Bekkers Wrote:
Or is the group concensus that the other passengers help pay for the
bike's transport? Why?
Same reason I contribute the same amount of tax to the upkeep of roads
and use an eigth of the space, additionally contributing nothing to wear
and tear?


--
EuanB

"Theo Bekkers" wrote in message
...
Zebee Johnstone wrote:


People who reply to this issue from outer fringe Perth or Sydney's tunnels
and double-deckers need to get a grip and realise this is a Victorian issue.
If you aren't very familiar with the Melbourne and Victorian PT system you
may be talking rubbish.

We don't need to build new trains or add carriages. We don't need to extend
platforms. The trains are 6 car sets and don't need to be made any longer.
And all carriages are 'level with the platform'.

The cost to rejig the interior layout of carriages to allow some open areas
that enble standing room (like there was in the early 80s) is going to be
relatively low (compared to bulding new rolling stock... or constructing 1
or 2 kms of the Eastlink tollway). And it will actually enable *more
passengers* to travel. as seated space takes up much more room. Standing
passengers can cram in much more in the peak.

Providing space for more people, that can also enable people to take bikes
on board will help the transport system earn more revenue, not less.

--
Cheers
Peter

~~~ ~ _@
~~ ~ _- \,
~~ (*)/ (*)

PeteSig Wrote:

Providing space for more people, that can also enable people to take
bikes
on board will help the transport system earn more revenue, not less.

And here's a terrific example someone prepared earlier:
http://alansnel.com/blog/2007/08/rep...nneapolis.html

BTW, don't you love the good cop, bad cop comedy routine being played
out in the media today by Kosky and Hull? The whole reprieve thing was
complete bollox & PR spin anyway, as the changes haven't been gazetted
yet. Imagine spinning the 'grace' period as a reprieve when it actual
fact the government haven't done the changes yet.

Fig A - Morning
http://tinyurl.com/2a8s6d

Fig B - Afternoon
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...8-2862,00.html

Read a interpretation about 'Bike Bans on Trains in Victoria 1st
January, 2008 - Frequently asked Questions' he
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2hkst3

And if the thought 'Oh dear, someone should do something about it' has
crossed your mind, here's another link to get you started:
http://modernthings.org/binthebikeban/


--
cfsmtb

"PeteSig" wrote:

Providing space for more people, that can also enable people to take bikes
on board will help the transport system earn more revenue, not less.

Even the Dept of Infrastructure agrees with this proposition, but not the
idea of providing that space for bikes:

http://www.bv.com.au/forums/viewtopi...sc&star t=120

"Received a quick response...

Department of Infrastructure wrote:
...Rearranging seats is being considered to increase the carrying
capacity of trains for passengers, but not for bikes. There are no plans to
remove seats to cater for bikes. ...


And in the meantime, passengers who need their bikes at both ends of the
journey can go whistle."
_________________
Murray

Obviously all people are created equal, but some are more equal than
others!!

--
Cheers
Peter

~~~ ~ _@
~~ ~ _- \,
~~ (*)/ (*)