|
Paratransit Speed (was: Revolutionary Urban Transportation ...)
On 09 Dec 2003 05:54:39 -0800, Jym Dyer wrote:
NYC buses now accommodate wheelchairs. It takes about 5 minutes to load or unload one, and even on not-very-frequent routes, this sometimes means that the following bus passes the one doing an unloading operation. =v= Bear in mind that the Americans with Disabilities Act gave the nation 20 years to figure out good ways to accommodate folks in wheelchairs. An *extremely* generous amount of time to phase things in, while an entire generation had no access. Yet bus companies, like most businesses, waited until the last minute to slap together a half-assed solution. _Jym_ P.S.: I've trimmed the uk.* newsgroups from followups, as the ADA doesn't apply to the U.K. ... and I've added back uk.transport.london because the Disability Discrimination Act _does_ apply to the UK. The British solution has been to build buses with ramps that are activated from the cab. The driver doesn't leave their secure environment. I would challenge MTA's claim that it operates, "This makes New York City Transit's system the world's largest accessible fleet." [of accessible buses]" According to http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk...lowfloor.shtml there are some 5,600 fully accessible buses in service in London, compared to a quoted figure on MTA's web page at http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/nyct/facts/ffbus.htm of some 4,400 buses. With roll-out of the fully accessible fleet in London, there is a progressive withdrawal of the Mobility Bus network (a low frequency scheduled paratransit service). Rob. (groups trimmed to London and those carried by my server...) -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
Paratransit Speed
In misc.transport.urban-transit Robert Woolley wrote:
On 09 Dec 2003 05:54:39 -0800, Jym Dyer wrote: NYC buses now accommodate wheelchairs. It takes about 5 minutes to load or unload one, and even on not-very-frequent routes, this sometimes means that the following bus passes =v= Bear in mind that the Americans with Disabilities Act gave the nation 20 years to figure out good ways to accommodate folks B The British solution has been to build buses with ramps that are activated from the cab. The driver doesn't leave their secure environment. unfortunately for some stupid reason most of those buses do not actually have the ramp installed. I would challenge MTA's claim that it operates, "This makes New York City Transit's system the world's largest accessible fleet." [of accessible buses]" probably accurate According to http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk...lowfloor.shtml there are some 5,600 fully accessible buses in service in London, compared to a quoted figure on MTA's web page at LOW floor does not = accessible Bob -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:03:32 -0000, Access Systems
wrote: unfortunately for some stupid reason most of those buses do not actually have the ramp installed. I would challenge MTA's claim that it operates, "This makes New York City Transit's system the world's largest accessible fleet." [of accessible buses]" probably accurate According to http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk...lowfloor.shtml there are some 5,600 fully accessible buses in service in London, compared to a quoted figure on MTA's web page at LOW floor does not = accessible The vast majority of these have ramps. Low floor plus ramp looks pretty accessible to me. Rob. -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
Paratransit Speed
In misc.transport.urban-transit Robert Woolley wrote:
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:03:32 -0000, Access Systems wrote: unfortunately for some stupid reason most of those buses do not actually have the ramp installed. http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk...lowfloor.shtml there are some 5,600 fully accessible buses in service in London, compared to a quoted figure on MTA's web page at LOW floor does not = accessible The vast majority of these have ramps. Low floor plus ramp looks pretty accessible to me. low floor with ramp is accessible, unless a lot of ramps have been retrofitted the first couple thousand low floors were delived without the ramps....will double check with my source in London. Bob -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
In misc.transport.urban-transit Access Systems wrote:
In misc.transport.urban-transit Robert Woolley wrote: On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:03:32 -0000, Access Systems wrote: unfortunately for some stupid reason most of those buses do not actually have the ramp installed. http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk...lowfloor.shtml there are some 5,600 fully accessible buses in service in London, compared to a quoted figure on MTA's web page at LOW floor does not = accessible The vast majority of these have ramps. Low floor plus ramp looks pretty accessible to me. low floor with ramp is accessible, unless a lot of ramps have been retrofitted the first couple thousand low floors were delived without the ramps....will double check with my source in London. my check shows that as of Sept approx 3500 of the 5500 LT buses are Low floor, most of these have a kneeling feature and space on board for wheelchairs but most do not comply with DDA (UK-ADA) "only the low floor buses with the double center doors have the power ramps" LT proclaims that their bus fleet will be fully DDA compliant by 2017 NYC TA buses have been 100% ADA compliant for a number of years... also a much higher percentage of the subway (tube) stations are accessible.. Bob -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
Access Systems wrote:
Access Systems wrote: Robert Woolley wrote: wrote: unfortunately for some stupid reason most of those buses do not actually have the ramp installed. http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk...lowfloor.shtml there are some 5,600 fully accessible buses in service in London, compared to a quoted figure on MTA's web page at LOW floor does not = accessible That depends on the driver. The vast majority of these have ramps. Low floor plus ramp looks pretty accessible to me. low floor with ramp is accessible, unless a lot of ramps have been retrofitted the first couple thousand low floors were delived without the ramps....will double check with my source in London. my check shows that as of Sept approx 3500 of the 5500 LT buses are Low floor, most of these have a kneeling feature and space on board for wheelchairs but most do not comply with DDA (UK-ADA) "only the low floor buses with the double center doors have the power ramps" Those are the only ones with extending ramps, but IIRC a lot of the others have automatic folding ramps, which are usually more efficient. However, ramp reliability is a problem - probably the biggest reason for buses not being fully accessible. More and more London bus routes are cashless, so in future some operators may use manually folding ramps, which will solve the reliability problem. LT proclaims that their bus fleet will be fully DDA compliant by 2017 I thought they were claiming 2012? NYC TA buses have been 100% ADA compliant for a number of years... |
Paratransit Speed
Robert Woolley wrote:
With roll-out of the fully accessible fleet in London, there is a progressive withdrawal of the Mobility Bus network Are you sure? UIVMM most of the Mobility Bus network is in the outer suburbs, with long routes that penetrate into estates that regular routes do not, to provide disabled and elderly people (and anyone else who wants to use them) a 1 seat ride to the most popular destinations. (a low frequency scheduled paratransit service). It is low frequency (typically only two journeys, only 1 day per week) and it is scheduled, but is it paratransit? I thought "paratransit" referred to the (council operated) Dial-A-Ride schemes. |
Paratransit Speed
Access Systems wrote in message ...
also a much higher percentage of the subway (tube) stations are accessible.. Thats because they're not nearly so deep down and so its a lot easier to retro fit lifts. Though to be honest even assuming someone in a wheelchair could get down to the platform , how they'd get on a tube train in the rush hour beats me. B2003 |
Paratransit Speed
In misc.transport.urban-transit Boltar wrote:
Access Systems wrote in message ... also a much higher percentage of the subway (tube) stations are accessible.. Thats because they're not nearly so deep down and so its a lot easier to only a small percentage are "deep" what's the problem with the rest retro fit lifts. Though to be honest even assuming someone in a wheelchair could get down to the platform , how they'd get on a tube train in the rush hour beats me. why should there be a problem...people in wheelchairs regularly ride NYC and Tokyo subways at rush hour, what makes the tube any less possible. this has always been the biggest obstacle to access, people who have never been there (using a wheelchair) telling the users what they "can't" do without ever bothering to find out what they "can do". the last couple times WMATA (DC) tried to count the number of wheelchair users they gave up because there were too many. I have been on trains at rush hour when 5,6 or more people in wheelchairs were on the same train, and probably more I didn't see. I have heard unoffical numbers of several thousand a day use the subway in wheelchairs. "if you build it we will come" but there is a certain minimum number of stations have to be accessible for the system to be functionally usable. And it is generally been found that the stations that need to be accessible are the same ones that everyone else uses, so start by making the busiest stations accessible. as an aside the loss of the World Trade center station on PATH and NYCTA was a major loss for people with disabilites in NYC as it was the major accessible station in lower Mannhatan and the substitute stations were for the most part inaccessible. Bob -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 02:41:24 -0000, Access Systems
wrote: In misc.transport.urban-transit Access Systems wrote: In misc.transport.urban-transit Robert Woolley wrote: On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:03:32 -0000, Access Systems wrote: unfortunately for some stupid reason most of those buses do not actually have the ramp installed. http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk...lowfloor.shtml there are some 5,600 fully accessible buses in service in London, compared to a quoted figure on MTA's web page at LOW floor does not = accessible The vast majority of these have ramps. Low floor plus ramp looks pretty accessible to me. low floor with ramp is accessible, unless a lot of ramps have been retrofitted the first couple thousand low floors were delived without the ramps....will double check with my source in London. my check shows that as of Sept approx 3500 of the 5500 LT buses are Low floor, most of these have a kneeling feature and space on board for wheelchairs but most do not comply with DDA (UK-ADA) "only the low floor buses with the double center doors have the power ramps" LT proclaims that their bus fleet will be fully DDA compliant by 2017 LT ceased to exist on 15 July. The 2017 timetable relates to DDA requirements. Routemasters are rapidly becoming the last non accessible vehicles in London and they're being withdrawn. Soon they'll only be left on a couple of special 'heritage; routes.... Rob. -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
Paratransit Speed
|
Paratransit Speed
Robert Woolley wrote:
(a low frequency scheduled paratransit service). It is low frequency (typically only two journeys, only 1 day per week) and it is scheduled, but is it paratransit? I thought "paratransit" referred to the (council operated) Dial-A-Ride schemes. I've used the phrase in this context as Mobility Buses have such low frequencies and used specialised vehicles. Not that specialised - I've known them to be used on normal buses occasionally. Don't forget that there is a progressive introduction of mainstream bus routes in deeply residential areas.... They're not progressing with it very quickly - it will take a long time to get them everywhere the mobility buses go. |
Paratransit Speed
In misc.transport.urban-transit Robert Woolley wrote:
wrote: In misc.transport.urban-transit Access Systems wrote: In misc.transport.urban-transit Robert Woolley wrote: wrote: unfortunately for some stupid reason most of those buses do not actually have the ramp installed. there are some 5,600 fully accessible buses in service in London, compared to a quoted figure on MTA's web page at LOW floor does not = accessible The vast majority of these have ramps. Low floor plus ramp looks pretty accessible to me. low floor with ramp is accessible, unless a lot of ramps have been retrofitted the first couple thousand low floors were delived without the ramps....will double check with my source in London. my check shows that as of Sept approx 3500 of the 5500 LT buses are Low floor, most of these have a kneeling feature and space on board for wheelchairs but most do not comply with DDA (UK-ADA) "only the low floor buses with the double center doors have the power ramps" LT proclaims that their bus fleet will be fully DDA compliant by 2017 LT ceased to exist on 15 July. right, name change old habit The 2017 timetable relates to DDA requirements. Routemasters are but you were comparing with NYC, NYCTA buses are 100% ADA compliant. rapidly becoming the last non accessible vehicles in London and they're being withdrawn. Soon they'll only be left on a couple of special 'heritage; routes.... and people with disabilities don't need to travel on heritage routes??? Bob "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
Access Systems wrote:
In misc.transport.urban-transit Robert Woolley wrote: Routemasters are rapidly becoming the last non accessible vehicles in London and they're being withdrawn. Soon they'll only be left on a couple of special 'heritage; routes.... and people with disabilities don't need to travel on heritage routes??? No, because other routes using fully accessible buses will be available for the same journeys. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Paratransit Speed
Access Systems wrote in message ...
In misc.transport.urban-transit Boltar wrote: Access Systems wrote in message ... also a much higher percentage of the subway (tube) stations are accessible.. Thats because they're not nearly so deep down and so its a lot easier to only a small percentage are "deep" what's the problem with the rest I think you missed the point.The majority of underground LU stations are deep down bored tunnel. Installing a life means boring a shaft , not simply cutting a hole in the roof as in NYC. retro fit lifts. Though to be honest even assuming someone in a wheelchair could get down to the platform , how they'd get on a tube train in the rush hour beats me. why should there be a problem...people in wheelchairs regularly ride NYC and Tokyo subways at rush hour, what makes the tube any less possible. Some types of tube trains are a lot smaller than subway trains, the platforms are narrower and the platforms are not level with the train floors in most cases. Also on the trains there is nowhere for a wheelchair to go other than block the doorways causing a safety hazard. this has always been the biggest obstacle to access, people who have never been there (using a wheelchair) telling the users what they "can't" do without ever bothering to find out what they "can do". Anything can be done if you have a couple of billion to spare. LU doesn't. everyone else uses, so start by making the busiest stations accessible. See above. B2003 |
Paratransit Speed
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 15:01:27 -0000, Access Systems
wrote: as an aside the loss of the World Trade center station on PATH and NYCTA was a major loss for people with disabilites in NYC as it was the major accessible station in lower Mannhatan and the substitute stations were for the most part inaccessible. The temporary PATH terminal which opened last month restored accessibility to the E and downtown N/R platforms that are on the same level as the former WTC Concourse. -- Peter Schleifer "Who mistook my steak for chicken?" |
Paratransit Speed
Access Systems wrote:
why should there be a problem...people in wheelchairs regularly ride NYC and Tokyo subways at rush hour, what makes the tube any less possible. The fact that it isn't so heavily subsidized. |
Paratransit Speed
In misc.transport.urban-transit Aidan Stanger wrote:
Access Systems wrote: why should there be a problem...people in wheelchairs regularly ride NYC and Tokyo subways at rush hour, what makes the tube any less possible. The fact that it isn't so heavily subsidized. BS if I ever heard it. Bob -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
In misc.transport.urban-transit Boltar wrote:
Access Systems wrote in message ... In misc.transport.urban-transit Boltar wrote: Access Systems wrote in message ... also a much higher percentage of the subway (tube) stations are accessible.. Thats because they're not nearly so deep down and so its a lot easier to only a small percentage are "deep" what's the problem with the rest I think you missed the point.The majority of underground LU stations are deep down bored tunnel. Installing a life means boring a shaft , not simply cutting a hole in the roof as in NYC. only a few lines are deep, the rest are fairly shallow, and NYC has their share of deep tunnels, boring a shaft is not as hard as it sounds (finding a place to bore it is much harder) retro fit lifts. Though to be honest even assuming someone in a wheelchair could get down to the platform , how they'd get on a tube train in the rush hour beats me. why should there be a problem...people in wheelchairs regularly ride NYC and Tokyo subways at rush hour, what makes the tube any less possible. Some types of tube trains are a lot smaller than subway trains, the platforms right the deep ones, but wheelchairs are not that big are narrower and the platforms are not level with the train floors in most narrow platforms are quite common in other cities, and as a few cities have done raising a short section of the platform to floor height is quite simple and inexpensive cases. Also on the trains there is nowhere for a wheelchair to go other than block the doorways causing a safety hazard. in other words the same place as everyone else. this has always been the biggest obstacle to access, people who have never been there (using a wheelchair) telling the users what they "can't" do without ever bothering to find out what they "can do". Anything can be done if you have a couple of billion to spare. LU doesn't. I found a long time ago, that is someone wants to do something they will find a way, and if they don't want to do it they will find an excuse.. everyone else uses, so start by making the busiest stations accessible. See above. see answer above Bob -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 18:12:31 -0000, Access Systems
wrote: In misc.transport.urban-transit Aidan Stanger wrote: Access Systems wrote: why should there be a problem...people in wheelchairs regularly ride NYC and Tokyo subways at rush hour, what makes the tube any less possible. The fact that it isn't so heavily subsidized. BS if I ever heard it. Fine, what would you like - accessibility or service cuts? Vehicle replacement (providing trains with wheelchair access) is relatively easy. Putting access into a deep level mass transit system is much more easy -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
Paratransit Speed
In misc.transport.urban-transit Robert Woolley wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 18:12:31 -0000, Access Systems In misc.transport.urban-transit Aidan Stanger wrote: Access Systems wrote: why should there be a problem...people in wheelchairs regularly ride NYC and Tokyo subways at rush hour, what makes the tube any less possible. The fact that it isn't so heavily subsidized. Fine, what would you like - accessibility or service cuts? don't ever ask that question of someone who is getting NO service at all, you might not like the answer. what would you prefer some service or no service is the same question if you ask a person in a wheelchair. Vehicle replacement (providing trains with wheelchair access) is relatively easy. Putting access into a deep level mass transit system is much more easy ???? I don't understand the question Bob -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
Access Systems wrote:
In misc.transport.urban-transit Aidan Stanger wrote: Access Systems wrote: why should there be a problem...people in wheelchairs regularly ride NYC and Tokyo subways at rush hour, what makes the tube any less possible. The fact that it isn't so heavily subsidized. BS if I ever heard it. Really? Are you claiming the NYC and Tokyo subways aren't more heavily subsidized than the Tube? Or that the subsidies don't enable them to make more stations accessible? The Tube has been short of funding for a lot longer than the accessibility issue was something that most people considered important. It's not just a lack of subsidy that's the problem, it's also the fact that they weren't allowed to issue bonds. This meant that the opportunity to make improvements in any area (not just access) has been very limited, as what little money there is often has to be spent on keeping the network running! I'm not saying that London Underground couldn't have done more - they probably could've done a few things better. But they couldn't've done *much* more. Now that the PPP's in place, funding is available (albeit inefficiently) so things may get better. However, the contract structure is such that major improvements are unlikely to occur for a while. |
Paratransit Speed
Access Systems wrote in message ...
I think you missed the point.The majority of underground LU stations are deep down bored tunnel. Installing a life means boring a shaft , not simply cutting a hole in the roof as in NYC. only a few lines are deep, the rest are fairly shallow, and NYC has their Only a few lines? Umm , central, northern, piccadilly, victoria, jubilee, bakerloo, waterloo & city are all deep bored tunnel in central london with platforms probably at an average of 70 feet down from street level. right the deep ones, but wheelchairs are not that big are narrower and the platforms are not level with the train floors in most narrow platforms are quite common in other cities, and as a few cities have done raising a short section of the platform to floor height is quite simple and inexpensive Not where the platform is curved (as quite a few in london are) as it will foul the side of the train. This then requires ramps to be built into platforms (expensive) or trains (nowhere to put them in the smaller trains). cases. Also on the trains there is nowhere for a wheelchair to go other than block the doorways causing a safety hazard. in other words the same place as everyone else. Actually no , standees can move down the aisles or sit on a seat. The aisles are too narrow for wheelchairs. Anything can be done if you have a couple of billion to spare. LU doesn't. I found a long time ago, that is someone wants to do something they will find a way, and if they don't want to do it they will find an excuse.. Given that LU doesn't currently even have enough money to maintain its infrastructure properly I think its fair to say that spending a fortune on making the tube accessable to a small amount of wheelchair users is currently somewhere near the bottom of their list of priorities. That might not be right-on and politically correct and you might not like to hear it but its a fact. Deal. B2003 |
Paratransit Speed
Access Systems writes:
"if you build it we will come" Do you have any statistics to back that up, say usage statistics for the Jubilee line between Westminster and Stratford vs the rest of LU? |
Paratransit Speed
Access Systems wrote:
LT ceased to exist on 15 July. right, name change old habit Errr... no... a change from a single centralised London-wide public organisation to (essentially) a collection of semi-private companies The 2017 timetable relates to DDA requirements. Routemasters are but you were comparing with NYC, NYCTA buses are 100% ADA compliant. Legislation which, of course, doesn't have any relevance to the UK Bob "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named If you're so obsessed with imposing your beliefs on Usenet and e-mail, how about using a standard sig separator so those of who don't care don't have to keep reading your bandwidth-wasting sig |
Paratransit Speed
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:28:57 -0000, "Stimpy"
wrote: Access Systems wrote: LT ceased to exist on 15 July. right, name change old habit Errr... no... a change from a single centralised London-wide public organisation to (essentially) a collection of semi-private companies LRT focussed only on public transport. TfL in addition has responsibilities as a highway authority and taxi/minicab regulator. Rob. -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
Paratransit Speed
"Aidan Stanger" wrote: Robert Woolley wrote: With roll-out of the fully accessible fleet in London, there is a progressive withdrawal of the Mobility Bus network Are you sure? UIVMM most of the Mobility Bus network is in the outer suburbs, with long routes that penetrate into estates that regular routes do not, to provide disabled and elderly people (and anyone else who wants to use them) a 1 seat ride to the most popular destinations. You *are* very much mistaken. Robert was quite right - there is a progressive withdrawal of the Mobility Bus network. In Autumn 1998, 23 buses were needed to operate the Mobility Bus network. By Autumn 2003, only 10 buses were needed. Many routes have been withdrawn - so many, in fact, that the 8xx series of route numbers is no longer needed (the remaining routes are all numbered in the 9xx series). Even these figures are a little misleading. Then and now, First Thamesway need 3 buses for their Mobility Bus routes. In 1998, their network was fairly typical of this sort of operation - ten routes, each running one or two days a week, with typically one return journey per day. Now, they only serve two routes - but each route runs six days a week and has a number of journeys. The emphasis is much more on plugging gaps in the mainstream network, rather that providing a specialist service supplementing the mainstream network (as before) - and it wouldn't seem strange if these two routes were renumbered to become (albeit rather infrequent) mainstream routes in their own right. Bearing this in mind, the "true" Mobility Bus network has declined from 23 buses to just 7 buses over 5 years. -- MetroGnome ~~~~~~~~~~ (To email me, edit return address) |
Paratransit Speed (was: Revolutionary Urban Transportation ...)
"Robert Woolley" wrote: I would challenge MTA's claim that it operates, "This makes New York City Transit's system the world's largest accessible fleet." [of accessible buses]" According to http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk...lowfloor.shtml there are some 5,600 fully accessible buses in service in London, compared to a quoted figure on MTA's web page at http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/nyct/facts/ffbus.htm of some 4,400 buses. Of course, if you wanted to be pedantic, you could argue that London actually has many *separate* fleets of accessible buses, all of them smaller than the overall NYC fleet - because almost the entire network is contracted out to a number of private companies. But if you wanted to be *really* pedantic, you could argue that New York also has separate fleets - with those run by the MTA's New York City Transit Authority being entirely separate from those run by the MTA's Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority! (Out of interest, does either the MTA's claim or the 4400-bus figure quoted include the private bus companies running routes under contract to the City - the ones that the MTA is trying to take over?) -- MetroGnome ~~~~~~~~~~ (To email me, edit return address) |
Paratransit Speed
In misc.transport.urban-transit Stimpy wrote:
The 2017 timetable relates to DDA requirements. Routemasters are but you were comparing with NYC, NYCTA buses are 100% ADA compliant. Legislation which, of course, doesn't have any relevance to the UK DUH! DDA = London ADA = NYC laws as applies to public transit are very similar Bob -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
Access Systems wrote the following in:
ADA = NYC Presumably non-Americans with disabilities are considered unimportant. -- message by Robin May, but you can call me Mr Smith. Enjoy the Routemaster while you still can. Another high quality lesson from Robin May: Your and you're are different words! |
Paratransit Speed
"Access Systems" wrote:
low floor with ramp is accessible, unless a lot of ramps have been retrofitted the first couple thousand low floors were delived without the ramps....will double check with my source in London. [...] my check shows that as of Sept approx 3500 of the 5500 LT buses are Low floor, most of these have a kneeling feature and space on board for wheelchairs but most do not comply with DDA (UK-ADA) "only the low floor buses with the double center doors have the power ramps" Your source is mistaken. The TfL website states (as referenced in a previous message) that "84% of the total bus fleet of 6,663 [about 5600] is wheelchair accessible". Not merely "low-floor" - specifically "wheelchair accessible". Any bus that is low-floor but does not have a wheelchair ramp is regarded as part of the 16% of the fleet that is *not* wheelchair accessible. It is true that the first few hundred low-floor buses in London were not fitted with wheelchair ramps^. A few have had ramps retrofitted; a few may remain in London service unmodified. However, the vast majority have been withdrawn from London service and replaced by newer low-floor buses that *do* have wheelchair ramps fitted. It may seem strange that so many low-floor buses entered service without wheelchair ramps. While with hindsight this clearly was a short-sighted policy, it did sort of make sense at the time. Thanks to relatively high ridership, and (by US standards) relatively narrow roads that require more manoeuvrable (ie shorter) vehicles, many London bus routes need double-deckers. By about 1996, UK bus technology had progressed to the stage where low-floor single-deckers were becoming standard, but low-floor double-deckers (which presented a greater technical challenge) were still some way off. It was not possible to fit folding-step wheelchair lifts to standard-floor buses (these lifts are not legal in the UK if operated (US-style) from the cab - and, as London bus drivers carry cash and give change, it is not generally considered safe for them to leave the cab to operate such lifts). Hence, normal double-deck buses could not be made wheelchair-accessible. So, at this time there was no concept of a London-wide wheelchair-accessible bus network. Without such a concept, there was no perceived need for *any* bus to be wheelchair-accessible (even though this would have been quite possible for single-deckers). However, low-floor buses *were* considered desirable, because they offered easier access to the "ambulant disabled" and those with pushchairs (strollers). Hence, low-floor buses (but without wheelchair ramps) were specified for most single-deck routes. A couple of years later, low-floor double-deckers were developed, and the concept of a wheelchair-accessible London-wide bus network came into vogue. For the last four years, all new buses for London service (both single-deck and double-deck, and including the articulated single-deck buses that have been introduced on a handful of routes since Summer 2002) have been low-floor and wheelchair-accessible. ^ = I don't have the figures, but I'd be surprised if it was as many as two thousand. Still, I could be wrong. -- MetroGnome ~~~~~~~~~~ (To email me, edit return address) |
Paratransit Speed
In misc.transport.urban-transit MetroGnome wrote:
"Robert Woolley" wrote: I would challenge MTA's claim that it operates, "This makes New York City Transit's system the world's largest accessible fleet." [of accessible buses]" of some 4,400 buses. (Out of interest, does either the MTA's claim or the 4400-bus figure quoted include the private bus companies running routes under contract to the City - the ones that the MTA is trying to take over?) those are only the NYCTA buses, the private bus companies are not included and are not 100% accessible either Bob -- MetroGnome ~~~~~~~~~~ (To email me, edit return address) -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
In misc.transport.urban-transit Robin May wrote:
Access Systems wrote the following in: ADA = NYC Presumably non-Americans with disabilities are considered unimportant. no more so than the DDA is only for citizens of the UK. the laws affect PROPERTIES not passengers. if you are in NYC (USA) you are covered by ADA if you are in London (UK) you are covered by DDA nationality of the individual is not important Bob -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
Access Systems wrote the following in:
In misc.transport.urban-transit Robin May wrote: Access Systems wrote the following in: ADA = NYC Presumably non-Americans with disabilities are considered unimportant. no more so than the DDA is only for citizens of the UK. So I'd hope. I was making a point about the very silly name. the laws affect PROPERTIES not passengers. if you are in NYC (USA) you are covered by ADA if you are in London (UK) you are covered by DDA nationality of the individual is not important Then why call it the "Americans with Disabilities Act"? -- message by Robin May, but you can call me Mr Smith. Enjoy the Routemaster while you still can. Robin May may be my name, but Robin is my first name. |
London v New York accessibility (was Paratransit Speed)
"Access Systems" wrote:
NYC TA buses have been 100% ADA compliant for a number of years... Yes, but how accessible are they overall to the disabled population? Not just wheelchair users, but also the far more numerous "ambulant disabled" who can walk with difficulty (most of whom don't consider themselves to be "disabled enough" to use the lift)? A standard-floor bus with a wheelchair lift fitted may meet ADA requirements - but it still leaves a *lot* to be desired as far as disability access is concerned, when compared with a low-floor bus. As you note elsewhere in the thread, the private bus lines running routes under contract to the City (which I understand are marketed as part of the NYCTA network, and accept MetroCards) are not yet 100% ADA compliant. also a much higher percentage of the subway (tube) stations are accessible.. NOT TRUE! Quite the reverse, in fact - the London Underground has a much higher percentage of stations accessible than the New York Subway. Look at the MTA and TfL websites (http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/mta/ada/stations.htm and http://tube.tfl.gov.uk/content/tubem...s_guide_1.pdf). I assume that we are talking about step-free access from street to platform (ie accessibility for wheelchair users). If we consider that a station is "accessible" if there is step-free access to and from trains running in both directions, on at least one line serving that station (and count it as "half a station" if this applies only to trains running in one direction), we find: New York Subway - 37 accessible stations, plus 3 accessible in only one direction, to give a total of 38½ stations out of a possible 468. This is 8.23%. London Underground - 44 accessible stations, plus 11 accessible in only one direction, to give a total of 49½ stations out of a possible 275. This is 18.00%. If we also consider the MTA's and TfL's "secondary" Metro systems, then New York is even worse by comparison. Including the Staten Island Railway and the Docklands Light Railway, we find: New York - 42½ stations out of a possible 490. This is 8.67%. London - 81½ stations out of a possible 305. This is 26.72%. New York seems to have a lot of catching up to do... -- MetroGnome ~~~~~~~~~~ (To email me, edit return address) Notes about my figures ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I've tried to be as balanced as possible. I've assumed that the MTA list is completely up-to-date (it includes, for example, the brand new access at 72nd Street on the IRT, which was not shown as accessible on the November 2003 system map). I've just taken the oft-quoted "468 subway stations" figure as correct - this presumably includes the temporarily-closed stations near Coney Island, and possibly some arguable cases. The London access guide is dated 2002, and includes four stations (Kilburn, Earl's Court, Fulham Broadway, and Hounslow East - shown with the wheelchair symbol crossed out) where access was then either under construction or suspended temporarily - I've assumed that wheelchair access has now been completed/restored (it definitely has been at some of them, but I'm not 100% sure it has been at all of them). I've also accounted for Heron Quays having re-opened. In arguable cases (where interchange between lines involves the use of public streets or walkways), I have considered Shadwell and Hammersmith to be single stations, but Paddington and Canary Wharf to each consist of two separate stations. |
Paratransit Speed
"Access Systems" wrote:
LT proclaims that their bus fleet will be fully DDA compliant by 2017 2017 is when the fleet *has* to be fully accessible by law. What they (TfL, as LT's successor) now says is "With the exception of Routemasters, London Buses expect to reach 100% [wheelchair accessibility] by 2004/05". This comes from http://www.transportforlondon.gov.uk...lowfloor.shtml, the page that was linked to earlier in the thread. What TfL hasn't yet announced publicly is that Routemasters (the "traditional" front-engined, open-platform double-deckers that need conductors) will themselves be withdrawn from the entire network by 2004/05. This withdrawal programme began a few months ago. and people with disabilities don't need to travel on heritage routes??? Err, no. Nobody *needs* to travel on a heritage route - at least, not the sort of heritage route that is apparently being considered for London. We are *not* talking about heritage routes on the US "historic trolley" model - where, although old vehicles are used, the service often forms an integral part of the public transport network. Instead, we are talking about routes run primarily for leisure rather than transport purposes, where the ride itself is the main reason for travelling - routes that are *additional* to the public transport network. They would be somewhat akin to riverboat services on the River Thames, or San Francisco's cable cars - routes that in theory can be used just for getting from A to B, but in practice rarely are. So far, TfL themselves haven't "officially" announced the Routemaster withdrawal programme, for fear of a public backlash - they prefer to just quietly get on with the job and hope that no-one will notice until the process is almost complete. Hence, it is not clear whether the suggested "heritage" Routemaster routes will actually happen. -- MetroGnome ~~~~~~~~~~ (To email me, edit return address) |
London v New York accessibility (was Paratransit Speed)
In misc.transport.urban-transit MetroGnome wrote:
"Access Systems" wrote: NYC TA buses have been 100% ADA compliant for a number of years... Yes, but how accessible are they overall to the disabled population? Not ADA is for all people with disabilities just wheelchair users, but also the far more numerous "ambulant disabled" who can walk with difficulty (most of whom don't consider themselves to be "disabled enough" to use the lift)? A standard-floor bus with a wheelchair people are permitted to "stand" on the lifts, in fact it is manitory that they be allow to. lift fitted may meet ADA requirements - but it still leaves a *lot* to be desired as far as disability access is concerned, when compared with a low-floor bus. I agree the low floor bus is the best thing since sliced bread but a lot of transit authorities in the USA are resistant. the ADA only requires access not how it is to be done As you note elsewhere in the thread, the private bus lines running routes under contract to the City (which I understand are marketed as part of the NYCTA network, and accept MetroCards) are not yet 100% ADA compliant. yes and no, they are not yet ADA compliant because they are running rust buckets that should have been replaced years ago and is the main reason for the effort to get them taken over. also a much higher percentage of the subway (tube) stations are accessible.. NOT TRUE! Quite the reverse, in fact - the London Underground has a much higher percentage of stations accessible than the New York Subway. Look at the MTA and TfL websites (http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/mta/ada/stations.htm and http://tube.tfl.gov.uk/content/tubem...s_guide_1.pdf). Notes about my figures Bob -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve Neither liberty nor safety", Benjamin Franklin - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ASCII Ribbon Campaign accessBob NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail NO MSWord docs in e-mail Access Systems, engineers NO attachments in e-mail, *LINUX powered* access is a civil right *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*# THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be privileged. They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named |
Paratransit Speed
Robin May wrote:
Then why call it the "Americans with Disabilities Act"? Just another manifestation of the Pax American mentality! Cheers, Bill Bill Bolton Sydney, Australia |
Paratransit Speed
JRS: In article ,
seen in news:uk.transport.london, Robin May om posted at Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:13:28 :- Access Systems wrote the following in: ADA = NYC Presumably non-Americans with disabilities are considered unimportant. That would be illegal discrimination in favour of non-disabled Americans; you wrote two words too many in the middle of your sentence. -- © John Stockton, Surrey, UK. Turnpike v4.00 MIME. © Web URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links. Check boilerplate spelling -- error is a public sign of incompetence. Never fully trust an article from a poster who gives no full real name. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:29 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk