In article ,
Anthony Polson wrote:
Mike Bristow wrote:
[snip math]
That means that around 6% of journeys are possible step-free.


That is perhaps an overly pessimistic view. All a wheelchair user
needs is a bus service to an accessible LUL station. That makes the
step-free network available to a much wider range of users than 6%
would suggest.

This is sort-of true. But at a substantial time penalty.

Pick Leytonstone - Paddington (choosen purely because that's the
journey I'd make when visiting the inlaws). With no access needs,
the journey is 40-45 minutes, if you believe the journey planner.
If you need step-free access to the platform: 1h15-1h20 (again, if
you believe the journey planner).

Roughly double the time.

I've been toying with a FoI request to get a "snapshot" of journeys
made, and then hitting journey planner to see how bad the time
penalty of "just use the bus to join the dots" is, on average, but
I'm too lazy.

Thank you for pointing out how ridiculous Boltar's statement was.

Taking the opposite view to Boltar will see you right 9 times out of
ten, on average...

Cheers,

--
Mike Bristow

Mike Bristow wrote:

In article ,
Anthony Polson wrote:
Mike Bristow wrote:
[snip math]
That means that around 6% of journeys are possible step-free.


That is perhaps an overly pessimistic view. All a wheelchair user
needs is a bus service to an accessible LUL station. That makes the
step-free network available to a much wider range of users than 6%
would suggest.

This is sort-of true. But at a substantial time penalty.


I doubt that journey time matters quite so much to the average
wheelchair-bound person as it does to the rest of us. Cost is an
important issue and the only realistic alternative to bus-train-bus
would be an expensive taxi journey.