S stock
 

Was it really necessary for the body to taper in so severely at floor level?
I realise the lower floor means it has to be cut back for curved platforms
but it leaves a huge potentially dangerous gap at certain stations. Was it
really worth it just for those mythical wheelchair users who don't exist?

B2003

S stock
 

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 09:59:06 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

Was it really necessary for the body to taper in so severely at floor level?
I realise the lower floor means it has to be cut back for curved platforms
but it leaves a huge potentially dangerous gap at certain stations. Was it
really worth it just for those mythical wheelchair users who don't exist?

I'd rather have the low floor and a platform gap than vice versa.

S stock
 

Recliner wrote:

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 09:59:06 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

Was it really necessary for the body to taper in so severely at floor level?
I realise the lower floor means it has to be cut back for curved platforms
but it leaves a huge potentially dangerous gap at certain stations. Was it
really worth it just for those mythical wheelchair users who don't exist?

I'd rather have the low floor and a platform gap than vice versa.


I'd like to know why someone would use a "mythical wheelchair" when
even the real ones are far from satisfactory.

S stock
 

wrote in message
...
Was it really necessary for the body to taper in so severely at floor
level?
I realise the lower floor means it has to be cut back for curved platforms
but it leaves a huge potentially dangerous gap at certain stations. Was it
really worth it just for those mythical wheelchair users who don't exist?

The aim was to build a 'go-anywhere' common stock for all the SSR routes,
not just the Met. Once the A, C and D stock have all been replaced perhaps
they'll be altering the stepping distances at various stations?

There will always be certain stations where a compromise height/gap is
needed though, eg where tube gauge stock or NR stock uses the same
platforms.

Paul S

S stock
 

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 13:16:57 -0000
"Paul Scott" wrote:
wrote in message
...
Was it really necessary for the body to taper in so severely at floor
level?
I realise the lower floor means it has to be cut back for curved platforms
but it leaves a huge potentially dangerous gap at certain stations. Was it
really worth it just for those mythical wheelchair users who don't exist?

The aim was to build a 'go-anywhere' common stock for all the SSR routes,
not just the Met. Once the A, C and D stock have all been replaced perhaps
they'll be altering the stepping distances at various stations?

Stepping distances?

There will always be certain stations where a compromise height/gap is
needed though, eg where tube gauge stock or NR stock uses the same
platforms.

Well at aldwych the friend I was with almost slipped onto the tracks because
of the huge gap to the platform. It wasn't funny and it would probably be
bloody dangerous for someone with impaired vision if they didn't know about
it.

B2003

S stock
 

"Paul Scott" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
Was it really necessary for the body to taper in so severely at floor
level?
I realise the lower floor means it has to be cut back for curved
platforms
but it leaves a huge potentially dangerous gap at certain stations. Was
it
really worth it just for those mythical wheelchair users who don't exist?

The aim was to build a 'go-anywhere' common stock for all the SSR routes,
not just the Met. Once the A, C and D stock have all been replaced
perhaps they'll be altering the stepping distances at various stations?

I've now found a report (in the archived version of the DfT website) that
includes the plans for work on the 'Met' S8 stations. It definitely seems
to be a work that's still in progress, caused mainly by the multiple stock
types in use on the various bits of the line.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.g...olitanline.pdf

It's the last section, starting at page 40 of the pdf...

Paul S

S stock
 

On 2012\10\30 13:57, d wrote:

Well at aldwych the friend I was with almost slipped onto the tracks because
of the huge gap to the platform. It wasn't funny and it would probably be
bloody dangerous for someone with impaired vision if they didn't know about
it.

That is huge gap is caused by the station being closed since 1994.

S stock
 

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 14:40:02 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2012\10\30 13:57, d wrote:

Well at aldwych the friend I was with almost slipped onto the tracks because
of the huge gap to the platform. It wasn't funny and it would probably be
bloody dangerous for someone with impaired vision if they didn't know about
it.

That is huge gap is caused by the station being closed since 1994.

:o) Yes, sorry , meant aldgate! I suspect S stock might have other issues
in aldwych other than platform gaps.

B2003

S stock
 

wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 13:16:57 -0000
"Paul Scott" wrote:
wrote in message
...
Was it really necessary for the body to taper in so severely at floor
level?
I realise the lower floor means it has to be cut back for curved platforms
but it leaves a huge potentially dangerous gap at certain stations. Was it
really worth it just for those mythical wheelchair users who don't exist?

The aim was to build a 'go-anywhere' common stock for all the SSR routes,
not just the Met. Once the A, C and D stock have all been replaced perhaps
they'll be altering the stepping distances at various stations?

Stepping distances?

Move the coping stones on the platform. You couldn't do that with A stock
still running, at Euston Square there wasn't much of a gap to mind - about
half an inch if that.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

S stock
 

On 2012-10-30 14:48:31 +0000, d said:

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 14:40:02 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2012\10\30 13:57, d wrote:

Well at aldwych the friend I was with almost slipped onto the tracks because
of the huge gap to the platform. It wasn't funny and it would probably be
bloody dangerous for someone with impaired vision if they didn't know about
it.

That is huge gap is caused by the station being closed since 1994.

:o) Yes, sorry , meant aldgate! I suspect S stock might have other issues
in aldwych other than platform gaps.

B2003

The platforms at Aldgate are on such a tight curve I doubt anything
much can be done to alleviate the situation.

S stock
 

On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 11:22:13 +0000
Ken Wheatley wrote:
The platforms at Aldgate are on such a tight curve I doubt anything
much can be done to alleviate the situation.

The A stock partially solved it by having a floor higher than the platform and
so allowing the floor to be wider. Of course now LU has to cater for all these
fictitious wheelchair users who are flocking to the tube in droves (not) now
its being made more accessable that clearly isn't possible.

B2003

S stock
 

wrote:
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 11:22:13 +0000
Ken Wheatley wrote:
The platforms at Aldgate are on such a tight curve I doubt anything
much can be done to alleviate the situation.

The A stock partially solved it by having a floor higher than the platform and
so allowing the floor to be wider. Of course now LU has to cater for all these
fictitious wheelchair users who are flocking to the tube in droves (not) now
its being made more accessable that clearly isn't possible.

Perhaps more of them will, once the stations at *both* ends of their
journeys are accessible?

S stock
 

On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 04:33:04 -0600
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 11:22:13 +0000
Ken Wheatley wrote:
The platforms at Aldgate are on such a tight curve I doubt anything
much can be done to alleviate the situation.

The A stock partially solved it by having a floor higher than the platform
and
so allowing the floor to be wider. Of course now LU has to cater for all
these
fictitious wheelchair users who are flocking to the tube in droves (not) now
its being made more accessable that clearly isn't possible.

Perhaps more of them will, once the stations at *both* ends of their
journeys are accessible?

There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone in
a wheelchair on the tube yet?

B2003

S stock
 

In article , wrote:
On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 04:33:04 -0600
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 11:22:13 +0000
Ken Wheatley wrote:
The platforms at Aldgate are on such a tight curve I doubt anything
much can be done to alleviate the situation.

The A stock partially solved it by having a floor higher than the platform
and
so allowing the floor to be wider. Of course now LU has to cater for all
these
fictitious wheelchair users who are flocking to the tube in droves (not) now
its being made more accessable that clearly isn't possible.

Perhaps more of them will, once the stations at *both* ends of their
journeys are accessible?

There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone in
a wheelchair on the tube yet?

Why are you so focussed on wheelchairs ? Plenty of people have problems
with steps who aren't in chairs. (and steps from platform across a
ruddy great gap into a train, or vice versa, still count as steps).

Nick
--
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996

S stock
 

On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 10:55:25 +0000 (UTC)
Nick Leverton wrote:
There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone in
a wheelchair on the tube yet?

Why are you so focussed on wheelchairs ? Plenty of people have problems

I'm not, but LU are. All these changes are SPECIFICALLY for wheelchair users,
not people who need a stick to walk and so on.

B2003

S stock
 

In article , d
says...

On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 10:55:25 +0000 (UTC)
Nick Leverton wrote:
There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone in
a wheelchair on the tube yet?

Why are you so focussed on wheelchairs ? Plenty of people have problems

I'm not, but LU are. All these changes are SPECIFICALLY for wheelchair users,
not people who need a stick to walk and so on.

B2003

Wheelchair users seen on Central, Jubilee, Northern and District Lines
at various times last year and this year.

S stock
 

In article ,
d wrote:
There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone in
a wheelchair on the tube yet?

There are 66 stations which step-free from street to platform. That
means that there are 66 time 65 (just over 4 thousand) possible
journeys with both ends step-free. Assuming all the interchanges
are step free, of course.

There are 270 stations total. That means that there are 270*269
(or just over 72 thousand) possible journeys on LuL.

That means that around 6% of journeys are possible step-free.

If LuL wish to improve things, more power to them: 6% is dreadfully
low. Remember that the design life of S-Stock is probably around
30 years - and a lot can change in that time. In the mean time,
step free adaptations are mostly benifiting those with prams and
luggage; for them, a step free station at one end of the journey
will help as they have the option of strugling up the stairs at the
other end.


Cheers,
Mike

--
Mike Bristow

S stock
 

On 05/11/2012 10:45, d wrote:

On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 04:33:04 -0600
Recliner wrote:

The A stock partially solved it by having a floor higher than the platform
and so allowing the floor to be wider. Of course now LU has to cater for
all these fictitious wheelchair users who are flocking to the tube in droves
(not) now its being made more accessable that clearly isn't
possible.

Perhaps more of them will, once the stations at *both* ends of their
journeys are accessible?

There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone in
a wheelchair on the tube yet?

Yes.

(If all your first-person observations come from a part of the network
that isn't accessible, well...)

S stock
 

On 05/11/2012 16:52, Mike Bristow wrote:

In article ,
d wrote:
There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen
someone in a wheelchair on the tube yet?

There are 66 stations which step-free from street to platform. That
means that there are 66 time 65 (just over 4 thousand) possible
journeys with both ends step-free. Assuming all the interchanges
are step free, of course.

There are 270 stations total. That means that there are 270*269
(or just over 72 thousand) possible journeys on LuL.

That means that around 6% of journeys are possible step-free.

If LuL wish to improve things, more power to them: 6% is dreadfully
low. Remember that the design life of S-Stock is probably around
30 years - and a lot can change in that time. In the mean time,
step free adaptations are mostly benifiting those with prams and
luggage; for them, a step free station at one end of the journey
will help as they have the option of strugling up the stairs at the
other end.

Well said.

S stock
 

Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
d wrote:
There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone in
a wheelchair on the tube yet?

There are 66 stations which step-free from street to platform. That
means that there are 66 time 65 (just over 4 thousand) possible
journeys with both ends step-free. Assuming all the interchanges
are step free, of course.

There are 270 stations total. That means that there are 270*269
(or just over 72 thousand) possible journeys on LuL.

That means that around 6% of journeys are possible step-free.

If LuL wish to improve things, more power to them: 6% is dreadfully
low. Remember that the design life of S-Stock is probably around
30 years - and a lot can change in that time. In the mean time,
step free adaptations are mostly benifiting those with prams and
luggage; for them, a step free station at one end of the journey
will help as they have the option of strugling up the stairs at the
other end.

Actually, it's even more useful at interchange stations. When I change en
route from Heathrow, having lifts at Acton Town saves me stairs both up and
down when carrying a heavy suitcase. I often meet people pushing prams when
doing so.

S stock
 

Mike Bristow wrote:

In article ,
d wrote:
There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone in
a wheelchair on the tube yet?

There are 66 stations which step-free from street to platform. That
means that there are 66 time 65 (just over 4 thousand) possible
journeys with both ends step-free. Assuming all the interchanges
are step free, of course.

There are 270 stations total. That means that there are 270*269
(or just over 72 thousand) possible journeys on LuL.

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.


If LuL wish to improve things, more power to them: 6% is dreadfully
low. Remember that the design life of S-Stock is probably around
30 years - and a lot can change in that time. In the mean time,
step free adaptations are mostly benifiting those with prams and
luggage; for them, a step free station at one end of the journey
will help as they have the option of strugling up the stairs at the
other end.


Indeed.

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

S stock
 

On 05/11/2012 20:09, Anthony Polson wrote:

Mike Bristow wrote:
[snip]
There are 66 stations which step-free from street to platform. That
means that there are 66 time 65 (just over 4 thousand) possible
journeys with both ends step-free. Assuming all the interchanges
are step free, of course.

There are 270 stations total. That means that there are 270*269
(or just over 72 thousand) possible journeys on LuL.

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.


If LuL wish to improve things, more power to them: 6% is dreadfully
low. Remember that the design life of S-Stock is probably around
30 years - and a lot can change in that time. In the mean time,
step free adaptations are mostly benifiting those with prams and
luggage; for them, a step free station at one end of the journey
will help as they have the option of strugling up the stairs at the
other end.

Indeed.

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

Though I think Boltar's statement pointed out how ridiculous Boltar's
statement was, but there's no harm in reiterating the point.

S stock
 

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

S stock
 

In article , (Mike
Bristow) wrote:

In article ,
d wrote:
There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone
in a wheelchair on the tube yet?

There are 66 stations which step-free from street to platform. That
means that there are 66 time 65 (just over 4 thousand) possible
journeys with both ends step-free. Assuming all the interchanges
are step free, of course.

There are 270 stations total. That means that there are 270*269
(or just over 72 thousand) possible journeys on LuL.

That means that around 6% of journeys are possible step-free.

Er, probably not. I rather doubt that the number of journeys between each
possible pair of stations is equal. I would expect the steep-free stations
cover most of the busier stations so the percentage of journeys that are
possible step-free is much higher than 6%.

If LuL wish to improve things, more power to them: 6% is dreadfully
low. Remember that the design life of S-Stock is probably around
30 years - and a lot can change in that time. In the mean time,
step free adaptations are mostly benifiting those with prams and
luggage; for them, a step free station at one end of the journey
will help as they have the option of strugling up the stairs at the
other end.

This paragraph is therefore partly based on a false assumption.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

S stock
 

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.

S stock
 

In article ,
wrote:
Er, probably not. I rather doubt that the number of journeys between each
possible pair of stations is equal.

True, but in the absence of data I approximated. :)

I really should put in a FoI request to get better data...

I would expect the steep-free stations
cover most of the busier stations so the percentage of journeys that are
possible step-free is much higher than 6%.

I think this is not true; look at the Central Line. The accessible
stations are Stratford (probably one of the busier stations on the
line; but I'd guess Liverpool Street and Bank are as busy), Woodford,
Roding Valley, Hainault, and Epping.

Two things are noticeable: They're all out east; and most of them
are teeny-tiny-overground stations.

Looking at Central London, the only station inside the Circle Line
that's accessible is Green Park and Bank DLR (is that inside or
outside the circle?).

Basically, tiney-tiny overground (or nearly overground) stations
out in the sticks are much easier and cheaper to make accessable -
bung in a couple of short lifts and you're done. The busier central
stations are complex, and often deep. underground; this makes them
much harder to make step-free as you'd have to put in more lifts
and they're much longer. And you have to do it underground. And
there's less space on the surface, so you'd need to buy and demolish
an expensive building to do much.

All in all much more expensive. If you were TfL, and you had some
dosh explicitly to improve accessibility, would you make Oxford
Circus accessible, or make every station north of Leyton accessible?
It wouldn't surprise me if both of those plans would cost the same;
and the best thing to do for disabled Londoners is not at all obvious.

If LuL wish to improve things, more power to them: 6% is dreadfully
low. Remember that the design life of S-Stock is probably around
30 years - and a lot can change in that time. In the mean time,
step free adaptations are mostly benifiting those with prams and
luggage; for them, a step free station at one end of the journey
will help as they have the option of strugling up the stairs at the
other end.

This paragraph is therefore partly based on a false assumption.

An approximation, yes, but I think it's reasonable.


--
Mike Bristow

S stock
 

On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 16:52:07 +0000
Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
d wrote:
There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone in
a wheelchair on the tube yet?

There are 66 stations which step-free from street to platform. That
means that there are 66 time 65 (just over 4 thousand) possible
journeys with both ends step-free. Assuming all the interchanges
are step free, of course.

There are 270 stations total. That means that there are 270*269
(or just over 72 thousand) possible journeys on LuL.

That means that around 6% of journeys are possible step-free.

Your maths is up the spout. Its 6% of *possible* journeys but how many people
take the tube from say cockfosters to oakwood or epping to loughton? The
actually percentage of sane commuter journeys they can do is a lot higher.

step free adaptations are mostly benifiting those with prams and
luggage; for them, a step free station at one end of the journey
will help as they have the option of strugling up the stairs at the
other end.

Given that luggage and prams on the tube in the rush hour is a PITA for
everyone else thats hardly something to look forward to.

B2003

S stock
 

On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 14:37:56 -0000
Jim [wake wrote:
In article , d
says...

On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 10:55:25 +0000 (UTC)
Nick Leverton wrote:
There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone in
a wheelchair on the tube yet?

Why are you so focussed on wheelchairs ? Plenty of people have problems

I'm not, but LU are. All these changes are SPECIFICALLY for wheelchair users,
not people who need a stick to walk and so on.

B2003

Wheelchair users seen on Central, Jubilee, Northern and District Lines
at various times last year and this year.

Oh really? Which bits specifically?

B2003

S stock
 

In article , d
says...

On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 14:37:56 -0000
Jim [wake wrote:
In article , d
says...

On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 10:55:25 +0000 (UTC)
Nick Leverton wrote:
There are plenty of journeys available already. Has anyone seen someone in
a wheelchair on the tube yet?

Why are you so focussed on wheelchairs ? Plenty of people have problems

I'm not, but LU are. All these changes are SPECIFICALLY for wheelchair users,
not people who need a stick to walk and so on.

B2003

Wheelchair users seen on Central, Jubilee, Northern and District Lines
at various times last year and this year.

Oh really? Which bits specifically?

B2003

Central Line :: Wanstead to beyond Liverpool Street [passenger had to
struggle to get the wheelchair down the ecalator]

Jubilee Line :: Stratford to North Greenwich, Canary Wharf to London
Bridge, Canada Water to beyond London Bridge

Northern Line :: London Bridge to Euston

District Line :: East Ham travelling westbound, West Ham travelling
westbound, also at other times but I don't remember where.

S stock
 

On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 12:08:57 -0000
Jim [wake wrote:
Oh really? Which bits specifically?

B2003

Central Line :: Wanstead to beyond Liverpool Street [passenger had to
struggle to get the wheelchair down the ecalator]

So how did he manage that then? Stand up and hold it?

Jubilee Line :: Stratford to North Greenwich, Canary Wharf to London
Bridge, Canada Water to beyond London Bridge

Northern Line :: London Bridge to Euston

District Line :: East Ham travelling westbound, West Ham travelling
westbound, also at other times but I don't remember where.

Sorry, don't believe you. I've never seen anyone in a wheelchair on the tube.
Ever. What are the chances of you seeing them all those times and me never
seeing any? Slim.

B2003

S stock
 

In article , d
says...

On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 12:08:57 -0000
Jim [wake wrote:
Oh really? Which bits specifically?

B2003

Central Line :: Wanstead to beyond Liverpool Street [passenger had to
struggle to get the wheelchair down the ecalator]

So how did he manage that then? Stand up and hold it?

Jubilee Line :: Stratford to North Greenwich, Canary Wharf to London
Bridge, Canada Water to beyond London Bridge

Northern Line :: London Bridge to Euston

District Line :: East Ham travelling westbound, West Ham travelling
westbound, also at other times but I don't remember where.

Sorry, don't believe you. I've never seen anyone in a wheelchair on the tube.
Ever. What are the chances of you seeing them all those times and me never
seeing any? Slim.

B2003

Believe what you may, as one of your despised old gits that has
difficulty with stairs I am aware of station lifts. Whilst it's usually
buggies with the lifts, I have met wheelchair users using them at East
Ham and at West Ham.

I agree sightings are rare, that's why I remember them.

One day perhaps it will be you that needs such things, who knows?

S stock
 

On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 12:42:13 -0000
Jim [wake wrote:
Believe what you may, as one of your despised old gits that has

Don't put words in my mouth thanks. Its simply a fact that all the 10s if not
100s of millions that will eventuallt be spent on making public transport
wheelchair accessable with all the compromises it entails could have funded
dial-a-ride for every wheelchair user in the city for life.

B2003

S stock
 

In article ,
d wrote:
Your maths is up the spout. Its 6% of *possible* journeys but how many people
take the tube from say cockfosters to oakwood or epping to loughton? The
actually percentage of sane commuter journeys they can do is a lot higher.

I think you're probably wrong; but see my response to Colin for the detail.

--
Mike Bristow

S stock
 

On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 15:59:08 +0000
Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
d wrote:
Your maths is up the spout. Its 6% of *possible* journeys but how many people
take the tube from say cockfosters to oakwood or epping to loughton? The
actually percentage of sane commuter journeys they can do is a lot higher.

I think you're probably wrong; but see my response to Colin for the detail.

No, I'm not wrong. If you worked it out based on possible journeys from
Zone 2+ into zone 1 for wheelchair users then it would give a better picture
of how well they're are catered for.

B2003

S stock
 

"Mike Bristow" wrote in message
...

In article ,
wrote:
Er, probably not. I rather doubt that the number of journeys between each
possible pair of stations is equal.

True, but in the absence of data I approximated. :)

I really should put in a FoI request to get better data...

I would expect the steep-free stations
cover most of the busier stations so the percentage of journeys that are
possible step-free is much higher than 6%.

I think this is not true; look at the Central Line. The accessible
stations are Stratford (probably one of the busier stations on the
line; but I'd guess Liverpool Street and Bank are as busy), Woodford,
Roding Valley, Hainault, and Epping.

The other factor is that even if the start and destination are both
accessible, most interchange stations are not accessible which limits the
options further.

Peter Smyth

S stock
 

In article ,
d wrote:
No, I'm not wrong. If you worked it out based on possible journeys from
Zone 2+ into zone 1 for wheelchair users then it would give a better picture
of how well they're are catered for.

OK.

I count 63 Z1 stations[1], of which 7 [2] are step free.

There are 66 stations that are step free; so there are 59 outside
zone 1. This gives disabled passengers 413 "commuter routes".

There are 270 stations in total; so 207 outside zone 1. This gives
non-disabled passengers 13041 "commuter routes".

This means that *by your preferred measure*, 3% of the tube is
accessible, instead of my 6%.

As it happens, disabled people are more likely to be unemployed, so
I suspect my estimate is closer to the scale of the problem than
yours; on the other hand, my analysis totally ignores the issue of
interchanges, which means that they're both overestimates.

I'm also ignoring the folk who travel to London via NR stations -
a disabled person who lives in Woking, for example, will have a
pretty big problem commuting to London even if Waterloo's underground
station is completely accessible.

Put simply: 6% isn't a bad estimate; better estimates would lower,
rather than raise, that figure. At least part of the reason that
you don't see disabled[3] people using the Tube is because it's basically
closed to them.

Cheers,
Mike



[1] From wikipedia, Aldgate, Aldgate East, Angel, Baker Street,
Bank, Barbican, Bayswater, Blackfriars LU, Bond Street, Borough,
Cannon Street LU, Chancery Lane, Charing Cross LU, Covent Garden,
Earl's Court, Edgware Road (Bakerloo), Edgware Road (Circle),
Elephant & Castle LU, Embankment, Euston LU, Euston Square, Farringdon,
Gloucester Road, Goodge Street, Great Portland Street, Green Park,
High Street Kensington, Holborn, Hyde Park Corner, King's Cross St.
Pancras LU, Knightsbridge, Lambeth North, Lancaster Gate, Leicester
Square, Liverpool Street LU, London Bridge LU, Mansion House, Marble
Arch, Marylebone LU, Monument, Moorgate, Notting Hill Gate, Old
Street, Oxford Circus, Paddington LU, Piccadilly Circus, Pimlico,
Queensway, Regent's Park, Russell Square, Sloane Square, South
Kensington, Southwark, St. James's Park, St. Paul's, Temple, Tottenham
Court Road, Tower Hill, Vauxhall LU, Victoria LU, Warren Street,
Waterloo LU, and Westminster

[2] By eyeballing the map, Kings X, Farringdon, Green Park,
Blackfriars, Westminster, Earls Court, and Southwark. I've not
counted Waterloo (as it's only the JLE part that's accessible);
Tower Gateway (as it's the DLR not LUL). I wouldn't be surprised
if I've miscounted.

[3] by which, of course, you mean "obviously disabled". Some
people don't "look" disabled, but still find stairs difficult
or impossible.

S stock
 

Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
d wrote:
No, I'm not wrong. If you worked it out based on possible journeys from
Zone 2+ into zone 1 for wheelchair users then it would give a better picture
of how well they're are catered for.

OK.

I count 63 Z1 stations[1], of which 7 [2] are step free.

There are 66 stations that are step free; so there are 59 outside
zone 1. This gives disabled passengers 413 "commuter routes".

There are 270 stations in total; so 207 outside zone 1. This gives
non-disabled passengers 13041 "commuter routes".

This means that *by your preferred measure*, 3% of the tube is
accessible, instead of my 6%.

As it happens, disabled people are more likely to be unemployed, so
I suspect my estimate is closer to the scale of the problem than
yours; on the other hand, my analysis totally ignores the issue of
interchanges, which means that they're both overestimates.

I'm also ignoring the folk who travel to London via NR stations -
a disabled person who lives in Woking, for example, will have a
pretty big problem commuting to London even if Waterloo's underground
station is completely accessible.

Put simply: 6% isn't a bad estimate; better estimates would lower,
rather than raise, that figure. At least part of the reason that
you don't see disabled[3] people using the Tube is because it's basically
closed to them.

Cheers,
Mike



[1] From wikipedia, Aldgate, Aldgate East, Angel, Baker Street,
Bank, Barbican, Bayswater, Blackfriars LU, Bond Street, Borough,
Cannon Street LU, Chancery Lane, Charing Cross LU, Covent Garden,
Earl's Court, Edgware Road (Bakerloo), Edgware Road (Circle),
Elephant & Castle LU, Embankment, Euston LU, Euston Square, Farringdon,
Gloucester Road, Goodge Street, Great Portland Street, Green Park,
High Street Kensington, Holborn, Hyde Park Corner, King's Cross St.
Pancras LU, Knightsbridge, Lambeth North, Lancaster Gate, Leicester
Square, Liverpool Street LU, London Bridge LU, Mansion House, Marble
Arch, Marylebone LU, Monument, Moorgate, Notting Hill Gate, Old
Street, Oxford Circus, Paddington LU, Piccadilly Circus, Pimlico,
Queensway, Regent's Park, Russell Square, Sloane Square, South
Kensington, Southwark, St. James's Park, St. Paul's, Temple, Tottenham
Court Road, Tower Hill, Vauxhall LU, Victoria LU, Warren Street,
Waterloo LU, and Westminster

[2] By eyeballing the map, Kings X, Farringdon, Green Park,
Blackfriars, Westminster, Earls Court, and Southwark. I've not
counted Waterloo (as it's only the JLE part that's accessible);
Tower Gateway (as it's the DLR not LUL). I wouldn't be surprised
if I've miscounted.

[3] by which, of course, you mean "obviously disabled". Some
people don't "look" disabled, but still find stairs difficult
or impossible.

There's also the halfway house of the many stations that have escalators
rather than lifts: not very much use to wheelchair users, but very helpful
to many other travellers who may have trouble with stairs, particularly
when carrying luggage.

Like many others, I was in that category for a while after a knee
operation, and so am now much more attentive to stair-free locations, or at
least steps with good handrails. The UK is pretty good at providing
handrails on most staircases in public buildings, much better than many
other countries in, say, east Europe.

Incidentally, I remember the time when both of South Ken's Picc platforms
had stair-free access to road level, which was lost when the lifts were
replaced by escalators and stairs 40 years ago. That wouldn't happen today.

S stock
 

In message

, at 17:24:07 on Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Recliner
remarked:
[3] by which, of course, you mean "obviously disabled". Some
people don't "look" disabled, but still find stairs difficult
or impossible.

There's also the halfway house of the many stations that have escalators
rather than lifts: not very much use to wheelchair users, but very helpful
to many other travellers who may have trouble with stairs, particularly
when carrying luggage.

Mindful that many stations with escalators (or indeed original lifts)
aren't completely step-free, typically having a short flight of steps
adjacent to the platform, and often a flight of steps to get from the
ticket concourse to the roadway outside.
--
Roland Perry

S stock
 

66 step-free stations means 66! possible journeys which is about 5.443449390774432e92 or 5.4 yottillion yottillion yottillion yottillion yottillion yottillion yottillion yottillion journeys!!

S stock
 

On 07/11/2012 09:26, Offramp wrote:
66 step-free stations means 66! possible journeys which is about 5.443449390774432e92
or 5.4 yottillion yottillion yottillion yottillion yottillion
yottillion yottillion yottillion journeys!!


I'm sure I'm troll feeding, but my maths is screaming in my head!!

66 stations means 66 x 65 possible journeys - or perhaps journey legs if
we are being pedantic.

Ok, there are 66! ways of visiting all 66 stations, but that comes into
the CBA category. grin/

Just my 0.02GBP contribution

Kevin