In ,
Jack Taylor typed:

.... there have been many complaints about the fact the the
Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version) devote one third of an
entire coach to the disabled-access toilet,

A third??

The Electrostars and Turbostars that you travel on must be very different
from those that work everywhere else?



--
Bob

"Bob Wood" wrote in message
...
In ,
Jack Taylor typed:

.... there have been many complaints about the fact the the
Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version) devote one third of an
entire coach to the disabled-access toilet,

A third??

The Electrostars and Turbostars that you travel on must be very different
from those that work everywhere else?

Yes, there's such a significant difference between a quarter and a third,
isn't there? ;-)

It's the repeated incorrect references to 1/3 and 2/3 doors that tends to
make you think in thirds!

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 12:11:10 GMT, "Jack Taylor"
wrote:

Yes, there's such a significant difference between a quarter and a third,
isn't there? ;-)

It doesn't take a quarter of the coach, either. It takes about 2 bays
(or 5-6 one-side rows of airlines) which is quite a bit less.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...

It doesn't take a quarter of the coach, either. It takes about 2 bays
(or 5-6 one-side rows of airlines) which is quite a bit less.

We weren't discussing the size of the disabled toilet - we were discussing
the area taken up by the disabled toilet, the seating reserved for
wheelchair passengers and their companions and for bicycle stowage, which is
the entire area between one vestibule and the corridor connection at the end
of the vehicle.

David Martin wrote:
I would be quite happy for bulky goods (large suitcases, bicycles,
prams etc.) to be carried at a nominal handling charge if I could be
reasonably sure of getting a bike oto a train. It makes a mockery of
the train service when a family of five cannot travel with bikes.. I'm
thinking of the highland lines where you can only fit 2 bikes per train
(officially).

Far North Line (which uses 158s) is two bikes per two coaches, but in
the past ScotRail have put a van on to transport additional bikes

Highland Main Line seems to be Turbostars a lot now and they're
currently being modified with a second bike rack so that they can now
take four bikes per three coaches (and it's not unusual to see them
doubled up). (Or there's GNER's Highland Chieftan which will officially
take 6 bikes IIRC.)

West Highland line (which uses 156s) is six bikes per two coaches and
trains are usually formed of at least two units (although the number of
bikes depends on the amount of luggage being carried as well).

I doubt you could call the situation on the FNL or HML ideal however
(certainly if there's five of you).

Cheers,
eat

--
|"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room."
....| -- President Merkin Muffley
ScR|http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scot-rail/
Pix|http://photos.eatnet.org.uk/RoyalScotsman - new photos online

In ,
Jack Taylor typed:

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...

It doesn't take a quarter of the coach, either. It takes about 2
bays (or 5-6 one-side rows of airlines) which is quite a bit less.

We weren't discussing the size of the disabled toilet - we were
discussing the area taken up by the disabled toilet, , which is the entire
area between one vestibule and
the corridor connection at the end of the vehicle.


How can it be that we are not discussing the size of the disabled toilet?
This part of the thread is in answer to and relates solely to your statement
that ".... there have been many complaints about the fact the the
Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version) devote one third of an entire
coach to the disabled-access toilet,"

If you want to add "the seating reserved for wheelchair passengers and their
companions and for bicycle stowage", you should have done so in the first
instance. But it still doesn't amount to one-third of an entire coach, does
it?

Your hole is big enough. Why don't you stop digging?

--
Bob

Bob Wood wrote:
Jack Taylor typed:
"Neil Williams" wrote in message
It doesn't take a quarter of the coach, either. It takes about 2
bays (or 5-6 one-side rows of airlines) which is quite a bit less.

We weren't discussing the size of the disabled toilet - we were
discussing the area taken up by the disabled toilet,
which is the entire area between one vestibule and
the corridor connection at the end of the vehicle.

How can it be that we are not discussing the size of the disabled toilet?
This part of the thread is in answer to and relates solely to your statement
that ".... there have been many complaints about the fact the the
Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version) devote one third of an entire
coach to the disabled-access toilet,"

Which YOU trimmed at that point. Jack added 'the five (or less,
depends on the specification by the train operating company) tip-up
seats that can be used as wheelchair spaces or for people travelling
with wheelchair passengers and the cycle stowage areas.'

The comma after toilet is a big clue.

If you want to add "the seating reserved for wheelchair passengers and their
companions and for bicycle stowage", you should have done so in the first
instance.

As he did!

Your hole is big enough. Why don't you stop digging?

I think you'll find it's you in the hole.

The bike and wheelchair space should, of course, be flexible, with
tip-up seats. It would be easy and cheap to provide more flexible
space, allowing more bikes to be carried when necessary, and more bums
on seats the rest of the time.

As it is, the operators have chosen to turn away useful off-peak
business. The rest of the time, they have a nice seat-free area for
crush-loading with commuters - and they can blame the lack of seats on
having to provide for cyclists.

Colin McKenzie

In ,
Colin McKenzie typed:

Bob Wood wrote:
How can it be that we are not discussing the size of the disabled
toilet? This part of the thread is in answer to and relates solely
to your statement that ".... there have been many complaints about
the fact the the Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version)
devote one third of an entire coach to the disabled-access toilet,"

Which YOU trimmed at that point. Jack added 'the five (or less,
depends on the specification by the train operating company) tip-up
seats that can be used as wheelchair spaces or for people travelling
with wheelchair passengers and the cycle stowage areas.'

The comma after toilet is a big clue.

If you want to add "the seating reserved for wheelchair passengers
and their companions and for bicycle stowage", you should have done
so in the first instance.

As he did!

Yes, he did. And I apologise for not understanding what he had written
correctly before criticising what he had written.

I think I read the comma as a semi-colon and missed the 'that' in the second
part of the sentence.

Again, apologies to Jack - and apologies to you for having had to take
the time to point out my error.


Your hole is big enough. Why don't you stop digging?

I think you'll find it's you in the hole.

Can you lend me a ladder?


--
Bob

In ,
Colin McKenzie typed:

Bob Wood wrote:
How can it be that we are not discussing the size of the disabled
toilet? This part of the thread is in answer to and relates solely
to your statement that ".... there have been many complaints about
the fact the the Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version)
devote one third of an entire coach to the disabled-access toilet,"

Which YOU trimmed at that point. Jack added 'the five (or less,
depends on the specification by the train operating company) tip-up
seats that can be used as wheelchair spaces or for people travelling
with wheelchair passengers and the cycle stowage areas.'

The comma after toilet is a big clue.

If you want to add "the seating reserved for wheelchair passengers
and their companions and for bicycle stowage", you should have done
so in the first instance.

As he did!

Yes, he did. And I apologise for not understanding what he had written
correctly before criticising what he had written.

I think I read the comma as a semi-colon and missed the 'that' in the second
part of the sentence.

Again, apologies to Jack - and apologies to you for having had to take
the time to point out my error.


Your hole is big enough. Why don't you stop digging?

I think you'll find it's you in the hole.

Can you lend me a ladder?


--
Bob

In ,
Colin McKenzie typed:

Bob Wood wrote:
How can it be that we are not discussing the size of the disabled
toilet? This part of the thread is in answer to and relates solely
to your statement that ".... there have been many complaints about
the fact the the Electrostar and Turbostar (the diesel version)
devote one third of an entire coach to the disabled-access toilet,"

Which YOU trimmed at that point. Jack added 'the five (or less,
depends on the specification by the train operating company) tip-up
seats that can be used as wheelchair spaces or for people travelling
with wheelchair passengers and the cycle stowage areas.'

The comma after toilet is a big clue.

If you want to add "the seating reserved for wheelchair passengers
and their companions and for bicycle stowage", you should have done
so in the first instance.

As he did!

Yes, he did. And I apologise for not understanding what he had written
correctly before criticising it.

I think I read the comma as a semi-colon and missed the 'that' in the second
part of the sentence.

Again, apologies to Jack - and apologies to you for having had to take
the time to point out my error.


Your hole is big enough. Why don't you stop digging?

I think you'll find it's you in the hole.

Can you lend me a ladder?


--
Bob