A new lobbying campaign?

In article <[email hidden]>, junk@raven-
family.invalid says...

Quoted message said:

Member States may exempt long-distance domestic rail services from the
provisions of the regulation on non-basic rights (e.g. the right to take
a bicycle on the train), for an initial period of five years, which may
subsequently be extended for two further periods of up to five years.
Urban, suburban and regional services can be granted an indefinite
exemption from those same provisions."

Scrub that. I have just got the final text from the European Parliament
and they have watered down the non-basic right from being an absolute
one to take a bike on a train to one of being able to take the bike on a
train if the train company wants to allow you. It also gives the train
company three excuses - they are too cumbersome, it would affect the
service or there is no room - as reasons they can give for refusing you.
Quite why the European Parliament thought they might need to allow
exemptions from the right in those circumstances is beyond me.

"Bicycles
Railway undertakings shall enable passengers to bring bicycles on to the
train, where appropriate for a fee, if they are easy to handle, if this
does not adversely affect the specific rail service, and if the rolling-
stock so permits."

:-(

--
Tony

"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has
taken place"
George Bernard Shaw

Tony Raven said:

"Bicycles
Railway undertakings shall enable passengers to bring bicycles on to the
train, where appropriate for a fee, if they are easy to handle, if this
does not adversely affect the specific rail service, and if the rolling-
stock so permits."

Does that mean that the European Parliament has spent X days (at a
cost of Y pounds/Euros) to say "nothing changes"?

Or have I missed something very obvious?

PhilD

--
<><

Tony Raven said:

In article <[email hidden]>, junk@raven-
family.invalid says...

Quoted message said:

Member States may exempt long-distance domestic rail services from the
provisions of the regulation on non-basic rights (e.g. the right to take
a bicycle on the train), for an initial period of five years, which may
subsequently be extended for two further periods of up to five years.
Urban, suburban and regional services can be granted an indefinite
exemption from those same provisions."

Scrub that. I have just got the final text from the European Parliament
and they have watered down the non-basic right from being an absolute
one to take a bike on a train to one of being able to take the bike on a
train if the train company wants to allow you. It also gives the train
company three excuses - they are too cumbersome, it would affect the
service or there is no room - as reasons they can give for refusing you.
Quite why the European Parliament thought they might need to allow
exemptions from the right in those circumstances is beyond me.

"Bicycles
Railway undertakings shall enable passengers to bring bicycles on to the
train, where appropriate for a fee, if they are easy to handle, if this
does not adversely affect the specific rail service, and if the rolling-
stock so permits."

:-(

--
Tony

"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has
taken place"
George Bernard Shaw

Not ideal for bike users but I would suggest that the lack of bike
carrying facilities was the least of the rail services problems. Take
a look at this:

Thats my legs in the train from Wigan to Liverpool.
http://www.jbuckle.homeip.net/images/seats.jpg

At 6'1 I know I'm on the taller side but I'm not out of the ordinary.
I have to sit twisted, like that, for 45 minutes. Or stand. Or sit on
my bike.

PhilD said:

Tony Raven said:

"Bicycles
Railway undertakings shall enable passengers to bring bicycles on to the
train, where appropriate for a fee, if they are easy to handle, if this
does not adversely affect the specific rail service, and if the rolling-
stock so permits."

Does that mean that the European Parliament has spent X days (at a
cost of Y pounds/Euros) to say "nothing changes"?

Or have I missed something very obvious?

PhilD

--
<><

Thought that was the point of it, jobs for the boys. False reduction
in employment stats...

"I just do nt get our politicians/rule makers endless campaign against
cyclists.
Over the water its so simple.
Train comes into the station-you go to the carraige with a bike sign on the
door lift your bike thro the extra wide door- lock it- and sit down.
The down side in Germany at least is a lot of people must miss trains.
Saw my daughter off to Leeds from Edinburgh last week- in Germany the train
would have left at 11am plus 20 seconds perhaps- in Edinburgh the guard held
the train while up to 60 punters arrived up to 10 minutes late.
Sometimes good ole British individuality works for you[perhaps his football
team won the night before].
Tam

Quoted message said:

Does that mean that the European Parliament has spent X days (at a
cost of Y pounds/Euros) to say "nothing changes"?

Or have I missed something very obvious?

PhilD

--
<><

tam said the following on 14/11/2007 10:54:

Quoted message said:

Over the water its so simple.
Train comes into the station-you go to the carraige with a bike sign on the
door lift your bike thro the extra wide door- lock it- and sit down.

It used to be like that in the UK as well - except you wheeled your bike
to the guard's van and they didn't need silly bike stickers to tell
people where to put bikes. You just had to make sure that your train
wasn't an HST because that's when the restrictions started coming in,
but that was OK because the timetables told you what sort of train it was.

Then it all got privatised...

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Tony Raven said:

In article <[email hidden]>, junk@raven-
family.invalid says...

Quoted message said:

Member States may exempt long-distance domestic rail services from the
provisions of the regulation on non-basic rights (e.g. the right to take
a bicycle on the train), for an initial period of five years, which may
subsequently be extended for two further periods of up to five years.
Urban, suburban and regional services can be granted an indefinite
exemption from those same provisions."

Quoted message said:

Scrub that. I have just got the final text from the European Parliament
and they have watered down the non-basic right from being an absolute
one to take a bike on a train to one of being able to take the bike on a
train if the train company wants to allow you. It also gives the train
company three excuses - they are too cumbersome, it would affect the
service or there is no room - as reasons they can give for refusing you.
Quite why the European Parliament thought they might need to allow
exemptions from the right in those circumstances is beyond me.

You don't really mean it's beyond you that a railway company might
want to prohibit the carriage of certain sort(s) of luggage when
there's no room for it, do you?

Quoted message said:

"Bicycles
Railway undertakings shall enable passengers to bring bicycles on to the
train, where appropriate for a fee, if they are easy to handle, if this
does not adversely affect the specific rail service, and if the rolling-
stock so permits."

If bikes are easy to handle (I assume this means for the railway
company, since it need to be independently appraised, not just by the
person with the bike), there's no problem with that proviso.

But surely the bits about adverse effect on service and (effectively)
space on the train are reasonable enough? The Eurostar, if I remember
correctly, does not permit the carrying of unlimited amounts of stowed
luggage by any passengers (just one item?). And there are limitations
on size before quite significant extra charges are involved. It's more
like being on an aeroplane, except that the baggage doesn't go into a
hold.

CoyoteBoy said:

Not ideal for bike users but I would suggest that the lack of bike
carrying facilities was the least of the rail services problems. Take
a look at this:

Thats my legs in the train from Wigan to Liverpool.http://www.jbuckle.homeip.net/images/seats.jpg

You got a seat! You lucky lucky b

CoyoteBoy said the following on 14/11/2007 10:44:

Quoted message said:

At 6'1 I know I'm on the taller side but I'm not out of the ordinary.
I have to sit twisted, like that, for 45 minutes. Or stand. Or sit on
my bike.

You're not alone there! I'm "only" 6ft, and there isn't much public
transport I can actually sit in comfortably, except the older HSTs. My
knees are usually stuck out in the aisle where they get in other
people's way, but they have to go somewhere and under my chin is not a
good place to have my knees :-(

It seems to me that as the average height gets taller, the average
public transport seat gets less room.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:32:01 +0000

Paul Boyd usenet.is.worse@plusnet said:

It seems to me that as the average height gets taller, the average
public transport seat gets less room.

Heh. You want cramped legs, look at theatres and concert halls.
Many of them make train and bus legroom look huge by comparison.

(I find train seats have adequate legroom *provided* it's not
blocked by other passengers, or stupid obstructions like a
heater under the seat opposite/in front of me).

--
not me guv

Quoted message said:

But surely the bits about adverse effect on service and (effectively)
space on the train are reasonable enough? The Eurostar, if I remember
correctly, does not permit the carrying of unlimited amounts of stowed
luggage by any passengers (just one item?). And there are limitations
on size before quite significant extra charges are involved. It's more
like being on an aeroplane, except that the baggage doesn't go into a
hold.

But why can't the train simply have one more empty flat floored (no
seats) carrage where bikes can be deposited/collected to and from?
That's how I remember all InterCity trains where back in the early
90s. I never had to book a special bike ticket, or be tied to a
specific train, just turn up, take the bike to the guards carriage -
job done.

I haven't tried taking a bike on a train fo about 10 years, but from I
pick up on other peoples experiances, it's doubtful whether I'd even
try and bother. Sounds like you'd be better off giving up and buying
a folding bike.

Regards,

Duncan

PhilD said:

Does that mean that the European Parliament has spent X days (at a
cost of Y pounds/Euros) to say "nothing changes"?

I think it means that every passenger on every train service in the EU
has the absolute right to take a bicycle with them if the train
operating company in question chooses to let them.

I'm sure this is a milestone for human rights, and I'm shocked at your
negativity.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Duncan Smith said:

I haven't tried taking a bike on a train fo about 10 years, but from I
pick up on other peoples experiances, it's doubtful whether I'd even
try and bother. Sounds like you'd be better off giving up and buying
a folding bike.

To be fair to the TOCs (Why?) I have taken bikes on trains quite
frequently with no problems. To get a decent price on an intercity you
need to book anyway and with GNER you can make a bicyle reservation at
the same time.
http://tickets.gner.co.uk/gner/en/journeyplanning/GnerWebTISHomePage

Despite SWT customer services's aggressive attitude, guards on the
actual trains seem fairly relaxed with 3 bikes in the space for 2 etc.

Regards

Paul Luton

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:48:11 +0000,

Paul Luton said:

Duncan Smith said:

I haven't tried taking a bike on a train fo about 10 years, but from I
pick up on other peoples experiances, it's doubtful whether I'd even
try and bother. Sounds like you'd be better off giving up and buying
a folding bike.

To be fair to the TOCs (Why?) I have taken bikes on trains quite
frequently with no problems. To get a decent price on an intercity you
need to book anyway

I would disagree with that. I often get a one-day travelcard down to
London from Peterborough. Outside peak commuter times the price is pretty
decent even when buying a ticket immediately before travel.

--
Andy Leighton => [email hidden]
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

Duncan Smith said the following on 14/11/2007 13:26:

Quoted message said:

But why can't the train simply have one more empty flat floored (no
seats) carrage where bikes can be deposited/collected to and from?
That's how I remember all InterCity trains where back in the early
90s. I never had to book a special bike ticket, or be tied to a
specific train, just turn up, take the bike to the guards carriage -
job done.

It's called progress :-( I took various bikes by train regularly
to/from Bristol/Leicester/Cornwall in the mid-80s to early 90s, and
apart from checking that the train wasn't an HST I didn't really have
to give it any more thought. During my student days the bike was
massively loaded, but the only difference that made was that porters
would help me load the bike onto the train or up stairs.

My mother used to take her bike on cycling holidays by train until a
couple of years ago, but she's now given up. (The trains, not cycling!)
Even when you book the bike, and pay for it, there is still no
guarantee that you will get it on the train. If you then have
connections to make, you're stuffed. She lives near Lincoln, so always
has connections to make to get anywhere.

Again, in the "good old days", if there were going to be a lot of bikes
on a particular event then they would lay on special trains. What
happened at the London to Brighton this year? They banned bikes
entirely for the duration of the event.

If that's progress, can we go back 25 years please? But without the
unions. Or even better, go back to when the railways were a common
carrier and obliged to carry any load presented to them so long as it
could physically fit under bridges!

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Andy Leighton said:

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:48:11 +0000,

Paul Luton said:

Duncan Smith said:

I haven't tried taking a bike on a train fo about 10 years, but
from I pick up on other peoples experiances, it's doubtful whether
I'd even try and bother. Sounds like you'd be better off giving up
and buying a folding bike.

To be fair to the TOCs (Why?) I have taken bikes on trains quite
frequently with no problems. To get a decent price on an intercity
you need to book anyway

I would disagree with that. I often get a one-day travelcard down to
London from Peterborough. Outside peak commuter times the price is
pretty decent even when buying a ticket immediately before travel.

Its a distance from London thing...

If you are fairly close (about an hour) there isn't much difference between
the off-peak "turn up and go" fares and the "buy in advance" fares. There
are a few spectacular savings, but they are rare.

If you are a fraction further out, or not trying to travel to/from London,
then the savings are much more marked.

- Nigel

--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/

Paul Boyd usenet.is.worse@plusnet said:

Duncan Smith said the following on 14/11/2007 13:26:

Quoted message said:

But why can't the train simply have one more empty flat floored (no
seats) carrage where bikes can be deposited/collected to and from?

Simple answer: most trains are crowded for at least part of their
working day; they can put more seats in this space, make more money,
and also more brownie points for not having crowded trains than for
catering for cyclists.

I'm all for bikes (and preferably tandems as well) on trains, but
general crowdedness of our trains means it will be an uphill struggle.
Coaches and planes inevitably have some low quality space where you
can't put people and which is therefore available for luggage. Trains
(and our trains in particular) don't have this space, anywhere you
might put a bike you can also put a passenger seat.

Quoted message said:

It's called progress :-( I took various bikes by train regularly
to/from Bristol/Leicester/Cornwall in the mid-80s to early 90s, and
apart from checking that the train wasn't an HST I didn't really have
to give it any more thought.

Not sure about this, but aren't HSTs the same as 125s? And aren't they
the one type of train on which you are now most likely to be able to
take a bike?

Quoted message said:

Even when you book the bike, and pay for it, there is still no
guarantee that you will get it on the train. If you then have
connections to make, you're stuffed.

I agree. Booking is worrying. If anything goes wrong with your
journey, you can end up stuck somewhere.

Quoted message said:

If that's progress, can we go back 25 years please? But without the
unions. Or even better, go back to when the railways were a common
carrier and obliged to carry any load presented to them so long as it
could physically fit under bridges!

Again, I'm not sure about this, but isn't the problem that the
railways used to have a contract to carry Royal Mail, so they had
space where mail bags could be stored, which was practically never
full, and emminently suitable for bikes. They lost that contract, so
no longer have that space in their trains, so bikes now have to make a
special case.

I was heartened by Tony's first post, and disappointed by his second.
If we get rights to bikes on trains, it's not going to come from
Europe.

Rob

[email hidden] said the following on 14/11/2007 15:21:

Quoted message said:

Not sure about this, but aren't HSTs the same as 125s? And aren't they
the one type of train on which you are now most likely to be able to
take a bike?

HSTs are 125s, but when they were first introduced you couldn't easily
get bikes on them because they didn't have enough space. Then they
changed things about so that one coach lost seating space to provide
guards' space freeing up the space in the driving car for luggage, so
that's probably where bikes go now. Don't forget that HSTs are 30 years
old, so compared to modern trains they have acres of space for both
luggage and passengers. 20 years ago HSTs had relatively limited
luggage space, now the same space is relatively large.

Quoted message said:

Again, I'm not sure about this, but isn't the problem that the
railways used to have a contract to carry Royal Mail, so they had
space where mail bags could be stored, which was practically never
full, and emminently suitable for bikes.

Originally the common carrier thing had nothing to do with Royal Mail
AFAIK - it was simply a common carrier for anyone that turned up with
anything - even to the extent that the railway companies had to build
special wagons to carry big lumps of machinery or whatever. I'm not
sure when the common carrier status was scrapped, but certainly when I
was using trains regularly they had guard's vans at the back and locos
on the front - none of this cramped MU stuff! Now the guard seems to
have a cubby-hole to live in and instead of adding an extra coach if the
train gets busy they just leave passengers behind.

I went to the Taunton show a while ago. On the way down it was one of
those red things with narrow seats and arm rests that you can't rest
your arms on, and on the way back it was a 30 year old HST. I know
which I preferred!

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

In article <[email hidden]>, tpsc12248
@blueyonder.co.uk says...

Quoted message said:

"I just do nt get our politicians/rule makers endless campaign against
cyclists.
Over the water its so simple.
Train comes into the station-you go to the carraige with a bike sign on the
door lift your bike thro the extra wide door- lock it- and sit down.
The down side in Germany at least is a lot of people must miss trains.

Apparently not. In this case I understand it was Germany that was
mostly responsible for forcing the change because they did not want to
have to carry bikes on their I-CE trains.

--
Tony

"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has
taken place"
George Bernard Shaw