Great Western Coffee Shop

Has anyone heard about a change in GWR policy about bicycles on trains?

According to a conversation I overheard between a ticket inspector and a cyclist last week, cyclists will need to make a booking before taking their bicycles on all GWR trains from May, currently you only need to book on high speed trains. I can understand why GWR may want to do this given the way that some cyclists abuse the current rules by piling as many bikes as possible into the vestibules making it awkward for other passengers to get on and off the train. Although I am not sure how you would enforce this policy on a DOO train, it would be hard enough at a manned station never mind at an unmanned station.

Although of course it is one thing to introduce a policy and another to enforce it, and I am not convinced that the current policies are enforced today and even if enforced what would be the consequence of being caught on the train without a booking?

And to avoid accusations that I am anti-cyclist I do take my folding bike on the train every day and I assume this policy, if true, would not apply to folding bikes.

Can't answer as I've heard nothing - we have a Customer Panel meeting next month where I can raise it if we haven't an answer beforehand...but I suggest the answer to the quote is that they could kick you off at the next stop, and you'd be 'on your bike', quite literally.

This isn't quite correct, at the moment reservations are mandatory on some high speed services, but from May it will be all high speed services. There's no change for Turbos or the West fleet.

Folding bikes will remain allowed on any train and reservations won't be required as they can be treated as luggage.

Oh that could be interesting ... reservation needed on the 07:06 Newton Abbot to Paignton, but not on the 07:52 ... the first being a high speed service and the second being a higher speed service (taking less time)  ;)

To clarify, by High Speed Services I mean those operated by an HST or a Class 180 :)

Yikes. Is there a right-now operational reason, or is it in readiness for the IEPs (where I believe bike spaces will have electronic reservations and will be, to some degree, scattered throughout the train)?

That could cause some fun for the commuting cyclists on the Cotswold Line....

Yes, in-so-much as it won't work!

The policy change actually brings GWR in line with the majority of other TOCs. The purpose of it this is to give customers a 'soft landing' in the build up to IEP which will have compulsory bike reservations.

I don't think I've ever seen the cycle policy enforced on LT V....selfish idiots still seem to think it's acceptable to block the vestibules on Turbos with full size bikes during the peaks in and out of London, and tend to be full of righteous indignation if asked to move/show consideration for others.

The advantage of a policy applying to every passenger on certain trains is that it is easier to enforce than one which is a little ambiguous. Limiting cycles to, say, two per carriage will always start an argument about who was where first, and will never result in the third person saying "OK, I'll get off then".

It would be more accurate to say "the majority of other intercity TOCs", but even then the comparison is a little misleading.

Many point-to-point journeys on intercity franchises are duplicated by slower journeys on regional/L&SE franchises, for which reservations aren't compulsory. So it's not a big deal if Virgin insist on bike reservations for (say) Coventry-Birmingham, because you can always just jump on a London Midland train without reservation.

But that isn't the case for key Great Western routes, such as Didcot-Bristol/Newport or the Cotswold Line. Here, the sole service is provided by GWR using (now) compulsory-reservation stock. I can understand the rationale on peak-time trains towards London, but less so if I'm heading from Charlbury to Worcester with my bike at a weekday lunchtime.

If bike reservations could be made while the train was in transit (as seats can be on CrossCountry), and it was possible to do so at an unstaffed station (i.e. at a TVM or through an app), then it could work. As it is, however, I'm just glad I have that rare thing, a folding bike capable of being ridden for long distances!

Will this also apply to pushchairs and people with large 4 wheel suitcases in the peak too?

Are they banned on some peak services then, like bikes ?

the comparison is only partly valid, I think.  The particular problem with commuter bikes is that they tend by definition to be used on peak time commuter services.  Luggage and buggies tend to be travelling off peak and not every day.  I find it hard to begrudge the student travelling with too much luggage once a term or the parent and taking the family and buggy to the seaside once a year.  I wouldn't put those people into the same category of selfish as the person who blocks the Turbo vestibule every single day.

I think it is unrealistic (and selfish) to expect to be able to travel in the peak day in day out every day as part of your commute.  BUT, I would like to think that the railway would carry the more occasional cyclist (or the commuter who is transferring his/her second bike to the station as a one off).   I've said it before, but I would favour charging a fare for bikes.  Make it affordable and simple (say a flat rate of ^5 for the whole day??) and it is unlikely to be a major  burden to the occasional user, BUT at ^25 per week, it would incentivise the regular commuter to come up with a different solution to have a bike at both ends of their journey (ie buy a second bike or a folding one).

Apparently it is not possible, but I would like to see cycle reservations on ALL GWR services.

Have you experienced the last couple of Sunday services back from Barnstaple in the Summer or when the weather has been good? One one occasion I recall as many as thirty on a two coach Pacer!

So when the time comes to send the Pacers to Booths, just rip the seats out instead and use them as bike vans. :) :)

Southern BR used to have a few of those in slam-door days....used to return London-Brighton bikes back to the smoke.

Then they should be stopped from boarding, as that is clearly a safety issue.

East Kent Railway has more of these in preservation than they probably know what to do with ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_419
... perhaps they could spare one or two?

Early biomodes  ;D

And more here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_489
but electric only

Without wishing to rejoin this debate, couple of points:

1. Every time I read the subject of this topic I find myself wondering why on Earth the Home Secretary is bothering herself with this - surely this kind of thing is McLoughlin's brief?
2. I like the idea of biomodes - if we had compostible trains, perhaps we'd feel better about turfing out some of the old stock and replacing it with something fit for purpose.

At the moment it is not possible to make bicycle reservations on all trains. On the smaller trains (sorry, I'm not sure of the class names and numbers, but eg the Cardiff to Southampton and Bristol to Malvern trains) there is no provision for booking ^ it's simply first come, first served and use the tippy seats. Which sometimes are also used for wheelchairs. There really needs to be better provision IMO for both bikes and (especially) disabled passengers, but there isn't.

But even where reservations can be made they're rarely compulsory. You can put a bike on an HST without a booking, for instance. Theoretically, people who've booked have priority for the spaces (6 on an HST) but in practice that's completely unenforceable; once bikes are on, they're on. I don't know if train staff would have the right to remove an unbooked bike to make way for a booked one without informing its owner, but I'd like to think they wouldn't do that anyway.  :o If there is to be enforcement, it has to be at point of boarding. (A couple of weeks ago I was stopped from boarding with a bike at BRI because the train was already full of bikes. I caught the next one, which probably had an equal number, but we managed to jenga our machines in a surprisingly cooperative way in that space in the corridor so that people could still get by.)

The point about commuting, a few posts above, is probably valid, but all my bikes on trains experience is at non-commuting times (the incident above was about 7 pm on a Tuesday) so it really is a larger issue than that. I do think luggage is relevant too: it's all allocated the same space on most trains. The basic problem is we need more spacious trains with better facilities for luggage of all types.

 I have it good authority that from may 16th 2016 bike reservations will be compulsory on all hst and 180 stock, no reservation no travel.!!!!!!

Not sure I agree with luggage space comments above - have you seen the ridiculous amounts of luggage some people think a train is meant to carry with them? They move house.....

But yes, it all needs staff to enforce limits/bans...and there's the rub

Neither luggage nor bicycles pay to occupy the space though.

I can remember the days when you had to pay half fare for a bicycle, and trains had large guards vans in those days

I'd be in favour of that. Or even a third fare. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to have to pay to take a bulky item that takes up more space than an adult.

Many years ago a cycle ride that annually went from London to Brighton was rerouted to Oxford. The problem was that the organisers failed to tell anybody including Oxford Council or the railway, so from about two in the afternoon hordes of cyclists wishing to return to London started descending on Oxford Station expecting to just get on a train and go home with their bikes.

A Turbo a probable maximum of four per coach, to avoid blocking gangways, and of course six on an HST (pre booking required). The Police were called twice because of public order issues where cyclists were not getting their own way and just expecting to be being allowed to pile on to the detriment of everybody else.

I seem to remember going home that night from the Control at Reading at eight in the evening and watching hordes of cyclists standing on Reading Station platform trying to get back to London.

I understand the ride went back to Brighton the next year!

I did consider trying to run two specials with some spare Turbos, one for bikes and a following one for passengers but if I remember correctly platform space was not available at Padd to cater for anything extra because of engineering.

You cannot cater for the unexpected of which this was an extreme example

I think most people would not object to a small fare to take a bike on a train and would even welcome it if it meant they were assured of a space for their bike (or big luggage!)*. The problem is how to enforce it. You'd have to have a member of staff checking all bikes for reservations as they got put on the train, which is going to be difficult to do and cause delays at busy stations.

And paying for a space but then not getting one would cause ructions. Yes, you can buy a ticket and it doesn't guarantee you a seat, but it does let you on the train even if you have to stand in the corridor (on trains without compulsory seat reservations). That doesn't normally prevent other passengers getting on or staff getting up and down the gangway, whereas bikes in corridors are harder to get past. If, as often happens at the moment, you've reserved a space but it's already taken by an unreserved bike, what next?

*The luggage problem is hardly restricted to trains: see any plane.

Indeed.   But when something ceases to be free of charge, you get a step-change increase in the expectation of the service, extra costs in collecting those small fares which may be out of proportion to the fare collected, and you've probably got to have a monitoring / survey / refund / compensation setup too.

But the Train Manager still has discretion to allow unreserved bikes so long as there are unreserved spaces available.

This policy is going to put more pressure on the units if people are turned away from HSTs/180s or just can be bothered reserving.

As I say above, charging some kind of fare seems to me to be the solution.  This has the additional advantage that at barriered stations this can be enforced at the gate-line which is always easier than trying to enforce something on the train.

get it wrong, and the TM could apologise, er, unreservedly.

There are now leaflets confirming this policy ... that cycle reservations are needed if you wish to take your non-folding cycle on a  high speed trains - with three pictures to help you identify what a high speed train looks like.

On commuter flows with a mixture of high speed and other trains, is it anticipated that the additional need to reserve ahead of time on some trains will put additional cycle pressure on the others?    From Swindon to Kemble and beyond, for example, will cycles concentrate on the 15:36, 17:54 and 20:25, while easing pressures (perhaps more than is necessary) on the 14:39, 16:38, 18:41, 19:55 and 20:55?   And might we see more people taking their cycles from Swindon to Chippenham on the 17:36, rather than the 16:29, 16:57, 17:30, 18:00 and 18:30?

Yes, I'm sure that'll be the case - for the Turbos on the Cotswold Line at weekends, in particular.

Incidentally, I've had it confirmed by GWR that the 18-inch (wheel diameter) limit for folding bikes in the policy is an error, and it should be 20-inch. Bromptons aside, most folders have 20-inch wheels.

Only @ weekends I think. The wekday peaks are already restricted

All very well putting a picture of various trains but how is that supposed to help you know in advance whether your train will be a high speed service?  On the Golden Valley line, it's roughly 50/50, but should you expect an occasional traveller from Storehouse to Kemble to have to work out that as their service will go beyond Swindon then it probably is a high speed service.  And the first stopping service from Bristol to Weston in the morning - that's bound to be a local unit isn't it....err... or maybe it isn't?

The timetable & travel planner tells you if its an 'H'ST.

I think the idea is to eventually move reservations online?

Moving reservations online will make no difference to the confusion if some trains require reservations and some not. Unless, maybe, those trains requiring reservations for bikes also need reservations for passengers; then there'll be no ^ well, less ^ chance of getting that train without knowing which it is.

With respect, one looks up teain times to go where you need to go. You look into the detail if you want a bike reservation. It isn't rocket science

Personally, it's very rare that I use advance tickets or make a reservation (especially for return journeys home) as I can rarely predict my schedule.   Now - I'm no longer a cyclist so I can't make current comment, but are cyclists a different breed who always know their schedule well in advance, or can they walk up to the ticket counter in (say) Swindon at twenty past five and make a reservation for the half past?

As a customer on foot your decision doesn't impact on others, but cyclists have to understand that its not always going to be possible to get a full size bike on an already overcrowded train, so yes they have to plan their schedule with a bit more care and consideration for themselves and others - anyone who has seen (sometimes) selfish cyclists insisting that their bikes are carried, taking up large amounts of space, blocking exits and vestibules  will know what I mean. If they have a reservation, at least they have the comfort of knowing that they will be carried.

From the GWR website:-
What if the train manager is up the other end of the train at the time?

OK, so I've looked up on National Rail the 0614 NLS to YAT on 25th May.  It's an HST. But if I click through to "details" and then on the cycle icon, it tells me that cycles are allowed but reservations are not required, nor are they available.

If I then try the 1729 NLS to YAT (also an HST) it gives me the following information to help me decide whether I need to reserve.

High Speed Train services between London, South Wales and the West Country Free of charge. Reservations are compulsory weekdays on services arriving at London Paddington 0700 to 1000, or departing London Paddington from 1500 to 1900. Six cycle spaces per train. Tandems can be carried on most services. Please visit website for details of restrictions. Local services between London, the Cotswolds and throughout the Thames Valley. Free of charge. Reservations not available. Two cycle spaces per train. Restrictions apply weekdays on services arriving at London Paddington 0745 to 0945, or
departing London Paddington from 1630 to 1900. Local, rural and inter-urban services throughout the West County. Free of charge. Reservations recommended on Cardiff-Portsmouth services. Two cycle spaces per train. Please note fully folded bicycles are allowed on all services.

So that also appears inconsistent with the new cycle policy also.  And is hardly clear for a prospective passenger travelling from NLS to YAT, having to decipher all that and decide what it means for their journey.

So not rocket science, but hardly easy for a customer to understand, wouldn't you agree?

One purpose of the reservation.

Known in advance, they would know where access is required?

John R - looks as though that info is yet to be updated?

The main problem is not that it's difficult to find out which trains are HSTs but that you have to know in advance that you need to find out.

I have a friend of a friend who has to pedal like fury to make the evening 'halts' Class 180 train with his bike, nine times out of ten he just makes it, but if not has to get the following Hereford HST.  That's the sort of person who will be inconvenienced by the new policy if it is fully enforced.

[advocate mode=devil]Isn't there an encouragement for regular travellers to keep a bicycle at both ends of their journey rather than use up limited full size cycle spaces too frequently?[/advocate]

Or simply get a folder?

Yep, both possible options.  Though both an inconvenience as it adds cost/time to a journey.  That 9 out of 10 would probably drop a bit if he had to park his 'work end' bike up at the station, and a decent folding bike is fairly expensive.

I think this policy is definitely designed to try and put as many people off of travelling with a bicycle as possible, without it seemingly looking like that's the case.  I can certainly appreciate how that could be seen as both a good or bad thing depending on your opinion of cyclists, but it will certainly cause Train Manager's some issues and isn't very customer friendly on quieter services where a reservation is never likely to be necessary.

It might depend on your opinion of cyclists... or it might depend on your opinion of space utilisation on trains. Or the number, frequency and size of trains.

This shouldn't make any difference as the Hereford HST is already a 'reservations compulsory' service.

In practice, though, the peak down HSTs are very rarely full of bikes beyond Oxford, and never beyond Charlbury. I've never known reservations to be insisted on west of Oxford, and rightly so: the train manager and despatch staff have better things to do than delay departure, onto a single-line railway, while reservations are checked before loading a bike onto a service which isn't full anyway.

A bike at both ends is definitely the norm in Netherlands.  I do not know if NS charge for bikes, but they don't carry many even though there are spaces on trains.

Rather than seeing this policy being about discouraging cyclists perhaps it should be seen as an incentive to have a bike at both ends. 

That's part of the problem.  I can see the new policy not being properly enforced, and when it is enforced just causing arguments and delays.

I'd always assumed that NS didn't carry non-folding bikes.

That's pretty much what happens now when people try to get full size bikes onto LTV peak Turbo services (from which they are supposed to be banned) if there are any platform staff around they generally look the other way to avoid aforementioned arguments/delays.

From Holland-Cycling (http://www.holland-cycling.com/planning-your-trip/getting-around/rail):

Thank you for that information Grahame.  Given that Netherlands is perhaps Europe's biggest cycling nation, I suggest railways put most of their investment in provision of secure cycle storage at all stations (i.e. both ends). 

Interested in the Dutch metrics, I read further - a day ticket for a bicycle costs 6.10 Euros (2016 price) and for a dog costs 3.10 Euros. See here (https://www.ns.nl/producten/web/WFS/ns-website-Site/en_US/-/EUR/ViewProduct-Start?SKU=dagkaart-fiets-hond&CategoryName=).  Perhaps that's the right balance between persuading commuters to have a cycle at each end, and yet making it practical to get the cycles where they want in the first place, and allowing for occasional excursions with cycles?

Thanks for that information - I probably only travel during their peaks.

Having a bike at each end clearly only works for commuters.

It seems a waste to have two/three or more bikes to leave at stations you visit so that you can always cycle every where.

I personally have just one bike, that I leave at my local station, and then I walk at the other end, but then I am able to, and happy to, walk two or three miles.

Surely it would make sense for stations to have bikes that you can hire if you need one. Pay a deposit, and cycle away, and get most of your deposit back on return.

Can you imagine the number required at populsr stations? And the complaints if there aren't enough?

There are already many bike hire schemes at or near stations across GWR land.

Not particularly popular, at least in Oxford. There are 8 (I think) Bromptins available and there seems to be at least one always available (will check againbin the next hour as I'm passing through soon

So the numbers available are about right and there aren't compliants about not being enough?

The only bikes you can hire at BPW are Bromptons, from a vending machine.

Only in London have a I seen bikes to hire in from of the station, although I accept they may exist elsewhere at other stations

Brompton Docks can be found at Bristol Temple Meads, Oxford, Didcot, Reading.

At Bath you can hire bikes from Avon Valley Cyclery right next to the station. Some other stations have bike shops nearby which hire bikes out, but obviously this is dependent on shops and only works during retail hours.

A point worth making: some people who are unable to walk as little as a hundred yards are able to cycle several miles. "Bikes as mobility devices" isn't just a catchphrase!

Going off topic - have you seen the mobility scooter hire shop between Weymouth Station and the sea front?  Makes sense when you think about it, but that short road from the railway to the beach gets mighty crowded and I'm not sure I would want to start there with a hire vehicle!

Docking stations and bikes for hire can also be found at Burnham, Slough and (just down the road from) Langley:

http://www.slough.gov.uk/parking-travel-and-roads/cycle-hire-slough.aspx

Bath also has the NextBike http://www.nextbike.co.uk/en/bath/locations/ (http://www.nextbike.co.uk/en/bath/locations/) scheme with hire stations around the city centre including one at the station.  And of course in London there are the Boris Bikes. 

That may easily change with these tougher restrictions...

I broke a metatarsal almost a year ago stepping awkwardly on the edge of the kerb whilst miles from home.  Good job I had my bike, could hardly walk, but could ride without difficulty.

http://www.bikeandgo.co.uk
This scheme was set up on Merseyrail and Northern by Abellio (formerly NedRail as The UK arm of NS) and since has been expanded to Scotland and Eastern England.

Interestingly it continues in Northern England and is advertised in Arriva North's rail timetables.

^10 annual fee, ^3.80 per day hire. Key for bike collected from station booking office and returned to there or a collection box. Bikes are German Raleigh roadster types maintained by local contractors. Slight drawback is that bikes have to be returned to original station.

Nothing to stop GWR contracting Abellio to set up a scheme in their area of course.

A question that's cropped up ... writing things up ahead of time.

If someone's taking their cycle from a local station somewhere on the West Fleet area to London and have correctly reserved for the connecting high speed train ... what happens if the connection misses?   Is it down to the "next available train OK" like with advance tickets - but what if that train is already fully cycle reserved?

Ask @GWRhelp I think & get definitive answer

ok ...

I took my bike on two trains over the weekend. Up to Ashchurch on Friday morning using the Malvern train, for which I had the only bike on what looked like a busy train. And on Sunday back from Cheltenham to Temple Meads on a XC service (having missed the Malvern train ^ too much time sitting around in the sun, not enough pedalling!). On that train I became the fourth bike in the three spaces.  :( In fact, it wasn't really a problem, as my bike fitted underneath the empty luggage rack ^ but that was just lucky). At Parkway, there were five bikes. Luckily, at least two of us got off at TM.

I think the point is, some trains are very busy with bikes, others not. I've used that Malvern train several times with a bike and almost always been the only one. The XCs are a bit hit and miss but again IME Sunday evenings seem to be busy for the with bikes, at least heading southwards. So it's not just commuter times. Second point, it's relatively easy to enforce a compulsory reservation policy with HSTs and Pendolinos, because there's a separate compartment which staff can lock.* Once the HSTs are replaced by 800s with dangly in-carriage spaces, it's not going to be practical.

*A friend once got a cab ride in a Pendolino because the driver was intrigued by her unusual bike.

In an email from Mark Hopwood to stakeholders today:


Very sensible and welcome.

Will station staff know and have time to check if bikes are booked on to the same train later on its journey? If not, you could reserve a space and find it already taken ^ just as can happen under the present policy. Also, why station staff not train staff? What if it's a station without round the clock staffing?

No, they won't.  They probably won't even be in attendance to check in many cases.  It's an unworkable policy.

It sounds like an un-policy. It's either meaningless guff in that staff won't be letting bikes into spaces (because they can't) or if they do, it's a negation of the official policy to require reservations. Pointless.

Agreed.....This "fudge" will be seized upon by cyclists & is a recipe for endless circular arguments with train staff.....either you have a rule that says you need a reservation for a bike, or you don't.

I would hope that reservation tickets will be put above each bike space on HSTs, as has certainly been done in the past. (I don't recall seeing pockets for reservation tickets on 180s, but then have never looked out for them.)

Yes, I've seen those tickets on HSTs but not on other trains, though, like you, I've not really looked for them. Not that I'm quite sure what a "180" is but local services seem not to have reservable bike spaces anyway, at least when I've tried. Probably more to the point, the new policy is supposed to allow booking spaces on the day of travel, and even under the present system I know once or twice I've had a booked space on an HST and there's been no ticket in the bike compartment/guard's van, so it seems an unreliable method.

Definitely no space for a label on a 180, though I suppose holders could be fitted.  Is the booking engine clever enough to work out what end of the train the reservation needs to be allocated to?  I very much doubt it and stations with short platforms such as Hanborough and Honeybourne need bikes to be placed at the front.  Also, on 180s, the driver often helps out the TM by loading/unloading bikes, so I wonder how they will be informed about reservations?  If the TM has to deal with both ends then that's a recipe for more delays.

I saw the follow up email to Stakeholders too ... but I have not let that put me (TransWilts hat) advise as per the official line:


From my observation / not a cyclist, I see the new rules as an attempt to firm up on a structure for in what has become an increasingly difficult and sometimes fraught ("unruly"?) situation. I'm relieved to see what looks like a degree of discression being planned for but I share misgivings about the even application of discression - made than much harder, I suspect, by uneven cycle space demand.

It's being done because the IEP trains can only take x number of bikes and they *won't* be allowed in any vestibule. So best to get cyclists aware & used to the change sooner than later.

It will cause problems amongst those cyclists who assume it is their right to carry their bike on trains.

How's that any different to HST's and 180s and the policy that's existed for ages?

I've seen bikes in 180 vestibules....

Right, Wikipedia has shown me what a 180 is. I'm not sure I've ever been on one. Where are bikes supposed to go on these trains: in a separate compartment like HSTs? In dangly spaces like Voyagers? In racks in the vestibule like those trains on the Cardiff to Portsmouth service? At flip-up seats like some others? Or somewhere else? The relevance is that only a separate compartment will innately prevent passengers leaving bikes in gangways if the official places are full. All the other storage methods require enforcement by train (or station) staff to prevent boarding when there is no space, or failing that to make sure bikes are put in the appropriate places.

Where demand exceeds supply, which is the root problem (demand and supply not just for bike spaces but for seats and luggage space), there will be overcrowding and possibly some disorder unless policies are consistently enforceable. There is always room for discretion ^ it would be silly to turn away an unbooked bike on an empty midnight service, for instance ^ but if whatever rules exist will be fairly useless without enforceability.

As Graham hints to, this policy removes the vast majority of contentious issues we currently get across the network where the number of bikes > number of spaces on board. If you don't make a reservation, you are not guaranteed travel.

I'll admit that when I first heard about this policy, I was sceptic. But I am convinced that this is a good policy to have and at the right time. Eventually we will go from 6 spaces on HSTs to a minimum of 2 on IEPs. In my opinion, this policy is a soft landing to get customers into the habit of booking in advance so that when IEPs come round, we hopefully won't have crowds of cyclists fighting over spaces.

If you don't travel on the Cotswold Line it's quite plausible you've never seen one!

There's three dangly spaces behind each cab. There's no public access to these areas: they have to be unlocked by train (or station) staff with a T-key. For that reason, I always load my bike into the space behind the front cab to minimise delays, because there's guaranteed to be a staff member in close proximity. ;)

I've also seen them in HST vestibules*.  No doubt I'll also see them in IEP vestibules in the future, despite the fact that apparently *won't* be allowed.

* In virtually all cases that is when either they've gotten on board with it and the TM hasn't noticed (usually unintentionally), or the TM has allowed it as it's a quiet train and they're only going a station or two, or they've had to put it in a vestibule (boarding at Worcester Foregate Street and alighting at Evesham on a HST is a good example of that).


Do we know what the various IEP's have in terms of spaces?  I believe the 5-car sets have 2 bike/bulk rooms, and the 9-car sets have 4 bike/bulk rooms, but I don't know how many bikes each room can take.  For example, on a Voyager two stowage spaces can accept three bikes - it would be four but an electrical equipment box is in the way.


I remain of the opinion that GWR wish to make it as awkward as possible for people to travel on long distance trains with their bikes, though if there's been clarification that the policy of compulsory reservations won't be enforced (as quoted in Richard Fairhurst's post below), then that climbdown is a welcome one - though in effect it means the new policy is pretty much going to be the old policy!

I'm sure I've read it's going to be 4 bikes on the 5-car sets but 5 bikes on the 9-car sets, which implies that not all spaces are equal.

Bear in mind that the DfT will likely have specified the number of spaces on these trains & GWR have to handle the fall out the best they can. To make it a very firm policy means that cyclists know exactly where they stand & won't get left on the platform (with possibly a very long cycle home)

Apparently the 9-car IEPs will have their dangly spaces distributed around the train, rather than all in one carriage as with the Voyagers (or indeed the HSTs, not to mention smaller trains). So yes, being allocated a space will probably save running around the platform. I'm not quite sure of the purpose of not putting all the spaces together though.

The initial draft layout had them positioned at the end of the sixth and beginning of the seventh vehicle, so whilst not in the same carriage, backing onto each other.  That may have changed of course!

As said above the bike/bulk rooms are given a quantity of rooms rather than bikes, and in the DfT draft layouts it is 2 on a 5 car and 4 on a 9 car; implying a double fit on the long train.  I'd assume that translates to 4 or 8 bikes, rather than 4 or 5 as suggested upthread.

Paul

The expression "bike/bulk rooms" implies they're going to be even more cluttered with suitcases than on the Voyagers.

Yeah, right. We all like a nice pair of wheels...


The Right to Bear Cycles is seen by some as an inviolable constitutional right, rather than a privilege. Cyclists are by no means the only group with some members willing to insist on their "rights" being interpreted as they think fit. I have seen members of the "Right to Travel without a Ticket" band dealt with to the amusement of other pax, and have even intervened personally in one case.

From this, and Holland, could there be a solution? The idea of having to have a ticket for one's bike, as opposed to a free reservation, could remove some of the potential problems. The ticket would cost a nominal sum - certainly no more than the cost of bike hire at the destination, and I'm thinking of around the ^3.00 mark. It would need an accompanying compulsory reservation. The cost would not put many noses out of joint, other than on points of perceived principle, because many would have paid a pretty penny to get to wherever, and will be saving their onward transport cost. The big advantage is that a ticket has more legal standing than a reservation, and is more readily enforceable. The travelling public at large knows that a ticket is always required, but a reservation is almost always optional.

I speak as an occasional cyclist who has yet to take a bike on a train, even as a joke. I am favoured by proximity to BRI - I can walk there in 35 minutes, or get the rather good bus service for ^1 if I can't be arsed am in a hurry.

As I understand it the current franchise agreement requires GWR to carry bikes for free.  So there would have to be an element of public debate and persuading politicians that it is fair to charge before any change could be implemented.  I suspect this would be in the "too toxic" tray for our elected representatives, as the cyclist lobby group is fairly vociferous and those that think it reasonable would be unlikely to command the same attention.  So it's easier to retain the status quo and let the TOCs sort out the issue on the ground.

 

For just a second I was wondering what the relevance of the hospital was!

I think a small charge for bikes would be acceptable to most people who ever want to take a bike on a train. The difficulty, apart from the franchise agreement John R mentions, would still be space. Having paid for a ticket, you'd really expect to be able to take it on the train with you. I hesitate to say you'd actually have a right, as not only is that a controversial word but I'm not entirely sure of the "rights" a ticket might give you anyway, but certainly it would give the impression of a right to travel with bike on a train. So to make sure there was room for the bike, you'd either need enormous bike carriages ^ impractical, costly, often unused space ^ or be allowed to put your bike anywhere ^ impractical, inconvenient to others, potentially dangerous ^ or buying a cycle ticket would give you an automatic reservation on a specific train ^ requiring advance booking at least before departure of train from origin and problems of enforcement again. Also, would tickets be required on all trains? It would be strange otherwise. So I don't think there actually would be too many objections to the principle but I'm not sure of the practicalities.

Until such time when TOCs provide sufficient space for people to fit on trains without being crammed in like sardines (which seems a distant dream if not a forlorn fantasy despite the constant "manana manana" from GWR etc), bicycles have to take a distant second place. End of.

I am .. attracted ... to the concept of paying a fare for a cycle on a train - indeed I think it used to be the case, and  possibly still is on some heritage railways.   Yes - all sorts of issues with capacity and 'rights' and reservations, and although people say they would support it, including cyclists, when it came to the crunch I have my doubts.   It strikes me as very similar to ENCTS bus pass holders who tell me in one breath they would be willing to pay for a journey and in the next breath say they cannot travel before 09:30 (they can of course - they just have to ay like everyone else! ... with some operators like Faresaver they can even pay just a child's fare before 09:30)

A bit problem, though is identifying "what is a chargeable bicycle?".   Witness potential arguments over whether a cycle is folded (if folders are still free of charge) or whether a piece of luggage (box) contains a folded bicycle or something else (if folders are charged).  And it's the start of a (?) slippery slope on charging for large luggage items, dogs and other pets, etc.

And therein would or could lie a split into "full service" and "discount" operators.

I am well placed for that, too, and a regular visitor. Unfortunately.

I saw these signs go up along the platforms at Bath last month. I think that they are only applying them to the HST's though around the Bristol area It might be because they have had occasional occurrences where the train has been delayed due to the loading and unloading of bikes on those services. Certainly I do recall one service being about 15mins late with the apology 'that this was due to the loading / unloading of bikes'.

The problem with the HST's is that the cycle space is down at the ends through one door and sometimes there can be up to 8 cyclists waiting to load their bikes on which can obviously get frustrating for them and the train guard as turnaround is usually only 2 or 3 mins at intermediate stations.

Myself - I have a foldup which does have the advantage that I can (and do) stand directly over the folded frame when its really busy so the the bike takes up virtually no extra space at all. I made the decision last year that having a full sized bike on a train would be an inconvenience.

Restricting to 5 will a) speed up departure & b) disappoint some....

According to Hitachi the train layout will include 2 cycle 'cupboards' in a five car set. This document from 2014 illustrates the layout.
http://www.hitachi.com/rev/pdf/2014/r2014_10_105.pdf

The 'cupboard' layout (in illustration below) seems to have been designer by someone who has never tried to store a bicycle vertically. Two bikes, one suspended from the front wheel and the other suspended from the rear wheel. Now, for fit and probably youngish males of average height and above, suspending a bike from the front wheel is fairly straight forward - just lift the handlebars up with rear wheel on floor - however for women, people (of either gender) who are short in stature and for children this will be a challenge. Up-ending your bike to stand on its front wheel while you hook the rear wheel onto a hook almost 2 metres off the floor will prove to be a challenge too far for most people, the front wheel turns sideways and the bike falls on you!

In contrast bike storage on almost all DMUs, EMUs (except 333s), HSTs etc requires the bike to keep both wheels on the floor and fasten against a rail. Only Voyagers in main line use require 'up ending' your bike, and they are hard work!

180s too. Mrs F dreads loading her bike on those (so I usually do it).

The words next to that picture say:

So I guess if you wish to disagree, you need to find out who or what this Cycle Rail Working Group are. Well, they say:

It does look a bit light on the cyclists' side, doesn't it?

Even given that Sustrans tends to punch above its weight, I agree. Was there no-one else, did Sustrans get there first, or did someone nearly forget to add a token cycle group?

Despite the concerns raised regarding the new sets I have noticed that some of the 150s appear to have more cycle space than they used to with the whole front one side from the passenger door to the cab being fold down seats room for at least 4 to 6 bikes or about 20 fold up bikes. A noticeable improvement  :)

Yes, you'd have thought that Cycling UK, formerly the CTC, would be represented.

The refurbished 150/2s have the bike space set up like the 150/1s ie a whole side of 1 section at the end of one carriage, with the added advantage that there is also a separate wheelchair space beside the accessible toilet so neither the twain shall meet.  Disadvantage is that there are now fewer seats, and it encourages more people to store their luggage in both of these areas.

One of the things that would make the policy work is ease of reservation.
The GWR website says up to two hours before departure of the train (from origin). Ideally this would be at any time prior to departure - BR managed to provide reservations for cycles at any point during the journey (and that was with 1980's computing!).

That's quite significant on long distance trains then - if I want to take my bicycle on the 13:13 from Reading into Paddington, I need to reserve by 05:41!   But to be fair there are plenty of alternatives with shorter or no reservations needed.

Indeed. Day trippers with bikes in Devon and Cornwall could find their plans scuppered. If you want to book a space on the 1039 from Plymouth you need to do so before 0506!

Yet on Virgin Trains East Coast I can bike to the station about ten minutes before departure (I.e. At any staffed station en route), book a cycle reservation, booking office staff radio dispatchers, I go to platforms with bike, report to dispatcher who directs me to correct location on platform (north end for HST, south end for electric), opens van door and I place bike in using Velcro strap to hold bike in place. At destination dispatcher / platform staff are waiting, open van, I remove bike and staff report to dispatcher and guard. Result one train not delayed and one happy customer!

I appreciate that most VTEC stations are staffed and many GWR ones aren't.

By the way, if you can text CrossCountry to reserve a seat just before it arrives (or even whilst you are on it), can you do the same with a bike reservation?

Unfortunately not (yet)

Somebody mentioned upthread an HST being delayed by 15 minutes due to bike chaos. I can't imagine all those 15 minutes were spent getting bikes in and out(!), but as little delays expand with missed paths, it's possible. The problems with the HST guards van solution is there's only one external door and no internal access. Thus people putting bikes on always get there first, meaning they're likely to be occupying the van while departing passengers try to get their bikes out. Perhaps if they had two external doors each side, one entry and one exit, it would make things easier at peak times.

I think this should be seen as an interim solution for GWR. SETs have radio/digital reservations, and I guess that will extend to the bikes' dangling places (I'm sure that sounds better in German). Logically, the reservation system being introduced now should be designed to handle that, and also the transition when both train types are in use and may even share a route.

In my experience full size bikes cause far more misery on rush hour Turbos where there is no space for them than on HSTs where they can at least go in the Guard's van - this morning some berk tried to ram his bike on an already rammed train at Southall which caused considerable "rhetoric" from those already crushed together on board - I believe there are regulations about no bikes on these trains heading toward London at certain times but they never seem to be enforced or even managed.

Completely agree, TG.  The station staff at places like Southall should be much more proactive in enforcing the rules.

Though it has to be said that the majority of the actual delays occur on HST's due to people waiting on the wrong part of the platforms, loading it into a carriage, taking an age to stow it in the van and return to a carriage.  Although annoying on busy Turbo services it rarely, if ever, causes much in the way of delays.  That's no doubt why HST's gain more attention within the management circles that the situation on Turbo service.

The friend I mentioned upthread who got a cab ride in a Pendolino was involved in the Cycle Rail Working Group, in a minor way. She says this about it ("darksiders" is jargon for people who ride recumbent cycles) (I've copy-pasted her message to me without alteration save for asterisking the other name, not that he'd really be identifiable anyway):

My involvement was fairly last-minute, when they realised it would be a good idea to have some funny-shaped bikes and asked around the local darksiders (I tried to recruit ********, as a prime example of a seriously disabled person who uses a cycle as a mobility aid, but unfortunately he couldn't make it).  So I don't know the wider context beyond the morning we spent in an industrial unit in Warwick with a model of the IEP's interior.

I think it says a lot that by the time any cyclists were involved the design had been finalised to the point where the space couldn't be anything other than dangly, and that they genuinely thought we'd be pleased with what they'd come up with.

So, we spent a morning experimenting with various permutations of bikes in the bike space, tested the Brompton capacity of the Luggage racks, ease of loading/unloading bikes in the vestibule and so on.  We also talked a fair bit about TOC procedures, and how those can be as important as physical design.  For example, they'd come up with a cunning hoop to lock our bikes to (that could be released by train staff if necessary).  We said we'd rather a cycle reservation automatically reserved the seat nearest the bike space so we could easily keep an eye on it and be there to play tetris when another cyclist got on.  And stressed the importance of knowing where to stand on the platform before the train arrives.  That sort of thing.

The main feedback I had on the bike space was that requiring people to lift bikes is inherently discriminatory to the disabled, women and children (nobody seems to have thought about children having bikes, or how that works when travelling as a family if the bike spaces are spread throughout the train), and that fixed hook positions mean that some combinations of bike won't tessellate.  I suggested that since there are structural elements that mean they're stuck with the dangly design, they should go away and come up with movable hooks, and add some tie-down points for strapping things like removed wheels in place.

(I also took my cyclist hat off and had a conversation about wheelchairs and toilets and door controls and things.  It's fair to say they've done a reasonable job there.)


As for how much weight was given to it, I've no idea.  Other than being CCed into a couple of emails from Dave Holladay where he provided references for things, that's all I've heard.

AIUI it was organised by the CTC (David Cox was there, and seemed to be in an organisational role), but I think some Sustrans people were also present (though possibly just in their capacity as cyclists who could easily get to Warwick Parkway).

So it seems that, as you'd expect, the basic layout was predetermined, but the Working Group did look beyond that at booking and other procedures. The suggestion that booking a bike space should reserve the nearest seat is interesting: does anyone know if that's been implemented? Clearly the DDA angle on the dangly spaces hasn't been followed (and due to the way DDA works, almost certainly won't be).

Curious that it was in Warwick, seeing as these trains are due for GWR first. I don't know if that was just one of several around the country, or if there's some kind of depot there that made it convenient for the engineers or something.

Warwick is where DCA Design International (https://www.dca-design.com/contact), who did the interiors, hang out. Their web site, as you would expect, goes in for a lot of self-congratulation about their work. You know - loads of human factors inputs, consulting users, that sort of thing. They imply that the mock-ups were not the final design, and the design might genuinely be revised. We'll see.

They weren't the final design....i've spoken with people wirking there

There's a lot that could still be done in the way of education. Not just where to wait, but also how: in particular, remove your panniers before the train arrives and leave them on the platform, ready to pick up.

It would really help, too, if the Velcro in the HST bike storage wasn't invariably shot to pieces. Most of the time I spend loading a bike is trying to make sure that it won't fall over the moment the train leaves. If I'm travelling with a flat-barred bike I choose the leftmost space by preference (the one by the gangway), as you can just about wedge the bars into the grill such that it won't fall. But I do honestly reckon that, if GWR were to replace the Velcro with some new stuff that actually fastened, they'd save money on delay minutes.

What my friend saw clearly wasn't the final design but it seems to be only details that up for alteration.

Oh gosh, that's for sure. No hwavy duty changes now...you're looking at easy fit-out changes, I reckon

What is this DDA to which you refer? The Act of Parliament repealed in 2010?  ???

Although the Act of Parliament itself may have been repealed in 2010, the spirit lives on in other legislation and in my view and I think that of others terms such as "DDA Compilant", "DDA Compliance" and "the DDA angle" are commonly taken in discussion to mean "compliance with current disability discrimination legislation".

In a court of law, the current laws and their acts would be looked at; here in a discussion amongst friends,  terms such as "DDA angle" or "DDL angle" strike me as an appropriate shorthand which is far clearer than listing individual  sections of the Equalities Act of 2010 which has replaced the Equal Pay Act 1970, Sex Discrimination Act 1975, Race Relations Act 1976, Disability Discrimination Act 1995, Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003, Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003 and the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006.

At times in discussions like the current one, to refer to the Equalities Act without further qualification could suggest that the poster is questioning whether people of a certain religious following would feel unequal because they had to hang there cycles vertically.

I agree, Bmblbzzz - the Disability Discrimination law consideration for these spaces is an interesting question. :)

Well said Graham.

Exactly as Grahame has said. If I'd put "EA" I'm not sure people would have known what I meant. An occasion when being inaccurate conveys the more meaning better and is arguable more precise than being accurate!  :o

My apologies for merely striving for accuracy. Casual readers may have no idea what DDA stands for, let alone that it is no longer on the statute book. It may be appropriate shorthand for those in the know. For others, a short explanation of the correct legislation may be more helpful.

Then there's the fact that rail vehicles have their own separate regulations for accessibility.

Strive then - by explaining the current legislation, rather than just posing a question that you know the answer to?

Electronic Arts ? or the Environmental Agency ?  ;D

Evangelical Alliance!

This is not the only case of the former abbreviation / acronym / name being so widely known that it stays in use after supercession. Landlords who advertise their flats with the qualification "No DSS!" can be told that they are correct - there is no DSS, and hasn't been for almost 15 years, since the Department for Work and something beginning with P replaced it. How many people take their car for a MoT test, or look for a CORGI registered plumber to sort their gas piping out? In my (soon to be former) job, I see mothers aged in their 20s who tell me they get Family Allowance. As it was abolished on 6 December 1971, their mothers didn't get it for them.

We must move with the times, but remember that evolution is a slow business.

.....there's no business like slow business.... ;)

(I'll get my coat)

Although they could have checked that ever helpful list of abbreviations and acronyms, where it is listed.

A friend (actually a colleague of a friend) who commutes from Cardiff to Bristol (Parkway I presume as office is in Aztec) has been told the principal reason for the new policy is not lack of capacity but to reduce delays. With the HST guards vans, not only do passengers with bikes have to get from carriage to guards vans but ^ obviously ^ only one at a time can get through the door and it takes longer to get a bike through the door, in either direction, than a person (though maybe not than a person with large suitcase or push chair). But the main problem seems to be a reluctance on the part of passengers to enter the guards van while there's someone else already in there.

This is something I don't understand and haven't really observed myself. There is definitely room in there for more than one person at a time to stow/remove a bike, though not more than two or three. It does get tight though if more than one wants to manoeuvre their bike at the same time (it needs to be turned through 90 degrees between door and racks).

Anyway, said c of f has booked a space in each direction for a couple of months ahead (he has a season ticket) and wants to book a second space on a later train every day for occasions when he has to work late.

The pricipal reason has never been to reduce delays. It is simply to warm customers up for when the new electric / bimode trains come into service.

There's nothing stopping someone from getting reservations on 2 services if they have a season ticket. Just expect a lot of wasted tickets!

Except that it stops others from carrying their bike. You will get complaints when they can't reserve, leave their bike, then find empty spaces!

I really think anyone commuting daily should consider either a folding bike or a bike at both ends (as they do in Netherlands).  That is assuming that secure storage facilities are available at both ends - and if they are not they should be!

Please, please do not encourage that. It's downright selfish and disrespectful to others trying to travel.

I'd agree^. And my friend has pointed out that the result is artificially reduced bike capacity; not only from booking two services but because some of the days he's booked he will end up not working.

I think the point about delays was made to friend's colleague specifically about the services he uses, which apparently are't that busy with bikes. Where in the GWR decision chain it originates I'm not sure; could be just from whoever he was speaking to, so probably station or train staff.

Though the introduction of the IEPs, meaning no more walking from carriage to guards van, should reduce bike-loading induced delays too.

When the Cotswold Line had an assistant guard on every HST, they were usually based out of the little room between the bike storage and seating in Carriage A, and would let cyclists through the passage into the main carriage, which saved time. There was one particular guard who would also let non-cycling passengers off via this exit on arrival at Paddington - very welcome in the morning rush!

Apparently it was "GWR customer service," whoever that means, that told him the new policy was to reduce delays.

Whatever the reason, it's interesting that GWR are giving multiple versions.

That'll be included of course, but the main reason is that the IEPs are different to the HSTs in that bikes can *only* be carried in the reserved spaces, totally limiting them to that number, whereas HSTs can take as many as can fit in the space available (subject to train manager permission) regardless of actual stated limit.

Thus customers are being softly introduced to the new limitation, prior to IEP introduction

That will very quickly result in some sort of clamp down. Why should you be able to reserve a space on two services when you quite clearly will only use one of them?

The new policy doesn't seem to be fully enforced, with still the "if there is space" discretion being shown at some locations.

You will find a lot of policies being ignored, just due to the hassle that the poor staff member will get over it; things such as:

- only 2 bikes on DMUs
- scooters must have a permit
- only 2xSDS to next station can be sold if boarding at a penalty fare station
- being told to buy on the train full stop
- buggies and prams should be folded
- UPFNs for "customers" who cannot prove/buy a ticket
- use of e-cigs

and as the train cannot be delayed for these - then what's the point in arguing?  Especially as people who do it regularly know.

You seem to be suggesting that people are allowed to do pretty much whatever they want, because the "poor staff member" can't be bothered to have difficult conversations?

Or the staff member doesn't want to cause avoidable delay to the train, or risk putting their own safety in jeopardy, arguing the toss with someone over something pretty unimportant - thus minimising inconvenience to the other passengers.

That's quite a telling and compelling message to send to anyone who wants to break the rules.

As with everything in life, TG, it's a trade-off.  Some members of staff stick rigidly to 'the rules' - they are often the ones castigated for not using their discretion (sometimes by posters on here) and are often the ones that always seem to be the names that crop up when you hear someone has been assaulted.  Then there's others that go too far the other way and do anything for an easy life. 

Then there's the majority who tend to get the balance just about right and won't challenge a group of youths smoking e-cigarettes on an empty late night train, or won't worry too much if a young mother is only travelling one stop and hasn't folded her buggy, but will do their best to make sure everyone has a ticket and all other policies are followed as closely as possible within reason.

Thanks - that's a much more measured explanation  :)

So TMs have authority to allow more than 6 bikes on an HST? I didn't know that.

Yes, just like conductors have the discretion to allow more than 2 bikes on a DMU; but this is not a right for the passenger, and if a passenger is refused access they need to accept that.

Policy was debated in House of Commons on Monday 11 July.

Transcript (https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2016-07-11/debates/16071126000002/GreatWesternRailway%E2%80%99SBicyclePolicy)




Edit to re-direct link - Grahame

Can you summarise here please?

MP: It's very difficult to book a bike space if you don't know what train you're going to catch ...

Undersecretary of State for Transport:  I welcomed the company’s announcement that it will have a system in place by December through which people can make bicycle reservations almost as they show up to the station.

Much more in a 20 minute discussion - made an interesting read.

Thanks for amending the link Graham - it is an interesting read. An 'Orwellian system...' Excellent!

And did we detect a little flirting from Ms. Perry?

As an aside, and to just clarify: this is not a new policy from Theresa May, our new Prime Minister.  ;) :D ;D

With a name like his, I would expect the Right Honourable Member for Exeter to be big on railways!

I'm surprised the Speaker didn't tell them to get a room, though.

I'd have thought that was normal banter (or badinage for John Major!) in the HC.

Does anyone know anything more about this new system for December?

No-one knows, except that Theresa May will be Prime Minister. What happens to the opposition remains to be seen.

The Speaker and Claire Perry do have history (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/diary/diary-wholl-protect-the-little-ones-from-claire-perrys-potty-mouth-7904490.html) on such matters...

Back on topic, the late booking system sounds promising. Wonder if it will be smartphone-based, and if it will permit booking spaces while the train is already on its journey?

Not necessarily... she might have resigned or called a general election, or the UK might have been annexed by the Faeroe Islands...

... or Gibraltar.  ;)

 :D

Sweet Rockall !!.

Unlikely as it will need someone actively monitoring all reservations such that a further booking can be considered & space availability determined in real time