Great Western Coffee Shop

You may remember I've said about making some fairly minor internal layout alterations to the IETs to help solve the lack of space for buggies, which can often be found in doorways, or partially in the bike/luggage compartments.

Well, I've got out my measuring stick and worked out how I think it should be done.  Turns out that removal of four seats, replaced with three tip-up seats, can give you plenty of room for a buggy!  I've attached a diagram to show how it would work, including nominal measurements.

Feedback would be useful, otherwise it's over to you to improve things for your customers, GWR!  ;)

I can see the merit of this suggestion, the only real drawback IMHO is that it panders to those who refuse to fold buggies and thereby occupy excessive space.

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed "buggy inflation" whereby the contraptions become steadily larger as the years go past.

I’ve also spoken  about the fact that 9 car vehicles have Standard Class wheelchair spaces yet are in the Quiet Carriage. LNER worked around this and have the Quiet Carriage in coach H.

That may or may not be the case, but they are still substantially smaller than the prams some of us older buggers were pushed around in when we were kids.

My parents told me that my pram, together with numerous others, ended up in the guard's van when being taken into Bristol in the days when St Philip's station was still open. Unfortunately as I was only 15 months old when it closed I have absolutely no recollection of the trips whatsoever  ;D

Bit like some of us! :P

Why not have a coach with no fixed seats, just tip up seats around the edges, an easy clean non slip floor, hand grabs for standing, plenty of room for cycles, wheelchairs, prams, buggys, Isambard props, or lots of standing cummuters from London to the west country... (and surf boards)

A bit OTT to have a whole coach fitted out thus, but perhaps about one quarter or one third of a coach might be reasonable, it would be what we used to call the guard's van or luggage van, but would need re branding these days.
"multi functional facility" or some such.

Doesn’t sound like the nicest environment for passengers to travel in.  I remember when wheelchair passengers were simply dumped in the guards van and left to spend the journey cold, alone and staring at piles of parcels!

On one absolutely packed  service from Oxford to New Street in the late seventies, I spent the entire journey in the guard’s van sitting on my own bicycle's seat. Nicely sprung, it was more comfortable than standing up!

Yes but the new multi functional space could be equipped with heating, windows, and the tip up seats would allow the companions of the wheelchair user to travel with them.
So not cold nor alone.

couldn't the multifunctional user space described above sell hot and cold drinks, sandwiches, confectionary and cakes all at the same time. It could even be fixed in position....... :o

Not under present GWR management as it would be contrary to their strongly stated policy regarding such matters.
Might be worth considering by a future operator though.

Extend all the 9 car trains to 10 car by adding an extra vehicle incorporating the new multi function area.
About 40 or 50 seats in about half of the vehicle.
The other half of the vehicle to consist of stowage for bulky articles and heavy luggage and an area from which refreshment may be obtained.
At least a dozen tip up seats could be provided, primarily for those accompanying wheelchairs, baby carriages and the like.
Place this vehicle in the middle of the standard class section in order that no standard class customer has to walk far in order to use it.

I might have known my thread would get hijacked with buffet reinstatement suggestions.

No suggestions as of current to have locomotives at each end and replace the sliding doors with slam doors.

A locomotive at each end would IMO be preferable, I see no merit in the return of slam doors.

A tenth carriage with areas for wheelchairs, buggies and bikes is indeed a possibility, though a costly one and it does nothing to help the 5-car fleet.  I personally don’t think the sums for a 10-car extension will add up unless it’s entirely used for seating. 

My solution was designed to be quick and cheap to do.  You could probably complete the works on a given unit over a weekend.

It would seem absurd to reduce proper seating to allow for buggies when these should be collapsed on board. Surely better that gateline staff have a supply of leaflets explaining that buggies should be collapsed and the reasons why (emphasising safety). When someone asks to be let through the wide gate with a buggy they are handed the leaflet and asked to read it.  On board staff would also have a few available too.

There could be posters at stations too and maybe in the vestibule areas.

I thought the original idea of young children not paying a fare was that if a seat was needed by another person they would have to sit on the parent's lap. Now we are suggesting taking seats out for them.

What next, specially strengthened seats to take suitcases and a smoking area on board for those that prefer not to obey some of the other rules?

How radical do you want to be?

Charge the same fare for all ages, with a single range of loyalty railcards - bronze, silver and gold available to everyone offering increased discounts at each level for an increased annual fee.  Revise Groupsave so that discounts can be compounded.

Charge a part fare for bicycles, dogs, buggies, wheelchairs, heavy luggage, owls, surfboards, etc. Whether a flat fare or a proportion of the ticket - to be decides.  Whether loyalty discounts apply on these extras, goodness knows.

Fixed fee for seat reservations, but with a guarantee of a seat.

Your economics for extra carriages and what they should take may start to look better, and I'm sure those of us who from time to time take (in my case) dogs, owls and heavy luggage would not mind paying a bit extra on the occasions we did, if compensated by a bit less on the occasions we didn't ... nor would we mind a small seat reservation fee for those occassions we especially want to be able to be sure of being seated.

I wonder if Williams will be this radical!

Hats off to II for considering the matter.

As a pedantic quibble, but also to clarify a possible source of confusion, he talks of "buggies" but the diagram shows what I would call a "pram". Or a "baby carriage" if you want to be Transpondian. The term "buggy" to me suggests something smaller and for a toddler or older baby who is at least sitting up, if not walking. This isn't just a pedantic quibble – the crucial difference here is that a buggy folds, prams do not (or at least not without a deal of effort). Also, whereas the pram stage lasts maybe a year at most, the buggy stage lasts several years, so there are more buggies and due to the age, probably more travelling.

Thanks, and yes I chose that image for two reasons, firstly it indicated what space the largest item would take up, and secondly as a pictogram it worked much better than overhead views of pushchairs/buggies and I wanted to indicate the likely width so a side-on image wouldn’t have been as effective.

You could fit two small pushchairs in the available space if required.

I’m terms of ‘Why should we provide a space?’  Then I guess that comes down to whether you want to try and make journeys as rewarding and stress free as possible.  Insisting on folding away things takes time and can cause congestion as people behind try to get on.  Other people just ignore leaflets and guidance and will continue to leave them unfolded and abandoned in various other places on the train that causes other issues.

Generally my experience is that sleeping children in buggies object quite vociferously to being folded up. My experience is also that other passengers don’t particularly welcome vociferous children...

II, this is an excellent suggestion. Providing freeform luggage space like this would improve travel for everyone with buggies, suitcases and bikes. These seats are inevitably only used on very busy services in any case.

Belgium's SNCB/NMBS calls them "multi-functional areas" and I've found it to be generally one carriage of 10 (or the lower deck of a shorter double-decker, or half a carriage of a shorter single-decker). Some double-deckers have low-level exit doors but they can only be opened by the guard. See https://cheeseweb.eu/2015/06/bike-belgian-trains-stepbystep-guide/ although the Liege-Lux service now has carriages with an open area too.

The Netherlands's NS seemed to have thirds of some coaches as open spaces but labels them variously as luggage or 4-bike spaces (despite 6 fitting easily and 8 is possible on most with careful stacking, sometimes more, all with none blocking gangways), causing needless conflict and delay if you've a rules-enforcing guard and a different mix of luggage/bikes/passengers to what the builders expected.

AFAIK, the child, sleeping or otherwise is meant to be removed BEFORE folding the buggy. I would expect the child to object vociferously if folded up with the buggy. Some makes of buggy have instructions that read "WARNING, REMOVE CHILD BEFORE FOLDING"
Most children do not come with instructions.

The problem is that waking the child also sets off the vociferous chain of events!

Very small children IME have a natural inclinometer. They can fall asleep in any position but once asleep, will wake and initiate the aforementioned vociferous chain of events the instant they are laid on a horizontal surface. If by chance they happen to fall asleep in a horizontal position, they will wake the instant they are are raised or lowered, no matter how gently, with the same effects.

Back to II's initial suggestion  it seems sensible to me.

If he puts in an order for tip up seats, can he order a few extra please so they can be installed in the two substantial wheelchair spaces in the centre coaches of "refurbished" Turbos, so a few more folk can sit down when these spaces are not in use (dare I say, as is usually the case) for wheelchairs?

Having all these spaces for wheelchairs, buggys, priority seats on the train is all very well, but getting from the platform on to and out of the train, is more of an issue. remember any of us may need a wheelchair/pram one day..

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-49434911

On that point, I've started a dedicated topic about this latest TOC failing to provide for a disabled traveller:
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=22116.0

One at each end of life, often!

I think I read it on these boards first - we are all born disabled.

I made my pram into the most exciting trolley. The fun I had with that ...

Create space maybe for *collapsed* buggies free of charge a la II's idea, but if their owners don't want to colapse, then a further ticket necessary as they'll take up similar space to a seat. That'll make 'em think.

Hi everyone

I found this forum after searching online about pushchairs and trains. I have just returned from a 6 hour train journey (of which about 3 1/2 hours was on GWR) with a 1 1/2 year old, and I think the pushchair policy is a disgrace.

To those saying that they can be folded - you have obviously never travelled with a young child who needs to sleep at unpredictable times (and makes quite a fuss if they don't manage it!).

To those saying pay for it - I'd be happy if I could actually sit in the seat I already paid for. Instead I spent several hours on recent journeys sitting on the floor by the doors, because this is the only place where I can keep the pushchair reclined. Meanwhile my reserved seat in the middle of the train was unoccupied.

Train travel needs to remain a realistic option for families with young children. For what its worth, I think the original suggestion in the thread is a good one.

Thanks nf260 and welcome to the forum.  The "That'll make 'em think" attitude quite frankly stinks.

Welcome to the forum - hope you found the comments "up-thread" useful in helping to fill you in on issues and points of view, if (sadly) not really leading to a consensus view, let alone an agreed solution. I hope you're now recovered after the journey and got a good night's sleep - that's assuming that (s)he sleeps through!

On one hand, the "bean counters" are all about numbers of seats these days and that leaves little / less space for cycles, dogs, baby carriages (please forgive the old-fashioned word - I want to be all-encompassing) .  But on the other hand they're all about the provision of facilities for those who are in wheelchairs; that does not include, though, those who are too young to be self-mobile yet.

Some of the suggestions for modifications made earlier are sensible.  Best use could and should be made of wheelchair spaces and seats near them for all those for whom they can make travel an acceptable experience ... with (perhaps) more such spaces added over time as trains are refitted during their life - but with the IETs being so new, and the rail industry being so fast (not!) at doing things, that will be far too far in the future for your (or rather this) child.

It does sound as if the booking system could do with some tweaking, and perhaps even the fares and pricing?  Pretty useless having a seat reserved in the midst of the "airline" section if you need to keep the pushchair up.  We are due a fare system shakeup and one of the considerations should be passenger's needs; I worry about the law of unintended consequences, and of replacing one set of complex and obscure directives with another set that's different, but just as complex and obscure.


Indeed - and perhaps more so into the future.

The first thiong GWR needs to do is to have a seat selector as part of the booking process on their website. It seems that not to do sao is a Firstgroup 'initiative', as none of their franchises do.

However, When Avanti (First's takeover of Virgin West Coast franchise) removed the seat selector from a rebranded Virgin booking engine, it raised many complaints - such that they are tweeting that they are looking into providing one....so if Abanti do this, maybe their other franchises can be 'persuaded'.

Then it'll really be down to the DfT to persuade their franchises to provide more of the wheelchair-type spaces for reservation by prams, I guess as it will mean a loss of standard seats to provide the space. The problem then becomes that the extra legroom provided will be attractive to all customers, not just those with prams.

A piece in "Conservative Woman" this morning ... I was about to follow up here but the whole question was so much wider than IET that I've started a new thread ... http://www.passenger.chat/22723