|
|
Post by lindsay on Dec 16, 2005 23:26:39 GMT
Hi there, I have recentlry read on another forum that there has been a rail council ruling that platforms have to be near level for disabled access. If this is the case does this more or less kill of either the Bakerloo to Watford or Croxley Link (due to Watford High Street) and also cut back the Piccadilly line from Uxbridge?
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Dec 17, 2005 0:02:42 GMT
I suspect 'Grandfather rights' apply, so where the platforms has been a compromise in the past, that is still allowed, but no new projects will be permitted.
Raises an interesting question if the Bakerloo did want to get back to Watford though!
|
|
|
|
Post by crewman on Dec 17, 2005 0:14:09 GMT
Its the metropolitan to Watford and proposed Croxley Link . Isnt the A class about the same height as NR trains.
This problem would be more relevant to the Bakerloo to Harrow and Wealdstone where the lines are shared with the Silverlink services.
I may be wrong
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2005 0:18:11 GMT
If the District Line regained the Uxbridge services, then choosing a track/platform height for step-free access would be simple.
As for the ramifications of the Bakerloo and the Met to Watford, some very interesting problems would have to be worked out at Watford High Street - Watford Junction DC has five bay platforms available, so it would be easy to provide a set of surface-height platforms and a set of tube-height platforms with one at compromise height for emergencies.
|
|
|
|
Post by lindsay on Dec 17, 2005 0:26:54 GMT
I read one idea was to have both lines signalled bi-directional and use the one platform for Metropolitan services and the other for Bakerloo. This is not my idea, I read it on another forum.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Dec 17, 2005 4:45:09 GMT
Is this 'Rail Council' a legally binding organisation, or simply a red tape guideline body?
I'm sure that wherever possible all rail companies will try their best to accomodate all their customers needs - but sometimes they have to be realistic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hutch on Dec 17, 2005 7:27:33 GMT
Should a PC access policy come fully to the fore, may I suggest the cheapest alternative is for either the big or little trains not to stop at WHS. If someone needed to alight/board there for the non-stopping service they could simply change at WJ.
Not too long ago, I saw a 1972 replay of a Monty Python sketch ahead of those tragic Olympics that included the classic “100 metres freestyle for those that cannot swim”, plus some other hilarious ones that could not possibly be show now on public television. PCness without practical application will be the downfall of us.
|
|
