Bicycles on the Severn Beach Line.

[whole diary]

[JayMac]

I witnessed a rather unsavoury incident on my journey home today on the SVB Line.

By the time we'd left Stapleton Road there were eleven bicycles in the front carriage of the 150/1. Four in the designated cycle storage area, two more in the aisle in that front section, three in the first vestibule area and further two in the second vestibule.

At Redland a heated argument erupted between a passenger who was struggling to get off the train and one of the cyclists whose mountain bike was blocking the exit. These two folks had to be physically separated to avoid coming to blows.

Reluctant as I am to criticise the conductor, he should have been more proactive in stopping further cyclists from boarding the train after the cycle storage area was full. I've seen other conductors be much more assertive that four bikes is the limit on a 150/1.

To my mind the amount of bicycles in this one carriage was a real threat to the safety of other passengers and the train crew. In an emergency it would have been extremely difficult for the driver to leave his cab and walk through the train. Likewise the conductor would've been unable to get to the front of the train. Bicycles should not be blocking aisles and exits.

I know Bristol is a bit hilly, but if you've got a bike is it really necessary to take the train from Lawrence Hill/Stapleton Road to Clifton Down?

[JayMac]

Here's an idea.

On the Class 150/1s that operate on the SVB Line the cycle storage area is in a part of the train where there are just 8 permanent seats in two groups of four and 3 flip up ones.

On one side why not remove four of those seats, blank out the windows and remove the overhead luggage racks? In their place, install hangers, straps and wheel holders so that bicycles can be stored vertically. There would then be room for up to 8 bikes, possibly more. The aisle would be kept free and so would the area with the flip up seats which is, I believe the designated wheelchair space.

[Brucey]

I know Bristol is a bit hilly, but if you've got a bike is it really necessary to take the train from Lawrence Hill/Stapleton Road to Clifton Down?

Not necessary at all.  I've walked from Stapleton Road to Clifton Down (when I missed the train) and it wasn't very hilly or strenuous.  I could imagine it would be a fairly nice cycle.

[bambam]

I witnessed a rather unsavoury incident on my journey home today on the SVB Line.


I know Bristol is a bit hilly, but if you've got a bike is it really necessary to take the train from Lawrence Hill/Stapleton Road to Clifton Down?

But shouldn't we be promoting more intergrated transport. If you were told youd have to wait for the next train in 40 minutes because your luggage was too large you'd probably be annoyed and put off using the train.

[rich0099]

The BTP^▸ (British Transport Police) were aboard the commuter-time trains yesterday evening to back up FGW^▸ (First Great Western) staff over reducing the number of bicycles they can accept on a service.

This is a sticky one. I've noticed the level of bicycles has increased quite a bit over the past couple of weeks and I witnessed some cyclists getting angry when they were turned away from one particular service.

Since the school holidays, the number of carriages has be reduced to two (rather than three during peak), which I guess is fairly sensible on a cost basis. But I can't help wondering if FGW are missing a 'trick' here by not embracing the cyclists as revenue-earners, and maybe modifying some of the DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit)'s to have more flip up seats, to cope with it? Would FGW turn away multiple wheelchair users? Is there a limit to the latter?

I note that a lot of these cyclists must work within the Severnside industrial area - and it must be said that from SVB (and SAR) it can be a fair old walk to reach these distribution centres - hence why they opt for a bicycle, I guess.

Furthermore, those that work within the distribution centres probably aren't the highest of earners and therefore might not have access to a car. As has been said many times before, public transport past AVN to SVB is fairly non-existent. If the SGC & BCC^» (Bristol City Council - about) is determined to expand the area, it does need to address the commuting issue.

[JayMac]

It would appear that things have come somewhat to head following my flagging up of this issue back in May. I shared my concerns with staff on the Severn Beach Line who agreed that it can be a bit difficult to accommodate all the cyclists who wish to use the trains on the line, particularly in the evening peak out of Temple Meads.

Cycle storage would have been even more of a problem on Wednesday of this week when the 2 car Class 158 was out and about to and from Severn Beach!

The limit on FGW^▸ (First Great Western) west DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) fleet is just two bicycles per train, or up to four at the discretion of the Conductor.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/~/media/PDF/About%20us/Cycle%20by%20train_Nov_2011.pdf

As regard the workers in the various Distribution Centres between Avonmouth and Severn Beach, it's fortunate that the usual shift patterns of 6-2, 2-10 and 10-6 mean that if they do cycle and use the train they are, most the time, on quieter off peak services or contra-peak flows. Only the 6am overnight finishers could conceivably be travelling in the morning peak, but they are poorly served rail wise with the 0603 from SVB (0609 SAR) being a little too early and the next train not until 0718 (0724).

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

I note that the first objectiive of the Community Rail Partnership scheme is to:

"establish the contribution of Community Rail Development in achieving locally set objectives such as reducing road congestion and increasing accessibility"

It seems to me that simple modifications to the seat arrangments etc, such as suggested by BNM, seem an obvious thing to do to reduce road congestion and increase accessiblity.  Turning cyclists away because of unsuitable rolling stock may be necessary for safety reasons in the short term, but surely the proper solution is to make adeqaute and safe provison within the trains for bicycles. If that means a modest charge for taking bicycles on the train to pay for this work, well then so be it.

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

On a branch line is Switzerland they would probably hang a wagon on the back to carry the bicylces.  It's what they commonly do for skis.  And yes the wagon would be propelled in one direction.

OK, maybe a step too far for our current conservative heavy rail train operation culture.  But if the Severn Beach line were to become light rail and be freed from operating standards designed for 125 mph and 3,000 tonne trains, then maybe novel ideas could provide solutions and increase line usage.

[grahame]

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/~/media/PDF/About%20us/Cycle%20by%20train_Nov_2011.pdf

First Great Western welcomes customers who cycle to our stations and wish to travel on our services. The purpose of this guide is to explain our policy regarding the parking and carriage of bikes, so that your journey can be easy, convenient and enjoyable.

It's very interesting indeed to read between the lines in the first sentence, isn't it?

We made a conscious decision in the CRP^▸ (Community Rail Partnership) generated publicity for last year's TransWilts summer service to Weymouth to not encourage people to bring their cycles with them on the train.   We were full just about to capacity anyway (sometimes beyond) and all it would have needed would have been half a dozen cycles from to Melksham in the evening ...

If you are not able to board one of these services as instructed by the Conductor, you will need to wait for the next service on which there is space for a bike to be carried safely.

So with two cycles per train, that would have been 2 on the Monday morning, 2 on the Monday evening, and the final 2 on Tuesday morning.

I note that the first objectiive of the Community Rail Partnership scheme is to:

"establish the contribution of Community Rail Development in achieving locally set objectives such as reducing road congestion and increasing accessibility"

Ironic, isn't it?  The whole business of luggage, dogs, cycles, prams and other wheelchairs on what are essentially fitted as foot commuter trains leaves much to be desired!