Switzerland - railway services, facilities, improvements and incidents (merged posts)

[whole diary]

[TonyK]

And the breakthrough in the channel tunnel was celebrated with a couple of handshakes and exchange of slightly soiled flags!

Video from ITN here.

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

Here's a picture of a new Swiss EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit).  It's got sliding doors at different heights.  Presumably different sets of doors open depending on the height of the platform at the stations its serves.  I've never seen his before - maybe it's to help disabled people, load buggies etc?

[chrisr_75]

Here's a picture of a new Swiss EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit).  It's got sliding doors at different heights.  Presumably different sets of doors open depending on the height of the platform at the stations its serves.  I've never seen his before - maybe it's to help disabled people, load buggies etc?

Ah, I've been on these - I don't think they're particularly new.

As I recall, the higher doors are for luggage/goods space - presumably higher to allow them to be directly loaded from a trolley or van/lorry

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

Yes, that makes sense, and is consistent with there being no windows in that part of the train. I've travelled a fair bit by train in Switzerland (and will be there again in May) but never noticed a train with doors like that.

[chrisr_75]

Yes, that makes sense, and is consistent with there being no windows in that part of the train. I've travelled a fair bit by train in Switzerland (and will be there again in May) but never noticed a train with doors like that.

A lot of the 'private' railways in Switzerland that go to high resorts seem to carry quite a lot of goods and parcels and luggage - makes sense, especially in winter, to keep some of the vans and lorries off the road. Don't forget the BOB goes to Wengen which is traffic free.

Have you got any specific travel plans for your break this year? The ride on the BOB from Interlaken to Grindelwald and then on up to Junfraujoch is expensive and can be very busy (and is also quite a lengthy trip), but is worth it if you've not done it before. As I recall you can get 50% off with a Swiss Pass or half price card on the Junfrau Bahn and the BOB is classed as part of the national network for the rail cards iirc.

[broadgage]

It seems to me a little odd that the higher doors intended for light freight or parcels are of a contrasting colour to the surrounding bodywork.

I though that a European standard requires doors intended for passenger use to be of a contrasting colour so as to be seen by those with poor eyesight. That would seem to imply that doors NOT intended for public use should be inconspicuous by being of the same colour as the surroundings.

Or are these doors intended for the public to load their own bulky luggage, skis and so on ?

[stuving]

Surely the reason why the doors at the ends of the train are higher is because that's the floor height over the bogies. TGV^▸ (Train a Grande Vitesse)-duplex also have them, with a luggage storage area in each end trailer. As far as I can see (from an inadequate drawing) at the ends, where there is no high-level connection to the next carriage, there is a half-height "room" between the above-bogie floor and the upstairs floor - only accessible from this short full-height compartment at that sliding luggage door. Presumably the Swiss one, which has a cab not a power car next to that space, is much the same mutatis mutandis.

[Rhydgaled]

It seems to me a little odd that the higher doors intended for light freight or parcels are of a contrasting colour to the surrounding bodywork.

I though that a European standard requires doors intended for passenger use to be of a contrasting colour so as to be seen by those with poor eyesight. That would seem to imply that doors NOT intended for public use should be inconspicuous by being of the same colour as the surroundings.

I've thought the same of the staff doors on ATW^▸ (Arriva Trains Wales (former Train Operating Company))'s class 150s. They say Staff Access on them but are painted the same colour as the passenger doors.

[stuving]

From 2012 consolidated text of the the PRM^▸ (Persons with Reduced Mobility) TSI:

4.2.2.4.2. Exterior doors
...
External  doors  shall  be  painted  or  marked  on  the  outside  in  a  way that  gives  a  contrast  to  the  rest  of  the  vehicle  body-side
...

There is also this, from the 2014 draft of a revison (apprently still work in progress):

4.2.2.3.2 Exterior doors
...
All Exterior passenger doorways shall be marked on the outside in a way that gives a contrast to the vehicle body-side surrounding them.
...

There isn't anything about goods or staff access doors not being painted like passenger ones, which might help. As would common sense, of course.

[chrisr_75]

It seems to me a little odd that the higher doors intended for light freight or parcels are of a contrasting colour to the surrounding bodywork.

I though that a European standard requires doors intended for passenger use to be of a contrasting colour so as to be seen by those with poor eyesight. That would seem to imply that doors NOT intended for public use should be inconspicuous by being of the same colour as the surroundings.

Or are these doors intended for the public to load their own bulky luggage, skis and so on ?

Having witnessed them in action, albeit a few years ago now, I seem to recall station staff (there are lots) loading up with crates of food/drink deliveries, luggage and so on - I assume they use the high doors (agree that the floor is high due to the bogie clearance, but that bring other benefits) as they're on a level with a van or hand cart. And yes, in winter I am sure they'll be racked out for skis, although there is often an open wagon with ski racks that's towed/pushed at one end of some of the mountain railways. There's many tour groups visiting this area, so there will be significant demand for luggage space, especially for trains to Wengen as road access is not permitted.

With regards to oddities and not conforming to euro standards - this is Switzerland afterall...

[grahame]

From 2012 consolidated text of the the PRM^▸ (Persons with Reduced Mobility) TSI:

4.2.2.4.2. Exterior doors
...
External  doors  shall  be  painted  or  marked  on  the  outside  in  a  way that  gives  a  contrast  to  the  rest  of  the  vehicle  body-side
...

There is also this, from the 2014 draft of a revison (apprently still work in progress):

4.2.2.3.2 Exterior doors
...
All Exterior passenger doorways shall be marked on the outside in a way that gives a contrast to the vehicle body-side surrounding them.
...

There isn't anything about goods or staff access doors not being painted like passenger ones, which might help. As would common sense, of course.

My reading is that this makes the livery on 43003 to be against the 2012 rules, but allowed again from the 2014 rules, as the guard / train manager / bicycle door isn't contrasting.   Commonly accepted (or rather commonly acknowledged) that the who set couldn't be retro under modern requirements.

[stuving]

My reading is that this makes the livery on 43003 to be against the 2012 rules, but allowed again from the 2014 rules, as the guard / train manager / bicycle door isn't contrasting.   Commonly accepted (or rather commonly acknowledged) that the who set couldn't be retro under modern requirements.

That's what I meant by common sense: is the driver's door an "external door" under the 2012 wording? Or does it not count as there's no reason for considerations of passenger accessibility to apply to it. (Unless it's to help drivers who ...)

[stuving]

There was, in fact, a revised version that came out in 2014 - with the new wording:

4.2.2.3.2.   Exterior doors 
(3) All exterior passenger doorways shall be marked on the outside in a way that gives a contrast to the vehicle body-side surrounding them.

There has been a lot more changed in the words defining the scope of the standard. This has gone from:

This  TSI  concerns:
...
 — the Conventional Rail Rolling Stock subsystem shown in the list in point 1 of Annex II to Directive 2001/16/EC, as modified by Directive 2004/50/EC, only when intended to carry passengers. However, heritage Rolling Stock is specifically excluded from the need to comply at upgrade or renewal....

to :

2.1.2.  Scope related to rolling stock subsystem
This TSI applies to rolling stock which is in the scope of the LOC&PAS TSI and which is intended to carry passengers.

However, the earlier text also had a section headed "2. DEFINITION OF SUBSYSTEM/SCOPE", within which was:

2.1.2. Rolling Stock Structure, command and control system for all train equipment, traction and energy conversion units, braking, coupling and running gear (bogies, axles, etc.) and suspension, doors, man/ machine interfaces (driver, on-board staff and passengers, including the needs of persons with reduced mobility), passive or active safety devices and requisites for the health of passengers and on-board staff.

I can see that might be confusing. I take it to define the scope in terms of the subsystem breakdown - which parts of the railway does this apply to (or not) - while the simpler "scope" is about the scope of application, i.e. which aspects are affected. Which I see as common sense (though that's always been a tricky concept in specifications and standards writing).

[TM]

From 2012 consolidated text of the the PRM^▸ (Persons with Reduced Mobility) TSI:

4.2.2.4.2. Exterior doors
...
External  doors  shall  be  painted  or  marked  on  the  outside  in  a  way that  gives  a  contrast  to  the  rest  of  the  vehicle  body-side
...

There is also this, from the 2014 draft of a revison (apprently still work in progress):

4.2.2.3.2 Exterior doors
...
All Exterior passenger doorways shall be marked on the outside in a way that gives a contrast to the vehicle body-side surrounding them.
...

There isn't anything about goods or staff access doors not being painted like passenger ones, which might help. As would common sense, of course.

My reading is that this makes the livery on 43003 to be against the 2012 rules, but allowed again from the 2014 rules, as the guard / train manager / bicycle door isn't contrasting.   Commonly accepted (or rather commonly acknowledged) that the who set couldn't be retro under modern requirements.

I think the intention has always been for passenger doors to be contrasting.  The 2014 simply make that explicit.  AFAIK^▸ (as far as I know) the doors on power cars have never had a contrasting livery.

[Rhydgaled]

My reading is that this makes the livery on 43003 to be against the 2012 rules, but allowed again from the 2014 rules, as the guard / train manager / bicycle door isn't contrasting.   Commonly accepted (or rather commonly acknowledged) that the who set couldn't be retro under modern requirements.

I'm no lawyer, and I haven't read the relevant regulations in full, but as far as I can see there is nothing to stop FirstGWR putting a whole rake in a heritage livery if they wanted, for the following reasons:

• The regulations don't actually come into full force until 2020, and the slam-doors mean the train cannot operate beyond that date anyway
• Chiltern painted ex-Virgin mrk3s into blue&grey for their Banbury set and
• as has just brought to my attention by stuving above, there is an exemption for heritage stock anyway

I think a far more likely explanation for only 43002 and 43185 being in retro livery is that FirstGWR don't think it would be a good use of money to do a whole set.

AFAIK^▸ (as far as I know) the doors on power cars have never had a contrasting livery.

The guards door on the TGS and one of the doors on the buffet cars aren't in a contrasting colour either.