No working toilet on the train.

[yorksrob]

And as I wrote on your other thread, particularly relevant to 195s -



You can't just fit a second toilet to a 195 without fairly major modifications.

I find it hard to comprehend how we've ended up in a situation where multiple units built over thirty years ago have more room to install toilet infrastructure than brand new trains.

Emergency toilet bags exist. Each train should perhaps have a stock of them which could be used in the toilet cubicle in emergency even if it had failed.

I've considered "bringing a bottle" just in case.

 

[PeterC]

Emergency toilet bags exist. Each train should perhaps have a stock of them which could be used in the toilet cubicle in emergency even if it had failed.

I normally keep one or two if these with me on a journey.

TravelJohn UK Disposable Urinals UK | Travel John UK

TravelJohn UK. It’s never a fun situation when you’re on the go, and you have to go. Our products for men, women & children are perfect for on-the-go emergency situations when no traditional or sanitary facilities available.

www.traveljohn.co.uk

 

[Starmill]

As I've mentioned on other threads, modern trains are modular now, so it should be easy to retrofit toilet no 2 (for want of a better phrase).

The "space saver" toilet should only need four seats removing from the three cars. Of course the view at DfT is that this space is necessary for those four seats, even if it's a tiny proportion on a three car. Regardless the decision was made a very long time ago now and it can't be unmade without great expense.

One thing that could be done would be to reallocate 170s away from the Harrogate line and towards some long-distance services, with 195s filling in. However the Harrogate line doesn't have enough diagrams to cover any other service groups except for Leeds - Nottingham, which as yet cannot take three cars on weekdays. There may also be a crew training cost.

 

[D6130]

A proactive guard will arrange toilet stops. I always make sure to do one when control refuse to swap a unit out. I don't find it at all acceptable to how zero toilets no matter how long the service is

When I was driving on the Settle-Carlisle line we often had to incur station overtime if the single toilet on a 156 or 158/9 was out of use. This usually occurred at Appleby in the Down direction - where ladies' and gents' facilities were available - or Kirkby Stephen, Garsdale or Settle on the Up (Gents' only at the first two and both at the latter). Skipton could also be used in the Up direction if necessary, but only as a last resort, as a prolonged comfort stop there caused havoc with the intensive Aire Valley electric services.

 

[skyhigh]

I find it hard to comprehend how we've ended up in a situation where multiple units built over thirty years ago have more room to install toilet infrastructure than brand new trains.

Emissions equipment and retention tanks, for two reasons.

It would also have been a lot easier to design the unit to originally have 2 toilets than modify them now. They are not really modular in that sense.

 

[yorksrob]

The "space saver" toilet should only need four seats removing from the three cars. Of course the view at DfT is that this space is necessary for those four seats, even if it's a tiny proportion on a three car. Regardless the decision was made a very long time ago now and it can't be unmade without great expense.

One thing that could be done would be to reallocate 170s away from the Harrogate line and towards some long-distance services, with 195s filling in. However the Harrogate line doesn't have enough diagrams to cover any other service groups except for Leeds - Nottingham, which as yet cannot take three cars on weekdays. There may also be a crew training cost.

Yes, some of the 3 carriage 170's would be great for Calderdale.

When I was driving on the Settle-Carlisle line we often had to incur station overtime if the single toilet on a 156 or 158/9 was out of use. This usually occurred at Appleby in the Down direction - where ladies' and gents' facilities were available - or Kirkby Stephen, Garsdale or Settle on the Up (Gents' only at the first two and both at the latter). Skipton could also be used in the Up direction if necessary, but only as a last resort, as a prolonged comfort stop there caused havoc with the intensive Aire Valley electric services.

If only all lines had as excellent station facilities as the S&C !

Emissions equipment and retention tanks, for two reasons.

It would also have been a lot easier to design the unit to originally have 2 toilets than modify them now. They are not really modular in that sense.

They should have been specced with two toilets from the start.

 

[D6130]

If only all lines had as excellent station facilities as the S&C !

I believe that the Gents' toilet on the Up platform at Kirkby Stephen disappeared - or perhaps was locked-up - when the station building became a holiday let.

They should have been specced with two toilets from the start.

Fully agree!

 

[GPR]

I will say this, it’s not often a 331/195 will come onto depot and be out of use after being in traffic for the day.
Water level wise they have 4 lights on the side and it’s very rare they’ll be lower than 25%.
The tank which also holds the brown and golden stuff also has indicators on the side which are red or yellow depending on how full and 99 times out of 100 these won’t be lit.
Wether they are ever CETd and tanked during the day I do not know.

 

[yorksrob]

I believe that the Gents' toilet on the Up platform at Kirkby Stephen disappeared - or perhaps was locked-up - when the station building became a holiday let.

Indeed. That said, Appleby, Garsdale and Settle is still a good count.

 

[driverd]

One thing that could be done would be to reallocate 170s away from the Harrogate line and towards some long-distance services, with 195s filling in. However the Harrogate line doesn't have enough diagrams to cover any other service groups except for Leeds - Nottingham, which as yet cannot take three cars on weekdays. There may also be a crew training cost.

Almost correct - the core pattern is 6 units on Harrogate and 6 units on YRK-BPN (ignoring peak time Harrogates).

It was an observation made by myself and colleagues that this could be a very straight forward swap, traction training would only be required at Blackpool (and possibly Blackburn, I'm not 100% on that) for 170s, and Harrogate for 195s.

In almost every way, the 170s are more suited to Blackpool services (more luggage space, more toilets, comfier seats), and the run offers plenty of opportunity to get the units over oil-burning 60mph speeds.

Meanwhile, the 195s would deal with the tough gradients on Harrogate much better and are in almost every way more suited to the combination of regular stations and steep climbs. 195 WSP is also miles better than that on 170s, so it'd be a far more suitable allocation of stock during low adhesion.

But what do traincrew know, ey?

 

[WesternLancer]

The driver said if he had known there were no toilets it should have been taken out of service.

so a modern train but when the toilet out of service locking device kicks in there is no alert to staff in a cab? - sounds pretty poor design.

Obv I don't know what other duties the guard had to perform on the journey - but as a passenger I would think that occasional checks on passenger facilities like the toilet during the course of the journey would be a thing that should be done.

Otherwise it just looks like another case from the passengers point of view that having guards on trains makes little difference so why bother when DfT wants to get rid of the role.

If I'd been a passenger and needed the lav, or saw someone else who urgently needed it - I think I'd have gone and knocked on cab doors to raise the issue with staff - but I realise not everyone would know or think to do that.

 

[MichaelTrains]

so a modern train but when the toilet out of service locking device kicks in there is no alert to staff in a cab? - sounds pretty poor design.

Obv I don't know what other duties the guard had to perform on the journey - but as a passenger I would think that occasional checks on passenger facilities like the toilet during the course of the journey would be a thing that should be done.

Otherwise it just looks like another case from the passengers point of view that having guards on trains makes little difference so why bother when DfT wants to get rid of the role.

If I'd been a passenger and needed the lav, or saw someone else who urgently needed it - I think I'd have gone and knocked on cab doors to raise the issue with staff - but I realise not everyone would know or think to do that.

I don’t know if it’s a Northern thing but I’ve noticed on these late evening and last trains of the night, the guard very rarely comes out of the back cab unless doing the doors. I presume this is a safety issue with drunks rather than a lazy attitude.

Almost correct - the core pattern is 6 units on Harrogate and 6 units on YRK-BPN (ignoring peak time Harrogates).

It was an observation made by myself and colleagues that this could be a very straight forward swap, traction training would only be required at Blackpool (and possibly Blackburn, I'm not 100% on that) for 170s, and Harrogate for 195s.

In almost every way, the 170s are more suited to Blackpool services (more luggage space, more toilets, comfier seats), and the run offers plenty of opportunity to get the units over oil-burning 60mph speeds.

Meanwhile, the 195s would deal with the tough gradients on Harrogate much better and are in almost every way more suited to the combination of regular stations and steep climbs. 195 WSP is also miles better than that on 170s, so it'd be a far more suitable allocation of stock during low adhesion.

But what do traincrew know, ey?

Agree with the 170s being better suited to York >> Blackpool route.

We can all but dream.

 

[ModernRailways]

so a modern train but when the toilet out of service locking device kicks in there is no alert to staff in a cab? - sounds pretty poor design.

It will show up as a fault on the TCMS which both the guard and driver can see. With a 195, or 331 the guard will have left the cab in order to operate the doors. It's possible the toilet was working and then whilst enroute it's gone into fault. If it was working when the train was prepped then the relieving guard may have not been told and thus it can cause such a situation to arise. However, if a toilet does stop working enroute then I'd expect a passenger to let crew know before just deciding to relieve themselves in the saloon.

I've worked stock where the toilet has locked itself out as it has no water or the tanks are full and so the toilet doesn't empty, but if someone has made themselves known and a toilet stop is difficult (time of day, location and stations nearby etc) but they're desperate/in distress then I have manually unlocked the toilet, told them the situation and warned them that it may be messy but that it's something to bear with and just add to the waste already in there. I always carry anti bac wipes and sanitiser and so will also offer wipes to them for cleaning their hands.

 

[Starmill]

Almost correct - the core pattern is 6 units on Harrogate and 6 units on YRK-BPN (ignoring peak time Harrogates).

It was an observation made by myself and colleagues that this could be a very straight forward swap, traction training would only be required at Blackpool (and possibly Blackburn, I'm not 100% on that) for 170s, and Harrogate for 195s.

In almost every way, the 170s are more suited to Blackpool services (more luggage space, more toilets, comfier seats), and the run offers plenty of opportunity to get the units over oil-burning 60mph speeds.

Meanwhile, the 195s would deal with the tough gradients on Harrogate much better and are in almost every way more suited to the combination of regular stations and steep climbs. 195 WSP is also miles better than that on 170s, so it'd be a far more suitable allocation of stock during low adhesion.

But what do traincrew know, ey?

Agreed that would work very well in that case. Such a shame that money for crew training and relevant clearing of units is probably too much to ask for at the moment.

 

[Starmill]

Imagine my shock horror last night that the last Northern train of the day to Bradford had no working toilet on it.

Is this acceptable? Especially when it’s a two-hour journey?

At least one person ended up urinating on the train by the seats that are supposed to carry the cycle rack.

I guess if you've got to go you've got to go but why wasn't this train taken out of service?

I know it's the last train of the night but surely things can't be that bad at Northern that there's no working toilet.

The only thing I would add as I can't spot it, I strongly recommend contacting Northern customer relations on [email protected], pointing out there was no toilet access on the date and timed service in question.

 

[WesternLancer]

The only thing I would add as I can't spot it, I strongly recommend contacting Northern customer relations on [email protected], pointing out there was no toilet access on the date and timed service in question.

I think post #13 covers this and indicates the OP has been in touch with Northern, and their reply.

 

[Starmill]

I think post #13 covers this and indicates the OP has been in touch with Northern, and their reply.

I wasn't sure if that just meant they'd discussed it with the staff in person. Often they won't have the time to be able to make notes and feed it back so if so the problem may not be recorded in their statistics. But yes understood.

Some TOCs separately monitor a dedicated performance indicator for trains in public service where no toilets at all were in order. I don't remember if Northern currently do.

 

[WesternLancer]

I wasn't sure if that just meant they'd discussed it with the staff in person. Often they won't have the time to be able to make notes and feed it back so if so the problem may not be recorded in their statistics. But yes understood.

Some TOCs separately monitor a dedicated performance indicator for trains in public service where no toilets at all were in order. I don't remember if Northern currently do.

Good point well made!

 

[skyhigh]

traction training would only be required at Blackpool (and possibly Blackburn, I'm not 100% on that) for 170s

170 traction knowledge is far from universal for drivers at Leeds.

 

[driverd]

170 traction knowledge is far from universal for drivers at Leeds.

Unless that's change drastically, 1 link who sign Blackpool all sign them, the vast majority of others sign them for shunts/holbeck nights etc. I don't know the exact figures but certainly it's my impression more do than don't - In any case it's not showstopper (and the merits to both fleet reliability and customer experience surely would offset somewhat the cost).

 

[Starmill]

Unless that's change drastically, 1 link who sign Blackpool all sign them, the vast majority of others sign them for shunts/holbeck nights etc. I don't know the exact figures but certainly it's my impression more do than don't - In any case it's not showstopper (and the merits to both fleet reliability and customer experience surely would offset somewhat the cost).

It's a good idea clearly, and would be worth considering if it weren't such a battle to get the absolute bare minimum of training arrangements at the moment.

 

[CC 72100]

I don’t know if it’s a Northern thing but I’ve noticed on these late evening and last trains of the night, the guard very rarely comes out of the back cab unless doing the doors. I presume this is a safety issue with drunks rather than a lazy attitude.

Disagree. You can walk through a train and not do tickets. If its too unsafe for the staff member, why is it safe enough for a customer?

I'm not saying go chasing every £3 at 11pm at night, let's be realistic here, but there is absolutely no reason why a couple of walk throughs cannot be achieved.

 

[D6130]

Meanwhile, the 195s would deal with the tough gradients on Harrogate much better and are in almost every way more suited to the combination of regular stations and steep climbs. 195 WSP is also miles better than that on 170s, so it'd be a far more suitable allocation of stock during low adhesion.

What about the even steeper gradients on the Blackpool-York route....Gannow Junction and Stansfield Hall to Copy Pit Summit, Milner Royd to Halifax and Bradford Interchange to Bowling Tunnel and Laisterdyke?

 

[driverd]

What about the even steeper gradients on the Blackpool-York route....Gannow Junction and Stansfield Hall to Copy Pit Summit, Milner Royd to Halifax and Bradford Interchange to Bowling Tunnel and Laisterdyke?

Offset by the fact you don't have stops halfway up them. I don't sign Copy Pit but it's only a reasonably low speed run with no stops. You hit Milner Royd at 50mph and without a stop I would have expected a 170 to be able to maintain that without issue - there's a very brief stint of 60 before Bank Houses tunnel but its only really taken advantage of by 195s and doesn't have an impact on performance when a sprinter (which can't quite achieve 60 in the space available) is subbed.

The only place you may see a performance impact is the climb to Bowling tunnel, but again, there's no stops to kill the 170s energy, so I wouldn't expect it to be a huge detriment to the timetable.

Edit: Apologies, you have Burnely Manchester Road don't you, on the other side of Copy Pit. Again, wouldn't imagine it to be a huge detriment to the timetable because it's just the one stop - of course there would be an impact, but compared to the Harrogate line, I think most would agree Blackpool is substantially better suited to 170s - quite comparible with the routes they work quite successfully in Scotland.

 

[Benjwri]

Disagree. You can walk through a train and not do tickets. If its too unsafe for the staff member, why is it safe enough for a customer?

I'm not saying go chasing every £3 at 11pm at night, let's be realistic here, but there is absolutely no reason why a couple of walk throughs cannot be achieved.

I think the biggest safety risk is that checking of the tickets. People who might be calm and reasonable can become very violent and angry very quicky when confronted while drunk, and you can imagine someone asking for their tickets might kick this off, knowing they don't have one, or even just the sight of someone who might be asking for tickets, doing a walkthrough. I've worked at bars where we are specifically told not to check ID's, because people have got very violent in the past, and instead should discretely notify a manager who has to call over security to check an ID.

I'm not saying its right that people act and treat others in this way, but it's the way things are and there isn't an obvious solution to counter it. At the end of the day you have a single member of staff alone on a train, potentially not in the view of any other authority for hours, and who's uniform naturally draws attention to them in the same way a bouncer or police officer might, in that in these days of harsh RPIs many see any staff member as someone waiting to penalty fare them. I can absolutely sympathize with any member of staff not wanting to put themselves in a potentially extremely dangerous position.

 

[Starmill]

Offset by the fact you don't have stops halfway up them. I don't sign Copy Pit but it's only a reasonably low speed run with no stops. You hit Milner Royd at 50mph and without a stop I would have expected a 170 to be able to maintain that without issue - there's a very brief stint of 60 before Bank Houses tunnel but its only really taken advantage of by 195s and doesn't have an impact on performance when a sprinter (which can't quite achieve 60 in the space available) is subbed.

The only place you may see a performance impact is the climb to Bowling tunnel, but again, there's no stops to kill the 170s energy, so I wouldn't expect it to be a huge detriment to the timetable.

Edit: Apologies, you have Burnely Manchester Road don't you, on the other side of Copy Pit. Again, wouldn't imagine it to be a huge detriment to the timetable because it's just the one stop - of course there would be an impact, but compared to the Harrogate line, I think most would agree Blackpool is substantially better suited to 170s - quite comparible with the routes they work quite successfully in Scotland.

It has to be said, they do take stops for stations or to be held for a passing service rather poorly on the Highland Main Line, and clearly they don't tolerate poor railhead or snow quite as well as a newer unit may do, but the ScotRail ones aren't that bad at hills. Their anti-wheelslip seems fair too.

 

[duffield]

Given urine can't really be cleaned out of carpets very effectively, you could argue that no train at all is better than a train which says it has toilets but actually doesn't on that journey.


There are toilets at Bradford Interchange, but they're currently locked out of use as part of the issues that have been found with the building. They may be out of use for some time as the car park and bus interchange are completely closed to the public.

I'm sure I saw a comment that there are no toilets available at Forster Square either, but I can't find it. Do you know if it's true? I'm planning to go to Bradford tomorrow and hoped that at least one of the stations would have some facilities. I guess if not there will be some in the Broadway shopping centre?

 

[Starmill]

I'm sure I saw a comment that there are no toilets available at Forster Square either, but I can't find it. Do you know if it's true? I'm planning to go to Bradford tomorrow and hoped that at least one of the stations would have some facilities. I guess if not there will be some in the Broadway shopping centre?

I'm not sure if there ever have been toilets at Bradford Forster Square I'm afraid. There are some facilities in the City Park, or at a push, upstairs in Wetherspoon.

 

[Benjwri]

I'm sure I saw a comment that there are no toilets available at Forster Square either, but I can't find it. Do you know if it's true? I'm planning to go to Bradford tomorrow and hoped that at least one of the stations would have some facilities. I guess if not there will be some in the Broadway shopping centre?

There are toilets in The Broadway. Opposite Footasylum

 

[duffield]

I'm not sure if there ever have been toilets at Bradford Forster Square I'm afraid. There are some facilities in the City Park, or at a push, upstairs in Wetherspoon.

Thanks. National Rail says there are toilets at Forster Square but I certainly won't rely on it.