I was on a late running train recently that was announced would be missing out a couple of stops. One of the stops was required by a wheelchair user who had arranged for assistance to meet her there. However she now had to detrain at what was all intents and purposes a foreign station to her. She needed a ramp to enable her to get off the train, so staff were required to help. We sat there for 20 minutes before anyone turned up. Staff apologising because they had to explain to the large numbers of people detraining the reason and telling them their next available service. The train eventually departed 28 minutes after the initial message it was missing stops. Had the train carried on and called as booked, the resulatant delay would have been far less than the decision to run it fast.
Unfortunately that’s what can happen. The other solution - which may be quicker - is to overcarry the wheelchair user to the next stopping point so that they can then double back. Only a tiny % of trains have wheelchair users on board, and skipping stops saves time and reduces overall delay far more than these problems occur.
Similarly if a lift breaks down it may be necessary to take the person to the next stop along the line where a lift does work, and then they can double back.
I'm not sure what you're asking for. For every time someone refers to people with disabilities to add a qualification that it doesn't apply to everyone with a disability? I think we can all work that out. It would lead to some very convoluted sentances otherwise.
You appear to be referring to a very small subset of disabled people, those who are unable to travel independently.
Thst wasn't the point I was making. I was talking about where a disabled passenger does know that their own station and, where relevant, the trains used is accessible, and so is contrnt to operate independently.
Whatvare you suggesting? That somone who do not consider they require assistance should nevertheless book it, five days a week all year for getting to and from work, just in case a train skips a stop? That is a very poor use of resources and would take staff away from those who really need help.
If someone isn’t able to cope with disruption (whether it’s stop skipping, a fatality, a train breakdown etc.) they should consider carefully whether they are actually able to travel independently. If they are not, they should travel when accompanied, or book assistance. Surely that is obvious?
What are you suggesting? That there should be no attempt at service recovery just on the off chance someone who is severely impaired enough not to be able to adapt to a change of stopping patterns, yet is also travelling unannounced and unaccompanied, might be travelling?
I would hope all concerned, passengers and staff, would regard it as just what you do as a member of society, to help ensure the disabled person was supported appropriately to get home.
“I would hope” isn’t going to help much if it’s a DOO train at an unmanned non accessible station.
Why do you insist on defending the indefensible with the railway every single time?
I’m not, but you’re not actually addressing the points I’m making, and just moaning for the sake of it. Ironically de-staffing makes things considerably worse for many of those who rely on assistance, yet you and others advocate for it, so please don’t pretend you’re remotely concerned about the plight of those unable to travel independently!
Too often the railway fails with even very basic customer service. Too often it’s the “Carol Beer” experience. Yet you think it’s acceptable. Why?
Perhaps in your view, but in my experience the opinions of “enthusiasts” who lack perspective and enjoy moaning for the sake of it aren’t representative. If you don’t like the railway - and judging by your endless complaining about it, you really don’t - other methods of transport are available.
I think most people would regard trains calling at all stations they are advertised as doing to be a very minimum service expectation.
And the vast majority of trains do but sometimes in the real world things go wrong and it’s necessary to recover the service.
Spmetimes it works. Only yesterday a morning Hounslow roundabout service picked up a 22 minute delay at Barnes station for some reason, where I was diverted past it, it made all the stops around the loop, with the following service hard behind, but then ran nonstop back to Waterloo, picking up the entire delay. keeping the next diagram intact, having effectively lost the inward service anyway, and with another right behind, that makes sense. Nonstop at Clapham Jc on the Windsor lines must be something of a novelty.
Sometimes it really can be the best solution.