Portable seating / stools on trains

GlennaMaddy

I've just read the following
article from the Irish Independent

Should passengers be allowed to bring portable seating or stools on trains to avoid standing for the best part of an hour?

ixoy

No. I've been on those trains and it's always been some perfectly healthy girl reading her book, acting like she's at some damned picnic. Meanwhile passengers are crushed up against the window and - importantly - others are left standing on the station, unable to occupy the space that Her Majesty has annexed for her Throne.

Stark

They should definitely be banned on the DART, pure ignorance that is.

For trains like the Cork-Dublin train though I think exceptions should be made. If there are no seats available but the spaces between the carriages themselves are relatively empty then people should be allowed sit down on something.

hannable80

YEah good call i hate those people

Genghis

No they should not be allowed. On a commuter train there is deliberately large areas of space to allow many people standing, and thus maximise capacity. People with these chairs take up 2-3 times their allocated space; I would draw a comparison between a passenger who refuses to stop stretching out across two seats when a train is full, simply for his / her own comfort.

Besides anything else, can't these people see the danger of using these? Seats on trains are robustly bolted down for very good reasons.

Unshelved

I've got no problem with people using stools - I use one myself. I've been using the Drogheda-Dublin line for 20 years now, but in the last three years, by the time it gets to my station in the morning, there are no seats available. If there is room I put out my little stool and sit down with my book (I'm probably the woman ixoy is referring to). I've started doing this recently because I've been ill and am physically unable to stand for 40 minutes, twice a day. I do feel sorry for the people at other stations - notably Donabate - when they can't get on the train in the morning, but my point is that I'm taking up less room on a stool, than I would if I was sitting on the floor, which is my only alternative.

On the way home, I take the 5.13 from Pearse Station and use the stool as an alternative to becoming the pushing, shoving maniac that most other people transform into as soon as the doors of the train open. I simply let the stampede take place, and when it has subsided, board the train and unfold the stool. I see this as a more appealing alternative than getting elbowed in the ribs by the middle-aged, very aggressive people who usually use this train.

I also disagree with Ghengis who said that there is a large area of standing space on newer commutter trains. That is simply not true. In fact so little attention is given to standing passenters that there is very little in the way of bars etc. for standing commuters to hold on to, and most annoyingly of all, NONE of the windows can open to allow them to breathe while we are all squashed in together.

In conclusion, people with portable seats are only making the best of a bad situation. While it is not IE's fault that unrestricted development along the East coast has led to an explosion in the commuting population, the number of trains that I can take during morning rush hour has actually decreased over the last 20 years. If taking a stool with me makes my journey more comfortable, then I'm afraid that I'm going to continue doing it.

eth0_

Unshelved - do you actually get on at Drogheda? I got the 7.40am train for nearly a year and probably didn't get a seat 2-3 times in that whole year, and that was because I was legging it onto the train before it left. If you're there early for that train at least you should get a seat.

I don't have a problem with people using these seats if they aren't able to stand for 40 minutes, but they *are* dangerous if the train has to stop suddenly, as rare as that is. These seats aren't designed to be used in moving vehicles...they're for fishermen or people watching sporting events aren't they?

Two things that really annoy me on trains:
People who sit on the floor and stretch their legs out, taking up the space of about three people

Ignorant pr*cks who won't give up their seat for the elderly/disabled/pregnant women.

Unshelved - you're right about the lack of standing space on the new green commuter trains, there was always more space on the arrow, but I think the green trains are better on the whole, there are more actual seats after all!

ixoy

Originally posted by Unshelved
If taking a stool with me makes my journey more comfortable, then I'm afraid that I'm going to continue doing it.

What about when it's a prosecutable offence? I empathise that you're ill but there are others who sit who, I'm sure, are pefectly healthy. The "comfort" notion doesn't work - I mean why shouldn't we all bring seats with us then? We could all sit down and then someone could bring a portable screen and we could mount it over the unused door, grab a bag of popcorn, and turn it into a movie theatre...

GlennaMaddy

ixoy, I see at least one person faint on the train per week, they usually fit the description of the picnic'er you describe. Do you think these people should stay at home if they're not up to the journey?

Stark

I also disagree with Ghengis who said that there is a large area of standing space on newer commutter trains. That is simply not true. In fact so little attention is given to standing passenters that there is very little in the way of bars etc. for standing commuters to hold on to, and most annoyingly of all, NONE of the windows can open to allow them to breathe while we are all squashed in together.

That's a good point, I often find myself grasping for something to hold on to to stop myself from being thrown around while I'm standing in a group of people.

People who sit on the floor and stretch their legs out, taking up the space of about three people

God yeah, now that's just really taking the piss. I mean it's far more comfortable to stand than do that. I mean they must be noticing that their circulation is being cut off by sitting in that position on the hard floor, but seem to insist on taking other people's room anyway.

At the end of the day, we are talking commuter journeys here, you get on, you bear with it for whatever time it takes you to get to work, you're not settling in for a day of relaxation.

eth0_

Originally posted by ixoy
We could all sit down and then someone could bring a portable screen and we could mount it over the unused door, grab a bag of popcorn, and turn it into a movie theatre...

I think you're being ridiculous

ixoy

Originally posted by GlennaMaddy
ixoy, I see at least one person faint on the train per week, they usually fit the description of the picnic'er you describe. Do you think these people should stay at home if they're not up to the journey?

Alternatively, do you think 3 people should miss their train to convenience this one person?
I've also noticed that some carriages are less crowded than others on the Drogheda and Maynooth lines. The very front carriage appears nowhere near as bad as the sardine-fest that is the rear carriage. Maybe people could try these?
Actually, while I'm here - is there anyway that they could use proper eight carriage trains? As it is currently, it's two four-carraige trains welded together. Having four engine trains just reduces the amount of room available surely - can't they fix this in some way?

GlennaMaddy

Barry Kenny from Irish Rail was reported saying in the Irish Independant that
stools were being banned because they pose dangers to other
passengers and take up valuable standing room space.

The next day a leading UK safety expert said they posed a risk when the train needed to be evacuated

The following day Barry Kenny was reported saying in the same paper that the ban was for the comfort of passengers becuase they take up standing room and it was not a safety issue.

Unshelved

Well, I seem to have stirred up a bit of debate! First of all, no I don't commute from Drogheda but from further along the line.

Etho said that seats *are* dangerous if the train has to stop suddenly -

Indeed, however I refuse to accept that the stool is more dangerous than standing in an overcrowded train, should it stop suddenly. As I said in an earlier post, if IE was really concerned with passenger safety, standing areas in trains would be better designed. IE's real beef is with the number of passengers that they can squeeze onto trains - nor their purported safety - hence their clamp-down on stools.
They are blaming the fact that people are being left behind at stations on stool-users - maybe we are causing them to take notice of their inadequacies at peak-time service on this line.

While I genuinely have been ill, I don't think I'll be giving up my little seat when I'm better. In the end I agree with k'oriordan - the commuting experience on this passenger line is an unpleasant one, and whatever it take to make it more bearable, then I'll do it. If that means that people at other stations can't get on then I agree, that does make me selfish, but to be quite honest, I'm beyond caring.

GlennaMaddy

What's the big deal, I mean, I don't take up that much extra space, see...

Stark

lol. says it all.

eth0_

Originally posted by Unshelved

Indeed, however I refuse to accept that the stool is more dangerous than standing in an overcrowded train, should it stop suddenly.

How can you think that? You're basically sitting on three little sticks and a bit of canvas, sitting in a prone position, if the train stopped suddenly you'd be thrown onto your face, knocking over others in the process.

People who stand are at least holding onto hand rails and standing on your own two feet you're much more balanced than you are sitting on one of those stools.

I have to say though, I think Iarnrod Eireann *ARE* making an effort with the trains, there's much more rolling stock now than there was a few years ago and they're bringing more in. The problem with commuter towns is that they're exploding at such a rate, how can the transport system ever hope to keep up? You only have to look at places like London, there's a Tube literally every 2 minutes if not more frequently during peak hours, and people are still packed like sardines at rush hour!
Commuter trains apparently cannot be larger than 8 carriages, and putting on extra services at rush hour would be a logistical nightmare and probably make the Dublin/Dundalk line more dangerous.

The 7.40am train from Drogheda and the 17.40 from Pearse were the only trains I got that I ever found got jam packed. You always have the option of the bus....there's a bus every 15 minutes at peak from Dundalk-Dublin, I think they're pretty under used...

uberwolf

Originally posted by Unshelved
If that means that people at other stations can't get on then I agree, that does make me selfish, but to be quite honest, I'm beyond caring.

Its public transport, not you and some public.

Yes the service is far from adequate, but you're making other peoples less adequate by your actions.

RicardoSmith

In the past year I've seen about 3 people faint on the Maynooth train. Its generally packed most of the time. It was like that 10yrs ago and its like that now. It was never on time then, and its never on time now. As far as I can see its ever man for himself what ever form of transport system you use. Put pressure on your local politicans to improve the system. Thats the only way to get progress. Ultimately unless you are on foot or on 2 wheels theres no way of knowing how long any journey will take. Personally I only take the train off peak. Since its not if there'll be an accident, its when. They are dangerously overcrowded.

lowlands

Today it is stools, tomorrow they will ban Fat people. Cos they take up standing space for 2 to 3 normal people, and they are a serious safety hazard in an emergency stop.

RicardoSmith

On occassion in the past I've had to use the baggage car with 30 or 40 other people. Theres nothing to hold on to at all. You can see how they'd be worried about a couple of people with fold up stools...

Victor

Originally posted by lowlands
Today it is stools, tomorrow they will ban Fat people. Cos they take up standing space for 2 to 3 normal people, and they are a serious safety hazard in an emergency stop.

Fat people are a self-unloading safety hazrd, stools are not. Would you accept luggage in the aisle?

RicardoSmith

Originally posted by Victor
Fat people are a self-unloading safety hazrd, stools are not. Would you accept luggage in the aisle?

You couldn't get a wafer thin mint in the aisle of the trains I'm on.

lowlands

Fat people are a self-unloading safety hazard, stools are not.

Force=Mass*Acceleration, in a crash the mass makes all the difference. one fat bloke therefore is potentially much more dangerous then a lady on a stool.

Would you accept luggage in the aisle?

Would you refuse somebody traveling with a suitcase during rushour? That will be fun once/if the airport link opens.
What about the elderly or disabled, they would also hold up everybody in a mad dash to the exit in case of emergency.

In other words, I think this safety angle is complete nonsense.

More people = more money.

RicardoSmith

Since theres no seat belts on a train, everything and everyone becomes a missile in the event of a crash. If theres stuff in an overhead rack that all comes down too. Then you have about 100 standing aswell.

But hey lets ban the 4 people with stools.

GlennaMaddy

Seatbelts could easily be provided on trains, they would to make a difference in a crash.
There was a crash under the Severn tunnel in the UK some years ago, people who were sitting in seats that faced the right direction sufferred minor injuries while people seated facing the opposite direction suffered massive injuries after being thrown from their seats. The 'right direction' depends on if your train is hit from behind or runs into something in its path. There were no standing pasengers, or people on stools, but the evidence shows sitting, standing or stooling your f**ked either way.

The stools as projedtiles argument is nonsence, I'd be more worried about baggage flying from rails or on the rails

The evacuation of the carriage is nonsense too, if somebody left their stool behind they would be evacuating in a panic, if such panic occurred you'd be more likely to be injured by a crush or trampeling.

If you hear Irish Rail shouting about their great safety record, don't believe it, they've had many near misses which they have denied. The drivers union, ILDA, made public many incidents and we all remember the freight carriages that fell through the bridge in Munster somewhere

DadaKopf

I've got no problem with people using stools - I use one myself.

This is exactly why it should be banned.

Victor

Regarding luggage in the event of an accident, why do you think they have banned heavy items from overhead racks?

Originally posted by Unshelved
I've been using the Drogheda-Dublin line for 20 years now

Ever think of moving?

In the event of a crush, who is going to come out worst?

Victor

Originally posted by lowlands
Force=Mass*Acceleration, in a crash the mass makes all the difference. one fat bloke therefore is potentially much more dangerous then a lady on a stool.

How about pressure = force / area? Fat people have a larger cross section and fewer projecting bones. This makes them safer in an accident (short of them performing kung-fu kicks on fellow passengers).

You are completely missing the point, in a crush / panic situation nobody is going to trip over the "fat bloke", they will trip over the sitting "lady" and/or her stool either because they can't see her, she can't move quickly enough or because she has already been crumpled to the floor.

Originally posted by lowlands
Would you refuse somebody traveling with a suitcase during rushour? That will be fun once/if the airport link opens.

What do you think luggage racks are for? Why do you think extra luggage racks are fitted to vehicles serving major transport hubs?

Originally posted by lowlands
What about the elderly or disabled, they would also hold up everybody in a mad dash to the exit in case of emergency.

Stop being a muppet. Are you condemning people for being old, disabled or otherwise mobility impaired? Wheelchair users usually occupy designated wheelchair spaces. Elderly or other such people tend to occupy seats near the door. Perhaps they be slower in leaving the train, but they would also be among the last to leave as their reaction times are likely to be slower.

Originally posted by lowlands
More people = more money.

Indeed. More money enables them to buy more trains.

nlgbbbblth

Originally posted by eth0_

Ignorant pr*cks who won't give up their seat for the elderly/disabled/pregnant women.

I'll bet most of these pr*cks have paid for their seat
the same cannot be said for the first two categories you have mentioned

Whilst I have no problem giving up my seat to a blind/pregnant/physically handicapped person I draw the line at the elderly and the "flashers" - people who seem able-bodied but have a disability card

young(er) people can feel tired too

eth0_

Originally posted by nlgbbbblth
I'll bet most of these pr*cks have paid for their seat
the same cannot be said for the first two categories you have mentioned

Wow your mother must be so proud of you, what a well mannered, caring chap you are!

Whilst I have no problem giving up my seat to a blind/pregnant/physically handicapped person I draw the line at the elderly and the "flashers" - people who seem able-bodied but have a disability card

Why? Why wouldn't a weak and elderly lady/man deserve a seat? You know, there are seats designated for the elderly and disabled, yet you still see the able bodied people sitting in them avert their gaze when someone elderly or disabled gets on...