Bikes on trains

[rareposter]

So here's a crazy crazy idea. Imagine, just imagine, and please, go with me on this for a bit, that the cyclist who had booked the cycle bay had paid some money for it. Would that change the situation at all? Do you think? Possibly?

No.
Enough people get on, it's going to be chaos anyway. Seat reservations get cancelled at a moment's notice, a couple of cancellations or delays elsewhere mean other trains get overcrowded. Even when things do actually go to plan, plenty of people will chance their luck at sitting in a reserved seat and then there's the usual awkward situation when the seat owner comes along and needs to turf out the person in the seat. Many many times, that's too awkward for a lot of people - I remember asking some old woman who'd sat in my seat to vacate it and it was made very clear that I was that bad guy in this even though it was my pre-booked seat - very much a "leave the poor old dear alone" vibe. And on one occasion I moved to another carriage altogether when "my" pre-booked seat had a collection of drunken louts in that area. Definitely not going to ask them to shift...

You get a couple of wheelchairs, some large suitcases etc and the only place for them is in the bike area, what are you going to do? There is simply nowhere else to move them to.

If you want to charge for bikes (which is a terrible idea on pretty much every level), then you need to run a baggage system like an airport and charge for all big suitcases and actually manage it effectively as per an aircraft. Never going to happen and nor should it.

[maximus meridius]

So here's a crazy crazy idea. Imagine, just imagine, and please, go with me on this for a bit, that the cyclist who had booked the cycle bay had paid some money for it. Would that change the situation at all? Do you think? Possibly?

Even when things do actually go to plan, plenty of people will chance their luck at sitting in a reserved seat and then there's the usual awkward situation when the seat owner comes along and needs to turf out the person in the seat. Many many times, that's too awkward for a lot of people...

Perhaps. But "I've paid extra for that seat" makes it a lot less "awkward", doesn't it?

So when my wife had to get the conductor to turf the young goth out of the seat she had reserved, she might have had a better chance on her own if she could say "I paid extra for that seat".

Though she would also have had a better chance if I'd been there.

Much like "I've paid extra for that bike space" stops it being "awkward" and becomes a right. Sorta thing.

[maximus meridius]

Aaaannnyyywwwaaayyy.

It's being fascinating reading everybody's wonderful thoughts about why paying for a service you are getting is such a bad idea. Thanks for the input.

It's probably best just to leave the system for taking a bike on a train as it is. It's clearly a raging success at the moment.

Or just maybe it's worth considering the words of the cyclist who actually started this thread:

I’d rather pay a fee for a guaranteed slot.

But by the sound of it he and I are weirdos, because we don't mind paying money for certainty.

Cheers.

[Tangled Metal]

Also, can all train workers sort out the luggage in cycle bays? I've rarely seen the guard enforcing luggage into racks so cycles can get on. Mostly cyclists end up hovering in the doorways when the cycle area is full of luggage

So here's a crazy crazy idea. Imagine, just imagine, and please, go with me on this for a bit, that the cyclist who had booked the cycle bay had paid some money for it. Would that change the situation at all? Do you think? Possibly?

No. Paying for it isn't the issue, control of the space isn't there. There's places allocated for luggage, passengers, disabled passengers (please let's not drag this ToC use for wheelchair users again) and cycles. Passengers sit on seats is mostly OK. Cyclists almost always try to just cycle storage areas. Luggage is the issue on the trains I use. Simply put the passengers dump their suitcases wherever there is space so long as that space takes little effort. That usually means spaces allocated for cycle or wheelchair users and the fold up seats near the doors. It also means seats next to the owners and tables, especially with primark shopping bags it seems!

If I started to see passengers putting luggage up on racks (overhead on the trains I use) then perhaps there might be a case for charging for the cycle space. Not worth paying for what doesn't exist in reality due to luggage. It's why I wonder what should be done with competing uses. Those are wheelchair users, pram users, luggage owners and cycle users. Nothing is working well for any of us on the British rail network. We're behind other European countries in this respect for sure.

[mjr]

But you can answer mine, if you can be bothered.

How many people decide not to take a train journey because they don't know if they will be allowed to take their suitcase on the train?

How many people decide not to take a train journey because booking a space for their suitcase is too complicated?

I don't think anyone knows the exact numbers, any more than we know how many people don't use trains because of uncertainty or complications of bike reservations, but we do know that some famously switched from train to car when GWR stopped running the Newquay specials which had extra space for large luggage. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-54162329 https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2023/08/no ... tival.html

I remember reading of similar problems with the similar Hitachi Intercity trains used by LNER and Lumo on the East Coast Main Line but can't remember keywords to find news stories. I'm sure I read phrases like "I'll just drive next time" from the interviewees.

So I think it's clear that there answers to both above questions are "some".

Now maybe you'd like to explain the difference between bikes and other luggage, instead of trying to "win".

Having answered those questions, can you perhaps just take some time to reflect on the way you approach this issue. And perhaps just, with the merest scintilla of humility, accept that bags and suitcases, "luggage", are not at all the same as (full size unfolding) bicycles, in regard to travelling on trains with them.

That's why your question is silly game playing. And I ain't playing it.

So far, no difference between cycles and other luggage has been explained. The only "silly game playing" and sophistry is the question-dodging and seeming attempt at Proof By Assertion of this.

[mattheus]

Aaaannnyyywwwaaayyy.

It's being fascinating reading everybody's wonderful thoughts about why paying for a service you are getting is such a bad idea. Thanks for the input.

It's probably best just to leave the system for taking a bike on a train as it is. It's clearly a raging success at the moment.

Or just maybe it's worth considering the words of the cyclist who actually started this thread:

I’d rather pay a fee for a guaranteed slot.

But by the sound of it he and I are weirdos, because we don't mind paying money for certainty.

Cheers.

Same here - happy to pay for a definite slot [but don't ask me how much ... ]. OF COURSE the current situation is complex and many things would need to be changed at once to achieve this, but that doesn't stop it being a good idea

[Tangled Metal]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know exactly what a train ticket actually buys? Does it buy your passage only or if extras included what are they? Hand luggage, suitcases, folding bikes, rigid bikes, pushchairs and child, or what?

What is the cut off for what is treated as acceptable? With folding bikes some train companies define maximum fold size and even luggage size I think. My personal view if rigid bikes are to be charged for, no issues in that, then large luggage too should be similarly charged for. Indeed if cyclists are barred access due to train being full then luggage too should have that sanction.

One trip a single guy got on with three, huge suitcases, a fourth suitcase just bigger than airline carry on, a rucksack and a tote bag. It was a very busy train and the station before cyclists had been barred from getting on due to out being busy. This one guy took up the space of two possibly three cyclists. It was ridiculous how he was allowed on.

It is a mess at times and cyclists aren't the issue on my train route most of the time.

[Cowsham]

Maybe my bike fully loaded is taking the p though.

[mjr]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know exactly what a train ticket actually buys? Does it buy your passage only or if extras included what are they? Hand luggage, suitcases, folding bikes, rigid bikes, pushchairs and child, or what?

Your "travel on the National Rail Network, as allowed by the type of Ticket" only. You don't even buy a seat, even when you have a ticket saying a seat is reserved for you. If you have a first class ticket and there is no seat in first class, I think you get a partial refund. If you have any ticket and there's not enough space for you and reasonable accompaniments to travel, I think your ticket gets opened on request to allow travel as needed to complete the journey, ignoring its restrictions.

What is the cut off for what is treated as acceptable? With folding bikes some train companies define maximum fold size and even luggage size I think. My personal view if rigid bikes are to be charged for, no issues in that, then large luggage too should be similarly charged for.

I think acceptable is left as vague as possible to give guards discretion. Nationally, some maximum luggage sizes are defined, but I think few companies define maximum fold size any more since some companies tried to set it so small that only Bromptons would pass and there were protests from owners and sellers of other folders.

I think I'd agree that all large luggage should come under the same charging structure, but I'm open to persuasion on this.

Indeed if cyclists are barred access due to train being full then luggage too should have that sanction.

One trip a single guy got on with three, huge suitcases, a fourth suitcase just bigger than airline carry on, a rucksack and a tote bag. It was a very busy train and the station before cyclists had been barred from getting on due to out being busy. This one guy took up the space of two possibly three cyclists. It was ridiculous how he was allowed on.

It is a mess at times and cyclists aren't the issue on my train route most of the time.

The guard has the legal power to tell Mr Many-bags to leave the train if there wasn't room and travel on later, quieter services.

[maximus meridius]

"The Man Who Mistook His Suitcase for a Bicycle", is the title of Oliver Sacks' less well known follow up book.

I didn't realise the problem was so widespread.

[maximus meridius]

Aaaannnyyywwwaaayyy.

It's being fascinating reading everybody's wonderful thoughts about why paying for a service you are getting is such a bad idea. Thanks for the input.

It's probably best just to leave the system for taking a bike on a train as it is. It's clearly a raging success at the moment.

Or just maybe it's worth considering the words of the cyclist who actually started this thread:

I’d rather pay a fee for a guaranteed slot.

But by the sound of it he and I are weirdos, because we don't mind paying money for certainty.

Cheers.

Same here - happy to pay for a definite slot [but don't ask me how much ... ]. OF COURSE the current situation is complex and many things would need to be changed at once to achieve this, but that doesn't stop it being a good idea

Paying money and getting something in return is not an uncommon exchange. I've already done it several times today.

"Pay us some (extra) money and you will get this"

is a definite improvement over

"You don't have to give us any extra money at all and we might give you this for free. Or we might not".

Yes, lots of things would need to change. But lots of things need to change anyway. But I don't mind paying, to take my bike on a train, if I can be sure I will be able to. Which is what I said.

[a.twiddler]

As I recall, free bikes on trains was an experiment trialled on British Rail in 1977 and it sort of never got cancelled. So free bike carriage hasn't been something that cyclists have enjoyed since Victorian times. I think certain trains such as Pullmans and the then new Inter City 125s charged half fare. Most trains then had a fairly generous guards van so it was unusual for those to be full.

Things have changed since then, and with pigeons, parcels and newspapers no longer going by train it has led to the demise of the dedicated guards compartment.

Despite this, to read of cyclists demanding to have paid cycle bookings on trains is rather like turkeys voting for Christmas, or taxpayers calling out for higher taxes. Do they really think that will get them a better service? You can reserve a seat and a cycle space now, but is there a guarantee that you'll actually get your bike on a train if the space is crammed with luggage, or an opportunist cyclist has got in there first unbooked? Just because you're paying for it, doesn't mean that anything will change. With train operating companies hell bent on making savings such as closing ticket offices, I doubt that they're too interested in improving services for cyclists. I suspect that given the opportunity, they'd rather not carry those nuisance bicycles at all.

[maximus meridius]

As I recall, free bikes on trains was an experiment trialled on British Rail in 1977 and it sort of never got cancelled. So free bike carriage hasn't been something that cyclists have enjoyed since Victorian times. I think certain trains such as Pullmans and the then new Inter City 125s charged half fare. Most trains then had a fairly generous guards van so it was unusual for those to be full.

Things have changed since then, and with pigeons, parcels and newspapers no longer going by train it has led to the demise of the dedicated guards compartment.

Despite this, to read of cyclists demanding to have paid cycle bookings on trains is rather like turkeys voting for Christmas, or taxpayers calling out for higher taxes. Do they really think that will get them a better service? You can reserve a seat and a cycle space now, but is there a guarantee that you'll actually get your bike on a train if the space is crammed with luggage, or an opportunist cyclist has got in there first unbooked? Just because you're paying for it, doesn't mean that anything will change. With train operating companies hell bent on making savings such as closing ticket offices, I doubt that they're too interested in improving services for cyclists. I suspect that given the opportunity, they'd rather not carry those nuisance bicycles at all.

"It's all terrible, everything's a mess, there's no point trying to change anything".

What on earth is wrong with you people? Seriously, it's like moaners bloomin' monthly here.

Bikes on trains is bad, at least according to many posters here, including the original poster. I'd like it to be better, and I don't mind paying if that will make it better, so that I can be sure of getting my bike on the train. That is what I said. Yes, lots of things will have to change to enable that. But things are going to have to change, one way or the other, if joined up widespread cycle commuting is going to be possible, including bike/train/bike commutes.

The more I read this forum, the more I think that people here don't actually want anything to improve, because then they won't have anything to moan about.

By the way, I'm not a turkey. But I am a taxpayer. And I think taxes should rise, including for me, to properly fund public services, especially healthcare. Not everybody is so thoroughly self interested as to resent paying for things. Like guaranteed bike spaces on trains. Or a decent public health system.

[a.twiddler]

In my many years of sporadic cycle/train use, I haven't actually had any issues in getting my bike on. If I were a more regular user, I'm sure I would be adding to the anecdotes of disgruntled cyclists here. It's the nagging uncertainty that spoils the experience rather than the experience itself. There was a time when you could get an accompanied motorcycle on a train for half fare, and I made use of that facility several times. You can't do that now.

"Pay us some (extra) money and you will get this. Or you might not" sounds more realistic to me as far as the unpredictable nature of bike/train travel is concerned, with the random unregulated volumes of luggage that could possibly take prededence over your bike space. Just because you've pre booked, whether the TOC relieved you of any money or not, probably gives you the same odds of actually travelling with your bike.

In an ideal world, many things would change but as things are, and with the current rolling stock which will no doubt be around for many years, I would rather keep my (extra) money for other things.

[maximus meridius]

In my many years of sporadic cycle/train use, I haven't actually had any issues in getting my bike on. If I were a more regular user, I'm sure I would be adding to the anecdotes of disgruntled cyclists here. It's the nagging uncertainty that spoils the experience rather than the experience itself. There was a time when you could get an accompanied motorcycle on a train for half fare, and I made use of that facility several times. You can't do that now.

"Pay us some (extra) money and you will get this. Or you might not" sounds more realistic to me as far as the unpredictable nature of bike/train travel is concerned, with the random unregulated volumes of luggage that could possibly take prededence over your bike space. Just because you've pre booked, whether the TOC relieved you of any money or not, probably gives you the same odds of actually travelling with your bike.

In an ideal world, many things would change but as things are, and with the current rolling stock which will no doubt be around for many years, I would rather keep my (extra) money for other things.

Don't you think that anything can ever change? Is all the current rolling stock frozen for ever, not capable of any adaption? Oh wait, here's what Scotrail did:

https://busandtrainuser.com/2021/11/04/ ... -explorer/

Turns out, the inside of trains can be changed to hold more bikes. I'd quite happily pay for that, if that's what it takes. Which is what I said. You wouldn't pay, you say. Well I would. Why is that so very difficult to understand, and why do you, and so many here have such a thoroughly negative attitude to the idea of paying for a service.

But wait, what is this, in the link above. A comment from, yes, an actual train driver:

A lot of staff would agree that there should be charges for taking bikes on trains (as traincrew you see “commuting” cyclists using their bikes as weapons to force their way onto busy trains far too often, with no backup ever offered if you try to intervene, and rapidly stop believing that bikes on trains is a Good Thing), but the cyclists lobby has successfully ensured that it will be politically impossible for charges to ever be reintroduced.

In the old days there was a charge for Accompanied Animals and Articles, which was half-fare up to a fairly low limit. It should be reintroduced for bikes.

Meanwhile the "cycling lobby" thinks that cycles on trains should be free, except when there should be a charge.

https://www.cyclinguk.org/briefing/taking-cycles-trains