• Welcome to RAIL - Back On Track Forum.
 

New Generation Rollingstock

Started by O_128, April 13, 2010, 17:16:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Gazza

Quote from: ozbob on December 11, 2017, 09:49:17 AM
Quote from: Gazza on December 11, 2017, 09:24:06 AM
Quick question, why is it considered discriminatory to have it that you can't get past the toilet module, but it's not discrimination that a wheelchair can't get up to the top deck of the 777?

IM may comment later but as I understand the bus allows for independent travel or with the assistance of a companion on lower deck.  There are some situations which are simply not accessible and would be covered under unjustifiable hardship eg. top deck of a decker.

Ok another example is that a wheelchair cannot access the back section of a normal bus because it steps up and the aisle is narrow?

So why is this different?


red dragin

Quote from: Gazza on December 11, 2017, 11:17:49 AM
Ok another example is that a wheelchair cannot access the back section of a normal bus because it steps up and the aisle is narrow?

So why is this different?

My guess would be because there is suitable access at the front. Just like wheelchairs can't access all of Suncorp Stadium or the Entertainment Centre, but there are designated spots they can access that are suitable.

techblitz

https://www.humanrights.gov.au/employers/good-practice-good-business-factsheets/disability-discrimination

QuoteWhat is 'unjustifiable hardship'?

Unjustifiable hardship also applies to other situations. The DDA says it may not be against the law to discriminate in the provision of access to goods, services or facilities if it can be demonstrated that making the adjustments required to accommodate the person would place an unjustifiable hardship on the organisation.


For example, it may not be against the law to only provide entry to a building by a set of stairs if the owner of the building can show that it would cause unjustifiable hardship to modify the building to provide wheelchair access.

the things you have mentioned gazza probably don't come under that rule......on paper its discriminatory...these buses are not purposely designed to exclude persons in a wheelchair but designed as such to either maximise space etc.....

InclusionMoves

Person needs to be able to have equivalent access of service guys. Aisle being too narrow means no access for person with disability to toilet even when in a defined disability space in other carriage next door. thats the ballgame. fact the toilet itself is non compliant is icing on the cake.

Geoff   

Quote from: red dragin on December 11, 2017, 11:30:55 AM
Quote from: Gazza on December 11, 2017, 11:17:49 AM
Ok another example is that a wheelchair cannot access the back section of a normal bus because it steps up and the aisle is narrow?

So why is this different?

My guess would be because there is suitable access at the front. Just like wheelchairs can't access all of Suncorp Stadium or the Entertainment Centre, but there are designated spots they can access that are suitable.
Geoff Trappett OAM
Phone: 0411812854
Twitter: @inclusionmoves
LinkedIn: https://au.linkedin.com/in/geofftrappettoam
Website: www.inclusionmoves.com.au
Much of our work is pro bono: https://www.paypal.me/InclusionMoves

Gazza

Does that mean if either:
-The toilet was locked off.
-The wheelchair spots were shifted to at one end of the train only so wheelchair users don't have to pass through a narrow gap.

InclusionMoves

Toilet being locked doesn't change access path not being accessible. Thats still a non compliance that needs an exemption albeit a less critical issue. Solution being looked at is second toilet in MB carriage.

All these things would be worked out through exemption process just they went early and put train on track.

Geoff 
Geoff Trappett OAM
Phone: 0411812854
Twitter: @inclusionmoves
LinkedIn: https://au.linkedin.com/in/geofftrappettoam
Website: www.inclusionmoves.com.au
Much of our work is pro bono: https://www.paypal.me/InclusionMoves

Gazza

But if the toilet is locked why is there a reason to use the narrow hallway?

ozbob

Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

InclusionMoves

Emergency exit for one. Cant get into too many details that will be subject of complaint guys,

Geoff
Quote from: Gazza on December 11, 2017, 11:59:05 AM
But if the toilet is locked why is there a reason to use the narrow hallway?
Geoff Trappett OAM
Phone: 0411812854
Twitter: @inclusionmoves
LinkedIn: https://au.linkedin.com/in/geofftrappettoam
Website: www.inclusionmoves.com.au
Much of our work is pro bono: https://www.paypal.me/InclusionMoves

Gazza

Hows it an emergency exit though?

If it were a 3 car set, then that pathway wouldn't exist whatsoever.

Therefore wouldn't you exit an NGR in exactly the same way as any current train?
So therefore it offers the same level of safety?

InclusionMoves

Not there for everyone is not discrimination not there for some that just happen to have a disability is the issue here.

Quote from: Gazza on December 11, 2017, 12:12:09 PM
Hows it an emergency exit though?

If it were a 3 car set, then that pathway wouldn't exist whatsoever.

Therefore wouldn't you exit an NGR in exactly the same way as any current train?
So therefore it offers the same level of safety?
Geoff Trappett OAM
Phone: 0411812854
Twitter: @inclusionmoves
LinkedIn: https://au.linkedin.com/in/geofftrappettoam
Website: www.inclusionmoves.com.au
Much of our work is pro bono: https://www.paypal.me/InclusionMoves

MichaelJ

Views expressed in this post are those of the individual person and are not necessarily the views of any Government Agency or third-party Contractor.

My Photo Gallery
http://www.flickr.com/jamesmp

Gazza

Ok so im getting back to the gist of my original posts re the double decker buses on the GC or indeed the back section of any regular bus where it's raised up.

Is it discrimination to have sections of the bus that can only be used by those without a disability?


I don't think there is any requirement under the law that every square meter of a public transport vehicle has to be accessible.

My understanding is that  there just has to be a barrier free way to get on and off, and a a clear path to an adequate number of wheelchair spots, and to any onboard facilities (Toilets, dining etc)

Where they have gone wrong is putting a single toilet in the middle, because it creates an impossible problem in terms of getting to the toilet from both sides... having a toilet either end would have made more sense, and someone should get their arse kicked.

However, if you took the toilet out of use, then by default the train would be fully compliant in terms of a wheelchair user being able to get on and off and having a place to park.

ozbob

Their fix is to remove the toilet - 40 trains
Two toilets other 35 trains cars 3 & 4
Clumsy and expensive how much better had they been designed with compliance in mind
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

InclusionMoves

This is copied and pasted from the governments own application for exemption to show there are a few more issues than just the big ticket items I talk about in media. Thats the problem with running campaigns you can only talk in soundbites.

Can be read in full here http://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/legal/exemptions/exemption-applications-under-disability-discrimination-act-1992-cth

1.4 Compliance issues
The following compliance issues have been identified with the current
NGR train configuration:
(a) Access paths – width:
(i) The access path between the allocated spaces in the two
accessible cars is not compliant
(ii) The access path past the unisex accessible toilet module is not
compliant due to the narrow body width of the car
(b) Access paths – extent of path:
(i) The access path does not extend between the single assisted
boarding point door and all allocated spaces and priority seats
in the accessible cars
(ii) The access path does not extend between all allocated spaces
and priority seats in the accessible cars to/from the unisex
accessible toilet module
(c) Unisex accessible toilet module:
(i) Dimensions – one dimension within the toilet module (from
the centre-line of the pan to far side wall) is non-compliant
due to the design trade-off between the size of the toilet
module and adjacent path past the toilet
(ii) Functionality – some customers using a mobility device may
not be able to carry out a fully parallel side transfer to the pan
due to the circulation space between the toilet module's
curved door and wall and pan

Quote from: Gazza on December 11, 2017, 12:42:16 PM
Ok so im getting back to the gist of my original posts re the double decker buses on the GC or indeed the back section of any regular bus where it's raised up.

Is it discrimination to have sections of the bus that can only be used by those without a disability?


I don't think there is any requirement under the law that every square meter of a public transport vehicle has to be accessible.

My understanding is that  there just has to be a barrier free way to get on and off, and a a clear path to an adequate number of wheelchair spots, and to any onboard facilities (Toilets, dining etc)

Where they have gone wrong is putting a single toilet in the middle, because it creates an impossible problem in terms of getting to the toilet from both sides... having a toilet either end would have made more sense, and someone should get their arse kicked.

However, if you took the toilet out of use, then by default the train would be fully compliant in terms of a wheelchair user being able to get on and off and having a place to park.
Geoff Trappett OAM
Phone: 0411812854
Twitter: @inclusionmoves
LinkedIn: https://au.linkedin.com/in/geofftrappettoam
Website: www.inclusionmoves.com.au
Much of our work is pro bono: https://www.paypal.me/InclusionMoves

Gazza

Another example I thought of was in Sydney on their double deck trains.
Therefore, that demonstrates the need to move the full length of the train is not required, so therefore shouldn't be a basis for complaint.

Quotecant get into too many details that will be subject of complaint guys
QuoteThats the problem with running campaigns you can only talk in soundbites.
???
You don't have to talk in soundbites on a forum though?

The application gives some decent details...my thoughts
1.4 Compliance issues
The following compliance issues have been identified with the current
NGR train configuration:
(a) Access paths – width:
(i) The access path between the allocated spaces in the two
accessible cars is not compliant


Rip out seats


(ii) The access path past the unisex accessible toilet module is not
compliant due to the narrow body width of the car

The toilets should have been at the end, since the only thing you'd need to get past them would be the driver going into the cab.


(b) Access paths – extent of path:
(i) The access path does not extend between the single assisted
boarding point door and all allocated spaces and priority seats
in the accessible cars


This is one i'm not clear about....The priority seats are next to every door. Can they just offer assistance at any door?



(ii) The access path does not extend between all allocated spaces
and priority seats in the accessible cars to/from the unisex
accessible toilet module

See above


(c) Unisex accessible toilet module:
(i) Dimensions – one dimension within the toilet module (from
the centre-line of the pan to far side wall) is non-compliant
due to the design trade-off between the size of the toilet
module and adjacent path past the toilet
Can't be solved unless the toilet is moved to the end of the train to give more space.
How far short is the dimension?


(ii) Functionality – some customers using a mobility device may
not be able to carry out a fully parallel side transfer to the pan
due to the circulation space between the toilet module's
curved door and wall and pan
I couldnt really see the point of the curved door anyway. they could fix this by making the toilet deeper so the curve isn't cutting into the manoeuvring space.


ozbob

Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

ozbob

Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

MichaelJ

Regarding the path past the toilet, there is no way to make this wider due to the limitations of narrow gauge rollingstock.

I agree with Bob and Geoff that there should have been two toilets right from the outset for redundancy.  Given the situation we are currently in, I strongly believe that passengers requiring boarding assistance should entrain only in the car that has the toilet (whether that be Car 3 or 4).  In the unlikely event that more than the train is required to accommodate more than six wheelchairs, then utilise the non-toilet car.

In Sydney, we can accommodate a wheelchair or other passenger requiring boarding assistance in any carriage (four designated spaces per car) and are directed to honour any reasonable request to sit in the passenger's preferred carriage.  Infrastructure constraints don't make this action possible in Brisbane, however.
Views expressed in this post are those of the individual person and are not necessarily the views of any Government Agency or third-party Contractor.

My Photo Gallery
http://www.flickr.com/jamesmp

InclusionMoves

Nah mate trying to answer as much as I can just very busy morning. Every media in town etc etc.Reluctance to rip out seats cause other side of politics will portray that as a poor option. At end is a little complicated as its a driver cab at both ends scenario. But agree with the sentiment that way you can use full width. Having to provide assistance at every door is logistically difficult with only raised portion of platform in middle of a lot of platforms. They fix width of toilet by widening it and putting second toilet in other carriage. Means path is even worth but better of 2 evils,

Geoff 

Quote from: Gazza on December 11, 2017, 13:33:52 PM
Another example I thought of was in Sydney on their double deck trains.
Therefore, that demonstrates the need to move the full length of the train is not required, so therefore shouldn't be a basis for complaint.

Quotecant get into too many details that will be subject of complaint guys
QuoteThats the problem with running campaigns you can only talk in soundbites.
???
You don't have to talk in soundbites on a forum though?

The application gives some decent details...my thoughts
1.4 Compliance issues
The following compliance issues have been identified with the current
NGR train configuration:
(a) Access paths – width:
(i) The access path between the allocated spaces in the two
accessible cars is not compliant


Rip out seats


(ii) The access path past the unisex accessible toilet module is not
compliant due to the narrow body width of the car

The toilets should have been at the end, since the only thing you'd need to get past them would be the driver going into the cab.


(b) Access paths – extent of path:
(i) The access path does not extend between the single assisted
boarding point door and all allocated spaces and priority seats
in the accessible cars


This is one i'm not clear about....The priority seats are next to every door. Can they just offer assistance at any door?



(ii) The access path does not extend between all allocated spaces
and priority seats in the accessible cars to/from the unisex
accessible toilet module

See above


(c) Unisex accessible toilet module:
(i) Dimensions – one dimension within the toilet module (from
the centre-line of the pan to far side wall) is non-compliant
due to the design trade-off between the size of the toilet
module and adjacent path past the toilet
Can't be solved unless the toilet is moved to the end of the train to give more space.
How far short is the dimension?


(ii) Functionality – some customers using a mobility device may
not be able to carry out a fully parallel side transfer to the pan
due to the circulation space between the toilet module's
curved door and wall and pan
I couldnt really see the point of the curved door anyway. they could fix this by making the toilet deeper so the curve isn't cutting into the manoeuvring space.
Geoff Trappett OAM
Phone: 0411812854
Twitter: @inclusionmoves
LinkedIn: https://au.linkedin.com/in/geofftrappettoam
Website: www.inclusionmoves.com.au
Much of our work is pro bono: https://www.paypal.me/InclusionMoves

Cazza

Quote from: Joshwa779 on December 11, 2017, 09:56:28 AM
Is anyone aware if the new units will operate any other services today? e.g. a City to Gold coast services?
Might have missed them this morning.

I saw NGR 706 at Central operating an Airport service around 9:45 this morning.

verbatim9

Quote from: Cazza on December 11, 2017, 14:07:54 PM
Quote from: Joshwa779 on December 11, 2017, 09:56:28 AM
Is anyone aware if the new units will operate any other services today? e.g. a City to Gold coast services?
Might have missed them this morning.

I saw NGR 706 at Central operating an Airport service around 9:45 this morning.
First service was meant to operate from next Monday. Must of been a test train?

ozbob

Quote from: verbatim9 on December 11, 2017, 14:26:41 PM
Quote from: Cazza on December 11, 2017, 14:07:54 PM
Quote from: Joshwa779 on December 11, 2017, 09:56:28 AM
Is anyone aware if the new units will operate any other services today? e.g. a City to Gold coast services?
Might have missed them this morning.

I saw NGR 706 at Central operating an Airport service around 9:45 this morning.
First service was meant to operate from next Monday. Must of been a test train?

No mate, they started revenue services today. First was NGR704 out of Varsity Lakes at 6.25am.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

verbatim9

Quote from: ozbob on December 11, 2017, 14:32:47 PM
Quote from: verbatim9 on December 11, 2017, 14:26:41 PM
Quote from: Cazza on December 11, 2017, 14:07:54 PM
Quote from: Joshwa779 on December 11, 2017, 09:56:28 AM
Is anyone aware if the new units will operate any other services today? e.g. a City to Gold coast services?
Might have missed them this morning.

I saw NGR 706 at Central operating an Airport service around 9:45 this morning.
First service was meant to operate from next Monday. Must of been a test train?

No mate, they started revenue services today. First was NGR704 out of Varsity Lakes at 6.25am.
Ah cool. Got my dates mixed up

ozbob

Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

verbatim9

Noticed he said next 30years. So lifespan has been reduced by 5 years. Must of been the 5year delay in implementing them!!??
Or were the lifespan of the trains always 30years?

ozbob

#2307
Quote from: verbatim9 on December 11, 2017, 15:10:17 PM
Noticed he said next 30years. So lifespan has been reduced by 5 years. Must of been the 5year delay in implementing them!!??
Or were the lifespan of the trains always 30years?

The operating contract was 32 years.  They have lost a couple hence 30 years.

They are trying to avoid the fact that the NGRs are not compliant.  It has been a long day media wise for IM and myself.

I think the media generally is now more aware of the issues with respect to the temporary exemption application and so forth.  An important part of the AHRC process is having an independent agency (AHRC) review the rectification plan and so forth. The initial application they made was not up scratch, hence the further information request.  They took over a month to supply  that to the AHRC.  They can blame no one but themselves in the end for their tardiness.  To basically tell the disabled community and AHRC, we don't really care for the result of the exemption we will do what we want and disregard the DDA etc.  let alone their own Accessibility Action Plan is extremely disappointing and poor management.

I think the new Transport Minister, who should be known overnight, should act to cease operation of the trains until a temporary exemption is secured.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

InclusionMoves

Mr Easy is just doing his job which he will be judged for in good time. Media will rain on their parade a little which is sad it had to come to that but I have absolutely no regrets. As Ozbob said things will now kick off with new Minister.

My focus will be on educating people who want to make a complaint on how to make one. That helps with the AHRC decision down the track and also with any commission of inquiry showing it did affect people exactly how we said it would despite government arguments 'it will all be alright in the end'. If anyone knows of a philanthropist willing to kick in some cash let me know so we can continue the fight cause as with a lot of us this is "for the love" work. Surprisingly enough going up against government reduces your job prospects somewhat :-)

Geoff     

Quote from: ozbob on December 11, 2017, 15:16:19 PM
Quote from: verbatim9 on December 11, 2017, 15:10:17 PM
Noticed he said next 30years. So lifespan has been reduced by 5 years. Must of been the 5year delay in implementing them!!??
Or were the lifespan of the trains always 30years?

The operating contract was 32 years.  They have lost a couple hence 30 years.

They are trying to avoid the fact that the NGRs are not compliant.  It has been a long day media wise for IM and myself.

I think the media generally is now more aware of the issues with respect to the temporary exemption application and so forth.

I think the new Transport Minister, who should be known overnight, should act to cease operation of the trains until a temporary exemption is secured.
Geoff Trappett OAM
Phone: 0411812854
Twitter: @inclusionmoves
LinkedIn: https://au.linkedin.com/in/geofftrappettoam
Website: www.inclusionmoves.com.au
Much of our work is pro bono: https://www.paypal.me/InclusionMoves

ozbob

Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

ozbob

Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

ozbob

^ lol - more seat complaints.  I was right on the money ...  :P
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

ozbob

Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

ozbob

Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

ozbob

^

" the seats are dreadful " 

:bg:
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky


HappyTrainGuy

Getting past the toilet is pointless in an emergency situation if the train is on its side.


What about the DAA status if there is a locomotive stuck inside it?

red dragin

Both photos from the Petrie accident?

The last day EMU05 & EMU60 where separate trains.

verbatim9

Quote from: ozbob on December 11, 2017, 18:17:54 PM
^

" the seats are dreadful " 

:bg:
The seats on Adelaide and Melbourne trains are hard too. That's how they are done nowadays.

matlock

Quote from: red dragin on December 11, 2017, 21:34:45 PM
Both photos from the Petrie accident?

The last day EMU05 & EMU60 where separate trains.
that was a guilty laugh

🡱 🡳