robgul wrote:I've asked Eurostar for the dimensions of the boxes that they will provide* ...
From the link in the OP
Eurostar's press officer, Rob Haycocks, also clarified internal dimensions of the provided boxes as 126 x 79 x 25cm.
robgul wrote:I've asked Eurostar for the dimensions of the boxes that they will provide* ...
PH wrote:robgul wrote:I've asked Eurostar for the dimensions of the boxes that they will provide* ...
From the link in the OP
Eurostar's press officer, Rob Haycocks, also clarified internal dimensions of the provided boxes as 126 x 79 x 25cm.
mjr wrote:So, as suspected, even a road bike will have to have its mudguards and racks removed and I think 79cm is short enough that seat posts will need removing from all but the shortest bikes.
mjr wrote:Where are they going to stack them, though? The seating plan on http://www.seat61.com shows no luggage space on the new trains except for the racks in the passenger areas.
Good Morning,
Thank you for contacting us regarding our cycle policy.
I would first like to reassure you that the luggage policy has been designed to use the space on our trains more flexibly for the benefit of all customers, including cyclists.
As you correctly point out, bikes will now need to be carried in a bike box. Any-sized bike boxes will be accepted, and Eurostar will happily provide a padded bike box to customers who would rather not travel with one. Please also rest assured that our staff are trained and ready to assist to ensure it is a seamless experience for our passengers.
When packaged in this way, it means that we can look at carrying more bikes than before depending on the demand from passengers, which I’m sure you will agree is good news for the cycling community.
I hope this will help clarify the situation, and reassure you that our cycling customers continue to be important to us.
Kind regards,
Eurostar Traveller Care
Audax67 wrote:New intelligence from Eurostar:Good Morning,
Thank you for contacting us regarding our cycle policy.
I would first like to reassure you that the luggage policy has been designed to use the space on our trains more flexibly for the benefit of all customers, including cyclists.
As you correctly point out, bikes will now need to be carried in a bike box. Any-sized bike boxes will be accepted, and Eurostar will happily provide a padded bike box to customers who would rather not travel with one. Please also rest assured that our staff are trained and ready to assist to ensure it is a seamless experience for our passengers.
When packaged in this way, it means that we can look at carrying more bikes than before depending on the demand from passengers, which I’m sure you will agree is good news for the cycling community.
I hope this will help clarify the situation, and reassure you that our cycling customers continue to be important to us.
Kind regards,
Eurostar Traveller Care
iviehoff wrote:mjr wrote:I looked at http://www.ORR.gov.uk and I can't figure out what even requires them to take luggage at all! Is there a kindly railway expert here?
ORR is the wrong place to look. A train company's operating contract (franchise agreement) is with a funding body such as DfT, Scottish govt, etc. These vary considerably from case to case.
I've just downloaded Virgin Trains' franchise agreement https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... eement.pdf and the word bicycle does not appear in all 449 pages of it. The word "luggage" appears only once, where it clarifies that a fare can be charged for luggage.
However in Abellio Scotrail's franchise agreement, extending to over 600 pages, http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/sys ... ersion.pdf the word bicycle appears quite frequently. Condition 9 is entirely about bicycles. But ultimately all they really require is that so far as is reasonably practical, subject to availability, make reasonable provision for carriage of bicycles (unfortunately it isn't letting me copy the exact wording), which as we know means very little. Abellio have not always been very open-minded down at Anglia, where they brought in more restrictive rules than the preceding franchisee in relation to Stansted Express services. Which since they are nearly always very empty when I travel on them, is unnecessary.
Psamathe wrote:Re: Rail Regulationiviehoff wrote:mjr wrote:I looked at http://www.ORR.gov.uk and I can't figure out what even requires them to take luggage at all! Is there a kindly railway expert here?
ORR is the wrong place to look. A train company's operating contract (franchise agreement) is with a funding body such as DfT, Scottish govt, etc. These vary considerably from case to case.
I've just downloaded Virgin Trains' franchise agreement https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... eement.pdf and the word bicycle does not appear in all 449 pages of it. The word "luggage" appears only once, where it clarifies that a fare can be charged for luggage.
However in Abellio Scotrail's franchise agreement, extending to over 600 pages, http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/sys ... ersion.pdf the word bicycle appears quite frequently. Condition 9 is entirely about bicycles. But ultimately all they really require is that so far as is reasonably practical, subject to availability, make reasonable provision for carriage of bicycles (unfortunately it isn't letting me copy the exact wording), which as we know means very little. Abellio have not always been very open-minded down at Anglia, where they brought in more restrictive rules than the preceding franchisee in relation to Stansted Express services. Which since they are nearly always very empty when I travel on them, is unnecessary.
I'm surprised the various cycle campaigning organisations have not been campaigning to ensure that the various rail contracts (which come-up for re-tendering periodically) do not include requirements to carry bikes and specify minimum cycle facilities, etc. I can see a lot of "transport" trips where people would take bikes on trains (e.g. into city centres) and cycle the shorter sections (home<->station, station<-> work). OK, it might be shorter distances but would help lower car volumes, pollution, parking needs/problems/etc.. More bikes as transport than bikes for sport.
(Ok, people could buy folders but a lot of people would probably not go and buy a new bike on-top of their already rather expensive season ticket - particularly when they have a perfectly good bike sitting unused at home ...)
Ian
Psamathe wrote:I'm surprised the various cycle campaigning organisations have not been campaigning to ensure that the various rail contracts (which come-up for re-tendering periodically) do not include requirements to carry bikes and specify minimum cycle facilities, etc.
(Ok, people could buy folders but a lot of people would probably not go and buy a new bike on-top of their already rather expensive season ticket - particularly when they have a perfectly good bike sitting unused at home ...)