Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <aqdjsgdh9prtsa9j6tnh1ftpuegvhsk047@4ax.com>, at 12:53:57 on
> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 12:41:23 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <igbjsg5n8d3853j22hrs30erj0mvr0abp4@4ax.com>, at 12:17:01 on
>>> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:49:13 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <sq5k6p$90v$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:29 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <sq497o$41b$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:00:08 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <sq2bin$a4s$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:27:51 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Somewhere there's a list (updated from time to time) of train types
>>>>>>>>>>> which are exempt from DDA rules,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sounds interesting! Where do I find this list?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I found it when looking at SIs issued around the time some SWT
>>>>>>>>> EMUs were given a dispensation to carry on operating (the issue
>>>>>>>>> in that case being on-train PIS in too small a font). Ten years ago, perhaps?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course, since then, we've had much more serious dispensations for
>>>>>>>>> things like HSTs without accessible toilets.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That wasn't the problem with the HSTs, which have long had accessible
>>>>>>>> toilets.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What was the problem with the HSTs? (I have to say I don't think I ever
>>>>>>> saw [inside] one with an accessible toilet, although Scotrail may have
>>>>>>> retro-fitted them, and I have seen one of their HSTs, albeit the coaches
>>>>>>> in the rake pre-refurbishment).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HSTs have had accessible toilets, though perhaps not meeting the letter of
>>>>>> the current regulations, for at least 20 years.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been looking at the derogation for Scotrail's pre-refurbished HSTs,
>>>>> and it lists the following aspects:
>>>>>
>>>>> 5.3.2.4 Accessible toilet
>>>>>
>>>>> Does that mean they were not accessible at all, or that not all of them
>>>>> were accessible, or is that just a subtitle?
>>>>>
>>>>> But going on...
>>>>>
>>>>> 5.3.2.2 (2) A visual and tactile (or audible) indication given inside
>>>>> and outside the toilet to indicate when locked.
>>>>> 5.3.2.6 (3) Visual indication that call for aid has been operated
>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (2) Standard toilet door width
>>>>> 5.3.2.2(3),(4) Force to operate any door control device, and other
>>>>> equipment inside the toilet compartment and contrast
>>>>> of toilet control devices.
>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (3) Provision of a fixed vertical and/or horizontal handrail
>>>>> adjacent to the toilet seat and the wash basin.
>>>>> 5.3.2.4 (9) Height of toilet seat
>>>>> 5.3.2.5 (1-2) Baby change table - height and load bearing
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing about retention tanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/upl
>>>>> oads/attachment_data/file/953089/scotrail-short-form-hsts-
>>>>> 2020-dispensation-letter-timed-document.pdf>
>>>>
>>>> As I've told you already, retention tanks are a separate aspect from
>>>> accessibility.
>>>
>>> Do you think that's possibly why I mentioned they weren't on the
>>> accessibility list?
>>
>> No, it's because you seemed surprised that they weren't.
>
> Is it possible that's why I asked "What was the problem with the HSTs?"
> and didn't get much of a reply.

Huh? I told you exactly what was wrong with them, correcting your error
that it was accessible toilets.

>
> And all we've really established is that at least one HST has "had an
> accessible toilet for 20yrs", and no detail about the pace of rollout.
> Apart from two lots of anecdata about MML HSTs, which is roughly where I
> came in.

I'd be amazed if any HSTs have run without an accessible toilet for at
least a decade.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sqcfv9$27g$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:44:09 on Mon, 27 Dec
> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sq1lid$roa$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:12:13 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> Even when many of those emails have 20-page Word attachments, hat
>>>>> require editing and sending back?
>>>>
>>>> For the umpteenth time NOBODY is suggesting this other than you.
>>>
>>> There's at least one person who has said they haven't needed a desktop,
>>> or printed anything out, for years.
>>
>> Perhaps that person has no need to edit 20 page word documents, or perhaps
>> they have an iPad as well as a phone.
>
> Indeed, different people have different requirements. What's a bit
> annoying is being pilloried for pointing out that one size doesn't
> fit all.

Which nobody disputed, so nobody pilloried you for saying it.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sqcfv9$27g$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:44:09 on Mon, 27 Dec
>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sq1lid$roa$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:12:13 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>> Even when many of those emails have 20-page Word attachments, hat
>>>>>> require editing and sending back?
>>>>>
>>>>> For the umpteenth time NOBODY is suggesting this other than you.
>>>>
>>>> There's at least one person who has said they haven't needed a desktop,
>>>> or printed anything out, for years.
>>>
>>> Perhaps that person has no need to edit 20 page word documents, or perhaps
>>> they have an iPad as well as a phone.
>>
>> Indeed, different people have different requirements. What's a bit
>> annoying is being pilloried for pointing out that one size doesn't
>> fit all.
>
> Which nobody disputed, so nobody pilloried you for saying it.
>
>

Only Roland keeps raising the issue of editing 20 page Word documents on a
phone. Nobody else has ever suggested doing it. The issue has always been
can you easily receive a pdf rail ticket on your phone.

In message <sqcl8i$5jt$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:14:26 on Mon, 27 Dec
2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sqcfv9$27g$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:44:09 on Mon, 27 Dec
>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sq1lid$roa$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:12:13 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Even when many of those emails have 20-page Word attachments, hat
>>>>>>> require editing and sending back?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For the umpteenth time NOBODY is suggesting this other than you.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's at least one person who has said they haven't needed a desktop,
>>>>> or printed anything out, for years.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps that person has no need to edit 20 page word documents, or perhaps
>>>> they have an iPad as well as a phone.
>>>
>>> Indeed, different people have different requirements. What's a bit
>>> annoying is being pilloried for pointing out that one size doesn't
>>> fit all.
>>
>> Which nobody disputed, so nobody pilloried you for saying it.
>
>Only Roland keeps raising the issue of editing 20 page Word documents on a
>phone. Nobody else has ever suggested doing it. The issue has always been
>can you easily receive a pdf rail ticket on your phone.

And I have been routinely pilloried for suggesting that this doesn't
suit me.

Noting also, that no-one (apart from myself) has come up with any
suggested remedies for the startling increase in penalty fares caused by
the train companys' failure to keep their TVMs in working order.

Other than saying everyone should expect to equip themselves to buy and
receive (as an emailed PDF) a mobile phone ticket.
--
Roland Perry

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sqcfv9$27g$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:44:09 on Mon, 27 Dec
>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sq1lid$roa$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:12:13 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Even when many of those emails have 20-page Word attachments, hat
>>>>>>> require editing and sending back?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For the umpteenth time NOBODY is suggesting this other than you.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's at least one person who has said they haven't needed a desktop,
>>>>> or printed anything out, for years.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps that person has no need to edit 20 page word documents, or perhaps
>>>> they have an iPad as well as a phone.
>>>
>>> Indeed, different people have different requirements. What's a bit
>>> annoying is being pilloried for pointing out that one size doesn't
>>> fit all.
>>
>> Which nobody disputed, so nobody pilloried you for saying it.
>>
>>
>
> Only Roland keeps raising the issue of editing 20 page Word documents on a
> phone. Nobody else has ever suggested doing it. The issue has always been
> can you easily receive a pdf rail ticket on your phone.

Yup. I assume Roland was embarrassed to discover that he was alone in
finding this challenging, so he 'moved the goal posts' to something most
people would avoid doing: editing long Word documents on a phone.

In message <sqcjir$prm$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:45:47 on Mon, 27 Dec
2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <aqdjsgdh9prtsa9j6tnh1ftpuegvhsk047@4ax.com>, at 12:53:57 on
>> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 12:41:23 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <igbjsg5n8d3853j22hrs30erj0mvr0abp4@4ax.com>, at 12:17:01 on
>>>> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:49:13 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>><roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <sq5k6p$90v$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:29 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <sq497o$41b$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:00:08 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <sq2bin$a4s$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:27:51 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>>>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Somewhere there's a list (updated from time to time) of train types
>>>>>>>>>>>> which are exempt from DDA rules,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds interesting! Where do I find this list?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I found it when looking at SIs issued around the time some SWT
>>>>>>>>>> EMUs were given a dispensation to carry on operating (the issue
>>>>>>>>>> in that case being on-train PIS in too small a font). Ten
>>>>>>>>>>years ago, perhaps?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Of course, since then, we've had much more serious dispensations for
>>>>>>>>>> things like HSTs without accessible toilets.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That wasn't the problem with the HSTs, which have long had accessible
>>>>>>>>> toilets.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What was the problem with the HSTs? (I have to say I don't
>>>>>>>>think I ever saw [inside] one with an accessible toilet,
>>>>>>>>although Scotrail may have retro-fitted them, and I have seen
>>>>>>>>one of their HSTs, albeit the coaches in the rake pre-refurbishment).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> HSTs have had accessible toilets, though perhaps not meeting the
>>>>>>>letter of the current regulations, for at least 20 years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been looking at the derogation for Scotrail's pre-refurbished HSTs,
>>>>>> and it lists the following aspects:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5.3.2.4 Accessible toilet
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does that mean they were not accessible at all, or that not all of them
>>>>>> were accessible, or is that just a subtitle?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But going on...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5.3.2.2 (2) A visual and tactile (or audible) indication given inside
>>>>>> and outside the toilet to indicate when locked.
>>>>>> 5.3.2.6 (3) Visual indication that call for aid has been operated
>>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (2) Standard toilet door width
>>>>>> 5.3.2.2(3),(4) Force to operate any door control device, and other
>>>>>> equipment inside the toilet compartment and contrast
>>>>>> of toilet control devices.
>>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (3) Provision of a fixed vertical and/or horizontal handrail
>>>>>> adjacent to the toilet seat and the wash basin.
>>>>>> 5.3.2.4 (9) Height of toilet seat
>>>>>> 5.3.2.5 (1-2) Baby change table - height and load bearing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing about retention tanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/upl
>>>>>> oads/attachment_data/file/953089/scotrail-short-form-hsts-
>>>>>> 2020-dispensation-letter-timed-document.pdf>
>>>>>
>>>>> As I've told you already, retention tanks are a separate aspect from
>>>>> accessibility.
>>>>
>>>> Do you think that's possibly why I mentioned they weren't on the
>>>> accessibility list?
>>>
>>> No, it's because you seemed surprised that they weren't.
>>
>> Is it possible that's why I asked "What was the problem with the HSTs?"
>> and didn't get much of a reply.
>
>Huh? I told you exactly what was wrong with them,

Did you say "exactly" that? I don't recall you listing baby change
tables, or 'Width of wheelchair space tipping screen' for example.

>correcting your error that it was accessible toilets.

If not including accessible toilets, why the need for the dispensation
to Scotrail.

>> And all we've really established is that at least one HST has "had an
>> accessible toilet for 20yrs", and no detail about the pace of rollout.
>> Apart from two lots of anecdata about MML HSTs, which is roughly where I
>> came in.
>
>I'd be amazed if any HSTs have run without an accessible toilet for at
>least a decade.

Apart perhaps for those ones from Scotrail?

And please cite your source for those which were installed 20yrs ago
being up to modern standards. Just having a big circular sliding door
isn't sufficient.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sqcjir$prm$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:45:47 on Mon, 27 Dec
> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <aqdjsgdh9prtsa9j6tnh1ftpuegvhsk047@4ax.com>, at 12:53:57 on
>>> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 12:41:23 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <igbjsg5n8d3853j22hrs30erj0mvr0abp4@4ax.com>, at 12:17:01 on
>>>>> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:49:13 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <sq5k6p$90v$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:29 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <sq497o$41b$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:00:08 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <sq2bin$a4s$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:27:51 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Somewhere there's a list (updated from time to time) of train types
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which are exempt from DDA rules,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds interesting! Where do I find this list?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I found it when looking at SIs issued around the time some SWT
>>>>>>>>>>> EMUs were given a dispensation to carry on operating (the issue
>>>>>>>>>>> in that case being on-train PIS in too small a font). Ten
>>>>>>>>>>> years ago, perhaps?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, since then, we've had much more serious dispensations for
>>>>>>>>>>> things like HSTs without accessible toilets.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That wasn't the problem with the HSTs, which have long had accessible
>>>>>>>>>> toilets.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What was the problem with the HSTs? (I have to say I don't
>>>>>>>>> think I ever saw [inside] one with an accessible toilet,
>>>>>>>>> although Scotrail may have retro-fitted them, and I have seen
>>>>>>>>> one of their HSTs, albeit the coaches in the rake pre-refurbishment).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> HSTs have had accessible toilets, though perhaps not meeting the
>>>>>>>> letter of the current regulations, for at least 20 years.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've been looking at the derogation for Scotrail's pre-refurbished HSTs,
>>>>>>> and it lists the following aspects:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 5.3.2.4 Accessible toilet
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does that mean they were not accessible at all, or that not all of them
>>>>>>> were accessible, or is that just a subtitle?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But going on...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 5.3.2.2 (2) A visual and tactile (or audible) indication given inside
>>>>>>> and outside the toilet to indicate when locked.
>>>>>>> 5.3.2.6 (3) Visual indication that call for aid has been operated
>>>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (2) Standard toilet door width
>>>>>>> 5.3.2.2(3),(4) Force to operate any door control device, and other
>>>>>>> equipment inside the toilet compartment and contrast
>>>>>>> of toilet control devices.
>>>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (3) Provision of a fixed vertical and/or horizontal handrail
>>>>>>> adjacent to the toilet seat and the wash basin.
>>>>>>> 5.3.2.4 (9) Height of toilet seat
>>>>>>> 5.3.2.5 (1-2) Baby change table - height and load bearing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nothing about retention tanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/upl
>>>>>>> oads/attachment_data/file/953089/scotrail-short-form-hsts-
>>>>>>> 2020-dispensation-letter-timed-document.pdf>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I've told you already, retention tanks are a separate aspect from
>>>>>> accessibility.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you think that's possibly why I mentioned they weren't on the
>>>>> accessibility list?
>>>>
>>>> No, it's because you seemed surprised that they weren't.
>>>
>>> Is it possible that's why I asked "What was the problem with the HSTs?"
>>> and didn't get much of a reply.
>>
>> Huh? I told you exactly what was wrong with them,
>
> Did you say "exactly" that? I don't recall you listing baby change
> tables, or 'Width of wheelchair space tipping screen' for example.

Stop being so silly.

>
>> correcting your error that it was accessible toilets.
>
> If not including accessible toilets, why the need for the dispensation
> to Scotrail.

That presumably was for the pre-refurb sets?

>
>>> And all we've really established is that at least one HST has "had an
>>> accessible toilet for 20yrs", and no detail about the pace of rollout.
>>> Apart from two lots of anecdata about MML HSTs, which is roughly where I
>>> came in.
>>
>> I'd be amazed if any HSTs have run without an accessible toilet for at
>> least a decade.
>
> Apart perhaps for those ones from Scotrail?

Did you check each carriage?

>
> And please cite your source for those which were installed 20yrs ago
> being up to modern standards. Just having a big circular sliding door
> isn't sufficient.

Of course they wouldn't have complied with the latest standards. None
fitted at that time would.

On 27/12/2021 13:25, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <aqdjsgdh9prtsa9j6tnh1ftpuegvhsk047@4ax.com>, at 12:53:57 on
> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 12:41:23 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <igbjsg5n8d3853j22hrs30erj0mvr0abp4@4ax.com>, at 12:17:01 on
>>> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:49:13 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <sq5k6p$90v$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:29 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <sq497o$41b$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:00:08 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <sq2bin$a4s$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:27:51 on Thu, 23
>>>>>>>>> Dec
>>>>>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Somewhere there's a list (updated from time to time) of train
>>>>>>>>>>> types
>>>>>>>>>>> which are exempt from DDA rules,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sounds interesting! Where do I find this list?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I found it when looking at SIs issued around the time some SWT
>>>>>>>>> EMUs were  given a dispensation to carry on operating (the
>>>>>>>>> issue in that case being  on-train PIS in too small a font).
>>>>>>>>> Ten years ago, perhaps?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course, since then, we've had much more serious
>>>>>>>>> dispensations for
>>>>>>>>> things like HSTs without accessible toilets.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That wasn't the problem with the HSTs, which have long had
>>>>>>>> accessible
>>>>>>>> toilets.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What was the problem with the HSTs? (I have to say I don't think
>>>>>>> I ever
>>>>>>> saw [inside] one with an accessible toilet, although Scotrail may
>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>> retro-fitted them, and I have seen one of their HSTs, albeit the
>>>>>>> coaches
>>>>>>> in the rake pre-refurbishment).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HSTs have had accessible toilets, though perhaps not meeting the
>>>>>> letter of
>>>>>> the current regulations, for at least 20 years.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been looking at the derogation for Scotrail's pre-refurbished
>>>>> HSTs,
>>>>> and it lists the following aspects:
>>>>>
>>>>> 5.3.2.4 Accessible toilet
>>>>>
>>>>> Does that mean they were not accessible at all, or that not all of
>>>>> them
>>>>> were accessible, or is that just a subtitle?
>>>>>
>>>>> But going on...
>>>>>
>>>>> 5.3.2.2 (2) A visual and tactile (or audible) indication given inside
>>>>>            and outside the toilet to indicate when locked.
>>>>> 5.3.2.6 (3) Visual indication that call for aid has been operated
>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (2) Standard toilet door width
>>>>> 5.3.2.2(3),(4) Force to operate any door control device, and other
>>>>>               equipment inside the toilet compartment and contrast
>>>>>               of toilet control devices.
>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (3) Provision of a fixed vertical and/or horizontal handrail
>>>>>            adjacent to the toilet seat and the wash basin.
>>>>> 5.3.2.4 (9) Height of toilet seat
>>>>> 5.3.2.5 (1-2) Baby change table - height and load bearing
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing about retention tanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/upl
>>>>>
>>>>> oads/attachment_data/file/953089/scotrail-short-form-hsts-
>>>>> 2020-dispensation-letter-timed-document.pdf>
>>>>
>>>> As I've told you already, retention tanks are a separate aspect from
>>>> accessibility.
>>>
>>> Do you think that's possibly why I mentioned they weren't on the
>>> accessibility list?
>>
>> No, it's because you seemed surprised that they weren't.
>
> Is it possible that's why I asked "What was the problem with the HSTs?"
> and didn't get much of a reply.
>
> And all we've really established is that at least one HST has "had an
> accessible toilet for 20yrs", and no detail about the pace of rollout.
> Apart from two lots of anecdata about MML HSTs, which is roughly where I
> came in.

Some HSTs have had disabled toilets for a number of years but they don't
meet the present definition of an accessible toilet and may never have
done so.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sqcl8i$5jt$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:14:26 on Mon, 27 Dec
> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sqcfv9$27g$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:44:09 on Mon, 27 Dec
>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <sq1lid$roa$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:12:13 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Even when many of those emails have 20-page Word attachments, hat
>>>>>>>> require editing and sending back?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the umpteenth time NOBODY is suggesting this other than you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's at least one person who has said they haven't needed a desktop,
>>>>>> or printed anything out, for years.
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps that person has no need to edit 20 page word documents, or perhaps
>>>>> they have an iPad as well as a phone.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, different people have different requirements. What's a bit
>>>> annoying is being pilloried for pointing out that one size doesn't
>>>> fit all.
>>>
>>> Which nobody disputed, so nobody pilloried you for saying it.
>>
>> Only Roland keeps raising the issue of editing 20 page Word documents on a
>> phone. Nobody else has ever suggested doing it. The issue has always been
>> can you easily receive a pdf rail ticket on your phone.
>
> And I have been routinely pilloried for suggesting that this doesn't
> suit me.
>
> Noting also, that no-one (apart from myself) has come up with any
> suggested remedies for the startling increase in penalty fares caused by
> the train companys' failure to keep their TVMs in working order.
>
> Other than saying everyone should expect to equip themselves to buy and
> receive (as an emailed PDF) a mobile phone ticket.

I’m entirely with you about the threatening nature of penalty fare
publicity, and yes TVMs should either work, or be withdrawn and be replaced
with a suitable alternative. Perhaps on lightly used lines e-ticketing
should be encouraged with an on train ticket machine for those who can’t
use a phone.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sq5k6q$90v$2@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:30 on Fri, 24 Dec
> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sq1me1$1a3$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:26:57 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> one of the things which doesn't fit well on a phone is emailed PDFs
>>>>> of travel tickets, when an in-app delivery would be entirely acceptable
>>>>> (and in turn wouldn't work very well on a laptop, unless you have an
>>>>> Android phone emulator on it, which I suspect is slightly unusual, but
>>>>> is how many developers test their products).
>>>>
>>>> I'd rather receive emailed PDFs than have to have a unique app installed
>>>> for every vendor.
>>>
>>> I wonder what happened to the "pass" system (as implemented on the
>>> PassWallet, and other, apps). That at least gathers all the e-tickets in
>>> one place, whereas I don't regard "scattered through my email spool" as
>>> 'one place'.
>>
>> ISTR you complained that extracting them from email to pass wallet was too
>> much of a chore.
>
> The chore is having to extract them at all. Why can't they be pushed to
> the app? Just like ITSO tickets are pushed to Apps, for local transfer
> transfer to a card (which is fairly straightforward).

I’m reliably informed by someone who works in LNER ticketing HQ that their
app delivers e-tickets to their app directly (as well as by email), both
for LNER trips and other TOCs where e-tickets are available. So I await the
next set of objections…..

On 27/12/2021 18:15, Tweed wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sq5k6q$90v$2@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:30 on Fri, 24 Dec
>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sq1me1$1a3$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:26:57 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>> one of the things which doesn't fit well on a phone is emailed PDFs
>>>>>> of travel tickets, when an in-app delivery would be entirely acceptable
>>>>>> (and in turn wouldn't work very well on a laptop, unless you have an
>>>>>> Android phone emulator on it, which I suspect is slightly unusual, but
>>>>>> is how many developers test their products).
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd rather receive emailed PDFs than have to have a unique app installed
>>>>> for every vendor.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder what happened to the "pass" system (as implemented on the
>>>> PassWallet, and other, apps). That at least gathers all the e-tickets in
>>>> one place, whereas I don't regard "scattered through my email spool" as
>>>> 'one place'.
>>>
>>> ISTR you complained that extracting them from email to pass wallet was too
>>> much of a chore.
>>
>> The chore is having to extract them at all. Why can't they be pushed to
>> the app? Just like ITSO tickets are pushed to Apps, for local transfer
>> transfer to a card (which is fairly straightforward).
>
> I’m reliably informed by someone who works in LNER ticketing HQ that their
> app delivers e-tickets to their app directly (as well as by email), both
> for LNER trips and other TOCs where e-tickets are available. So I await the
> next set of objections…..
>
So with TfW as ell that's two companies that do this. Any more bids?

In message <sqcvsn$hr6$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:15:51 on Mon, 27 Dec
2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sq5k6q$90v$2@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:30 on Fri, 24 Dec
>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sq1me1$1a3$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:26:57 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>> one of the things which doesn't fit well on a phone is emailed PDFs
>>>>>> of travel tickets, when an in-app delivery would be entirely acceptable
>>>>>> (and in turn wouldn't work very well on a laptop, unless you have an
>>>>>> Android phone emulator on it, which I suspect is slightly unusual, but
>>>>>> is how many developers test their products).
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd rather receive emailed PDFs than have to have a unique app installed
>>>>> for every vendor.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder what happened to the "pass" system (as implemented on the
>>>> PassWallet, and other, apps). That at least gathers all the e-tickets in
>>>> one place, whereas I don't regard "scattered through my email spool" as
>>>> 'one place'.
>>>
>>> ISTR you complained that extracting them from email to pass wallet was too
>>> much of a chore.
>>
>> The chore is having to extract them at all. Why can't they be pushed to
>> the app? Just like ITSO tickets are pushed to Apps, for local transfer
>> transfer to a card (which is fairly straightforward).
>
>I’m reliably informed by someone who works in LNER ticketing HQ that their
>app delivers e-tickets to their app directly (as well as by email), both
>for LNER trips and other TOCs where e-tickets are available. So I await the
>next set of objections…..

Oh do keep up. I posted a long and detailed report of how I successfully
bought a ticket using the GWR app, and it was delivered to my phone
without the intermediate step of being a PDF. During which I claim to
have debunked your assertions that (a) the in-app ticket is a rendering
of the pdf (which they send separately as belt-and-braces) and (b) that
it's possible to screen-shot the in-app ticket.

But one of my long term objections has always been (and therefore
doesn't qualify as "next...") is that implementation is patchy across
different TOCs and different flows.

Anyway, here we go with LNER...

Good news: sign up to their Loyalty scheme and you get £5 credit
against your future ticket purchases. Bad news: they forgot to mention
that it can only be redeemed against LNER AP tickets. (It also
mis-advertises a 2% discount on ticket purchases, which it turns out
also only applies to LNER services; this all reminds me of the Virgin
loyalty scheme, which over a period of several years never managed to
deliver any benefits at all).

Also tried applying for a Smartcard, but only at the very very end does
it say you need to upload a mugshot, and I don't have any of those on my
phone, so I'll need to try that again on my laptop. Yes, I suppose I
could take a selfie using the phone, but it's 7am and I haven't combed
my hair yet.

Some tickets it offers in-app delivery, which I'm sure will work fine,
but Ely-LST all it offers is TOD. Which is the same restriction as GA,
thus indicating a flow that only ever allows paper tickets (not even
Smartcards, which is doubly odd because GA had a big campaign saying
they'd only issue season tickets, for which that would be a typical
flow, on Smartcards), for some reason.

Just in case there's an idea that flow has a special issue to do with
LST, Cambridge to Guildford isn't available as an e-ticket/PDF either,
and that would go via Kings Cross (and Waterloo).
--
Roland Perry

In message <sqd4vj$jju$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:42:43 on Mon, 27 Dec
2021, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>On 27/12/2021 18:15, Tweed wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sq5k6q$90v$2@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:30 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sq1me1$1a3$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:26:57 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> one of the things which doesn't fit well on a phone is emailed PDFs
>>>>>>> of travel tickets, when an in-app delivery would be entirely acceptable
>>>>>>> (and in turn wouldn't work very well on a laptop, unless you have an
>>>>>>> Android phone emulator on it, which I suspect is slightly unusual, but
>>>>>>> is how many developers test their products).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd rather receive emailed PDFs than have to have a unique app installed
>>>>>> for every vendor.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder what happened to the "pass" system (as implemented on the
>>>>> PassWallet, and other, apps). That at least gathers all the e-tickets in
>>>>> one place, whereas I don't regard "scattered through my email spool" as
>>>>> 'one place'.
>>>>
>>>> ISTR you complained that extracting them from email to pass wallet was too
>>>> much of a chore.
>>>
>>> The chore is having to extract them at all. Why can't they be pushed to
>>> the app? Just like ITSO tickets are pushed to Apps, for local transfer
>>> transfer to a card (which is fairly straightforward).
>> I’m reliably informed by someone who works in LNER ticketing HQ
>>that their
>> app delivers e-tickets to their app directly (as well as by email), both
>> for LNER trips and other TOCs where e-tickets are available. So I await the
>> next set of objections…..
>>
>So with TfW as ell that's two companies that do this. Any more bids?

Hmm, that app just crashed when I did a password-reset. Worked at the
second attempt. Or maybe it didn't... no email received.

Anyway, I tried, now over to you - what delivery options does it offer
for Cambridge-Guildford?
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sqd4vj$jju$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:42:43 on Mon, 27 Dec
> 2021, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>> On 27/12/2021 18:15, Tweed wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sq5k6q$90v$2@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:30 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <sq1me1$1a3$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:26:57 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> one of the things which doesn't fit well on a phone is emailed PDFs
>>>>>>>> of travel tickets, when an in-app delivery would be entirely acceptable
>>>>>>>> (and in turn wouldn't work very well on a laptop, unless you have an
>>>>>>>> Android phone emulator on it, which I suspect is slightly unusual, but
>>>>>>>> is how many developers test their products).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd rather receive emailed PDFs than have to have a unique app installed
>>>>>>> for every vendor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wonder what happened to the "pass" system (as implemented on the
>>>>>> PassWallet, and other, apps). That at least gathers all the e-tickets in
>>>>>> one place, whereas I don't regard "scattered through my email spool" as
>>>>>> 'one place'.
>>>>>
>>>>> ISTR you complained that extracting them from email to pass wallet was too
>>>>> much of a chore.
>>>>
>>>> The chore is having to extract them at all. Why can't they be pushed to
>>>> the app? Just like ITSO tickets are pushed to Apps, for local transfer
>>>> transfer to a card (which is fairly straightforward).
>>> I’m reliably informed by someone who works in LNER ticketing HQ
>>> that their
>>> app delivers e-tickets to their app directly (as well as by email), both
>>> for LNER trips and other TOCs where e-tickets are available. So I await the
>>> next set of objections…..
>>>
>> So with TfW as ell that's two companies that do this. Any more bids?
>
> Hmm, that app just crashed when I did a password-reset. Worked at the
> second attempt. Or maybe it didn't... no email received.
>
> Anyway, I tried, now over to you - what delivery options does it offer
> for Cambridge-Guildford?

Is Cambridge to Guildford via the Underground? If so that’s probably why no
QR code based ticket is being issued until the barrier issue is resolved.

In message <sqeht6$9bj$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:29:26 on Tue, 28 Dec
2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sqd4vj$jju$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:42:43 on Mon, 27 Dec
>> 2021, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>>> On 27/12/2021 18:15, Tweed wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <sq5k6q$90v$2@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:30 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <sq1me1$1a3$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:26:57 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> one of the things which doesn't fit well on a phone is emailed
>>>>>>>>>PDFs of travel tickets, when an in-app delivery would be
>>>>>>>>>entirely acceptable (and in turn wouldn't work very well on a
>>>>>>>>>laptop, unless you have an Android phone emulator on it, which
>>>>>>>>>I suspect is slightly unusual, but is how many developers test their products).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd rather receive emailed PDFs than have to have a unique app
>>>>>>>>installed for every vendor.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wonder what happened to the "pass" system (as implemented on the
>>>>>>> PassWallet, and other, apps). That at least gathers all the e-tickets in
>>>>>>> one place, whereas I don't regard "scattered through my email spool" as
>>>>>>> 'one place'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ISTR you complained that extracting them from email to pass
>>>>>>wallet was too much of a chore.
>>>>>
>>>>> The chore is having to extract them at all. Why can't they be pushed to
>>>>> the app? Just like ITSO tickets are pushed to Apps, for local transfer
>>>>> transfer to a card (which is fairly straightforward).

>>>> I’m reliably informed by someone who works in LNER ticketing HQ
>>>>that their app delivers e-tickets to their app directly (as well as
>>>>by email), both for LNER trips and other TOCs where e-tickets are
>>>>available. So I await the next set of objections…..
>>>>
>>> So with TfW as ell that's two companies that do this. Any more bids?
>>
>> Hmm, that app just crashed when I did a password-reset. Worked at the
>> second attempt. Or maybe it didn't... no email received.
>>
>> Anyway, I tried, now over to you - what delivery options does it offer
>> for Cambridge-Guildford?
>
>Is Cambridge to Guildford via the Underground?

Yes it can be is, there's a transfer between the London terminals.
Although in this specific instance, if a permitted routing, one could
travel on Thameslink via London Bridge to Waterloo East (indeed, with
Thameslink trains terminating at Cambridge, you don't even need to get
off at KGX/STP).

>If so that’s probably why no QR code based ticket is being issued
>until the barrier issue is resolved.

Or they could offer to deliver the ticket to a smartcard, which TfL
barriers should accept.

LST is still a conundrum though, because their barriers must accept QR
codes on account of Chelmsford-LST being available on in-app tickets.
--
Roland Perry

In message <sqcmjf$evb$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:37:19 on Mon, 27 Dec
2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sqcfv9$27g$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:44:09 on Mon, 27 Dec
>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <sq1lid$roa$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:12:13 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>>> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Even when many of those emails have 20-page Word attachments, hat
>>>>>>>> require editing and sending back?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the umpteenth time NOBODY is suggesting this other than you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's at least one person who has said they haven't needed a desktop,
>>>>>> or printed anything out, for years.
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps that person has no need to edit 20 page word documents, or perhaps
>>>>> they have an iPad as well as a phone.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, different people have different requirements. What's a bit
>>>> annoying is being pilloried for pointing out that one size doesn't
>>>> fit all.
>>>
>>> Which nobody disputed, so nobody pilloried you for saying it.
>>
>> Only Roland keeps raising the issue of editing 20 page Word documents on a
>> phone. Nobody else has ever suggested doing it. The issue has always been
>> can you easily receive a pdf rail ticket on your phone.
>
>Yup. I assume Roland was embarrassed to discover that he was alone in
>finding this challenging, so he 'moved the goal posts' to something most
>people would avoid doing: editing long Word documents on a phone.

It's just an example of something a person who deal with lots of emails
is likely to encounter fairly routinely. And the proposition I was being
heckled with was that it was something about my own use of phones (or
email clients or something), which meant I was particularly unable to
cope with handling emails on one.

But perhaps we can draw a line under this now, given your apparent
acceptance that phones are not the solution for everyone. Those
goalposts have been in the same place from the start of the debate.
--
Roland Perry

In message <sqco53$p7k$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:03:47 on Mon, 27 Dec
2021, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>On 27/12/2021 13:25, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <aqdjsgdh9prtsa9j6tnh1ftpuegvhsk047@4ax.com>, at 12:53:57
>>on Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 12:41:23 +0000, Roland Perry
>>><roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <igbjsg5n8d3853j22hrs30erj0mvr0abp4@4ax.com>, at 12:17:01 on
>>>> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:49:13 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>><roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <sq5k6p$90v$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:29 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <sq497o$41b$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:00:08 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <sq2bin$a4s$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:27:51 on Thu,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Somewhere there's a list (updated from time to time) of
>>>>>>>>>>>>train types which are exempt from DDA rules,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds interesting! Where do I find this list?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I found it when looking at SIs issued around the time some
>>>>>>>>>>SWT EMUs were  given a dispensation to carry on operating
>>>>>>>>>>(the issue in that case being  on-train PIS in too small a
>>>>>>>>>>font). Ten years ago, perhaps?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Of course, since then, we've had much more serious
>>>>>>>>>>dispensations for things like HSTs without accessible toilets.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That wasn't the problem with the HSTs, which have long had
>>>>>>>>>accessible toilets.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What was the problem with the HSTs? (I have to say I don't
>>>>>>>>think I ever saw [inside] one with an accessible toilet,
>>>>>>>>although Scotrail may have retro-fitted them, and I have seen
>>>>>>>>one of their HSTs, albeit the coaches in the rake pre-refurbishment).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> HSTs have had accessible toilets, though perhaps not meeting the
>>>>>>>letter of the current regulations, for at least 20 years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been looking at the derogation for Scotrail's
>>>>>>pre-refurbished HSTs, and it lists the following aspects:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5.3.2.4 Accessible toilet
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does that mean they were not accessible at all, or that not all
>>>>>>of them were accessible, or is that just a subtitle?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But going on...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5.3.2.2 (2) A visual and tactile (or audible) indication given inside
>>>>>>            and outside the toilet to indicate when locked.
>>>>>> 5.3.2.6 (3) Visual indication that call for aid has been operated
>>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (2) Standard toilet door width
>>>>>> 5.3.2.2(3),(4) Force to operate any door control device, and other
>>>>>>               equipment inside the toilet compartment and
>>>>>>contrast
>>>>>>               of toilet control devices.
>>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (3) Provision of a fixed vertical and/or horizontal handrail
>>>>>>            adjacent to the toilet seat and the wash basin.
>>>>>> 5.3.2.4 (9) Height of toilet seat
>>>>>> 5.3.2.5 (1-2) Baby change table - height and load bearing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing about retention tanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
<https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/syst>>>>>>em
/uploads/attachment_data/file/953089/scotrail-short-form-hsts-
>>>>>>2020-dispensation-letter-timed-document.pdf>
>>>>>
>>>>> As I've told you already, retention tanks are a separate aspect from
>>>>> accessibility.
>>>>
>>>> Do you think that's possibly why I mentioned they weren't on the
>>>> accessibility list?
>>>
>>> No, it's because you seemed surprised that they weren't.

>> Is it possible that's why I asked "What was the problem with the
>>HSTs?" and didn't get much of a reply.

>> And all we've really established is that at least one HST has "had
>>an accessible toilet for 20yrs", and no detail about the pace of
>>rollout. Apart from two lots of anecdata about MML HSTs, which is
>>roughly where I came in.
>
>Some HSTs have had disabled toilets for a number of years but they
>don't meet the present definition of an accessible toilet and may never
>have done so.

That's precisely one of the suggestions I made up-thread. But others
appear to think that all accessible toilets are equal.

I think it's one of those irregular verbs "his lack of appreciation of
the subtleties, is my alleged moving the goalposts".
--
Roland Perry

In message <sqcnmt$mlo$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:56:13 on Mon, 27 Dec
2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sqcjir$prm$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:45:47 on Mon, 27 Dec
>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <aqdjsgdh9prtsa9j6tnh1ftpuegvhsk047@4ax.com>, at 12:53:57 on
>>>> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 12:41:23 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>><roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <igbjsg5n8d3853j22hrs30erj0mvr0abp4@4ax.com>, at 12:17:01 on
>>>>>> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:49:13 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In message <sq5k6p$90v$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:29 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <sq497o$41b$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:00:08 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>>>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <sq2bin$a4s$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:27:51 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Somewhere there's a list (updated from time to time) of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which are exempt from DDA rules,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds interesting! Where do I find this list?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I found it when looking at SIs issued around the time some SWT
>>>>>>>>>>>> EMUs were given a dispensation to carry on operating (the issue
>>>>>>>>>>>> in that case being on-train PIS in too small a font). Ten
>>>>>>>>>>>> years ago, perhaps?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, since then, we've had much more serious
>>>>>>>>>>>>dispensations for things like HSTs without accessible toilets.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That wasn't the problem with the HSTs,

****

>>>>>>>>>>>which have long had accessible toilets.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What was the problem with the HSTs? (I have to say I don't
>>>>>>>>>> think I ever saw [inside] one with an accessible toilet,
>>>>>>>>>> although Scotrail may have retro-fitted them, and I have seen
>>>>>>>>>> one of their HSTs, albeit the coaches in the rake
>>>>>>>>>>pre-refurbishment).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> HSTs have had accessible toilets, though perhaps not meeting the
>>>>>>>>> letter of the current regulations, for at least 20 years.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've been looking at the derogation for Scotrail's
>>>>>>>>pre-refurbished HSTs, and it lists the following aspects:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 5.3.2.4 Accessible toilet
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does that mean they were not accessible at all, or that not all of them
>>>>>>>> were accessible, or is that just a subtitle?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But going on...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 5.3.2.2 (2) A visual and tactile (or audible) indication given inside
>>>>>>>> and outside the toilet to indicate when locked.
>>>>>>>> 5.3.2.6 (3) Visual indication that call for aid has been operated
>>>>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (2) Standard toilet door width
>>>>>>>> 5.3.2.2(3),(4) Force to operate any door control device, and other
>>>>>>>> equipment inside the toilet compartment and contrast
>>>>>>>> of toilet control devices.
>>>>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (3) Provision of a fixed vertical and/or horizontal handrail
>>>>>>>> adjacent to the toilet seat and the wash basin.
>>>>>>>> 5.3.2.4 (9) Height of toilet seat
>>>>>>>> 5.3.2.5 (1-2) Baby change table - height and load bearing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nothing about retention tanks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/upl
>>>>>>>> oads/attachment_data/file/953089/scotrail-short-form-hsts-
>>>>>>>> 2020-dispensation-letter-timed-document.pdf>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I've told you already, retention tanks are a separate aspect from
>>>>>>> accessibility.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you think that's possibly why I mentioned they weren't on the
>>>>>> accessibility list?
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it's because you seemed surprised that they weren't.
>>>>
>>>> Is it possible that's why I asked "What was the problem with the HSTs?"
>>>> and didn't get much of a reply.
>>>
>>> Huh? I told you exactly what was wrong with them,
>>
>> Did you say "exactly" that? I don't recall you listing baby change
>> tables, or 'Width of wheelchair space tipping screen' for example.
>
>Stop being so silly.

What's silly about correcting your statement that you said "exactly"
what was wrong. You could retrieve the situation a little by expanding
on this now.

>>> correcting your error that it was accessible toilets.
>>
>> If not including accessible toilets, why the need for the dispensation
>> to Scotrail.
>
>That presumably was for the pre-refurb sets?

Oh, so you didn't read that link above. There's a pretty big clue in the
title, too.

>>>> And all we've really established is that at least one HST has "had an
>>>> accessible toilet for 20yrs", and no detail about the pace of rollout.
>>>> Apart from two lots of anecdata about MML HSTs, which is roughly where I
>>>> came in.
>>>
>>> I'd be amazed if any HSTs have run without an accessible toilet for at
>>> least a decade.
>>
>> Apart perhaps for those ones from Scotrail?
>
>Did you check each carriage?

No, but it appears someone from the DfT or Wabtec, or Scotrail did,
hence the need for the dispensation.

>> And please cite your source for those which were installed 20yrs ago
>> being up to modern standards. Just having a big circular sliding door
>> isn't sufficient.
>
>Of course they wouldn't have complied with the latest standards. None
>fitted at that time would.

Now, can we get back to the "that wasn't the problem", with some more
detail about what "that" referred to? [See **** above]
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sq5k6q$90v$2@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:30 on Fri, 24 Dec
> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <sq1me1$1a3$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:26:57 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> one of the things which doesn't fit well on a phone is emailed PDFs
>>>>> of travel tickets, when an in-app delivery would be entirely acceptable
>>>>> (and in turn wouldn't work very well on a laptop, unless you have an
>>>>> Android phone emulator on it, which I suspect is slightly unusual, but
>>>>> is how many developers test their products).
>>>>
>>>> I'd rather receive emailed PDFs than have to have a unique app installed
>>>> for every vendor.
>>>
>>> I wonder what happened to the "pass" system (as implemented on the
>>> PassWallet, and other, apps). That at least gathers all the e-tickets in
>>> one place, whereas I don't regard "scattered through my email spool" as
>>> 'one place'.
>>
>> ISTR you complained that extracting them from email to pass wallet was too
>> much of a chore.
>
> The chore is having to extract them at all. Why can't they be pushed to
> the app? Just like ITSO tickets are pushed to Apps, for local transfer
> transfer to a card (which is fairly straightforward).

You complained that having in-app wallets was too difficult because you
wouldn't be able to remember which app you'd used to buy the ticket.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <oq59sg53f0onh5ci556d0o2mm169fn4heh@4ax.com>, at 15:37:05 on
> Thu, 23 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
> remarked:
>> On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 09:51:04 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <sq087j$ua$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:18:27 on Wed, 22 Dec 2021,
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>
>>>> But most people seem able to access their email with equal convenience on
>>>> either phone or computer.
>>>
>>> Even when many of those emails have 20-page Word attachments, hat
>>> require editing and sending back?
>>
>> You can certainly access them, yes. Editing them is a different
>> function, which may be harder, or even practically impossible, depending
>> on the nature of the document. But an e-ticket doesn't require editing.
>> It only requires access.
>
> We really do have to concentrate on this business of accessing emails,
> versus accessing the processing the content of email versus the
> protocols used to send data from a supplier to a consumer. e-tickets
> ordered in-app, should never be in an email in the first place.
>

Emailed PDFs are easier to forward to other people, for example if one
person books tickets for two people travelling together, in order to get
seats together.

PassWallet tickets work well for that too.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sq1lid$roa$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:12:13 on Thu, 23 Dec
> 2021, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>> Even when many of those emails have 20-page Word attachments, hat
>>> require editing and sending back?
>>
>> For the umpteenth time NOBODY is suggesting this other than you.
>
> There's at least one person who has said they haven't needed a desktop,
> or printed anything out, for years.

I have a laptop which I use very occasionally to access old photos on
external hard drives, and for the very rare occasions that I need to create
a word document, for example. But that’s perhaps twice a year maximum.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <aqdjsgdh9prtsa9j6tnh1ftpuegvhsk047@4ax.com>, at 12:53:57 on
> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 12:41:23 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <igbjsg5n8d3853j22hrs30erj0mvr0abp4@4ax.com>, at 12:17:01 on
>>> Mon, 27 Dec 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:49:13 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <sq5k6p$90v$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:29 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <sq497o$41b$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:00:08 on Fri, 24 Dec
>>>>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <sq2bin$a4s$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:27:51 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>>>>>>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Somewhere there's a list (updated from time to time) of train types
>>>>>>>>>>> which are exempt from DDA rules,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sounds interesting! Where do I find this list?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I found it when looking at SIs issued around the time some SWT
>>>>>>>>> EMUs were given a dispensation to carry on operating (the issue
>>>>>>>>> in that case being on-train PIS in too small a font). Ten years ago, perhaps?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course, since then, we've had much more serious dispensations for
>>>>>>>>> things like HSTs without accessible toilets.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That wasn't the problem with the HSTs, which have long had accessible
>>>>>>>> toilets.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What was the problem with the HSTs? (I have to say I don't think I ever
>>>>>>> saw [inside] one with an accessible toilet, although Scotrail may have
>>>>>>> retro-fitted them, and I have seen one of their HSTs, albeit the coaches
>>>>>>> in the rake pre-refurbishment).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HSTs have had accessible toilets, though perhaps not meeting the letter of
>>>>>> the current regulations, for at least 20 years.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been looking at the derogation for Scotrail's pre-refurbished HSTs,
>>>>> and it lists the following aspects:
>>>>>
>>>>> 5.3.2.4 Accessible toilet
>>>>>
>>>>> Does that mean they were not accessible at all, or that not all of them
>>>>> were accessible, or is that just a subtitle?
>>>>>
>>>>> But going on...
>>>>>
>>>>> 5.3.2.2 (2) A visual and tactile (or audible) indication given inside
>>>>> and outside the toilet to indicate when locked.
>>>>> 5.3.2.6 (3) Visual indication that call for aid has been operated
>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (2) Standard toilet door width
>>>>> 5.3.2.2(3),(4) Force to operate any door control device, and other
>>>>> equipment inside the toilet compartment and contrast
>>>>> of toilet control devices.
>>>>> 5.3.2.3 (3) Provision of a fixed vertical and/or horizontal handrail
>>>>> adjacent to the toilet seat and the wash basin.
>>>>> 5.3.2.4 (9) Height of toilet seat
>>>>> 5.3.2.5 (1-2) Baby change table - height and load bearing
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing about retention tanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/upl
>>>>> oads/attachment_data/file/953089/scotrail-short-form-hsts-
>>>>> 2020-dispensation-letter-timed-document.pdf>
>>>>
>>>> As I've told you already, retention tanks are a separate aspect from
>>>> accessibility.
>>>
>>> Do you think that's possibly why I mentioned they weren't on the
>>> accessibility list?
>>
>> No, it's because you seemed surprised that they weren't.
>
> Is it possible that's why I asked "What was the problem with the HSTs?"
> and didn't get much of a reply.
>
> And all we've really established is that at least one HST has "had an
> accessible toilet for 20yrs", and no detail about the pace of rollout.
> Apart from two lots of anecdata about MML HSTs, which is roughly where I
> came in.

The fGW fleet all had a large toilet cubicle with push-button operated
automatic sliding door, handrails on the wall etc, by 2000 at the latest
(coach B in each set if someone can find some old fleetlists and correlate
those to current numbers). Those toilets were replaced by updated ones
during a later refurbishment, presumably because they no longer exactly met
the latest legislation.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

> Perhaps on lightly used lines e-ticketing
> should be encouraged with an on train ticket machine for those who can’t
> use a phone.
>

It works well in other countries, but with very limited exceptions [1] the
stock used for 'lightly-used lines' one day will be on a busier line
tomorrow or next week.

[1] Stourbridge, Bedford-Bletchley, soon maybe Wrexham-Bidston, ScotRail
cycle 153s

Anna Noyd-Dryver

In message <sqhrir$tdg$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:32:59 on Wed, 29 Dec
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <sq5k6q$90v$2@dont-email.me>, at 23:13:30 on Fri, 24 Dec
>> 2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <sq1me1$1a3$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:26:57 on Thu, 23 Dec
>>>> 2021, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>> one of the things which doesn't fit well on a phone is emailed PDFs
>>>>>> of travel tickets, when an in-app delivery would be entirely acceptable
>>>>>> (and in turn wouldn't work very well on a laptop, unless you have an
>>>>>> Android phone emulator on it, which I suspect is slightly unusual, but
>>>>>> is how many developers test their products).
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd rather receive emailed PDFs than have to have a unique app installed
>>>>> for every vendor.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder what happened to the "pass" system (as implemented on the
>>>> PassWallet, and other, apps). That at least gathers all the e-tickets in
>>>> one place, whereas I don't regard "scattered through my email spool" as
>>>> 'one place'.
>>>
>>> ISTR you complained that extracting them from email to pass wallet was too
>>> much of a chore.
>>
>> The chore is having to extract them at all. Why can't they be pushed to
>> the app? Just like ITSO tickets are pushed to Apps, for local transfer
>> transfer to a card (which is fairly straightforward).
>
>You complained that having in-app wallets was too difficult because you
>wouldn't be able to remember which app you'd used to buy the ticket.

There's two use-cases here.

One is buying a ticket significantly ahead of travelling, where if sent
as a PDF you'd have to remember which sender to look for in the email
spool. The other is buying ticket at the last minute, where one probably
still has the app in question open on the phone.
--
Roland Perry

In message <sqhrir$tdg$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:33:00 on Wed, 29 Dec
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <oq59sg53f0onh5ci556d0o2mm169fn4heh@4ax.com>, at 15:37:05 on
>> Thu, 23 Dec 2021, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>> remarked:
>>> On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 09:51:04 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <sq087j$ua$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:18:27 on Wed, 22 Dec 2021,
>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> But most people seem able to access their email with equal convenience on
>>>>> either phone or computer.
>>>>
>>>> Even when many of those emails have 20-page Word attachments, hat
>>>> require editing and sending back?
>>>
>>> You can certainly access them, yes. Editing them is a different
>>> function, which may be harder, or even practically impossible, depending
>>> on the nature of the document. But an e-ticket doesn't require editing.
>>> It only requires access.
>>
>> We really do have to concentrate on this business of accessing emails,
>> versus accessing the processing the content of email versus the
>> protocols used to send data from a supplier to a consumer. e-tickets
>> ordered in-app, should never be in an email in the first place.
>
>Emailed PDFs are easier to forward to other people, for example if one
>person books tickets for two people travelling together, in order to get
>seats together.

Agreed, but a bit of a rush if you ordered the tickets just before
travelling (and in any event I rarely travel on trains with reserved
seating).

The somewhat separate business of one person being able to buy tickets
for two people to use, raises its ugly head for contactless PAYG too.

In many ways, buying paper tickets and handing them over, is still the
"keep it simple" option.

Earlier in the month I got a bus with my wife and used my contactless
card to buy her a [till-roll] ticket, while I used my Twirly card. That
confused the driver to begin with.

>PassWallet tickets work well for that too.

Where available.
--
Roland Perry