Re: Threat to Melbourne Trams?

[crookesp@aol.com (Crookesp)]

In article <349C6FC6.22C831C9@merddyn.apana.org.au>, garry
<garry@merddyn.apana.org.au> writes:

>The age trams survive to (40 years or more) makes their replacement more
>costly than the virtual nil compliance costs for bus operators (extra cost of
buses
>ignored). Even so. many of Melbourne's trams will have or be reaching their
>use >by date by then. Others will need major rebuilds. Although the costs will
be
>significantly higher than for buses, it will still not be the catastrophic
>costs you are suggesting.

The real issue is whether this is the most effective way to provide mobility
for the diabled. I suggest that it is not. 

At peak loadings, the idea of wheelchair access is a non-starter - there's no
room. Not even on the fully wheelchair accessible Metrolink trams in
Manchester,
already running in peak hour pairs and still stuffed to capacity and more.

I suggest that there are several alternativers to improve mobility for people,
whether in wheelchairs, or with bad vision, or hampered by children, prams and
so on.

First the wheelchairs. More money needs to be spent to improve the design and
functionality of wheelchairs. I wonder what work there is that would allow the
wheelchair user to be supported correctly while standing (so avoiding the
automatic and I should think annoying sitruation where the wheelchair user is
always 30-40 cm lowere than everyone else around). What work is there on
designing stair- and kerb-climbing wheelchairs? Or wheelchairs that can climb
obstacles and bridge gaps. If Sojourner can do it mon Mars, why not a
wheelchair on Earth? All of this could be funded from a further 10 cent tax on
cigarettes, which are the cause of much disability and so should pay for it.

Bad vision - I'd like to know more about what is done to nake trasnport systems
accessible to and useable by people with seriously restricted vision. Sound
coues and Braille are two of the ways to go...

The huge category of people with children, parcels, strollers (pushchairs)
prams etc.
This is where good design could work wonders. First at the stops. In 
Manchester each platform (some are actually kerbside) have access ramps for
wheeled things, and give floor level access to at least one pair of doors. In
Christchurch, the tourist trams pull into the kerb to pick up and set down
passengers. Seems to me that there's a lesson to learn here - maybe more tram
stops should have the tram pulling int to the kerb so that passengers don't
have to cross a road.

If you are acconmpanied by three kids under five, one pram and have an armload
of shopping (not an untypical sight) you ened the easiest access you can get.
That mneans not having to push buttons to open doors, not having to find and
show tickets as you get on, not having to megotiate turnstile barriers getting
on or off.

And finally, I'd like to see a cost-benefit analysis (including social aspects)
of modifying the whole tram fleet as against providing a dial-up minibus for
some mobility-impaired people.

*Philip*