|
|
Post by spsmiler on Oct 30, 2019 10:29:58 GMT
I am baffled, its seems that every time I travel on the Jubilee line trains they have a different variation of seat colours - all are Barman pattern but the accessible sets sometimes have slogans, sometimes do not and sometimes the bum rests are blue whilst other times they are gray (similar to the accessible seats).
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by commuter on Oct 30, 2019 14:14:21 GMT
The different coloured priority seating is a fairly new innovation and slowly being rolled out- this is probably why you have not seen it on every train.
Can’t say I’ve ever seen any gray perch seats.
|
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Oct 30, 2019 15:11:31 GMT
spsmiler , You are not alone! I have counted eight variances. Black/Orange Colour Palette:
1) Plain 2) Blue disk - "This is a priority seat" 3) Blue disk - "Be prepared to offer this seat" 4) Blue disk - "Not all disabilities are visible" 5) Blue disk - "Please give up this seat" 6) Blue disk - "Please offer this seat" 7) Blue disk - "Someone may need this seat" Grey/Blue Color Palette:
8) Standard symbols
|
|
|
|
Post by metrider on Nov 1, 2019 6:57:04 GMT
spsmiler , You are not alone!...... ... 2) Blue disk - "This is a priority seat" 3) Blue disk - "Be prepared to offer this seat" 4) Blue disk - "Not all disabilities are visible" 5) Blue disk - "Please give up this seat" 6) Blue disk - "Please offer this seat" 7) Blue disk - "Someone may need this seat" ... As good an idea as this is, as a (hopefully temporary/few more months) priority seat user, I'm not convinced it registers with people what the etiquette should be. 9/10 despite wearing the blue circular badge and obviously struggling with steps, I need to ask if the occupant needs the seat, and about 4/5 of those I actually need to tap on the shoulder to wake them up from their mobile phone/laptop/newspaper trance.:/ |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,399
|
Post by Chris M on Nov 1, 2019 11:40:25 GMT
As someone who also needs a seat, it's rare that I'm not offered one but I do sometimes have to ask. There is absolutely no correlation between the moquette of the seat and whether I'm likely to be offered it - usually it's just whomever is the first to make eye contact.
|
|
|
|
Post by orienteer on Nov 2, 2019 13:57:57 GMT
The main anomaly I've noticed is that the worn-out fabric on the end of car perches hasn't been replaced, even on refurbished trains.
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Nov 2, 2019 18:17:41 GMT
The JL interior Refurb didn't include any seat refurbishment I understand. But I agree the end of car perches have been allowed to get into very poor condition.
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Nov 3, 2019 21:40:22 GMT
spsmiler , You are not alone! I have counted eight variances. Black/Orange Colour Palette:
1) Plain 2) Blue disk - "This is a priority seat" 3) Blue disk - "Be prepared to offer this seat" 4) Blue disk - "Not all disabilities are visible" 5) Blue disk - "Please give up this seat" 6) Blue disk - "Please offer this seat" 7) Blue disk - "Someone may need this seat" Grey/Blue Color Palette:
8) Standard symbols I have seen more than just this - I need to sort through some photos and get them on Flickr, so that everyone can see them. As an aside, I have also seen some variations on the Piccadilly line, but not to the same degree as the Jubilee. What irks me is that if the Jubilee and Bakerloo can have Barmen pattern fabric based on other colours, why can't the Central have the same. Such as its line colour! |
|
|
|
Post by moquette on Nov 8, 2019 21:22:55 GMT
spsmiler , You are not alone! I have counted eight variances. Black/Orange Colour Palette:
1) Plain 2) Blue disk - "This is a priority seat" 3) Blue disk - "Be prepared to offer this seat" 4) Blue disk - "Not all disabilities are visible" 5) Blue disk - "Please give up this seat" 6) Blue disk - "Please offer this seat" 7) Blue disk - "Someone may need this seat" Grey/Blue Color Palette:
8) Standard symbols I have seen more than just this - I need to sort through some photos and get them on Flickr, so that everyone can see them. As an aside, I have also seen some variations on the Piccadilly line, but not to the same degree as the Jubilee. What irks me is that if the Jubilee and Bakerloo can have Barmen pattern fabric based on other colours, why can't the Central have the same. Such as its line colour! Apologies in advance for coming late to this party!
Goodness yes, I'm sure the many issues behind moquette patterns and colours have been covered (no pun intended) before but I agree at present there seems to be a lack of a 'single mind' behind the too-ing and fro-ing regarding priority seating and signing it. I wonder if there's now 'more than one master' but it doesn't help having so many variations on a theme in terms of having a consistent approach for passengers – live experimentation is no bad thing if that is what it is and not just a scattergun approach to ‘trying things’. Apologies in advance for the length of this posting but …
Anyhow, the last posting regarding the fact that the Central doesn't have a Barman colour variation; one of the reasons behind the commission for the Barman moquette was simply a requirement to have a single moquette that could be used on multiple stocks as, at the time, the policy was to downplay line colour. The reasons for this included a) the breakdown in LU's ability to choose seat fabric during PPP (which gave us the grim off the shelf fabric on the Picc and the rather weak design on the S-stock) and the impact on corporate identity b) the cost of sourcing multiple 'unique' fabrics tied to a line or stock and c) the issues about RVAR/DDA compliance in that with each stock we had to do all the designs and calculations again and that is not simple. So, Barman was intended for cross-line and stock use including refurbishments and, indeed, new stock. The first real target was the Piccadilly as that TLL fabric was not only 'non - corporate' but also due to the design and manufacturing liable to show wear pattern very quickly (its more 'plush' than we'd have ordered) and it was also because of its backing and thread count (i.e. cheaper) more liable to 'collapse' on the seat design due to lack of tension; in other words it sags and tears easier. For various reasons at the time Barman went on the Central and as usual, as is par for the course in LU, the discussions about 'single design' were raised again. From memory the subject of the W&C came up and it then got a 'line colour' interior. The real test was the Northern line refurbishments and it got the 'pure' LU corporate interior as we'd been requested to design and deliver - shades of blue and greys, all very RVAR compliant including the moquette as the colourways within the fabric and the majority field colour should, ideally, assist in contrast against the background and the components such as the armrests (and we struggled on the Northern with that).
Interestingly, we did the calculations for black handrails on the 1995-stock and they would have worked remarkably well as you can't really get more of a colour contrast against a light background than with black. This is also why yellow handrails can often 'fail' against light backgrounds and colours such as on the S-stock where there is empirical evidence that all the yellow can 'merge' so potentially causing issues with the very visibility the design should be giving. So, the '95 came out and about and we started to look at the '96-stock. The initial plan was to simply deliver the '95 interior - compliant to standards and with cost savings. But, the Board asked us to look at using the grey line colour and so, obeying orders, this was delivered with some difficulty as the ‘line colour’ doesn’t give an acceptable colour contrast on, for example, handrails and so a different shade to the line colour had to be used, specified and sourced. The Bakerloo then followed and we were asked, given the age of the stock, to deliver a ‘heritage’ feel and so the colours chosen for the interior became quite straightforward. That said, recolouring the Barman design is not simple or easy as the original design by Wallace & Sewall was predicated by a very tight schedule of colours we included in the specification and for good reasons. The patterns, colourways, repeat and internal contrast of the design have to ‘fit together’ or you end up with issues around durability, dominant field colours and pattern dazzle that have to be considered. So ‘just changing the colours’ doesn’t always actually work – it needs to be carefully looked at around shades, percentages and similar factors. This is where some of the issues around the priority seating designs came in.
Years ago we looked at so many designs to delineate priority seating including reversing the colourways or using different colourways but at the time one of the requirements we were asked to work to was not to ‘stigmatise’ the potential user such as in making a design too ‘shouty’ as well as if the very method you use to identify the seat (the moquette) is the one thing you can’t see if someone is sat on it. So, the eventual policy was to use the same common signs as used on the car interiors replicated in a consistent way on the fabric. This in itself produced a ‘problem’ in that to get the sign correctly positioned within the moquette repeat and always in the middle of the seat back requires a different production batch with more ‘waste’ at trimming. Anyhow, the issue regarding identification never went away and so the company seems to be having another go although I wonder (and I’m no longer part of it!) if corporate memory has already started to slip in terms of the very things that were discussed and rejected some years ago. That said, things and priorities change and so long as the solutions are consistent and add up to what the hopefully correct specification says – good luck! At the moment there does seem to be a move towards a radically different visual appearance to the seat and for the message to be aimed at the person who may not require the seat rather than the one who does. In some ways having a design that is significantly in terms of colourways rather than one that is so subtle that it just looks as if it has faded (think Overground) is better, the trick is that the design and colourway still has to work in terms of the overall car interior ‘look’ and meet any colour contrast rules. I can't help but think that there is a danger of over complicating what should be a simple issue here - more variations doesn't, in my designers mind, make for a solution.
|
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Nov 9, 2019 6:51:50 GMT
Apropos that last post, I used a Scotrail class 385 unit last week, where they’d had to deal with identifying the priority seats. The main patterns are a simple repeating design, but the priority seats have various priority conditions (pregnancy, walking sticks, a number of others) embroidered in as the pattern. It was very smart and effective.
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Nov 19, 2019 22:40:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Nov 19, 2019 22:50:53 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Nov 19, 2019 22:56:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Nov 20, 2019 8:45:40 GMT
I've always tended to stand up if somebody not-so-agile needs a seat anyway, despite the colour of the fabric.
"Not all disabilities are visible" just makes it easier for lazy folk to abuse disabled facilities. You don't have to walk with a bogus limp!
|
|
|
|
Post by moquette on Nov 20, 2019 19:24:41 GMT
Hmm, it isn't for me to say but I'd be worried about a couple of things in some of those pictures. Firstly, the 'grey on grey' boundaries between the vestibule screen, the moquette and the handrail on some of the '96-ts could be seen as being too indistinguishable to some conditions and so making the seat 'invisible'or difficult to place.
The other overall feeling, and I'll have to gently 'ask' some of my ex-colleagues, is that there's not a lot of evidence of a controlling mind at work here. It feels like a 'committee' has come up with a series of concepts and possiblities and decided to throw them all into real trains to 'see how they work out'. I hope I'm wrong. One of LU's biggest issues when faced with 'problems' when I was involved, such as in platform access/egress, crowding and S8 door locations at Farringdon was that lots of 'solutions' were thought up (no problems there) but the 'answers' were implemented in such a way as to make it almost impossible to assess a) if they'd worked when measured against the original issue and b) could they be assessed against each other independently of the cumlative impact of the various solutions. Guess what?
It is the same with priority seating. Yes, we have to try different approaches but if you aren't careful and you don't have a 'control' in place then a) you can't correctly tell if a solution has worked and b) you end up causing visual confusion across a single car, a line fleet and - oh, the network. Keep it simple, deliverable and plausible across the network so that your passengers have reassurance.
|
|
