The design approach taken by Luna Rail:
I donât see how their âlong-termâ bilevel-car approach could possibly be made ADA compliant. It reminded me of a modernized version of those old Long Island Rail Road cars that âsiamesedâ seats to shoehorn more of them in.
There are ADA concerns with the âpodâ approach to individual seats, in that the sawtooth aisles will be difficult for wheelchairs or scooters to negotiate. We recognized that concern back with the longer angled âbusiness classâ sleeper pods discussed a few years ago. The angled approach has always worked for parlor-car seating⌠but those were never intended to recline for sleeping.
I thought there were some interesting ideas shown here:
To be compliant here, have one car that is easier access. I donât think ADA requires every car be compliant.
Your post makes it sound like you think European countries lack standards for disabled accessibility.
ADA requires that every car in the train be fully accessible. You may be sure that activist groups will hold Amtrak to that, too. While there may have been waivers for âpreexisting equipmentâ, I doubt there would be for new bilevel equipment â and yes, I think thatâs a major reason Amtrak has abandoned the RFP for bilevel equipment; I suspect no practical design they received could be made fully suitable.
I remain upset and worried about the outcome of the scooter affair a few years ago. You may remember that an activist group had decided to âtestâ by wanting to ride together as a group larger than the âscooter accommodationâ size provided in one car. Amtrak had to oblige them by changing seating, then tried billing them for the configuration changes both ways. The group sued over the charges and Amtrak either lost or settled. Car features that require âspecialâ attention from employees to use safely, like the elevators or lifts to higher elevation, may not be adequately fast or convenient to âcountâ as reasonable accommodationâŚ
Having spent time in wheelchairs, I donât think I would be happy having to negotiate a couple of carsâ worth of sawtooths between rows of angled seat âpodsâ unless the free corridor width were at least that conforming to straight passage â which wastes a great deal of the potential space for each âmoduleâ. I see the situation as even more limiting in European loading gages⌠which is why I wonder if the European version of disability accommodation actually prioritizes passage in wheelchairs or on mobility devices as ours does.
Not according to a Google search.
"ADA compliance for passenger rail cars requires that for new or used vehicles purchased/leased after August 25, 1990, at least one car per train must be accessible. While not every car must be fully ADA-compliant, the train must have accessible restrooms (if others are provided), designated seating for wheelchair users, and specific door widths. "
Thatâs highly interesting. The material I had been reading was big on the idea that everything âaccessibleâ to normal patrons should be reasonably accessible to the disabled. I will have to go back and see if interpretation has changed over the years.
Maybe sensible reasoning happened? Itâs ridiculous, expensive and poses a barrier to good transportation for everyone that every car needs to be accessible to the few handicapped folks in wheelchairs.
Maybe it just means that one of each must be accessible. As an exampleâone coach, one sleeper, one dining car, not every one on the train. That way, they have access to all the same amenities, just on a smaller scale.
Imagine implementing ADA in the Jim Crow era.
Using Google, and its AI overview, all cars new or rebuilt cars after that 1990 date must be ADA compliant. After that date every train must have one compliant car in its consist.
I think the one car requirement is/was a temporary requirement until the entire car fleet is ADA compliant. It appears that 100 percent ADA compliant equipment is the ultimate goal.
Jeff
But not the current law or rule 36 years later. And it did not say âAll new or rebuilt cars after 1990â must. You apparently misread the Google AI summary. So it would seem that only one ADA car (perhaps of each type) is needed.
AI, Iâve noticed, is terribly inconsistent. I would be unsurprising if it changed its mind or never had a clue what was going on in the first place!
Go ahead and check then.
Europeans at least based on my travels have less of an entitlement mentality about life in general than Americans. More willing to just suck it up and get on with it rather than complain.
But it didnât always seem to be that way. Just relatively recently. Say last 10-15 years.
And itâs not a left vs right wing either. Seems pretty prevalent across the board.
The ADA is 42 USC 12101 et seq.
I canât say that I found the section that you were referring to. What page is it on?
I think he misquoted the reference. Try starting here (for instance) or use the cite I gave above in eCFR):
The stupid Feds blocked the correct request.
Ah, thanks.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-A/part-37/subpart-D
This covers ADA and transportation modes. You have to scroll down for Amtrak and heavy rail commuter trains.