this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2025
36 points (97.4% liked)
Public Transport
498 readers
2 users here now
Everything about public transportation!
founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't get it, you posted double-decker train, then tried to rip into this solution for being less accessible?
Double decker trains don't have a ladder, they have stairs.
Edit for clarification:
This is what stairs look like for the double decker trains, if you are in a wheelchair they are still mostly inaccessible, but we can see there are seats and spaces on the platform level for people with reduced mobility.
This are the proposed ladder(vertical stairs) for that futuristic wagon. Still inaccessible by wheelchair, but also inaccessible by people with reduced mobility.
In theory that means that one entire "floor" of the Luna is accessible, compared to just the vestibules on the traditional double-decker. Considering it's trying to be a sleeper as well, I'd say that's not too bad. There is what looks to be a solid handle there to transfer in with, so as long as the aisles are wide enough, even towards the end of the car, then it looks pretty good to me. You'd want somewhere for an attendant to park the chair as well. Granted, I'm an ambulatory chair user so I don't have a read on how difficult it would be for someone without use of their legs.
However, these are just early mockups. There's plenty of potential for more accessible pods at either end of a car, close to doors, that solve the issues you've brought up. So I just struggle to see how you could look at this and definitively say it's less accessible than current double-deck designs.
I cannot definitely say it, but from the early mockups it doesn't seem promising to me.
Also the marketing of "revolutionary" "life-changing" and "solving all problems"(hyperboly of course) and providing only a very light redesign and a 3d visual is a big red flag.
I am basically afraid of this.
Would you say this is a "very light redesign" of a traditional sleeper car?
Yes, but in not a good way, adding hard to reach areas, screens and foldable beds imo is not the right direction.
Whether you love or hate* it, I think calling it a "very light redesign" is disingenuous at best. As for screens and foldable beds, those already exist on trains as well as planes and have for decades, so calling them "added" seems strange on your part. Sure, there's likely good criticisms to be made here about this design, but you've as yet not really given any tangible ones.