TFL e-bike ban

[ebikeerwidnes]

My suggestion is based on this that TFL said "...it said that as it was difficult to differentiate between models a general ban was necessary until improved safety measures were in place."

They don't need to test in advance, simply make it a condition of travel that your bike has to be UK EAPC legal, and if suspected that it is not the traveller accepts their travel may be refused and/or the bike confiscated. The current TFL Conditions of travel I think already cover most of what I suggest, Section 9:

• 9.2 Staff can refuse permission for you to take any item onto our services. For example, you may be prevented from taking a bicycle on DLR services during the London Marathon. Such as an illegal EAPC.
• 9.5 You must not bring with you anything that:
  • is more than 2 metres long
  • you are unable to carry yourself (including on stairs and escalators) is hazardous or
    inflammable. Such as an illegal EAPC.

Just add an addional note those with illegal EAPCs will be reported to the BTP and they're golden.

Sounds fine - except that the staff would then have to stop someone and check if it UK EPAC legal
and how do they do that

OK - a "proper" one - i.e. made to spec and everything by a proper manufacturer (e.g. Raleigh or Carrera) then it will have a plate on it somewhere
Mine is on the bottom and normally covered inmud and grit - but easily wiped clean

but you can buy that "plates" (actually just a sticker) online
so if someone turns up with a bike and the staff think it might be a DIY conversion what to they do?

and if they say "nah mate - sorry not allowed" then the person with the bike might claim it is fine
then you just have an argument

and how do they tell if someone has a normal Carrera ebike - but has put a bigger motor on it and a bigger battery - but left the original "plate" and made the battery look "proper" with stickers (also available on the WWW)

Basically they are protecting their staff from forseeable problems

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Best solution is to make all non legal and non safe ebikes illegal in all circumstances

and enforce it

which goes against a lot of basic principles - freedom and all that
and would require a lot of effort and manpower to enforce - without which it is useless

 

[Paulus]

Sounds fine - except that the staff would then have to stop someone and check if it UK EPAC legal
and how do they do that

OK - a "proper" one - i.e. made to spec and everything by a proper manufacturer (e.g. Raleigh or Carrera) then it will have a plate on it somewhere
Mine is on the bottom and normally covered inmud and grit - but easily wiped clean

but you can buy that "plates" (actually just a sticker) online
so if someone turns up with a bike and the staff think it might be a DIY conversion what to they do?

and if they say "nah mate - sorry not allowed" then the person with the bike might claim it is fine
then you just have an argument

and how do they tell if someone has a normal Carrera ebike - but has put a bigger motor on it and a bigger battery - but left the original "plate" and made the battery look "proper" with stickers (also available on the WWW)

Basically they are protecting their staff from forseeable problems

Your reasoning is sound, but it is not just about protecting staff who may or may not allow a hooky Ebike onto the system.
If such a bike burst into flames just as a train is leaving the station, where do the passengers go to get away from the fire? They can't get off the train until the next station, however long that maybe. Should the train be stopped between stations, they are effectively trapped on a train with a chemical fire on board.
The resulting enquiry would want to know who let the bike onto the system and why, did the driver see the bike and why did they continue on the journey?
It is much easier to ban all ebikes rather than try to judge a bike on its merits at the point of entry.

 

[mjr]

It is much easier to ban all ebikes rather than try to judge a bike on its merits at the point of entry.

But that's not what they've done and it'd be even easier to ban all lithium batteries over a size, which would reduce fire risk further.

 

[classic33]

But that's not what they've done and it'd be even easier to ban all lithium batteries over a size, which would reduce fire risk further.

What does the person who's battery is deemed "oversize/too large" then do with the battery. Leave it behind? If so where, and who takes responsibility for it?

All TFL have done is become the first to ban them from trains.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Your reasoning is sound, but it is not just about protecting staff who may or may not allow a hooky Ebike onto the system.
If such a bike burst into flames just as a train is leaving the station, where do the passengers go to get away from the fire? They can't get off the train until the next station, however long that maybe. Should the train be stopped between stations, they are effectively trapped on a train with a chemical fire on board.
The resulting enquiry would want to know who let the bike onto the system and why, did the driver see the bike and why did they continue on the journey?
It is much easier to ban all ebikes rather than try to judge a bike on its merits at the point of entry.

Yes
I was giving example of the staff on the way in trying to stop dodgy ebikes

but I was also thinking of the resulting enquiry and newspaper headlines demanding retribution and a scapegoat

and the law suits

I don't like the new regulations - but I can see why they want to do it like that

 

[mjr]

What does the person who's battery is deemed "oversize/too large" then do with the battery. Leave it behind? If so where, and who takes responsibility for it?

All TFL have done is become the first to ban them from trains.

Presumably they'd be ordered to carry it off the site. After that, it's their responsibility, same as usual.

How is this any different to the person whose e-bike is deemed a fire risk? If left unchallenged, they could lock it up at the departure station (note that they announced a travel ban, not a ban on parking at TfL stations, which seems absurd when both fires mentioned were both on platforms not trains) where it can catch fire unobserved by its owner (one of the fire alarms was raised by the owner... not sure about the other).

The more you think about this ban, the less justifiable it seems. It leaves the situation that led to the cited fires completely unchanged.

All TfL have done is jerked their knee and kicked users of non-folding e-bikes, and disabled ones disproportionately so.

 

[classic33]

Presumably they'd be ordered to carry it off the site. After that, it's their responsibility, same as usual.

How is this any different to the person whose e-bike is deemed a fire risk? If left unchallenged, they could lock it up at the departure station (note that they announced a travel ban, not a ban on parking at TfL stations, which seems absurd when both fires mentioned were both on platforms not trains) where it can catch fire unobserved by its owner (one of the fire alarms was raised by the owner... not sure about the other).

The more you think about this ban, the less justifiable it seems. It leaves the situation that led to the cited fires completely unchanged.

All TfL have done is jerked their knee and kicked users of non-folding e-bikes, and disabled ones disproportionately so.

You can evidence that claim?

 

[Paulus]

Presumably they'd be ordered to carry it off the site. After that, it's their responsibility, same as usual.

How is this any different to the person whose e-bike is deemed a fire risk? If left unchallenged, they could lock it up at the departure station (note that they announced a travel ban, not a ban on parking at TfL stations, which seems absurd when both fires mentioned were both on platforms not trains) where it can catch fire unobserved by its owner (one of the fire alarms was raised by the owner... not sure about the other).

The more you think about this ban, the less justifiable it seems. It leaves the situation that led to the cited fires completely unchanged.

All TfL have done is jerked their knee and kicked users of non-folding e-bikes, and disabled ones disproportionately so.

Presumably the bike fires on the platform occured before the train had arrived, a few minutes later they would of been on the train with a fire in inside the carriage. If a fire occurred in the bike park/car park or chained up to a drain pipe outside, the risk to life is a lot less than being inside a moving train with it.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

But that's not what they've done and it'd be even easier to ban all lithium batteries over a size, which would reduce fire risk further.

How do the staff judge whether it is too big or not

a lot of new ones are enclosed in the frame so can;t even be seen

these sort of problem are why they have gone for the "solution" they have

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Are there any mobility scooters that use lithium batteries?
or do they all use older style ones

Asking because banning them would open a whole new can of worms
and they woul dhave even bigger batteries


Thought of this due to the comment above about disabled people using ebikes
my wife wanted one due to her asthma. With an ebike she could be sure she would have a way to get home with little effort even if she was having trouble breathing

They are clearly not registered as disabled transport aids or anything - but there must be people on the verge of the disabled category that use them to help with getting out

Including older people (like me) who use it because it allows them to get out to places they used ot be able to get to years ago

 

[mjr]

How do the staff judge whether it is too big or not

It would be set down in the rules.

a lot of new ones are enclosed in the frame so can;t even be seen

these sort of problem are why they have gone for the "solution" they have

Maybe those would be treated as the size of the enclosing frame.

I doubt these sort of problems are why they've come up with this ridiculous ban that they probably won't enforce consistently, same as their existing bans. I'd bet that neither bike battery involved in the platform fires was enclosed in a frame, but we'll have to wait for TfL to actually publish their so-called "comprehensive safety review".

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

It would be set down in the rules.

In what terms - W Ah Wh or physical size
and how do you tell?

if it is based on battery size you can always get a sticker to make it look smaller than it is

and you can get a "good" battery recelled with more Ah's
(although the last one also applies to folders)

I think one point is that folders are not cool so they are much less likley to be messed with using dodgy stuff

but basically it is all down to stats and ease

 

[silva]

The specific danger of Li-Ion is a concentration of highly reactive chemicals (hence the high energy density) that when fire starts (due to damage/temperature/shock), release bound oxygen, causing the fire to continue without needing external oxygen. Meaning it's impossible to stop the fire, it goes on till all chemicals become neutral.
The close stacking of cells causes the gases to build up, pressure increases, till explosion.
So the fire/explosion danger is always there, setting a battery size limitation doesn't remove it.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Just been looking things up

Some of the mobility scooters have the same battery chemistry

and use bigger batteries

but are not likely to have been "modified" or come from cheap Chinese places
same as folding bikes I suppose