On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 22:57:30 -0000, "John Rowland"
wrote:

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
.. .

I have similar criticisms of cashless boarding and
changes to publicity provision that I think are half
baked and badly executed. The concepts sound
fine but the reality is a long way away from the original
intent.

Could you please elaborate? Thanks.

As you asked so nicely :-)

On cashless boarding I think the street machines are too cheap and of
poor quality. From comments on various groups there are reliability
issues with them, they are not intuitive to use and they are already
being modified to reduce tampering with the coin slot. Their limited
functionality and lack of change giving creates issues for the future,
potentially imposes limitations on the fare levels that can be sensibly
charged in future thus meaning larger than (strictly) necessary leaps in
fares in the future. There is also the rather obvious problem of the
machine staying at the normal stop which might be closed due to
roadworks leaving people with a walk to and fro from a temporary stop.
This was the case with the w/b stop at Warren St recently. The temporary
stop was a least 1 min away from the machine - there was no notice at
the temporary stop to advise people they HAD to go to the machine to buy
a ticket in advance. That is not passenger friendly.

The rules that the drivers have to operate to are also not very
friendly. I understand that TfL have to have rules and that they have to
try to apply them or else the concept will never stick but there are too
many instances of people being kicked off buses to go to machines,
people being abused by drivers for not complying with the rules, the
opposite case of drivers bending the rules and there being no
consistency. You also have the odd discrepancy of conductor buses having
one set of rules, artics having another and other buses in the cashless
zone operated to other rules. No wonder people are confused.

I do understand the benefits that TfL are trying to deliver but the
current position is a mess. I cannot see the existing concept working
across London. I hope Oyster will unlock a lot of the problems when bus
pre-pay starts as the fraud check is done by the card / reader interface
and the transaction is simple. The boarding policy on artics is also
encouraging fraud as I do not believe the level of revenue check is in
place at levels that would act as deterrent. Again I understand there is
a business case trade off between revenue lost and running time gained
but I feel very uncomfortable with taxpayers effectively subsidising an
increase in public transport fraud.

On publicity provision I am concerned about a trend towards dumbing down
information to passengers. I accept I am lucky in that I can read a
timetable and a map. I know there are many people who struggle with
these tasks although I cannot comprehend what it must be like. I will
happily say at the outset that I am a traditionalist who links to be
able to

a) buy or obtain detailed timetables for a network
b) buy or obtain a high quality network wide route map.

TfL provide neither of those things. There are various local guides and
the quadrant maps. These are often very hard to obtain without a fight
although I accept the local one is usually posted through your letter
box. Information on public services should be a right not a privilege
and no one should have to go through fifty steps to try to get a bus
timetable or guide. Although there are lots of shiny bus station offices
apparently stuffed with booklets you try and find the man who has the
key! And if you find him try to get a civil response to a request for a
book or a map - it's rare that you get a decent response.

TfL have closed down many travel information centres including recently
opened ones in the suburbs as well as popular ones in Central London.
This is a retrograde step.

I dislike the Journey Planner and find it cumbersome to use. I believe
there is too much emphasis on internet provided information and this has
been at the cost of the more traditional "channels". While I am very
happy to use the Internet the two sites I use the most to get at
detailed London bus information are not run by TfL at all - ironic isn't
it?

www.busmap.co.uk
www.londonbusroutes.net for those who may be interested!

oh and www.firstlondontimetables.co.uk is good for First's services in
London. I can actually get the proper time for every bus on my local
service via this site - hooray.

Bus stop information panels are being dumbed down to the extent that
they are useless. They are also inaccurate - an example being route 34
where the stop specific panels say buses run every 6-12 mins Monday to
Friday. This is quite wrong - there are about 2 intervals in the early
morning when a couple of buses leave 6 mins apart because the running
time increases to reflect traffic conditions and they arrive 8 mins
apart at the terminus. Buses actually run every 8-9 mins for the better
part of the day and then every 12 in the evening. To say every 6-12
could mean every 6 or every 12 or every 6 then 12 then 6 then 12. It is
all very unclear and unhelpful - all because a computer trawled the base
information and found the minimum and maximum headways. Why is it a
state secret to know the exact time a bus is supposed to turn up at your
stop? - they can do this for high frequency services in the Netherlands
and Germany with no difficulty. All the base information exists - why
can't the user have easy and convenient access to it?

If you read Ken's Transport Strategy it promises much in the field of
information and publicity. The result to date is very disappointing in
that (IMO) the quality has gone down, it is harder to obtain, there is a
"one size fits all" policy and I don't think it is really any easier for
car owners or occasional users to feel comfortable with understanding
what the transport network offers. There is a long, long way to go.

Now I expect Mr Woolley to come running along shortly to defend London
Buses so I'll give him a wave now :-)))
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!