Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

"The all lines rover is NOT valid for travel on Eurostar, Heathrow
Express, TfL Underground, Docklands Light Railway and Croydon Tramlink,
private railways (except Ffestiniog Railway) or on any shipping
service."

Which is a rather London-Centric view, and perhaps it's not valid on the
Sheffield/Nottingham/Manchester trams either.

Why do you say that? If a line is not in the exception list the rover is
valid, surely?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 1:59*pm, Roy Badami wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
How about "trains upon which an all-lines rover are accepted"?

So is the all-lines rover valid on the current LO? *Will it be valid on
the ELL extension?

Dunno. My guess is that it will be accepted, but not because it has to
be, instead simply because TfL decide it might as well be, given that
it'll be valid on the rest of the LO network. However I'd guess that
the TfL-owned ELL route miles wouldn't count towards the LO would
receive from the RSP's All-Lines Rover pot. Basically it's a niche
product which is hardly going to be at the top of TfL's concerns -
maybe no-one's even thought about it yet.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 11:41*pm, wrote:

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:
"The all lines rover is NOT valid for travel on Eurostar, Heathrow
Express, TfL Underground, Docklands Light Railway and Croydon Tramlink,
private railways (except Ffestiniog Railway) or on any shipping
service."

Which is a rather London-Centric view, and perhaps it's not valid on the
Sheffield/Nottingham/Manchester trams either.

Why do you say that? If a line is not in the exception list the rover is
valid, surely?

I assume that's a conversational gambit as opposed to a serious
opinion...

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

In article
,
(Mizter T) wrote:

On Feb 20, 1:59*pm, Roy Badami wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
How about "trains upon which an all-lines rover are accepted"?

So is the all-lines rover valid on the current LO? *Will it be valid
on the ELL extension?

Dunno. My guess is that it will be accepted, but not because it has to
be, instead simply because TfL decide it might as well be, given that
it'll be valid on the rest of the LO network. However I'd guess that
the TfL-owned ELL route miles wouldn't count towards the LO would
receive from the RSP's All-Lines Rover pot. Basically it's a niche
product which is hardly going to be at the top of TfL's concerns -
maybe no-one's even thought about it yet.

I thought the new ELL won't the sleepy backwater that the old one was,
though?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

In message , at 17:41:32
on Sat, 20 Feb 2010, remarked:
"The all lines rover is NOT valid for travel on Eurostar, Heathrow
Express, TfL Underground, Docklands Light Railway and Croydon Tramlink,
private railways (except Ffestiniog Railway) or on any shipping
service."

Which is a rather London-Centric view, and perhaps it's not valid on the
Sheffield/Nottingham/Manchester trams either.

Why do you say that? If a line is not in the exception list the rover is
valid, surely?

a) Are those trams "National Rail lines" [probably not, but then neither
is the Croydon one].
b) Are they on the map [no].
--
Roland Perry

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 21, 9:05*am, "Willms" wrote:

Am Sat, 20 Feb 2010 21:14:50 UTC, *schrieb Andy *
auf uk.railway :

con ces sion aire *(kn-ssh-n r):

The holder or operator of a concession.

LOROL are the concessionaire of the concession awarded by TfL. DfT
have handed over their role to TfL, LO is a concession rather than a
franchise due to the differing arrangements regarding service levels
and revenue.

* DfT has conceded the exploitation of a part of the railway network
around London to TfL. "The concession" is both the contractual
relationship of the conceding party (DfT) and the concessionaire (TfL)
and also the resource with is object of the concession.

* Paul Corfield mostly describes correctly what a concession is:
namely where the concessionaire bears the commercial risk of
exploiting the resource conceded by the concession and as the
concession (see e.g. the contracts about the Channel Tunnel at the
IGC's website). A mining company may get a concession to exploit a
given mineral resource (including fluid minerals like petroleum).

* But then he describes LOROL as the concessionaire, although it is
TfL and not LOROL which bears the commercial risk of exploiting the
concession, and where it is TfL which sets the fares etc etc. LOROL is
the contractor to operate the London Overground network for TfL, but
not the concessionaire.

The London Overground network is not a resource to be exploited in the
same way as an oil field. It's always going to be a subsidised service
- that subsidy is derived from the precept on the council tax levied
by the GLA (i.e. from London council tax payers), and also from the
grant given to TfL by central government which IIRC makes up roughly
half of TfL's income.

The DfT passed responsibility for this service to TfL, they didn't
'concede the exploitation' of it. It's basically a small act of
devolution.

I do see where you're coming from with regards to questioning the use
of the terms concession and concessionaire in this case, but whether
you like it or not those are the terms that have been used here.

This is from the DfT's 2007 annual report:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/about/publicat...ort2007?page=8

---quote---
7.81 The responsibility for specification and funding of passenger
services on the Silverlink Metro network will be transferred from the
Department to TfL in November 2007, at the end of the current
franchise. TfL are currently in the process of letting the North
London Rail Concession which will include services on the extended
East London line in due course.
---/quote---

It should just be called the "London Rail Concession" (not the *North*
London Rail Concession) but that's by the by - you'll see that the DfT
regards TfL as "letting" the rail concession - the DfT don't regard
themselves as having "let" or given the concession to TfL, instead
they say they have "transferred" the "responsibility" for these
services to TfL.

Likewise on Merseyside, the Merseyrail Electrics arrangement is also
called a concession - e.g. see references to the term "concession" in
this document (PDF):
http://www.merseytravel.gov.uk/pdf/history_Merseyrail.pdf

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 21, 9:09*am, wrote:

(Mizter T) wrote:

On Feb 20, 1:59*pm, Roy Badami wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
How about "trains upon which an all-lines rover are accepted"?

So is the all-lines rover valid on the current LO? *Will it be valid
on the ELL extension?

Dunno. My guess is that it will be accepted, but not because it has to
be, instead simply because TfL decide it might as well be, given that
it'll be valid on the rest of the LO network. However I'd guess that
the TfL-owned ELL route miles wouldn't count towards the LO would
receive from the RSP's All-Lines Rover pot. Basically it's a niche
product which is hardly going to be at the top of TfL's concerns -
maybe no-one's even thought about it yet.

I thought the new ELL won't the sleepy backwater that the old one was,
though?

Yes, it'll be busy - what relevance is that?

In the grand scheme of things number of people who might like to make
use of an All-Lines Rail Rover on the ELL would make up a completely
minuscule proportion of the total passenger numbers on the line.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 21, 9:26*am, Roland Perry wrote:

remarked:

"The all lines rover is NOT valid for travel on Eurostar, Heathrow
Express, TfL Underground, Docklands Light Railway and Croydon Tramlink,
private railways (except Ffestiniog Railway) or on any shipping
service."

Which is a rather London-Centric view, and perhaps it's not valid on the
Sheffield/Nottingham/Manchester trams either.

Why do you say that? If a line is not in the exception list the rover is
valid, surely?

a) Are those trams "National Rail lines" [probably not, but then neither
* * *is the Croydon one].
b) Are they on the map [no].

Croydon Tramlink might have a case for inclusion as part of it used to
be a BR/NR line - but that's also the case with Metrolink in
Manchester of course.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message , at
17:41:32 on Sat, 20 Feb 2010, remarked:
"The all lines rover is NOT valid for travel on Eurostar, Heathrow
Express, TfL Underground, Docklands Light Railway and Croydon
Tramlink, private railways (except Ffestiniog Railway) or on any
shipping service."

Which is a rather London-Centric view, and perhaps it's not valid on
the Sheffield/Nottingham/Manchester trams either.

Why do you say that? If a line is not in the exception list the rover
is valid, surely?

a) Are those trams "National Rail lines" [probably not, but then
neither
is the Croydon one].
b) Are they on the map [no].

Of course, For some reason I read "Sheffield/Nottingham/Manchester" but
not "trams". Silly me. So your complaint is justified. Sorry.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

In article
,
(Mizter T) wrote:

On Feb 21, 9:09*am, wrote:

(Mizter T) wrote:

On Feb 20, 1:59*pm, Roy Badami wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
How about "trains upon which an all-lines rover are accepted"?

So is the all-lines rover valid on the current LO? *Will it be
valid on the ELL extension?

Dunno. My guess is that it will be accepted, but not because it has
to be, instead simply because TfL decide it might as well be, given
that it'll be valid on the rest of the LO network. However I'd
guess that the TfL-owned ELL route miles wouldn't count towards the
LO would receive from the RSP's All-Lines Rover pot. Basically it's
a niche product which is hardly going to be at the top of TfL's
concerns - maybe no-one's even thought about it yet.

I thought the new ELL won't the sleepy backwater that the old one was,
though?

Yes, it'll be busy - what relevance is that?

In the grand scheme of things number of people who might like to make
use of an All-Lines Rail Rover on the ELL would make up a completely
minuscule proportion of the total passenger numbers on the line.

They might get in the way more, though. That would have less of an issue
before.

--
Colin Rosenstiel