Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

Subject says it all. Is London Overground part of the National Rail,
network, or not?

The observation that triggered the question was seeing, on one of the
maps on board a tube train, a station showing an interchange opportunity
with London Overground, but *not* showing the National Rail symbol
against the station name. Which would seem to imply not.

-roy

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On 20.02.10 12:01, Roy Badami wrote:
Subject says it all. Is London Overground part of the National Rail,
network, or not?

The observation that triggered the question was seeing, on one of the
maps on board a tube train, a station showing an interchange opportunity
with London Overground, but *not* showing the National Rail symbol
against the station name. Which would seem to imply not.

-roy
It is part of National Rail, but TfL has the franchise for whatever
number of years.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 12:16*pm, "
wrote:
On 20.02.10 12:01, Roy Badami wrote: Subject says it all. *Is London Overground part of the National Rail,
network, or not?

The observation that triggered the question was seeing, on one of the
maps on board a tube train, a station showing an interchange opportunity
with London Overground, but *not* showing the National Rail symbol
against the station name. Which would seem to imply not.

-roy

It is part of National Rail, but TfL has the franchise for whatever
number of years.

That's not quite right. TfL has taken over the responsibility for
awarding the concession from DfT. The current operating company is
LOROL, with a contract for seven years (plus a possible two year
extension) which started November 2007. LO is not a franchise (in the
same way as most of the other Train Operating Companies), as TfL takes
the full revenue risk and LOROL has to run the services to TfL's
specifications for a contracted price; with all the revenue going
back to TfL. When LOROL's contract is over, it will be upto TfL to
award the next concession. As far as ticketing, timetabling etc. is
concerned, LO are still part of the National Rail systems.

In some ways this is similar to the situation with Merseyrail, where
DfT has devolved the awarding of the concession/franchise to
Merseyside.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 12:01*pm, Roy Badami wrote:

Subject says it all. *Is London Overground part of the National Rail,
network, or not?

The observation that triggered the question was seeing, on one of the
maps on board a tube train, a station showing an interchange opportunity
with London Overground, but *not* showing the National Rail symbol
against the station name. *Which would seem to imply not.

Yes. And no. And it depends on what you mean by "National Rail
network" anyway.

The current LO network - NLL, WLL and DC line - is all part of the
National Rail network - for example NR ticketing applies.

When the ELL reopens, then the section from Dalston down to New Cross
and NXG will not be part of the National Rail network (it's also not
owned by Network Rail), and the NR double-arrow symbol won't appear on
station totem signs along this stretch. How through NR ticketing will
work on this line is yet to be made clear.

TfL seem to regard LO as a kind of metro network - as the LO name
suggests, sort of an overground equivalent to the Underground. And
ultimately TfL are free to show interchanges on in-carriage Tube
diagrams however they please.

The travelling punter isn't going to care one way or another - what
they will know is that it's clear that TfL are responsible for LO. The
memorandum of understanding between DfT and TfL with regards to the
London Rail Concession agreements makes pretty clear that both parties
regard this as an open ended arrangement, i.e. TfL would be
responsible for these services for the foreseeable future.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 12:41*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 12:16:18 +0000, "
wrote:

On 20.02.10 12:01, Roy Badami wrote:
Subject says it all. *Is London Overground part of the National Rail,
network, or not?

The observation that triggered the question was seeing, on one of the
maps on board a tube train, a station showing an interchange opportunity
with London Overground, but *not* showing the National Rail symbol
against the station name. Which would seem to imply not.

It is part of National Rail, but TfL has the franchise for whatever
number of years.

Not quite correct. *TfL have been given the powers to let and manage the
concession for the Overground network. LOROL are the concessionaire who
operate the service for TfL and have to meet the requirements and
standards set by TfL. TfL also take almost all of the risk on revenue
(i.e. they set and control fares rather than it being a TOC decision)
although LOROL are incentivised to keep fraud levels under control.

The set up is not dissimilar to what applies with the Merseyrail network
where the local PTE has delegated powers to specify and contract the
operation of the local Merseyrail Electrics network.

Though I understand that the operator of the Merseyrail Electrics,
Serco-Nedrailways (or is it now Serco-Abellio?), takes the revenue
risk - though I think the PTE may have taken it under the previous
arrangement when the concession (or possibly still a franchise back
then) was in the hands of MTL then Arriva (via a takeover).

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

LO is not a franchise (in the
same way as most of the other Train Operating Companies), as TfL takes
the full revenue risk and LOROL has to run the services to TfL's
specifications for a contracted price; with all the revenue going
back to TfL. When LOROL's contract is over, it will be upto TfL to
award the next concession. As far as ticketing, timetabling etc. is
concerned, LO are still part of the National Rail systems.

But not, it appears, as far as branding goes - unless the example I
cited was a mistake.

Out of curiosity, is LOROL a member or ATOC?

-roy

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

Mizter T wrote:

The current LO network - NLL, WLL and DC line - is all part of the
National Rail network - for example NR ticketing applies.

When the ELL reopens, then the section from Dalston down to New Cross
and NXG will not be part of the National Rail network (it's also not
owned by Network Rail), and the NR double-arrow symbol won't appear on
station totem signs along this stretch.

Ah, so do I take it from that that the NR symbol *has* been retained at
LO stations on the lines you mention?

-roy

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 12:58*pm, Roy Badami wrote:

* [...] LO is not a franchise (in the same way as most of the other
Train Operating Companies), as TfL takes the full revenue risk
and LOROL has to run the services to TfL's specifications for a
contracted price; *with all the revenue going back to TfL. When
LOROL's contract is over, it will be up to TfL to award the next
concession. As far as ticketing, timetabling etc. is concerned,
LO are still part of the National Rail systems.

But not, it appears, as far as branding goes - unless the example I
cited was a mistake.

Out of curiosity, is LOROL a member or ATOC?

Yes - see:
http://www.atoc.org/about.asp

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Sat, 20 Feb 2010, Roy Badami wrote:

Subject says it all. Is London Overground part of the National Rail,
network, or not?

You've had a salvo of answers on this specific question, to which i won't
add.

The observation that triggered the question was seeing, on one of the
maps on board a tube train, a station showing an interchange opportunity
with London Overground, but *not* showing the National Rail symbol
against the station name. Which would seem to imply not.

Which map, and which station?

TfL do have policies about what symbols get shown. For signs outside
stations (ones they run, at least), it says [1]:

Where a station is owned by London Underground, but has separate
platforms for London Overground trains

The totem outside the station will lead with an Underground roundel
followed by an Overground roundel and National Rail logo (where the
Overground network is not part of the National Rail network, no National
Rail logo is to be used).

But the rules for line diagram design [2] say:

(always display National Rail logo at Overground stations)

Now, AIUI at the moment there are no bits of the LO network which is not
part of the NR network, so both these rules mean the same thing in
practice, and both disagree with the map you actually saw.

However, if it was a network map rather than a line map, then it wouldn't
really be covered by either, and i can't find the rules for network maps.

tom

[1] http://www.tfl.gov.uk/microsites/int...rd-issue04.pdf
[2] http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...rd-issue03.pdf

--
My mother always said that democracy is the best revenge - Bilawal
Bhutto Zardari

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 1:02*pm, Roy Badami wrote:

Mizter T wrote:
The current LO network - NLL, WLL and DC line - is all part of the
National Rail network - for example NR ticketing applies.

When the ELL reopens, then the section from Dalston down to New Cross
and NXG will not be part of the National Rail network (it's also not
owned by Network Rail), and the NR double-arrow symbol won't appear on
station totem signs along this stretch.

Ah, so do I take it from that that the NR symbol *has* been retained at
LO stations on the lines you mention?

No - I said it "won't appear". At least that's what the TfL design
guidelines state. None of the stations are open yet, so I couldn't say
for sure, but there was no-sign of it at Surrey Quays or Rotherhithe
stations when I passed by recently, whilst orange LO roundels were
visible.

Of course the NR symbol will appear at New Cross and NX Gate, given
the other NR services there. (And New Cross itself is to remain a
Southeastern managed station, though NXG has already transferred to LO
management.)

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

Roy Badami wrote:
Mizter T wrote:

The current LO network - NLL, WLL and DC line - is all part of the
National Rail network - for example NR ticketing applies.

When the ELL reopens, then the section from Dalston down to New Cross
and NXG will not be part of the National Rail network (it's also not
owned by Network Rail), and the NR double-arrow symbol won't appear
on station totem signs along this stretch.

Ah, so do I take it from that that the NR symbol *has* been retained
at LO stations on the lines you mention?

Where Network Rail is the freeholder of the station, the National Rail
symbol still has primacy, even if only LO trains call there. LU or LO symbol
position then depends on who manages the station, eg it is LU first on many
of the DC line stations.

In my opinion the ELL core stations should still have a National Rail symbol
as well, because as far as members of the public are concerened, you will
catch mainline trains there onto the existing network, (eventually in both
directions). I think that the ownership detail should be subordinated to
practical usefulness...

Paul S

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 12:58*pm, Roy Badami wrote:
* LO is not a franchise (in the

same way as most of the other Train Operating Companies), as TfL takes
the full revenue risk and LOROL has to run the services to TfL's
specifications for a contracted price; *with all the revenue going
back to TfL. When LOROL's contract is over, it will be upto TfL to
award the next concession. As far as ticketing, timetabling etc. is
concerned, LO are still part of the National Rail systems.

But not, it appears, as far as branding goes - unless the example I
cited was a mistake.


But that's a pretty minor point, as you can also see maps, on
Underground trains, where interchange is shown with both NR and LO.
The approach on the train maps generally seems to be that interchange
with LO is a special case, as this is a TfL company and the double
arrow symbol is only definitely used when there is interchange with
another TOC as well. But there doesn't seem to be a consistent rule.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

Mizter T wrote:

No - I said it "won't appear". At least that's what the TfL design
guidelines state. None of the stations are open yet, so I couldn't say
for sure, but there was no-sign of it at Surrey Quays or Rotherhithe
stations when I passed by recently, whilst orange LO roundels were
visible.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. You seemed to be contrasting the situation
between Dalston and New Cross with the rest of the LO network, which you
say *is* part of National Rail.

I understand you are saying this section of line will not have any NR
branding, but I was curious as to whether the stations on the NLL, WLL
and DC line have retained the NR logo, or whether it has been removed as
part of the LO rebranding.

-roy

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

In message
, at
04:53:11 on Sat, 20 Feb 2010, Mizter T remarked:
Is London Overground part of the National Rail,
network, or not?

The observation that triggered the question was seeing, on one of the
maps on board a tube train, a station showing an interchange opportunity
with London Overground, but *not* showing the National Rail symbol
against the station name. *Which would seem to imply not.

Yes. And no. And it depends on what you mean by "National Rail
network" anyway.

How about "trains upon which an all-lines rover are accepted"?
--
Roland Perry

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

Tom Anderson wrote:

Which map, and which station?

I think it was the map of the Victoria line (i.e. the horizontal ones
inside the Victoria line trains). Is that what is meant by 'line diagram'?

I forget which station, I'm afraid.

I can see some logic in the answer elsewhere in this thread that the NR
symbol only appears on those kinds of maps where there is an interchange
opportunity with non-LO trains, but that seems to contradict the
guidance you quote below.


TfL do have policies about what symbols get shown. For signs outside
stations (ones they run, at least), it says [1]:

Where a station is owned by London Underground, but has separate
platforms for London Overground trains

The totem outside the station will lead with an Underground roundel
followed by an Overground roundel and National Rail logo (where the
Overground network is not part of the National Rail network, no National
Rail logo is to be used).

But the rules for line diagram design [2] say:

(always display National Rail logo at Overground stations)

Now, AIUI at the moment there are no bits of the LO network which is not
part of the NR network, so both these rules mean the same thing in
practice, and both disagree with the map you actually saw.

However, if it was a network map rather than a line map, then it
wouldn't really be covered by either, and i can't find the rules for
network maps.

Thanks.

-roy

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

Where Network Rail is the freeholder of the station, the National Rail
symbol still has primacy, even if only LO trains call there. LU or LO symbol
position then depends on who manages the station, eg it is LU first on many
of the DC line stations.

Interesting, thanks. So that would presumably be the case on all of the
current LO network (i.e. excluding the ELL)?

-roy

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

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?

-roy

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

I wrote:

I think it was the map of the Victoria line (i.e. the horizontal ones
inside the Victoria line trains). Is that what is meant by 'line diagram'?

I forget which station, I'm afraid.

I'm guessing it was probably Blackhorse Road, as I recall it was close
to the end of the line. Blackhorse Road appears on the Standard Tube
Map without an NR logo, too.

-roy

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

In message , at
13:59:17 on Sat, 20 Feb 2010, Roy Badami remarked:
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?

"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.

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/manage...c35ce74100fb0d
e1b9798124/areaMap/All_Line_Rover.pdf
--
Roland Perry

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

"Paul Scott" wrote in message
...
Roy Badami wrote:
Mizter T wrote:

The current LO network - NLL, WLL and DC line - is all part of the
National Rail network - for example NR ticketing applies.

When the ELL reopens, then the section from Dalston down to New
Cross
and NXG will not be part of the National Rail network (it's also not
owned by Network Rail), and the NR double-arrow symbol won't appear
on station totem signs along this stretch.

Ah, so do I take it from that that the NR symbol *has* been retained
at LO stations on the lines you mention?

Where Network Rail is the freeholder of the station, the National Rail
symbol still has primacy, even if only LO trains call there. LU or LO
symbol position then depends on who manages the station, eg it is LU
first on many of the DC line stations.

No it doesn't. The Overground symbol is shown before the NR symbol.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...rd-issue02.pdf

Peter Smyth

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

Roy Badami wrote:
Subject says it all. Is London Overground part of the National Rail,
network, or not?

The observation that triggered the question was seeing, on one of the
maps on board a tube train, a station showing an interchange
opportunity with London Overground, but *not* showing the National
Rail symbol against the station name. Which would seem to imply not.

Long before LO was invented, it was already the tradition that tube network
maps only used the NR symbol at stations where all of the NR lines were not
shown in both directions. So tube maps which showed the Thameslink line from
Kentish Town to Elephant had a BR symbol at Kentish Town and Elephant (to
symbolise the Thameslink lines to the suburbs) but not at Farringdon or
Blackfriars. See http://homepage.ntlworld.com/clive.billson/1995.htm . Line
maps which omit the NR symbol where they already show the Overground flag
are in keeping with that philiosophy, and so imply nothing about the
relationship or lack thereof between LO and NR.

--
We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

Peter Smyth wrote:
"Paul Scott" wrote in message

Where Network Rail is the freeholder of the station, the National
Rail symbol still has primacy, even if only LO trains call there. LU
or LO symbol position then depends on who manages the station, eg it
is LU first on many of the DC line stations.

No it doesn't. The Overground symbol is shown before the NR symbol.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...rd-issue02.pdf

There's an issue 3 of that now, same link with '03' at the end. I was going
by section 2.3.1 there, note 3, but agree it could be interpreted
differently.

Depends on what is meant by 'interchanges with the rest of the national rail
network'. Do we assume that means trains calling?

Paul S

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 1:43*pm, Roy Badami wrote:

Mizter T wrote:
No - I said it "won't appear". At least that's what the TfL design
guidelines state. None of the stations are open yet, so I couldn't say
for sure, but there was no-sign of it at Surrey Quays or Rotherhithe
stations when I passed by recently, whilst orange LO roundels were
visible.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. *You seemed to be contrasting the situation
between Dalston and New Cross with the rest of the LO network, which you
say *is* part of National Rail.

I understand you are saying this section of line will not have any NR
branding, but I was curious as to whether the stations on the NLL, WLL
and DC line have retained the NR logo, or whether it has been removed as
part of the LO rebranding.

Yes, the other stations on the NLL, WLL and DC line retain, and will
continue to retain, the NR logo on the totem signs (i.e. the flag
things, whatever you want to call them), regardless of how much of an
LO makeover they're having / have had.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

Willms wrote:

Not quite correct. TfL have been given the powers to let and manage the
concession for the Overground network. LOROL are the concessionaire who
operate the service for TfL and have to meet the requirements and
standards set by TfL.

which is a wrong use of the English language...

Answering questions on a UK newsgroup would seem to be a perfectly
appropriate use of the English language, but I assume that's not what
you actually meant to say.

Assuming you think that the quoted text is in some way poor English,
though, I can't immediately see anything wrong with it. Are you perhaps
confused by the use of the plural here when the organisations mentioned
are syntactically singular? That's a perfectly valid British English
construction - the organisations can be taken to be semantically plural
(think of them as collective nouns for the people at the organisation).
Singular would be correct here too, and is often used, but IME use of
the plural is more common than the singular in cases like this.
(American English would require the singular here, however.)

Or is there some other usage error that I'm missing?

-roy

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 7:24*pm, "Willms" wrote:
Am Sat, 20 Feb 2010 12:47:24 UTC, *schrieb Andy *
auf uk.railway :

In some ways this is similar to the situation with Merseyrail, where
DfT has devolved the awarding of the concession/franchise to
Merseyside.

* i.e. Merseyside (or the Merseyside PTE) is the concessionaire. DfT
has awarded a concession to Merseyside, but not Merseyside to
Serco-Nedrail. *


No they havn't. Merseyside PTE (now using the public name of
Merseytravel) now award the franchise as DfT have devolved the
responsibily to them. LO and Merseyrail are the only Train Operating
Companies where DfT doesn't award the contract. London Overground is a
concession with TfL taking the revenue risk and specifying the
service, whereas in Merseyside, the revenue remains with the Train
Operating Company (Serco-Nedrail for 25 years from 2003)

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 7:24*pm, "Willms" wrote:
Am Sat, 20 Feb 2010 12:41:01 UTC, *schrieb Paul Corfield
*auf uk.railway :

It is part of National Rail, but TfL has the franchise for whatever
number of years.

Not quite correct. *TfL have been given the powers to let and manage the
concession for the Overground network. LOROL are the concessionaire who
operate the service for TfL and have to meet the requirements and
standards set by TfL.

* which is a wrong use of the English language...

I suggest you check again:


con·ces·sion·aire (kn-ssh-nâr):

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.


TfL also take almost all of the risk on revenue
(i.e. they set and control fares rather than it being a TOC decision)
although LOROL are incentivised to keep fraud levels under control.

* Which says that DfT has given the network used by TfL for London
Overground as a concession, and TfL has made an operation contract
with LOROL for operating it.

Check again, see above. TfL are taking the role of DfT in London
Overground and DfT have ceded all their control and role to TfL.


* The concessionaire, which is the party taking all the commercial
risk of exploiting a given resource conceded to it, is TfL.


There is nothing about revenue risk in the word concessionaire.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

"Andy" wrote

LO and Merseyrail are the only Train Operating
Companies where DfT doesn't award the contract.

and Scotrail

Peter

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 20, 9:22*pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Andy" wrote

LO and Merseyrail are the only Train Operating
Companies where DfT doesn't award the contract.

and Scotrail


Of course, I'd forgotten about Scottish devolution, but wasn't the
current franchise awarded before DfT passed the responsibilities to
Transport Scotland? Transport Scotland did award the franchise
extension though.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On 20/02/2010 20:31, Roy Badami wrote:
Willms wrote:

Not quite correct. TfL have been given the powers to let and manage the
concession for the Overground network. LOROL are the concessionaire who
operate the service for TfL and have to meet the requirements and
standards set by TfL.

which is a wrong use of the English language...

Answering questions on a UK newsgroup would seem to be a perfectly
appropriate use of the English language, but I assume that's not what
you actually meant to say.

Assuming you think that the quoted text is in some way poor English,
though, I can't immediately see anything wrong with it. Are you perhaps
confused by the use of the plural here when the organisations mentioned
are syntactically singular? That's a perfectly valid British English
construction - the organisations can be taken to be semantically plural
(think of them as collective nouns for the people at the organisation).
Singular would be correct here too, and is often used, but IME use of
the plural is more common than the singular in cases like this.
(American English would require the singular here, however.)

Or is there some other usage error that I'm missing?

I think the issue is the exact meaning and use of
concession/franchise/operating contract/whatever in a particular context.

Presumably it is not the use of "Overground" to mean a limited subset of
the services which the man on the Clapham rail replacement omnibus calls
"overground", while wondering what the "Overground Network" is :-)
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

In article ,
(Roy Badami) wrote:

I wrote:

I think it was the map of the Victoria line (i.e. the horizontal
ones inside the Victoria line trains). Is that what is meant by
'line diagram'?

I forget which station, I'm afraid.

I'm guessing it was probably Blackhorse Road, as I recall it was
close to the end of the line. Blackhorse Road appears on the
Standard Tube Map without an NR logo, too.

Does it appear with an interchange symbol? It was at one time the only
Victoria Line station to appear without such a symbol (before the Brixton
extension opened, as you ask).

--
Colin Rosenstiel

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