On 06/02/2012 20:06, Mizter T wrote:

On Feb 6, 7:10 pm, Arthur wrote:

On 06/02/2012 14:50, Bruce wrote:

From the Evening Standard:

Boris bid to run every rail service in London

Boris Johnson today made a bid to take over every rail service in
London in a move described as the biggest shake-up since
privatisation.

The Mayor wants to control all suburban railways and introduce a
one-ticket system across Greater London.

Haven't we got one? Or would this be about squishing those nasty
point-to-point rail seasons in favour of multi-modal travelcards... at
twice the price. Or even breaking through ticketing to the world beyond
the M25.

We've got three different Oyster PAYG fare scales for single journeys
- one for TfL rail services (Tube, DLR, London Overground plus a few
NR routes as well), one for NR, and one for 'through journeys' that
involve both TfL and NR rated services. This understandably causes
some confusion - a single unified tariff would be preferable.

With Oyster, how many people actually know? I'm hearing more and more
people saying they basically trust they system to get it right, or at
least even out over time.

I must admit I didn't know Overground was different to the rest of NR.
How would know whether you get Overground or Southern for the trips
where both are possible?

The 'three tariff' situation is mirrored with paper ticket fares for
single journeys (and indeed return journeys - though off-peak, a Day
Travelcard is likely to be cheaper) - one fare scale for TfL/Tube, one
for NR, one for TfL-NR through journeys.

Haven't ever come across any suggestion that point-to-point rail
seasons would be squished, either under the proposals floated back
when Livingstone was Mayor, nor under any of these latest proposals.

Equally, has anyone denied it...

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Feb 6, 9:13*pm, Ganesh Sittampalam
wrote:

Isn't it cheaper for the operator if your journey has one leg rather
than two? There's overhead from getting on/off - people getting on
buses, interchange capacity at stations, etc. It seems like a good
thing to me to encourage people at the margins to not change

People don't generally choose to change. They change because there is
not a feasible through journey opportunity. That is in its own a
penalty.

There should not be any fee for changing; it should be one transport
system made up of all the modes, just as the Tube is.

If particular interchanges are overloaded because of *bus* traffic,
the route network needs redesigning. If it's because of train or Tube
traffic, perhaps the zone map needs playing with to encourage
"optimal" changes. But certainly not to discourage them.

Neil

On Feb 7, 8:50*am, Arthur Figgis wrote:

I'm not sure that having a third TOC which runs trains into both
Liverpool Street and Marylebone (or whatever) would be necessary for
getting through bus tickets.

True.

Getting NS to accept passengers kicked off DB buses which stop short
would be a good start.

Assuming you mean in London, that is already possible *if* the bus
changes its destination after you've boarded. If a driver fails to do
it they should be reported for being lazy and neglect of duty.

I think, however, that whether the bus has terminated short should be
irrelevant. There should be a through single fare from any part of
London to any other part of London by any mode, its cost being
determined by the zones crossed, and *only* the zones crossed, nothing
else. It should probably be around the level of the current Tube fare
set. For bus only (as there is an advantage with an overcrowded Tube
of keeping people on buses; this does not exist in most other cities)
there should be again one single fare for a bus journey of any length
in London regardless of whether that involves one, two or ten buses.

There is an argument that this causes pass-back fraud. But if you did
it on Oyster, it couldn't.

Being able to change buses would be nice. But who cares about the bus
passengers who actually /pay/? Chances are they aren't the Poorest +
Most Vulnerable Members of Society.

Quite.

Neil

On Feb 7, 8:55*am, Arthur Figgis wrote:

I must admit I didn't know Overground was different to the rest of NR.
How would know whether you get Overground or Southern for the trips
where both are possible?

One set of fares apply. The same as Euston-Watford Junction assumes
you *didn't* use LO, because LM is a more attractive service for that
journey.

Neil

"allantracy" wrote in message
...

If good for London, why not every other major city in the UK?

Surely, we already have such tickets.

In London, they have the Railcard and that even covers the Croydon
Tramlink.

Er... they have the 'Travelcard' in London. A London Travelcard is
effectively a day pass though, so it is overkill if you only want to do a
single journey that uses two modes.

Railcards are a different beast, generally held to give discounts on rail
travel...

Paul S

On Feb 6, 5:22*pm, Neil Williams wrote:

It is absolutely nonsensical that you are penalised for a journey that
requires two buses, and you are penalised for changing from Tube/train
to bus.

Well, only up to a point. PAYG Oyster caps make this less of a
problem than it otherwise would be. What you're proposing is
essentially a "transfer" system in which once you step onto the
transport system, you pay only one fare until you exit the system or
for the next hour or whatever; you could do that, but unless you're
assuming that you reduce the overall revenue by some considerable
amount, it'll involve raising the single fare (because single now
encompasses what were previously multiple rides) which is politically
tricky.

It also means that some realistic use-cases, such as "quickly nipping
over to X to buy a Y" become single journeys, unless you have some
amazingly complex rules on doubling back. Unless you add Oyster tap-
out to bus journeys, how would you detect "bus from home to shop, buy
thing, bus back?"

So if a Zone 1 to Zone 3 fare is, say, £4, it should be £4 whether
it's a direct Tube, or a bus, a Tube and another bus, or whatever.

OK, so bus Zone 4 to Zone 1, buy a book in Foyles, bus back to Zone 4
is charged as what? Show your working.

ian

On Tue, 7 Feb 2012 03:33:21 -0800 (PST)
ian batten wrote:
amount, it'll involve raising the single fare (because single now
encompasses what were previously multiple rides) which is politically
tricky.

Not if you're called Boris.

B2003

On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 05:34:41PM +0000, Paul Corfield wrote:

http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor%E2%80...ervices-london

The proposal centres on taking over the local "West Anglia" routes out
of Liverpool Street and the inner suburban services on South Eastern.
There is a report linked from the above press release.

It's a damned shame that, if you look at the map and charts on page 21,
the areas proposed for a TfL takeover are those that already have the
best service. It would be better to concentrate on areas served by
Southern and Southwest Trains, as they serve areas that have a lower
train frequency and very few tube stations.

The diagram on page 29 bears out the complaints I've been making here
about the recent Clapham Junction to Shepherds Bush improvements being
little more than cosmetic. They are predicted to be woefully inadequate
within a decade - indeed, they are inadequate already. We can assume
that all of those figures are under-estimates, given that it says that
there are *no* passengers having to stand between Battersea Park and
Balham - that's not true now, and certainly won't be in a decade's time.

And I'm surprised that there's no mention of HS2 or Old Oak Common.

--
David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice

Wow, my first sigquoting! I feel so special now!
-- Dan Sugalski

"Neil Williams" wrote:

On Feb 7, 8:55 am, Arthur Figgis wrote:

I must admit I didn't know Overground was different to the rest of NR.
How would know whether you get Overground or Southern for the trips
where both are possible?

One set of fares apply. The same as Euston-Watford Junction assumes
you *didn't* use LO, because LM is a more attractive service for that
journey.

That's not a great example, in that it doesn't really make sense - there's
only one Oyster PAYG fare for a Watford Jn to Euston (or v.v.) journey - my
understanding is that it's essentially set by London Midland, as it's
'their' flow (bear in mind WJ is outside the zonal system - 'zone W' for WJ
is a term that's only used internally).

On Feb 7, 12:33*pm, ian batten wrote:

Well, only up to a point. *PAYG Oyster caps make this less of a
problem than it otherwise would be. *What you're proposing is
essentially a "transfer" system in which once you step onto the
transport system, you pay only one fare until you exit the system or
for the next hour or whatever; you could do that, but unless you're
assuming that you reduce the overall revenue by some considerable
amount, it'll involve raising the single fare (because single now
encompasses what were previously multiple rides) which is politically
tricky.

It is fair that the fare be raised for that, yes. Perhaps it could
even go back to being zonal.

It also means that some realistic use-cases, such as "quickly nipping
over to X to buy a Y" become single journeys, unless you have some
amazingly complex rules on doubling back. *Unless you add Oyster tap-
out to bus journeys, how would you detect "bus from home to shop, buy
thing, bus back?"

So if a Zone 1 to Zone 3 fare is, say, £4, it should be £4 whether
it's a direct Tube, or a bus, a Tube and another bus, or whatever.

OK, so bus Zone 4 to Zone 1, buy a book in Foyles, bus back to Zone 4
is charged as what? *Show your working.

Absent bus touch-out, it's quite a hard one to determine. I'd
probably say it should be something along the lines of a bus-only
touch-in allows unlimited bus travel within an hour of the first touch-
in (or possibly a variable time based on the journey length of the bus
you touched in on). For paper tickets in other countries it's often
something like a bus ticket being a one-hour rover ticket.

Neil