In message , at 15:46:23 on
Mon, 9 May 2016, Paul Corfield remarked:
As we have no commercial product definition for the "Hopper Ticket" it
is impossible to say whether the technology currently on buses and in
central systems can support the new product. I could speculate in all
sorts of ways as to how it could work but there'd be no point. My
only observation would be that I can't see that it will be a "quick
fix" issue taking only weeks to introduce.

If it's based on the current hardware, then an "hourly cap" would seem
to fit the bill, and the Oyster daily capping software is already in
place (isn't it?)
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:46:23 on
Mon, 9 May 2016, Paul Corfield remarked:
As we have no commercial product definition for the "Hopper Ticket" it
is impossible to say whether the technology currently on buses and in
central systems can support the new product. I could speculate in all
sorts of ways as to how it could work but there'd be no point. My
only observation would be that I can't see that it will be a "quick
fix" issue taking only weeks to introduce.

If it's based on the current hardware, then an "hourly cap" would seem
to fit the bill, and the Oyster daily capping software is already in
place (isn't it?)

Yes, the logic for an hourly cap seems simple enough, although I suppose
there's bound to be some strange edge cases.

Given that he also promises to freeze fares, I wonder how he plans to make
up the revenue loss?

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 15:30:53 on Mon, 9 May 2016, Recliner
remarked:
As we have no commercial product definition for the "Hopper Ticket" it
is impossible to say whether the technology currently on buses and in
central systems can support the new product. I could speculate in all
sorts of ways as to how it could work but there'd be no point. My
only observation would be that I can't see that it will be a "quick
fix" issue taking only weeks to introduce.

If it's based on the current hardware, then an "hourly cap" would seem
to fit the bill, and the Oyster daily capping software is already in
place (isn't it?)

Yes, the logic for an hourly cap seems simple enough, although I suppose
there's bound to be some strange edge cases.

Given that he also promises to freeze fares, I wonder how he plans to make
up the revenue loss?

Stuffing ever more passengers onto the existing buses and tubes?
--
Roland Perry

On 09/05/2016 17:45, Paul Corfield wrote:

The crucial issue is whether the 3 caps are hard wired into the card
and system design or if there is flexibility to add more caps within
the system.

Isn't part of the point of the new back office system for contactless
that it can be told to do more and cleverer stuff?

If there is flexibility then yes, broadly, an hourly cap
works *provided* you don't care about whether people can make a return
journey for a single fare within 1 hour.

That has long been possible on Tramlink (within 90 minutes, maybe?).

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

In message , at
18:38:29 on Mon, 9 May 2016, Arthur Figgis
remarked:
The crucial issue is whether the 3 caps are hard wired into the card
and system design or if there is flexibility to add more caps within
the system.

Isn't part of the point of the new back office system for contactless
that it can be told to do more and cleverer stuff?

But doesn't it still do no capping at all (or am I out of date)?
--
Roland Perry

On 09/05/2016 18:38, Arthur Figgis wrote:

On 09/05/2016 17:45, Paul Corfield wrote:

The crucial issue is whether the 3 caps are hard wired into the card
and system design or if there is flexibility to add more caps within
the system.

Isn't part of the point of the new back office system for contactless
that it can be told to do more and cleverer stuff?

Yep, ditto my thinking. (Hence Monday-Sunday caps on contactless and
whatever else may yet be to come.)


If there is flexibility then yes, broadly, an hourly cap
works *provided* you don't care about whether people can make a return
journey for a single fare within 1 hour.

That has long been possible on Tramlink (within 90 minutes, maybe?).


70 minutes for contactless/Oyster, but only one change, i.e. using two
trams. It's 90 minutes for paper single tickets (still available at tram
stop ticket machines).

It also allows for one free change from some local buses which feed the
tram in the New Addington area (used to be T-prefixed bus routes but the
bus network was remodelled recently so the T-buses are no more) -
however again this is just one free transfer, i.e. feeder bus+tram, so
feeder bus+tram+tram is two fares.

All outlined on this page (inc list of feeder bus routes):
https://tfl.gov.uk/fares-and-payments/fares/bus-and-tram

If the Oyster system isn't flexible enough for the 'hour hopper' ticket,
then I could imagine the 70 minute one free transfer being implemented
instead (i.e. copying what happens on Tramlink). Not what was in the
manifesto, but arguably close enough.

In message , at 17:45:25 on
Mon, 9 May 2016, Paul Corfield remarked:

an hourly cap works *provided* you don't care about whether people can
make a return journey for a single fare within 1 hour. If you do care
about that then the checking logic becomes very complex indeed.

Notwithstanding you go on to say some administrations seek to ban that,
I doubt if the Mayor has mixed such a thing into his promise.

The only place I recall permission plus a limit (maybe an hour, I don't
remember) on multiple trips - which includes their Metro as well as
buses - is Brussels and I don't think that has an anti-return or
anti-circular-trip mechanism.
--
Roland Perry

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 9 May 2016 19:53:20 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 17:45:25 on
Mon, 9 May 2016, Paul Corfield remarked:

an hourly cap works *provided* you don't care about whether people can
make a return journey for a single fare within 1 hour. If you do care
about that then the checking logic becomes very complex indeed.

Notwithstanding you go on to say some administrations seek to ban that,
I doubt if the Mayor has mixed such a thing into his promise.

The only place I recall permission plus a limit (maybe an hour, I don't
remember) on multiple trips - which includes their Metro as well as
buses - is Brussels and I don't think that has an anti-return or
anti-circular-trip mechanism.


The 1 hour Hopper ticket launches in September.

https://twitter.com/BBCTomEdwards/st...59297308823552

As I expected TfL have obviously been working away in the background
so there's a quick win delivery of part of the manifesto.

Good work. I guess they could read the opinion polls just like everyone
else, and realised very early on that Sadiq was the likely winner and they
should be helping him with one of his key pledges.

I did notice that in one of his victory speeches he was fulsome in his
praise for the police and fire services, but just said that he looked
forward to working with TfL. He's also on the record as saying how flabby
and wasteful it is:

"Fares don’t have to keep going up like this.

Because at the same time as fares have gone up, TfL has become more and
more bloated.
They simply haven’t had to make the efficiency savings that other parts of
the public sector have had to in recent years.

Did you know - they pay 450 staff more than £100,000 a year.

They spend £383 million a year on consultants and agency workers – which
has more than doubled under Boris Johnson.

They wasted £900 million on the tube signalling contract disaster with
Bombardier.

And they bizarrely still have entirely separate engineering operations for
underground and surface transport - which wastes hundreds of millions of
pounds on two sets of overheads, backroom functions and procurement.
So TfL is flabby.

And it’s not acceptable."

From
http://www.sadiq.london/i_ll_be_the_...ore_affordable

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 9 May 2016 19:53:20 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 17:45:25 on
Mon, 9 May 2016, Paul Corfield remarked:

an hourly cap works *provided* you don't care about whether people can
make a return journey for a single fare within 1 hour. If you do care
about that then the checking logic becomes very complex indeed.

Notwithstanding you go on to say some administrations seek to ban that,
I doubt if the Mayor has mixed such a thing into his promise.

The only place I recall permission plus a limit (maybe an hour, I don't
remember) on multiple trips - which includes their Metro as well as
buses - is Brussels and I don't think that has an anti-return or
anti-circular-trip mechanism.


The 1 hour Hopper ticket launches in September.

https://twitter.com/BBCTomEdwards/st...59297308823552

As I expected TfL have obviously been working away in the background
so there's a quick win delivery of part of the manifesto.

Good work. I guess they could read the opinion polls just like everyone
else, and realised very early on that Sadiq was the likely winner and they
should be helping him with one of his key pledges.

I did notice that in one of his victory speeches he was fulsome in his
praise for the police and fire services, but just said that he looked
forward to working with TfL. He's also on the record as saying how flabby
and wasteful it is:

"Fares don’t have to keep going up like this.

Because at the same time as fares have gone up, TfL has become more and
more bloated.
They simply haven’t had to make the efficiency savings that other parts of
the public sector have had to in recent years.

Did you know - they pay 450 staff more than £100,000 a year.

They spend £383 million a year on consultants and agency workers – which
has more than doubled under Boris Johnson.

It's impossible to say that this represents bad value for money without
knowing what these workers achieved and what the equivalent cost of doing
the work with "full-time" employees would have been.

Using agency workers isn't always the worst case cost-wise, plenty of major
companies use them precisely because they are cheaper.

(Though I accept that they are, almost, always bad from the pov of workers
rights, so if you are a left leaning organisation/person this fact may trump
all others. But you can't use "cost" as a proxy for this argument, you have
to make it explicitly)

They wasted £900 million on the tube signalling contract disaster with
Bombardier.

wasn't this forced upon them by HMG, despite TfL's protestations?

tim

tim... wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 9 May 2016 19:53:20 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 17:45:25 on
Mon, 9 May 2016, Paul Corfield remarked:

an hourly cap works *provided* you don't care about whether people can
make a return journey for a single fare within 1 hour. If you do care
about that then the checking logic becomes very complex indeed.

Notwithstanding you go on to say some administrations seek to ban that,
I doubt if the Mayor has mixed such a thing into his promise.

The only place I recall permission plus a limit (maybe an hour, I don't
remember) on multiple trips - which includes their Metro as well as
buses - is Brussels and I don't think that has an anti-return or
anti-circular-trip mechanism.


The 1 hour Hopper ticket launches in September.

https://twitter.com/BBCTomEdwards/st...59297308823552

As I expected TfL have obviously been working away in the background
so there's a quick win delivery of part of the manifesto.

Good work. I guess they could read the opinion polls just like everyone
else, and realised very early on that Sadiq was the likely winner and they
should be helping him with one of his key pledges.

I did notice that in one of his victory speeches he was fulsome in his
praise for the police and fire services, but just said that he looked
forward to working with TfL. He's also on the record as saying how flabby
and wasteful it is:

"Fares don’t have to keep going up like this.

Because at the same time as fares have gone up, TfL has become more and
more bloated.
They simply haven’t had to make the efficiency savings that other parts of
the public sector have had to in recent years.

Did you know - they pay 450 staff more than £100,000 a year.

They spend £383 million a year on consultants and agency workers – which
has more than doubled under Boris Johnson.

It's impossible to say that this represents bad value for money without
knowing what these workers achieved and what the equivalent cost of doing
the work with "full-time" employees would have been.

Using agency workers isn't always the worst case cost-wise, plenty of major
companies use them precisely because they are cheaper.

(Though I accept that they are, almost, always bad from the pov of workers
rights, so if you are a left leaning organisation/person this fact may trump
all others. But you can't use "cost" as a proxy for this argument, you have
to make it explicitly)

They wasted £900 million on the tube signalling contract disaster with
Bombardier.

wasn't this forced upon them by HMG, despite TfL's protestations?

I've heard that there was Treasury pressure to "save" money, but it was
actually Boris's decision to overrule Peter Hendy, who knew it was a bad
idea.