wrote:
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 11:56:38 on Wed, 3 Aug
2016, tim... remarked:

"In the autumn, keyGo will extend to stations in London and all of
its Great Northern and Thameslink routes - providing coverage from
Brighton to Huntingdon."

A nice bit of doublespeak there - last time I looked the GN route
went all the way to Peterborough. So when they say "all GN and
Thameslink routes" they mean "... but only at stations we can be
arsed to equip, thus breaking one of our franchise commitments".

surely the problem with Peterborough is having to avoid the problem of
people using Main line trains and then toughing out as if they have
used a stopping train (which I believe attracts a lower fare)

No, it's because Peterborough is an East Coast managed station and
GTR haven't sorted out integrating their readers with the gateline.

Same problem as Cambridge where the majority of 10m annual passengers use
GTR trains but AGA run the station and only handle their own smartcard and
m-ticket technologies.

And there was me thinking that ticketing was one bit that wasn't meant to be
so fragmented after privatisation.

I thought the whole idea behind ITSO cards and technology was to avoid
precisely this issue. Where did it all go wrong?

Robin

In message , at 23:51:45 on Thu, 4 Aug 2016,
bob remarked:
"In the autumn, keyGo will extend to stations in London and all of
its Great Northern and Thameslink routes - providing coverage from
Brighton to Huntingdon."

A nice bit of doublespeak there - last time I looked the GN route
went all the way to Peterborough. So when they say "all GN and
Thameslink routes" they mean "... but only at stations we can be
arsed to equip, thus breaking one of our franchise commitments".

surely the problem with Peterborough is having to avoid the problem of
people using Main line trains and then toughing out as if they have
used a stopping train (which I believe attracts a lower fare)

No, it's because Peterborough is an East Coast managed station and
GTR haven't sorted out integrating their readers with the gateline.

Same problem as Cambridge where the majority of 10m annual passengers use
GTR trains but AGA run the station and only handle their own smartcard and
m-ticket technologies.

And there was me thinking that ticketing was one bit that wasn't meant to be
so fragmented after privatisation.

I thought the whole idea behind ITSO cards and technology was to avoid
precisely this issue. Where did it all go wrong?

Two problems, quite different.

The one about stations: having gated them you have to attach ITSO pads
to them. That took TfL long enough just to allow ITSO season ticket
holders passage. Unless I've missed it I don't think TfL and their
national rail partners have got their head around ITSO pay as you go yet
on routes with ticket interavailability.

Secondly, interoperability: this is much more fundamental to the ITSO
concept. In theory I should be able to load a Scotrail ITSO ticket onto
a whatever Southern's "the Key" is called this week, but there isn't
even interoperability amongst (eg) ITSO cards in different bits of the
Stagecoach empire, let alone on trips using more than one franchise's
trains.
--
Roland Perry

ITSO PAYG (TYP 2) is not part of the ITSO on Prestige rollout, so wouldn't be recognised by Oyster readers were any scheme to actually exist.

Southern's account based PAYG scheme (TYP 22 PTYP 4) is part of IoP.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...20analysis.pdf

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 23:51:45 on Thu, 4 Aug
2016, bob remarked:
"In the autumn, keyGo will extend to stations in London and all of
its Great Northern and Thameslink routes - providing coverage from
Brighton to Huntingdon."

A nice bit of doublespeak there - last time I looked the GN route
went all the way to Peterborough. So when they say "all GN and
Thameslink routes" they mean "... but only at stations we can be
arsed to equip, thus breaking one of our franchise commitments".

surely the problem with Peterborough is having to avoid the problem
of people using Main line trains and then toughing out as if they
have used a stopping train (which I believe attracts a lower fare)

No, it's because Peterborough is an East Coast managed station and
GTR haven't sorted out integrating their readers with the gateline.

Same problem as Cambridge where the majority of 10m annual passengers
use GTR trains but AGA run the station and only handle their own
smartcard and m-ticket technologies.

And there was me thinking that ticketing was one bit that wasn't
meant to be so fragmented after privatisation.

I thought the whole idea behind ITSO cards and technology was to avoid
precisely this issue. Where did it all go wrong?

Two problems, quite different.

The one about stations: having gated them you have to attach ITSO
pads to them. That took TfL long enough just to allow ITSO season
ticket holders passage. Unless I've missed it I don't think TfL and
their national rail partners have got their head around ITSO pay as
you go yet on routes with ticket interavailability.

Secondly, interoperability: this is much more fundamental to the ITSO
concept. In theory I should be able to load a Scotrail ITSO ticket
onto a whatever Southern's "the Key" is called this week, but there
isn't even interoperability amongst (eg) ITSO cards in different bits
of the Stagecoach empire, let alone on trips using more than one
franchise's trains.

And one TOC's cards can't use another TOC's systems, or so it seems at
Cambridge. That is one place where it should be possible to use GTR's card
but one can't. Only AGA's technology (Smartcards & m-tickets) can be used on
the Cambridge gateline.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 05/08/2016 00:51, bob wrote:
wrote:


And there was me thinking that ticketing was one bit that wasn't meant to be
so fragmented after privatisation.

I thought the whole idea behind ITSO cards and technology was to avoid
precisely this issue. Where did it all go wrong?

A while ago I met some techies from a TOC and TfL, who told me there is
a big problem with the conflict between a political desire to let 'the
market' come up with something instead of being told what to do by the
government, and the practical need to have someone in charge who can
decide on a standard which everyone can then actually get on and use.

Everyone knows it is daft for every company to deploy its own system,
but co-ordination needs someone in charge to decide what to use. The
techies claimed that every time there was almost an agreement, Claire
Perry would run away and say it had to be left to the market rather than
DfT.

Plus, TOCs want to hold on to their passenger data, not share it with
rivals who might bid for the next franchise.

And there is the issue of goat-herding orphans, which acts as a brake on
technology. Even deciding they can just walk instead takes ages.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message
...
On 05/08/2016 00:51, bob wrote:
wrote:


And there was me thinking that ticketing was one bit that wasn't meant
to be
so fragmented after privatisation.

I thought the whole idea behind ITSO cards and technology was to avoid
precisely this issue. Where did it all go wrong?

A while ago I met some techies from a TOC and TfL, who told me there is a
big problem with the conflict between a political desire to let 'the
market' come up with something instead of being told what to do by the
government, and the practical need to have someone in charge who can
decide on a standard which everyone can then actually get on and use.

Everyone knows it is daft for every company to deploy its own system, but
co-ordination needs someone in charge to decide what to use. The techies
claimed that every time there was almost an agreement, Claire Perry would
run away and say it had to be left to the market rather than DfT.

The smart-metering initiative seems to have suffered from the same problem.

Governments and IT, not a good mix!

Plus, TOCs want to hold on to their passenger data, not share it with
rivals who might bid for the next franchise.

And there is the issue of goat-herding orphans, which acts as a brake on
technology. Even deciding they can just walk instead takes ages.

There is always going to have to be a system of purchasing tickets by walk
ups - even if the actual "ticket" is dispensed on a one time use smart
card..

A registered-card only system is going to disenfranchise too large a set of
people (even if they do try to do this on London buses)

tim

In article , (tim...)
wrote:

There is always going to have to be a system of purchasing tickets by
walk ups - even if the actual "ticket" is dispensed on a one time use
smart card..

A registered-card only system is going to disenfranchise too large a
set of people (even if they do try to do this on London buses)

Contactless largely undid that.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote in message
...
In article , (tim...)
wrote:

There is always going to have to be a system of purchasing tickets by
walk ups - even if the actual "ticket" is dispensed on a one time use
smart card..

A registered-card only system is going to disenfranchise too large a
set of people (even if they do try to do this on London buses)

Contactless largely undid that.

--

Not for under 18s and foreigners, it didn't. Especially in groups when only
one between four has a card (which can only be used for one)

And they are the set most likely to be disenfranchised by a registration
system

tim

In article , (tim...)
wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(tim...) wrote:

There is always going to have to be a system of purchasing tickets by
walk ups - even if the actual "ticket" is dispensed on a one time use
smart card..

A registered-card only system is going to disenfranchise too large a
set of people (even if they do try to do this on London buses)

Contactless largely undid that.

Not for under 18s and foreigners, it didn't. Especially in groups
when only one between four has a card (which can only be used for one)

And they are the set most likely to be disenfranchised by a
registration system

That was why I said "largely" of course. Registration is not necessary to
use contactless which is why it is available to many if not most foreigners.
Many under-18s go free of course.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote in message
...
In article , (tim...)
wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(tim...) wrote:

There is always going to have to be a system of purchasing tickets by
walk ups - even if the actual "ticket" is dispensed on a one time use
smart card..

A registered-card only system is going to disenfranchise too large a
set of people (even if they do try to do this on London buses)

Contactless largely undid that.

Not for under 18s and foreigners, it didn't. Especially in groups
when only one between four has a card (which can only be used for one)

And they are the set most likely to be disenfranchised by a
registration system

That was why I said "largely" of course. Registration is not necessary to
use contactless which is why it is available to many if not most
foreigners.

Many foreign countries don't have a credit card culture, at least not on a
one per family member basis

not all foreign banks offer contactless

Many under-18s go free of course.

We are talking about expansion to the national rail network, not London
buses

tim