On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 16:41:28 +0100 Clive D. W. Feather clive@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk said...

That sounds crazy to me - the only way in which Bus Savers and Bus Passes
can be sold at NR stations is for TfL to take them over?

No: the only way in which TfL can ensure that they are sold at NR
stations is to take them over.

You should be writing to SWT and asking *them* why they aren't selling
the tickets.

It could be done, NR stations could effectively become "Pass Agents" like
newsagents shops throughout London and sell TfL products albeit with
another machine at each window.

However I suspect the accountants and auditors of the TOCs somehow won't
allow it as it....

--
Phil Richards
London, UK
Home page: http://www.philrichards1.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

"Rich Mallard" wrote in message ...

"The rationalisation of the fares systems of both networks would be
a major advantage" ...to TfL I assume. I am sure this will mean all sorts
of Cheap Day Deturn tickets and rail-only season tickets etc. disappear and
be replaced with higher 'zonal' fares or Travelcards.

Interesting point - I notice that LT fares apply to all Bakerloo Line
destinations except if travelling to/from Harrow & Wealdstone, in
which case NR's rate applies between Kenton and Harrow & Wealdstone;
wonder if this bit is cheaper/dearer per mile? Also, do separate NR
and LU fares exist between, say, Amersham and Harrow-on-the-Hill, and
if so, which is cheaper?

David E. Belcher

David E. Belcher wrote:
"Rich Mallard" wrote in message ...


"The rationalisation of the fares systems of both networks would be
a major advantage" ...to TfL I assume. I am sure this will mean all sorts
of Cheap Day Deturn tickets and rail-only season tickets etc. disappear and
be replaced with higher 'zonal' fares or Travelcards.


Interesting point - I notice that LT fares apply to all Bakerloo Line
destinations except if travelling to/from Harrow & Wealdstone, in
which case NR's rate applies between Kenton and Harrow & Wealdstone;
wonder if this bit is cheaper/dearer per mile? Also, do separate NR
and LU fares exist between, say, Amersham and Harrow-on-the-Hill, and
if so, which is cheaper?

David E. Belcher

Comparing fares from NRES Online at www.nationalrail.co.uk/planmyjourney
and TfL Journey Planner at www.journeyplanner.org gives:

NR: Standard Day Single £2.90
TfL: Single (Zones D-5) £2.90

NR: Cheap Day Return £4.10
Standard Day Return £5.80

Obviously the standard return prices are the same (as TfL don't really
do returns, just two singles), but the CDR is significantly cheaper -
and you can get railcard discounts too presumably.

The only problem is, how do you buy a CDR between Amersham & Harrow?
There's no NR ticket office at either station.

As for Harrow & Wealdstone to Kenton, the NR single (SDS) price is £1.70
whereas an LU zonal single would be £1.50 (£1.30 Oyster weekdays,
£1.00 weekends). A CDR is £2.00 where a normal LU fare would be £3.00.
(SDR is £2.90).

If you so desired, you could also buy a First Day Return between these
two stations, a journey of around 5 minutes each way, for £16.80.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Annabel Smyth wrote in message ...
Boltar wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 4 Oct 2004:

"Chris Henderson" wrote in message
...
A metro system that is part of the National Rail network seems to work
perfectly well in Liverpool. Are there reasons why it wouldn't in London?

But its not a metro system is it. Its just a load of old BR track lumped
together and rebranded as a metro. You could do the same to half a dozen
different suburban lines in cities around the country.

They've done it in South London, where they call it the "Overground
Network" at the moment; at one stage it was South London Metro.

For those who might be interested the London Transport Users Committee
has done some research recently on both stations jointly served by
London Underground and on rail fares policy in London. To view this
work please visit http://www.ltuc.org.uk/document_list.php?category_id=85

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 15:56:12 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote:

David E. Belcher wrote:
"Rich Mallard" wrote in message ...


"The rationalisation of the fares systems of both networks would be
a major advantage" ...to TfL I assume. I am sure this will mean all sorts
of Cheap Day Deturn tickets and rail-only season tickets etc. disappear and
be replaced with higher 'zonal' fares or Travelcards.


Interesting point - I notice that LT fares apply to all Bakerloo Line
destinations except if travelling to/from Harrow & Wealdstone, in
which case NR's rate applies between Kenton and Harrow & Wealdstone;
wonder if this bit is cheaper/dearer per mile?

As for Harrow & Wealdstone to Kenton, the NR single (SDS) price is £1.70
whereas an LU zonal single would be £1.50 (£1.30 Oyster weekdays,
£1.00 weekends). A CDR is £2.00 where a normal LU fare would be £3.00.
(SDR is £2.90).

If you so desired, you could also buy a First Day Return between these
two stations, a journey of around 5 minutes each way, for £16.80.

Harrow and Wealdstone is, I believe, excluded as it is a priced station
used for the compilation of other NR fares on the line out of Euston.
Therefore if it went to the TfL farescale all fares would probably fall
thus making the revenue compensation payable to Silverlink huge and an
inappropriate use of TfL's money.

Oyster pre-pay is valid to Harrow and Wealdstone though so you can get
the discounted rates.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Tue, 5 Oct 2004 22:52:06 +0100, Phil Richards
wrote:

On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 16:41:28 +0100 Clive D. W. Feather clive@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk said...

That sounds crazy to me - the only way in which Bus Savers and Bus Passes
can be sold at NR stations is for TfL to take them over?

No: the only way in which TfL can ensure that they are sold at NR
stations is to take them over.

You should be writing to SWT and asking *them* why they aren't selling
the tickets.

It could be done, NR stations could effectively become "Pass Agents" like
newsagents shops throughout London and sell TfL products albeit with
another machine at each window.

However I suspect the accountants and auditors of the TOCs somehow won't
allow it as it....

....competes with their profits? In their tiny privatized competitive mindset,
if they facilitate other modes of transport, they are cutting your own throats.

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 02:05:53 +0100 Marc Brett
said...

It could be done, NR stations could effectively become "Pass Agents" like
newsagents shops throughout London and sell TfL products albeit with
another machine at each window.

However I suspect the accountants and auditors of the TOCs somehow won't
allow it as it....

...competes with their profits? In their tiny privatized competitive mindset,
if they facilitate other modes of transport, they are cutting your own throats.

I'm not sure exact commission amounts, but your local friendly Pass Agent
will still have to be paid a reasonable amount to make it worthwhile for
him. It's probably more to do with having monetary takings split over two
ticket issuing systems that will cause the NR ticket offices to throw a
few wobblers....

--
Phil Richards
London, UK
Home page: http://www.philrichards1.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
"Chris Henderson" wrote in message
...
A metro system that is part of the National Rail network seems to work
perfectly well in Liverpool. Are there reasons why it wouldn't in London?

But its not a metro system is it. Its just a load of old BR track lumped
together and rebranded as a metro. You could do the same to half a dozen
different suburban lines in cities around the country.

It didn't seem much different in practice to the Tyne & Wear metro (the only
other one I'm familiar with) - a similar proportion of it is undeground.

And since when was the whole of the London Underground designed as one metro
system? My knowledge is patchy but I know most of the eastern end of the
Central Line was BR track until 1945 or thereabouts.

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:21:11 +0000 (UTC), "Chris Henderson"
wrote:
less well informed (due to relative lack of public knowledge of
the ability to make many journeys by NR instead of/as well as by LU, or
vice
versa),

please provide evidence to support this assertion as I don't understand
what you are trying to say. Why the public don't understand things can
result from a whole range of factors that are completely outside the
scope of railway management(s).

I'm saying that a good number people have a limited or non-existent
awareness of suburban National Rail services in London, because the Tube map
is so widely believed to be the definitive guide.

and more expensive (due to missed economies of scale in management,
staffing and many other areas) than could be the case with one merged
network? What mitigating circumstances are there?

Please evidence your argument that LU being owned by the main line
railway would be more "efficient".

I can't "evidence" it as such, but as a general principle, needless
duplication of management, staffing structures, communications systems and
so on tends to be inefficient.

A metro system that is part of the National Rail network seems to work
perfectly well in Liverpool. Are there reasons why it wouldn't in London?

You call the Merseyrail system a Metro? Interesting.

Why, shouldn't I?

(Genuine questions from a puzzled non-expert.)

Out of curiosity why are you asking the questions? for research?

No. Because of my own curiosity. It occurred to me after using Merseyrail
for the first time recently, which I hadn't realised in advance was NR, a
pleasant surprise which made things simpler.

You're generally being distinctly aggressive with me considering I made it
perfectly clear that I'm *not* an expert and I'm asking genuine questions
out of pure curiosity.

"Chris Henderson" wrote in message ...
"Boltar" wrote in message
om...
"Chris Henderson" wrote in message
...
A metro system that is part of the National Rail network seems to work
perfectly well in Liverpool. Are there reasons why it wouldn't in London?

But its not a metro system is it. Its just a load of old BR track lumped
together and rebranded as a metro. You could do the same to half a dozen
different suburban lines in cities around the country.

It didn't seem much different in practice to the Tyne & Wear metro (the only
other one I'm familiar with) - a similar proportion of it is undeground.

Yes , but at least that has some route specifically built as a metro and runs
metro type rolling stock with metro type frequencies.


And since when was the whole of the London Underground designed as one metro
system? My knowledge is patchy but I know most of the eastern end of the
Central Line was BR track until 1945 or thereabouts.

Indeed. But then they went and built another 5 miles of tube gauge tunnel
from leytonstone. Anyway, theres always a grey area with the definition of
a metro as in all things. But you have to admit that a system such as
liverpools that uses mainline rolling stock , is 99% above ground and runs
intercity is not exactly a metro in the sense that most people would describe
one (they're limited to a single city for a start!). Some natty rebranding
doesn't really change that.

B2003