With the central line down from North Acton this morning, I got the District
from Ealing to Acton, then Picc to Hammersmith (same price as to WC). As my
destination is White City, and the H&C isn't the most frequent service, I
decided to get the 72 or 220. Of course I got charged for it, so as well as
taking longer and having to suffer the scallys that infest Londons busses, I
had to pay more too!

*grouches*
--
Everything above is the personal opinion of the author, and nothing to do
with where he works and all that lovely disclaimery stuff.
Posted in his lunch hour too.

"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
...
With the central line down from North Acton this morning, I got the
District
from Ealing to Acton, then Picc to Hammersmith (same price as to WC). As
my
destination is White City, and the H&C isn't the most frequent service, I
decided to get the 72 or 220. Of course I got charged for it, so as well
as
taking longer and having to suffer the scallys that infest Londons busses,
I
had to pay more too!

shrugs

Could have got the Central Line from Ealing, then the rail replacement bus
service from North Acton, which was pretty quick, or even spent only 80p on
a 607 from Ealing to Shepherd's Bush and walked five mins to WC.

Ken didn't steal your 80p, you simply didn't use the rail replacement bus
service!

Ian Harper wrote:
"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
...
With the central line down from North Acton this morning, I got the
District from Ealing to Acton, then Picc to Hammersmith (same price
as to WC). As my destination is White City, and the H&C isn't the
most frequent service, I decided to get the 72 or 220. Of course I
got charged for it, so as well as taking longer and having to suffer
the scallys that infest Londons busses, I had to pay more too!

shrugs

Could have got the Central Line from Ealing, then the rail
replacement bus service from North Acton, which was pretty quick, or
even spent only 80p on a 607 from Ealing to Shepherd's Bush and
walked five mins to WC.

Ken didn't steal your 80p, you simply didn't use the rail replacement
bus service!

If they hadn't been carrying out the work on the railway that's causing the
line to be closed, he'd have complained about that instead.

Ian Harper wrote:
Could have got the Central Line from Ealing, then the rail
replacement bus
service from North Acton, which was pretty quick

No doubt, had I waited 15 minutes for a central line

, or even spent only 80p on
a 607 from Ealing to Shepherd's Bush and walked five mins to WC.

Wasn't sure how long that would take, last time I did it is was full of
the usual scum that infest busses, a fight broke out, and it took over
half an hour

Ken didn't steal your 80p, you simply didn't use the rail replacement
bus
service!

He promised that tickets were valid on local busses.

"Paul Weaver" typed



Ian Harper wrote:
Could have got the Central Line from Ealing, then the rail
replacement bus
service from North Acton, which was pretty quick

No doubt, had I waited 15 minutes for a central line

, or even spent only 80p on
a 607 from Ealing to Shepherd's Bush and walked five mins to WC.

Wasn't sure how long that would take, last time I did it is was full of
the usual scum that infest busses, a fight broke out, and it took over
half an hour

Ken didn't steal your 80p, you simply didn't use the rail replacement
bus
service!

He promised that tickets were valid on local busses.

Presuming you are on Oyster PrePay, I think you *might* be able to get
your money back, if you were prepared to spend ages on the phone.

I don't think I'd bother for 80p though.

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

Paul Weaver wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 20 Mar 2005:

it is was full of
the usual scum that infest busses,

Thank you. Not.
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 4 March 2005 with a new photo

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 10:48:02 -0000, "Ian Harper"
wrote:

Ken didn't steal your 80p, you simply didn't use the rail replacement bus
service!

To go back to my old chestnut, I see no reason whatsoever why, within
a system like TfL or a Passenger Transport Executive, a multi-modal or
connectional journey should be any more expensive than a single-modal
or non-connectional one.

You pay for a journey, be it by distance or zonal, the *system* should
provide it. No one mode is more or less important than another.

I point, once again, at the sensible model in the German
Verkehrsverbuende, where fares don't generally differ by mode.

I can see why you'd want to discourage use of the Tube in Zone 1 by
providing a high Tube fare (why can't this one be multi-modal?) and a
lower bus-only one, but other than in this specific instance the rest
of the fares system is an unjustified mess.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

To go back to my old chestnut, I see no reason whatsoever
why, within a system like TfL or a Passenger Transport
Executive, a multi-modal or connectional journey should be
any more expensive than a single-modal or non-connectional
one.

You pay for a journey, be it by distance or zonal, the
*system* should provide it. No one mode is more or less
important than another.

The reason which you profess to be unable to see is that,
even if you accept that all modes of transport are of
equal importance, they still cost different amounts (on a
per-mile basis) to run. Thus it is more expensive to
transport a person by tube from Ealing Broadway to White
City than it is to take them they by bus. That is why that
journey by tube costs £1.30 while the bus is only £1.20.

Of course, even if each mode had the same per-mile cost it
probably still wouldn't be possible to offer the same fare
for a multi-modal journey as for a single mode one, because
it would be impossible to reliably define a 'journey'. You
might know that you are going from Ealing Broadway to White
City, but what if you then completed your business there
and so went on to Ladbroke Grove 20 minutes later? Would
that still be a single journey over several modes that
would qualify for a 'through' fare? And how are TfL to
know either way? Could you travel all day making different
transfers from one mode to another and call it one journey?

A system that does not reflect the different costs of each
mode, and pass them on to the passenger, would also hugely
disadvantage the poorest members of the community. If
each mode cost the same then someone existing on benefit
who travels only on buses would be subsidising the cost of
transport for a city banker who uses the tube.

And all that depends on you accepting that every mode of
transport is of equal importance, which I personally do not
believe is the case. I would imagine that the vast majority
of Londoner's find that one or two modes are by far the
most important to them -- I would certainly imagine that
more people find the tube valuable than do so for Tramlink,
just as more people use buses than Dial-a-Ride.

Of course, if you want to make multi-modal journeys for as
little money as possible, may I introduce you to the
Travelcard (a long standing resident of almost every
newsagent in the city) and it's new friend, Oyster PrePay?

With the central line down from North Acton this morning,
I got the District from Ealing to Acton, then Picc to
Hammersmith (same price as to WC). As my destination is
White City, and the H&C isn't the most frequent service, I
decided to get the 72 or 220. Of course I got charged for
it, so as well as taking longer and having to suffer the
scallys that infest Londons busses, I had to pay more too!

Next time, I would suggest that you choose any one of the
many very good transport links available in that part of
London rather than taking the most convoluted route I can
think of and then moaning here about the consequences of
your own inefficiency.

And if you don't want to travel with other people, be they
the "scallys" and "scum" you so vividly describe you might
consider any one of the 20,000 taxis licensed for hire in
London, or the minicab firm just outside Ealing Broadway
station.


Matt Ashby
www.mattashby.com

On 20 Mar 2005 11:37:58 -0800, wrote:

The reason which you profess to be unable to see is that,
even if you accept that all modes of transport are of
equal importance, they still cost different amounts (on a
per-mile basis) to run. Thus it is more expensive to
transport a person by tube from Ealing Broadway to White
City than it is to take them they by bus.

No, it is not.

It is cheaper to operate a bus service than a train service. In a
place like London, these services will operate regardless of which one
a single given passenger chooses. As such, there is no cost directly
attributable to one person's journey, apart from a tiny amount of
extra diesel or electricity and the bit of paper their ticket is
printed on. If they're using Oyster, the latter cost doesn't even
exist.

This was, of course, the same argument recently used against the
person who claimed that it was unreasonable for a journey from zone 6
to zone 6 via zone 1 to cost the same as one from zone 6 to zone 1.
There is no significant directly attributable cost to either of those
journeys. That is the nature of a public transport system.

The ticketing system is, as such, purely a model, and an
overcomplicated one at that.

Of course, even if each mode had the same per-mile cost it
probably still wouldn't be possible to offer the same fare
for a multi-modal journey as for a single mode one, because
it would be impossible to reliably define a 'journey'. You
might know that you are going from Ealing Broadway to White
City, but what if you then completed your business there
and so went on to Ladbroke Grove 20 minutes later? Would
that still be a single journey over several modes that
would qualify for a 'through' fare? And how are TfL to
know either way? Could you travel all day making different
transfers from one mode to another and call it one journey?

You could perhaps place a time limit on the ticket as many European
cities do. I'm sure there are other ways.

As regards social deprivation, perhaps those on benefits could be
given a discount on all modes, if that is felt appropriate? I don't
see why the Tube should be a mode of transport for the upper classes
and the bus for the lower classes. The two modes should not be
competing for anyone's business - they should complement each other.
This is one of the biggest failings in UK city transport planning, and
is one that the Germans[1] invariably have right.

Of course, if you want to make multi-modal journeys for as
little money as possible, may I introduce you to the
Travelcard (a long standing resident of almost every
newsagent in the city) and it's new friend, Oyster PrePay?

A Travelcard is a good example of an integrated ticket, but is no use
for a single journey. Oyster PrePay is a good idea, but is
overcomplicated in its fares structure, and doesn't offer significant
discounts for multimodal journeys.

[1] Hamburg is a huge city, but the number of normal bus routes that
enter the city centre is in the teens or low twenties. Most feed into
the superb U- and S-Bahn network instead. While I recognise that the
crowding in the Tube in zone 1 requires buses to spread the load, this
principle could be applied to an extent.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

wrote:
Of course, if you want to make multi-modal journeys for as
little money as possible, may I introduce you to the
Travelcard (a long standing resident of almost every
newsagent in the city) and it's new friend, Oyster PrePay?

The OP was using Oyster Prepay - hence the reference to 80p in the
subject


With the central line down from North Acton this morning, snip

Next time, I would suggest that you choose any one of the
many very good transport links available in that part of
London rather than taking the most convoluted route I can
think of and then moaning here about the consequences of
your own inefficiency.

Erm, do read the comment on the central line being closed before
trolling