Oyster - Meant to make your life easier??!
 

David Cantrell wrote:

If you want to seriously reduce fraud, use ticket inspectors. I have
*never* seen one on a tube, almost never on suburban trains, and only
once on a bendy bus.

I've seen them a few times at Liverpool Street (tube) but they invariably
hang around by the barriers and ask to check people's tickets. Far better to
deploy them at ungated stations. As for buses, there have been times when a
cohort wait at a bus stop and pounce on it - it happened on the 25 late one
night the other week. But regularly on board inspectors would work much
better.

Oyster - Meant to make your life easier??!
 

Ian Jelf wrote:
In message , David of Broadway
writes
I can only speak for Americans, but we tend to get very little
vacation time these days.

Yes, amongst Americans (and possibly Canadians) that's certainly a
factor and an important one.

Furthermore, the chance, in itineraries to "see" lots of places is a big
attraction for a lot of casual visitors. The fact that they don't
"see" them long enough to enjoy them only becomes apparent when they're
actually here. I see this disappoint more than a few people for whom a
day or two to "do" London is all they get, along with 90 minutes in
Warwick Castle, an hour of two in Stratford or Oxford and so on.

I had a trip somewhat like that last year: seven weeks in Europe,
starting with a respectable period (about a week and a half) in London
but followed by very short stays (between one and five days) in other
cities.

But, having never been to mainland Europe before, that was the point. I
didn't want to immerse myself in one or two cities; I wanted variety.
Now I have a better idea of which cities I want to spend more time in on
my next visit.
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

Oyster - Meant to make your life easier??!
 

Paul Corfield wrote:
Thank you Robin. I am clearly attempting to explain something that is
seen as indefensible by a fair slice of group opinion. I might work for,
I may even have been one of the brains behind the Prestige project but
I'm not here to defend a policy I did not develop and do not have
responsibility for. Those who are fed up with it should direct their ire
at LU directly.

I can't speak for others here, but I'm simply looking to understand the
new policy. From what I can tell (across the pond), it has some serious
problems. I could be wrong. If I'm wrong, I hope to be informed why;
if I'm right, perhaps somebody in a position to solve those problems is
reading this newsgroup.

Oyster policy doesn't personally affect me here in New York (although
transportation officials in New York are certainly watching Oyster
closely), so I don't think it would be appropriate for me to complain to LU.

I don't come here and contribute to be "beaten around the head". Whether
people like it or not a stored value type product requires an entry and
an exit to work properly - that is how it works. It cannot work any
other way unless you have flat fares which are deducted solely on entry
as in New York on the Subway.

And all I'm looking for is your (and others') contributions. I'm not
trying to beat anyone around the head.

A Travelcard system with the capability to issue automatic ticket
extensions requires entry and exit swipes just as much as pure PAYG. A
regular commuter between Kenton and Central London can get away with a
Z1-2 Travelcard (£888 annually) rather than the proper Z1-4 Travelcard
(£1264 annually) -- a 30% savings -- in exchange for the risk of an
occasional £20 penalty charge on an inbound trip (but not on an outbound
trip).

(I would have used Harrow & Wealdstone as my example, for a more
dramatic 41% savings, but I'm not sure if Harrow & Wealdstone has gates,
while I know Kenton doesn't.)

I don't understand why PAYG abuse is such a problem while Travelcard
abuse is not.

And, as I've pointed out, a traveler following the rules to the letter
can still get hit with the penalty charge, or even two on a single trip!
Fix those glitches and I'd be much less critical of the charge.

I was going to draft a detailed explanation about the forthcoming change
but I don't see that there is any point because such a post will simply
attract unwarranted criticism when I am trying to be helpful. Sorry to
those who asked for it but there's no point in perpetuating the
criticism. I won't be responding to other posts in the thread even
though some of the conclusions are clearly incorrect.

That's a shame. I was looking forward to it. Your posts are
interesting and informative, even if I don't agree with all of them.
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

Oyster - Meant to make your life easier??!
 

Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
How wide are the islands though? Leaving aside the shops on those platforms,
the available space for moving down them is so narrow that most of the time
passengers need both sides to move down, especially if you're trying to get
round a buggy. And how exactly would you construct a TfL users only sealed
route from the eastbound Central Line to the DLR platform?

Fairly wide. These should give you a rough idea:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/triborough/92363857/
http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?22191

--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

Oyster - Meant to make your life easier??!
 

In article ,
Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
I've seen them a few times at Liverpool Street (tube) but they invariably
hang around by the barriers and ask to check people's tickets. Far better to
deploy them at ungated stations.

They are a semi-regular feature of Finchley Central (and Woodside Park,
I believe).

--
I don't play The Game - it's for five-year-olds with delusions of adulthood.

Oyster - Meant to make your life easier??!
 

David of Broadway wrote:

How wide are the islands though? Leaving aside the shops on those
platforms, the available space for moving down them is so narrow that
most of the time passengers need both sides to move down, especially if
you're trying to get round a buggy. And how exactly would you construct a
TfL users only sealed route from the eastbound Central Line to the DLR
platform?

Fairly wide. These should give you a rough idea:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/triborough/92363857/
http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?22191

If I read those images correctly, that's much wider than the Stratford
platforms. No way could a barrier setup like that work there.

Oyster - Meant to make your life easier??!
 

On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 18:37:45 -0000, "Tim Roll-Pickering"
wrote:

David of Broadway wrote:

How wide are the islands though? Leaving aside the shops on those
platforms, the available space for moving down them is so narrow that
most of the time passengers need both sides to move down, especially if
you're trying to get round a buggy. And how exactly would you construct a
TfL users only sealed route from the eastbound Central Line to the DLR
platform?

Fairly wide. These should give you a rough idea:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/triborough/92363857/

These look as if they are made by Cubic as they resemble LU second
generation gates very closely.

http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/show?22191

If I read those images correctly, that's much wider than the Stratford
platforms. No way could a barrier setup like that work there.

What is not visible (and I don't know the NYC location) is how long the
platform is and how many gate arrays there are. The other factor is
train frequency and the volume of people transferring. Some London
locations can get between 8 and 12 car trains at 1-2 headways which
would require very high numbers of gates to clear those alighting before
the next train arrives - that is before you get people transferring in
the opposite direction and any accumulated crowds who have been unable
to get on their connecting train. If we take Stratford as an example it
is not unusual for people to be unable to board the first Central Line
train at the height of the peak and thus you need standing room.

Nonetheless I still think it is rather academic as you simply could not
create such installations at almost all LU to NR "within one station"
interchanges as things stand today.

Years and years ago I dragged round a set of consultants from KPMG to
explain how the fare validities work and what that means for ticket
validation requirements at the most complex interchanges. Now, if
anything, it has become much more complicated with TOC specific
validities as well as what has happened with TfL fares. While I can see
other cities can obviously spend the money and have the space to install
inter-system checks it won't work in London unless someone chucks
several hundreds of millions of pounds at reconstruction of key
stations.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Oyster - Meant to make your life easier??!
 

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 17:08:03 GMT, David of Broadway
wrote:

Paul Corfield wrote:
Thank you Robin. I am clearly attempting to explain something that is
seen as indefensible by a fair slice of group opinion. I might work for,
I may even have been one of the brains behind the Prestige project but
I'm not here to defend a policy I did not develop and do not have
responsibility for. Those who are fed up with it should direct their ire
at LU directly.

I can't speak for others here, but I'm simply looking to understand the
new policy. From what I can tell (across the pond), it has some serious
problems. I could be wrong. If I'm wrong, I hope to be informed why;
if I'm right, perhaps somebody in a position to solve those problems is
reading this newsgroup.

I think it all depends on how people perceive TfL's actions. It is
evident that there is polarised opinion and no amount of explanation
will change that. People have decided what their view is and anyone
proffering the counter view simply gets "abused".

Oyster policy doesn't personally affect me here in New York (although
transportation officials in New York are certainly watching Oyster
closely), so I don't think it would be appropriate for me to complain to LU.

Do you know what particularly about Oyster they are watching closely? I
can't imagine it is the smartcard element as that is proven in many
places and they already have experience of key elements of such a system
via the magnetic Metrocard installation.

I don't come here and contribute to be "beaten around the head". Whether
people like it or not a stored value type product requires an entry and
an exit to work properly - that is how it works. It cannot work any
other way unless you have flat fares which are deducted solely on entry
as in New York on the Subway.

And all I'm looking for is your (and others') contributions. I'm not
trying to beat anyone around the head.

I didn't name any names. If I post here it is for my enjoyment - when it
is no longer enjoyable the only option is to stop.

A Travelcard system with the capability to issue automatic ticket
extensions requires entry and exit swipes just as much as pure PAYG. A
regular commuter between Kenton and Central London can get away with a
Z1-2 Travelcard (£888 annually) rather than the proper Z1-4 Travelcard
(£1264 annually) -- a 30% savings -- in exchange for the risk of an
occasional £20 penalty charge on an inbound trip (but not on an outbound
trip).

Yes - this has always been the case but Oyster allows more sophisticated
checks to be made which could very easily pick out such usage and alert
revenue protection staff.

(I would have used Harrow & Wealdstone as my example, for a more
dramatic 41% savings, but I'm not sure if Harrow & Wealdstone has gates,
while I know Kenton doesn't.)

H&W does not have gates - I was there on Saturday.

I don't understand why PAYG abuse is such a problem while Travelcard
abuse is not.

And, as I've pointed out, a traveler following the rules to the letter
can still get hit with the penalty charge, or even two on a single trip!
Fix those glitches and I'd be much less critical of the charge.

If they follow the rules I don't see how they get hit. Anyone
encountering a problem with validation due to equipment failure or
emergency evacuation will be treated sympathetically and would have the
£4 adjusted away. If they follow the rules then they would otherwise
have touched in and out properly and thus there would be no risk of
overcharging or missed caps.

I was going to draft a detailed explanation about the forthcoming change
but I don't see that there is any point because such a post will simply
attract unwarranted criticism when I am trying to be helpful. Sorry to
those who asked for it but there's no point in perpetuating the
criticism. I won't be responding to other posts in the thread even
though some of the conclusions are clearly incorrect.

That's a shame. I was looking forward to it. Your posts are
interesting and informative, even if I don't agree with all of them.

And there was me imagining you agreed with everything I said!

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Oyster - Meant to make your life easier??!
 

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...

Fix those glitches and I'd be much less critical of the charge.

If they follow the rules I don't see how they get hit. Anyone
encountering a problem with validation due to equipment failure or
emergency evacuation will be treated sympathetically and would have the
£4 adjusted away. If they follow the rules then they would otherwise
have touched in and out properly and thus there would be no risk of
overcharging or missed caps.


Paul C

Admits to working for London Underground!

As an irregular user of LU services I now have a PAYG Oyster card, and it
was failing to touch half way through a journey when transferring NR to LU
that confused my account on a trip from Marylebone to Watford, changing at
Harrow on the Hill. The readers at Harrow simply say Oyster PAYG users must
touch out (or something like) - couldn't they, and those at any 'transfer'
point be more informative?

What I'm trying to say is, it is obvious to touch in or out when entering or
leaving the paid area theough a barrier, but if its a cross platform
interchange like at Stratford, couldn't the signs maybe say something like
'Oyster PAYG customers touch to transfer'?

Paul

Oyster - Meant to make your life easier??!
 

In message , Paul Scott
writes

Fix those glitches and I'd be much less critical of the charge.

If they follow the rules I don't see how they get hit. Anyone
encountering a problem with validation due to equipment failure or
emergency evacuation will be treated sympathetically and would have the
£4 adjusted away. If they follow the rules then they would otherwise
have touched in and out properly and thus there would be no risk of
overcharging or missed caps.

Paul C

Admits to working for London Underground!

As an irregular user of LU services I now have a PAYG Oyster card, and it
was failing to touch half way through a journey when transferring NR to LU
that confused my account on a trip from Marylebone to Watford, changing at
Harrow on the Hill. The readers at Harrow simply say Oyster PAYG users must
touch out (or something like) - couldn't they, and those at any 'transfer'
point be more informative?

Is Watford within the PAYG area? If not, that may be part of your
answer.

I know my staff pass doesn't work the barriers there, even though it is
actually valid (by grandfather rights).
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)