On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:16:28 -0400, David of Broadway wrote:

There simply isn't any justification for imposing penalty fares to
coerce people into using a system that isn't fully available.

On the systems that accept it, how is it not fully available?

It isn't fully integrated with NR yet, and that's a shame. But it's
fully available on all TfL services, no?

I think what you're saying is that for any given journey, either:

(a) Oyster PAYG is valid, and the cash fare is 'punitive'; or

(b) Oyster PAYG is not valid, but the cash fare is not 'punitive'.


However, there is at least one type of journey where neither of these
holds - where one part of the journey is along a route where Tube cash
fares are valid but Oyster isn't, and the other part of the journey is
by Tube.

For example, Camden Road to Manor House, changing from NLL to Tube at
Highbury & Islington. In 2005, the cash fare for this journey was
£1.30 (a Z23 Tube single). At the 2006 fares revision, when the
'punitive' fares were introduced, the cash fare increased to £3.00.
But Oyster PAYG cannot be used for this journey.

(It's possible to reduce the fare slightly by buying a paper ticket
for the NLL part of the journey (£1.50) and using Oyster for the Tube
part (£1.00), but that's still almost a 100% increase.)

In article ,
(Jack Taylor) wrote:

wrote:
On 18 Mar, 19:40, (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
Indeed so but the old stock continued in use for a bit before the
313s were introduced, did it not?

But they were Class 501s, which are 3 car units.

As are the 313s, so I don't exactly see your point. However, whilst
the Euston - Watford services were exclusively the preserve of the
three-car 501s, before handing over to three-car 313s, the North
Woolwich services spent some time in the hands of two-car Southern
Region class 416 2-EPBs, post-501 and pre-313.

Ah! I thought they had used some Southern units. Didn't they ever run in
pairs?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 18 Mar 2007 09:14:39 -0700, MIG wrote:

Not a good reason not to have an Oyster card for this Cambridge resident.

I bet you are looking forward to Oyster being introduced on FCC/One in
Greater London, so that you'll have to get off to touch in/out and
wait half an hour for the next train every journey or else pay more
for the bit where you could do it on Oyster (probably at an
excessively hiked rate to discourage non-Oyster use in Greater London
etc).

If travelling from Manchester to London, do you currently have to hurl
yourself off the train at Harrow & Wealdstone (where PAYG becomes
valid), pick yourself up, dust yourself off, touch in with your
Oyster, and continue your journey on a local train, or else pay a
higher fare?

(Hint: the answer is no)

On Mar 18, 11:49 pm, asdf wrote:
On 18 Mar 2007 09:14:39 -0700, MIG wrote:

Not a good reason not to have an Oyster card for this Cambridge resident.

I bet you are looking forward to Oyster being introduced on FCC/One in
Greater London, so that you'll have to get off to touch in/out and
wait half an hour for the next train every journey or else pay more
for the bit where you could do it on Oyster (probably at an
excessively hiked rate to discourage non-Oyster use in Greater London
etc).

If travelling from Manchester to London, do you currently have to hurl
yourself off the train at Harrow & Wealdstone (where PAYG becomes
valid), pick yourself up, dust yourself off, touch in with your
Oyster, and continue your journey on a local train, or else pay a
higher fare?

(Hint: the answer is no)



The fare from Manchester to Harrow and Wealdstone is probably higher
tha Manchester to Euston (one of those anomalies).

Is VWC one of the companies to which Oyster validity will be
relevant? I suspect that the answer is no.

Has this got any relevance to a more likely journey where the company
involved will have to allow Oyster, eg Tring or Watford to London? I
think the answer is no.

Does what I suggested seem unreasonable and unlikely to happen? The
answer is yes.

Is the example of what has actually happened with Oyster so far
totally unreasonable? The answer is yes.

Have we got good reason to expect unreasonable fare hikes based on
current experience? The answer is yes.

On Mar 18, 7:12 pm, David of Broadway
wrote:
MIG wrote:
I bet you are looking forward to Oyster being introduced on FCC/One in
Greater London, so that you'll have to get off to touch in/out and
wait half an hour for the next train every journey or else pay more
for the bit where you could do it on Oyster (probably at an
excessively hiked rate to discourage non-Oyster use in Greater London
etc).

Put a few Oyster pads on the train.
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA



If the relevant authorities were prepared to do this, they would have
done so on LU trains. They have not done so. Why should we expect
any better when Oyster is introduced on NR?

On Mar 18, 7:16 pm, David of Broadway
wrote:
MIG wrote:
I have got an Oyster card. My problem is that I can't use it for all
the journeys I make for a number of reasons and nor do I have the
typical options (eg when passing my local station ticket office) for
putting credit on it.

Understood. I was somewhat frustrated when I discovered that daily
capping was useless if I was riding NR. And the day I went to Hampton
Court, I was a bit surprised to find that a ODTC was my best bet.

But, even if Oyster isn't /always/ the best payment mode, it /often/ is.
Since it effectively costs nothing to have one, why not keep one in
your wallet just in case?


Yeah, I just said that I do, but ...



There simply isn't any justification for imposing penalty fares to
coerce people into using a system that isn't fully available.

On the systems that accept it, how is it not fully available?


Firstly, when I reach the point where I want to switch to PAYG, I
haven't previously had the full range of opportunities to put credit
on it.

Secondly, when I have a paper travelcard and want to go an extra zone
on LU (this is not hypothetical; it has happened to me several times)
I either have to pay £4 for the single zone extension (ludicrous), do
the whole journey on PAYG (less, but still paying for the part of the
journey for which I already have a paper season ticket) or get off, go
up the escalator, touch "in", go back down and wait for a later train.

None of these options is acceptable, despite there being obvious
solions, eg

1) put pads in the trains
2) offer paper extensions at a reasonable price to people who can show
a paper travelcard
3) flag a person's Oyster (where the extension is being bought) as
haveinb being touched in at the boundary station, only then needing to
be touched out.

These solutions can't be beyond the technology, and the problem can't
have been unknown. The explanation is that is whole bluddy thing is
a cynical scam.

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Jack Taylor) wrote:

As are the 313s, so I don't exactly see your point. However, whilst
the Euston - Watford services were exclusively the preserve of the
three-car 501s, before handing over to three-car 313s, the North
Woolwich services spent some time in the hands of two-car Southern
Region class 416 2-EPBs, post-501 and pre-313.

Ah! I thought they had used some Southern units. Didn't they ever run
in pairs?

Now you're testing my powers of recall, Colin! I don't remember ever seeing
any and, as far as I know, some stations (such as Willesden Junction)
wouldn't be able to take four cars, so I'm presuming not - unless anyone
else knows better.

David of Broadway wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote:

until the
yanks stop treating all visitors as potential criminals and terrorists
it will be a long time before I visit again despite the fact I love the
city.

If it's any consolations, citizens are treated similarly.

In under two years, we'll have a new president.

On second thought, might I suggest reconsidering?

Currently, most of our B Division (former BMT/IND, with lettered route
designations) routes run at least some rolling stock with windows at the
front of the train, with a nice view of the track ahead (like on DLR).
Unfortunately, most if not all of that older rolling stock -- the R-32,
R-38, R-40, and R-42 -- is slated to be replaced by the R-160 order,
which has already started coming in.

In particular, these ...

http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...2_itemId=52000
http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...2_itemId=42146
http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...2_itemId=51538
http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...2_itemId=43700

.... are being replaced by these ...

http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...2_itemId=42126
http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...2_itemId=39895
http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...2_itemId=42715
http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...2_itemId=39875

We've already lost front windows on the A Division (former IRT), except
on the Flushing-bound 7. Don't wait until they're gone from the B
Division too!

If anybody's planning to visit New York, send me an email and I'll tell
you where you can find what.
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

MIG wrote:

These solutions can't be beyond the technology, and the problem can't
have been unknown. The explanation is that is whole bluddy thing is
a cynical scam.

Well, someone is cynical, that is for sure. I don't think it's TfL though.
--
Michael Hoffman

On 18 Mar, 23:49, asdf wrote:
If travelling from Manchester to London, do you currently have to hurl
yourself off the train at Harrow & Wealdstone (where PAYG becomes
valid), pick yourself up, dust yourself off, touch in with your
Oyster, and continue your journey on a local train, or else pay a
higher fare?

I got lost several posts back. Which higher fare are you talking
about?

U