On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:45:25 -0800 (PST), Mr Thant
wrote this gibberish:

On 20 Feb, 20:10, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:
Is there any difference between national rail oyster PAYG routes and
london overground routes as far as touching in and out is concerned?

No.

cool

and is there a way to make the TFL website route thingy include oyster
PAYG rail routes? I can only see it including all rail routes, or not.

No.

Bugger.

one of my regular journeys is Hackney to Horley which I usually do via
bus to london bridge on PAYG and then buy a paper return ticket to
horley which lets me come back via either london bridge or victoria
(which can be handy for me), is it possible to get a travel card that
includes as far out as horley? is that a cheaper option than my 2x90p
plus £9.10 paper ticket? anything else I can do to cheapen this route?
I do it a couple of days per month on average and never during morning
peak.

Off-peak Z1-6 Travelcard is £7 plus a Cheap Day Return from Boundary
Zone 6 to Horley for ca. £5. Not cheaper, but gives you unlimited
travel throughout London for the day.

will keep it in mind but not likely of any use to me in this case.

the local shops sell travelcards so I could easily buy one before
starting the journey. can they be loaded onto my PAYG oyster and if so
can they be charged to my PAYG account or do I have to pay there and
then?

Weekly and longer Travelcards can be loaded onto your card, but you
still have to pay cash. Day Travelcards on Oyster don't exist.

U

thank you! much appreciated.

--
Mark.
www.MarkVarleyPhoto.co.uk

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:04:36 +0000, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:45:25 -0800 (PST), Mr Thant
wrote this gibberish:

On 20 Feb, 20:10, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:
Is there any difference between national rail oyster PAYG routes and
london overground routes as far as touching in and out is concerned?

No.

cool

Specifically, "London Overground" is just one company that operates
"National Rail" trains.

On 21 Feb, 05:22, James Farrar wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:04:36 +0000, MarkVarley - MVP

wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:45:25 -0800 (PST), Mr Thant
wrote this gibberish:

On 20 Feb, 20:10, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:
Is there any difference between national rail oyster PAYG routes and
london overground routes as far as touching in and out is concerned?

No.

cool

Specifically, "London Overground" is just one company that operates
"National Rail" trains.


Yes, but...

In terms of passenger facing communications TfL does refer to "London
Overground" separately from "National Rail" services - passengers who
don't know the story behind all this are thus quite entitled to think
of London Overground as being a different beast from National Rail.

I would suggest that the original poster doesn't worry about all the
details that I'm about to go into!


In terms of the arrangements London Overground is quite different from
other National Rail Train Operating Companies* - the Department for
Transport (DfT) has ceded responsibility for running the service to
TfL, and TfL has subsequently appointed a concessionaire (i.e.
operator) to run the day to day operations. Whether TfL could ever
have operated it all directly through a public-sector subsidiary
company I don't know, I suspect the deal between TfL and the DfT
doesn't allow for this though. Of course TfL has transferred
management of several stations that are shared with the Bakerloo line
over to London Underground Ltd. (LUL), so in a sense they has brought
them into direct public-sector operation.

And when the ELLX opens, the route from Dalston down to New Cross/ New
Cross Gate will not be part of the 'National Rail network' as such -
it will be (indeed already is) owned by TfL. AIUI ownership of this
stretch is actually going to stay vested in LUL, and LUL will remain
as the named "infrastructure controller" (which is an important legal
term for reasons I'm not clear about), though this is surely simply
for the sake of convenience apart from anything else - there really
isn't much point in TfL shuffling the legal ownership around between
its various subsidiary companies because after all it owns them all!


-----
* The London Overground arrangement has strong similarities to the
Merseyrail arrangement on Merseyside, where the Merseytravel PTA is
responsible for arranging a concessionaire to operate train services
on the Northern and Wirral lines there. However I understand that
under the first concession agreement the Merseytravel PTA took the
revenue risk, whilst under the current concession agreement the
concessionaire takes the revenue risk - the current concessionaire
being a Serco/NedRailways joint venture. Meanwhile on London
Overground the revenue risk is borne by TfL alone, not by the
concessionaire LOROL.

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 07:26:33 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote this gibberish:

On 21 Feb, 05:22, James Farrar wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:04:36 +0000, MarkVarley - MVP

wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:45:25 -0800 (PST), Mr Thant
wrote this gibberish:

On 20 Feb, 20:10, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:
Is there any difference between national rail oyster PAYG routes and
london overground routes as far as touching in and out is concerned?

No.

cool

Specifically, "London Overground" is just one company that operates
"National Rail" trains.


Yes, but...

In terms of passenger facing communications TfL does refer to "London
Overground" separately from "National Rail" services - passengers who
don't know the story behind all this are thus quite entitled to think
of London Overground as being a different beast from National Rail.

snipped

As someone who knows buggerall about who runs what and what is
technically what I see 'London Overground' as an oyster payg rail
service like the underground and 'national rail' as 'need to buy a
ticket'.


--
Mark.
www.MarkVarleyPhoto.co.uk

On 21 Feb, 17:36, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 07:26:33 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote this gibberish:

On 21 Feb, 05:22, James Farrar wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:04:36 +0000, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:45:25 -0800 (PST), Mr Thant
wrote this gibberish:

On 20 Feb, 20:10, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:
Is there any difference between national rail oyster PAYG routes and
london overground routes as far as touching in and out is concerned?

No.

cool

Specifically, "London Overground" is just one company that operates
"National Rail" trains.

Yes, but...

In terms of passenger facing communications TfL does refer to "London
Overground" separately from "National Rail" services - passengers who
don't know the story behind all this are thus quite entitled to think
of London Overground as being a different beast from National Rail.

snipped

As someone who knows buggerall about who runs what and what is
technically what I see 'London Overground' as an oyster payg rail
service like the underground and 'national rail' as 'need to buy a
ticket'.


Quite - and that was exactly the point I was trying to make in
response to James Farrar!

Of course, the world isn't ever quite that simple! As I pointed out
earlier there are a limited number of National Rail routes on which
you can use Oyster PAYG - however since January several have been
added (including all the Chiltern and c2c routes within London plus
some of the 'one' railway routes) and more are in the pipeline.
Unfortunately this is a slow process, and is progressing on a TOC by
TOC* basis.

Anyway, for full information on which National Rail routes you can
currently use Oyster PAYG on, including a link to a map, go to this
TfL webpage:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tickets/oysteronline/5823.aspx

One day, eventually, it will be possible to use it on all National
Rail routes in London.

-----
* TOC = Train Operating Company

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 07:26:33 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote:

On 21 Feb, 05:22, James Farrar wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:04:36 +0000, MarkVarley - MVP

wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:45:25 -0800 (PST), Mr Thant
wrote this gibberish:

On 20 Feb, 20:10, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:
Is there any difference between national rail oyster PAYG routes and
london overground routes as far as touching in and out is concerned?

No.

cool

Specifically, "London Overground" is just one company that operates
"National Rail" trains.


Yes, but...

In terms of passenger facing communications TfL does refer to "London
Overground" separately from "National Rail" services - passengers who
don't know the story behind all this are thus quite entitled to think
of London Overground as being a different beast from National Rail.

Which, of course, right now it isn't.

I wonder if Livingstone's master plan is to eventually end up with all
suburban rail routes controlled by TfL and branded as LO, with
National Rail being reserved for long-distance train services.


Incidentally, passing through Waterloo LU station on Wednesday
morning, I noticed new-looking signs to the mainline station
(presumably installed ater E* decamped to SPI) simply saying "Trains"
with the double-arrow symbol. I thought LU had settled on directions
to mainline stations being the name of the station and the said
symbol, but apparently not.

On 22 Feb, 03:18, James Farrar wrote:
Incidentally, passing through Waterloo LU station on Wednesday
morning, I noticed new-looking signs to the mainline station
(presumably installed ater E* decamped to SPI) simply saying "Trains"
with the double-arrow symbol.

I think that's a Eurostar-era sign referring to both services.

I thought LU had settled on directions
to mainline stations being the name of the station and the said
symbol, but apparently not.

They use "National Rail" most of the time in new signage. Moorgate has
"Trains to Stevenage" and "Trains to Bedford" of course.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 01:01:05 -0800 (PST), Mr Thant
wrote:

On 22 Feb, 03:18, James Farrar wrote:
Incidentally, passing through Waterloo LU station on Wednesday
morning, I noticed new-looking signs to the mainline station
(presumably installed ater E* decamped to SPI) simply saying "Trains"
with the double-arrow symbol.

I think that's a Eurostar-era sign referring to both services.

It looked new with no sign of a patch covering the E* logo (though I
could be wrong!)