stan5001 wrote:
This is quite misleading - it shows the fare from Clapham Junction to
Canary Wharf being £2.20 (£2.30 next year).

Now if I were to use PAYG in January I could assume that's what it
would cost, yet other tables suggest it could be £3.30, which I reckon
is the right price.

That will be the fare using TfL services only, eg LO changing onto LU
somewhere.

Click on the 'Alternative fares' button for the lower fares using LO via
Stratford and higher fares using NR via a mainline service to Vauxhall,
Victoria, Waterloo etc. Seems to be £3.20 though...

'Alternative fares' show the necessary routeing information

Paul S

Yes, but being pedantic, it does say underneath "Alternative Oyster
single fares, which may be cheaper, are available for this journey"

And, if you click on "Plan this journey" it suggests SWT to Waterloo
and thence Jubilee line.

So it is perfectly feasible for those not in the know to pay more than
they expected.

stan5001 wrote:
Yes, but being pedantic, it does say underneath "Alternative Oyster
single fares, which may be cheaper, are available for this journey"

And, if you click on "Plan this journey" it suggests SWT to Waterloo
and thence Jubilee line.

So it is perfectly feasible for those not in the know to pay more than
they expected.

If you are suggesting that the fare finder should default to the most likely
journey that will be made, such as the fastest or most direct, I agree
entirely.

Following the default that the journey planner comes up with would seem most
sensible.

Paul S

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:32:12 -0000, "Paul Scott"

Following the default that the journey planner comes up with would seem
most
sensible.

Except that what the journey planner advises in a great many cases has
no relationship at all to what the fare finder may tell you in terms of
routes. You have to manipulate the journey planner options to replicate
what the fares finder tells you. In some cases the fare finder options
(for alternative fares) are so wide ranging in the lists of "valid"
stations for a given route that a number are, to my mind, mind boggling
and utterly illogical.

Er... right. Then maybe it should just explain what it is displaying by
default, eg for the example above it could explicitly say it is for an LO/LU
fare. Then the 'alternative fares' button note could read that other lower
OR higher fares may also be available. Stan's point is valid I think
though, because the typical traveller is probably going to go to Waterloo
for the Jubilee.

Paul S

On 15 Dec, 18:55, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:32:12 -0000, "Paul Scott"





wrote:
stan5001 wrote:
Yes, but being pedantic, it does say underneath "Alternative Oyster
single fares, which may be cheaper, are available for this journey"

And, if you click on "Plan this journey" it suggests SWT to Waterloo
and thence Jubilee line.

So it is perfectly feasible for those not in the know to pay more than
they expected.

If you are suggesting that the fare finder should default to the most likely
journey that will be made, such as the fastest or most direct, I agree
entirely.

Following the default that the journey planner comes up with would seem most
sensible.

Except that what the journey planner advises in a great many cases has
no relationship at all to what the fare finder may tell you in terms of
routes. *You have to manipulate the journey planner options to replicate
what the fares finder tells you. In some cases the fare finder options
(for alternative fares) are so wide ranging in the lists of "valid"
stations for a given route that a number are, to my mind, mind boggling
and utterly illogical.
--
Paul C

One confusing issue with the farefinder is that the alternative routes
use groups of OSIs or purple validators where not all are sensible.
For example, Willesden Junction to Holland Park gives the interchanges
as "Kensington Olympia, Shepherds Bush or West Brompton". This
grouping always appears even where only one of these would be sensible
(Shepherds Bush in this case.)

On 15 Dec, 12:57, "Paul Scott" wrote:
That will be the fare using TfL services only, eg LO changing onto LU
somewhere.

I think the fare it gives you first is always what you'd be charged if
you didn't touch any barriers or readers along the way, which on some
journeys (like this one) assumes a cheaper route than the most
obvious.

U