In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 18:02:49 -0600,
wrote:

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

Note that there are no fares booklets for the 2010 increase. They
have been abolished. You are stuck with using the TfL website.

Isn't there even a downloadable PDF version of the booklet?

No and believe me I have looked. Barry Salter confirmed in a recent post
that there is no publicly issued document.

Why this bull headedness? Is it because London in effect no longer has
zonal fares because how you get to the zone changes the fares?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote:

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 12:05:14 -0600,
wrote:

[2010 fares document]

Why this bull headedness? Is it because London in effect no longer has
zonal fares because how you get to the zone changes the fares?

I have no idea at all. I was expecting a booklet to be published as
normal. While the 2010 package is undoubtedly more complex it is not
beyond a written explanation as evidenced by the TfL website. I expect
ticket selling staff have been getting it in the neck for weeks and that
next week will be hell for them.

My suspicion is that it is a combination of saving money and a continued
push to put everything on the web. While the web is a wonderful thing it
is not, IMO, a substitute for freely available printed documents. I have
similar grumbles about the lack of proper bus timetables.

It's also very hard on those without access to the internet or familiarity
with how to use it, mainly the old, if the internet is the only means of
access to information.

I'm surprised some disabled groups haven't got on to them. They don't get
free travel on NR or do they?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 13:20:56 -0600,
wrote:

[2010 fares document]

Why this bull headedness? Is it because London in effect no longer has
zonal fares because how you get to the zone changes the fares?

I have no idea at all. I was expecting a booklet to be published as
normal. While the 2010 package is undoubtedly more complex it is not
beyond a written explanation as evidenced by the TfL website. I expect
ticket selling staff have been getting it in the neck for weeks and that
next week will be hell for them.

My suspicion is that it is a combination of saving money and a continued
push to put everything on the web. While the web is a wonderful thing it
is not, IMO, a substitute for freely available printed documents. I have
similar grumbles about the lack of proper bus timetables.

It's also very hard on those without access to the internet or familiarity
with how to use it, mainly the old, if the internet is the only means of
access to information.

I'm surprised some disabled groups haven't got on to them. They don't get
free travel on NR or do they?

A disabled freedom pass does grant free travel on NR (and without the
M-F a.m. peak restriction that over-60s have).

In article ,
lid (asdf) wrote:

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 13:20:56 -0600,
wrote:

[2010 fares document]

Why this bull headedness? Is it because London in effect no longer
has zonal fares because how you get to the zone changes the fares?

I have no idea at all. I was expecting a booklet to be published as
normal. While the 2010 package is undoubtedly more complex it is not
beyond a written explanation as evidenced by the TfL website. I
expect ticket selling staff have been getting it in the neck for
weeks and that next week will be hell for them.

My suspicion is that it is a combination of saving money and a
continued push to put everything on the web. While the web is a
wonderful thing it is not, IMO, a substitute for freely available
printed documents. I have similar grumbles about the lack of proper
bus timetables.

It's also very hard on those without access to the internet or
familiarity with how to use it, mainly the old, if the internet is
the only means of access to information.

I'm surprised some disabled groups haven't got on to them. They don't
get free travel on NR or do they?

A disabled freedom pass does grant free travel on NR (and without the
M-F a.m. peak restriction that over-60s have).

But is Freedom Pass eligibility wide enough for TfL to escape the DDA
non-compliance charge? Only London residents are entitled to Freedom
Passes for a start and not all Londoners who would have difficulty using
the web rather than paper are eligible AIUI.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

asdf wrote:

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 13:20:56 -0600,
wrote:

[2010 fares document]


It's also very hard on those without access to the internet or familiarity
with how to use it, mainly the old, if the internet is the only means of
access to information.

I'm surprised some disabled groups haven't got on to them. They don't get
free travel on NR or do they?

A disabled freedom pass does grant free travel on NR (and without the
M-F a.m. peak restriction that over-60s have).


The freedom pass page say that the M-F am peak restriction does hold on
NR. http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/freedompass/whenwhere/rail.htm

The only case I can see where the disabled pass is allowed where older
persons is not is Southern services between Clapham Junction and Harrow
& Wealdstone before 9.00am Monday to Friday. (from the map)

--
Mark

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 12:05:14 -0600,
wrote:

[2010 fares document]

Why this bull headedness? Is it because London in effect no longer has
zonal fares because how you get to the zone changes the fares?

I have no idea at all. I was expecting a booklet to be published as
normal. While the 2010 package is undoubtedly more complex it is not
beyond a written explanation as evidenced by the TfL website. I expect
ticket selling staff have been getting it in the neck for weeks and that
next week will be hell for them.

My suspicion is that it is a combination of saving money and a continued
push to put everything on the web. While the web is a wonderful thing it
is not, IMO, a substitute for freely available printed documents. I have
similar grumbles about the lack of proper bus timetables.

But it's not on the web in a usable form, not that I can find

tim

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:42:47 +0000, Paul Corfield wrote:

My suspicion is that it is a combination of saving money and a continued
push to put everything on the web. While the web is a wonderful thing it
is not, IMO, a substitute for freely available printed documents. I have
similar grumbles about the lack of proper bus timetables.

As well as the push to put everything on the web, there seems to be a
marked decrease in the openness of information. The trend seems to be
to only provide it on a sort of "need-to-know" basis.

For example, they no longer provide the zonal fare tables or Tube
timetables; they only allow you to query the fare between two
particular stations or get Tube times for a particular point in time.

On 1 Jan, 19:49, asdf wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:42:47 +0000, Paul Corfield wrote:
My suspicion is that it is a combination of saving money and a continued
push to put everything on the web. While the web is a wonderful thing it
is not, IMO, a substitute for freely available printed documents. I have
similar grumbles about the lack of proper bus timetables.

As well as the push to put everything on the web, there seems to be a
marked decrease in the openness of information. The trend seems to be
to only provide it on a sort of "need-to-know" basis.

For example, they no longer provide the zonal fare tables or Tube
timetables; they only allow you to query the fare between two
particular stations or get Tube times for a particular point in time.

I am reminded of my comments in the thread about the Thames and, more
importantly, zones disappearing from the LU map.

All this makes it much more difficult to notice whether fares have
been increased or services have been reduced, both of which are going
to happen.

In article
,
(MIG) wrote:

On 1 Jan, 19:49, asdf wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:42:47 +0000, Paul Corfield wrote:
My suspicion is that it is a combination of saving money and a
continued push to put everything on the web. While the web is a
wonderful thing it is not, IMO, a substitute for freely available
printed documents. I have similar grumbles about the lack of proper
bus timetables.

As well as the push to put everything on the web, there seems to be a
marked decrease in the openness of information. The trend seems to be
to only provide it on a sort of "need-to-know" basis.

For example, they no longer provide the zonal fare tables or Tube
timetables; they only allow you to query the fare between two
particular stations or get Tube times for a particular point in time.

I am reminded of my comments in the thread about the Thames and, more
importantly, zones disappearing from the LU map.

All this makes it much more difficult to notice whether fares have
been increased or services have been reduced, both of which are going
to happen.

While I understand that removing the zones probably has that effect, I
don't see how removing the Thames from the Tube map could do so.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 1 Jan, 22:18, wrote:
In article
,





(MIG) wrote:
On 1 Jan, 19:49, asdf wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:42:47 +0000, Paul Corfield wrote:
My suspicion is that it is a combination of saving money and a
continued push to put everything on the web. While the web is a
wonderful thing it is not, IMO, a substitute for freely available
printed documents. I have similar grumbles about the lack of proper
bus timetables.

As well as the push to put everything on the web, there seems to be a
marked decrease in the openness of information. The trend seems to be
to only provide it on a sort of "need-to-know" basis.

For example, they no longer provide the zonal fare tables or Tube
timetables; they only allow you to query the fare between two
particular stations or get Tube times for a particular point in time.

I am reminded of my comments in the thread about the Thames and, more
importantly, zones disappearing from the LU map.

All this makes it much more difficult to notice whether fares have
been increased or services have been reduced, both of which are going
to happen.

While I understand that removing the zones probably has that effect, I
don't see how removing the Thames from the Tube map could do so.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

I was referring to what the thread was about, in which I made comments
about the removal of zones.

The removal of the Thames is a different issue, since it was the last
barrier preventing the southern hordes from invading north London. No
wonder Boris was furious.