On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 07:28:16 -0800 (PST)
TimB wrote:
wouldn't be an issue. But to save themselves a bit of cash they decided t=
o
stiff the public instead.

B2003

It's all a conspiracy to stiff you, isn't it?

No , its standard practice. Do everything as cheaply as possible. I was
involved, albeit on some peripheral back-end systems, in the original paper
travelcard system rolled out to newsagents back in the mid 90s (large blue
boxes if anyone remembers them). And believe me, if a cost could be cut and
got away with it would be. I see no reason to believe that the decisions
behind oyster were any different. So if they could cut the number of
validators in half and put some software lash up in its place then thats
exactly what they'd do. And have done.

B2003

On 25 Jan, 19:09, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:13:52 +0000 (UTC), wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 07:28:16 -0800 (PST)
TimB wrote:
wouldn't be an issue. But to save themselves a bit of cash they decided t=
o
stiff the public instead.

B2003

It's all a conspiracy to stiff you, isn't it?

No , its standard practice. Do everything as cheaply as possible. I was
involved, albeit on some peripheral back-end systems, in the original paper
travelcard system rolled out to newsagents back in the mid 90s (large blue
boxes if anyone remembers them). And believe me, if a cost could be cut and
got away with it would be.

Oh you were involved in the PASS Agent Terminals. chortle Lucky you.

And yes they were built down to a price because the people running PASS
didn't want to incur the costs from a supplier like Cubic. To be fair
the terminal needed to be basic and simple as the transactions were only
supposed to be simple. *The scope of service assumed for the PASS
network is now far greater than back in the late 90s because there is
such a determined shift to get sales off stations.

I see no reason to believe that the decisions
behind oyster were any different. So if they could cut the number of
validators in half and put some software lash up in its place then thats
exactly what they'd do. And have done.

Well you would be wrong wouldn't you? *I identified the need for
validators at the interface points with the LUL system. When I was
involved there was no agreement about NR involvement on the scale that
is now in place. The concept for validators was to permit easy but small
scale validation for the limited numbers of people who may need to
register an entry or an exit for SVT (now PAYG) travel. *The basic logic
is "enter" or "exit" and assuming there was a valid entry it is entirely
logical to assume someone is exiting the system. *Similarly if the last
exit was a fair time in the past it is logical to assume that the card
holder is "entering" the system.

There was also the practical issue that space is at a premium at some of
the interchange points and it was feasible to install ranks of entry and
exit validators. *The point about Oyster is that you should be able to
"touch and pass" (old concept from the old days) and not worry what the
system is doing. *I'll grant you we've ended up some distance from that
admirable goal but then Oyster is being asked to do far, far more than
the original design.

Er, hang on ...

Now the reason why Oyster PAYG can't replace the travelcard is because
Oyster is being asked to do too much.

Previously the reason why Oyster PAYG couldn't replace the travelcard
was because NR wouldn't cooperate and the system couldn't be used
where it had been envisaged.

I think Oyster could cope either way; it's the accompanying decisions
that have caused the problems.

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:09:22 +0000
Paul Corfield wrote:
Oh you were involved in the PASS Agent Terminals. chortle Lucky you.

It was a job. I actually met the guy who did most of the programming for
them. IIRC he said they had something like 4 or 5 seperate CPUs inside them
and each had to be programmed with a mixture of some cut down version of C
and assembler. He certainly earned his money.

Well you would be wrong wouldn't you? I identified the need for

Would I?

validators at the interface points with the LUL system. When I was
involved there was no agreement about NR involvement on the scale that
is now in place. The concept for validators was to permit easy but small

Well you should have thought ahead shouldn't you. Even without NR involvement
there are still places like finsbury park where seperate in and out
validators would make things a lot less confusing and obviate the need for
this silly time out penalty charge.

register an entry or an exit for SVT (now PAYG) travel. The basic logic
is "enter" or "exit" and assuming there was a valid entry it is entirely
logical to assume someone is exiting the system. Similarly if the last
exit was a fair time in the past it is logical to assume that the card
holder is "entering" the system.

Well that logic has been shown not to work hasn't it.

There was also the practical issue that space is at a premium at some of
the interchange points and it was feasible to install ranks of entry and
exit validators. The point about Oyster is that you should be able to

Oh come off it. They're not that big and you could easily have 1 validator
with 2 seperate touch pads marked with IN and OUT in big bold letters.

system is doing. I'll grant you we've ended up some distance from that
admirable goal but then Oyster is being asked to do far, far more than
the original design.

In other words its not up to the job.

B2003

On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:50:20 +0000 someone who may be Paul Corfield
wrote this:-

In other words its not up to the job.

No, in other words it is easy to be wise after the event when
circumstances have changed massively.

I'll put in a good word for it. In my extremely limited experience
of these contraptions they seemed to work well. The only exception
being on one of those bendy bus things where the yellow box wasn't
working (well I assume it wasn't working, as it had a red light on
it and didn't bleep when many people tried it). Given that I would
have had to surf over the heads of the passengers to get to one of
the other yellow boxes on the bus I decided to be a respectable
member of society by not even trying to pay, thus not upsetting many
people. It charged the amount I was expecting on each of the four
days that I used it, though on three days that was just one bus trip
one of which was the one where the yellow box was kaput.

That was before these things were working on many "main line"
trains, so my experience was only the underground in the central
zone and some bus trips outwith the central zone.

Having been warned here, if I was doing a "trainspotter" tour I
would get a paper ticket at the moment. Those responsible should
sort out what seems to be a problem, before even trying to get rid
of paper day tickets.

Those trying to introduce a tracking system for all public transport
journeys, sorry a "smart" card to make the public's life easier,
would also do well to study these problems and see if there is
anything to learn.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000...#pt3-pb3-l1g54

On Jan 26, 6:21*pm, David Hansen
wrote:

On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:50:20 +0000 someone who may be Paul Corfield
wrote this:-

In other words its not up to the job.

No, in other words it is easy to be wise after the event when
circumstances have changed massively.

I'll put in a good word for it. In my extremely limited experience
of these contraptions they seemed to work well. The only exception
being on one of those bendy bus things where the yellow box wasn't
working (well I assume it wasn't working, as it had a red light on
it and didn't bleep when many people tried it). Given that I would
have had to surf over the heads of the passengers to get to one of
the other yellow boxes on the bus I decided to be a respectable
member of society by not even trying to pay, thus not upsetting many
people. It charged the amount I was expecting on each of the four
days that I used it, though on three days that was just one bus trip
one of which was the one where the yellow box was kaput.

On busy bendy buses it's certainly not unknown for pax to hand their
Oyster cards down to others to touch it in for them.


That was before these things were working on many "main line"
trains, so my experience was only the underground in the central
zone and some bus trips outwith the central zone.

Having been warned here, if I was doing a "trainspotter" tour I
would get a paper ticket at the moment. Those responsible should
sort out what seems to be a problem, before even trying to get rid
of paper day *tickets.

There have not been any suggestions that paper day tickets will be got
rid of. (Except in the mind of MIG.)


Those trying to introduce a tracking system for all public transport
journeys, sorry a "smart" card to make the public's life easier,
would also do well to study these problems and see if there is
anything to learn.

Yes, of course.

On 26 Jan, 19:19, Mizter T wrote:
On Jan 26, 6:21*pm, David Hansen
wrote:





On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:50:20 +0000 someone who may be Paul Corfield
wrote this:-

In other words its not up to the job.

No, in other words it is easy to be wise after the event when
circumstances have changed massively.

I'll put in a good word for it. In my extremely limited experience
of these contraptions they seemed to work well. The only exception
being on one of those bendy bus things where the yellow box wasn't
working (well I assume it wasn't working, as it had a red light on
it and didn't bleep when many people tried it). Given that I would
have had to surf over the heads of the passengers to get to one of
the other yellow boxes on the bus I decided to be a respectable
member of society by not even trying to pay, thus not upsetting many
people. It charged the amount I was expecting on each of the four
days that I used it, though on three days that was just one bus trip
one of which was the one where the yellow box was kaput.

On busy bendy buses it's certainly not unknown for pax to hand their
Oyster cards down to others to touch it in for them.



That was before these things were working on many "main line"
trains, so my experience was only the underground in the central
zone and some bus trips outwith the central zone.

Having been warned here, if I was doing a "trainspotter" tour I
would get a paper ticket at the moment. Those responsible should
sort out what seems to be a problem, before even trying to get rid
of paper day *tickets.

There have not been any suggestions that paper day tickets will be got
rid of. (Except in the mind of MIG.)

Nope. I still haven't said that. This is becoming Brucesque.

On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:19:30 -0800 (PST) someone who may be Mizter T
wrote this:-

On busy bendy buses it's certainly not unknown for pax to hand their
Oyster cards down to others to touch it in for them.

There was hardly room to move one's arms, let alone pass a piece of
plastic the length of the bus.

There have not been any suggestions that paper day tickets will be got
rid of. (Except in the mind of MIG.)

All sorts of paper tickets have already been withdrawn. The goal is
no doubt to get rid of them all eventually. They will then not need
to maintain the paper ticket readers.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000...#pt3-pb3-l1g54

On 27 Jan, 01:47, David Hansen
wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:19:30 -0800 (PST) someone who may be Mizter T
wrote this:-

On busy bendy buses it's certainly not unknown for pax to hand their
Oyster cards down to others to touch it in for them.

There was hardly room to move one's arms, let alone pass a piece of
plastic the length of the bus.

There have not been any suggestions that paper day tickets will be got
rid of. (Except in the mind of MIG.)

All sorts of paper tickets have already been withdrawn. The goal is
no doubt to get rid of them all eventually. They will then not need
to maintain the paper ticket readers.

--
* David Hansen, Edinburgh
*I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
*http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000...#pt3-pb3-l1g54

The magnetic stripe on tickets should eventually be replaced by AZTEC
2D barcodes (as already used by Chiltern and East Coast), which would
also be usable for mobile and print at home tickets. Bus readers may
also have a 2d barcode scanner added.

On 26/01/2010 18:21, David Hansen wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:50:20 +0000 someone who may be Paul Corfield
wrote this:-

In other words its not up to the job.

No, in other words it is easy to be wise after the event when
circumstances have changed massively.

I'll put in a good word for it. In my extremely limited experience
of these contraptions they seemed to work well. The only exception
being on one of those bendy bus things where the yellow box wasn't
working (well I assume it wasn't working, as it had a red light on
it and didn't bleep when many people tried it). Given that I would
have had to surf over the heads of the passengers to get to one of
the other yellow boxes on the bus I decided to be a respectable
member of society by not even trying to pay, thus not upsetting many
people.

In non-bendy buses it is standard to travel free when the thing is
broken. Not sure if people without Oyster would be expected to pay!

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK