In message
-septemb
er.org, at 23:36:21 on Sun, 30 Mar 2014, Clank
remarked:
So the traffic will be a bit ****ty for an afternoon.

Not really.

In Cambridge, the closures start at 5.30pm on Sunday, the core closes at
4am and whole route through Cambridgshire is pretty much locked down
from 7am.

In Essex it looks like this:

Uttlesford and Braintree: 7.30am to 4pm
Chelmsford: 8am to 5pm
Epping DC: north of the A414 closed 8am opened 5pm.
Epping DC: south of the A414 and including the A414 closed 9am opened
5pm."

Seriously, deal with it. If it really bothers you that much, take a
holiday

It would be nice if the schools had an amnesty that day for parents
taking their children out of school; after all quite a few won't have
the means to get there anyway, let alone the idea of being a spectator.

Some schools, and many businesses, are of course on the route, and will
be landlocked all day.
--
Roland Perry

It would be nice if the schools had an amnesty that day for parents
taking their children out of school; after all quite a few won't have
the means to get there anyway, let alone the idea of being a
spectator.

There's a fair few parents in East London who can't afford to take
a day off work to look after their children let alone to go watch the
Tour. (I think that's one significant difference from 2007 when the time
trial was in central London on Saturday and 1st stage on Sunday.)

Prompts the thought that some commuters will end up using 2
buses where usually it's only one. And the extra GBP 1.45 will
matter to some of them. It'd be nice if TfL could do something to
address the point. Could they instruct drivers to issue "bus transfer
tickets" where routes are curtailed? (Not something I've seen them do
routinely.)
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

On Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:28:53 +0100, "Robin" wrote:

Prompts the thought that some commuters will end up using 2
buses where usually it's only one. And the extra GBP 1.45 will
matter to some of them. It'd be nice if TfL could do something to
address the point. Could they instruct drivers to issue "bus transfer
tickets" where routes are curtailed? (Not something I've seen them do
routinely.)

A little less than 1.45/journey with the cap (assuming a return
journey), but yes, it would be a nice move to issue transfers, or
better -- get Oyster to do it. I don't know if it's possible to
enable free transfers at all or per route, other than making half the
route free, or just letting everyone on for nothing at the first stop.

I've bored before that bus transfers are the right thing anyway. (And
no NR-LU price difference.)

Richard.

On Monday, 31 March 2014 09:28:53 UTC+1, Robin wrote:
There's a fair few parents in East London who can't afford to take

a day off work to look after their children let alone to go watch the

Tour. (I think that's one significant difference from 2007 when the time

trial was in central London on Saturday and 1st stage on Sunday.)



Prompts the thought that some commuters will end up using 2

buses where usually it's only one. And the extra GBP 1.45 will

matter to some of them. It'd be nice if TfL could do something to

address the point. Could they instruct drivers to issue "bus transfer

tickets" where routes are curtailed? (Not something I've seen them do

routinely.)

I've long thought it unfair that buses don't have a transfer system by default.
Oyster would have been the perfect opportunity to introduce it - a single
journey limited by time, just like the trams and tubes work. Someone might
need to take 2 or 3 buses to travel the distance someone else does on 1 bus,
and it's not their fault the routes don't favour them.

"Mark Hynes" wrote

[...]
matter to some of them. It'd be nice if TfL could do something to
address the point. Could they instruct drivers to issue "bus transfer
tickets" where routes are curtailed? (Not something I've seen them do
routinely.)

I've long thought it unfair that buses don't have a transfer system by
default.
Oyster would have been the perfect opportunity to introduce it - a single
journey limited by time, just like the trams and tubes work. Someone might
need to take 2 or 3 buses to travel the distance someone else does on 1 bus,
and it's not their fault the routes don't favour them.

See previous discussions !

The Oyster capping deals with a lot of this and it was pointed out that
there are 1 per hour TfL buses so limited by time would allow many return
journeys free, plus the variable time due to traffic would vary the cost
too.

Compare the Out of Station Interchange cases where a return was partially
joined to the initial journey.



--
Mike D

On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 04:12:12AM -0700, Mark Hynes wrote:

I've long thought it unfair that buses don't have a transfer system by default.
Oyster would have been the perfect opportunity to introduce it - a single
journey limited by time, just like the trams and tubes work.

IIRC that's been a Lib Dem policy for their London Assembly members
since forever.

Someone might
need to take 2 or 3 buses to travel the distance someone else does on 1 bus,
and it's not their fault the routes don't favour them.

It's a good policy, because it gets rid of all the faff of transfer
tickets and the ripoff that results from the vast majority of passengers
not knowing about them and drivers not bothering to inform them. But I
don't buy your argument. Unless you're a child you choose where you
live. And you choose where you work. If you choose to do inconvenient
journeys that's your problem.

It's a bit like people in Bromley moaning about not having any tubes.

--
David Cantrell | top google result for "internet beard fetish club"

While researching this email, I was forced to carry out some
investigative work which unfortunately involved a bucket of
puppies and a belt sander
-- after JoeB, in the Monastery

On Thursday, 3 April 2014 12:52:40 UTC+1, David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 04:12:12AM -0700, Mark Hynes wrote:



I've long thought it unfair that buses don't have a transfer system by default.

Oyster would have been the perfect opportunity to introduce it - a single

journey limited by time, just like the trams and tubes work.



IIRC that's been a Lib Dem policy for their London Assembly members

since forever.



Someone might

need to take 2 or 3 buses to travel the distance someone else does on 1 bus,

and it's not their fault the routes don't favour them.



It's a good policy, because it gets rid of all the faff of transfer

tickets and the ripoff that results from the vast majority of passengers

not knowing about them and drivers not bothering to inform them. But I

don't buy your argument. Unless you're a child you choose where you

live. And you choose where you work. If you choose to do inconvenient

journeys that's your problem.

No, not everyone is fortunate enough to choose where they work, or where they live, or where their family, friends, shops etc are.

On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 12:52:40 +0100, David Cantrell
wrote:

On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 04:12:12AM -0700, Mark Hynes wrote:

[Re transfers] Someone might
need to take 2 or 3 buses to travel the distance someone else does on 1 bus,
and it's not their fault the routes don't favour them.

It's a good policy, because it gets rid of all the faff of transfer
tickets and the ripoff that results from the vast majority of passengers
not knowing about them and drivers not bothering to inform them. But I
don't buy your argument. Unless you're a child you choose where you
live. And you choose where you work. If you choose to do inconvenient
journeys that's your problem.

If we can agree that people move to be near particular railways or
motorways, and I'm sure they do -- I did -- I can't accept that it's
ever the case for a bus route. They're just too ephemeral. Like a
cheap Ryanair destination, they can be gone in a moment.

It's a bit like people in Bromley moaning about not having any tubes.

Well, I moan about the lack of transfers, but don't think it's the
same at all. South London is bereft of the Underground thanks to
history, corporate decisions and, some say, geology. I'll never agree
with what Bromley did, by the way, but I see the objection they had.

On the other hand, I am as very well served as almost everyone else in
Greater London, with one of the world's best bus networks. It just
doesn't necessarily go where I want, although it might have done a
year ago and it might do in future. I have no complaint about the
level of service, I just want the *same* treatment that rail
travellers get, a ticket to where I'm going, not some arbitrary point
along the way.

I wonder what the figures are? What would the PAYG single fare need
to be for a change to transfers to need no extra subsidy? Yes,
occasional return journeys might be made, in the same way that a
second journey might be possible with a rail OSI. You could make a
transfer only to a different route, but that would remove the benefit
of not faffing about with transfer tickets during disruption (or a
planned event).

Richard.

On Thursday, 3 April 2014 20:24:56 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
I wonder what the figures are? What would the PAYG single fare need

to be for a change to transfers to need no extra subsidy? Yes,

occasional return journeys might be made, in the same way that a

second journey might be possible with a rail OSI. You could make a

transfer only to a different route, but that would remove the benefit

of not faffing about with transfer tickets during disruption (or a

planned event).

Occasional return journeys for a single fare happen already on Tramlink. Actually probably not that occasional, it's happened to me a fair few times when I've, say, hopped into Croydon to visit my bank (which is next to a stop) and straight back. I can't remember, and can't find, what the maximum journey time allowed on one touch-in is but I think it's fairly generous.

Thinking about this, I've also had similar on a bus. I caught a bus to its terminus, went to a shop and was back at the terminus in time to catch the same bus back. The ticket machine refused my card with something like "passback attempted". The driver remembered me from earlier and just waved me on..

The OSI time between London Bridge Underground and NR is 40 minutes, far greater than I need if I know my train time[1] so I've often used it to leave the station to do something quickly.

[1] The downside of OSI times at Underground/NR interchanges is that if something goes wrong on the NR side it's easy to exceed them and be charged for two journeys. A problem that generally won't happen in the the reverse (NR to Underground) direction as unlike on NR you go through the gateline without waiting for your train to be there / announced.

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message


rg, at 23:36:21 on Sun, 30 Mar 2014, Clank
remarked:
So the traffic will be a bit ****ty for an afternoon.

Not really.

In Cambridge, the closures start at 5.30pm on Sunday, the core closes at
4am and whole route through Cambridgshire is pretty much locked down
from 7am.

In Essex it looks like this:

Uttlesford and Braintree: 7.30am to 4pm
Chelmsford: 8am to 5pm
Epping DC: north of the A414 closed 8am opened 5pm.
Epping DC: south of the A414 and including the A414 closed 9am opened
5pm."

Seriously, deal with it. If it really bothers you that much, take a
holiday

It would be nice if the schools had an amnesty that day for parents
taking their children out of school; after all quite a few won't have
the means to get there anyway, let alone the idea of being a
spectator.

Some schools, and many businesses, are of course on the route, and will
be landlocked all day.

FSVO "whole route". A large part of the north and east sides of the city
centre will be open.

The "landlocked" schools include my granddaughter's and that will only be
hard to access by car. On foot and by bicycle will be fine. I think it's
going to close anyway.

--
Colin Rosenstiel