On Sunday, 24 December 2017 01:13:49 UTC, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 24 Dec 2017 00:54:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 07:23:09 +0000 (GMT+00:00), tolly57
wrote:

PhilD Wrote in message:
On Wednesday, 20 December 2017 11:51:07 UTC, Basil Jet wrote:
Boundary of TfL ownership? I presume Taplow will be it.

*Ownership* boundary will be near Royal Oak. Station responsibility
will be Taplow (Slough stays with GWR).



Zone 6 is currently West Drayton for Oyster and Freedom Pass
holders, I assume an extension ticket will be required for onward
travel to Reading then?

Freedom Pass/60+ Oyster holders only need a valid ticket of some type
for the extended journey as no touch in/out or stopping of the train
is required at the boundary station. PAYG Oyster needs a touch in/out
at both ends of the journey within the Oyster zones to prevent a
maximum fare being created.

True, but I don't think we know yet how far west the Freedom Pass will run
when the Elizabeth line opens: West Drayton, Taplow, or somewhere in
between? And what zone(s) will the new stations be in for Oyster?

Based on the current arrangements for FP/60+, "how far" is probably as
far as the GLA regards as reasonable (see also Swanley and Dartford)
to support GL residents going off-patch. West Drayton is the last bit
of the GL conurbation, Iver is in comparative countryside so Langley
or Slough would seem to be natural choices while anything west of
Slough is arguably a trip into the countryside beyond. For paid Oyster
it might be whatever the system can support, maybe in conjunction with
sorting the anomoly which is going to result if/when Watford (Met)
services (zone 7) are diverted to Watford Junction (zone 9 and a bit).

Not really a decision for the GLA. It's for London Councils to determine as they co-ordinate the Borough's funding for concessionary travel. Until TfL determine the fare levels that will apply and some sort of demand forecast then the "revenue foregone" can't be calculated. Only then can London Councils determine if the cost can or should be funded. The 60+ Pass is funded by TfL but its availability follows what is set for the Freedom Pass. The fact the FP reaches Dartford and Watford is largely an accident of history. Crossrail is rather different (IMO) and the potential revenue impact (given how high fares are to Reading) greater plus there are issues of perceived fairness - why should London residents gain free travel so far to the west but Berkshire residents get nothing?

The other factor with the 60+ Pass is the growing number of people who are entitled to it and the spiralling cost to TfL. There are huge pressures on TfL's budget to 2020 and beyond so there may be good reason not to expand its coverage and all the attendant cost.

Not sure I understand the earlier comments about "TfL empire building". The transfer of stations between TOCs has been happening since franchising starting. The transfer of some, but not all, stations for stopping services in West London just reflects what has been agreed with the DfT as to what Crossrail will operate. It is noteworthy that the stations that have national rail fare setting rules (Slough, Reading) remain with GWR so they're in charge of pricing for the route. Again no doubt a DfT demand as with other transfers to TfL - Shenfield didn't transfer nor did Cheshunt. In similar vein Dartford remains with South Eastern despite Oyster ticketing eventually being extended there. The stations remaining with GWR also reflect the existence of other rail services (branches) or longer distance trains stopping.

I think all the "mood music" has been that Oyster PAYG / contactless will reach Reading but don't expect any clever "zones" or stuff like that. With the restructured Oyster system each station should be capable of being individually priced rather than grouped as has happened in the past. We may also see some past pricing compromises being removed once the new system is fully operational. I also wonder quite what will happen with daily / 7 day capping and maximum fares given the high fares that apply beyond the normal T/Card boundary. We may see the first signs of fare adjustments in May 2018 when the Heathrow service starts and Oyster / CPC is extended there.

--
Paul C
via Google

Two points:

TfL's operations also extend to Epping which is way outside
the Greater London Area. Does the 60+ pass extend to Epping?
My Freedom Pass does. It also allows me to go to Cheshunt as
long as I use TfL Rail.

TfL's empire building refers primarily to the ambition to take
control of suburban services in South London, even though
that would inevitably have a huge impact on services from
further afield. It also takes in their determination to have a
major say in the allocation of train paths between Paddington
and Reading. I haven't bothered to keep up, but several months
ago I did come across some blogs where Berkshire commuters
were indignant about TfL's territorial ambitions.

Although instinctively reluctant to be generous to TfL, I do assume
they were not party to Mr. Khan's ludicrous suggestion some time
ago that he should take over the Southern services as he had
some magical mediating skills which could resolve the dispute
over guards.

On Thursday, 28 December 2017 14:57:38 UTC, Robin9 wrote:

Two points:

TfL's operations also extend to Epping which is way outside
the Greater London Area. Does the 60+ pass extend to Epping?
My Freedom Pass does. It also allows me to go to Cheshunt as
long as I use TfL Rail.

TfL's empire building refers primarily to the ambition to take
control of suburban services in South London, even though
that would inevitably have a huge impact on services from
further afield. It also takes in their determination to have a
major say in the allocation of train paths between Paddington
and Reading. I haven't bothered to keep up, but several months
ago I did come across some blogs where Berkshire commuters
were indignant about TfL's territorial ambitions.

Although instinctively reluctant to be generous to TfL, I do assume
they were not party to Mr. Khan's ludicrous suggestion some time
ago that he should take over the Southern services as he had
some magical mediating skills which could resolve the dispute
over guards.
--
Robin9

As I made clear there are is some validity that stretches beyond the GL boundary for longstanding historical reasons. Freedom Passes have been valid to Dartford for a very long time and long before PAYG was extended there and without TfL having any say in the train service that reaches Dartford.

Places like the Watford line have long had LT / LU / TfL involvement by virtue of former through working of services. Those arrangements have been refined where TfL have subsequently been granted specification / procurement rights for some of the rail services. I assume TfL and London Councils have reached agreement that the current F Pass can stretch to these cross boundary points as usual volumes are very low and revenue foregone is similarly low and not material to the overall funding settlement. With Crossrail to the west we face a rather different situation as the fare revenue foregone could be high if even moderate numbers were to use a "free" pass given the much higher fares to places like Twyford and Reading.

I am afraid I am going to be my usual picky self and say it is not TfL that have the "empire building ambitions". It is Mayors from the two main parties that have held such ambitions because the Mayoralty has been granted a wider area of influence over rail services. They do this for the obvious reasons of power and influence plus a belief they can secure better services.. The revenue would also be a nice add on to TfL's coffers. TfL only ever does what the Mayor requires which is why we have monstrous NB4L buses, a pointless cable car and why Ken Livingstone annoyed generations of bus loons by scrapping Routemasters. TfL implemented those Mayoral policies regardless of the wider issues. Just read the transcripts from the recent Garden Bridge investigation where both Peter Hendy and Mike Brown explain precisely how things work in the current structure. The only stuff that *has* to get done is what is in Mayoral manifestos. The fact a transport service also operates 364 days a year is incidental.

It is worth pointing out that courtesy of Heathrow Airport acting like an extortion racket over access to Heathrow via their rail tunnels that TfL, City Hall and the DfT all ended up on the same page over Crossrail issues in West London. Now that a settlement has been reached over Heathrow access it is notable that what followed is an outbreak of agreement between the Mayoralty and the DfT about granting extra running rights to Reading. This seemingly worked to DfT's satisfaction or else why on earth would a Grayling led DfT ever concede anything to a Labour run City Hall? He has plenty of form for blocking every rail devolution idea the current Mayor has had (even the ludicrous one you cite re Southern). I would also argue that if you rip funding away from TfL as George Osborne did then what on earth do you expect people to do to fill the gap? They will naturally look for opportunities to add services and responsibilities that allow new revenues to be gained and new sources of investment funding to be drawn on. That (IMO) partly sits behind the long held desire to take on South London's suburban rail network and also in wanting to run a much higher service level on Crossrail than originally envisaged. It all boils down to power and ££££s.

--
Paul C
via Google

Paul Corfield Wrote in message:
On Thursday, 28 December 2017 14:57:38 UTC, Robin9 wrote:

Two points:

TfL's operations also extend to Epping which is way outside
the Greater London Area. Does the 60+ pass extend to Epping?
My Freedom Pass does. It also allows me to go to Cheshunt as
long as I use TfL Rail.

TfL's empire building refers primarily to the ambition to take
control of suburban services in South London, even though
that would inevitably have a huge impact on services from
further afield. It also takes in their determination to have a
major say in the allocation of train paths between Paddington
and Reading. I haven't bothered to keep up, but several months
ago I did come across some blogs where Berkshire commuters
were indignant about TfL's territorial ambitions.

Although instinctively reluctant to be generous to TfL, I do assume
they were not party to Mr. Khan's ludicrous suggestion some time
ago that he should take over the Southern services as he had
some magical mediating skills which could resolve the dispute
over guards.
--
Robin9

As I made clear there are is some validity that stretches beyond the GL boundary for longstanding historical reasons. Freedom Passes have been valid to Dartford for a very long time and long before PAYG was extended there and without TfL having any say in the train service that reaches Dartford.

Places like the Watford line have long had LT / LU / TfL involvement by virtue of former through working of services. Those arrangements have been refined where TfL have subsequently been granted specification / procurement rights for some of the rail services. I assume TfL and London Councils have reached agreement that the current F Pass can stretch to these cross boundary points as usual volumes are very low and revenue foregone is similarly low and not material to the overall funding settlement. With Crossrail to the west we face a rather different situation as the fare revenue foregone could be high if even moderate numbers were to use a "free" pass given the much higher fares to places like Twyford and Reading.

I am afraid I am going to be my usual picky self and say it is not TfL that have the "empire building ambitions". It is Mayors from the two main parties that have held such ambitions because the Mayoralty has been granted a wider area of influence over rail services. They do this for the obvious reasons of power and influence plus a belief they can secure better services. The revenue would also be a nice add on to TfL's coffers. TfL only ever does what the Mayor requires which is why we have monstrous NB4L buses

I know you hate them, but I'm genuinely baffled why. I suspect
that the man who introduced them plays an undue influence.

I was on the 38 yesterday, and thought it was genuinely excellent.
As a tall person I find the upper deck much better than
'traditional' London double deckers (insomuch as I don't whack my
head on the roof trying to find a seat), and the rear stairs &
door are much more convenient than "fighting with passengers on
the way up when you want to get off" that is normal in a regular
London double decker.

Oh, and the climate was fine.

What is your problem with them? On the two days a year that
London experiences warm weather I never found the existing bus
stock particularly wonderful, so I'm not buying "they're
sometimes warm"...


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Thursday, 28 December 2017 20:02:45 UTC, Clank wrote:

I know you hate them, but I'm genuinely baffled why. I suspect
that the man who introduced them plays an undue influence.

I was on the 38 yesterday, and thought it was genuinely excellent.
As a tall person I find the upper deck much better than
'traditional' London double deckers (insomuch as I don't whack my
head on the roof trying to find a seat), and the rear stairs &
door are much more convenient than "fighting with passengers on
the way up when you want to get off" that is normal in a regular
London double decker.

Oh, and the climate was fine.

What is your problem with them? On the two days a year that
London experiences warm weather I never found the existing bus
stock particularly wonderful, so I'm not buying "they're
sometimes warm"...

The simple answer is that they make me ill. Don't know why specifically but I have ended up feeling exhausted and having a thumping headache when using them in the early days. I am not prone to headaches so if I get one it's an unusual event. The weather was not exceptional on any day in question. No other bus in the *world* (and I've travelled on plenty) has the same effect. Heck I even survived crossing the Channel twice in one day in very stormy conditions without being seasick and I loathe ferry travel. To my mind that pretty much proves I am not prone to travel sickness so why the NB4L affects me physically I don't know but it does.

The fact that so much money was splashed on something that is a reflection of Boris's monstrous ego certainly doesn't help my opinion of them but it is not the main reason why I refuse to travel on NB4Ls. Why would I use a bus that makes me ill? Simple answer - I don't and it's one reason why my bus use and visits to Central London have declined markedly. I await the day when they start being withdrawn and are replaced with something decent. I know that's at least a decade away and that's fine. I know people like them and others hate them - that's fine too.

--
Paul C
via Google

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thursday, 28 December 2017 20:02:45 UTC, Clank wrote:

I know you hate them, but I'm genuinely baffled why. I suspect
that the man who introduced them plays an undue influence.

I was on the 38 yesterday, and thought it was genuinely excellent.
As a tall person I find the upper deck much better than
'traditional' London double deckers (insomuch as I don't whack my
head on the roof trying to find a seat), and the rear stairs &
door are much more convenient than "fighting with passengers on
the way up when you want to get off" that is normal in a regular
London double decker.

Oh, and the climate was fine.

What is your problem with them? On the two days a year that
London experiences warm weather I never found the existing bus
stock particularly wonderful, so I'm not buying "they're
sometimes warm"...

The simple answer is that they make me ill. Don't know why specifically
but I have ended up feeling exhausted and having a thumping headache when
using them in the early days. I am not prone to headaches so if I get one
it's an unusual event. The weather was not exceptional on any day in
question. No other bus in the *world* (and I've travelled on plenty) has
the same effect. Heck I even survived crossing the Channel twice in one
day in very stormy conditions without being seasick and I loathe ferry
travel. To my mind that pretty much proves I am not prone to travel
sickness so why the NB4L affects me physically I don't know but it does.

The fact that so much money was splashed on something that is a
reflection of Boris's monstrous ego certainly doesn't help my opinion of
them but it is not the main reason why I refuse to travel on NB4Ls. Why
would I use a bus that makes me ill? Simple answer - I don't and it's
one reason why my bus use and visits to Central London have declined
markedly. I await the day when they start being withdrawn and are
replaced with something decent. I know that's at least a decade away and
that's fine. I know people like them and others hate them - that's fine too.

Paul,

I'm sure you'll be thrilled at this bit of news:

"William Wright, of Ballymena-based Wrightbus - the company behind the new
London Routemaster double-decker - is knighted for services to the economy
and bus industry."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42504660

On Friday, 29 December 2017 22:49:57 UTC, Recliner wrote:

I'm sure you'll be thrilled at this bit of news:

"William Wright, of Ballymena-based Wrightbus - the company behind the new
London Routemaster double-decker - is knighted for services to the economy
and bus industry."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42504660

Not terribly bothered to be honest. Wrightbus have made a lot of very decent vehicles over the years and have developed a decent business. They have had an awful lot of state support too but that's not exactly unusual in NI.

If Wrightbus hadn't made the NB4L someone else would. It was a political construct not a bus industry initiative.

--
Paul C
via Google

On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 07:58:32 -0800 (PST)
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thursday, 28 December 2017 20:02:45 UTC, Clank wrote:
What is your problem with them? On the two days a year that
London experiences warm weather I never found the existing bus
stock particularly wonderful, so I'm not buying "they're
sometimes warm"...

The simple answer is that they make me ill. Don't know why specifically but=
I have ended up feeling exhausted and having a thumping headache when usin=

The air con always was flakey. Perhaps its something to do with that?

On 29/12/2017 15:58, Paul Corfield wrote:
snip

The simple answer is that they make me ill. Don't know why specifically but I have ended up feeling exhausted and having a thumping headache when using them in the early days. I am not prone to headaches so if I get one it's an unusual event. The weather was not exceptional on any day in question. No other bus in the *world* (and I've travelled on plenty) has the same effect. Heck I even survived crossing the Channel twice in one day in very stormy conditions without being seasick and I loathe ferry travel. To my mind that pretty much proves I am not prone to travel sickness so why the NB4L affects me physically I don't know but it does.

The fact that so much money was splashed on something that is a reflection of Boris's monstrous ego certainly doesn't help my opinion of them but it is not the main reason why I refuse to travel on NB4Ls. Why would I use a bus that makes me ill? Simple answer - I don't and it's one reason why my bus use and visits to Central London have declined markedly. I await the day when they start being withdrawn and are replaced with something decent. I know that's at least a decade away and that's fine. I know people like them and others hate them - that's fine too.


Is it possible you are allergic to something used in the construction of
the buses or given off by it (possibly something not even specified by
Boris such as the paint)? And that that something might now have
dissipated? One way way to test this would be for you to travel on old
NB4Ls a few times - although it would not be possible to eliminate the
effects of your views on the bus without making it impossible for you to
tell when you were on one and when on another bus. Would blindfold, ear
protectors and thick mitts suffice?

If you would then need a travelling companion we may struggle to set up
a double-blind experiment, but let's not make the best the enemy of the
good

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On Saturday, 30 December 2017 11:00:14 UTC, Robin wrote:

Is it possible you are allergic to something used in the construction of
the buses or given off by it (possibly something not even specified by
Boris such as the paint)? And that that something might now have
dissipated? One way way to test this would be for you to travel on old
NB4Ls a few times - although it would not be possible to eliminate the
effects of your views on the bus without making it impossible for you to
tell when you were on one and when on another bus. Would blindfold, ear
protectors and thick mitts suffice?

If you would then need a travelling companion we may struggle to set up
a double-blind experiment, but let's not make the best the enemy of the
good

I don't know about allergies. I'm not knowingly allergic to anything but you may be correct. I appreciate you're enjoying the prospect of me suffering additional anguish from a force fed NB4L ride complete with ridiculous "disguise" but I doubt I'm that much of a sucker for punishment. ;-)

--
Paul C
via Google