Having seen this several times a week, why were ticket gates so
designed so that if someone bunged in a paper ticket which the gate
rejected Seek Assistance, it is possible and even probable that a
too-fast person behind can insert their ticket which lets the rejected
person through and traps the eager beaver? Every time I see this, the
one left behind wails to staff, they wave their supposedly valid
ticket and are let in, so I guess the lucky one in front has to find
another victim at exit, vault the gate, use an unguarded station.

Is it not possible to "eject" the failed person (as it were) before
allowing a ticket to be inserted after a rejected one?
--
New anti-spam address cmylod at despammed dot com

Sensors on the gate stop someone putting in another ticket until the first
has cleared the sensor. The non ticket person pushes up against the gates
and this clears the sensor (didnt take them long to work it out)....so the
next ticket is able to go in. Sometimes the non payer reaches around and
takes the good ticket...leaving the second person saying "my ticket is lost
in the machine". The gates actually open when you take the ticket out, not
put it in.
The answer is not to take out your ticket until the person in front is gone.
But in the rush......this is a hard one to remember.

"Colum Mylod" wrote in message
...
Having seen this several times a week, why were ticket gates so
designed so that if someone bunged in a paper ticket which the gate
rejected Seek Assistance, it is possible and even probable that a
too-fast person behind can insert their ticket which lets the rejected
person through and traps the eager beaver? Every time I see this, the
one left behind wails to staff, they wave their supposedly valid
ticket and are let in, so I guess the lucky one in front has to find
another victim at exit, vault the gate, use an unguarded station.

Is it not possible to "eject" the failed person (as it were) before
allowing a ticket to be inserted after a rejected one?
--
New anti-spam address cmylod at despammed dot com

Malcolm & Nika wrote:

Sensors on the gate stop someone putting in another ticket until the first
has cleared the sensor. The non ticket person pushes up against the gates
and this clears the sensor (didnt take them long to work it out)....so the
next ticket is able to go in. Sometimes the non payer reaches around and
takes the good ticket...leaving the second person saying "my ticket is lost
in the machine". The gates actually open when you take the ticket out, not
put it in.
The answer is not to take out your ticket until the person in front is gone.
But in the rush......this is a hard one to remember.

Even easier to get in when the person behind you has an Oyster (no
"taking the ticket out" to be done).

On the occasions it has been done to me, I don';t think it was malicious
- it is usually someone whose ticket said Seek Assistance, but they
didn't notice.

Having seen this several times a week, why were ticket gates so
designed so that if someone bunged in a paper ticket which the gate
rejected Seek Assistance, it is possible and even probable that a
too-fast person behind can insert their ticket which lets the rejected
person through and traps the eager beaver?

....or if the eager beaver has had it happen to him before and reacts quickly
enough to get through the gates it makes it look like he has gone through on
the ticket of the person in front.

In article , Colum Mylod
writes
Is it not possible to "eject" the failed person (as it were) before
allowing a ticket to be inserted after a rejected one?

The first design of gate involved you walking through the gate while it
processed your ticket. At the end, you were either released with your
ticket or dumped into a "sin-bin" for an inspector to come over and
investigate.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

In message , Clive D. W. Feather
writes

The first design of gate involved you walking through the gate while it
processed your ticket. At the end, you were either released with your
ticket or dumped into a "sin-bin" for an inspector to come over and
investigate.
I seem to remember the first ones had two sets of gates but the second
set only opened if your ticket was valid, thus trapping you, however
these were quickly modified when it was found they trapped innocent
heavily pregnant women because the first gates closed before the second
lot opened
--
Clive.

In article , Clive Coleman
writes
The first design of gate involved you walking through the gate while
it processed your ticket. At the end, you were either released with
your ticket or dumped into a "sin-bin" for an inspector to come over
and investigate.
I seem to remember the first ones had two sets of gates but the second
set only opened if your ticket was valid, thus trapping you,

I remember those, but that's not what I mean.

The design was an experiment that involved a walkway about 2 metres
long. It contained several metal bars like turnstile arms. You pushed
one in front of you, transporting your ticket along inside. If it was
valid, the arm dropped away to be carried back for re-use. If not, the
arm routed you into the sin-bin.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: