Paul Corfield wrote:
I am also the person who spent a lot of time explaining the benefits of
gating and the business case issues to a wide range of TOCs as well as
the first private owners (Prism) of what is now C2C.

I don't see any bad side to 'gates', but the fact is the ones at Kings
Cross are inadequate. Now, I will accept your explanation for this
deficiency, but that doesn't change the fact that they may be narrower
- so you can have more gates - but they're slow and cause all sorts of
problems. Others have commented on how they're bad at accepting
tickets, especially Oyster cards.

There are many different suppliers of gates and
while Cubic have the biggest share of the market they are not without
competitors.

Sure, but I doubt First will change supplier for the roll-out on the
remainder of the Thameslink branch and Great Northern - based on what
they already use.

Gates are a good thing, for sure, and I can't wait to see them at ALL
stations - but if they're that easy to get around, then there's a
serious issue to be dealt with. The use of gates will be a possible
justification to reduce staffing, and/or physical ticket checks. So,
they should be much more successful at stopping fare evaders.

What we have is a situation where fare evasion is a piece of p**s (for
want of better words), which means they gates are almost there just to
validate Oyster cards, collect tickets from the ordinary passenger and
maybe regulate the flow! We queue, while the others just double up and
get through scot free. Something is fundamentally wrong here!

Jonathan

On 14 Jun 2006 15:48:46 -0700, "Jonathan Morris"
wrote:

What we have is a situation where fare evasion is a piece of p**s (for
want of better words), which means they gates are almost there just to
validate Oyster cards, collect tickets from the ordinary passenger and
maybe regulate the flow! We queue, while the others just double up and
get through scot free. Something is fundamentally wrong here!

So write to LUL pointing out your concerns and ask them to rectify them
or else explain why not. No good just expressing your concerns on a
newsgroup when you don't or won't really accept the explanation that has
been provided to you.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Paul Corfield wrote:
So write to LUL pointing out your concerns and ask them to rectify them
or else explain why not. No good just expressing your concerns on a
newsgroup when you don't or won't really accept the explanation that has
been provided to you.

I accept your explanation, but still don't think it is right (not what
you're saying, but the system we've ended up with).

However, as LUL will have signed an agreement to buy X number of
barriers and for them to be installed on the network, a letter saying
they should change them is rather futile. They're not stupid - if I've
commented on such things, then they know about them too (just use one
and you can instantly see its shortcomings).

The gates would appear to make fare evasion easy (at least at certain
times, namely when a station is crowded), and I've had the highest
number of failed readings on my Oyster card since I got a prepay one on
launch day - causing the other problem of getting stuck, and the person
behind lets you through with their ticket (and either doubles up, or
gets stuck). People with paper tickets are also complaining, although -
to be fair - my season ticket always got damaged by using the old style
gates at Farringdon.

As you have explained why they work the way they do, I can at least
understand a bit more (and I am grateful) but I also hope things can be
tweaked to try and improve things in the future. We're not going to see
millions of ticket inspectors anytime soon, so it annoys me if anything
makes things easier for the people putting my fare up!

Regards,

Jonathan