On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:53:40 +0100, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:

It would surely be dead easy to set the system whereby if you board a
bus within, say, an hour of boarding another on the same route in the
same direction you are not charged again.

They have bus to bus transfer in New York. Return trips are banned
within the transfer system so as to force people to pay for an outward
and return ride. While not quite the same rule as the one you suggest
the software programming was absolutely horrendous and I can see the
permutations being required in London for "forward" transfer being even
worse. I appreciate you say transfer onto a bus on the same route but
that would simply not be sustainable as the public would refuse to be
restricted to waiting for a 38 when they could, on some sections, also
take a 19 or a 341 for example. All of this "Logic" would have to be
programmed and maintained and it would probably cost as much as it
sought to save. Therefore you need a different commercial rule.

Some days I only do the same bus route twice with a couple of stops so
I could pay £3.60 to go to Victoria and back instead of £1.80 to cover
the same distance in more or less the same time on the same bus route.
not enough to be getting into travel card price capping but it adds
up.

Surely under the £3.60 example you are actually capped at £3 for a One
Day Bus cap using Oyster PAYG? No need to trigger a One Day Travelcard
cap.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On 23 Apr, 20:54, Mr Thant
wrote:

On 23 Apr, 20:34, MIG wrote:

I know that it's just the way it is, but it really could be better and
I wish some alternatives could be seriously considered.

Maybe they could have a scheme so that if you make, say, three and a
bit journeys in one day, the rest are free?


A note of explanation for those less acquainted with Oyster - the lack
of smiley or any other clue belies the fact that U is in fact
referring to the £3 daily price cap for bus travel in London. Thus
currently the first three journeys on any one day cost 90p, the fourth
30p, the rest are then 'free'.

On 23 Apr, 19:16, Paul Weaver wrote:

(snip)

3) Board a murderbus at the back and touch your oyster in, money is
deducted

What a ridiculous thing to say.

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:06:42 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote this gibberish:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:53:40 +0100, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:

It would surely be dead easy to set the system whereby if you board a
bus within, say, an hour of boarding another on the same route in the
same direction you are not charged again.

They have bus to bus transfer in New York. Return trips are banned
within the transfer system so as to force people to pay for an outward
and return ride. While not quite the same rule as the one you suggest
the software programming was absolutely horrendous and I can see the
permutations being required in London for "forward" transfer being even
worse. I appreciate you say transfer onto a bus on the same route but
that would simply not be sustainable as the public would refuse to be
restricted to waiting for a 38 when they could, on some sections, also
take a 19 or a 341 for example. All of this "Logic" would have to be
programmed and maintained and it would probably cost as much as it
sought to save. Therefore you need a different commercial rule.

Then perhaps a policy of ignoring the practice when encountered would
be nice )

Some days I only do the same bus route twice with a couple of stops so
I could pay £3.60 to go to Victoria and back instead of £1.80 to cover
the same distance in more or less the same time on the same bus route.
not enough to be getting into travel card price capping but it adds
up.

Surely under the £3.60 example you are actually capped at £3 for a One
Day Bus cap using Oyster PAYG? No need to trigger a One Day Travelcard
cap.

I didn't know about the one day bus cap, but it's still £1.20 more
than necessary, that's almost a sandwich! this is my Yorkshire origins
showing through I think...
--
Mark Varley
www.MarkVarleyPhoto.co.uk
www.TwistedPhotography.co.uk
London, England.

MarkVarley - MVP wrote:

From what I've seen ticket inspectors can see only bus number and time
when they check your oyster, and I doubt a 5 minute break would be
noticed, but I was curious if there was an allowance for such with the
logic that I'm boarding a bus and paying for an hours journey so have
paid from point 'a' to point 'b', it seems the powers that be don't
agree with that.

That's because you're not paying for an hour's journey; you're paying for
the journey that ends when you leave the bus. Since you're doing so in
order to visit a bank, the break in journey has value for you, so why
shouldn't you pay for it?

And to the poster who claimed that with private transport (e.g. your own
car) you could break the journey without any extra cost, have you forgotten
about the cost of parking, and the time and cost of driving around looking
for a free meter?
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Jarle H Knudsen wrote:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 11:16:10 -0700 (PDT), Paul Weaver wrote:

Yes, and the following are the legal ways of boarding a bus:
1) Board at the front with a saver, driver takes half the saver
2) Board at the front and touch your oyster in, money is deducted
(unless it's a travelcard/capped etc)
3) Board a murderbus at the back and touch your oyster in, money is
deducted
4) Board at the front and show a paper travelcard
5) Board at the back with a valid paper or oyster travelcard and dont
touch in.
6) Outside central london you can board at the front and pay cash

From YOUR guide to fares and tickets:

Cash fares are not accepted on buses in the Pay Before You Board area in
central London, on bendy buses or on route W7.

Ha, i didn't know that. Why is the W7 a special case? Because it's
ludicrously busy ferrying people from the Centre of the Universe to the
wilds of Crouch End?

They really need to send some sort of railway line up to Crouch End. That,
or poison everyone who lives there to death. Thinking about it, the latter
would be preferable.

In fact, when some of our enterprising local terrorists started that ricin
plot a few years back, why on earth did they decide to target Holloway
rather than Crouch End? Holloway isn't exactly the lair of the
imperialist, is it? An attack on Crouch End, on the other hand, would be
an attack on the very heart of the western bourgeoisie. You know what i
think? I think it's because they couldn't get to bloody Crouch End because
the bus doesn't take cash.

tom

--
YOU CANT TAKE AWAY HATGUYS HAT. THEN HE IS JUST GUY -- The_Toad

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Mr Thant wrote:

On 23 Apr, 20:34, MIG wrote:

I know that it's just the way it is, but it really could be better and
I wish some alternatives could be seriously considered.

Maybe they could have a scheme so that if you make, say, three and a bit
journeys in one day, the rest are free?

What an absurdly roundabout solution to a very straightforward problem.
Where on earth did you get that idea? I can't see any public transport
authority implementing that in preference to bus transfers unless they
were all quite mad [1].

tom

[1] Yes, i know you mean capping - Ha Ha Only Serious.

--
YOU CANT TAKE AWAY HATGUYS HAT. THEN HE IS JUST GUY -- The_Toad

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:53:40 +0100, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:

It would surely be dead easy to set the system whereby if you board a
bus within, say, an hour of boarding another on the same route in the
same direction you are not charged again.

They have bus to bus transfer in New York.

And Vancouver.

Return trips are banned within the transfer system so as to force people
to pay for an outward and return ride. While not quite the same rule as
the one you suggest the software programming was absolutely horrendous
and I can see the permutations being required in London for "forward"
transfer being even worse. I appreciate you say transfer onto a bus on
the same route but that would simply not be sustainable as the public
would refuse to be restricted to waiting for a 38 when they could, on
some sections, also take a 19 or a 341 for example. All of this "Logic"
would have to be programmed and maintained and it would probably cost as
much as it sought to save. Therefore you need a different commercial
rule.

How about not banning return trips? That would make it pretty
straightforward.

tom

--
YOU CANT TAKE AWAY HATGUYS HAT. THEN HE IS JUST GUY -- The_Toad

On Apr 24, 12:44*am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:53:40 +0100, MarkVarley - MVP
wrote:

It would surely be dead easy to set the system whereby if you board a
bus within, say, an hour of boarding another on the same route in the
same direction you are not charged again.

They have bus to bus transfer in New York.

And Vancouver.

The first such system I remember seeing was in Lille in 1985 (also the
first place and time I saw platform edge doors and a driverless
metro). It didn't require computer programming, beyond that needed to
read a ticket and clunk it with a date and time. I don't think that
the principle of the restrictions and the automation of ticket checks
need to be confused or depend on each other.

You'd clunk your ticket on the metro in the centre of town and it
would be valid on your bus home at the other end, as long as you
completed the journey in a hour (I think). But in a larger city like
London, the time it takes to get home can be a lot longer, so there
could be complications.

On Apr 24, 12:41*am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Mr Thant wrote:
On 23 Apr, 20:34, MIG wrote:

I know that it's just the way it is, but it really could be better and
I wish some alternatives could be seriously considered.

Maybe they could have a scheme so that if you make, say, three and a bit
journeys in one day, the rest are free?

What an absurdly roundabout solution to a very straightforward problem.
Where on earth did you get that idea? I can't see any public transport
authority implementing that in preference to bus transfers unless they
were all quite mad [1].

tom

[1] Yes, i know you mean capping - Ha Ha Only Serious.

People whose travel is frequently capped have probably been won over
to the efficacy of public transport anyway.

Anyway, they only do it because bus passes had already been invented
(and a jolly Good Thing too), and capping was required in order to
provide an alternative. It wasn't new thinking as such.