Waterloo gateline
 

In message
Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 00:34:00 on Tue,
16 Dec 2008, Theo Markettos
remarked:
When they are open. The main gents has been closed more often that it
was open on my trips in the last six months, and there's a perpetual
queue out of the door for the ladies.

I'm surprised nobody modelled that.

They were too busy making sure the glass wall panels lined up properly.

But they don't :-)


--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

Waterloo gateline
 

On Dec 13, 1:56*pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 13 Dec, 11:15, Roland Perry wrote:

In message 01c95cc0$991a8ca0$LocalHost@default, at 01:21:36 on Sat, 13
Dec 2008, Michael R N Dolbear remarked:

Is there such a thing as a Off-peak Single ?

Depends on the route. I've found them to be less prevalent near London.

There isn't for Richmond to London.

That's a fare that falls within the London zonal fares regime *- since
January 2007 all National Rail fares in the London zones, regardless
of TOC, are priced set according to a zonal fare scale (though still
issued on a point-to-point basis).

The only tickets available for such journeys are Anytime Singles,
Anytime Day Returns and Off-Peak Returns (aka CDRs) - plus of course
Travelcards and Oyster PAYG on a limited number of routes (and indeed
LU fares on a few routes that have interavailable ticketing).

Personally I think this is the worst of both worlds-no oyster PAYG,
zonal fares as on the tube, but they can't be used zonally- so you
couldn't use a Bromley South-"Zone 4" single to either Beckenham
Junction or Hill, depending on which came first. (Not a brilliant
example, but you get the idea- London Terminals to West Dulwich
couldn't be used at Tulse Hill). I think this was a massively
premature step towards full integration of the fare system, since
they're now saying 'late 2009' for Oyster PAYG.

Waterloo gateline
 

On 16 Dec, 15:22, Rupert Candy wrote:

On Dec 13, 1:56 pm, Mizter T wrote:

(snip)

That's a fare that falls within the London zonal fares regime - since
January 2007 all National Rail fares in the London zones, regardless
of TOC, are priced set according to a zonal fare scale (though still
issued on a point-to-point basis).

The only tickets available for such journeys are Anytime Singles,
Anytime Day Returns and Off-Peak Returns (aka CDRs) - plus of course
Travelcards and Oyster PAYG on a limited number of routes (and indeed
LU fares on a few routes that have interavailable ticketing).

Personally I think this is the worst of both worlds-no oyster PAYG,
zonal fares as on the tube, but they can't be used zonally- so you
couldn't use a Bromley South-"Zone 4" single to either Beckenham
Junction or Hill, depending on which came first. (Not a brilliant
example, but you get the idea- London Terminals to West Dulwich
couldn't be used at Tulse Hill). I think this was a massively
premature step towards full integration of the fare system, since
they're now saying 'late 2009' for Oyster PAYG.


I'd say it's not really any worse than the situation that existed
prior to this change - that said I do absolutely acknowledge the point
that zonal pricing inevitably creates winners and losers, and the fact
that the tickets are still issued point-to-point means that the normal
concomitant increase in flexibility associated with the introduction
of zonal fares has not occurred.

However I don't think that you really give sufficient weight to the
politics involved in this - zonal pricing for paper tickets is
basically regarded as an necessary precursor to the introduction of
zonal PAYG fares (and the idea that there might be non-zonal fares on
PAYG is a nightmare both in terms of passenger comprehension and also
systems implementation). Therefore TfL persuading DfT to foist zonal
pricing on the London TOCs, doubtless against some opposition, can
only be regarded as a win in the ongoing saga of bringing Oyster PAYG
to the mainline railways.

You say this is premature - I'd counter that this change was necessary
to progressing the argument on. One of the many arguments the TOCs had
against Oyster PAYG is that they'd lose the freedom to set their own
fares - this change nullifies that argument.

As to why they didn't implement full zonal ticketing rather than
retaining point-to-point tickets, I'm sure there are a whole host of
concerns the TOCs would have about that - revenue allocation being a
crucial issue (something that can be done far more tightly with PAYG),
and the potential for misuse of such tickets being another.

Changing over to an LU-style zonal ticketing system would also have
great number of other implications - for example, LU tickets are not
valid for Break of Journey whilst National Rail tickets are. Would you
remove BoJ, or retain it - and if you retained it what about the
implications for the misuse of tickets?

Waterloo gateline
 

In article ,
(Clive D. W. Feather) wrote:

In article ,
writes
I expect that the automatic wide gates will be bi-directional
though based on other stations.
Which other station? None of the wide gates I know are bi-directional
but they are mainly FCC or TfL gates.

How about the FCC gates at Huntingdon?

No idea. Never used that station. It's not a lot of use to me, living in
Cambridge.

For each of the two gatelines, the two narrow gates are set for one
direction or the other (usually both the same way in the peaks, one
each way at quiet times), but the wide gate is always left in
first-come-first-served mode, so in the peak it is the *only* way
to pass the gateline in the contra-peak direction *but* remains
available for peak travellers needing it.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Waterloo gateline
 

In article
,
(Mizter T) wrote:

On 16 Dec, 15:22, Rupert Candy wrote:

On Dec 13, 1:56 pm, Mizter T wrote:

(snip)

That's a fare that falls within the London zonal fares regime
- since January 2007 all National Rail fares in the London zones,
regardless of TOC, are priced set according to a zonal fare scale
(though still issued on a point-to-point basis).

The only tickets available for such journeys are Anytime Singles,
Anytime Day Returns and Off-Peak Returns (aka CDRs) - plus of course
Travelcards and Oyster PAYG on a limited number of routes (and
indeed LU fares on a few routes that have interavailable ticketing).

Personally I think this is the worst of both worlds-no oyster PAYG,
zonal fares as on the tube, but they can't be used zonally- so you
couldn't use a Bromley South-"Zone 4" single to either Beckenham
Junction or Hill, depending on which came first. (Not a brilliant
example, but you get the idea- London Terminals to West Dulwich
couldn't be used at Tulse Hill). I think this was a massively
premature step towards full integration of the fare system, since
they're now saying 'late 2009' for Oyster PAYG.

I'd say it's not really any worse than the situation that existed
prior to this change - that said I do absolutely acknowledge the point
that zonal pricing inevitably creates winners and losers, and the fact
that the tickets are still issued point-to-point means that the normal
concomitant increase in flexibility associated with the introduction
of zonal fares has not occurred.

However I don't think that you really give sufficient weight to the
politics involved in this - zonal pricing for paper tickets is
basically regarded as an necessary precursor to the introduction of
zonal PAYG fares (and the idea that there might be non-zonal fares on
PAYG is a nightmare both in terms of passenger comprehension and also
systems implementation). Therefore TfL persuading DfT to foist zonal
pricing on the London TOCs, doubtless against some opposition, can
only be regarded as a win in the ongoing saga of bringing Oyster PAYG
to the mainline railways.

You say this is premature - I'd counter that this change was necessary
to progressing the argument on. One of the many arguments the TOCs had
against Oyster PAYG is that they'd lose the freedom to set their own
fares - this change nullifies that argument.

As to why they didn't implement full zonal ticketing rather than
retaining point-to-point tickets, I'm sure there are a whole host of
concerns the TOCs would have about that - revenue allocation being a
crucial issue (something that can be done far more tightly with PAYG),
and the potential for misuse of such tickets being another.

Changing over to an LU-style zonal ticketing system would also have
great number of other implications - for example, LU tickets are not
valid for Break of Journey whilst National Rail tickets are. Would you
remove BoJ, or retain it - and if you retained it what about the
implications for the misuse of tickets?

If NR have zonal fares now, how come Vauxhall-Putney is £1.60 when the
equivalent tube journey is £1.50 (both off-peak)?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Waterloo gateline
 

On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 04:35:43PM -0600, wrote:

If NR have zonal fares now, how come Vauxhall-Putney is £1.60 when the
equivalent tube journey is £1.50 (both off-peak)?

Because they have different fares for their zones.

Also, on NR you don't have to go through zone 1 for that journey.

--
David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic

"IMO, the primary historical significance of Unix is that it marks the
time in computer history where CPUs became so cheap that it was possible
to build an operating system without adult supervision."
-- Russ Holsclaw in a.f.c