wrote in message ...
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:38:38 +0100
"David A Stocks" wrote:
They managed a flat fare in New York. You ever looked at the distance
between
Times Square and Far Rockaway?

NY's flat fare only worked because geology and history combined to provide
a
system that doesn't have the lack of capacity in the central area that is
experienced by London.

If you can imagine London with most of the central zone lines sub-surface
rather than deep tunnel, and express and local services on each route
(especially the east-west routes), then you could start thinking about a
flat fare. Having 2 or 3 large mainline hub termini in the middle rather
than a load of smaller stations scattered around the edge would help as
well.

Sorry , I don't follow your reasoning. So because new york has more
stations
and lines in the central area it can charge a flat fare?
That's because you haven't read my post. The *geology* kept the tracks and
stations close to the surface. No deep platform tunnels. No escalators or
lifts. At most local stations the only way to change tracks is via the
street, sacrificing another token in the process.

Eh? I know NYC
has twice the number of stations than london (but the same route miles)
but
that means twice the maintenance costs all other things being equal
The stations are dead cheap compared to London. In addition to the points
above, most of them are entirely below ground and within the confines of the
street above, so there is almost no commercial property space sacrificed at
street level to make way for stations. Compare with the Tottenham Court Road
and Farringdon works currently in progress and the plans for CrossRail,
where lots of commercial property is being demolished to make way for
stations.

so if
anything it should be a reason NOT to have a flat fare.
And I thought it was you who was trying to justify a flat fare, not me ....

The generous capacity provision in the NYC central area allows the flat fare
to work without unacceptable overcrowding, and also encourages people to
walk rather than taking short journeys. A large part of London's zonal fare
system is aimed at throttling back demand for travel to/from/within zone 1.
Once you've gone at all zonal you might as well go the whole the way.

However, as Paul Corfield has pointed out, the MTA receives huge subsidies
to run public transport in NYC. It would be interesting to speculate on
where to put zone boundaries on the NYC subway system, and how the fare
structure would work.

D A Stocks