On 26.02.23 15:47, Recliner wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 13:57:43 +0100, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>
>> On 26.02.23 12:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>>
>>>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>>>> zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>>>> continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers
>>>> in-station on
>>>> the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>>>> already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>>>> somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>>>> Roland.
>>>
>>> Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
>>> the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
>>> interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
>>> this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.
>>
>> Farringdon allows transfer between London Undergronud services and
>> Thameslink services without passing through a gateline. That's not
>> possible at StP because to get to the Thameslink platforms from the LU
>> platforms involves passng through two gatelines.
>
> Roland wants validators on the TL platforms so TL passengers can touch in and out of the Oyster zone, switching from/to
> some other TL ticket. They will remain on TL, ideally on the same train.
>
> So, for example, someone coming from Cambridge with a London Terminals ticket (valid as far as KGX or SPI) and wishing
> to continue on the same train to, say, London Bridge, needs to touch-in at that point, even though they are continuing
> on TL.

Under what circumstances would this actually be a thing a person might
want to do? There are fares from Thameslink served stations to
destinations "through the core" beyond London Terminals, and they are
cheaper than a London Terminals ticket + Oyster Z1 fare, so not only
does this hypothetical passenger have to inconveneince themself by
getting off the train to validate their oyster card, but they also have
to pay more for the privilege. And somehow, for a passenger deliberately
inconveniencing themself and paying extra, it is nevertheless
unacceptable to have them go up a couple of flights of stairs/escalators
to the gateline. The scenario just makes no sense.

Robin

On 26/02/2023 15:11, Recliner wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 14:50:10 +0000, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 26/02/2023 11:42, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <ttffdh$2teka$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:22:25 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 26/02/2023 10:10, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 20:00:57 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <v3kkvh1v8l0ettrtkm99ttn1hopcu9qe95@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>> 18:17:42 on
>>>>>>> Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 10:49:25 +0000, Graeme Wall
>>>>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 25/02/2023 10:09, Scott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:16:32 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tt9tfh$25ttp$5@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:37 on Fri,
>>>>>>>>>>> 24 Feb
>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> UK and Ireland have had passport free common travel area
>>>>>>>>>>>>> arrangements
>>>>>>>>>>>>> since Ireland became independent. In a case where Scotland
>>>>>>>>>>>>> were in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Schengen and rUK was not, that would not be possible.  It
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would be the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> same issue that plagues NI today for goods, but for people.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, which is why Scotland would stay in the CTA.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I used to think that in event of Brexit, then "the UK would
>>>>>>>>>>> stay in the
>>>>>>>>>>> Single Market" for similar reasons. And look what happened.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I interpreted 'taking back control' as departing from EU
>>>>>>>>>> regulations
>>>>>>>>>> with the inevitable consequence of leaving the single market.  This
>>>>>>>>>> was my biggest concern.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We were assured at the time by one, then senior, politician that we
>>>>>>>>> would remain in the single market, it would be the easiest deal
>>>>>>>>> ever.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The "Taking back control" nonsense originally was only about
>>>>>>>>> immigration.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not my recollection.  I thought it was about getting rid of EU red
>>>>>>>> tape and making our own laws (which inevitably was going to put us in
>>>>>>>> conflict with the single market). .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> People have different recollections, because it wasn't a single issue
>>>>>>> vote. There were at least four major themes: anti-immigration,
>>>>>>> £350m for
>>>>>>> the NHS, wonky bananas, and opposing "ever greater federalism"; as
>>>>>>> well
>>>>>>> as stuff to do with a golden future making independent trade deals and
>>>>>>> getting to keep more of our own fish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree entirely - and all depending on who was speaking at the time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have just heard the ERG chair on Sky News saying we need to
>>>>>> 'expunge' EU law from Northern Ireland.  Clearly his aversion goes far
>>>>>> beyond immigration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>  Yes, the ERG seems to have got steadily more hardline. As has been
>>>>> said of
>>>>> them before, there's no point in trying to reach an agreement with
>>>>> them —
>>>>> they swallow any concessions, and then just demand more.
>>>>>  Sunak was smart enough to appoint a couple of former ERG leading
>>>>> lights to
>>>>> the ministerial team doing the NI negotiations, hoping that the ERG
>>>>> would
>>>>> accept any final deal that their former leaders had negotiated, but they
>>>>> still won't. So he's probably going to have to ride roughshod over them,
>>>>> get the best deal he can (far better than the deal Boris got) and
>>>>> dare them
>>>>> to try and bring him down.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately I don't think he has the political nerve to succede in
>>>> facing down both the ERG and the DUP and both groups are spiteful
>>>> enough to bring down the government if they don't get what they want.
>>>>
>>>> At this stage does he care enough to even try. He could walk away now
>>>> into anyone of a number of highly paid jobs with the added bonus of
>>>> multi-million dollar speech engagements in prospect.
>>>
>>> He doesn't actually need any conventional income, he's quite
>>> spectacularly independently wealthy. Which in the current kind of
>>> circumstance is probably a good thing, because he'll keep his nerve.
>>
>> Which is why I wonder whether he will be particularly bothered to try
>> and fight it through. If it gets too nasty, and it will, he can just say
>> sod it and get on the next plane to California.
>
> No, I think he's determined to fight it through. He's invested a lot of personal hours working on the detail of the
> proposed agreement (unlike oven-ready Boris), and many more hours personally taking the DUP through those details and
> comparing it with their list of musts. If he pulls this off, it's very much his personal triumph, finally achieving what
> his four Tory predecessors failed to do (arguably, Major and Thatcher were also both brought down on this issue).
>
> Unlike Boris, he's worked hard to establish a bond with the EU leaders, particularly UVL. For example, UVL and both the
> Sunaks have Stanford MBAs, so they're almost members of an alumni club, and UVL is a keen horsewoman, like both Sunak
> daughters (UVL named one of her children's horses Cockney). And one of UVL's seven children is currently studying at
> Oxford University, from which Sunak has a first class degree. UVL and her husband are both doctors, like Sunak's dad.
> He's built on these links to establish a bond of trust, something Boris had no interest in doing (in fact, he stitched
> up his supposed friends, the DUP, something Sunak is trying to fix).

Is there nyone Boris hasn't stitched up?
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 26/02/2023 15:17, Coffee wrote:
> On 26/02/2023 15:01, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On 26/02/2023 14:46, Coffee wrote:
>>> On 25/02/2023 20:17, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>> On 25/02/2023 16:10, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <bfnjvh5ec006arb9hga19p7q6apbkiqvt0@4ax.com>, at
>>>>> 10:09:36 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:16:32 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <tt9tfh$25ttp$5@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:37 on Fri, 24
>>>>>>> Feb
>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> UK and Ireland have had passport free common travel area
>>>>>>>>> arrangements
>>>>>>>>> since Ireland became independent. In a case where Scotland were in
>>>>>>>>> Schengen and rUK was not, that would not be possible.  It would
>>>>>>>>> be the
>>>>>>>>> same issue that plagues NI today for goods, but for people.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, which is why Scotland would stay in the CTA.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I used to think that in event of Brexit, then "the UK would stay
>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>> Single Market" for similar reasons. And look what happened.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I interpreted 'taking back control' as departing from EU regulations
>>>>>
>>>>> Not the whole lot, which would make it impossible for us to trade
>>>>> with the EU at all.
>>>>
>>>> Apparently exactly what Mogg wants.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Apparently.
>>>
>>> Quite frankly I don't think Mogg and his cronies understand the
>>> consequences of their actions or if they do put keeping their wealth
>>> away from UK regulations above the good of the UK.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> If you had three guesses, what would you do with the other two?
> Which other two?

The ones that didn't say they'd put their money before the country.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 26/02/2023 11:23, Arthur Figgis wrote:
> the European Commission
> basically looked the other way

One of the few things that the EU is good at, is bending the rules when
it suits them.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 26/02/2023 11:23, Arthur Figgis wrote:
>> the European Commission
>> basically looked the other way
>
>
> One of the few things that the EU is good at, is bending the rules when
> it suits them.

Do you think Al Johnson learned to bend the rules when he was in school in
Brussels?

In message <ttfrj3$2ujsh$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:50:10 on Sun, 26 Feb
2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>On 26/02/2023 11:42, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <ttffdh$2teka$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:22:25 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 26/02/2023 10:10, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 20:00:57 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <v3kkvh1v8l0ettrtkm99ttn1hopcu9qe95@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>18:17:42 on
>>>>>> Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 10:49:25 +0000, Graeme Wall
>>>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 25/02/2023 10:09, Scott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:16:32 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In message <tt9tfh$25ttp$5@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:37 on
>>>>>>>>>>Fri, 24 Feb
>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> UK and Ireland have had passport free common travel area
>>>>>>>>>>>>arrangements since Ireland became independent. In a case
>>>>>>>>>>>> Schengen and rUK was not, that would not be possible.  It
>>>>>>>>>>>>would be the same issue that plagues NI today for goods,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, which is why Scotland would stay in the CTA.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I used to think that in event of Brexit, then "the UK would
>>>>>>>>>>stay in the Single Market" for similar reasons. And look what happened.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I interpreted 'taking back control' as departing from EU
>>>>>>>>>regulations with the inevitable consequence of leaving the
>>>>>>>>>single market.  This was my biggest concern.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We were assured at the time by one, then senior, politician that we
>>>>>>>> would remain in the single market, it would be the easiest deal
>>>>>>>>ever.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The "Taking back control" nonsense originally was only about
>>>>>>>>immigration.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not my recollection.  I thought it was about getting rid of EU red
>>>>>>> tape and making our own laws (which inevitably was going to put us in
>>>>>>> conflict with the single market). .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> People have different recollections, because it wasn't a single
>>>>>> vote. There were at least four major themes: anti-immigration,
>>>>>>£350m for the NHS, wonky bananas, and opposing "ever greater
>>>>>>federalism"; as well as stuff to do with a golden future making
>>>>>>independent trade deals and getting to keep more of our own fish.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree entirely - and all depending on who was speaking at the time.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have just heard the ERG chair on Sky News saying we need to
>>>>> 'expunge' EU law from Northern Ireland.  Clearly his aversion goes far
>>>>> beyond immigration.
>>>>>
>>>>  Yes, the ERG seems to have got steadily more hardline. As has
>>>>been said of them before, there's no point in trying to reach an
>>>>agreement with them — they swallow any concessions, and then
>>>>just demand more.  Sunak was smart enough to appoint a couple of
>>>>former ERG leading lights to the ministerial team doing the NI
>>>>negotiations, hoping that the ERG would accept any final deal that
>>>>their former leaders had negotiated, but they still won't. So he's
>>>>probably going to have to ride roughshod over them, get the best
>>>>deal he can (far better than the deal Boris got) and dare them to try and bring him down.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately I don't think he has the political nerve to succede in
>>>facing down both the ERG and the DUP and both groups are spiteful
>>>enough to bring down the government if they don't get what they want.
>>>
>>> At this stage does he care enough to even try. He could walk away
>>>now into anyone of a number of highly paid jobs with the added bonus
>>>of multi-million dollar speech engagements in prospect.

>> He doesn't actually need any conventional income, he's quite
>>spectacularly independently wealthy. Which in the current kind of
>>circumstance is probably a good thing, because he'll keep his nerve.
>
>Which is why I wonder whether he will be particularly bothered to try
>and fight it through. If it gets too nasty, and it will, he can just
>say sod it and get on the next plane to California.

He may not get a Nobel Peace Prize, but successfully brokering a deal
would be a significant reputational brownie point. Running away the
complete opposite.
--
Roland Perry

In message <ttfrlg$2ujsh$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:51:28 on Sun, 26 Feb
2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>On 26/02/2023 11:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <88CcnXQ9QpMVomb-nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>11:16:24 on Sun, 26 Feb 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>remarked:
>>> On 25/02/2023 20:00, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>>> People have different recollections, because it wasn't a single
>>>>issue vote. There were at least four major themes: anti-
>>>>immigration, £350m for  the NHS, wonky bananas, and opposing "ever
>>>>greater federalism"; as well  as stuff to do with a golden future
>>>>making independent trade deals and  getting to keep more of our own
>>>>fish.
>>>
>>> And don't forget lexit - IMHO too many people treat lexit as a joke,
>>>but "the EU is forcing privatisation of state industries" was a real
>>>thing.

>> Of all the dozens of disparate reasons (including "it means we'll
>> be allowed to ban the export of live animals", and "Tampon Tax")
>> I haven't heard that particular one before.
>
>Given, at the time, they already had been, I can't see what attraction
>that would have had.

There would have been an attraction to those who dislike privatisation,
in writing on the side of a bus (or wherever) "No more EU-inspired
privatisation if you vote Leave".

[And it would even have been true, we'd have just had home-grown
privatisation instead].
--
Roland Perry

In message <ceycna7g769kxWb-nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
13:04:58 on Sun, 26 Feb 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
remarked:
>On 26/02/2023 11:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <88CcnXQ9QpMVomb-nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>11:16:24 on Sun, 26 Feb 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>remarked:
>>> On 25/02/2023 20:00, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>>> People have different recollections, because it wasn't a single
>>>>issue vote. There were at least four major themes:
>>>>anti-immigration, £350m for  the NHS, wonky bananas, and opposing
>>>>"ever greater federalism"; as well  as stuff to do with a golden
>>>>future making independent trade deals and  getting to keep more of our own fish.
>>>
>>> And don't forget lexit - IMHO too many people treat lexit as a joke,
>>>but "the EU is forcing privatisation of state industries" was a real
>>>thing.

>> Of all the dozens of disparate reasons (including "it means we'll
>> be allowed to ban the export of live animals", and "Tampon Tax")
>> I haven't heard that particular one before.
>
>Some of the rail unions pushed it, and I've seen variants in other
>sectors. And it's not actually untrue (ask SNCF), although there are
>workarounds by directly awarding contracts to the state company.

And now we've "taken back control", the Tories are free to privatise
the NHS, without any pesky people from Brussels sucking their teeth
and saying "steady on old chap, that's taking it a bit far".
--
Roland Perry

In message <ttg47s$2vf7j$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:17:47 on Sun, 26 Feb
2023, MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>On 26/02/2023 11:23, Arthur Figgis wrote:

>> the European Commission basically looked the other way
>
>One of the few things that the EU is good at, is bending the rules when
>it suits them.

Or you could say "when it suits one of the dissident members".

Which rather defeats the view that Brussels will force all members to do
its bidding, come what may.
--
Roland Perry

In message <ttfub4$2uplb$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:37:05 on Sun, 26 Feb
2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>On 26.02.23 15:47, Recliner wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 13:57:43 +0100, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 26.02.23 12:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>>>>> zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>>>>> continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers
>>>>> in-station on
>>>>> the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>>>>> already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>>>>> somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>>>>> Roland.
>>>>
>>>> Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
>>>> the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
>>>> interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
>>>> this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.
>>>
>>> Farringdon allows transfer between London Undergronud services and
>>> Thameslink services without passing through a gateline. That's not
>>> possible at StP because to get to the Thameslink platforms from the LU
>>> platforms involves passng through two gatelines.

>> Roland wants validators on the TL platforms so TL passengers can
>>touch in and out of the Oyster zone, switching from/to
>> some other TL ticket. They will remain on TL, ideally on the same train.

>> So, for example, someone coming from Cambridge with a London
>>Terminals ticket (valid as far as KGX or SPI) and wishing
>> to continue on the same train to, say, London Bridge, needs to
>>touch-in at that point, even though they are continuing
>> on TL.
>
>Under what circumstances would this actually be a thing a person might
>want to do? There are fares from Thameslink served stations to
>destinations "through the core" beyond London Terminals, and they are
>cheaper than a London Terminals ticket + Oyster Z1 fare,

Fare regimes ebb and flow (so what's cheaper today might not be
tomorrow), and not all journeys have such tickets to zonal destinations
available - especially as not everyone started the day on a Thameslink
train.

See this page which I've been maintaining for over a decade now,
especially the first bracketed note to section 2.

http://perry.co.uk/avantix_for_dummies.html

Meanwhile, I may not want to go forward to just to one zonal
destination, there might be several more legs I was anticipating during
the day, making perhaps an outboundary travelcard cheaper.

But again, the frog boilers are hard at work making *them* less
attractive year upon year.

It seems to me the least complicated thing to do is get a ticket (a
paper one probably) to London terminals, and then continue my day with
Oyster (rather than CCC because of the lack-of-Senior-Railcard
loadability).

> so not only does this hypothetical passenger have to inconveneince
>themself by getting off the train to validate their oyster card,

Given the number of trains rattling through SPILL, at worst it's getting
off one and onto the next. And should there be validators, I'd soon
remember where about in the train to sit to be able to reach them
quickest.

>but they also have to pay more for the privilege.

See earlier comments, it's not automatically cheaper, even if only doing
a simple two-leg extension.

>And somehow, for a passenger deliberately inconveniencing themself and
>paying extra,

See above.

>it is nevertheless unacceptable to have them go up a couple of flights
>of stairs/escalators to the gateline.

It's a ridiculous thing to have to do. May I remind you they've now
installed a validator at Farringdon, when the trip via a double gateline
that it eliminates, is far shorter.

>The scenario just makes no sense.

Yours might not, because it made some unwarranted assumptions.

I've been grappling with this particular multi-modal expedition for well
over 20yrs; back then the cheapest (and just as convenient) was a ticket
to London Terminals and a paper carnet of tube singles. Unless you were
going to use three from the carnet, in which case it was marginally
cheaper to buy an outboundary Z12 Travelcard, but I usually swallowed
the extra 10p or whatever.

Triangular trips weren't uncommon, I'd be going to one meeting in the
morning, then transfer to a different venue for the afternoon, then back
home.

From here (maybe more widely) in 2022/23 there's only a Z16 outboundary
travelcard any more.

When the paper fares manual (a book the size of a telephone directory)
was replaced[1] in 2010 by the Avantix CD, I set about using it, and
quickly decided a shortcut guide was needed. Hence the web page cited.

[1]In public anyway, a secret one had circulated internally for a few
years.
--
Roland Perry

On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 14:47:08 +0000, Recliner
<recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 13:57:43 +0100, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>
>>On 26.02.23 12:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>>
>>>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>>>> zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>>>> continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers
>>>> in-station on
>>>> the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>>>> already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>>>> somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>>>> Roland.
>>>
>>> Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
>>> the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
>>> interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
>>> this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.
>>
>>Farringdon allows transfer between London Undergronud services and
>>Thameslink services without passing through a gateline. That's not
>>possible at StP because to get to the Thameslink platforms from the LU
>>platforms involves passng through two gatelines.
>
>Roland wants validators on the TL platforms so TL passengers can touch in and out of the Oyster zone, switching from/to
>some other TL ticket. They will remain on TL, ideally on the same train.
>
>So, for example, someone coming from Cambridge with a London Terminals ticket (valid as far as KGX or SPI) and wishing
>to continue on the same train to, say, London Bridge, needs to touch-in at that point, even though they are continuing
>on TL. In an ideal world, there would be pads on the train that knew where they were at the time of the touch, but if
>not, distributed along the platform.

It seems a huge amount of effort. I know that it can be a pain wishing
to travel beyond the validity of your ticket as it affects me quite
often when I reach the Z1-6 travelcard limit. I either have to get
off, buy a ticket and wait for the next train or buy a ticket online
before I reach the change point. But my unplanned wanderings are
hardly typical of most rail users.

In message <ttfu9i$2utmo$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:36:19 on Sun, 26 Feb
2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 13:57:43 +0100, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 26.02.23 12:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>>>>> zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>>>>> continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers
>>>>> in-station on
>>>>> the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>>>>> already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>>>>> somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>>>>> Roland.
>>>>
>>>> Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
>>>> the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
>>>> interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
>>>> this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.
>>>
>>> Farringdon allows transfer between London Undergronud services and
>>> Thameslink services without passing through a gateline. That's not
>>> possible at StP because to get to the Thameslink platforms from the LU
>>> platforms involves passng through two gatelines.
>>
>> Roland wants validators on the TL platforms so TL passengers can touch in
>> and out of the Oyster zone, switching from/to
>> some other TL ticket. They will remain on TL, ideally on the same train.
>>
>> So, for example, someone coming from Cambridge with a London
>>Terminals ticket (valid as far as KGX or SPI) and wishing to
>>continue on the same train to, say, London Bridge, needs to touch-in
>>at that point, even though they are continuing on TL. In an ideal
>>world, there would be pads on the train that knew where they were at
>>the time of the touch, but if not, distributed along the platform.
>
>Or perhaps eventually you can just have a mobile phone app that knows
>exactly where you are and saves all the bother. With your phone acting as a
>radio beacon they ought to know where you are.

Greater Anglia announced they would be trialing that, maybe 4-5 years
ago. Then it went very quiet.

<Thread convergence> When they have the 5G-on-the-tube working
everywhere, I wonder what the location data will look like. A logable
handover very hundred yards down the tunnel, or might it be per stretch
of line fed by the same backhaul? And of course there are still rural
stations in the southeast (let alone anywhere else) where you could get
off the train and be halfway home before regaining mobile coverage.

Anyway, here's what Mr Google's location services claimed I did one day
(including changing at Stansted Airport, because I could):

http://www.perry.co.uk/images/2017-train-geolocation.jpg

Not entirely sure about the colour changes, and clearly the
Moorgate(sic) to Bishops Stortford leg is just one straight line
between the two points, as are many other of the sections.

My guess at the time was that the "Ipswich" location must have been a
wifi hotspot relocated by Greater Anglia, the station under the airport
probably having no having mobile coverage. A hotspot on a train [or even
a bus] obviously moves around all the time, and would cause chaos if
used as a reference point by geolocation services, so I'd expect their
SSIDs to be blacklisted pretty thoroughly.
--
Roland Perry

On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 19:25:52 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>I really object to having my EU citizenship taken from me.

+1

--

Brian

Beware the spamtrap by Kubrick.

On 27.02.23 11:00, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <ttfub4$2uplb$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:37:05 on Sun, 26 Feb
> 2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>> On 26.02.23 15:47, Recliner wrote:
>>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 13:57:43 +0100, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 26.02.23 12:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with
>>>>>>>> Oyster [or
>>>>>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the
>>>>>>>> Oyster
>>>>>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>>>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>>>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree &
>>>>>>> Borhamwood
>>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that
>>>>>> the ccc
>>>>>> zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This
>>>>>> will
>>>>>> continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers
>>>>>> in-station on
>>>>>> the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as
>>>>>> there
>>>>>> already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough,
>>>>>> TfL had
>>>>>> somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> Roland.
>>>>>
>>>>> Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most
>>>>> obviously on
>>>>> the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
>>>>> interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned
>>>>> SPILL, but
>>>>> this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.
>>>>
>>>> Farringdon allows transfer between London Undergronud services and
>>>> Thameslink services without passing through a gateline. That's not
>>>> possible at StP because to get to the Thameslink platforms from the LU
>>>> platforms involves passng through two gatelines.
>
>>>  Roland wants validators on the TL platforms so TL passengers can
>>> touch in and out of the Oyster zone, switching from/to
>>> some other TL ticket. They will remain on TL, ideally on the same train.
>
>>>  So, for example, someone coming from Cambridge with a London
>>> Terminals ticket (valid as far as KGX or SPI) and wishing
>>> to continue on the same train to, say, London Bridge, needs to
>>> touch-in at that point, even though they are continuing
>>> on TL.
>>
>> Under what circumstances would this actually be a thing a person might
>> want to do? There are fares from Thameslink served stations to
>> destinations "through the core" beyond London Terminals, and they are
>> cheaper than a London Terminals ticket + Oyster Z1 fare,
>
> Fare regimes ebb and flow (so what's cheaper today might not be
> tomorrow), and not all journeys have such tickets to zonal destinations
> available - especially as not everyone started the day on a Thameslink
> train.

For what journey is this a sensible option? Where would you be starting
from that is not served by Thameslink where the cheapest/fastest option
is not a train to the MML platforms at St Pancras or into King's Cross?

> See this page which I've been maintaining for over a decade now,
> especially the first bracketed note to section 2.
>
> http://perry.co.uk/avantix_for_dummies.html
>
> Meanwhile, I may not want to go forward to just to one zonal
> destination, there might be several more legs I was anticipating during
> the day, making perhaps an outboundary travelcard cheaper.

What destinations in London are better served by carrying on via
Thameslink rather than changing to the Underground at Kings Cross St
Pancras (or perhaps Finsbury Park)?

> But again, the frog boilers are hard at work making *them* less
> attractive year upon year.
>
> It seems to me the least complicated thing to do is get a ticket (a
> paper one probably) to London terminals, and then continue my day with
> Oyster (rather than CCC because of the lack-of-Senior-Railcard
> loadability).
>
>> so not only does this hypothetical passenger have to inconveneince
>> themself by getting off the train to validate their oyster card,
>
> Given the number of trains rattling through SPILL, at worst it's getting
> off one and onto the next. And should there be validators, I'd soon
> remember where about in the train to sit to be able to reach them quickest.

At the bottom of the stairs/escalators, the validators are at the top.

>> but they also have to pay more for the privilege.
>
> See earlier comments, it's not automatically cheaper, even if only doing
> a simple two-leg extension.

What actual journey would this be useful for? For what destination in
London is this going to be the right journey to make?

>> And somehow, for a passenger deliberately inconveniencing themself and
>> paying extra,
>
> See above.
>
>> it is nevertheless unacceptable to have them go up a couple of flights
>> of stairs/escalators to the gateline.
>
> It's a ridiculous thing to have to do. May I remind you they've now
> installed a validator at Farringdon, when the trip via a double gateline
> that it eliminates, is far shorter.

LU is well known for signposting routes that are not the most direct in
order to manage crowding.

>> The scenario just makes no sense.
>
> Yours might not, because it made some unwarranted assumptions.
>
> I've been grappling with this particular multi-modal expedition for well
> over 20yrs; back then the cheapest (and just as convenient) was a ticket
> to London Terminals and a paper carnet of tube singles. Unless you were
> going to use three from the carnet, in which case it was marginally
> cheaper to buy an outboundary Z12 Travelcard, but I usually swallowed
> the extra 10p or whatever.

Then you'll have no problem giving an example of a journey where this
set of circumstances arises. I'm clearly not seeing the particular
journey(s) you have in mind, so please enlighten me.

Robin

On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 10:38:30 +0000
Brian <Brian@2001.bjforster.force9.co.uk> wrote:
>On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 19:25:52 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
><usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I really object to having my EU citizenship taken from me.
>
>+1

Thats democracy for you, suck it up.

In message <1s0pvhdhsris2vglbv49dk5mg4si6e0c0s@4ax.com>, at 10:21:46 on
Mon, 27 Feb 2023, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 14:47:08 +0000, Recliner
><recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 13:57:43 +0100, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 26.02.23 12:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>>>>> zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>>>>> continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers
>>>>> in-station on
>>>>> the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>>>>> already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>>>>> somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>>>>> Roland.
>>>>
>>>> Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
>>>> the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
>>>> interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
>>>> this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.
>>>
>>>Farringdon allows transfer between London Undergronud services and
>>>Thameslink services without passing through a gateline. That's not
>>>possible at StP because to get to the Thameslink platforms from the LU
>>>platforms involves passng through two gatelines.
>>
>>Roland wants validators on the TL platforms so TL passengers can touch
>>in and out of the Oyster zone, switching from/to
>>some other TL ticket. They will remain on TL, ideally on the same train.
>>
>>So, for example, someone coming from Cambridge with a London Terminals
>>ticket (valid as far as KGX or SPI) and wishing
>>to continue on the same train to, say, London Bridge, needs to
>>touch-in at that point, even though they are continuing
>>on TL. In an ideal world, there would be pads on the train that knew
>>where they were at the time of the touch, but if
>>not, distributed along the platform.
>
>It seems a huge amount of effort. I know that it can be a pain wishing
>to travel beyond the validity of your ticket as it affects me quite
>often when I reach the Z1-6 travelcard limit. I either have to get
>off, buy a ticket and wait for the next train or buy a ticket online
>before I reach the change point.

Now think about the ramifications if using capped Oyster/CCC as a
virtual travelcard. (When you reach the edge of the contactless charging
area you need to be sure you've touched-in/out as appropriate).

>But my unplanned wanderings are hardly typical of most rail users.

The whole point of all this technology and "trust me I'm a computer I'll
charge you the correct amount" is aimed squarely at people who want to
just wander around unencumbered with planning, or needing to guess in
advance what tickets to buy.
--
Roland Perry

In message <ttfl5d$2tvae$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:00:27 on Sun, 26 Feb
2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>On 26.02.23 12:55, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <ttfdj6$2t6qr$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:51:16 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>>>>>>> I meant a mixture of railway modes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why would that affect the price cap or rail card discount?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The tube fare between A and B (via perhaps C) isn't necessarily
>>>>>>>>the  same  as the National Rail fare between A and B (via
>>>>>>>>perhaps D). So the fare  you are discounting by a third won't
>>>>>>>>be the same. But at least it'd be  clear which of the two to discount.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, if you changed modes part way, rather than sticking to
>>>>>>>>one  mode  all the way, the undiscounted fare is difficult to
>>>>>>>>know especially  when  the system can't tell where you made
>>>>>>>>the modal  circumstances there are no barriers to go through
>>>>>>>>where you change  modes).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hence the Oyster readers on interchange routes in stations like
>>>>>>>Farringdon  and Stratford.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But not, as we've discussed before, at SPILL.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please remind me — why would they be needed?
>>>>>
>>>>>> There may be other locations not provisioned as well. Wimbledon
>>>>>>probably has them (hence the complicated, and confusing for some
>>>>>>visitors, rules about touching in/out/sideways when changing
>>>>>>there. Does Stratford have them for the cross-platform changes
>>>>>>with the Central Line (I haven't been to look at that specific aspect).
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure, but why would they be needed?  LE and LU are
>>>>>treated as  one.
>>
>>>>  Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster
>>>>[or  CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside
>>>>the Oyster  or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>
>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>(depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree &
>>>Borhamwood etc.

>> No, you need it wherever people actually physically change trains.
>
>If you change trains at St Pancras, you pass through a gateline, which
>does the job of validating.

Not when you change trains at SPILL !! (I hope I've explained this fully
by now).
--
Roland Perry

On 27.02.23 11:45, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 10:38:30 +0000
> Brian <Brian@2001.bjforster.force9.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 19:25:52 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
>> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I really object to having my EU citizenship taken from me.
>>
>> +1
>
> Thats democracy for you, suck it up.

Democracy involves the people being free to object to government
policies they don't like. "If you don't like it, suck it up" is not a
feature of a democratic system, that's what dictatorships do.

Robin

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <ttfu9i$2utmo$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:36:19 on Sun, 26 Feb
> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 13:57:43 +0100, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 26.02.23 12:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>>>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>>>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>>>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>>>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>>>>>> zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>>>>>> continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers
>>>>>> in-station on
>>>>>> the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>>>>>> already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>>>>>> somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>>>>>> Roland.
>>>>>
>>>>> Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
>>>>> the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
>>>>> interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
>>>>> this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.
>>>>
>>>> Farringdon allows transfer between London Undergronud services and
>>>> Thameslink services without passing through a gateline. That's not
>>>> possible at StP because to get to the Thameslink platforms from the LU
>>>> platforms involves passng through two gatelines.
>>>
>>> Roland wants validators on the TL platforms so TL passengers can touch in
>>> and out of the Oyster zone, switching from/to
>>> some other TL ticket. They will remain on TL, ideally on the same train.
>>>
>>> So, for example, someone coming from Cambridge with a London
>>> Terminals ticket (valid as far as KGX or SPI) and wishing to
>>> continue on the same train to, say, London Bridge, needs to touch-in
>>> at that point, even though they are continuing on TL. In an ideal
>>> world, there would be pads on the train that knew where they were at
>>> the time of the touch, but if not, distributed along the platform.
>>
>> Or perhaps eventually you can just have a mobile phone app that knows
>> exactly where you are and saves all the bother. With your phone acting as a
>> radio beacon they ought to know where you are.
>
> Greater Anglia announced they would be trialing that, maybe 4-5 years
> ago. Then it went very quiet.

Ditto Chiltern. I never heard the results of the trial, and I don't think
it's still in operation.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <ttfub4$2uplb$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:37:05 on Sun, 26 Feb
> 2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>> On 26.02.23 15:47, Recliner wrote:
>>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 13:57:43 +0100, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 26.02.23 12:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>>>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>>>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>>>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>>>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>>>>>> zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>>>>>> continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers
>>>>>> in-station on
>>>>>> the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>>>>>> already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>>>>>> somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>>>>>> Roland.
>>>>>
>>>>> Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
>>>>> the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
>>>>> interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
>>>>> this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.
>>>>
>>>> Farringdon allows transfer between London Undergronud services and
>>>> Thameslink services without passing through a gateline. That's not
>>>> possible at StP because to get to the Thameslink platforms from the LU
>>>> platforms involves passng through two gatelines.
>
>>> Roland wants validators on the TL platforms so TL passengers can
>>> touch in and out of the Oyster zone, switching from/to
>>> some other TL ticket. They will remain on TL, ideally on the same train.
>
>>> So, for example, someone coming from Cambridge with a London
>>> Terminals ticket (valid as far as KGX or SPI) and wishing
>>> to continue on the same train to, say, London Bridge, needs to
>>> touch-in at that point, even though they are continuing
>>> on TL.
>>
>> Under what circumstances would this actually be a thing a person might
>> want to do? There are fares from Thameslink served stations to
>> destinations "through the core" beyond London Terminals, and they are
>> cheaper than a London Terminals ticket + Oyster Z1 fare,
>
> Fare regimes ebb and flow (so what's cheaper today might not be
> tomorrow), and not all journeys have such tickets to zonal destinations
> available - especially as not everyone started the day on a Thameslink
> train.
>
> See this page which I've been maintaining for over a decade now,
> especially the first bracketed note to section 2.
>
> http://perry.co.uk/avantix_for_dummies.html
>
> Meanwhile, I may not want to go forward to just to one zonal
> destination, there might be several more legs I was anticipating during
> the day, making perhaps an outboundary travelcard cheaper.
>
> But again, the frog boilers are hard at work making *them* less
> attractive year upon year.
>
> It seems to me the least complicated thing to do is get a ticket (a
> paper one probably) to London terminals, and then continue my day with
> Oyster (rather than CCC because of the lack-of-Senior-Railcard
> loadability).
>
>> so not only does this hypothetical passenger have to inconveneince
>> themself by getting off the train to validate their oyster card,
>
> Given the number of trains rattling through SPILL, at worst it's getting
> off one and onto the next. And should there be validators, I'd soon
> remember where about in the train to sit to be able to reach them
> quickest.
>
>> but they also have to pay more for the privilege.
>
> See earlier comments, it's not automatically cheaper, even if only doing
> a simple two-leg extension.
>
>> And somehow, for a passenger deliberately inconveniencing themself and
>> paying extra,
>
> See above.
>
>> it is nevertheless unacceptable to have them go up a couple of flights
>> of stairs/escalators to the gateline.
>
> It's a ridiculous thing to have to do. May I remind you they've now
> installed a validator at Farringdon, when the trip via a double gateline
> that it eliminates, is far shorter.

It's not, you know. That validator was needed on the short-cut route
between the northbound TL platform and the EL.

On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 11:50:28 +0100
Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>On 27.02.23 11:45, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 10:38:30 +0000
>> Brian <Brian@2001.bjforster.force9.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 19:25:52 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
>>> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I really object to having my EU citizenship taken from me.
>>>
>>> +1
>>
>> Thats democracy for you, suck it up.
>
>Democracy involves the people being free to object to government
>policies they don't like. "If you don't like it, suck it up" is not a
>feature of a democratic system, that's what dictatorships do.

Dictatorships hold referendums and undertake to follow the outcome do they?
When did this happen?

There seems to be a big problem with people such as yourself only believing
something is democratic if you agree with the outcome of the vote. Thats not
how democracy works. I'm not happy with the SNP having most of the seats in
scotland but thats how the vote went, end of. As I said, suck it up.

On 27.02.23 11:41, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <ttfl5d$2tvae$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:00:27 on Sun, 26 Feb
> 2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>> On 26.02.23 12:55, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <ttfdj6$2t6qr$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:51:16 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>> 2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I meant a mixture of railway modes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why would that affect the price cap or rail card discount?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The tube fare between A and B (via perhaps C) isn't necessarily
>>>>>>>>> the  same  as the National Rail fare between A and B (via
>>>>>>>>> perhaps  D). So the fare  you are discounting by a third won't
>>>>>>>>> be the  same. But at least it'd be  clear which of the two to
>>>>>>>>> discount.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> However, if you changed modes part way, rather than sticking to
>>>>>>>>> one  mode  all the way, the undiscounted fare is difficult to
>>>>>>>>> know especially  when  the system can't tell where you made the
>>>>>>>>> modal  circumstances there are no barriers to go through where
>>>>>>>>> you change  modes).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hence the Oyster readers on interchange routes in stations like
>>>>>>>> Farringdon  and Stratford.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But not, as we've discussed before, at SPILL.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please remind me — why would they be needed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There may be other  locations not provisioned as well. Wimbledon
>>>>>>> probably has them (hence  the complicated, and confusing for some
>>>>>>> visitors, rules about touching  in/out/sideways when changing
>>>>>>> there. Does Stratford have them for the  cross-platform changes
>>>>>>> with the Central Line (I haven't been to  look at  that specific
>>>>>>> aspect).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure, but why would they be needed?  LE and LU are treated
>>>>>> as  one.
>>>
>>>>>  Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster
>>>>> [or  CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside
>>>>> the Oyster  or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>
>>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree &
>>>> Borhamwood etc.
>
>>>  No, you need it wherever people actually physically change trains.
>>
>> If you change trains at St Pancras, you pass through a gateline, which
>> does the job of validating.
>
> Not when you change trains at SPILL !! (I hope I've explained this fully
> by now).

You haven't. You've made some vague assertions that this is important
and hand waved away any suggestion that it might not be a very good
idea. What actual journey would this be useful for?

Robin

On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 10:56:38 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> it is nevertheless unacceptable to have them go up a couple of flights
>>> of stairs/escalators to the gateline.
>>
>> It's a ridiculous thing to have to do. May I remind you they've now
>> installed a validator at Farringdon, when the trip via a double gateline
>> that it eliminates, is far shorter.
>
>It's not, you know. That validator was needed on the short-cut route
>between the northbound TL platform and the EL.

I've noticed they seem to have made it as awkward as possible to get
from the tube platforms to thameslink and vice verca at Farringdon without
going through the gatelines though it is possible via the bridge right up
the end or via a small set of stairs from the NB tube to SB TL which has
a no entry sign in the other direction (which I ignored). God knows why.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 10:56:38 -0000 (UTC)
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> it is nevertheless unacceptable to have them go up a couple of flights
>>>> of stairs/escalators to the gateline.
>>>
>>> It's a ridiculous thing to have to do. May I remind you they've now
>>> installed a validator at Farringdon, when the trip via a double gateline
>>> that it eliminates, is far shorter.
>>
>> It's not, you know. That validator was needed on the short-cut route
>> between the northbound TL platform and the EL.
>
> I've noticed they seem to have made it as awkward as possible to get
> from the tube platforms to thameslink and vice verca at Farringdon without
> going through the gatelines though it is possible via the bridge right up
> the end or via a small set of stairs from the NB tube to SB TL which has
> a no entry sign in the other direction (which I ignored). God knows why.

No, it's just as easy/difficult to transfer between LU and TL as it always
was. But I think they want LU-EL transferring pax to go via the surface
gatelines. They've not included any direct links between the lines, though
it's possible to transfer via the TL platforms.

The links between the TL and EL platforms are very good, but it didn't seem
to have occurred to them initially that a few pax would need an Oyster tap
en route.

On 27/02/2023 08:03, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <ttfrj3$2ujsh$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:50:10 on Sun, 26 Feb
> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>> On 26/02/2023 11:42, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <ttffdh$2teka$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:22:25 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 26/02/2023 10:10, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 20:00:57 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <v3kkvh1v8l0ettrtkm99ttn1hopcu9qe95@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>> 18:17:42 on
>>>>>>> Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 10:49:25 +0000, Graeme Wall
>>>>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 25/02/2023 10:09, Scott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:16:32 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tt9tfh$25ttp$5@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:37 on
>>>>>>>>>>> Fri,  24 Feb
>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> UK and Ireland have had passport free common travel area
>>>>>>>>>>>>> arrangements  since Ireland became independent. In a case
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Schengen and rUK was not, that would not be possible.  It
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would be the  same issue that plagues NI today for goods,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, which is why Scotland would stay in the CTA.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I used to think that in event of Brexit, then "the UK would
>>>>>>>>>>> stay in the  Single Market" for similar reasons. And look
>>>>>>>>>>> what happened.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I interpreted 'taking back control' as departing from EU
>>>>>>>>>> regulations  with the inevitable consequence of leaving the
>>>>>>>>>> single market.  This  was my biggest concern.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We were assured at the time by one, then senior, politician
>>>>>>>>> that we
>>>>>>>>> would remain in the single market, it would be the easiest deal
>>>>>>>>> ever.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The "Taking back control" nonsense originally was only about
>>>>>>>>> immigration.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not my recollection.  I thought it was about getting rid of EU red
>>>>>>>> tape and making our own laws (which inevitably was going to put
>>>>>>>> us in
>>>>>>>> conflict with the single market). .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> People have different recollections, because it wasn't a single
>>>>>>>  vote. There were at least four major themes: anti-immigration,
>>>>>>> £350m for  the NHS, wonky bananas, and opposing "ever greater
>>>>>>> federalism"; as  well  as stuff to do with a golden future making
>>>>>>> independent trade deals and  getting to keep more of our own fish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree entirely - and all depending on who was speaking at the time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have just heard the ERG chair on Sky News saying we need to
>>>>>> 'expunge' EU law from Northern Ireland.  Clearly his aversion goes
>>>>>> far
>>>>>> beyond immigration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>  Yes, the ERG seems to have got steadily more hardline. As has been
>>>>> said of  them before, there's no point in trying to reach an
>>>>> agreement with  them —  they swallow any concessions, and then just
>>>>> demand more.   Sunak was smart enough to appoint a couple of former
>>>>> ERG leading  lights to  the ministerial team doing the NI
>>>>> negotiations, hoping that the ERG  would  accept any final deal
>>>>> that their former leaders had negotiated, but they  still won't. So
>>>>> he's probably going to have to ride roughshod over them,  get the
>>>>> best deal he can (far better than the deal Boris got) and  dare
>>>>> them  to try and bring him down.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately I don't think he has the political nerve to succede in
>>>> facing down both the ERG and the DUP and both groups are spiteful
>>>> enough to bring down the government if they don't get what they want.
>>>>
>>>> At this stage does he care enough to even try. He could walk away
>>>> now  into anyone of a number of highly paid jobs with the added
>>>> bonus of  multi-million dollar speech engagements in prospect.
>
>>>  He doesn't actually need any conventional income, he's quite
>>> spectacularly independently wealthy. Which in the current kind of
>>> circumstance is probably a good thing, because he'll keep his nerve.
>>
>> Which is why I wonder whether he will be particularly bothered to try
>> and fight it through. If it gets too nasty, and it will, he can just
>> say sod it and get on the next plane to California.
>
> He may not get a Nobel Peace Prize, but successfully brokering a deal
> would be a significant reputational brownie point.  Running away the
> complete opposite.

He doesn't get many brownie points if the DUP/ERG crashes the government
and he's forced to go for an early election which he will currently lose
massively.

We shall see what happens very soon.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.