 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups Destinations USA and CanadaEuropeAustralia and NZAsiaLatin AmericaCaribbean IslandsAfricaTravel Types Air TravelCruisesRV Travel |
Travel Forum / Destinations / Europe / December 2004Times: Rail travellers' guide to becoming a legal fare dodger
The Times December 27, 2004 Rail travellers' guide to becoming a legal fare dodger By Ben Webster With price rises ahead, it is important for passengers to be more aware of good-value deals THOUSANDS of rail passengers pay too much for their journeys because train companies do not tell them about the cheapest tickets available. Rail fares have become so complex that only those well-versed in the rules and regulations can be reasonably sure of getting the best deal. Passengers have to know to ask for a specific ticket or combination of tickets because train companies are not obliged to advise them of the cheapest fare. One railway enthusiast runs seminars to teach travellers how to play the system to avoid paying over the odds. The secrets of obtaining a bargain on the railways will become more relevant from January 2, when fares will increase by an average of 4 per cent. Further rises are likely because the Government is considering abolishing the price cap on Saver tickets. One of the simplest tricks, which saves money on many routes, is to ask for two return tickets that combine to form a whole journey. A passenger starting out at Peterborough station and asking for a day return to Birmingham will be sold a Saver return for £32.10. However, if he asked for a cheap day return to Melton Mowbray for £6.20 and another from Melton Mowbray to Birmingham for £9.60, the total would be £15.80, less than half the amount requested by the clerk at Peterborough. Another method is to buy a Network Card for £20, with which a passenger at Weymouth could buy a return to King¹s Lynn for £50.25 instead of the usual price of £76.10 making a saving of £5.85. The passenger could then use the card for the next year to get one third off all his journeys in the South East. It is also possible to save hundreds of pounds a year by buying a season ticket that is never used for the stations it covers. Alex Nelson, who runs a rail travel agency in Chester-le-Street, Co Durham, has a season ticket that covers the route between Ryde Esplanade and Ryde St Johns on the Isle of Wight. The two stations are at opposite ends of the town, and the season ticket is the cheapest in Britain at £104 a year. Mr Nelson lives more than 300 miles from the Isle of Wight but uses the ticket on his regular trips to London. The ticket, as with all season tickets, entitles him to a one-third discount within the Network South East area, which stretches from Exeter to King¹s Lynn and from Worcester to Hastings. The season ticket also allows him to upgrade to first class for only £3. He has used his ticket on the Isle of Wight only once in four years but saves £100 a year on other journeys. Mr Nelson has uncovered many other money-saving dodges and holds ticketing masterclasses with voluntary groups, including the Women¹s Institute and rotary clubs. Barry Doe, a public transport consultant, said that most of the anomalies had emerged since the railways were privatised. ³Some train companies have been so greedy in pushing up fares that they can hardly complain if people play the system to get a cheaper ticket,² he said. ³In British Rail days, fare rises were done across the system and everything was dovetailed so that you didn¹t get these anomalies. "The system would be much fairer and easier to understand if the Strategic Rail Authority set the fares centrally rather than giving the companies freedom to charge what they like." The Rail Passengers Council plans to issue bulletins to passengers advising them how to avoid paying too much. Anthony Smith, the council¹s director, said: ³The fares system is ridiculously complicated and customers need to be very well- informed to negotiate it. "If you are doing anything more complicated than buying a simple point to point return then the different options and restrictions can be bewildering." The Association of Train Operating Companies said that ticket clerks did not always advise passengers of the cheapest deal because it would take too long. A spokeswoman said: "People are perfectly within their rights to ask for those tickets if they want to. It¹s possible in some circumstances they are going to get a cheaper fare." http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,170-1416530,00.html : The Rail Passengers Council plans to issue bulletins to passengers advising : them how to avoid paying too much. I wonder if railway companies come under the new Freedom of Information Act? Public bodies and organisations providing services for public bodies (in Scotland, I'm not sure of the situation in England) will have to respond to any request for information within 20 days. Anyone like to try writing to Central Trains with a formal FOIA request for the cheaptest day return fare from Peterborough to Birmingham? Ian >: The Rail Passengers Council plans to issue bulletins to passengers advising >: them how to avoid paying too much. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >request for the cheaptest day return fare from Peterborough to >Birmingham? Lets start with accurate timetables, when they can manage that we can move on to fares.  SignatureMartin >I wonder if railway companies come under the new Freedom of >Information Act? No, they don't. See <http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/coverage.htm> SignatureNeil Sunderland Braunton, Devon Please observe the Reply-To address : >I wonder if railway companies come under the new Freedom of : >Information Act? : : No, they don't. See <http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/coverage.htm> Thanks. Though I note that the British Railways Board, Rail Users Consultative Committees and the Strategic Rail Authority are covered. And the SRA presumably hold information on all the railway fares in the UK ... I'd only previouly looked through the Scottish Act which is, rather wider in coverage than the English version. The guidance notes say 8. The Act provides for other authorities to be added later, and for organisations to be designated as public authorities if they exercise functions of a public nature or provide a service under a contract which is a function of a public authority. This provision would enable private companies to be brought within the scope of the Act should they be involved in significant work of a public nature... So it looks as if Holyrood could bring First Scotrail under the Act if it chose. Ian > : >I wonder if railway companies come under the new Freedom of > : >Information Act? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Ian First Scotrail would presumably have good grounds to object unless all other transport companies were brought under the act, at the same time. Paul > : >I wonder if railway companies come under the new Freedom of > : >Information Act? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > And the SRA presumably hold information on all the railway fares in > the UK ... <snip> I'm amazed that Office of Rail Regulation don't appear to be on the list. In fact, none of the regulators are. The other big (and for me, annoying) omission is Network Rail. <sarcasm>But of course, they're not a public body are they?</sarcasm> >I'm amazed that Office of Rail Regulation don't appear to be on the list. They're first on the list! "1. Any government department." The clue is on the ORR website: <http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.001008> "ORR is a small, non-ministerial Government department staffed by civil servants." SignatureNeil Sunderland Braunton, Devon Please observe the Reply-To address >>I'm amazed that Office of Rail Regulation don't appear to be on the list. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > "ORR is a small, non-ministerial Government department staffed by > civil servants." Aah, I see. I foolishly assumed every body would be listed. >>I wonder if railway companies come under the new Freedom of >>Information Act? > > No, they don't. See <http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/coverage.htm> But do Network Rail come under it? PF > The Times > December 27, 2004 > > Rail travellers' guide to becoming a legal fare dodger > By Ben Webster Fascinating stuff. Howver,I am reminded that Margaret Thatcher is alleged to have said "a man who finds himself on public transport after the age of 30 can count himself a failure in life.” >> The Times >> December 27, 2004 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >"a man who finds himself on public transport after the age of 30 can >count himself a failure in life.” Stupid bitch. SignatureMartin > > The Times > > December 27, 2004 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > "a man who finds himself on public transport after the age of 30 can > count himself a failure in life.” Utter nonsense of course, but was the quote really so gender specific? I suspect some of the elite don't count their long distance 1st class express journeys to town as 'public transport' since they don't have to rub shoulders with the masses as on local buses etc. SignatureMark : I suspect some of the elite don't count their long distance 1st class : express journeys to town as 'public transport' They don't think of those big aluminium things belonging to BA and the rest as public tranport either. Ian > > > The Times > > > December 27, 2004 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Utter nonsense of course, but was the quote really so gender specific? Yes it was (also it was buses not public transport) La Belle Dame was surprisingly misogynistic, count the number of women she appointed to cabinet posts. SignatureGraeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html> >> > > The Times >> > > December 27, 2004 [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >surprisingly misogynistic, count the number of women she appointed to cabinet >posts. Thatcher was dismissive of men and women who weren't like her. She would have had no time whatsoever for any possible Tory equivalent of "Blair's Babes", indeed she appeared to me to have no time for any of her contemporary female colleagues in Parliament. Her dislike of public transport was near-total, unless you include aircraft. The comment in question would have been restricted to the male gender because even Maggie would know that women used bus services extensively, especially at off-peak times. > Fascinating stuff. Howver,I am reminded that Margaret Thatcher is > alleged to have said > > "a man who finds himself on public transport after the age of 30 can > count himself a failure in life.” ... Or someone who actually gives a sh.t about the planet. Ronnie > The Times > December 27, 2004 <Big snip> > The Association of Train Operating Companies said that ticket clerks did not > always advise passengers of the cheapest deal because it would take too > long. A spokeswoman said: "People are perfectly within their rights to ask > for those tickets if they want to. It¹s possible in some circumstances they > are going to get a cheaper fare." OK, the fares structure *is* complicated, and I do think the matter will come to a head at some point, but in the intrerests of balance I should make the following points: 1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares between two stations, plus all the *combinations* of fares between those stations. If you want ticket office queues to slow down by a factor of about 400% then push for all combinations of fares to be made available. Personally, I don't think it is unreasonable for these combination fares to be available only to those in the know. 2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on all the bargain fares being advanced purchase. For example compare and contrast Virgin fare policy with Chiltern policy. 3. When you have a situation where the fare from A to C is less than the fare from A to B that is usually because the A to C fare has received an increased discount. Evening out the fares will only result in the A to C fare being increased. 4. Similarly, where A to B plus B to C fares come out cheaper than an A to C fare it may be because the more local journeys have been kept low to increase this specific market. The longer distance journey, though more expensive reflects the actual fare and is probably well enough used to not requre any discounting. In short, the cheaper local fares might be keeping the smaller stations alive. I'm not saying the present fare amomalies are a good thing, but they are not necessarily a result of pure daftness as seems to be suggested by many posters. Roger http://rpm-railpics.fotopic.net/ http://therailwaystationgallery.fotopic.net/ http://therailticketgallery.fotopic.net/ >1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares between >two stations, plus all the *combinations* of fares between those stations. Yep it would be ridiculous, I have had clerks tell me when it's cheaper to buy a combination ticket, or a ticket beyond the destination I really want. >2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on all >the bargain fares being advanced purchase. Could you explain? >3. When you have a situation where the fare from A to C is less than the >fare from A to B that is usually because the A to C fare has received an >increased discount. Evening out the fares will only result in the A to C >fare being increased. but it will also reduce the A-B to fares, giving those people who don't know about the A-C ticket better off, the result farer as each ticket gets similar subsidies... Jim. > >1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares between > >two stations, plus all the *combinations* of fares between those stations. > > Yep it would be ridiculous, I have had clerks tell me when it's > cheaper to buy a combination ticket, or a ticket beyond the > destination I really want. Clerks may be good enough to do it for you but they are not obliged to. This is for a very good reason. Is is simple enough to split a short journey, but for longer journeys the combinations increase almost exponentially. It becomes impractical to offer every possible combination. > >2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on all > >the bargain fares being advanced purchase. > > Could you explain? Virgin make much of their cheap fares, but the quotas can be incredibly restrictive. Surely it is better to offer good value walk-on fares, concentrating on simple time restrictions to satisfy yield management issues. > >3. When you have a situation where the fare from A to C is less than the > >fare from A to B that is usually because the A to C fare has received an [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > don't know about the A-C ticket better off, the result farer as each > ticket gets similar subsidies... It wouldn't though. It would just result in the A to C fare becoming equal to the existing A to B fare plus the B to C fare. Roger http://rpm-railpics.fotopic.net/ http://therailwaystationgallery.fotopic.net/ http://therailticketgallery.fotopic.net/ >> >1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares >between [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >for longer journeys the combinations increase almost exponentially. It >becomes impractical to offer every possible combination. It may be manually but it is not beyond the ability of a PC with the right software to work out the cheapest combinations, if the info is made available. In the meantime I can't even work out the times of the bus & train needed to get from Leeds Bradford International to Huddersfield. It looks like the last airport bus goes long before the last scheduled landing. SignatureMartin >>>1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares > between [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > for longer journeys the combinations increase almost exponentially. It > becomes impractical to offer every possible combination. Why would it be impractical? A suitably-programmed computer could do it in an instant. Moreover, a printout could be given to the customer, who could then present it to any gripper suspicious of the combination of tickets issued. Sounds like good customer service to me. SignaturePersonal Website: http://web.ukonline.co.uk/cj.tolley/ Railway pictures: http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- cjt.7@supanet.com NB: the dot separating the t and 7 is there to fool spambots. Remove it before using this address. >>>>1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares >> between [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >could then present it to any gripper suspicious of the combination of >tickets issued. Sounds like good customer service to me. In an ideal world, yeah. But when lousy, inefficient customer service directly results in more revenue coming in, who would be silly enough to push for improvements? Signature--- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- -- >Sounds like good customer service to me. Customer service? When did the railway operators ever hear of that? -- Alasdair Baxter, Nottingham, UK.Tel +44 115 9705100; Fax +44 115 9423263 "It's not what you say that matters but how you say it. It's not what you do that matters but how you do it" >> Is is simple enough to split a short journey, but >> for longer journeys the combinations increase almost exponentially. It >> becomes impractical to offer every possible combination. >Why would it be impractical? A suitably-programmed computer could do it >in an instant. Rather more than an instant. The standard algorithm for this is the matrix multiplication one [*]. This is O(n^3*log[2]n). So for one particular fare type (say SOR) and 2500 stations, it involves about 170,000,000,000 individual calculations. Assuming you can do 100 million per second on a dedicated machine, that's about 30 minutes for one ticket type. Having said that, that will solve the problem for every possible combination of stations. But it ignores the "train must stop at each relevant station" issue. >Moreover, a printout could be given to the customer, who >could then present it to any gripper suspicious of the combination of >tickets issued. Since the train has to stop at every station where you change ticket, no printout should be necessary. [*] Define the matrix M0 as M0[a,a] = 0 M0[a,b] = the fare from a to b Let the * operator M*N be defined as: (M*N)[a,b] = minimum, for all c, of M[a,c] + N[c,b] Then let: M1 = M0 * M0 M2 = M1 * M1 M3 = M2 * M2 The calculation will converge to the final result Mi at the latest when 2^(i-1) < number of stations <= 2^i. For 2500 stations, that's i = 12. SignatureClive D.W. Feather | Home: <clive@davros.org> Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: <http://www.davros.org> Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: <clive@demon.net> Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: <clive@davros.org> >>> Is is simple enough to split a short journey, but >>> for longer journeys the combinations increase almost exponentially. It [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >calculations. Assuming you can do 100 million per second on a dedicated >machine, that's about 30 minutes for one ticket type. That assumes that you wish to do a very primitive type of search, which no programmer would ever use. For example, using hashing tables to store the most common and obvious combinations would speed things up massively. Signature--- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- -- >>The standard algorithm for this is the matrix multiplication one [*]. [...] >That assumes that you wish to do a very primitive type of search, >which no programmer would ever use. No, that's the standard algorithm for doing the all x all problem. You run it once and then store the results. The only significant criticism is that it doesn't allow for the "key stations plus add-ons" approach to fare setting. >For example, using hashing tables to store the most common and obvious >combinations would speed things up massively. No it wouldn't. Hash tables *might* help in storing the results, though there may well be more effective ways. SignatureClive D.W. Feather | Home: <clive@davros.org> Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: <http://www.davros.org> Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: <clive@demon.net> Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: <clive@davros.org> >>>The standard algorithm for this is the matrix multiplication one [*]. >[...] [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >is that it doesn't allow for the "key stations plus add-ons" approach to >fare setting. What about the example from the original post about buying two return tickets for each half of a longer journey? This search would produce a much more expensive ticket. >>For example, using hashing tables to store the most common and obvious >>combinations would speed things up massively. > >No it wouldn't. Yes it bloody well would if it was designed properly!!! >Hash tables *might* help in storing the results, though there may well >be more effective ways. And storing the results would speed up the search, if the system is designed properly. Signature--- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- -- > The standard algorithm for this is the matrix multiplication one > [*]. This is O(n^3*log[2]n). So for one particular fare type (say > SOR) and 2500 stations, it involves about 170,000,000,000 > individual calculations. Assuming you can do 100 million per > second on a dedicated machine, that's about 30 minutes for one > ticket type. This is an exhaustive search through every possible combination of tickets that make up a particular journey? What's needed is a quick check of a subset of that which probably contains a better solution than the one-ticket price, but which may not be the best possible. That's to say looking for the optimum solution may be a waste of time where all the purchaser wants is a better price than the single ticket, and with a simple combination of tickets. A search through the two-ticket combinations using all stopping points on the journey (scales as 'n' where n is the number of stopping points) should yield a 'good enough' solution. SignatureChris Game This time it will surely run. >> The standard algorithm for this is the matrix multiplication one >> [*]. This is O(n^3*log[2]n). >This is an exhaustive search through every possible combination of >tickets that make up a particular journey? No, that makes up every possible journey. >What's needed is a quick >check of a subset of that which probably contains a better solution >than the one-ticket price, but which may not be the best possible. Possibly. As with all programming, defining the problem is half the solution. SignatureClive D.W. Feather | Home: <clive@davros.org> Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: <http://www.davros.org> Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: <clive@demon.net> Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: <clive@davros.org> >> >2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on >all [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >concentrating on simple time restrictions to satisfy yield management >issues. having cheap walk on fares at the expense of advance purchase isn't fair. Being able to travel immediately is a service that should be paid for. >> >3. When you have a situation where the fare from A to C is less than the >> >fare from A to B that is usually because the A to C fare has received an [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >It wouldn't though. It would just result in the A to C fare becoming equal >to the existing A to B fare plus the B to C fare. You said above that A-C was due to an increased discount, so the only way your new assertion could be true was if the profits increased, now that could happen, except of course there's a fares regulator in theory preventing this... Jim. >>> >2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on >>all [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > fair. Being able to travel immediately is a service that should be > paid for. Bollocks!!! So you think that the railways should be like airlines with premium fares for walk on passengers? Perhaps you've forgotten the purpose of the railways (as a public service) Tim >Bollocks!!! So you think that the railways should be like airlines with >premium fares for walk on passengers? Yes, being able to get on a train immediately and go where you want is a premium service. I can't really see in what way it's otherwise? The flexibility to take any train you want in the next 4 days, is a big premium service over taking a specific train in that time period, and it's sensible to charge extra for that privilige. >Perhaps you've forgotten the purpose >of the railways (as a public service) Sorry, I thought the purpose of a train was to get people (or goods) from station 1 to station 2, it's certainly not a public service. Jim. >>Bollocks!!! So you think that the railways should be like airlines with >>premium fares for walk on passengers? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > big premium service over taking a specific train in that time period, > and it's sensible to charge extra for that privilige. So write my local TOC is Merseyrail. Do you think I they should offer a service to book in advance in case I want to go shopping in Liverpool next Thursday!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tim >>Perhaps you've forgotten the purpose >>of the railways (as a public service) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Jim. : So write my local TOC is Merseyrail. Do you think I they should offer a : service to book in advance in case I want to go shopping in Liverpool next : Thursday!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why not? Ian > : So write my local TOC is Merseyrail. Do you think I they should offer a > : service to book in advance in case I want to go shopping in Liverpool > next > : Thursday!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > Why not? Because it's a stupid idea. I can just see the guards (sorry conductors) going through a 508 unit putting Reservation labels on seats in the 5 minute turnaound at Chester/West Kirby/ New Brighton etc!!! You really have been hitting that Christmas Brandy too much! Have we really come this far since privatisation where some of the basic principals of rail travel are being eroded. Pay on the day is a STANDARD service. Advance purchased tickets should be available but only as a special bonus. Tim : > : So write my local TOC is Merseyrail. Do you think I they should offer a : > : service to book in advance in case I want to go shopping in Liverpool [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] : going through a 508 unit putting Reservation labels on seats in the 5 minute : turnaound at Chester/West Kirby/ New Brighton etc!!! Why are you assuming that seats have to be reserved? Supposing Merseyrail simply said "Buy your ticket more than three days ahead and we'll give you a quid off" in order to level out demand at booking offices. Would that be such a travesty? Do you also object to the way they give a discount to people who pay for a week, a month or a year's travel in advance? : Have we really come this far since : privatisation where some of the basic principals of rail travel are being : eroded. "Basic principle" is not the same as "What I'm used to" : Pay on the day is a STANDARD service. Advance purchased tickets should be : available but only as a special bonus. Why? And "because that's how it was in 1989" is not a good answer. Ian > : Have we really come this far since > : privatisation where some of the basic principals of rail travel are [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Why? And "because that's how it was in 1989" is not a good answer. Sorry but how the ticketing system was in 1989 was better than the myriad of fares that we have now. No doubt you will flag up the 'consumer choice' arguement but that is now 'consumer confusion'. So the whole idea of Privatisation was to turn the whole railway system into an advance purchase only system. Maybe they should try it with local buses as well. The convienience of the train is to go somewhere and then not feel fixed that you've got to come back at a certain time of day. If the railway is to compete with the car then there is no way that APEX type fares are going to tempt people out of their cars, because people don't like being restricted like that. Of course the reason why TOCs promote cheap advance tickets alot is because of the fact that they get a larger 'cut' of the revenue from them!!!! Tim > Ian :: > Why? And "because that's how it was in 1989" is not a good answer. : Sorry but how the ticketing system was in 1989 was better than the myriad of : fares that we have now. Indeed, simple, simple days. Let's see, in my little wallet I have: singles, blue savers (and supersavers), white savers (and savers), cheapday returns and network savers. I didn't bother with advanced purchase, so no Apex, SuperApex, Advance or SuperAdvance. Ah, happy simplicity. When was it that BR decided that their ticketing structure was so absurdly complicated that they'd reduce it to standard, white saver and blue saver only. Didn't take long for the rest to come back, did it? : No doubt you will flag up the 'consumer choice' : arguement but that is now 'consumer confusion'. Well, I wsn't going to, but since you bring it up, how stupid do you think passengers are? "Book in advance and you may get a cheaper deal" ain't rocket science, and none of the airlines seem to have difficulty getting it across... :The : convienience of the train is to go somewhere and then not feel fixed that : you've got to come back at a certain time of day. No, that's /your/ convenience. Don't assume that everyone wants to use the transport system in the way you do, or that everyone else should subsidize the tickets you prefer to use! : If the railway is to compete with the car then there is no way that APEX : type fares are going to tempt people out of their cars, because people don't : like being restricted like that. Says who? Got any evidence? Most services I use are, near as dammit, 4/5 or 3/4 reserved. That suggests that an awful lot of people are willing to choose a train in advance. : Of course the reason why TOCs promote cheap advance tickets alot is because : of the fact that they get a larger 'cut' of the revenue from them!!!! So they make more money from selling tickets which you claim nobody buys? Isn't that a bit like the argument "Nobody travels by Voyagers because they're always crowded"...? Ian > Most services I use are, near as dammit, 4/5 or 3/4 reserved. That > suggests that an awful lot of people are willing to choose a > train in advance. It suggests to me that people don't fancy standing for a 200 mile journey. SignatureChris Game Lottery: A tax on people who are bad at math. > If the railway is to compete with the car then there is no way > that APEX type fares are going to tempt people out of their cars, > because people don't like being restricted like that. As Jeremy Clarkson keeps proving, the train lost the competition long ago, even in long distance continental travel. SignatureChris Game Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine. >> If the railway is to compete with the car then there is no way >> that APEX type fares are going to tempt people out of their cars, >> because people don't like being restricted like that. > >As Jeremy Clarkson keeps proving, the train lost the competition >long ago, even in long distance continental travel. But Jeremy Clarkson decides his own rules... If I was going to travel by high speed train to the south of France, had luggage, and the local bus only ran hourly, I'd take a taxi to the station.... and I would still not need to break the speed limits to beat him. JohnK >>> If the railway is to compete with the car then there is no way >>> that APEX type fares are going to tempt people out of their cars, >>> because people don't like being restricted like that. >> >>As Jeremy Clarkson keeps proving, the train lost the competition >>long ago, even in long distance continental travel. >>Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine. > >But Jeremy Clarkson decides his own rules... ... mostly based on fiction. >If I was going to travel by high speed train to the south of France, >had luggage, and the local bus only ran hourly, I'd take a taxi to the >station.... and I would still not need to break the speed limits to >beat him. Yes. SignatureMartin > As Jeremy Clarkson keeps proving, the train lost the competition > long ago, even in long distance continental travel. In certain staged situations, yes. In real-world situations, there are still plenty of times when the train wins. Driving back from my parents' house today, with an open road and a heavy right foot, it took me the same time that it would take by train. Under typical circumstances, it would take 15 minutes longer. When Hull Trains gets its new Meridians, the train journey will be 10-15 minutes quicker still. No way will I expect to drive it quicker than the train. I enjoy watching Top Gear, I find it very entertaining, but I have no illusions about the veracity of their stunts such as the race to the south of France. Firstly because I know that they would only conclude it in one way, and I have no doubts that they would rig it if need be (as it could be argued that they did by their choice of starting point), and secondly because with judicious use of taxi a/o car, as most people would use for such a journey, for the initial stage of the journey, the whole thing would have been *much* quicker by train. SignatureStevie D \\\\\ ///// Bringing dating agencies to the \\\\\\\__X__/////// common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs" ___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________ >> As Jeremy Clarkson keeps proving, the train lost the competition >> long ago, even in long distance continental travel. > >In certain staged situations, yes. In real-world situations, there are >still plenty of times when the train wins. The problem is the inconsistency. A journey like York-London will always be quicker by train, thanks to GNER and despite the presence of the A1 and M1. A journey like Cambridge-Birmingham Airport/NEC will always be quicker by car, because of the A14 and the dismal performance of CT [not all their own fault, the infrastructure is against them]. SignatureRoland Perry > Yes, being able to get on a train immediately and go where you want is > a premium service. I can't really see in what way it's otherwise? > The flexibility to take any train you want in the next 4 days, is a > big premium service over taking a specific train in that time period, > and it's sensible to charge extra for that privilige. But on the other hand, so is being guaranteed a seat a premium. So, could it not be argued that on busy services you should be charged a premium to book in advance and be allocated a seat rather than turning up and take pot luck on getting a seat? Alternatively, if the 'turn up and go' ticket is considered a premium then when all seats are taken, holders of cheap advance purchase tickets should have to give up their seats to any holders of the 'premium' tickets who do not have a seat. > Yes, being able to get on a train immediately and go where you want is > a premium service. I can't really see in what way it's otherwise? > The flexibility to take any train you want in the next 4 days, is a > big premium service over taking a specific train in that time period, > and it's sensible to charge extra for that privilige. You're looking at it backwards. The standard fare is the Saver, the Standard Open, the ticket that you buy 5 minutes before getting on the train. Advance Purchase tickets offer discounts to passengers who go with the "yield management" demands and fix their journeys on trains that currently (at the time of purchase) have lots of spare seats. These tickets do not have to be offered, and can be offered in very limited quantities at the manglement's discretion. That is _not_ the same as your model, where the standard would be to be fixed on one particular train, where you pay extra for the privilege of flexible travel. The problem with Apex tickets in this country is that they have a different discount policy (some do not allow Railcard discounts, some do on some Railcards but not others; some are only available in single fares; varying different deadline dates - all TOC-dependent) and poor availability. Thus a ridiculously low 'headline' fare results in very, very few people buying at that price, for one reason or another, and far more passengers very pissed off because they had to pay a lot more for their tickets. I agree that you should have to pay more for premium services. But does the flexibility to travel on any train (subject to time and routeing restrictions as appropriate) really count as a 'premium' service? In what way is it cheaper -in your model- to provide the cheap book-ahead service? It isn't. By all means, continue with the yield management model of Apex tickets. But make them consistent across all TOCs in terms of conditions of purchase, availability, deadline, Railcards and so on. And make the damn things available! That means more seats on that scheme, it means opening the quotas more than three days before the deadline, and it means charging one realistic price that everyone can pay, rather than quoting an attention-grabbing headline price then charging two or three times that amount. SignatureStevie D \\\\\ ///// Bringing dating agencies to the \\\\\\\__X__/////// common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs" ___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________ >>>> >2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on >>>all [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >premium fares for walk on passengers? Perhaps you've forgotten the purpose >of the railways (as a public service) It must be nearing the point where it's cheaper to let passengers travel free than to support the infrastructure required to collect fares.Add a bit more to road tax and make public transport free. SignatureMartin >>>> >2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on >>>all [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Tim Surely airlines are just as much a public service? JohnT : Bollocks!!! So you think that the railways should be like airlines with : premium fares for walk on passengers? Perhaps you've forgotten the purpose : of the railways (as a public service) And why should that part of the public that book in advance not get served with a discount? Ian > : Bollocks!!! So you think that the railways should be like airlines with > : premium fares for walk on passengers? Perhaps you've forgotten the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > And why should that part of the public that book in advance not get > served with a discount? What I am trying to say here is that walk on fares have gone up by rediculous amount in the last 10 years. It's OK offering cheap APEX type tickets but not at the expense of putting up the walk on fares so much. Part of the joy of rail travel was being to just get on a train and then return when you liked - that joy has been eroded. Tim > Ian : > And why should that part of the public that book in advance not get : > served with a discount? : : What I am trying to say here is that walk on fares have gone up by : rediculous amount in the last 10 years. By a strange coincidence, I just found my YP Railcard holder and a bunch of tickets from 1989 - 91. Let's do some comparisons. The old tickets are for spring 1989 and summer 1991. Using the purchasing power information at http://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/economic_trends/ET604CPI1750.pdf (which is a fascinating article), the indices are 454.5, 526.7 and 715.2, so one pound in 1989 was the equivalent of ?1.57 now... Glasgow - Oxford (1989) Then: Blue Saver 29.05 (45.71) White Saver 38.30 (60.29) Now: Saver 59.75 Oxford - Scarborough (1989) Then: White Saver 26.40 (41.54) Now: Saver 59.05 Glasgow - London (1991) Then: Single 35.00 (47.53) Now: Single 66.00 (not needed, but for comparison) Saver Single 56.85 (valid any train becauseof the railcard) York - Edinburgh (1991) Then: Saver 31.00 (42.09) Now: Saver 40.75 Oxford - London (1991) Then: Cheap DR 7 (9.51) Now: Cheap DR 9.90 Salisbury - Plymouth (1991) Then: Supersaver 16.50 (22.40) Now: Saver 29.20 So on the face of it, there really isn't much difference for some routes, some are slightly cheaper and some are much more expensive. HOWEVER... what was the railcard discount in 1989/91? Was it still 50% in those days, because if so the story would look very different.... : It's OK offering cheap APEX type : tickets but not at the expense of putting up the walk on fares so much. Part : of the joy of rail travel was being to just get on a train and then return : when you liked - that joy has been eroded. That's personal though, isn't it? Lots of people might say, now, that part of the joy of rail travel is being able to get a good preice by booking early ... Ian > Part of the joy of rail travel was being to just get on a train > and then return when you liked - that joy has been eroded. That's what your car is for! SignatureChris Game "Some software or hardware problem no doubt," -- Grimly Fiendish >> Part of the joy of rail travel was being to just get on a train >> and then return when you liked - that joy has been eroded. > > That's what your car is for! Indeed and it's cheaper than the train to! >>> Part of the joy of rail travel was being to just get on a train >>> and then return when you liked - that joy has been eroded. >> >> That's what your car is for! > > Indeed and it's cheaper than the train to! And faster as Top Gear showed us. SignatureChris Game Never forget: 2 + 2 = 5 for extremely large values of 2. : > Indeed and it's cheaper than the train to! : : And faster as Top Gear showed us. For one route. Shall we have a little race? You drive, I'll take the train. And because I'm nice I'll let you choose whether we do London to Paris or London to Edinburgh. Ian >:> Indeed and it's cheaper than the train to! >: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > train. And because I'm nice I'll let you choose whether we do London > to Paris or London to Edinburgh. Well they've done it twice now - even used a plane for one hop. And on more practical routes than the city centre to city centre one you propose. SignatureChris Game "...it is important to realize that any lock can be picked with a big enough hammer." -- Sun System & Network Admin manual : >:> Indeed and it's cheaper than the train to! : >: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] : on more practical routes than the city centre to city centre one you : propose. Where did I say city centre to city centre? And while the Top Gear piece was very amusing, they did choose a public transport route which involve flight, train and bus ... and the car still only won by a few second, after being driven illegally fast, and the others had been given a one-hour wait... But OK, practical route, no city centres Car versus public transport for Oxford to Lerwick. Winner pays loser's fare twice over. Ian > But OK, practical route, no city centres Car versus public transport > for Oxford to Lerwick. Winner pays loser's fare twice over. I assume the car ferry is permitted on the last leg? Sheila : > But OK, practical route, no city centres Car versus public transport : > for Oxford to Lerwick. Winner pays loser's fare twice over. : > : I assume the car ferry is permitted on the last leg? Oh of course. After all, Mr Clarkson had to get his Ferrari across (or under) the English Channel. I haven't used the Aberdeen - Lerwick ferry since P&O lost the contract, but it used to be a very pleasant trip. Ian > But OK, practical route, no city centres Car versus public > transport for Oxford to Lerwick. Winner pays loser's fare twice > over. Start at 12 midnight? SignatureChris Game Usenet is like Tetris for people who still remember how to read. -- Button from the Computer Museum, Boston, MA : > But OK, practical route, no city centres Car versus public : > transport for Oxford to Lerwick. Winner pays loser's fare twice : > over. : : Start at 12 midnight? Fine by me. Does that mean you accept? Here's what I suggest are the terms of the race: 1) We start at the front door of the Randolph Hotel in Oxford at midnight 2) We end at the front door of the Royal Hotel in Lerwick 3) I will make the journey exclusively using mass public transport: buses, trains, planes, ferries and tramcars 4) You may travel as you wish, but you must leave Oxford and arrive in Lerwick in the same car. 5) Each competitor to keep a note of all travel expenses incurred en route. 6) The loser to pay the winner twice the expenses incurred in travel to Lerwick, plus twice any additional expenses incurred in returning to Oxford, plus a sum for subsistence. 7) The subsistence amount will be a flat rate of two thousand pounds. How does that sound? Ian PS Are you quite, quite sure you know where Lerwick is? It's not the place between Newcastle and Edinburgh ... In message <cCUlhtvFIYkV-pn2-dWVCdddyrdPy@localhost>, at 11:37:45 on Wed, 29 Dec 2004, Ian Johnston <NOianSPAM.NOgroupsSPAM@btinternet.com> remarked: >: > But OK, practical route, no city centres Car versus public >: > transport for Oxford to Lerwick. Winner pays loser's fare twice [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >4) You may travel as you wish, but you must leave Oxford and arrive in >Lerwick in the same car. Sounds to me as if Ian knows there isn't a viable car ferry to Lerwick. >5) Each competitor to keep a note of all travel expenses incurred en >route. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >PS Are you quite, quite sure you know where Lerwick is? It's not the >place between Newcastle and Edinburgh ... SignatureRoland Perry : >4) You may travel as you wish, but you must leave Oxford and arrive in : >Lerwick in the same car. : : Sounds to me as if Ian knows there isn't a viable car ferry to Lerwick. Oh, good heavens no, I'm not that unfair. There are two car ferry routes to Lerwick, or were last time I checked, so I'm even leaving him some choice. Ian In message <cCUlhtvFIYkV-pn2-tnmnC4be3mi2@localhost>, at 13:52:47 on Wed, 29 Dec 2004, Ian Johnston <NOianSPAM.NOgroupsSPAM@btinternet.com> remarked: >: Sounds to me as if Ian knows there isn't a viable car ferry to Lerwick. > >Oh, good heavens no, I'm not that unfair. There are two car ferry >routes to Lerwick, or were last time I checked, so I'm even leaving >him some choice. But how often so they run? There's a car ferry to Alderney, but last time I looked it ran once a week. To be "viable" in the terms of your contest I think it would have to run at least twice a day. SignatureRoland Perry : In message <cCUlhtvFIYkV-pn2-tnmnC4be3mi2@localhost>, at 13:52:47 on : Wed, 29 Dec 2004, Ian Johnston <NOianSPAM.NOgroupsSPAM@btinternet.com> : remarked: : >Oh, good heavens no, I'm not that unfair. There are two car ferry : >routes to Lerwick, or were last time I checked, so I'm even leaving [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : time I looked it ran once a week. To be "viable" in the terms of your : contest I think it would have to run at least twice a day. Used to be 6pm from Aberdeen and Lerwick, 8am arrival, every day. Anyway, if he's allowed to choose odd starting times, or if Jeremey C is allowed to choose a route and ime which will involve an hour's wait for a train, I think I'm allowed to even the score a bit ... Ian > How does that sound? Plus you stump up the hire charge for a Ferrari inc sat nav (so I can get out of Oxford). I don't think my Fiesta would get to Oxford, never mind Scotland! > Ian > > PS Are you quite, quite sure you know where Lerwick is? It's not the > place between Newcastle and Edinburgh ... No idea where it is, sounds like a Scottish Island. Nat Rail Enquiries suggests the earliest you could be in Thurso (nrst rail station) is 21.00 with 130 miles or so still to do. There must be something you're not telling me! SignatureChris Game "If you ever find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause, and reflect." -- Mark Twain : > PS Are you quite, quite sure you know where Lerwick is? It's not the : > place between Newcastle and Edinburgh ... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] : : There must be something you're not telling me! It's the capital of Shetland. You either have to take the fourteen hour ferry crossing from Aberdeen, or take a Scrabster - Stromness (Orkney) ferry and then a Stromness - Lerwick one, but I think that route may not run at this time of year. I, on the other hand, can get there from Heathrow in under three hours, plus an hour on the bus at each end ... I once did Edinburgh - Inverness (day one) - Thurso - York (day two) - Milton Keynes - Edinburgh (day three) in my beloved Triumph Herald convertible. I would have taken the ob.train, but the line north of Inverness was closed. Ian : [snip] > 3) I will make the journey exclusively using mass public transport: > buses, trains, planes, ferries and tramcars I'm intrigued to know where you are going to find a tramcar on that route. I assume doubling back is not allowed, ie you can't get a late train down to Heathrow and fly up to Aberdeen? SignatureGraeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html> : [snip] : > 3) I will make the journey exclusively using mass public transport: : > buses, trains, planes, ferries and tramcars : I'm intrigued to know where you are going to find a tramcar on that route. : : I assume doubling back is not allowed, ie you can't get a late train down to : Heathrow and fly up to Aberdeen? Sorry, I was just giving examples. But I suppose I could do Oxford - Worcester - Jewellery Quarter - Moor Street (tram!) - New Street - Birmingham International - Edinburgh - Lerwick. Ian > : In message <cCUlhtvFIYkV-pn2-dWVCdddyrdPy@localhost> : "Ian > Johnston" <NOianSPAM.NOgroupsSPAM@btinternet.com> wrote: : : [snip] : > 3) [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Worcester - Jewellery Quarter - Moor Street (tram!) - New Street - > Birmingham International - Edinburgh - Lerwick. Oh I realised that, just had visions of an American style Interurban car working from Sumborough up to Lerwick. SignatureGraeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html> > : >:> Indeed and it's cheaper than the train to! > : >: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > But OK, practical route, no city centres Car versus public transport > for Oxford to Lerwick. Winner pays loser's fare twice over. Hmmm, last time I went to Lerwick I would probably have lost out taking the PT route! Delayed at Aberdeen for about 8 hours due to a tech fault on the plane[1], and we'd flown up the night before to get an early start as we were supposed to put in a full day's work in Lerwick when we arrived. Bae ATP, which according to the crew stands for Another Technical Problem. SignatureGraeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html> : Hmmm, last time I went to Lerwick I would probably have lost out taking the : PT route! Delayed at Aberdeen for about 8 hours due to a tech fault on the : plane[1], and we'd flown up the night before to get an early start as we were : supposed to put in a full day's work in Lerwick when we arrived. The first time I went to Lerwick I took the ferry with some of my colleagues, while most flew and laughed at us for having had to leave Edinburgh at lunchtime the day before the meeting, while they had flown up the following morning. Then the north Atlantic fog came in. The ferry back was on time. Their flight from Sumburgh was delayed by three days ... Ian PS If Chris accepts the bet I'll be delaying the race till after the fog season ... shh, don't tell him. > PS If Chris accepts the bet I'll be delaying the race till after the > fog season ... shh, don't tell him. I was thinking of delaying it till the risk of snowbound roads north of Carlisle abated a bit anyway! SignatureChris Game "A witty saying proves nothing." -- Voltaire : > PS If Chris accepts the bet I'll be delaying the race till after the : > fog season ... shh, don't tell him. : : I was thinking of delaying it till the risk of snowbound roads north : of Carlisle abated a bit anyway! Snow? Wot bleedin' snow? Quarter of a lousy inch on Christmas Day and that's been the lot. Ian, north of Carlisle >:> Indeed and it's cheaper than the train to! >: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > train. And because I'm nice I'll let you choose whether we do London > to Paris or London to Edinburgh. But Top Gear started from somewhere near Guildford, in the wee small hours. I'm sure that would also kibosh an Edinburgh trip. SignaturePersonal Website: http://web.ukonline.co.uk/cj.tolley/ Railway pictures: http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- cjt.7@supanet.com NB: the dot separating the t and 7 is there to fool spambots. Remove it before using this address. : But Top Gear started from somewhere near Guildford, in the wee small : hours. I'm sure that would also kibosh an Edinburgh trip. Well exactly. Their result - any result - would be highly dependent on start and timing. They certainly didn't prove that driving always faster than public transport. I'm willing to start our Oxford - Lerwick race at 3am if you want. Ian > Well exactly. Their result - any result - would be highly > dependent on start and timing. They certainly didn't prove that > driving always faster than public transport. What it did show is that any speed advantage that public transport (rail, air...) has on paper in Europe is easily lost in delays between connections and short links with poor bus services. SignatureChris Game "You must be an intellectual. No normal person would say a thing like that." -- George Orwell : > Well exactly. Their result - any result - would be highly : > dependent on start and timing. They certainly didn't prove that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : (rail, air...) has on paper in Europe is easily lost in delays : between connections and short links with poor bus services. No, what it showed was that in some cases waits and slow links in public transport lose time. As compared to a Ferrari driven very fast on motorways and one final short twisty bit. My next challenge: let's race from Horton in Ribblesdale to Mallaig. Ian > My next challenge: let's race from Horton in Ribblesdale to Mallaig. Hmmm, there seems to be one sensible connection by rail and that takes 9.5 hrs. SignatureChris Game 'Calm down -- it's only ones and zeros.' : having cheap walk on fares at the expense of advance purchase isn't : fair. Being able to travel immediately is a service that should be : paid for. This is a regular argument on uk.railway. You'll find three points of view loudly argued over the next couple of days: 1) Those who make lots of walk on journeys will explain why their fares should be subsidized by higher book-ahead prices. 2) Those who make lots of book ahead journeys will explain why their fares should be subsidized by higher walk-on prices. 3) Henry Law will explain that if trains only did 50mph and didn't have air conditioning, all fares could be reduced to enough to give enough change from half a crown for a good seat at the Bexhill Odeon and fish 'n' chips on the way home. Ian > : having cheap walk on fares at the expense of advance purchase isn't > : fair. Being able to travel immediately is a service that should be > : paid for. > > This is a regular argument on uk.railway. You'll find three points of > view loudly argued over the next couple of days: > 3) Henry Law will explain that if trains only did 50mph and didn't > have air conditioning, all fares could be reduced to enough to give > enough change from half a crown for a good seat at the Bexhill Odeon > and fish 'n' chips on the way home. BZZZZTT!!! There was no Odeon in Bexhill according to this page - http://www.curzon-pp.com/pages/cinemas.html ;-) Nick > >Virgin make much of their cheap fares, but the quotas can be incredibly > >restrictive. Surely it is better to offer good value walk-on fares, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > fair. Being able to travel immediately is a service that should be > paid for. Not if the tickets are sold on a stand-by basis. No seat, and you wait for the next service with a free seat or stand. Book in advance and you are guaranteed of a seat. SignatureTerry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society 75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: terry.harper@btinternet.com URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ : Clerks may be good enough to do it for you but they are not obliged to. This : is for a very good reason. Is is simple enough to split a short journey, but : for longer journeys the combinations increase almost exponentially. It's dead easy to work out, at least with a few simplifying assumptions. Suppose there is one route between A and B, with n intermediate stops. At each stop we have to ask "Do I change ticket here or not?" Since that two-way decision has to be made n times, it's easy to see that there are 2^n possible stopping patterns for that route. It's reasonable to assume that there will be one lowest fare for the dates involved between each pair of stopping points, so that 2^n fares. For example: Direct trains from London to Glasgow may call at Milton Keynes, Rugby, Stafford, Crewe, Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme, Penrith, Carlisle, Lockerbie and Motherwell en route. That's 14 stops, so 16,384 possible total fares. These are combinations of 15 fares from London, 14 from Milton Keynes, 13 from Rugby and so on. In this case that's 120 sub-fares, and in general its (n^2 + 3n + 2) /2 Lots of time could be saved in implementation in various ways. For example, once you know the cheapest fare London - Lancaster - Glasgow, you don't need to recalculate the London - Lancaster bit for London - Lancaster - Carlisle - Glasgow. You can also truncate the search as soon as the fare exceeds the lowest you've found so far, so if there was no London - Lancaster - Carlisle fare which was less than a London - Glasgow fare, there is no point in investigating London - Lancaster - Carlisle - Lockerbie - Glasgow. Of course there are several routes you could take, but finding the cheapest combination should not be an insuperable problem. Particularly since, if the world was sensible. ATOC would run it once for every pair of stations, reduce the direct fare to the minimum and iterate till no further change, then publish the fares manual! Ian >: Clerks may be good enough to do it for you but they are not obliged to. This >: is for a very good reason. Is is simple enough to split a short journey, but [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >for every pair of stations, reduce the direct fare to the minimum and >iterate till no further change, then publish the fares manual! You've just done EDS out of another multibillion pound contract :-(( SignatureMartin > For example: Direct trains from London to Glasgow may call at Milton > Keynes, Rugby, Stafford, Crewe, Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Ian I believe you have forgotten the case where it is cheaper to buy a ticket *beyond* your destination than it is to buy one *to* your destination. That makes for a lot more sub-fares. Using your same example, there is no reason that they couldn't be running a couple of specials London -> Rugby and Milton Keynes -> Glasgow for a penny each. Then you could buy a ticket London -> Rugby, get off at MK, and buy MK -> Glasgow. You also have to take into account all stations beyond Glasgow and before London (if there are any). Now add in the case where having a season ticket for *any* pair of stations in the system entitles you to a major discount on any route in that system... T. : > For example: Direct trains from London to Glasgow may call at Milton : > Keynes, Rugby, Stafford, Crewe, Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : > Rugby and so on. In this case that's 120 sub-fares, and in general its : > (n^2 + 3n + 2) /2 : I believe you have forgotten the case where it is cheaper to buy a ticket : *beyond* your destination than it is to buy one *to* your destination. That : makes for a lot more sub-fares. It would be a modification, yes. : Using your same example, there is no reason that they couldn't be running a : couple of specials London -> Rugby and Milton Keynes -> Glasgow for a penny : each. Then you could buy a ticket London -> Rugby, get off at MK, and buy : MK -> Glasgow. That's not a major problem: the cheapest fare from London to Milton Keynes would be the London to Rugby fare - that's a one-off investigation needed when the database of fares is constructed. OJ, maybe it's quite a major problem, but it's a different problem from the multi-hop optimisation one! : You also have to take into account all stations beyond Glasgow and before : London (if there are any). Same different problem. : Now add in the case where having a season ticket for *any* pair of stations : in the system entitles you to a major discount on any route in that : system... OK, so the database of fares has to know about things like this, but again, not insuperable. Ian >Of course there are several routes you could take, but finding the >cheapest combination should not be an insuperable problem. See my previous post. >Particularly since, if the world was sensible. ATOC would run it once >for every pair of stations, reduce the direct fare to the minimum and >iterate till no further change, No need to iterate; the algorithm already takes account of it. SignatureClive D.W. Feather | Home: <clive@davros.org> Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: <http://www.davros.org> Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: <clive@demon.net> Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: <clive@davros.org> : >Of course there are several routes you could take, but finding the : >cheapest combination should not be an insuperable problem. : : See my previous post. I think your previous algorithm is over complex. It continues to refine routes which are already ruled out. There is no need to consider routes from Glasgow to Lockerbie which start with a ticket costing more than the basic Glasgow - Lockerbie fare. : >Particularly since, if the world was sensible. ATOC would run it once : >for every pair of stations, reduce the direct fare to the minimum and : >iterate till no further change, : : No need to iterate; the algorithm already takes account of it. No, I was talking about setting fares, not finding a fare. My method would ensure that the direct A - B ticket was always cheaper than a multi-ticket version. And now back to designing algorithms for producing finite-elements arrays. God it's boring. Ian >I think your previous algorithm is over complex. It continues to >refine routes which are already ruled out. There is no need to >consider routes from Glasgow to Lockerbie which start with a ticket >costing more than the basic Glasgow - Lockerbie fare. I think you mean over-simple. The advantage of the algorithm is that it's clean, it's highly parallelisable, the inner loops are small and keep the instruction pipeline full, and they're easy to unroll. Oh, and it requires no local knowledge. >: No need to iterate; the algorithm already takes account of it. >No, I was talking about setting fares, not finding a fare. So was I. Run the algorithm once, then set all the A-B fares according to the resulting matrix. If the new fare book still had cheaper multi-ticket routes, those would have appeared in the matrix and been made the single fare. If I wanted to find a single fare, I'd use a minor variant of the ink-blot algorithm that CORE uses for shortest route. Even on the antique machine I use, it converges in a couple of seconds. >My method >would ensure that the direct A - B ticket was always cheaper than a >multi-ticket version. So would mine. This is elementary graph theory I learned when the ZX-80 was state of the art and I was still helping design the ZX-81. It ain't rocket science. SignatureClive D.W. Feather | Home: <clive@davros.org> Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: <http://www.davros.org> Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: <clive@demon.net> Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: <clive@davros.org> : >I think your previous algorithm is over complex. It continues to : >refine routes which are already ruled out. There is no need to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] : keep the instruction pipeline full, and they're easy to unroll. Oh, and : it requires no local knowledge. Yes, poor choice of word on my part. It doesn't stop at obvious dead ends. Which is sensible if you are trying to generate every possible cheapest route, but not of you are just looking for one. Thirty minutes per ticket type for the whole of the UK sounds fine, anyway - just run it in advance and store the results: no need to search every time. Of course, it would have to be done for weekday, saturday and sunday services, and for different starting times, and for railcard/non-railcard, and therefore for July/August and other months and ... hmm, yes. To be done usefully, of course, it would have to be combined with a routing system: London - Birmingham - Glasgow might well be cheaper than London - Glasgow, but take longer. But as I posted before, for a given route with n intermediate stops, there are only 2^n fare combinations to look at, which is pretty simple. : This is elementary graph theory I learned when the ZX-80 was state of : the art and I was still helping design the ZX-81. It ain't rocket : science. As ever, it's not just the theory, it's the implementation. So, when can we expect the CORE upgrade? What about COFFEE: Clive's Online Fares From Everywhere to Everywhere... Ian On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:13:18 -0000, "RPM" ><rpm@warmstone.wanadoo.co.uk> wrote: >1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares > between two stations, plus all the *combinations* of fares between those > stations. Why don't the train companies let booking clerks use computer software to calculate the cheapest fare between A and B? It would save time thereby pleasing the customers and booking clerk. It cannot be impossible because years ago my insurance broker had software that calculated the cheapest insurance premium for my car when I provided information on the car, where I lived and the type of insurance I required. SignatureBruce Fletcher (To reply replace figure 1 with letter i) Stronsay, Orkney, UK http://www.stronsay.co.uk/claremont If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you're reading it in English, thank a soldier. >Yep it would be ridiculous, I have had clerks tell me when it's >cheaper to buy a combination ticket, or a ticket beyond the >destination I really want. I thought it was illegal to buy a ticket to a more distant station to save money. -- Alasdair Baxter, Nottingham, UK.Tel +44 115 9705100; Fax +44 115 9423263 "It's not what you say that matters but how you say it. It's not what you do that matters but how you do it" >>Yep it would be ridiculous, I have had clerks tell me when it's >>cheaper to buy a combination ticket, or a ticket beyond the >>destination I really want. > >I thought it was illegal to buy a ticket to a more distant station to >save money. I guess it's legal as long as the ticket you buy lets you break your journey. Regards, Rian SignatureRian van der Borgt, Leuven, Belgium. e-mail: rvdborgt+@xs4all.be www: http://www.xs4all.be/~rvdborgt/ Fix Outlook Express: http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ Fix Outlook: http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/ : >>Yep it would be ridiculous, I have had clerks tell me when it's : >>cheaper to buy a combination ticket, or a ticket beyond the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] : I guess it's legal as long as the ticket you buy lets you break your : journey. Why guess? It'd perfectly legal, and you don't need a journey breakable ticket. Ian > : >>Yep it would be ridiculous, I have had clerks tell me when it's > : >>cheaper to buy a combination ticket, or a ticket beyond the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Why guess? It'd perfectly legal, and you don't need a journey > breakable ticket. I believe there was a test case in the courts a few years ago. A TOC took someone to court for a having a season ticket from A-C but only going from A-B because the A-C ticket was cheaper (can't remember the stations - somewhere in the south East). It was thrown out of court. Tim > Ian >>:>I thought it was illegal to buy a ticket to a more distant station to >>:>save money. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >A-B because the A-C ticket was cheaper (can't remember the stations - >somewhere in the south East). It was thrown out of court. Could he break his journey with his season ticket? Regards, Rian SignatureRian van der Borgt, Leuven, Belgium. e-mail: rvdborgt+@xs4all.be www: http://www.xs4all.be/~rvdborgt/ Fix Outlook Express: http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ Fix Outlook: http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/ Comment ------------------------------------------------------------------------ A scandal of secrecy and profligacy The Skye bridge contract allowed private firms to fleece the taxpayer George Monbiot The Guardian Tuesday December 28, 2004 One of the ways in which the government can avoid the freedom of information laws, which come into force at the end of this week, is to classify public business as private business. Under the act, information can be withheld from the public if its disclosure would "prejudice the commercial interests of any person". Wherever the government has entered into partnership with a private company, it can argue that it would damage the company's interests if it told us what it was doing. So unless there is a public inquiry, we might never discover why a bridge that should have cost £25m to build has now cost £93m. Last week the people of the island of Skye won a remarkable victory. For nine years they had been fighting for the removal of the tolls on the bridge to the mainland. The bridge, built at the behest of the Conservative government, was Britain's first privately financed public project. Under the private finance initiative (PFI), public works such as roads, bridges, schools and hospitals are built and run by private companies, then rented back to the government. Because, the government claims, private companies are more efficient than the public sector, PFI schemes cost less. On the day the bridge was opened (October 16 1995), the government stopped the ferry service it ran between Skye and the mainland, thus granting the consortium that built the bridge a monopoly; there was no other means of getting on and off the island. The consortium was able to charge the islanders what are believed to be the highest tolls per mile of road in the world. They rose to £5.70 each way for a one-mile crossing. (After massive public pressure, the Labour government gave the residents a discount, but only if they bought tickets in books of 20.) After nine years of what was to have been a 27-year contract, the companies that built the bridge have reaped £33m from motorists. This is bad enough. But before the bridge was built, the government threw in £13m of sweeteners. Desperate to make its showcase project work, it spent £6m on building the approach roads (a few hundred metres of tarmac); another £3m on hiring consultants and buying land; and a further £4m as "compensation" to the consortium for the costs of construction delays and design changes (which, if you believe the government's claims about "risk transfer", should have been carried by the consortium itself). The European Investment Bank lent a further £13m to help finance the bridge. This loan breached the bank's own investment criteria. The bank's purpose is to fund projects that boost the livelihoods of people in the less developed parts of Europe. It is legally bound to lend money only when "funds are not available from other sources on reasonable terms" and to support only those schemes that do not "distort competition". The tolls have damaged people's livelihoods by discouraging tourists. Private investors, who know a good thing when they see it, were falling over themselves to buy a stake in the project. The closure of the ferry service on the day the bridge opened did not distort competition: it eliminated it. The discount for books of 20 tickets was financed by the government, not the consortium. So to help reduce the cost of the tolls (which would not have been levied at all had the bridge been built at public expense), the government has paid a further £7.6m. Now the tolls are being removed and the contract is being bought back from the companies by the Scottish executive at a cost of £27m. The bridge, in other words, appears to have cost the public £93.6m. If we accept the consortium's account of how much it cost to build - £25m - we have paid for it 3.7 times. Even this could be an underestimate: independent engineers suggest that it shouldn't have cost more than £15m. So what was in the contract? I have no idea, and nor does anyone who was not involved in negotiating it. Though it was giving away our money, though there was no possible security argument for keeping it secret, both the Tory and Labour governments have hidden the contract behind the excuse of "commercial confidentiality". Unless an inventive challenge can be launched, governments will continue to do so, using the loophole in the act. The lesson of the Skye bridge fiasco is obvious. If we are not allowed to see what's being done in our name, there's a pretty good chance we are being ripped off. · www.monbiot.com : Could he break his journey with his season ticket? National Conditions of Carriage, Section 15: You have the right to break and resume a journey covered by your ticket (in either direction in the case of a return ticket) at any intermediate station, as long as your ticket is valid for the trains you want to use. You may also end your journey before the destination shown on your ticket at any such intermediate station. However, these rights may not apply to certain tickets. If so, the relevant Train Companies will state this in their notices and other publications. Ian PS I have never encountered a ticket with the restriction referred to. Perhaps someone else can give an example, or maybe they have kept the power, just in case they want it. > : Could he break his journey with his season ticket? > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > intermediate station, as long as your ticket is valid for the trains > you want to use. You may also end your journey before the destination > shown on your ticket at any such intermediate station. However, these > rights may not apply to certain tickets. If so, the relevant Train > Companies will state this in their notices and other publications. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > PS I have never encountered a ticket with the restriction referred to. > Perhaps someone else can give an example, or maybe they have kept the > power, just in case they want it. The restrictions mentioned apply to all Saver and SuperSaver tickets for the outward journey and to all advance purchase tickets. jb > >I believe there was a test case in the courts a few years ago. A TOC took > >someone to court for a having a season ticket from A-C but only going from > >A-B because the A-C ticket was cheaper (can't remember the stations - > >somewhere in the south East). It was thrown out of court. > > Could he break his journey with his season ticket? Other things being equal, yes. Regards Jonathan >>I believe there was a test case in the courts a few years ago. A TOC took >>someone to court for a having a season ticket from A-C but only going from >>A-B because the A-C ticket was cheaper (can't remember the stations - >>somewhere in the south East). It was thrown out of court. > >Could he break his journey with his season ticket? Season tickets allow unlimited travel between any two stations *within*[1] the end points. [1] Because of routing rules, there may be several ways *between* the end points, for example a Peterborough to London Season is valid either via the ECML or Ely/Cambridge. SignatureRoland Perry >>>I believe there was a test case in the courts a few years ago. A TOC took >>>someone to court for a having a season ticket from A-C but only going from [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Season tickets allow unlimited travel between any two stations >*within*[1] the end points. So this doesn't say anything about getting out earlier with a ticket that doesn't allow a journey break. Regards, Rian SignatureRian van der Borgt, Leuven, Belgium. e-mail: rvdborgt+@xs4all.be www: http://www.xs4all.be/~rvdborgt/ Fix Outlook Express: http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ Fix Outlook: http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/ : So this doesn't say anything about getting out earlier with a ticket : that doesn't allow a journey break. No, but as has been pointed out to you several times, the National Conditions of Carriage do. What's the problem with that? Ian >:So this doesn't say anything about getting out earlier with a ticket >:that doesn't allow a journey break. > >No, but as has been pointed out to you several times, the National >Conditions of Carriage do. What's the problem with that? Nothing... I should read all messages before posting a new on :-) Regards, Rian SignatureRian van der Borgt, Leuven, Belgium. e-mail: rvdborgt+@xs4all.be www: http://www.xs4all.be/~rvdborgt/ Fix Outlook Express: http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ Fix Outlook: http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/ >>>Could he break his journey with his season ticket? >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >So this doesn't say anything about getting out earlier with a ticket >that doesn't allow a journey break. Correct. The concept of "journey break" (as specified by the rules posted here recently, for one-trip tickets) doesn't mean anything useful for a season ticket. But we *have* answered the question: "yes, you can always "break" a journey on a season ticket". SignatureRoland Perry > I thought it was illegal to buy a ticket to a more distant station to > save money. Not if the ticket is valid for break of journey (i.e. an Open ticket). The article in the printed edition of The Times gives three examples to explain this: You want a FOR Euston to Manchester. It costs £280, but a FOR London to Edinburgh is £257, and is valid via, and for break of journey at, Manchester. BTW, if you need to do this journey twice in a week it's a toss-up between an Edinburgh FOR or a 7 day all lines Rover at £515. King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the train also conveys passengers to Berwick on Tweed travelling on a Saver at £93.50. It is not legitimate for the Newcastle passenger to book to Berwick, as the Saver is not valid for break of journey. And the one often discussed on uk.r, Chester to London peak return. SOR is £148, but Saver from Shotton to London at £53.30 has no restrictions. It is not legitimate for a Chester passenger to book from Shotton, as starting a journey 'short' is not allowed (but how do VT prove that you didn't travel into Chester on the connecting service from Shotton, but the conductor didn't come round to grip your ticket on the short journey?). Peter >> I thought it was illegal to buy a ticket to a more distant station to >> save money. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > into Chester on the connecting service from Shotton, but the conductor > didn't come round to grip your ticket on the short journey?). At the expense of starting the debate again. I still fail to see that starting a journey 'short' infringes the rules. After the Saver rules state you cannot 'break' a journey on the outward portion. Surely if you start your journey short then you haven't 'technically' broken your journey as you haven't started it yet. Bit of a 'grey area' me thinks! And of course on the return it is even better as the ticket is completely unrestricted coming out of London AND you can break your journey!!!! Tim : King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is ?176, but the train : also conveys passengers to Berwick on Tweed travelling on a Saver at ?93.50. : It is not legitimate for the Newcastle passenger to book to Berwick, as the : Saver is not valid for break of journey. Have GNER explicity said that you can't end a L:ondon - Berwick trip at Newcastle? Because if they have not, you may do so. Once again, NCoC 15 You have the right to break and resume a journey covered by your ticket (in either direction in the case of a return ticket) at any intermediate station, as long as your ticket is valid for the trains you want to use. You may also end your journey before the destination shown on your ticket at any such intermediate station. However, these rights may not apply to certain tickets. If so, the relevant Train Companies will state this in their notices and other publications. Ian > : King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the train > : also conveys passengers to Berwick on Tweed travelling on a Saver at £93.50. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Have GNER explicity said that you can't end a L:ondon - Berwick trip > at Newcastle? Because if they have not, you may do so. For the 0800 the answer is Yes, in the National Fares Manual, a publicly available (if not easily available!) document. I presume the NFM would form part of item 3 of NCoC 4, which states: Each ticket is issued subject to: 1. these Conditions; 2. the applicable bye-laws; 3. the conditions relating to certain types of reduced and discounted fare tickets set out in the notices and other publications issued by the Train Companies whose trains you are entitled to use; and 4. the conditions set out in the notices and other publications issued by another person if your ticket enables you to use any of their goods or services. > Have GNER explicity said that you can't end a L:ondon - Berwick trip > at Newcastle? Because if they have not, you may do so. He then goes on to answer his own question... > Once again, NCoC 15 > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > you want to use. You may also end your journey before the destination > shown on your ticket at any such intermediate station. Here's the relevant part... > However, these rights may not apply to certain tickets... ...of which the most obvious example is a SVR, on which break of journey is not allowed on the outward half. Regards Jonathan >> Have GNER explicity said that you can't end a L:ondon - Berwick trip >> at Newcastle? Because if they have not, you may do so. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > is > not allowed on the outward half. Whether it is allowed or not will not stop you getting off the train at Newcastle!!! > Regards > > Jonathan > Whether it is allowed or not will not stop you getting off the train at > Newcastle!!! Of course it won't, but that wasn't the question. Jonathan : > You may also end your journey before the destination : > shown on your ticket at any such intermediate station. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] : ...of which the most obvious example is a SVR, on which break of journey is : not allowed on the outward half. Read more carefully. We am not talking about breaking your journey. We are talking about terminating your journey early, and with most Savers (I thought it was all, but one exception has been pointed out) this is perfectly legitimate. Though I stand to be corrected, if you can point me at a blanket restriction which says that early termination of outward journey is not allowed with Savers. Ian PS Not break of journey. Early termination. Not going on. Stopping sooner than the ticket allows. > : > You may also end your journey before the destination > : > shown on your ticket at any such intermediate station. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > PS Not break of journey. Early termination. Not going on. Stopping > sooner than the ticket allows. Now that is an interesting point. Never thought of it that way!!! : > We am not talking about breaking your journey. We are talking about : > terminating your journey early, and with most Savers (I thought it was : > all, but one exception has been pointed out) this is perfectly : > legitimate. : Now that is an interesting point. Never thought of it that way!!! I think it's a fairly recent change to the Conditions of Carriage. Wasn't it discussed here when it came in? Ian > : > We am not talking about breaking your journey. We are talking about > : > terminating your journey early, and with most Savers (I thought it was [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I think it's a fairly recent change to the Conditions of Carriage. > Wasn't it discussed here when it came in? Can't find it at: http://nrekb.nationalrail.co.uk/conditions.htm or has it changed more recently? Tim > Ian > I think it's a fairly recent change to the Conditions of Carriage. : > Wasn't it discussed here when it came in? : : Can't find it at: : : http://nrekb.nationalrail.co.uk/conditions.htm It's there. Click on "C Using Your ticket" and look at the first paragraph of 15: C. Use of Tickets 15. Breaking or ending a journey at intermediate stations You have the right to break and resume a journey covered by your ticket (in either direction in the case of a return ticket) at any intermediate station, as long as your ticket is valid for the trains you want to use. You may also end your journey before the destination shown on your ticket at any such intermediate station. However, these rights may not apply to certain tickets. If so, the relevant Train Companies will state this in their notices and other publications. Ian > Not break of journey. Early termination. Not > going on. Stopping sooner than the ticket allows. I can imagine myself ending up being inpolite to a member of station staff telling me that I could not leave their premises and go home, but instead had to go to Berwick whether I liked it or not. Matt Ashby > King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the train > also conveys passengers to Berwick on Tweed travelling on a Saver at £93.50. > It is not legitimate for the Newcastle passenger to book to Berwick, as the > Saver is not valid for break of journey. How can this possibly be enforced? Can a train company refuse to let a passenger leave a train? Krist >> King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the train >> also conveys passengers to Berwick on Tweed travelling on a Saver at £93.50. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >How can this possibly be enforced? Can a train company refuse to let a >passenger leave a train? Many stations have barriers or other ticket checks as you leave your station, if your ticket isn't valid for leaving at that station, it will be picked up. Jim. : Many stations have barriers or other ticket checks as you leave your : station, if your ticket isn't valid for leaving at that station, it : will be picked up. I normally save myself a few quid by buying a Dumfries - London ticket (valid via Oxford, and getting off there) rather than a Dumfries - Oxford one. The barriers spit it out, but the humans just wave me through. I wonder if they really know, or care, whether it's valid... Ian >>> King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the >>> train [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > station, if your ticket isn't valid for leaving at that station, it > will be picked up. You can always say that you are visiting the 'local facilities' something which is allowed on the outward portion of savers. > Jim. >>>King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the train >>>also conveys passengers to Berwick on Tweed travelling on a Saver at £93.50. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > station, if your ticket isn't valid for leaving at that station, it > will be picked up. Wel suppose this: Saver from A -> B is more expensive than saver from A -> C with trains from A -> all calling at C. You buy a Saver from A - B with the intention to get out at C. To get past the barriers at C you also buy a ticket from D -> C with D the station for which the cheapest ticket to C is available. You use this ticket to leave C... I guess a ticket to Newcastle from the closest station would do in this occasion. How is one to stop you doing this :-) Just an asside: Can one buy a "platform" ticket in the UK? A ticket that only gives access to the platform, but does not entitle one to travel on a train. Krist > Just an asside: Can one buy a "platform" ticket in the UK? A ticket that > only gives access to the platform, but does not entitle one to travel on > a train. Only at very few stations I think. You can still at Leeds, it costs 20 pence. >> Just an asside: Can one buy a "platform" ticket in the UK? A ticket >> that only gives access to the platform, but does not entitle one to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You can still at Leeds, it costs 20 pence. What do you do if you want to accompany someone to the train on a station with barriers? Krist >Many stations have barriers or other ticket checks as you leave your >station, if your ticket isn't valid for leaving at that station, it >will be picked up. AIUI, break (and resumption) of journey and finishing short without any further use of the ticket are two distinctly different things, and the latter is permitted on all walk-on tickets. Failing that, buy the Saver and a single from the previous stop to the desired exit station from Trainline. Neil SignatureNeil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. >> King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the >> train [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > How can this possibly be enforced? Can a train company refuse to let a > passenger leave a train? Very difficult to enforce indeed. It's just a case of whether people know how to 'bend' the rules as it were. Tim >> I thought it was illegal to buy a ticket to a more distant station to >> save money. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > the > Saver is not valid for break of journey. Although Savers are not valid for break of journey on the outward, you can break the journey on your return. So all you have to do is get off at Newcastle and present the ticket inspectors with your return portion and say you are breaking your return journey. Peter Smyth > King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the train > also conveys passengers to Berwick on Tweed travelling on a Saver at £93.50. > It is not legitimate for the Newcastle passenger to book to Berwick, as the > Saver is not valid for break of journey. Not that it affects anything that's been said, but the £93.50 ticket that allows travel on any train between KX and Berwick is a Business Saver, not an ordinary Saver. >King's Cross - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the train >also conveys passengers to Berwick on Tweed travelling on a Saver at £93.50. >It is not legitimate for the Newcastle passenger to book to Berwick, as the >Saver is not valid for break of journey. That depends on how you define 'break', though. If it means 'getting off at X and then resuming your journey later', then you're not actually breaking your journey. SignatureNeil Sunderland Braunton, Devon Please observe the Reply-To address >>King's Cross - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the train >>also conveys passengers to Berwick on Tweed travelling on a Saver at £93.50. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > off at X and then resuming your journey later', then you're not > actually breaking your journey. From the National Conditions of Carriage: 'Break your journey' means leaving a Train Company's or Rail Service Company's premises after you start your journey other than to: 1. Join a train at another station, or 2. Stay in overnight accommodation when you cannot reasonably complete your journey within one day, or 3. comply with directions of Train Company's staff. On Tuesday, in article <33ddc0F4063dhU1@individual.net> > From the National Conditions of Carriage: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >complete your journey within one day, or > 3. comply with directions of Train Company's staff. So, if you are so obnoxious when you stop to change trains that they throw you out of the station, then that's OK? Signature[ John Hein GM1YME | Phaggots do it on the phone! ] [ johndunedin@drink.demon.co.uk | Sine Pretio Loquimini Omnibus ] [ johndunedin@cix.compulink.co.uk| ] [ Telephone: +44 131 558 1279 |http://www.scotsgay.co.uk/people/john.html] [ TeleFax: +44 131 539 2999 | 45 B5/6 f+ t- w+ d g++ k- s++! r-- p ] [ Lambda BBS: +44 131 556 6316 | S8/9 b g- l y- z/ n o++ x-- a+ u- v- j++ ] > From the National Conditions of Carriage: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > complete your journey within one day, or > 3. comply with directions of Train Company's staff. That cannot be the complete definition as it also covers leaving the railway premises at the destination station, and I am sure that this is not intended to be classed as a "break of journey". >>>King's Cross - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but >>>the train [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >complete your journey within one day, or > 3. comply with directions of Train Company's staff. So you could travel up to Newcastle, and back again, without leaving the station (only much use for trainspotters and certain kinds of courier), but if you went to a destination outside the station (eg to conduct business or pleasure in the normal way) then you have broken the journey. I don't think you could even take a local trip from Newcastle to (say) Metro Centre, as that doesn't involve leaving the station. However, perhaps if you had a ticket from Dunston to Metro Centre, you could leave the station and get a bus to Dunston to catch the train. It seems clear that when they talk about leaving the station to join a train at another station they mean *on the same ticket* (eg walking from KX to KX-Thameslink on a Cambridge to Gatwick ticket), but that's not what the words say. SignatureRoland Perry >King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the train >also conveys passengers to Berwick on Tweed travelling on a Saver at £93.50. >It is not legitimate for the Newcastle passenger to book to Berwick, as the >Saver is not valid for break of journey. Buy the Saver and a Durham - Newcastle Standard Single. You wouldn't be breaking the outward journey on the Saver. PRAR Signaturehttp://www.i.am/prar/ As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. Dick Cavett Please reply to the newsgroup. That is why it exists. NB Anti-spam measures in force - If you must email me use the Reply to address and not prar@deadspam.com > >King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the train > >also conveys passengers to Berwick on Tweed travelling on a Saver at £93.50. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Buy the Saver and a Durham - Newcastle Standard Single. You wouldn't > be breaking the outward journey on the Saver. You would be at Durham. Jonathan "Jonathan Morton" <jonathan@jonathanmortonbutignorethisbit.co.uk> wrote: >> >King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the >train [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >You would be at Durham. In BR days I regularly purchased a Saver to Hexham, which involved changing at Newcastle. It was significantly cheaper than a Saver to Newcastle. But I was often collected from Newcastle Central by a relative, so on many occasions I didn't use the last portion. What is to stop anyone doing that today? Simply exit the barriers to buy a newspaper (for example) and don't return. >> >King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the >train [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >You would be at Durham. Eat the outward portion of the Saver ticket as you depart Durham then. Lost ticket = no ticket = buy new ticket = full fare single to next inter-change. PRAR Signaturehttp://www.i.am/prar/ As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. Dick Cavett Please reply to the newsgroup. That is why it exists. NB Anti-spam measures in force - If you must email me use the Reply to address and not prar@deadspam.com >>King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the >>train [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > PRAR Or better still a standard single Manors to Newcastle.........! >>>King's Cros - Newcastle, outward onm the 0800. A SOR is £176, but the >>>train [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Or better still a standard single Manors to Newcastle.........! If you are going to do that then start with a Kings Cross - Stevenage ticket. PRAR Signaturehttp://www.i.am/prar/ As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it. Dick Cavett Please reply to the newsgroup. That is why it exists. NB Anti-spam measures in force - If you must email me use the Reply to address and not prar@deadspam.com (but how do VT prove that you didn't travel into Chester on the connecting service from Shotton, but the conductor didn't come round to grip your ticket on the short journey?). They can tell from the ticket where and when it was issued - and if it was at Chester shortly before their train left that's pretty conclusive. If you actually bought it at Shotton, or elsewhere, or in advance, they couldn't. > They can tell from the ticket where and when it was issued - and if it > was at Chester shortly before their train left that's pretty > conclusive. If you actually bought it at Shotton, or elsewhere, or in > advance, they couldn't. "I'm sorry, Mr. Train Manager, but what happened was I was in a rush at Shotton, and I didn't have a chance to get my ticket there. However, I knew I would have time to buy the ticket between changing trains at Chester. So being an honest citizen, I have bought the ticket for the whole of the journey I have made, rather than just pretending to have come from Chester. I would have bought the ticket from the guard on the first train, but he or she didn't come round." SignaturePersonal Website: http://web.ukonline.co.uk/cj.tolley/ Railway pictures: http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- cjt.7@supanet.com NB: the dot separating the t and 7 is there to fool spambots. Remove it before using this address. >> They can tell from the ticket where and when it was issued - and if it >> was at Chester shortly before their train left that's pretty [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > come from Chester. I would have bought the ticket from the guard on the > first train, but he or she didn't come round." Exactly. There are many ways of getting around the problem. Some may call it 'fare dodging'. I would say it's more a case of 'playing a save some money game'. Tim [...] >Exactly. There are many ways of getting around the problem. Some may call it >'fare dodging'. I would say it's more a case of 'playing a save some money >game'. There's fare avoidance and fare evasion. Avoidance is legal, is being discussed here, and can keep people happily occupied for weeks discovering all the options. In most cases staff are totally sympathetic with avoidance as they're human too and nobody likes paying more than they have to for anything! Evasion, which some people call dodging, is illegal and is an entirely different matter. Trust a journalist to spice up a story by offering a frisson of illegality. SignatureRoss, a.k.a. Prof. E. Scrooge, CT, 153 & bar, Doctor of Cynicism (U. Life) Scrooge would like to wish everyone a happy humbug, and to assure you all that whilst you are all freezing your bits off, Scrooge will be enjoying some Turkish delight. ;o))) [snip] Scrooge would like to wish everyone a happy humbug, and to assure you all that whilst you are all freezing your bits off, Scrooge will be enjoying some Turkish delight. ;o))) Does she have a sister? SignatureGraeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html> : 1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares between : two stations, plus all the *combinations* of fares between those stations. If only someone would invent some sort of automatic calculating device for doing this sort of thing, eh? Perhaps when Mr Babbage has finshed his Analytical Engine ... Ian PS An algorithm very similar to that used in routefinding programmes would work fine. Replace times with costs and bob's your uncle. >: 1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares between >: two stations, plus all the *combinations* of fares between those stations. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >PS An algorithm very similar to that used in routefinding programmes >would work fine. Replace times with costs and bob's your uncle. Much too easy or what? SignatureMartin > The Times > December 27, 2004 > > Rail travellers' guide to becoming a legal fare dodger > By Ben Webster [...] > Alex Nelson, who runs a rail travel agency in Chester-le-Street, Co > Durham, > has a season ticket that covers the route between Ryde Esplanade and Ryde > St > Johns on the Isle of Wight. The two stations are at opposite ends of the > town, and the season ticket is the cheapest in Britain at £104 a year. [...] > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,170-1416530,00.html Hmmm what an interesting character this Nelson - first he nicks all the railway-related domain names, then this... ;-) Good idea though, with the amount of routeing/ticketing q's posted here its obviously a popular subject. Cheers, -- James Hancock > Alex Nelson, who runs a rail travel agency in Chester-le-Street, Co Durham, > has a season ticket that covers the route between Ryde Esplanade and Ryde St > Johns on the Isle of Wight. The two stations are at opposite ends of the > town, and the season ticket is the cheapest in Britain at £104 a year. <snip> > He has used his ticket on the Isle of Wight only once in four years but > saves £100 a year on other journeys. So he's only £4 a year worse off... Regards Jonathan > One of the simplest tricks, which saves money on many routes, is to ask for > two return tickets that combine to form a whole journey. A passenger [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Mowbray to Birmingham for £9.60, the total would be £15.80, less than half > the amount requested by the clerk at Peterborough. I used this to my full advantage yesterday. I needed to make a one-way journey from Bristol to birmingham. The single fare is £26. But I bought two separate tickets - a First Class single from Bristol to Cheltenham at £11.60 (even cheaper than the Virgin First weekend upgrade!) and a Standard single from Cheltenham to Birmingham at £12.50. Total: £24.10, which is cheaper than the walk-on single *and* I got an empty First Class carriage for most of the journey! The Voyager was diverted via Newport so I managed to get my freebies from the shop twice. I presented both tickets to the Train Manager and said I'd move to cattle class after Cheltenham but the nice guy said it was ok if I remained in Club. Just think what would happen if everybody travelling on a one-way journey from Bristol to Birmingham did what I did. A First/Std journey being cheaper than the direct Std fare! > The Times > December 27, 2004 > > Rail travellers' guide to becoming a legal fare dodger > By Ben Webster SNIP > It is also possible to save hundreds of pounds a year by buying a season > ticket that is never used for the stations it covers. > > Alex Nelson, who runs a rail travel agency in Chester-le-Street, Co Durham, > has a season ticket that covers the route between Ryde Esplanade and Ryde > St Johns on the Isle of Wight. The two stations are at opposite ends of the > town, and the season ticket is the cheapest in Britain at £104 a year. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > He has used his ticket on the Isle of Wight only once in four years but > saves £100 a year on other journeys. Errrmm.... Let's do the maths on this one. You spend £104 each year fro a season ticket. This saves you around £100 a year on other rail journeys. So, you don't really save a lot and you might even be down a few quid.... Verdict: Must try harder! Nick > Errrmm.... Let's do the maths on this one. You spend £104 each > year fro a season ticket. This saves you around £100 a year on > other rail journeys. So, you don't really save a lot and you > might even be down a few quid.... Verdict: Must try harder! The saving may have taken into account the cost of the season ticket. SignatureChris Game Justify my text? I'm sorry but it has no excuse. > One of the simplest tricks, which saves money on many routes, is to ask for > two return tickets that combine to form a whole journey. A passenger [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Mowbray to Birmingham for £9.60, the total would be £15.80, less than half > the amount requested by the clerk at Peterborough. I used this to my full advantage yesterday. I needed to make a one-way journey from Bristol to birmingham. The single fare is £26. But I bought two separate tickets - a First Class single from Bristol to Cheltenham at £11.60 (even cheaper than the Virgin First weekend upgrade!) and a Standard single from Cheltenham to Birmingham at £12.50. Total: £24.10, which is cheaper than the walk-on single *and* I got an empty First Class carriage for most of the journey! The Voyager was diverted via Newport so I managed to get my freebies from the shop twice. I presented both tickets to the Train Manager and said I'd move to cattle class after Cheltenham but the nice guy said it was ok if I remained in Club. Just think what would happen if everybody travelling on a one-way journey from Bristol to Birmingham did what I did. A First/Std journey being cheaper than the direct Std fare! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.