Loss of rights on Cross-London e-tickets

[TUC]

Given that it is a standard flexible fare ticket and not an Advance, can validity legally be different for e-tickets vs paper tickets? I recognise the TfL issue, but is that TfL and the rail industry's problem rather than a legal change to ticket validity?

 

[RJ]

And some people have Maltese Cross tickets and still think they have to pay again for the tube!

Some people buy One Day Travelcards then use their contactless card to travel on the Underground. Not everyone knows what they are buying!

 

[crablab]

Get rid of e-tickets and issue ITSO compliant mobile tickets (which you add to Google Pay).

I understand they are working with "another wallet provider" to provide support for the standard soon, so take what you will of that.

 

[adrock1976]

* Side question, what is the proper name for "bog roll" tickets.

PRT - Paper Roll Tickets

They are very similar to the fax paper style tickets that were issued on the PERTIS machines that British Rail had back in the late 80s/early 90s.

I wouldn't object to making them a bit cheaper and removing the Tube validity. Many don't use it anyway, they walk, use a bus, a Sadiq cycle or a taxi.

I don't see the sense in abolishing them entirely.

Could you be kind enough to please explain what on earth a Sadiq cycle is?

I have heard of Boris Bikes (sponsored by Barclays - one of the banks that got bailed out) and Borismasters (New Routemasters) that were both brought in by the present occupant of 10 Downing Street when he was formerly the Mayor of London.

 

[Hadders]

Could you be kind enough to please explain what on earth a Sadiq cycle is?

I have heard of Boris Bikes (sponsored by Barclays - one of the banks that got bailed out) and Borismasters (New Routemasters) that were both brought in by the present occupant of 10 Downing Street when he was formerly the Mayor of London.

A Sadiq cycle is the same thing as a Boris bike (renamed as Sadiq is now the Mayor of London)

Barclays was not bailed out by the UK Government during the last financial crisis.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Get rid of e-tickets and issue ITSO compliant mobile tickets (which you add to Google Pay).

No, don't. E-tickets are a great format as they are simple and media-agnostic. That would be a huge, huge step backwards.

I'd rather see the cross London Tube validity removed with no discount than that.

 

[mrmatt]

I'm unconvinced the reason for TFL not wanting barcode scanning ticket gates is purely financial. They are far slower

Ever been behind someone trying to use Apple Pay without it ready? Now that's slow! Modern barcode scanners are pretty quick - i'd be surprised if a camera based scanner couldn't be almost as fast as someone using contactless.

 

[island]

Ever been behind someone trying to use Apple Pay without it ready? Now that's slow! Modern barcode scanners are pretty quick - i'd be surprised if a camera based scanner couldn't be almost as fast as someone using contactless.

Since some months ago the requirement to have Apple Pay “ready” has been removed, and (assuming one’s phone or watch is properly configured) the device need only be tapped on the reader at the station, without need to do anything prior.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Since some months ago the requirement to have Apple Pay “ready” has been removed, and (assuming one’s phone or watch is properly configured) the device need only be tapped on the reader at the station, without need to do anything prior.

While I've switched to Android, thank goodness for that! I found it cack-handed and rejected more often than not because I hadn't unlocked it the right amount of time before touching the barrier.

I assume that applies only to "transit mode"?

 

[Haywain]

Modern barcode scanners are pretty quick - i'd be surprised if a camera based scanner couldn't be almost as fast as someone using contactless

The problem is more to do with the user presenting the barcode than the device reading it.

 

[FenMan]

TBH, thinking more, it might be even easier to allow it for all flows but to require retailers to state, alongside the e-ticket option, "E-tickets cannot be used for cross-London transfers via London Underground", and that paper tickets via ToD must be offered in such cases.

Bonkers. Are you serious?

 

[Wallsendmag]

Isn't that exactly where we are at the moment? I haven't enabled any X London flows so eTickets aren't available. ToD on the other hand is.

 

[crablab]

Modern barcode scanners are pretty quick

It suffers from the same problem as the "people without Apple Pay ready".
NFC is pretty quick too!

No, don't. E-tickets are a great format as they are simple and media-agnostic. That would be a huge, huge step backwards.

Fine, offer e-tickets as an option but not on anything with a TfL connection/travelcard.

You could also issue this type of ITSO ticket onto a physical ITSO compliant card, so I would argue it is just as media agnostic.

I don't understand the obsession with Aztec. ITSO has been around for ages and is a global specification - put the effort into implementing and improving that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bonkers. Are you serious?

Yes. I prefer e-tickets and mostly do not use the LU transfer when crossing London, I tend to prefer bus, walk or "Sadiq cycle" to enjoy my time above ground, so I mostly don't care if it's offered or not. On the odd occasion when I was wanting to use the Tube I would just opt for a paper ticket.

I don't like the way people think I should not have that option other than by splitting tickets.

You could also issue this type of ITSO ticket onto a physical ITSO compliant card, so I would argue it is just as media agnostic.

Could you explain how I load one onto a sheet of A4 paper for my Nan?

The obsession with Aztec is because it is totally media-agnostic and basically futureproof. It will work on anything that can display it, even if that thing has not yet been invented.

But beyond that the true future is true e-ticketing - the ticket is in a database, and you just need a reference to it in some form (so even the booking reference would do). Not keeping things on devices which is prone to causing issues.

 

[cactustwirly]

To completely remove ambiguity it could be routed 'Not Underground'.


However, it is also overlooked that TfL have an additional problem with barcode ticket acceptance and that is that they require a fast flow of people through ticket barriers, without which they could find themselves having to close stations more frequently due to overcrowding as part of their safety case. It isn't clear that they have any confidence that such a flow could be maintained if people are using barcode tickets.

Which is complete bs as the e tickets are much faster to scan than a physical ticket, which has to be inserted read and removed, talking a good 5-10 seconds.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which is complete bs as the e tickets are much faster to scan than a physical ticket, which has to be inserted read and removed, talking a good 5-10 seconds.

No way does it take 5-10 seconds to pass a magstripe ticket through the barriers. You walk up to the barrier with it ready pointing the right way, the barrier takes it in (far more "nicely" than a newer National Rail gate) and you walk forwards, taking it as you go (if experienced, you can pass a barrier without breaking stride). It's slightly slower than Oyster but maybe by 0.5 seconds at most.

 

[cactustwirly]

No way does it take 5-10 seconds to pass a magstripe ticket through the barriers. You walk up to the barrier with it ready pointing the right way, the barrier takes it in (far more "nicely" than a newer National Rail gate) and you walk forwards, taking it as you go (if experienced, you can pass a barrier without breaking stride). It's slightly slower than Oyster but maybe by 0.5 seconds at most.

But a barcode scanner is much faster, it's almost instant, rather than a delay whilst the ticket is inserted and read.

Yes. I prefer e-tickets and mostly do not use the LU transfer when crossing London, I tend to prefer bus, walk or "Sadiq cycle" to enjoy my time above ground, so I mostly don't care if it's offered or not. On the odd occasion when I was wanting to use the Tube I would just opt for a paper ticket.

Yes you may prefer that, but most people prefer to use the tube as it's much faster and easier to use.
The cross London integration is important, as you don't need to faff around with oyster cards etc.
I don't even have oyster, I have never used it, I've always used paper tickets when using the underground because for me it's much easier and cheaper.

 

[JonathanH]

Yes. I prefer e-tickets and mostly do not use the LU transfer when crossing London, I tend to prefer bus, walk or "Sadiq cycle" to enjoy my time above ground, so I mostly don't care if it's offered or not. On the odd occasion when I was wanting to use the Tube I would just opt for a paper ticket.

I don't like the way people think I should not have that option other than by splitting tickets.

With respect, I simply don't believe that you have a majority view on cross-London transfer. Most people want to get somewhere in the shortest time rather than take their time to cross London. I accept that Euston to St Pancras or Kings Cross is best done above ground but most other transfers aren't.

Just because you like e-tickets is no reason to remove validity of cross London transfer for the majority. The danger here appears to be that if e-tickets become the normal that cross London transfer will be lost.

However, it should also be noted that, when PAYG replaces the current fare structure around London, extension of the current principles for fares within London will lead to the mixed-mode premium applying for such journeys - look up the paper fares for Redhill to St Albans (Any permitted +) and the Contactless fares.

Super off-peak day return (weekend only)
£12.90

Off peak day return
£19.30

Off-peak single fares on Contactless
£10.80 direct
£13.20 using the underground

So, not only is Contactless return more expensive in both cases than an off-peak day return, going via Victoria is more expensive. That is the future.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But a barcode scanner is much faster, it's almost instant, rather than a delay whilst the ticket is inserted and read.

It's not, because in practice it's quite hard to line it up unless you're using a pre folded piece of A4. You only have to spend 5 minutes at any barriered Northern station to see that.

A paper ticket in a well designed barrier (i.e. the type LU use, not the type used on NR) basically takes zero time to accept - you can process it without breaking stride.

 

[Wallsendmag]

It's not, because in practice it's quite hard to line it up unless you're using a pre folded piece of A4. You only have to spend 5 minutes at any barriered Northern station to see that.

A paper ticket in a well designed barrier (i.e. the type LU use, not the type used on NR) basically takes zero time to accept - you can process it without breaking stride.

Our updated gates are much quicker reading barcodes but still not as quick as cards.

 

[philthetube]

A barcode scanner is also slower because the info on the barcode has to be passed back to a data base and checked, whereas a paper ticket is read by the gate which is immediately opened. Not a huge time lag, but it doesn't help.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A barcode scanner is also slower because the info on the barcode has to be passed back to a data base and checked, whereas a paper ticket is read by the gate which is immediately opened. Not a huge time lag, but it doesn't help.

It doesn't need to do that. There's enough detail in the AZTEC code to determine validity.

They might be choosing to do that so they can do additional checks e.g. if it's been refunded, but it isn't necessary.

 

[alistairlees]

A barcode scanner is also slower because the info on the barcode has to be passed back to a data base and checked, whereas a paper ticket is read by the gate which is immediately opened. Not a huge time lag, but it doesn't help.

Just a local barcode server at the gateline, no more than that.

 

[cactustwirly]

It's not, because in practice it's quite hard to line it up unless you're using a pre folded piece of A4. You only have to spend 5 minutes at any barriered Northern station to see that.

A paper ticket in a well designed barrier (i.e. the type LU use, not the type used on NR) basically takes zero time to accept - you can process it without breaking stride.

My experience is the barcode on my phone cand it is faster than cards.

 

[Haywain]

All the argument about ITSO or barcode overlooks the fact that seat reservations are very difficult for the user to read when they are on a smart card. For long distance journeys it is far easier to have all the information in one place with the essentials in human readable form.

 

[JonathanH]

All the argument about ITSO or barcode overlooks the fact that seat reservations are very difficult for the user to read when they are on a smart card. For long distance journeys it is far easier to have all the information in one place with the essentials in human readable form.

I totally agree with that view. The idea that a blank card with a pretty picture on it can replace tickets for simple journeys was a bit misguided. Fine for season tickets and point to point PAYG but not to replace paper tickets for simple journeys.

 

[JB_B]

Which is complete bs as the e tickets are much faster to scan than a physical ticket, which has to be inserted read and removed, talking a good 5-10 seconds.

Five to ten seconds sounds like an overestimate,

Humans will be walking at maybe 1.5 m/s and I don't normally break my stride at NR barriers whether with CCST+magstripe or NFC/contactless. So, allowing for reach-ahead/behind, I think one second would be a reasonable uppper limit.

 

[Wallsendmag]

When we talked to TfL the figure was in milliseconds, Haywain may remember the actual figure but it was very quick.

 

[crablab]

Not keeping things on devices which is prone to causing issues.

There's enough detail in the AZTEC code to determine validity.

Contradiction, no?

All the argument about ITSO or barcode overlooks the fact that seat reservations are very difficult for the user to read when they are on a smart card. For long distance journeys it is far easier to have all the information in one place with the essentials in human readable form.

Fine for season tickets and point to point PAYG but not to replace paper tickets for simple journeys.

Agreed! Good news is that you can add ITSO-compliant tickets to your mobile wallet which will display such things as seat reservations.

Could you explain how I load one onto a sheet of A4 paper for my Nan?

Can you explain how I load my e-ticket onto an ITSO smartcard?

The equivalent to a printed e-ticket, I would argue, is a smartcard.

I appreciate that there are people who do not use mobile phones, but they would be in the minority these days and increasingly so.

---

We seem to be missing the important point that I might have to carry a binder full of e-tickets (or locate the right PDF on my phone), whereas I can just put all those on an ITSO card, plus my UK bus ticket and that tram ticket in Europe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Contradiction, no?

No. Having something within the barcode in a simple PDF or printed sheet of A4 is quite different from having something hidden within a device that can malfunction in some way.

(That said, there have been some issues with e-tickets "failing to decrypt", there's a thread on that. All that proves is that railway incompetence is capable of fouling up even the simplest system - when was the last time your boarding pass on an airline did that? For me never, and I've scanned rather more of them than the average person!).