Can AZTEC (e-)tickets be CCST (Credit card sized tickets)?

[bakerstreet]

Interested in your thoughts here.

Given Aztec coded tickets are now the norm is there any particular reason why Aztec tickets bought at the station cannot be credit card sized?

Attached, the full sized Aztec ticket.




Next, the full size ticket next to ticket wallet for comparison



Next, the Aztec ticket folded to fit wallet, displaying all the information on the ticket (except the valid until which could be moved elsewhere. perhaps to beneath the Aztec code )



Finally, the same folded Aztec ticket with an existing CCST on top to show scale.




So, is there anything which is logistically, legally, practically stopping the production of machine issued Aztec e-tickets being printed on CCST stock (perhaps without the magnetic strip).

It would be my preferred but perhaps there have been focus groups which conclude others have a desire for these to be larger than a CCST.

 

[Haywain]

It's not going to happen because paper rolls are far cheaper than cut card.

 

[bakerstreet]

It's not going to happen because paper rolls are far cheaper than cut card.

So print it on paper

 

[crablab]

So, is there anything which is logistically, legally, practically stopping the production of machine issued Aztec e-tickets being printed on CCST stock (perhaps without the magnetic strip).

Aztec on CCST were available for a short period in the VTEC days.

I imagine the issues were:
- relatively small print area for the Aztec to be readable, plus the human readable information
- higher ticket stock and printing costs - the machines are bespoke and not used anywhere else in the world, whereas PRT is just a thermal receipt printable paper
- customer confusion about how to use the ticket (looks like a magstripe one, but is supposed to be used optically)

I think it'd be a challenge to get all the information plus a large Aztec on a CCST in some of the edge cases, and the industry wants to move away from expensive CCST in any case.

So print it on paper

Is it the size or the medium that you're primarily concerned about?

German tickets issued by DB are also not CC sized.

 

[bakerstreet]

Aztec on CCST were available for a short period in the VTEC days.

I imagine the issues were:
- relatively small print area for the Aztec to be readable, plus the human readable information
- higher ticket stock and printing costs - the machines are bespoke and not used anywhere else in the world, whereas PRT is just a thermal receipt printable paper
- customer confusion about how to use the ticket (looks like a magstripe one, but is supposed to be used optically)

I think it'd be a challenge to get all the information plus a large Aztec on a CCST in some of the edge cases, and the industry wants to move away from expensive CCST in any case.


Is it the size or the medium that you're primarily concerned about?

German tickets issued by DB are also not CC sized.

I’d like it to fit into a national rail ticket wallet

 

[Ashley Hill]

CCST with Aztec codes are appearing in the West of England. Perhaps it’s to do with the roll out of new ticket machines in GWR booking offices.

 

[Haywain]

I’d like it to fit into a national rail ticket wallet

I can fit paper roll tickets into a ticket wallet. It's about how you fold them.

 

[bakerstreet]

I can fit paper roll tickets into a ticket wallet. It's about how you fold them.

Good point which is why I included same in original post.

 

[Hadders]

It would be helpful if a PRT ticket, when folded in half, was the size of a CCST.

 

[stadler]

CCST with Aztec codes are appearing in the West of England. Perhaps it’s to do with the roll out of new ticket machines in GWR booking offices.

What is the point of an Aztec code on a CCST ticket? If it is a CCST ticket then it has a mag stripe to use to go through the barriers which means an Aztec code as well is a bit unnecessary?

I do not suppose anyone has any photos of these new CCST with Aztec tickets that have started appearing? I am curious if the CCST ticket layout has been redesigned in order to fit the Aztec code on it?

 

[The exile]

I’d like it to fit into a national rail ticket wallet

Or indeed into a normal wallet. Height is almost more critical than length.

 

[crablab]

I do not suppose anyone has any photos of these new CCST with Aztec tickets that have started appearing?

They aren't new.

 

[Hadders]

What is the point of an Aztec code on a CCST ticket? If it is a CCST ticket then it has a mag stripe to use to go through the barriers which means an Aztec code as well is a bit unnecessary?

It is advantageous to get rid of mag stripes for a nmber of reasons:

1. Easier to print - printers don't require capability to encode mag stripes
2. Cheaper - the mag stripe can be removed from tickets
3. Ticket barriers need fewer moving parts thus saving on maintenance
4. Ticket scans on AZTEC tickets are stored centrally thus enabling investigation into misuse

 

[thelongestroad]

What is the point of an Aztec code on a CCST ticket? If it is a CCST ticket then it has a mag stripe to use to go through the barriers which means an Aztec code as well is a bit unnecessary?

I do not suppose anyone has any photos of these new CCST with Aztec tickets that have started appearing? I am curious if the CCST ticket layout has been redesigned in order to fit the Aztec code on it?

Purely a guess... issuing CCSTs maintain the ability to sell Travelcards and cross-London tickets which are a big part of GWR's business into Paddington. We all know the magstripes are not particularly reliable, so the barcode makes sense for the NR stations with barcode reader barriers/onboard inspection.

So I guess it's a revenue protection, reliability and compatibility with the Tube.

 

[Haywain]

It is advantageous to get rid of mag stripes for a nmber of reasons:

1. Easier to print - printers don't require capability to encode mag stripes
2. Cheaper - the mag stripe can be removed from tickets
3. Ticket barriers need fewer moving parts thus saving on maintenance
4. Ticket scans on AZTEC tickets are stored centrally thus enabling investigation into misuse

Mag stripes carry a very limited amount of data.
Mag stripe data is very easily corrupted.

 

[transportphoto]

I do not suppose anyone has any photos of these new CCST with Aztec tickets that have started appearing? I am curious if the CCST ticket layout has been redesigned in order to fit the Aztec code on it?

The layout hasn’t been redesigned - simply the addition of a small Aztec code under the date into otherwise blank space (aligned with “See restrictions nre.co.uk” and “Refundable and exchangeable for a fee” lines of text). GWR’s ticket offices using TTK software are now issuing these.

The layout is redesigned slightly for excesses.

The Aztec code is not as detailed and is encoded differently.

 

[Haywain]

The Aztec code is not as detailed and is encoded differently.

I'm surprised that it's seen as worthwhile. When East Coast tried it the barcode couldn’t carry a significant amount of useful data.

 

[Wallsendmag]

CCST with Aztec codes are appearing in the West of England. Perhaps it’s to do with the roll out of new ticket machines in GWR booking offices.

The layout hasn’t been redesigned - simply the addition of a small Aztec code under the date into otherwise blank space (aligned with “See restrictions nre.co.uk” and “Refundable and exchangeable for a fee” lines of text). GWR’s ticket offices using TTK software are now issuing these.

The layout is redesigned slightly for excesses.

The Aztec code is not as detailed and is encoded differently.

Type 11 instead of type 6 barcodes I presume

 

[Ashley Hill]

By being scannable it’s also proof of use thus preventing dubious refunds.

 

[Wallsendmag]

What is the point of an Aztec code on a CCST ticket? If it is a CCST ticket then it has a mag stripe to use to go through the barriers which means an Aztec code as well is a bit unnecessary?

I do not suppose anyone has any photos of these new CCST with Aztec tickets that have started appearing? I am curious if the CCST ticket layout has been redesigned in order to fit the Aztec code on it?

New being a strange word for something that the long gone GNER had

 

[YorkC]

From memory, quite a few years ago (I reckon late 2010s) for a while these printed on open tickets with destination to/from Manchester Airport. I had RP scan the code before going through the barriers there.

 

[Haywain]

I’d like it to fit into a national rail ticket wallet

Like this:

 

[_toommm_]

Interested in your thoughts here.

Given Aztec coded tickets are now the norm is there any particular reason why Aztec tickets bought at the station cannot be credit card sized?

Attached, the full sized Aztec ticket.

View attachment 180116


Next, the full size ticket next to ticket wallet for comparison

View attachment 180117

Next, the Aztec ticket folded to fit wallet, displaying all the information on the ticket (except the valid until which could be moved elsewhere. perhaps to beneath the Aztec code )

View attachment 180113

Finally, the same folded Aztec ticket with an existing CCST on top to show scale.

View attachment 180114


So, is there anything which is logistically, legally, practically stopping the production of machine issued Aztec e-tickets being printed on CCST stock (perhaps without the magnetic strip).

It would be my preferred but perhaps there have been focus groups which conclude others have a desire for these to be larger than a CCST.

Presumably you would just need to fold it such that the Aztec code is visible as most onboard staff will just scan that (other than maybe TPE if they're still in the dispute about scanning tickets if anyone can confirm that?)

 

[bakerstreet]

Like this:

No, because yours cannot be manually read and does not display all the relevant information.

I demonstrated folding in the original post in such a way that all of the information would fit on a credit card sized ticket.

I know a ticket can be folded but I also know that all the information on that ticket, because of the way I folded it, would fit on a ticket which was credit card sized


My question is only this.

Is there a logical reason why it cannot it be presented to the passenger in this way in the first place on something credit card sized.

I’m simply wondering what the reason is.

 

[dodecahedron67]

(other than maybe TPE if they're still in the dispute about scanning tickets if anyone can confirm that?)

Correct

 

[superalbs]

CCST with Aztec codes are appearing in the West of England. Perhaps it’s to do with the roll out of new ticket machines in GWR booking offices.

Yes I've noticed that too! I thought there was a trial on VTEC/LNER that deemed this a failure because the codes were too small?

 

[saismee]

No, because yours cannot be manually read and does not display all the relevant information.

Neither does the way you have folded it as the end date is covered (pretty much the first thing most staff will be looking for, beyond the start/end station).

I think it was utterly stupid for the paper tickets to not be printed on CCST-sized paper, as the aztec code could certainly fit on it. It's almost definitely too late for it to be changed now though, as these printers have already been put everywhere. Really unfortunate as it makes the paper tickets a pain to use... maybe that's the goal so people are more inclined to use e-tickets. If they want e-tickets to be used by everyone, maybe they should start providing charging points in stations - a phone can run out of charge but a paper ticket can't!

 

[renegademaster]

I'm pretty sure I've seen them from avanti gaurds

 

[Adam Williams]

Is there a logical reason why it cannot it be presented to the passenger in this way in the first place on something credit card sized.

The print resolution and the size of the CCST ticket is too poor to be able to print a type 06 barcode in a way which would still allow the ticket details to be laid out and for the barcode to be able to be scanned reliably. Today's E-Ticket/PRT barcodes need 7 or 8 layers.

The ones that are sometimes printed on CCST are, as @Wallsendmag suggested, so-called type 11 barcodes which only use 4 layers. This barcode format is obsolete, and no longer accredited.

 

[bakerstreet]

Neither does the way you have folded it as the end date is covered (pretty much the first thing most staff will be looking for, beyond the start/end station).

I think it was utterly stupid for the paper tickets to not be printed on CCST-sized paper, as the aztec code could certainly fit on it. It's almost definitely too late for it to be changed now though, as these printers have already been put everywhere. Really unfortunate as it makes the paper tickets a pain to use... maybe that's the goal so people are more inclined to use e-tickets. If they want e-tickets to be used by everyone, maybe they should start providing charging points in stations - a phone can run out of charge but a paper ticket can't!

understood, although in the first post I make that point and suggest that the valid until date could easily fit underneath the Aztec code. There is so much free space.

A few people have suggested that not everything would fit on a credit card sized ticket.

I understand this point of view.

But the railway is already printing full Aztec codes in a way that they would fit on a credit card size ticket, and all the other information could fit on it too, if just the valid until date were moved to beneath the Aztec code.

I’m happy to leave this here, but just to conclude – my question was simply raised because I felt able to fold my ticket in such a way that everything needed to be seen could fit into a credit card size ticket.

Agreed not the valid until date, but there is enough free space for this to appear beneath the Aztec code.

Nothing I’ve seen above explains to me why this couldn’t be offered on a credit size ticket for the passenger benefit.

The Aztec code on my ticket at the size printed scanned repeatedly successfully

I also wondered if any focus groups had been consulted as to whether there was specifically a passenger desire for PRT tickets to be larger than credit card sized.

Thank you for all your input, it’s all been interesting.