Future ticket gating

[ukrob]

True, but many stoppers terminate at 8 or 9.

Many?

I can think of one an hour - one of the half hourly Oxford Road stoppers.

 

[VTPreston_Tez]

So everyone could just use the subway to access p1 / 2 then?

In theory all the platforms could be gated. Gates at the main entrance to access the trains and of course gates at the other entrances. You would however need to remove the pillars and possibly allow the mail platforms to be an entrance to the station to try to ease crowds but it could be done with a lot of planning. Same for most stations really.

I could see a need for Weymouth being gated at the open exit at the FGW platforms, with ticket checks at the main office it looks far too easy to evade.

 

[yorkie]

You would however need to remove the pillars...

You propose removing these pillars, is that right?

 

[IanXC]

Not really sure where they are going to placed at Huddersfield to be effective.Once you bought your ticket from the ticket office your guided onto the platform, behind the meat head revenue protection officers, through a small set of doors. There isn't any room for them by the small doors through onto platform 1,so once you've bought your ticket they're unecessary.

I would have thought they'd be placed pretty much exactly where the manual barrier is operated from at the moment? That could easily be fenced back to force those who have purchased a ticket from the booking office to have to pass through the barrier too.

 

[scrapy]

Re Huddersfield: They could be placed on platform 1 sideways on to the entrance similar to the arrangement at Lincoln or Grantham as it's a wide platform. This would free up booking hall space.

 

[IanXC]

Re Huddersfield: They could be placed on platform 1 sideways on to the entrance similar to the arrangement at Lincoln or Grantham as it's a wide platform. This would free up booking hall space.

I was thinking Newark Northgate style, and forgetting how wide polatform 1 is. How would the barriers fit compared to the lift?

 

[142094]

I would have thought there should be enough room at Huddersfield for barriers on platform 1. However would of course mean that the doors to the pubs would be locked permanently from the platforms.

 

[AndyHudds]

If the ticket barriers are going to side on to the entrance to platform 1 what about if your using platform 1? Would you not be required to use the ticket barrier? Platform 1 is wide but space has been taken up by the new stairs and lift.The platform also gets rammed at peak times with passengers disembarking and boarding so I can't see the powers at be wanting to clutter the platform slowing the passenger flow down.

IanXC probably has the right idea as to where the barriers could be placed.

 

[142094]

You would still have to use the barriers if using platform one, if they were placed parallel with the running lines. Wouldn't be that hard.

 

[Bevan Price]

Last I heard was that the idea for New St is to do a similar thing to Euston on it and not call the train platform until it is fairly close to the station. The platforms are meant to be gated too.

That sounds like a dangerous nightmare. It might work for a terminal station like Euston, but for a busy through station, with frequent local services, it would be chaotic - one lot of passengers fighting their way down narrow flights of steps / escalators against a flow of alighting passengers, and others irritated because they are trying to make a tight connection between different platforms.

 

[VTPreston_Tez]

You would however need to remove the pillars...

You propose removing these pillars, is that right?

Forget that just keep them there will be something that can be achieved

 

[yorkie]

Forget that just keep them there will be something that can be achieved

Hmm, glad you have seen sense! But I am surprised and alarmed you ever considered it was a possibility.

My advice would be to read through your posts carefully before submitting them in future, only press submit if you are sure that the post makes sense, is sensible and feasible

 

[Crossover]

Forget that just keep them there will be something that can be achieved

I think you may have more pressing issues than ticketing if you remove them :P

 

[Lampshade]

I think you may have more pressing issues than ticketing if you remove them :P

Yes I'm pretty sure that structural integrity is a more important issue than fare evasion hock:

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Sheffield is going to have ticket barriers.

The DfT has found £3 million to give to Sheffield City Council for the scheme.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-17576931

I guess the £3 million investment will be covered by the increase in ticket sales following the installation of barriers and resultant reduction in ticketless travel.

£3 million to build a footbridge over a station???? You could build dozens of complete decent-sized houses for that money (Ignoring the cost of buying the land, which I think is fair as there shouldn't be any significant land to buy to build a footbridge.

Why so expensive?

 

[mattyb1405]

That sounds like a dangerous nightmare. It might work for a terminal station like Euston, but for a busy through station, with frequent local services, it would be chaotic - one lot of passengers fighting their way down narrow flights of steps / escalators against a flow of alighting passengers, and others irritated because they are trying to make a tight connection between different platforms.

Not to mention when people are taking cycles down, luggage as they are going to International or families with push chairs trying to use the lifts! Does seem a tad bizarre if that happens

 

[Lampshade]

£3 million to build a footbridge over a station???? You could build dozens of complete decent-sized houses for that money (Ignoring the cost of buying the land, which I think is fair as there shouldn't be any significant land to buy to build a footbridge.

Why so expensive?

It needs to essentially be a like-for-like replacement for the current bridge, so with heating, lighting, lifts etc.

Although why the DfT can't just give up and accept barriers are not suitable for Sheffield is beyond me :roll:

 

[scarby]

How depressing. The rest of Europe gets along perfectly well with un-gated stations.

 

[jopsuk]

It's OK, give it ten-twenty years, when all major manned stations are gated, and someone will decide to revert back to "open" stations, as BR did

 

[HH]

How depressing. The rest of Europe gets along perfectly well with un-gated stations.

How do you know that they get by perfectly well? Facts and figures please.

 

[jon0844]

The open station concept seemed rather flawed to me, and made even less plausible as more trains are introduced (and DOO ones at that) and they get busier to make on-board checking or even random checks less easy/likely.

Throw in rolling stock where you can't move easily from one set to another and I really wonder why BR decided to effectively make so much of the network free to use! And all that revenue lost over the years must add up to quite a few quid (not least the added congestion from people who might not be there if they had to pay).

Maybe with smart ticketing and validation points dotted around (including on the train) to more accurately charge you, complete with hefty penalties for being caught, could make the stations open once more - but I don't think society is moving towards a time where people will do the right thing. I see it as getting more and more 'dog eat dog' and people always chancing - especially when the punishment for getting caught can be so slim.

Perhaps the TOCs now going for byelaw 18 offences and seeking court/out-of-court settlements that are far more than a nice easy £20 penalty fare might deter people a little more though.

One reason I'd like to see gates kept isn't just revenue protection but creating a bit of protection for the railway and passengers - especially if gates are used all day and night, with staff kept at stations instead of them being locked up with side gates left open.

 

[Lampshade]

How do you know that they get by perfectly well? Facts and figures please.

Well otherwise they'd have barriers :roll:

 

[HH]

Well otherwise they'd have barriers :roll:

Um, no. They might just be inefficient. BR never had gates. Were they getting on fine? :roll::roll::roll:

 

[jopsuk]

BR did have (manual) gates- especially at terminals, each platform had a gate (think the old expanding lattice types ones for example at Liverpool Street and Waterloo) and they did ticket checks there. They then got rid of them, under the "open stations" program, and started reintroducing them a few years later.

 

[David Goddard]

Would much rather see open stations, conductors checking tickets on every train (two if appropriate) and hefty fines for fare evasion.

 

[HH]

BR did have (manual) gates- especially at terminals, each platform had a gate (think the old expanding lattice types ones for example at Liverpool Street and Waterloo) and they did ticket checks there. They then got rid of them, under the "open stations" program, and started reintroducing them a few years later.

True, however were you aware that there was a massive problem with fraud by the gate staff?

But at the time of privatisation BR was in a state of denial on ticketless travel. I recall a video produced for internal consumption whereby it claimed that ticketless travel was not an issue. And then automatic ticket gates were introduced and ticket sales from affected stations increased substantially. I know, for instance, that when gates were introduced at Shenfield and Chelmsford, revenue flow between the two stations increased by 60%. Now this will be an extreme example, but ticket gates in Glasgow saw a revenue increase well into double figures.

The case for ticket gates has been proven time and again. Of course it doesn't suit some people that the privatised railway has increased fares collection - that might sound like a good news story...

 

[PR1Berske]

Whilst I don't agree with knocking down half of Preston station just to put up gates is a good idea the point being made actually indicates the difficulty of introducing modern ticket gates in very old buildings.

The layout of Preston - and off the top of my head, Lancaster and Carlisle too - is such that it's very easy to avoid buying a ticket. I know that ticket inspection on board trains, especially Northern, has improved. However it can still be possible to sneak onto and out of Preston without buying a ticket. It's not at all easy to build modern gates across the ticket office, subways and/or footbridges without leaving some change in the budget for a rainy day.

 

[HH]

Yes, not every station can be gated; some would have problems with planning consent; some would not pay back their cost, or simply cost too much to run (multiple gatelines, except at the largest stations, are an issue). Each case needs to be judged on its merits.

 

[jon0844]

Even King's Cross with its multiple gates (split by large bits of wall) has resulted in them being left open for a lot of the day. I can see cost being an issue at smaller stations with multiple entrances needing to be protected.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

The layout of Preston - and off the top of my head, Lancaster and Carlisle too - is such that it's very easy to avoid buying a ticket.

Lancaster and Preston yes, there's multiple ways out of each: Preston has the booking office, footbridge and subway, whilst Lancaster has the booking office, plus one exit at either end of p3 I think, one to the car park certainly. Carlisle on the other hand I think is only accessible via the booking office, so could be gated I think.

I will state now that I do approve of ticket gates, but at metro / suburban stations only, plus their relevant terminal, like the Dartford Loop lines or around South London for example. I am very sceptical of the need for them at stations like Carlisle and York however.