Oyster Card Zone Discussion

[159]

Hello all (sorry if this topic is in another thread already),

-I'm wondering: the Oyster zone has only expanded since its inception. Recently, the spur to Gatwick has been established. Many parts of the zone extend far beyond London into Essex, Hertfordshire and Bucks.
-Is it only a matter of time before it is extended to Reading, thanks to Crossrail? What about its distorted shape? If you look at the M25, the Oyster zone doesn't extend even close to it on the Surrey side and it goes past it on the Amersham side. What affects this logic of extensions? A journey from Horley to London can be made by Oyster, while one from Epsom cannot?

-Could this also be a product of TFL empire-building? TFL rail extends well into Essex, as does the Metropolitan line in Bucks, and the extensions into Herts have only been made because of LO's acquisition.
What are your opinions on the zone's borders and overall size? Should it be further extended?

-As a side note, do you think that the transition between tube and rail should be seamless (i.e. no need to tap out, then tap in at a London terminus to continue your journey underground)? Is this feature also a TFL revenue-stealing scheme, because commuters on commuter rail would prefer e.g. to go to South Wimbledon Northern line station instead of Wimbledon because the change at Waterloo (to continue onwards) would incur additional fees?

 

[PeterC]

I thought that the implementation of Oyster to Gatwick was imposed by government.
Most coverage outside of Greater London is simply down to those services being operated by TfL.

-As a side note, do you think that the transition between tube and rail should be seamless (i.e. no need to tap out, then tap in at a London terminus to continue your journey underground)? Is this feature also a TFL revenue-stealing scheme, because commuters on commuter rail would prefer e.g. to go to South Wimbledon Northern line station instead of Wimbledon because the change at Waterloo (to continue onwards) would incur additional fees?

No, it is because the layout of the terminus forces you to pass through a public space rather than staying "railside". If you use Moorgate or Stratford or Farringdon the interchange can be made without touching a reader if your whole journey is covered by Oyster as all platforms are behind the same barrier line.

 

[Mojo]

-As a side note, do you think that the transition between tube and rail should be seamless (i.e. no need to tap out, then tap in at a London terminus to continue your journey underground)? Is this feature also a TFL revenue-stealing scheme, because commuters on commuter rail would prefer e.g. to go to South Wimbledon Northern line station instead of Wimbledon because the change at Waterloo (to continue onwards) would incur additional fees?

How do you mean? If you are interchanging between Tube and Train at a London terminal then you get charged a single fare even if you have to pass through a gateline, this is called an Out of Station Interchange (OSI). Whilst interchange between LU and NR on certain NR routes can incur a higher fare than a single mode journey, this is as a result of the Train Operating Companies that want to charge a higher fare for certain journeys.

 

[159]

No, it is because the layout of the terminus forces you to pass through a public space rather than staying "railside". If you use Moorgate or Stratford or Farringdon the interchange can be made without touching a reader if your whole journey is covered by Oyster as all platforms are behind the same barrier line.

You need to tap in/out at Moorgate...
But independently, why couldn't a passageway be established between tube and train? I know there are legalities to deal with, but wouldn't it be physically simple in most cases?

 

[Kite159]

You need to tap in/out at Moorgate...
But independently, why couldn't a passageway be established between tube and train? I know there are legalities to deal with, but wouldn't it be physically simple in most cases?

You can interchange from Great Northern services to LU at Moorgate without having to touch out/in

 

[Mojo]

But independently, why couldn't a passageway be established between tube and train? I know there are legalities to deal with, but wouldn't it be physically simple in most cases?

There is no need to pass through a gateline when interchanging between LU and NR trains at Moorgate. At other stations, what would be the point of spending hundreds of millions of pounds (as well as the increased risk of fare evasion) in providing links between the LU and NR platforms other than perhaps the saving of a minute or two of walking time?

 

[plcd1]

Several points to answer.

1. Oyster and zones have extended to reflect the services that TfL operate or are responsible for procuring. Some additions have been the result of public pressure to have the benefits of the technology to them. Some TOCs have played ball and got in early such as C2C. The Gatwick extension was highly political involving government, MPs and London Assembly members droning on about it for months and months. The fact it destroyed the basic tenet of PAYG on Oyster always being cheapest seems not to matter to those in power.

2. I don't see this as a TfL "power grab". TfL are constrained by the Mayor, the DfT, the Secretary of State and other pressures from stakeholders. That would explain why seemingly logical PAYG extensions like Staines and Epsom haven't happened - SWT weren't in favour, C Grayling can't allow Oyster at Epsom as it would show how useless ITSO is etc etc. I think it is clear that some form of Oyster / Contactless based charging will apply to Reading on Crossrail. Whether the zones are extended is, to my mind, a moot point. If the Oyster "central system" has changed in the way I think it has then it can simply recognise each station individually for fares calculation purposes without grouping into zones. This would make it far easier for TfL to comply with its obligations not to harm existing fares structures on parallel services. We have already seen a "West Anglia + Shenfield" PAYG tariff with different charges to the normal TfL one. I'm not going to be shocked if we see a "West London & Heathrow Elizabeth Line tariff" start to emerge from May next year when TfL take over Heathrow Connect. It'll expand again in Dec 2019. There may be a choice as to how the fares charging is presented to the public but not that TfL don't really explain zones anymore for single fares - you're directed to a Single Fare Finder that is based around services and routes and not zones.

3. The drive for devolution of rail services (and thus fares and ticketing products) has been a cross party political move in London (and elsewhere). Patrick McLoughlin, when SoS at the DfT, was broadly in favour. The current holder of that role is not in favour. I rather suspect that if he could have reversed West Anglia and TfL Rail / Crossrail control sitting with TfL he would have done so. Thankfully he was too late to impose that sort of disastrous change.

4. I think we just have to accept that London has *never* had a single integrated rail charging tariff. Your observations about "open interchange" between lines on LUL and sometimes between LU / DLR / TOCs is as much to do with the physical nature of stations as anything else. It's about convenience and, in some places, safety. I was the client for network wide gating on LU. I had to fend off all sorts of nonsenses about gating LU off from every other operator with people being forced to go through gatelines between different operators. Anyone with even a limited knowledge of some interchanges would know this is lunacy and physically impossible without huge rebuilding costs that would never be justified by any revenue savings.

Although I've been away from revenue matters for a long time some of the TOC gating schemes horrify me. Without reopening old debates from elsewhere on this forum I wonder what people were thinking when they introduced some of the schemes that now exist. It's made worse when the TOCs then only have the gates in service for a matter of a few hours a day and certainly not the traffic day when trains are running. They're just a variant of the "nightmare" I tried to avoid happening on LU.

 

[matt_world2004]

Hello all (sorry if this topic is in another thread already),

-I'm wondering: the Oyster zone has only expanded since its inception. Recently, the spur to Gatwick has been established. Many parts of the zone extend far beyond London into Essex, Hertfordshire and Bucks.
-Is it only a matter of time before it is extended to Reading, thanks to Crossrail? What about its distorted shape? If you look at the M25, the Oyster zone doesn't extend even close to it on the Surrey side and it goes past it on the Amersham side. What affects this logic of extensions? A journey from Horley to London can be made by Oyster, while one from Epsom cannot?

-Could this also be a product of TFL empire-building? TFL rail extends well into Essex, as does the Metropolitan line in Bucks, and the extensions into Herts have only been made because of LO's acquisition.
What are your opinions on the zone's borders and overall size? Should it be further extended?

-As a side note, do you think that the transition between tube and rail should be seamless (i.e. no need to tap out, then tap in at a London terminus to continue your journey underground)? Is this feature also a TFL revenue-stealing scheme, because commuters on commuter rail would prefer e.g. to go to South Wimbledon Northern line station instead of Wimbledon because the change at Waterloo (to continue onwards) would incur additional fees?

Historically,the london transport network was larger than it was now, and the expansion of the oyster card zones is slower than the expansion of the London commuter network at the same time. Especially when compared to the old travelcard/capitalcard zones.

 

[swt_passenger]

-Is it only a matter of time before it is extended to Reading, thanks to Crossrail? What about its distorted shape? If you look at the M25, the Oyster zone doesn't extend even close to it on the Surrey side and it goes past it on the Amersham side.

The M25 is of no relevance to the demarcation of the Greater London area. Mentioning it in connection with Oyster is going down a blind alley.

Oyster PAYG allows for the concept of a route where specific 'special fares apply'. The best example has always been Watford Junction, which is not in the "London Fare Zones". If you tap in or out at Watford Junction the Oyster processing locates you in something called "Zone W", but there is no Zone W shown on the maps.

TfL have said that Oyster will extend to the limits of the Crossrail route. By the above logic that doesn't necessarily put such places or their stations "in the zones".

 

[Hadders]

Oyster is convenient for many journeys but don't fall into the trap of thinking that just because you can use an Oyster card the fares are cheaper...