Tom Edwards over at BBC London is reporting that discussions are now actively underway between the DfT, TfL and FCC over the expansion of Oyster onto more services.
TfL first mooted the idea of further expanding Oyster’s sphere back in February, when it received a short mention in the one year review of the Oyster PAYG rollout:
TfL is making some progress on discussions about stations on First Capital Connect such as St. Albans, on First Great Western such as Slough, on Southeastern such as Dartford and on Southwest Trains such as the Shepperton branch.
Since then, however, there has been no mention of progress and the BBC piece, confirmed by other sources, represents the first real indication that progress is being made.
As an Operator, First were always likely to be at the forefront of any further Oyster expansion. Alongside Southern, they cover a higher-than-average number of gated railway stations and are also responsible for Thameslink. Sources suggest they were also one of the first TOCs to sign on for the expansion of Oyster PAYG onto national rail services as well.
If the infrastructure is there to support it, smart ticketing can have a positive impact both on casual travelling and simplification of administration. Several TOCs (such as SWT) have also started to realise that it potentially presents opportunities to reduce Ticket Office staffing as well, following TfL’s recent example. FCC are likely aware of all these opportunities, and with ITSO, the official national rail smart card standard, still immature, Oyster has rapidly become the defacto standard.
From TfL’s perspective, any expansion of the system is also a relative no-brainer – particularly if it takes Oyster onto services which they have half an eye to controlling themselves anyway. As our recent piece on the Future of Franchising highlighted, TfL’s own ambitions (for relatively good reasons) currently stretch well out from the London core – taking in both the lines currently mooted for this Oyster expansion. Anything in either perception or reality that begins to link those services in further with TfL is thus a positive. Similarly, it also gives TfL further leverage over the relationship between Oyster and ITSO.
Beyond this, the form that a further expansion of Oyster onto TOC services takes may also begin to give TfL some practical ideas as to how to address the big blue Oyster Elephant currently lurking in its room – Crossrail.
Oyster itself will no doubt have evolved further by the time Crossrail’s passenger services begin. Whatever visage it then wears, however, the simple fact is that TfL, which will operate Crossrail as a Concession in largely the same way as it operates the Overground, will need to roll Oyster out across its full length – if not for practical and passenger reasons, then most definitely for political ones. Any work that has been done to take its smart ticketing beyond London’s borders will thus no doubt prove valuable in the long run.
Returning to the specifics of the current plans between TfL and the DfT/First Group, although details are relatively scarce, sources suggest that the current discussions are focused on expanding Oyster acceptance out as far as St Albans on Thameslink, and out onto the Hertford Loop as far as Hertford North.
Halting Oyster acceptance here for now rather than continuing on to include Stevenage, an increasingly major commuter hub, may initially seem strange. It is worth remembering, however, that by limiting the reach to the railway stations suggested above the need to involve TOCs other than FCC is, for now at least, avoided.
Just what form this expansion might take, and how it might affect fares and ticketing, is currently unclear. As the BBC article hints at, one option might be to include the additional stations into the non-London Travelcard Zones (7-9). The outer of these, Zone 9, currently features only Amersham and Chesham, and thus would seem a reasonable fit for the additional stations. Ultimately, however, this should be seen as little more than speculation at this point.
Similarly, timescales are also currently unknown, although sources suggest that we are unlikely to see any practical implemenation until the end of Q1 2012.
Whatever the current situation, it is clear that Oyster’s scope is likely to be expanded once again in the not too distant future. For even if the current negotiations with First fall through, it seems unlikely that similar discussions are not taking place with other TOCs (most likely Southern at the very least).
Ultimately this is likely good news for passengers. It does, however, contain an element of risk. As we’ve discussed before, Oyster is becoming an increasingly complex beast, mostly because of the fundamentally flawed fares structure that currently exists within London and beyond. If Oyster is to be extended out even further, then that will put even more strain on the system’s ability to keep things simple for passengers and make a reform of fares and ticketing even more crucial.
As the recent Franchise piece highlighted, fare reform is something that TfL are very much committed to, and to which the TOCs and the DfT have been largely ambivalent so far. Whether a further expansion of Oyster turns out to be the Trojan Horse which allows TfL to finally breach that resistance will be interesting to see.
Chiltern Railways are apparently to trial contactless EMV cards between Bicester and Oxford.
From LinkedIn:
https://uk.linkedin.com/pub/ola-ayodele/15/910/359
“EMV Project Manager
Chiltern Railways
2014 – Present (1 year)London, United Kingdom
The objective of this project is to implement and pilot contactless travel on the new Bicester – Oxford route on Chiltern Railways. This is a partnership between Chiltern Railways, DfT and TfL.”
Slough should be in Oyster Zone 8. It is a very similar distance from central London as Brentwood in the East?
‘…… we are unlikely to see any practical implemenation until the end of Q1 2012’. Should that be 2022 (and implementation)?
@Littlejohn
This article was written 13 September 2011, so the implementation date may well be correct.
Err a few comments.
Oyster is at its design limits in terms of how many “zones” can be recognised. It is a matter of conjecture as to what zone Slough should or should not be in. It will gain Oyster when Crossrail services commence in December 2019. The Oyster system should have been rejigged by December 2018 but I am sceptical as to whether DfT would be willing to extend Oyster prior to that. We will see what transpires.
Oyster extension to the north of London on the former FCC but now GTR routes has effectively been killed stone dead. Partly because of the Oyster system constraints but also because DfT are pushing GTR to extend “the Key” to these routes. I understand season ticket acceptance on “the Key” is now in place on most of the Great Northern route and on Thameslink to Bedford. Unfortunately there are “holes” at Peterborough (a Virgin station) and Cambridge (an Abellio station). At present you cannot buy single or return tickets on the Key for stations north of the Thames nor is the “Key Go” PAYG type product valid there either. It’s all a bit of a thin and unattractive customer proposition at the moment.
First / MTR are apparently going to do their “own thing” on SWT with regards to smart ticketing and the word Oyster got nowhere near the press releases when the franchise award was announced. Clearly the DfT don’t want any that naughty shellfish anywhere near “their” railway. 😉
We did get Oyster extended to Shenfield, Gatwick Airport, Swanley, Dartford, Cheshunt / Hertford East and on HS1 to Stratford.
@WW: Oyster to Dunton Green and Sevenoaks probably fall into same category. But if they were added then it would be logical to add Eynsford, Shoreham (Kent), Otford and Bat & Ball as well.
As an aside some SE trains now also have warning on the display to say that Oyster is not valid beyond Dartford, Swanley and Knockholt. IIRC, there are no voice announcements for this.
Walthamstow Writer 3 July 2017 at 14:15
“We did get Oyster extended ………………….. on HS1 to Stratford.”
Only pay as you go.
And through tickets to and from Stratford International (your friendly neighbourhood high-speed station) via St Pancras and / or Kings Cross still cost a lot more than separate tickets.
@ SHLR – you are probably correct and if TfL had been allowed to take on more devolved services these stns would have been added in due course. I am sceptical that the new South Eastern franchise will include any Oyster extensions as it won’t fit the DfT narrative about their ideas being “superior” to those of TfL and the Mayor. You can see this already in the way the consultation for South Eastern has “stolen” some aspects of TfL’s preferred operating philosophy.
@ Alan G – yes are right. Yet again I fall foul of not being sufficiently precise.
Will Oyster extended to Slough when Crossrail opens?
@Dan
Yes, and beyond to Reading (or, at-worst, Maidenhead). However there’s major issues to work out, and no details about zones and pricing has been released yet (hopefully we’ll hear about Heathrow NR’s zone soon, given TfL Rail will start going there in May). TfL will not have a service that doesn’t have Oyster validity and it was part of the Crossrail bill
—-
Given Grayling and the DfT are actively happy to work with Khan and TfL wrt on bringing about Crossrail 2, presumably there’s been a thawing in DfT opposition to further extension of Oyster beyond the boundary? After all, they have just started talking about TfL services to Grayling’s backyard of Epsom!
@ Si – sorry to be “Mr Doom and Gloom” but there is nothing in the public domain to say who will be responsible for operating CR2 nor what fares and ticketing will apply. I am sure City Hall and TfL would like the letting of the operating contract and fare setting to be their responsibility but there is no Bill in place yet never mind an Act. I also don’t believe any of the recent announcement to be a “thaw”. It was politically expedient for the DfT to do what they did to shift the CR2 spotlight back to the Mayor and TfL. DfT have not approved the business case nor scope nor affordability nor funding mechanism. We have gone precisely nowhere on CR2. If nothing else the announcement was a masterpiece in “conning” the media and public that something had happened when it had not.
The recent announcement on Heathrow was a rare situation where DfT and TfL interests coincided so a mutually acceptable way forward was likely there.
@WW – so what you are saying is that the announcement (whose main problem was really bad timing) that turned the North from disappointed with Grayling/DfT to angry at them was a totally meaningless puff piece? The evidence of political incompetance just grows and grows.
@SI: Actually the timing was perfect, just in time to allow the anger to die down again before parliament resumes in the autumn.
@SHLR – yes, the timing was “perfect” but the point might be that there was actually nothing to be said – which might have been even better?
@ Si – yes you can frame it like that but my sense is that the DfT were very keen to get out of the “CR2 firing line” if only for a few months. The fact the message “upset” the North is probably not Mr Grayling’s key concern. He wanted to get out of the Mayor’s (and his supporters) line of attack. You can argue that anywhere that is not London is permanently upset with the level of transport spending so if that upset gets a bit louder for a while does it really resonate or affect those in the DfT? Doubtful if you ask me.
What Mr Grayling does not want is his old adversary (Mr Khan) being able to lob rocks at the DfT week after week. He also doesn’t want nagging letters and motions from the London Assembly nor groups like the London Chamber of Commerce and others knocking on his door repeatedly saying “you must sign off CR2 now”. I don’t believe a word Mr G is saying on CR2 because I don’t think he has got any sign off on CR2 from the Prime Minister or the Chancellor / HMT about a projected spend of £15bn never mind any of the detail. The country hasn’t actually got a recognisable economic policy at the moment and it’s clear Mr Hammond is trying to avoid any additional spending at all because of the risks around a certain predominant policy issue that cannot be named on this blog but is consuming about 98% of the Govt’s attention.
@WW
It’s not just the North complaining about this “announcement”. I was disappointed to read Kerry McCarthy stating:
This week, it looks doubtful that the electrification of the Great Western Railway into [Bristol] Temple Meads station will ever go ahead. The Transport Secretary, Chris Grayling, has cancelled electrification works between Liverpool-Manchester-Newcastle, as well as Cardiff-Swansea, while agreeing billions more in funding for Crossrail 2 – a new underground train line from his constituency through central London.
As we know, it’s indefinite postponement (not cancellation) of Bristol TM to Thingley Junction and Bristol Parkway, Crossrail 2 isn’t funded, and the scheme really important to Bristol – requadrification of Filton Bank – is in progress, so it’s a case of “blame the SoS for anything, anywhere, which isn’t happening”. While I agree with you that I doubt Grayling cares, Tory Central Office might start to if this type of story starts to surface from across the country.
@ Ian S – well unfortunately for Mr Grayling he is in effective control of Network Rail and also all, bar 4, franchises. As soon as he starts taking decisions to axe things completely and cite bi-modes as the solution then it’s not exactly a suprise that people will fear cancellation for schemes close to their heart even if the facts, as of now, state otherwise.
There would have to be a monumental and long lasting shift in public opinion and voting attention for Tory Central Office to be even slightly worried about railway issues. If all the moans were coming from Surrey, Sussex, Kent and Hampshire then they may well be more concerned. However Wales and the North don’t really count. East Anglia was another danger zone on rail matters but a new franchise with oodles of new trains and a few “headline” fast journeys seems to have calmed matters for now. It’ll all kick off again if the new rolling stock is unreliable and the new timetables don’t work but that’s a fair few years away.
WW
even with the complete disconnect ( Oops, pun unintended ) between the “Diesel (or bi-mode) is better” on rail & “electric is better” on roads … with opposite “reasons” given for each case?
IMHO, someone is going to “notice” this in public, & then the discussion will turn interesting.
Greg: Some consistency can be re-introduced by rephrasing the argument into “power delivered through overhead wiring = bad, power brought with you on the vehicle (as fuel, charged batteries, flywheels, compressed air, bionic duckweed or whatever) = good”. So electrified railways (and also trams and trolleybuses) are bad because it costs lots to put the wires up, and they look untidy.
Malcom
How does one do a totally ironic smiley?
Because, as your “explanation” shows, it’s a sham “argument” … never mind.
I think the issue is Oyster against the Key as a payment mechanism is mixed up here. It doesn’t matter how you pay, especially as Contactless and Phone payments are taking off, but the structure of the fares underneath.
We have had “Oyster” extension to Gatwick which allows us to use Oyster or Contactless for payment. What this has done is created another layer of fares not on a Zonal basis, which the Oyster Fare is often more expensive than paper or Key fares. So, travellers have to make a complex calculation before buying a ticket to work out which is going to be cheapest.
When this was brought up as part of a long running campaign to get fair fares with DfT the response was “well at least you don’t have to queue at the ticket office”. In other words, the long standing Oyster commitment that you will be charged the cheapest fares does not apply along the line to Gatwick.
What the passengers want is a simple fare structure they can understand and travel without complexity. That is exactly what the Zonal system does in London and the Key fails to do as most passengers being forced onto the Key want to travel to London and find the Oyster zone convenience/simplicity is just not there.
The Shires are starting to catch on to this (Yes – @WW they are moaning) and the DfT is getting pressure now that the Shires want some money spent on their Railways (not on HS2 and London Schemes like Thameslink and Crossrail) and a simple travel payment system like Oyster. Whether DfT will take any notice we will have to see.
I had an extraordinary issue in Glasgow last week. I bought two singles @ £2.20 each but it cost £10 as the bus company didn’t give change and I didn’t have any. Next day, used the same operator for a slightly different (but more or less same origin and destination) and the day fare was £2.20. Next day used a different operator (no.2) who charged £4.20 for a day ticket (that operator only) and they did give change although I had acquired some by then. The day ticket price seemed reasonable. On the last day used operator no.2 for two singles back to central Glasgow. Cracked it, I thought. I had by 2x £2.20 ready but was told “single is £4.60 each or £4.20 for a day ticket”. Inevitably I had insufficient change so offered a £20 note, no change available despite previous day’s experience. The bus driver charged a special fare based on what change we did have.
I’m aware there is some sort of special ticket/smartcard in Glasgow – lots of people were using one, but I found no easy way a) to find out how it worked and b) how to obtain one.
The moral of this story – London is truly lucky to have Oyster and contactless.
Emphasing the point – it’s sometimes easy to forget how advanced London is….. TFGM (transport for G Manchester) told me today they’re aiming to trial contactless in 2019. Why they need two years to introduce something that already works in London….
Island Dweller: I imagine that TfL took a lot longer than two years to go from deciding to use contactless to the first public trial. Of course TFGM may be remiss in not having started soon enough, but I doubt if the comparison with London means anything at all – completely different fare system, different organisation altogether.
Recent comments remind us how fortunate London is to have escaped so many of the ill effects of bus deregulation.
Malcolm
IIRC the ideologues ( Ridley et al ) were determined to have bus deregulation in London, but were stopped by a combination of London Transport & some MP
‘s, pointing out the chaos that would result ( As it has done elsewhere ) – there are also rumours that LT simply said: “If you do that, we will refuse to co-operate or work with it & London will grind to a standstill on day one …”Does Lord Dawlish have any useful recollections of those events?
@ 100&30 – Glasgow / Strathcylde ticketing is awful. There is the long standing Zone Card season ticket which covers a huge area. There is also a multi modal day ticket but, unfortunately, not all operators participate in the scheme. McGills, who took over Arriva’s old west of Glasgow operation, and Glasgow Citybus are notable non participants. I recently tried to research some trips in Glasgow and was almost driven insane by the appalling lack of simple information such as a proper city centre bus map showing all services. Now that may be something of a challenge but TfL can manage it.
@ Island Dweller – I always remember the boasts of Greater Manchester PTE who were going to have the first integrated smartcard in the country. They were going to “flick the nose” of us upstarts from London with our silly Prestige project (later Oyster). Of course it all collapsed in a heap and went precisely nowhere because the bus operators wouldn’t co-operate (far more competiton back then), Metrolink was not yet there and rail privatisation meant BR weren’t interested. Even now the (non smart) ticket range is a disaster because of the way Metrolink is funded. Their latest effort – the “Getmethere” card – has just managed to get a range of bus and tram tickets launched. Previously it only worked on Metrolink. This looks like an “early prezzie” for the new Mayor, Mr Burnham. Quite whether he can sustain the pace of change will be a crucial test for him. I am not surprised that contactless is far behind because the bus operators will not want a centralised “pool” that distributes what they consider to be “their” money. They want it in their accounts ASAP for all sorts of business reasons. This lack of pooling is what has killed off any real form of intra TOC smart PAYG ticketing outside Greater London. The way the TOCs act you’d think they owned the railway when the reality is that they are government contractors. Quite why the DfT won’t grab all this by the neck and sort it out is beyond me (well, sort of). It’s obviously down to politics, competence, will and no doubt decades of not wanting to sully their hands with anything complex or controversial.
@ Malcolm – clearly TfL have taken their time on contactless. More importantly it was an “in house” development which is very unusual these days. Clearly TfL will be looking for licensing opportunities but that is via Cubic Transportation (who supply most of London’s ticketing kit). Most other areas of the country do not use Cubic kit for bus or rail ticket issuing or back office stuff although quite a lot of Cubic ticket gates exist with the TOCs. Getting contactless to work outside London is going to be a company level thing just like the Key (for Go Ahead) or Stagecoach Smart (for Stagecoach). Stagecoach are progressively rolling out contactless payment on their bus services nationwide but that’s no help if they don’t run your local buses!
@WW: Of course getting a “Key” is useless to those of us on Southeastern who live inside the zones. It doesn’t support just a Zone 1-6 Travelcard….
What really makes it all laughable is that it will be useless should Go-Ahead lose the franchise…..
Going slightly out of town again, I saw Stagecoach buses in Chichester last weekend that said they accepted contactless. I was stunned!
WW
a proper city centre bus map showing all services. Now that may be something of a challenge but TfL can manage it.
Except they have just scrapped those …..
Oxford buses have used ITSO for ages, a system which deserves the nickname “It’s Slow”. Several seconds per passenger, with a misread approximately one in five goes. Using the TFL gatelines with an Oyster is like being in the future!
George………that strikes a chord. My senior citizen bus pass (not Oxted!) is very slow to be read by bus readers compared with Oyster.
Londoners who use Oyster for 99% of journeys understandably expect it to include trips to London Airports. Ticketing rules around breaking journeys or needing a loo might therefore require all intermediate stops on the line.
What I often hear is a clamour from the Counties to ‘include’ their station in Oyster.
Are there surveys to understand this?
Is it something innocuous like downloading a monthly trip summary for expense reports.
Or something fiendish like an expected travel cap or automatically searching out the cheapest fare permutation without research?
My understanding of the user is that they want to download their ticket onto their phone which they are holding anyway when they pass through barriers.
Multiple networks and extra cards is not going to sell.
Actually, Aleks2CV, I believe ‘Londoners’ know better than to expect Oyster to anywhere other than Heathrow or City airports, because they live here. It might be that people outwith the conurbation think that an Oyster card should but then you get in to the argument again about what constitutes a ‘London’ airport. Luton? Gatwick? Stansted? Southend? Southampton? Oxford? Cambridge? etc etc etc.
Even when out-of-towners are on Oyster, they don’t seem to know
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/chris-grayling-i-use-a-phone-to-buy-lunch-so-why-do-we-still-queue-for-rail-tickets-a3413296.html
(75% of the stations in his constituency are on Oyster)
(warning: link includes an image which may distress some transport enthusiasts) – actually the headline tells you all you need to know)
@Alison
“I believe ‘Londoners’ know better than to expect Oyster to anywhere other than Heathrow or City airports, because they live here. ”
And they would be wrong, as you can use it to Gatwick too!
Timbeau: Yes, I guessed that when I posted someone might pick me up on that. In my defence it is a fairly newish addition! 😛 Thing is, just because an airport puts “London” in its name doesn’t mean it is, so shouldn’t mean a London ticket has to reach it.
Ashford and Oxford are examples.
It’s harder to rationalise Thameslink with Gatwick NOT Luton.
and Stansted in the midlands is #3 and has a London Express.
With the Elizabeth at Shenfield you’re halfway to the London Southend Airport Terminal station which is a diversionary for City so arriving passengers already have the expectation of using their Oyster.
Some tidying up would be in order.
None of which was my enquiry about why the county commuter station groups are asking for Oyster. What is the main attraction to them ?
And CG is wrong on a n other, perhaps philosophical point.
I certainly don’t ever want my ticket to be on my phone – even if the ticket is an electronic one ( Oysyer or similar – i have a Liverpool “Walrus” f’rinstance )
Keeping them separate is actually a very good idea, or so I believe …
Why are users of certain stations asking for Oyster? This is the sort of speculative question that does not usually get us far, as people just make up answers. But (to make up an answer) it is probably a mix of perceived convenience (if they already have an Oyster card as probably many do), and a hope that fares could be lower (as already happened in many cases – though not all – when other existing stations joined Oyster).
Malcom
Both, actually – it’s a lot more convenient & it will likely be cheaper, at least some of the time.
Think Shepperton branch ….
er, Aleks2CV, Stansted is in East Anglia and *nowhere* near the Midlands!
Along the Redhill route, rail users want a Travelcard zone for London not specifically Oyster. Oyster is just a method of payment.
We have Oyster readers but more often than not paper tickets are cheaper than using Oyster. That’s because Oyster is used for a hybrid point to point fare rather than as part of a Zone system. We are the only place with Oyster where you are not guaranteed the cheapest fare. As mentioned on Mike Whitakers excellent site https://www.oyster-rail.org.uk/when-not-to-use-oyster/
A Travelcard zone would hopefully reduce most of our fares (which with the Redhill Hump that would be useful), add simplification of a complex ticket system, allow capping (which helps ensure fair pricing for journeys) and allow tickets that can be used multiple times to London in a day (a paper ticket only allows one journey to London even if it has a Travelcard element and the ticket machines steal them when you return so you can’t even go back later and use the Travelcard portion)
Simple cheap zone fares is what most rail users want, even if they call it Oyster.
T33: You could avoid the ticket-stealing gate issue by getting yourself let out by a staff member – probably best to tell them that you need the ticket to claim the fare back from your firm, or some other fiction. But using it as a travelcard later in the day may be technically illegal anyway – and in fairness you have probably got it more cheaply.
From my neck of the woods, a ticket with travelcard actually costs more than buying the two separately, but I think this is atypical.
AlisonW “Thing is, just because an airport puts “London” in its name doesn’t mean it is, so shouldn’t mean a London ticket has to reach it.”
Slightly off topic, though still transport related… There is a definition of a London airport. IATA (international air transport association) set the definition. There are six London airports : Heathrow Gatwick City Stansted Luton Southend.
Many travel agents and web tools allow a search against airport code “LON” – doing that will return results for flights to all six London airports.
The fact that other airports also now use the name (London Oxford for example) is just marketing fluff – a search for flights to LON will never include Oxford.
Keygo (GTRs version of Pay as You Go is being extended next week to cover Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern routes within Zones 1-6 and north to Bedford, Huntingdon & Foxton.
https://www.southernrailway.com/-/media/goahead/gtr-all-shared-pdfs-and-documents/gtr-1801-ret-keygo-area-map-v16.pdf?la=en
The charging model is changing to be similar to TfLs contactless model, with a small initial charge being deducted on the first journey each day, and a final charge calculated after each day
@ISLANDDWELLER
The problem is that Southend is a long way from London in terms of stops and travel time, and with no specific rail link service. So Oyster would need to capture the entire LTS for that to work
@Stuart.
Southend Airport has its own station, opened in 2011. It’s not on the LTS though!
@Timbeau
OK, My bad re LTS, and I know it has its own station, but it is still a long way from London in terms of stops and the trains are not a specific service with it as a destination. I hope the station is busier than the airport was when I flew from there a couple of years ago. It felt like a ghost town in the terminal building in July !
Stuart. Why care if Southend Airport has a dedicated service. Travel time is almost the same as Stansted, services are as frequent as Stansted (at times more frequent) but rail tickets are cheaper, and the airport terminal is an absolute delight to use.
According to the latest Ticketing & Revenue Update, Oyster PAYG should be extended to Hertford North and Epsom next January. (Welwyn Garden City is not mentioned).
Stations between Iver and Reading will be placed in the non published zone 15 (F).
Oyster at present can only cope with zones up to 15, so any further zones will require modifications.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/526812/response/1260533/attach/4/TRU112%20Redacted.pdf?
@ M Dickinson – Genuinely surprised to see the planned extension of Oyster to Epsom and Hertford North. I really thought the whole process had ground to a complete halt barring what was needed for Crossrail to Reading. I’m also suprised that the basic Oyster “zonal” coding structure has been retained for Crossrail to Reading. I really thought that was going to be heavily amended to facilitate a more nuanced and flexible pricing structure.
Epsom (SWT & Southern), but not Shepperton (again) Hertford N is Anglia, of course ….
Welwyn would be whichever TOC takes over the current GN suburban services I suppose
Hertford North is currently Great Northern (like WGC). Hertford East is Anglia.
Surprising that Iver-Reading is all one zone. You’d have thought that they could use different fare scales to play about, and there was potential to use 7-9 as well as ‘A’-‘F’.
The fare scales mean that zone 8 is really 4 different zones for single journeys (like how zones ‘G’ and ‘W’ are both really zone ‘A’). Watford High Street is on the TfL-Eus scale (which gives peak discounts if travelling to/from Euston only), Chalfont & Latimer on the TfL-LU, Cheshunt on the TfL-Ang (peak discounts into Liverpool St NR, more expensive than standard scale for journeys not involving Z1) and Dartford+Swanley on the NR2 scale (itself different, ie more expensive, from the NR1 scale).
These different scales would allow a more-zonal approach out to Hertford, Gatwick, Reading, etc, with some zonal differentiation between travelling from an Iver or Mertsham rather than a Reading or Horley, but the fare-scale controlled by the DfT/TOC.
There might be a limit on the number of scales, but they managed to add one for Heathrow in May.
The zones are mainly for capping purposes, and Heathrow Rail was merely placed in Zone 6.
Contactless and Oyster PAYG is due to launch mid-November on Heathrow Express.
Upgrades to Business First will be available on board, which I think is a first for contactless or Oyster PAYG.
@ SI – I guess it’s possible that if there is a “Crossrail scale” that not all of Iver – Reading will be in “Zone 15”. I’d not be shocked if there were fares aligned with pseudo zones 7-12 with the further stns away from London using “zone 15”. Not sure why I hadn’t made the connection about fare scales possibly being a system variable alongside the zonal structure. Fares scales won’t be a card level constraint as the zonal structure is for Oyster. It will be a variable in the fares tables created centrally and also held in device level tables (for Oyster) and centrally (for Contactless).
@WW
“Not sure why I hadn’t made the connection about fare scales possibly being a system variable alongside the zonal structure.”
You might have made the connection if you lived south of the river, where there can be four fares between the same two stations (never mind the same two zones) depending on the route taken. (e.g Wimbledon – Kings Cross via Earls Court, via Tulse Hill, via Vauxhall or via Waterloo)
@ Tim L – obviously I know there are multiple farescales and complex pricing options between certain origin and destination pairings. I was making the linkage that “fare scales” could be a system variable as opposed to the “zones”. Everyone has fixated on “zones” when discussing pricing for the route to Reading. Just call it a personal “light bulb going on” moment given my TfL fares system knowledge is, shall we say, rusty as it’s a *long* time since I worked on it.
@Tim L
4? Not on Oyster, surely? I can only see 3 (off-peak single fares given):
TfL-LU scale (£2.80) – via Earls Court
NR1 scale (£2.70) – via Tulse Hill (or Waterloo if you use the OSI to Blackfriars NR)
NR1-T scale (£4.20) – via Vauxhall or Waterloo as what matters is that you use NR and then use LU, with no concern about which zone you changed in.
I should also note that none of these journeys go to the station called ‘Kings Cross’ (which would require going to Finsbury Park to change onto a service into it) – rather Kings Cross St Pancras, or St Pancras International depending on route.
@Si
It may be only three – I thought that as Vauxhall is a boundary station it may charge an NR4-2 fare plus an LUL Zone 1 fare if that is less (which it may be if one leg is outside peak hours).
And yes, my mental map of Thameslink hasn’t caught up yet with the move from the old KXTL station to the new “Halfway-to-Mornington-Crescent” site.
To be a bit picky, the difference between “Kings Cross”, “St Pancras International” and “Kings Cross St Pancras” is not really related to exactly where the platforms, or the gatelines, or the street entrances, are. Operationally, and also for fares purposes, they are three different stations. (Although changes between them are not, I think, considered to be an OSI).
The fact that you cannot draw neat ovals on a map enclosing the three stations is unimportant. Bank/Monument/Cannon Street is another such mess.
Malcolm – Changes between the three stations are an OSI. With 15 mins from LU to LU. 30 mins from LU to St Pancras and 40 from LU to Kings Cross NR and 20 between St Pancras and Kings Cross NR.
The expansion of Oyster/PAYG in 2019 also has Luton with Epsom and Hertford North/WGC.
Rail minister Andrew Jones said: ‘This is about making access to the capital even easier for commuters and other rail travellers, including visitors to the UK arriving at Luton Airport.
The DfT’s previous efforts to bring smart ticketing to the South East under the £80m South East Flexible Ticketing scheme ended in failure and the industry is also is set to miss a DfT target to give ‘all passengers’ the option of travelling without a paper ticket by the end of the year, despite a further £80m public funding.
Oyster PAYG and Contactless starts at Epsom Station in Surrey today (February 25th 2019).
Not yet shown on the TfL single fare finder though.
In the TfL single fare finder now, with some discrepancies with BRFares (that had it earlier in the day).
Epsom-Balham fares are given on both as if going via Clapham Junction. Epsom-Vauxhall fares are given as if Vauxhall is in zone 1. Are these errors, or odd assumptions of what route you’ve taken?
Is the fare finder wrong, or is that actually what is being charged. If Oyster turns out to be more expensive than a paper ticket, no doubt the local MP will be Having Words with the Transport Secretary to sort it out. (!)
@Si
Where are you finding those fares? – when I tried just now, the fare finder only recognises “Epsom Downs Rail station”, not Epsom
@Tim
It keeps flipping back and forth as to whether it’s on there.
It’s there currently – ditto Cuffley, Bayford and Hertford North.
It is indeed back, complete with the anomalous fares noted before.
And using a completely arbitrary Epsom to Purley gives both peak and off peak substantially cheaper than the cash fares.
According to the latest Ticketing & Revenue Update, https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/552646/response/1325385/attach/3/TRU115 Redacted.pdf?
contactless acceptance will be extended to Radlett in June. Notably this does not include Oyster PAYG.
The Great Northern website has been updated to say
“Coming soon: Oyster and Contactless PAYG will be extended to Potters Bar later this summer. Further details will be provided nearer the time. Following this, Contactless only PAYG will be extended to Brookmans Park.”
and the Thameslink website has been updated to say
“Coming soon: Oyster and Contactless PAYG will be extended to Radlett later this summer. Further details will be provided nearer the time”
Coming in 2020. The £5 charge for an oyster card will no longer be refundable if you ‘cash in’ the card. I’m guessing the change is designed to nudge visitors to contactless / phone, as I presume this is the group who obtain oyster then ‘cash in’ after a short period.
Although the £5 charge won’t be refunded, if the card is used for more a year, after a year the £5 is added to the card balance and becomes available to use for travel.
It would be nice if we could Expand the Oyster Cards in the future. Especially to Hastings and Clacton-on-Sea as loads of people go to work all the way to London everyday.