How far out is "London"

[Wolfie]

Physical boundaries that are not considered impassable now were serious obstacles in historical times, including when the railways were constructed.

In Victorian times the North Downs were the obstacle on the south side, for example Polhill and Merstham/Quarry tunnels.

On the north side the obstacle was the ridge of hills under which the Potters Bar and Elstree tunnels pass.

It isn't an accident that most definitions of the edge of London incorporate these in some way.

Makes sense

 

[JonathanH]

Shepperton Line should be Zones 7 & 8. There should be complete rings of Zones 7-9. Some stations would move down zones, like Dartford from 8 to 7 and zone 9 would go out to around Gravesend. Horley would become part of Zone 9, with Gatwick remaining part of Zone 10.

The funding cost of that would cause a staggering hit on the railway's income.

 

[yorksrob]

London is very "far out". It's pretty groovy really.

 

[Wolfie]

London is very "far out". It's pretty groovy really.

How very 60s, Austin....

 

[yorksrob]

How very 60s, Austin....

Oh behave.....

 

[The exile]

Physical boundaries that are not considered impassable now were serious obstacles in historical times, including when the railways were constructed.

In Victorian times the North Downs were the obstacle on the south side, for example Polhill and Merstham/Quarry tunnels.

On the north side the obstacle was the ridge of hills under which the Potters Bar and Elstree tunnels pass.

It isn't an accident that most definitions of the edge of London incorporate these in some way.

Don’t think there’s really anything in (the South of) England (other than the coast) that would be impassible enough by human on horseback to be considered a non-arbitrary boundary. Even river estuaries could be rounded in less than a day. Clearly, putting your boundary / border along a river is more logical and definable than putting it through the middle of a field or someone’s front door, but in most cases the choice of which river / stream is or was arbitrary.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The funding cost of that would cause a staggering hit on the railway's income.

Should that be the basis for zone boundaries though? If Epsom, Watford, Chesham and Amersham are in TfL zones I don't see any sensible reason for Shepperton to be treated as if it's way out in the sticks by comparison. Particularly when compared with other branches on the SW such as Hampton Court and Chessington.
Fair enough there's a historical argument for those far-flung termini on the Met, but once you start bringing other places in that don't have that precedent it's hard to justify why some places are included while others aren't.

 

[BerkshireRails]

Maybe do the zones based on distance from a certain place. For example 0-3 miles of Kings Cross is Zone 1, 3-6 Miles is Zone 2, 6-9 Miles is Zone 3, 9-12 Miles is Zone 4, 12-15 Miles is Zone 5, 15-18 Miles is Zone 6, 18-21 Miles is Zone 7, 21-24 Miles is Zone 8 and 24-27 Miles iz Zone 9.

 

[Farnborough]

Not the railway station of the same name, but what was originally the site of Queen Eleanor (of Castile)'s memorial cross, yes?

Yes

*The* Cross at Charing

 

[JonathanH]

Fair enough there's a historical argument for those far-flung termini on the Met, but once you start bringing other places in that don't have that precedent it's hard to justify why some places are included while others aren't.

I'm not convinced those other places are going to be brought in.

Consider the fact that the Zone 6 all day cap is £16.40, and that the all day cap from Shepperton is £33.10, then consider how that revenue shortfall is going to be addressed.

I'm not saying that it is right to charge people from outside London much more than those inside or it can be justified, but it does seem unaffordable to extend lower levels of pricing out beyond the current boundaries.

 

[frankmoh]

Maybe do the zones based on distance from a certain place. For example 0-3 miles of Kings Cross is Zone 1, 3-6 Miles is Zone 2, 6-9 Miles is Zone 3, 9-12 Miles is Zone 4, 12-15 Miles is Zone 5, 15-18 Miles is Zone 6, 18-21 Miles is Zone 7, 21-24 Miles is Zone 8 and 24-27 Miles iz Zone 9.

I still have no clue how the current Zone 1-6 rings are laid out.

Lower Sydenham station is exactly 7 miles away from Charing Cross's cross, whereas Grange Hill is 11.8 miles away. Both stations are in Zone 4. I blame the Tube.

 

[contrex]

London is very "far out". It's pretty groovy really.

Sometimes it's 'too much', and, from time to time, 'outa sight'.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm not convinced those other places are going to be brought in.

Consider the fact that the Zone 6 all day cap is £16.40, and that the all day cap from Shepperton is £33.10, then consider how that revenue shortfall is going to be addressed.

I'm not saying that it is right to charge people from outside London much more than those inside or it can be justified, but it does seem unaffordable to extend lower levels of pricing out beyond the current boundaries.

The places mentioned are already in TfL zones as per the aforementioned Nick Badley YouTube video.
I'm not suggesting that Shepperton should be in Zone 6, as that branch does extend further away from Waterloo than Chessington or Hampton Court does. But it's a fair bit closer to London than the "Metroland" extremeties of the Metropolitan Line, so placing it in Zone 7 or 8 would seem reasonable. As things stand the fares are artificially high due to not being in the TfL zonal system. One saving grace is that it's a particularly wealthy part of the country so the higher fares aren't likely to be a disproportionate disadvantage.

 

[contrex]

I can't help remembering the early 1960s (I'm that old), when my mother's side of the family (she was one of seven) gradually forsook their inner-South-London roots for various leafy suburbs, and gave themselves airs that they now lived in 'Surrey' or 'Kent'. One aunt kept mentioning that she had seen stories in the Kent Messenger. That all came crashing down on April 1st 1965. My own parents and I stayed put in Herne Hill, and I when I was 19 I decamped altogether to Bristol.

 

[Sonic1234]

Today I saw someone on the internet say that Bromley as a whole was not part of London. Zone 1 in 20 minutes (or less) by the way.

I expect returning the small villages and Biggin Hill in the south of the borough to Kent would prove popular.

 

[BerkshireRails]

The funding cost of that would cause a staggering hit on the railway's income.

Can't be much more than the London Overground rebranding as in basic terms it is just updating the contactless readers to be in the new zone and accept Oyster.

 

[JonathanH]

Can't be much more than the London Overground rebranding as in basic terms it is just updating the contactless readers to be in the new zone and accept Oyster.

I am referring to the funding cost of lower fares and reduction in revenue, not the infrastructure to deliver those fares, or paint on the trains.

 

[BerkshireRails]

I am referring to the funding cost of lower fares and reduction in revenue, not the infrastructure to deliver those fares, or paint on the trains.

There would be some increased patronage of the services as well as some fares would go up.

 

[frankmoh]

I think there's quite a few far-out Southern Region branches that are technically in London but I would really not count them as such.

Namely Chessington, Hampton Court, Epsom Downs, Tattenham Corner and Caterham.

Additionally, I would say Sanderstead station after 1983 because it lost its route to Elmers End, which is firmly within London.

Yes it's silly o'clock but I was awoken by a seemingly nocturnal goose 20 minutes ago.

 

[JonathanH]

Namely Chessington, Hampton Court, Epsom Downs, Tattenham Corner and Caterham.

The Chessington branch is entirely within Greater London. The Hampton Court branch is outside Grester London, but Hampton Court station serves an area within Greater London.

A specific decision was made for Banstead, Epsom Downs, Kingswood, Tadworth, Tattenham Corner, Whyteleafe, Whyteleafe South, Caterham, Upper Warlingham, Stoneleigh, Ewell East and Ewell West to be included within the London Zones.

Additionally, I would say Sanderstead station after 1983 because it lost its route to Elmers End, which is firmly within London.

Sanderstead is very much within the Greater London boundary.

 

[35B]

I think there's quite a few far-out Southern Region branches that are technically in London but I would really not count them as such.

Namely Chessington, Hampton Court, Epsom Downs, Tattenham Corner and Caterham.

Additionally, I would say Sanderstead station after 1983 because it lost its route to Elmers End, which is firmly within London.

Yes it's silly o'clock but I was awoken by a seemingly nocturnal goose 20 minutes ago.

Do you mean administratively or culturally? I’d say that all of them are edge cases, but Sanderstead is the “most” Londonish of any of the places you’ve listed.

If you’re looking for whether the services “should” be provided by TfL or “the railway”, Sanderstead is then the least Londonish because it’s on the Oxted line and served as part of that route, not as an inner suburban branch like the others.

To illustrate the point about fares, administration and culture, I used to live in Orpington. “For” it being in London, we were in a London borough (Bromley), zone 5, and London bus routes. But we also had a “BR” postcode and 01689 telephone number, and our address was “…Orpington, Kent”.

If we went out a couple of miles to Pratts Bottom, Knockholt, Cudham, or Biggin Hill, we’d definitely left the built up area and were in Kent - but still in the London borough of Bromley. The boundary was and will remain blurred.

 

[Farnborough]

But we also had a “BR” postcode and 01689 telephone number, and our address was “…Orpington, Kent”.

Postcodes and STD codes are not indicative of anything, other than proximity to somewhere.

Large parts of Hampshire have GU (Guildford, Surrey) or RG (Reading, Berkshire) postcodes - even though the boundary has been fixed since dot.

Likewise, locally, the 01252 (Aldershot, Hampshire) STD code extends into Surrey - strictly ALDershot should have been 0(1)253 but BLAckpool had got that!

 

[Fawkes Cat]

01252 (Aldershot, Hampshire) STD code extends into Surrey - strictly ALDershot should have been 0(1)253 but BLAckpool had got that

Someone will no doubt know, but my speculation is that in general STD codes were based on the first TWO letters of the exchange name, padded with a third digit to distinguish - so 01753 for SLough and 01752 for PLymouth (S and P both being against the digit 7 on the phone dial).

And I don't know what happened if there were more than 10 exchanges (principal exchanges if you like - I do know that the STD code for Burnham (Bucks) was 06286 i.e. Maidenhead 6) with the same 2 digit code.

 

[contrex]

Do you mean administratively or culturally? I’d say that all of them are edge cases, but Sanderstead is the “most” Londonish of any of the places you’ve listed.

If you’re looking for whether the services “should” be provided by TfL or “the railway”, Sanderstead is then the least Londonish because it’s on the Oxted line and served as part of that route, not as an inner suburban branch like the others.

To illustrate the point about fares, administration and culture, I used to live in Orpington. “For” it being in London, we were in a London borough (Bromley), zone 5, and London bus routes. But we also had a “BR” postcode and 01689 telephone number, and our address was “…Orpington, Kent”.

If we went out a couple of miles to Pratts Bottom, Knockholt, Cudham, or Biggin Hill, we’d definitely left the built up area and were in Kent - but still in the London borough of Bromley. The boundary was and will remain blurred.

London has been expanding for centuries - consider 'Surrey docks', the 'Surrey shore' of the Thames. Mr Pickwick (he of the Papers) retired to 'Dulwich, in Surrey'. As I said before, in my childhood, some of my mother's family gave themselves airs that they lived in 'Kent' (Newstead Avenue and Cathcart Drive, Orpington) and we needed to dial MM 3 to reach one lot, and FN 5 the others. Thornton Heath ('Surrey') was even worth a boast in those days.

 

[Fidelis]

Postcodes and STD codes are not indicative of anything, other than proximity to somewhere.

Large parts of Hampshire have GU (Guildford, Surrey) or RG (Reading, Berkshire) postcodes - even though the boundary has been fixed since dot.

Likewise, locally, the 01252 (Aldershot, Hampshire) STD code extends into Surrey - strictly ALDershot should have been 0(1)253 but BLAckpool had got that!

When postcodes were introduced the Royal Mail was moving the majority of its post by rail and used conveniently located railway stations to then reach towns around the stations by road. Tonbridge in West Kent was one (having both East-West and North- South rail services) mail and parcels were then forwarded to Sevenoaks addresses by road. Hence Sevenoaks has a TN (for Tonbridge) postcode.
Similarly Bromsgrove in Worcestershire has a B60 for Birmingham postcode not WR for Worcester.
So blame British Railways/GPO for the postcodes if they don't reflect local government areas.
Likewise a relative who was involved in the creation of STD codes told me that the codes were based on the number of telephones installed and usage by areas . Hence Birmingham was 0121, Edinburgh 0131.

 

[contrex]

Likewise a relative who was involved in the creation of STD codes told me that the codes were based on the number of telephones installed and usage by areas . Hence Birmingham was 0121, Edinburgh 0131.

Surely the codes were alphabetical, based on the old letters/numbers phone dials current in 1958, when STD began to be rolled out. You had 01 for London the rest of the 'Director' areas being 021 (0B1) (B)irmingham, 031 (0E1) (E)dinburgh, 041 (0G1) (G)lasgow, 051 (0L1) (L)iverpool, and 061 (0M1) (M)anchester, I think 071 (0S1) was planned for (S)heffield but used for London in the end. You could say that the first Bristol code (0272) was really 0BR2, and Brighton (0273) 0BR3 if you wanted. The STD code booklet showed 0DE125 to reach my granny in Castle Donington near DErby, later altered to 033125 when all-figure dialling came in roughly 1966 (I think).

The '1' digits in second place in 0121, 0131, etc, only came along on 'PhONEday', April 16, 1995.

 

[35B]

Postcodes and STD codes are not indicative of anything, other than proximity to somewhere.

But that proximity to somewhere is representative of local identity - which is the point of my illustration. Living there local identity was blurred

 

[Magdalia]

Postcodes and STD codes are not indicative of anything, other than proximity to somewhere.

STD codes are indications of locations of manual telephone exchanges, postcodes are indications of locations of letter sorting offices.

But that proximity to somewhere is representative of local identity

In the case of postcodes no it isn't. For example about half of Norfolk have Peterborough postcodes.

 

[contrex]

STD codes are indications of locations of manual telephone exchanges,

"Manual"? Really? With plugs and sockets?

 

[Magdalia]

"Manual"? Really? With plugs and sockets?

Yes.

The last manual exchange was on the Isle of Skye, which lasted until 1976, see the very bottom of this:

https://www.openreach.com/news/the-final-call-for-the-traditional-telephone-exchange/

26
June
2023

The final call for the traditional telephone exchange​

Richard Allwood, Chief Strategy Officer, Openreach

For more than a century the telephone exchange has formed the backbone of our telecommunications system. A vast array of more than 5,500 mostly nondescript buildings sit unnoticed on city, town or village streets, and quietly link up more than 254 million kilometres of cables and wires – keeping people in the UK connected to each other and the rest of the world.

Portree exchange on the Isle of Skye was the last manual exchange. Operator Mrs Dewar manually connected the last caller in October 1976.