Do You Agree With Ticket Barriers?

[Old Timer]

...Handy, do you know if it works efficiently? For example is a member of staff pulled off a ticket window?

Because there is never just one person on duty.

..... I love the feeling of walking in and out of a station uninhibited as happens in many countries on the continent (and luckily still some stations here in the UK!) .....

So do the fare evaders

 

[Firestarter]

I'm personally in the same boat as Yorkie - barriers are useful on LU, and the London suburban network (I can also see their logic at any station which has DOO services serving it such as FCC's Thameslink/GN routes)....but even then, only if they're always staffed, and in use whenever the station is open (there's no point if barriers are open after 7-8pm).

(Just as an aside, I've reset the poll voting due to changing the options - I have made the results public to encourage discussion, as voters cannot be personally identified anyway)

Do you think the likes of Bedford, Luton, Leagrave St ALBANS should be manned 24/7?

 

[lemonic]

So do the fare evaders

Well if their ticket (or lack of) was checked on the train then perhaps they would have the BTP joining them (if they are known offenders)...

 

[Mike395]

Do you think the likes of Bedford, Luton, Leagrave St ALBANS should be manned 24/7?

Certainly Bedford already is - there is a member of FCC staff (usually two) there until the station closes, in addition to the dispatchers.

I would assume the same at Luton, due to the station layout - not so sure about Leagrave or St Albans - in the case of the former, it perhaps doesn't get enough use in the evenings to warrant barriers being in use, but the latter certainly does!

 

[WelshBluebird]

I hate barriers. For quite a few reasons. The number of times I have had tickets rejected for random reasons is just crazy (breaking my journey, railcard, etc). I have once got suitcase stuck in one because it shut right away (I was going through the larger accessible barrier before anyone says anything). They are a pain in the backside when I am meeting someone off a train or seeing someone onto a train. And I have also had my ticket wrongly swallowed quite a few times.
And of course, you have the issues about having to pass through them to go to different platforms, and about where to have them in terms of station facilities (do you let the public use the WH smith in the station and make passengers passengers go through the barriers to use them, or do you put the facilities on the platform side?).

However, I understand they are needed. But I do think there needs to be more thought into what stations they are used at, and the issues regarding ticket rejection, ticket swallowing, how long they remain open etc etc need to be looked at.

Because there is never just one person on duty.

And if we had that in this country, it would mean huge increases in costs for ToC's as they would have to employ more staff. There are so many stations in this country that do either have just one person on duty, or indeed are not manned at all.

 

[IanXC]

I've voted for everywhere rather than suburban/tube because I feel it more closely represents what I think, however I would not argue that any currently unstaffed station, or many part time staffed stations should have barriers installed.

Broadly I think that stations which are manned "full time" hours ought to have barriers. I think one of the main benefits is to allow on train staff to spend time making more thorough checks. For instance on my local line I think that Hull and Bridlington ought to have barriers. Other than Beverley (which has a difficult layout for barriers) these 2 stations provide an overwhelming portion of the passengers on the route. Barriers at these 2 stations would clearly need staffing, however I would argue that the relatively high level of RPI coverage on this route would be better employed on these 2 barrier lines.

If that means that the barriers are open when someone needs assistance, or when the staff member is on a break or whatever then so be it. Much as they should be in use at all times, so long as the times they aren't are random and limited, the deterrence effect will be the same.

I also wonder whether the lack of barriers at some stations and in some areas, has an adverse effect on the passenger numbers (well and revenue) recorded for certain routes and services. Whether this has any discernible effect on where efforts go to alleviating overcrowding I don't know but it can't help!

 

[All Line Rover]

I don't agree that they should be installed everywhere.

Chester has ticket barriers - this is reasonable as all of the "facilities" (toilets, cafe's, ticket office, etc.) are in front of the platforms. Arriva just installed a row of ticket barriers at the entrance to the platforms. I'm fine with that.

On the other hand, just imagine trying to install ticket barriers at Crewe! :roll: All of the "facilities" are next to the platforms. The only way to "gate" the station would be to install a row of barriers just past the ticket hall. This would make the "ticketless" part of the station absolutely tiny, and would block off access to all of the facilities. It simply isn't practical to install ticket barriers at such a station.

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/sjp/CRE/plan.html

 

[Lampshade]

Chester has ticket barriers - this is reasonable as all of the "facilities" (toilets, cafe's, ticket office, etc.) are in front of the platforms. Arriva just installed a row of ticket barriers at the entrance to the platforms. I'm fine with that.

Plus, ATW will happily issue a platform ticket there so there's no problems for anyone not travelling but wanting to access the platforms.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I agree that on true InterCity runs, gates shouldn't be needed, but I will tell you (and put money on it) that if Wolves, Sandwell & Dudley, Birmingham International and Coventry, and Lancaster, Preston, Wigan NW and Warrington BQ were all gated, hoards would be caught out. Due to the staffing changes at Preston, and the short legs between the West Midlands stations, I have never had my ticket checked on a 390 on these routes, or at the stations, and it is plain to see when on board just how many fare dodge (most head to the extremities of the train or just pick a wedged vestibule).

 

[All Line Rover]

I agree that on true InterCity runs, gates shouldn't be needed, but I will tell you (and put money on it) that if Wolves, Sandwell & Dudley, Birmingham International and Coventry, and Lancaster, Preston, Wigan NW and Warrington BQ were all gated, hoards would be caught out. Due to the staffing changes at Preston, and the short legs between the West Midlands stations, I have never had my ticket checked on a 390 on these routes, or at the stations, and it is plain to see when on board just how many fare dodge (most head to the extremities of the train or just pick a wedged vestibule).

I've always thought Coventry had ticket barriers? Looking at Wikipedia, it says that Virgin removed them in 2008. What on earth where they thinking!? :roll: Virgin seem to be "against" ticket barriers - I've never understood why.

Coventry should have ticket barriers again. Sandwell and Dudley and Wigan North Western should also have ticket barriers. Birmingham International should DEFINITELY have ticket barriers - the design of the station makes this ideal. (http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/sjp/BHI/plan.html) It could be a similar design to Waterloo!

I'm not so sure about Wolverhampton. I don't know where they would go without causing inconvenience to passengers. The same applies at Lancaster (it has multiple entrances), Preston (it would be horrible if ticket barriers were installed here!) and Warrington Banq Quay.

Although I agree that ticket barriers should be installed at all of these stations, a balance must be struck. Ticket barriers are OK when they "blend in" (like at Waterloo) but not when they cause inconvenience to passengers (like at King's Cross, though I appreciate that the crowding problem will be "cured" somewhat once the refurbishment is complete).

 

[shinkansen1966]

I agree that on true InterCity runs, gates shouldn't be needed, but I will tell you (and put money on it) that if Wolves, Sandwell & Dudley, Birmingham International and Coventry, and Lancaster, Preston, Wigan NW and Warrington BQ were all gated, hoards would be caught out. Due to the staffing changes at Preston, and the short legs between the West Midlands stations, I have never had my ticket checked on a 390 on these routes, or at the stations, and it is plain to see when on board just how many fare dodge (most head to the extremities of the train or just pick a wedged vestibule).

Are you saying that there's fare evasion because of the way our railways are run in terms of staff cover, crowded trains (the wedged vestibule) ?

In this country, there could be strong case for separating intercity services and other trains. You could do this by making them all reserved (as in France) or different fares structure/stopping patterns (as in Germany).

In Spain prior to boarding an AVE train, there's a ticket and security control. But then AVE trains are practically run as a seperate entity from urban and regional trains.

 

[Lampshade]

I've always thought Coventry had ticket barriers? Looking at Wikipedia, it says that Virgin removed them in 2008. What on earth where they thinking!? :roll: Virgin seem to be "against" ticket barriers - I've never understood why.

Basically at that time Centro (WMPTE) were co-signatories to the West Midlands franchise, and were very anti-barrier. Virgin then decided to barrier Coventry but soon after, they worked out they were protecting Central Trains' revenue more than their own, and so demanded Central contributed to running them. Central basically told Virgin to jog on, so out they came.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I've always thought Coventry had ticket barriers? Looking at Wikipedia, it says that Virgin removed them in 2008. What on earth where they thinking!? :roll: Virgin seem to be "against" ticket barriers - I've never understood why.

Because they didn't want to protect Central Trains's revenue.

Coventry should have ticket barriers again. Sandwell and Dudley and Wigan North Western should also have ticket barriers. Birmingham International should DEFINITELY have ticket barriers - the design of the station makes this ideal. (http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/sjp/BHI/plan.html) It could be a similar design to Waterloo!

I'm not so sure about Wolverhampton. I don't know where they would go without causing inconvenience to passengers. The same applies at Lancaster (it has multiple entrances), Preston (it would be horrible if ticket barriers were installed here!) and Warrington Banq Quay.

Although I agree that ticket barriers should be installed at all of these stations, a balance must be struck. Ticket barriers are OK when they "blend in" (like at Waterloo) but not when they cause inconvenience to passengers (like at King's Cross, though I appreciate that the crowding problem will be "cured" somewhat once the refurbishment is complete).

What's the difference between North Western and Bank Quay? They're almost identical, both in layout and facilities!

I agree that Lancaster and Preston would be hard to gate, maybe Lancaster is OK, but at Preston thousands of pounds walks out of the door when locals to Colne, Blackpool and Manchester arrive.

As for them blending in, it really doesn't matter! Electronic departure boards don't really sit well in any Victorian station, but they still exist. Railways are there to provide a service, not look nice and fancy!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Are you saying that there's fare evasion because of the way our railways are run in terms of staff cover, crowded trains (the wedged vestibule) ?

In this country, there could be strong case for separating intercity services and other trains. You could do this by making them all reserved (as in France) or different fares structure/stopping patterns (as in Germany).

In Spain prior to boarding an AVE train, there's a ticket and security control. But then AVE trains are practically run as a seperate entity from urban and regional trains.

Because people chance not buying a ticket from a booking office as they know they won't be a guard about on the train, or staff about at their destination. I think extra staff specifically for revenue protection should be employed on these sort of IC journeys, but if you get on at Coventry and off at Birmingham International using a 390 ticketless, even with three members of staff checking tickets, chances are you'll get away with it.

 

[shinkansen1966]

Because people chance not buying a ticket from a booking office as they know they won't be a guard about on the train, or staff about at their destination. I think extra staff specifically for revenue protection should be employed on these sort of IC journeys, but if you get on at Coventry and off at Birmingham International using a 390 ticketless, even with three members of staff checking tickets, chances are you'll get away with it.

Exactly. With pricey and complex fares and endless moralising about fares evasion, the TOCs are treated with contempt.

In the eyes of the public, TOCs do not appear to offer a public service any longer. And some members of the public respond accordingly.

 

[Aictos]

I think it depends on the service and on the station for example Bristol Temple Meads serves InterCity, Locals and Regional services like York but unlike York has automatic ticket gates in operation even though both share something else in common which is said services have a guard to perform on train checks.

So while I do back ATGs, I also back on board checks.

 

[Old Timer]

...On the other hand, just imagine trying to install ticket barriers at Crewe! :roll: All of the "facilities" are next to the platforms. The only way to "gate" the station would be to install a row of barriers just past the ticket hall. This would make the "ticketless" part of the station absolutely tiny, and would block off access to all of the facilities. It simply isn't practical to install ticket barriers at such a station.

Where do you think the barriers were in BR days ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

...and about where to have them in terms of station facilities (do you let the public use the WH smith in the station and make passengers passengers go through the barriers to use them, or do you put the facilities on the platform side?)..

Such facilities are intended for use by passengers only thus in days gone by practically ALL (especially toilets) were within the ticket barrier line.

...And if we had that in this country, it would mean huge increases in costs for ToC's as they would have to employ more staff. There are so many stations in this country that do either have just one person on duty, or indeed are not manned at all.

Unmanned stations could easily have remotely monitored cctv with gate release, in the same way as many hotels and Companies do now on their access/car park gates.

....Ticket barriers are OK when they "blend in" (like at Waterloo) but not when they cause inconvenience to passengers (like at King's Cross, though I appreciate that the crowding problem will be "cured" somewhat once the refurbishment is complete).

What is this "inconvenience" you speak of ? I have never been inconvenienced by passing through barriers, neither seemingly were passengers from about 1830 to 1990's.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree that on true InterCity runs, gates shouldn't be needed, but I will tell you (and put money on it) that if Wolves, Sandwell & Dudley, Birmingham International and Coventry, and Lancaster, Preston, Wigan NW and Warrington BQ were all gated, hoards would be caught out. Due to the staffing changes at Preston, and the short legs between the West Midlands stations, I have never had my ticket checked on a 390 on these routes, or at the stations, and it is plain to see when on board just how many fare dodge (most head to the extremities of the train or just pick a wedged vestibule).

Fare evasion is endemic in the West Midlands because of the Political attitude of Centro or whatever they call themselves these days.

Their absurd Politically orientated attitude has been responsible for great damage to attitudes in the West Midlands. Thanks to them the Railway around Birmingham became an extensive playground for children and a means of entertainment for ne'er do wells, miscreants, scrotes and various other undesirables who used the network as a means of passing their time until the close of service.

 

[shinkansen1966]

Where do you think the barriers were in BR days ?
.

In BR days, there were ticket inspections at barriers.

But fast forward to 2011, and we have gates leading to platforms used by several train operators each with their own ticket restrictions. Earlier this year, my own valid cheap day return was rejected at Kings Cross.

So at the barrier, you had the situation where an East Coast inspector was referring to a document of fare restrictions imposed by First Capital Connect. He would not be held responsible for the validity of the FCC ticket restriction document. All he was doing was deciding to allow passengers through based on a restrictions from a third party. If I had tracked down an FCC member of staff, I would have missed my train.

Such a system could invite ridicule and mistrust.

 

[All Line Rover]

What is this "inconvenience" you speak of ? I have never been inconvenienced by passing through barriers, neither seemingly were passengers from about 1830 to 1990's.

Visit King's Cross during the evening peak and you will see the inconvenience that it causes people. There simply aren't enough barriers for everyone to pass through. To gate Preston would be utter madness!

 

[Lampshade]

To gate Preston would be utter madness!

I'd go as far to say it was impossible.

 

[Old Timer]

In BR days, there were ticket inspections at barriers.

But fast forward to 2011, and we have gates leading to platforms used by several train operators each with their own ticket restrictions. Earlier this year, my own valid cheap day return was rejected at Kings Cross.

So at the barrier, you had the situation where an East Coast inspector was referring to a document of fare restrictions imposed by First Capital Connect. He would not be held responsible for the validity of the FCC ticket restriction document. All he was doing was deciding to allow passengers through based on a restrictions from a third party. If I had tracked down an FCC member of staff, I would have missed my train.

Such a system could invite ridicule and mistrust.

I dont think anyone disputes that the TOCs have made a complete shambles of ticket barriering however the lead in this should have come from a central point and not be left up to individual TOCs/PTEs to decide what they want.

This demonstrates the monstrously stupid way that Labour managed the Railways for the last 13 years. It also demonstrates that you cannot have a successful half way house. The DfT is packed full of incompetents who would be unemployable in the private sector, hence why they are there in general, the remainder no doubt enjoy an unpressured lifestyle, where innovation and decisiveness are not required and where one can simply sit on ones hands until the final salary pension scheme finally kicks in.

The Railways either have to be completely stripped out from pretty much all Government control or they return back under a specified Ministry with a Board, aka BR Mk2.

 

[shinkansen1966]

Visit King's Cross during the evening peak and you will see the inconvenience that it causes people. There simply aren't enough barriers for everyone to pass through. To gate Preston would be utter madness!

Agreed.

At times, Kings Cross is casual chaos. And I will not re-telling the story of my own miserable experience at those KX ticket barriers again.

 

[All Line Rover]

What's the difference between North Western and Bank Quay? They're almost identical, both in layout and facilities!

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/sjp/WGN/plan.html

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/sjp/WBQ/plan.html

Above are the station plans for both stations.

Wigan has a fairly large ticket hall and corridor, with toilet facilities. If the BTP office was knocked down and moved, a row of ticket barriers could be installed along this section. The attached picture illustrates my idea.

Warrington has a tiny ticket hall with no facilities. The only place to install ticket barriers would be in front of the subway - there would be no way near enough barriers, and the "ticketless" part of the station would be very, very small.

 

[shinkansen1966]

This demonstrates the monstrously stupid way that Labour managed the Railways for the last 13 years.

This is one of the two main reasons I stopped voting Labour.

The other being John Prescott's Public Private Partnership to upgrade the Tube. If only Ken Livingstone had one that court battle with central government. We might just have been spared the expense of the PPP financial mess.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Having been to both many times, I do have to say that they a similar sizes, if anything Bank Quay is bigger!

 

[Old Timer]

Visit King's Cross during the evening peak and you will see the inconvenience that it causes people. There simply aren't enough barriers for everyone to pass through. ...

The same applies to LUL, and to most airports that I visit in busy times.

Try for example going through security at BHX at 05:00 on any summer morning without leaving an hour and a half just for this activity alone.

This is one of the two main reasons I stopped voting Labour.

The other being John Prescott's Public Private Partnership to upgrade the Tube. If only Ken Livingstone had one that court battle with central government. We might just have been spared the expense of the PPP financial mess.

Both the Management and staff are to blame for much of the losses on the LUL.

For example staff put every imaginable obstacle in the way of Contractors doing anything, prevented them from gaining access to the Possessions, made them jump through wholly uneccessary hoops for even the simplest tasks, and generally did everything they could to frustrate matters. This incidentally continues.

If they were competent themselves then this would not be so bad but frankly what I know of them leaves an awful lot to be desired and nothing on LUL is going to improve until someone comes in and takes the whole place apart and rids it of people with such attitudes.

For an organisation to even believe hauling an unbraked train up a steep gradient from the front simply beggars belief, and the fact that staff at all levels could not comprehend the possibility of a runback or its consequences says much.

 

[nedchester]

The Railways either have to be completely stripped out from pretty much all Government control or they return back under a specified Ministry with a Board, aka BR Mk2.

I'll go for the latter!

 

[Oswyntail]

...The DfT is packed full of incompetents who would be unemployable in the private sector, hence why they are there in general, the remainder no doubt enjoy an unpressured lifestyle, where innovation and decisiveness are not required and where one can simply sit on ones hands until the final salary pension scheme finally kicks in.......

And the rail industry is packed full of luddites who cannot face change and believe they are there to run a railway, not provide a service! Neither statement is true, but just that sort of accepted opinion is one of the major factors preventing real progress anywhere in this country.

 

[Old Timer]

And the rail industry is packed full of luddites who cannot face change and believe they are there to run a railway, not provide a service! Neither statement is true, but just that sort of accepted opinion is one of the major factors preventing real progress anywhere in this country.

I rather think that if the DfT was in any way competent there would not be the amount of criticism of it that has been shown in this Forum in a whole host of areas.

I suspect you yourself may not have been slow to criticise the DfT in the past.

Do you REALLY think that someone sat in the DfT in London really has much knowledge of how the Railway actually operates ? Honestly now ?

 

[Lampshade]

Do you REALLY think that someone sat in the DfT in London really has much knowledge of how the Railway actually operates ? Honestly now ?

No, because it's been so long since the railways were run as a railway and not as a cash cow for shareholders that most people seem to have forgotten.

 

[Oswyntail]

I rather think that if the DfT was in any way competent there would not be the amount of criticism of it that has been shown in this Forum in a whole host of areas.

I suspect you yourself may not have been slow to criticise the DfT in the past.

Do you REALLY think that someone sat in the DfT in London really has much knowledge of how the Railway actually operates ? Honestly now ?

I agree the DfT gets things wrong. But your previous (ahem) reasoned criticism was way off the mark. The purpose of a Whitehall department is to develop and implement government policy, and those working at DfT will be highly competent at that. Sometimes (as so often in the last government) policy is confused or unworkable. But one of the biggest frustrations comes when interested parties dealing with a Department quite naturally only see their own limited view.
The answer to your last question is almost undoubtedly "yes". But the corresponding question also needs to be considered: do you really think that someone sat in a railway office somewhere has much knowledge of how the Civil Service actually works?