Fares Consultation - what would a national zonal system look like?

[bringbackcrouc]

Given the RDG’s report that suggests a national pay as you go system might work I have one burning question... what would the map look like? Would there be intercity zones, suburban zones, commuter zones?

Are there any amateur cartographers who would be willing to have a go?

Here is the link: https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/files/Publications/2019-02_easier_fares_for_all.pdf

 

[yorkie]

There won't be a nationwide Pay As You Go (PAYG) zonal system.

But there are proposals to extend the existing London based PAYG zonal scheme: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/dft-consultation-on-expanding-pay-as-you-go.177831/

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm by no means a cartographer, but there are other countries which have such a system - the Netherlands used to (replaced by kilometric fares, which could be an option for any national UK PAYG scheme - it doesn't *have* to be zonal, it can be point to point - indeed a zonal model is actually slightly poor for PAYG and causes some inconsistencies in London) and Switzerland does, and they tend to look rather like the Merseyside system but bigger - based on what are essentially small irregular rectangles grouped into larger ones rather than being concentric.

 

[PeterC]

To create a zonal system you would start by overlaying hexagons of the optimal size for 1 zone on the map and then distorting them to fit the realities of geography. I think that you would also have to introduce a system of supplimenary fares on inter city services.

For a single city region an alternative approach is work with radial zones but divide the outer ones into quadrants.

(The question was about the "how" rather than about the "why", I am not necessarily advocating this in real life)

 

[swt_passenger]

Concentric circles as per London Zones is ultimately flawed because it assumes there is only a small number of full journeys right across from an outer zone to the diametrically opposite side. So the fact that half the journey is notionally free can be ignored by TfL, and charging is simplified.

Interestingly even a relatively small system such as the Tyne Wear Metro never went for concentric zones, perhaps they realised early on it wasn’t a good idea for a network with more than one ‘centre’?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Going back to my previous post - for PAYG, why do we need a zonal system at all? Why not simply use point to point fares? You know where the person touched in and out, those two go together to give you the fare.

The only thing that wouldn't work so well would be routed fares, so those would realistically have to go. (The approach taken on TfL with the pink validators wouldn't work, as in a mainline context a routed fare often doesn't involve actually changing trains).

 

[bringbackcrouc]

The only thing that wouldn't work so well would be routed fares, so those would realistically have to go. (The approach taken on TfL with the pink validators wouldn't work, as in a mainline context a routed fare often doesn't involve actually changing trains).

Could you have a touch in, touch on, touch out system where you have to tap a reader on each train you take? Otherwise it would charge you highest fare between two destinations. I’m thinking London to Birmingham or London to Oxford where there are two competing services with different speeds.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Could you have a touch in, touch on, touch out system where you have to tap a reader on each train you take? Otherwise it would charge you highest fare between two destinations. I’m thinking London to Birmingham or London to Oxford where there are two competing services with different speeds.

You could I suppose do that, yes. Or have separate touch pads per TOC, which is what the Dutch do (i.e. you touch to get through the barriers, but you also have to "check in" with the TOC you are using).

 

[PeterC]

Concentric circles as per London Zones is ultimately flawed because it assumes there is only a small number of full journeys right across from an outer zone to the diametrically opposite side. So the fact that half the journey is notionally free can be ignored by TfL, and charging is simplified.

Interestingly even a relatively small system such as the Tyne Wear Metro never went for concentric zones, perhaps they realised early on it wasn’t a good idea for a network with more than one ‘centre’?

The London system of charging isn't a function of concentric circle zones. A 3-2-1-2-3 journey could still be priced as 5 zones rather than London's 3.

 

[swt_passenger]

The London system of charging isn't a function of concentric circle zones. A 3-2-1-2-3 journey could still be priced as 5 zones rather than London's 3.

Yes that probably would work better but I think it is is still best suited to an area with only one obvious centre of (travel) gravity...

 

[PeterC]

Yes that probably would work better but I think it is is still best suited to an area with only one obvious centre of (travel) gravity...

I agree. As I posted earlier, for a generic zonal system you start by overlaying hexagons of the right size on the map and then distort for the realities of geography. As a geographer that is how I would do it if required. I make no judgement on the economics or other practicalities of the idea.

 

[6Gman]

I love all these ideas of high-tech solutions, given that - as I found out again yesterday - the technology at New Street is unable to recognise the West Midlands Day Ranger ticket.

To be fair, who would ever think a West Midlands ticket would be valid in ... er, Birmingham.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I love all these ideas of high-tech solutions, given that - as I found out again yesterday - the technology at New Street is unable to recognise the West Midlands Day Ranger ticket.

To be fair, who would ever think a West Midlands ticket would be valid in ... er, Birmingham.

Congratulations on having identified the only ticket I've come across thus far (regardless of origin/destination pair) that doesn't operate the barriers at New St