Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
It's being reported today that refunds for un-used tickets have to be
claimed by midnight the day before travel (Tardis, anyone?) rather than >> up to 30 days afterwards.
SNCF and others solved this problem years ago: you need to 'composter' your ticket before you get on the train. No stamp == ticket is not valid.
A modern version of that would be 'activating' a ticket (paper/electronic) before travel. The stamps includes the time/date so if you activated an e-ticket after you boarded the train then that would be detectable. Really it only needs that logic implemented in the gripper's e-ticket scanner - it knows when the train stopped at station X, so calculate if the ticket was activated after that time and flag if so.
Activated tickets aren't ordinarily eligible for refunds, non-activated tickets are.
Why would that not work on our system?
Theo
You?d need to abolish split tickets. Current Aztec tickets aren?t activateable. You would need platform scanners or revert to m-tickets (tickets captive in an app that you can activate).
Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
It's being reported today that refunds for un-used tickets have to be >>>> claimed by midnight the day before travel (Tardis, anyone?) rather than >>>> up to 30 days afterwards.
SNCF and others solved this problem years ago: you need to 'composter' your >>> ticket before you get on the train. No stamp == ticket is not valid.
A modern version of that would be 'activating' a ticket (paper/electronic) >>> before travel. The stamps includes the time/date so if you activated an >>> e-ticket after you boarded the train then that would be detectable. Really >>> it only needs that logic implemented in the gripper's e-ticket scanner - it >>> knows when the train stopped at station X, so calculate if the ticket was >>> activated after that time and flag if so.
Activated tickets aren't ordinarily eligible for refunds, non-activated
tickets are.
Why would that not work on our system?
Theo
You?d need to abolish split tickets. Current Aztec tickets aren?t
activateable. You would need platform scanners or revert to m-tickets
(tickets captive in an app that you can activate).
I don't see why you'd need to abolish split tickets - you'd just need to activate them before the train gets to the starting station of each ticket, either at a station or online. You could activate the whole journey
in one go.
I agree that more methods of activation (hardware, online, app, etc) would need to be implemented. Passing through the barriers could count as activation for one ticket, but you'd need other ways - eg scan barcode using phone/webcam.
It would need a database of recording ticket activation though, and grippers able to contact it.
Theo
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
It's being reported today that refunds for un-used tickets have to be >>>> claimed by midnight the day before travel (Tardis, anyone?) rather than >>>> up to 30 days afterwards.
SNCF and others solved this problem years ago: you need to 'composter' your
ticket before you get on the train. No stamp == ticket is not valid.
A modern version of that would be 'activating' a ticket (paper/electronic)
before travel. The stamps includes the time/date so if you activated an >>> e-ticket after you boarded the train then that would be detectable. Really
it only needs that logic implemented in the gripper's e-ticket scanner - it
knows when the train stopped at station X, so calculate if the ticket was >>> activated after that time and flag if so.
Activated tickets aren't ordinarily eligible for refunds, non-activated >>> tickets are.
Why would that not work on our system?
You?d need to abolish split tickets. Current Aztec tickets aren?t
activateable. You would need platform scanners or revert to m-tickets
(tickets captive in an app that you can activate).
I don't see why you'd need to abolish split tickets - you'd just need to activate them before the train gets to the starting station of each ticket, either at a station or online. You could activate the whole journey
in one go.
I agree that more methods of activation (hardware, online, app, etc) would need to be implemented. Passing through the barriers could count as activation for one ticket, but you'd need other ways - eg scan barcode using
phone/webcam.
It would need a database of recording ticket activation though, and grippers
able to contact it.
I don?t see how self scan/activation on the train can be fraud proof. Both time and location, especially on Android, can be spoofed. So you could
leave your ticket unscanned until you saw a gripper and then activate with
a historical starting point. I suppose you could require all tickets that
are part of a split to be scanned at the start of the trip by a railway controlled device. But I could foresee chaos at a gateline.
Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
It's being reported today that refunds for un-used tickets have to be >>>>>> claimed by midnight the day before travel (Tardis, anyone?) rather than >>>>>> up to 30 days afterwards.
SNCF and others solved this problem years ago: you need to 'composter' your
ticket before you get on the train. No stamp == ticket is not valid. >>>>>
A modern version of that would be 'activating' a ticket (paper/electronic)
before travel. The stamps includes the time/date so if you activated an >>>>> e-ticket after you boarded the train then that would be detectable. Really
it only needs that logic implemented in the gripper's e-ticket scanner - it
knows when the train stopped at station X, so calculate if the ticket was >>>>> activated after that time and flag if so.
Activated tickets aren't ordinarily eligible for refunds, non-activated >>>>> tickets are.
Why would that not work on our system?
You?d need to abolish split tickets. Current Aztec tickets aren?t
activateable. You would need platform scanners or revert to m-tickets
(tickets captive in an app that you can activate).
I don't see why you'd need to abolish split tickets - you'd just need to >>> activate them before the train gets to the starting station of each ticket, >>> either at a station or online. You could activate the whole journey
in one go.
I agree that more methods of activation (hardware, online, app, etc) would >>> need to be implemented. Passing through the barriers could count as
activation for one ticket, but you'd need other ways - eg scan barcode using
phone/webcam.
It would need a database of recording ticket activation though, and grippers
able to contact it.
I don?t see how self scan/activation on the train can be fraud proof. Both >> time and location, especially on Android, can be spoofed. So you could
leave your ticket unscanned until you saw a gripper and then activate with >> a historical starting point. I suppose you could require all tickets that
are part of a split to be scanned at the start of the trip by a railway
controlled device. But I could foresee chaos at a gateline.
With a database-based system (which is what e-tickets ultimately are), activation would create a timestamp in the database. It doesn't matter how or where you activated it, or what time your device thought it was, it's the creation of the database record that counts - you don't get to spoof the server time.
Activation would be an irrevocable intent that the journey has started. If your activation timestamp was after the train you are gripped on departed
the station on the ticket, then that could be immediately flagged. If you pass through a gateline you would need to have activated your ticket a plausible time in advance (eg if the line speed from A to B is 1 hour, you could not have activated it much later than 1 hour earlier)
You?d need to abolish split tickets. Current Aztec tickets aren?t
activateable. You would need platform scanners or revert to m-tickets
(tickets captive in an app that you can activate).
I don't see why you'd need to abolish split tickets - you'd just need to >activate them before the train gets to the starting station of each ticket, >either at a station or online. You could activate the whole journey
in one go.
I agree that more methods of activation (hardware, online, app, etc) would >need to be implemented. Passing through the barriers could count as >activation for one ticket, but you'd need other ways - eg scan barcode using >phone/webcam.
It would need a database of recording ticket activation though, and grippers >able to contact it.
On Fri, 6 Mar 2026 09:51:38 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
wrote:
In message <l47lqk58fhcrqvtihn5f7lsi98bqpmkk96@4ax.com>, at 09:21:52 on >>Fri, 6 Mar 2026, Trolleybus <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
Do any TOCs still run Permit To Travel schemes? On stations with no staff >>>>or ticket machines there was a machine you could stick a random amount of >>>>coinage into and it would present a permit which you would hand in at the >>>>destination station and pay the balance of a normal ticket.Northern have Promise to Pay machines that prove your starting point.
Actually they only prove where you bought the Promise to Pay ticket. You >>could have arrived at that station on an unticketed inbound train,
knowing that the station in question was the last one where you could
save money by pulling that trick.
Yes, exactly the same as Permits to Travel or just a TVM.
On Fri, 06 Mar 2026 21:44:14 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Mon, 2 Mar 2026 17:02:49 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>the
wrote:
GWR?s website is your friend for getting a reservation in advance of
travel day without needing a ticket at the point of making the >>>reservation.
The problem with that is that you then get reservations which are never
actually used.
T'wife and I went to London last May. We bought walk-up tickets on the
day, but when we got on the train practically every seat was reserved.
But we sat in a pair of reseerved seats anyway, on the basis that when
their owner turned up we'd move if necessary. But nobody did. We stayed
in the same seats all the way to Paddington.
Most booking sites insist on giving you a reservation even if you're
booking a flexible ticket, with no way to cancel or change it. If you
don't know what time you'll be leaving, you have to take a reservation on
a train you're unlikely to use.
In message <10oh17l$1f5tm$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:12:53 on Sat, 7 Mar
2026, Mike Humphrey <mail@michaelhumphrey.me.uk> remarked:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2026 21:44:14 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Mon, 2 Mar 2026 17:02:49 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>the
wrote:
GWR?s website is your friend for getting a reservation in advance of
travel day without needing a ticket at the point of making the >>>>reservation.
The problem with that is that you then get reservations which are never
actually used.
T'wife and I went to London last May. We bought walk-up tickets on the
day, but when we got on the train practically every seat was reserved.
But we sat in a pair of reseerved seats anyway, on the basis that when
their owner turned up we'd move if necessary. But nobody did. We stayed
in the same seats all the way to Paddington.
Most booking sites insist on giving you a reservation even if you're >>booking a flexible ticket, with no way to cancel or change it. If you
don't know what time you'll be leaving, you have to take a reservation on
a train you're unlikely to use.
Yes, but this isn't new. It's been like that for 20yrs.
The main difference is that if there's a TVM, you should normally be
able to buy a ticket, not merely register a "Promise to Pay".
Unless the TVM is broken in some way, like having lost its connectivity.
Other failures, like a broken touch-screen or having run out of blanks, would mean you couldn't get a PtP either.
Most booking sites insist on giving you a reservation even if you're >>>booking a flexible ticket, with no way to cancel or change it. If you >>>don't know what time you'll be leaving, you have to take a reservation on >>>a train you're unlikely to use.
Yes, but this isn't new. It's been like that for 20yrs.
And it's been relaxed recently. When I book with GA (a Trainline user)
it now asks me if I want to book a seat, so long as it isn't an
Advance.
In message <9vjqqk5uko1dqiv8gsnc9afasc59sa70s5@4ax.com>, at 10:32:17 on
Sun, 8 Mar 2026, Trolleybus <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
Most booking sites insist on giving you a reservation even if you're
booking a flexible ticket, with no way to cancel or change it. If you
don't know what time you'll be leaving, you have to take a reservation on >>>> a train you're unlikely to use.
Yes, but this isn't new. It's been like that for 20yrs.
And it's been relaxed recently. When I book with GA (a Trainline user)
it now asks me if I want to book a seat, so long as it isn't an
Advance.
Great. How many other TOCs/booking_sites do the same, though.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <dCF*WbNAA@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 17:47:47 on Thu,
5 Mar 2026, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <10obrc2$3p39q$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:02:10 on Thu, 5 Mar
2026, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <8i5qR.185$uJE9.29@fx10.ams1>, at 01:48:52 on Thu, 5 Mar >>>>>> 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
[Someone else said, attribution prematurely snipped]:
The 'repatriations' taking place by air are a symbolic gesture to show >>>>>>>> "Dubai is open!" If they were *actually* interested in repatriating >>>>>>>> people quickly, they would have organised a fleet of coaches to Riyadh.
Are there large fleets of suitable coaches and drivers (ie, not >>>>>>>the basic
buses used for Asian slave labourers) in that part of the world?
I though they had lots of capacity in order to cope with pilgrimage to >>>>>> Mecca. (1.5m foreigners each year).
That's 1,900km and a 19 hour drive away from Dubai.
It's a 10hr drive from Dubai to Riyadh. Driving fleets of coaches across >>>> the desert is simply one of the costs of doing this sort of business.
But these supposed coaches are plying the pilgrim trade near to Medina and >>> Mecca. Which means it's approximately two days drive away from the people >>> who need transport. It would also be picking up passengers in another
country, and I wouldn't be able to speculate what their laws say about that.
Given there's a hundred thousand (or whatever) people stranded, and
little sign that flights will resume any time soon, then these are small
problems to overcome.
Emirates is probably getting something like 20,000 people a day out. The >activity at DXB now seems to be building up, presumably as the Iranian
drone activity declines. But QR still seems to be grounded.
But that doesn?t address the problem of the many more thousands of people
who were planning to fly to or from Europe to Asia, Australia or Southern >Africa via a Gulf hub. Yes, there are other routes, but they have much less >capacity.
Ironically, the daily non-stop Perth-London flight is now having to go via >Singapore.
In message <4anqR.3$X61.1@fx16.ams1>, at 22:09:04 on Thu, 5 Mar 2026, >Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <dCF*WbNAA@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 17:47:47 on Thu,
5 Mar 2026, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <10obrc2$3p39q$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:02:10 on Thu, 5 Mar >>>>> 2026, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:But these supposed coaches are plying the pilgrim trade near to Medina and >>>> Mecca. Which means it's approximately two days drive away from the people >>>> who need transport. It would also be picking up passengers in another >>>> country, and I wouldn't be able to speculate what their laws say about that.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <8i5qR.185$uJE9.29@fx10.ams1>, at 01:48:52 on Thu, 5 Mar >>>>>>> 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
[Someone else said, attribution prematurely snipped]:I though they had lots of capacity in order to cope with pilgrimage to >>>>>>> Mecca. (1.5m foreigners each year).
The 'repatriations' taking place by air are a symbolic gesture to show
"Dubai is open!" If they were *actually* interested in repatriating >>>>>>>>> people quickly, they would have organised a fleet of coaches to Riyadh.
Are there large fleets of suitable coaches and drivers (ie, not >>>>>>>>the basic
buses used for Asian slave labourers) in that part of the world? >>>>>>>
That's 1,900km and a 19 hour drive away from Dubai.
It's a 10hr drive from Dubai to Riyadh. Driving fleets of coaches across >>>>> the desert is simply one of the costs of doing this sort of business. >>>>
Given there's a hundred thousand (or whatever) people stranded, and
little sign that flights will resume any time soon, then these are small >>> problems to overcome.
Emirates is probably getting something like 20,000 people a day out. The >>activity at DXB now seems to be building up, presumably as the Iranian >>drone activity declines. But QR still seems to be grounded.
But that doesn?t address the problem of the many more thousands of people >>who were planning to fly to or from Europe to Asia, Australia or Southern >>Africa via a Gulf hub. Yes, there are other routes, but they have much less >>capacity.
Ironically, the daily non-stop Perth-London flight is now having to go via >>Singapore.
Because of closed airspace and having to take a longer routing. The
stopover at Singapore adds 3hrs. However the Paris-Perth direct flight
is still operating (16hrs 15min).
| Sysop: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 5 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 119:51:11 |
| Calls: | 125 |
| Calls today: | 125 |
| Files: | 489 |
| D/L today: |
859 files (365M bytes) |
| Messages: | 76,568 |
| Posted today: | 26 |