Criteria for "London Overground"

London Overground is a train company that took over the services run by Silverlink when Silverlink's franchise expired, as an experiment in Transport for London running a rail service as much as anything. "Designating" isn't the right word to use.

Really, TfL should have nothing to do with things outwith London - however then what do we say about the TOCs which enter London? Again, really, TfL ought not to interfere with these - because whilst the TOC will try to do what is best for the franchise as a whole, TfL will want to do what is best for London - screw the rest of the franchise.

c.f. more train paths on the ECML - if TfL had a say no doubt they would want them to be used for local services, whereas overall it might be better for them to be used for Leeds/Lincoln/Newcastle/Edinburgh/Aberdeen.

Fair point Tom, but what defines the London area most appropriately? Its not just the London Boroughs; a vast number of people commute from further a field.

Looking at it, Ken said he'd make money available to Train Operating Companies to implement Oyster, most dragged their heels on the issue and did not want to sign up for it; they'd be responsible for another companies properry - the readers.

I for one would dearly love to see Oyster accepted on National Rail services, as per the TOC-Issued ODTC's currently offer.

If you look at it, from a simple point of view... TfL has, [or had] the West London Line, North London Line and the East London Line. The odd one out is the South London Line, currently operated by Southern, a rather good TOC, IMHO. South London Metro, through St Helier, Morden South etc, might be a suitable candidate for take over by Overground.

I think from memory, that ALL TOC's in the london Zonal area will have to accept Oyster PAYG anyway; which is one of the reasons the TOC's had the fares revision, so that, irrespective of TOC travelled on, passenger 1 travelling from a zone 3 station, would pay the same as another passenger travelling from the same zone on another TOC...

Quite. My post was merely a reply to Rob's point that it would be unacceptable to have TfL operating to other destinations in the south - such as Birmingham or Brighton.

Hmm, the reader question is difficult. You may end up with a situation where an Oyster is touched on a reader belonging to one company, on a station belonging to a second, then you board a train operated by a third! I can see that, in the event of difficulties, it would become a tremendous game of pass-the-buck.

If we look at the ECML (a subject close to my heart).

Currently if you're looking at Stakeholders at the Southern End the list would include:

FCC, NXEC, EWS, Eurostar, London travel watch, TfL, local councils, Hull Trains, Grand Central trains, East Midland trains, NXEA , ORR, Local MP's, local commuter groups....the list is virtually endless.

TBH I can see a logical point of TfL being responsible for the commuter routes into London, it makes sense.

Don't forget that London Transport et al, used to operate services in Stevange/ Hitchin etc not that many moons ago.

As for the Oyster acceptance, only SWT HAVE to accept Oyster (or similar) within Z1-6 as a part of their franchise agreement. All the rest are entering a voluntary agreement with TfL and DfT. My understanding of the agreement is TfL are funding the installation, DfT are funding the future upgrades to ITSO(rumoured to cost more than Oyster) and the TOC's are paying for the day-day running.