Integrated ticketing for Dublin - anyone got an update?

sitstill

At the moment I have a smartcard for Luas and a smartcard for Dart in my wallet. Been waiting a long time for the day I will only need one.

Does anyone know if this day is getting any closer?!

jack presley

It's happening in 2007, along with the real time info at the bus stops.

AlekSmart

Does anyone know if this day is getting any closer?!

Sitstill,I would suggest that you get comfortable with fidgeting a wee bit.

I would be very surprised if you were able to utilize a single card for Dart/Luas this side of January 2012...however I would be exira n delira if I were to be proven incorrect....;)

antoinolachtnai

As I understand it, the plan is for bus and luas to come on-stream first.

This is scheduled to happen in the middle of this year, as I understand it.

Just looking at it from the outside, I think the timespan mentioned by Alek would be a lot more realistic.

I think that the Dublin Bus rollout will be very difficult. This is no reflection on the people involved, but just the reality of the project. It is very difficult to get equipment installed and then working flawlessly on 1000 buses which are obviously constantly needed for operations. Even scheduling the buses and the work would be a nightmare.

Added to that is driver training. The Dublin Bus scheme is considerably more complex than the Luas,Irish Rail or TfL schemes from the point of view of the driver who has to operate it. (Again, this is no reflection on the drivers, it's just a fact that the system is complicated and will take a good bit of getting used to.)

I do not have a lot of inside information about the above. I hope I am wrong about this.

Stevek101

It is already being tested on Dublin Bus with the e purse option about to enter a heavy testing phase. It should be up and running for the public by May. You'll be able to top up at payzone points or online.

robd

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

I think that the Dublin Bus rollout will be very difficult. This is no reflection on the people involved, but just the reality of the project. It is very difficult to get equipment installed and then working flawlessly on 1000 buses which are obviously constantly needed for operations. Even scheduling the buses and the work would be a nightmare.

Integrating the various systems is a backend job not a frontline job. The luas, buses and darts all already have smart card readers which work for their indviudal cards. The systems just don't talk to one another yet.

Also buses sit in a depo for 6+ hours every night anyway and they already had to have smart cards fitted.

Not to say it's not complex, just that the buses don't need significant work, maybe just a software upgrade.

antoinolachtnai

The ITS is essentially a whole new ticketing system. It is not an amalgamation of existing systems. None of the existing cards will 'become' integrated tickets.

There is a special card reader module ('SCIM') that has to be deployed for the integrated ticketing. I do not know how widely these are deployed to date. They do not seem to be very widely deployed. Obviously these modules have to be made reverse compatible with the existing tickets.

You also need to upgrade or change the firmware on the ticket machine.

And there is also the training.

Stevek101

Sounds a bit different to what actually has to happen... Are you sure you are talking about Dublin Bus etc here?

Carawaystick

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The ITS is essentially a whole new ticketing system. It is not an amalgamation of existing systems. None of the existing cards will 'become' integrated tickets.

That's cos there is no integrated ticketing system. There is only an e-purse system, where you take your readily convertible cash, which can pay for any public transport in Dublin at the minute ( bar flights) and spend that on credit in a smart cart to allow you pay for certain public transport in Dublin, and it will cost pretty much the same as cash.

I've seen nowhere to suggest that there will be capping at daily/weekly/annual rates in the `Integrated Ticketing system'

Stevek101

Carawaystick wrote: »

I've seen nowhere to suggest that there will be capping at daily/weekly/annual rates in the `Integrated Ticketing system'

The system is capable of capping and it will be implemented for each provider when it is launched. Dublin Bus's current range of tickets will be migrated to the capping on the smart card. So as you say it isn't really integrated but capping will exist per operator.

Carawaystick

Stevek101 wrote: »

The system is capable of capping and it will be implemented for each provider when it is launched. Dublin Bus's current range of tickets will be migrated to the capping on the smart card. So as you say it isn't really integrated but capping will exist per operator.

So if I take 5 busses in less than 90 mins I'll only pay 1.85? same as a transfer 90 ticket?

Or no matter how many darts I take in a year I won't pay more than 1030?

Aard

Why oh why can it not be done so that the same ticket works on bus, Luas, and Dart? Even if the Dart were to be zoned and the integrated ticket only worked on one or two zones like the Paris RER, it would be good. It could be as simple as a 90-minute cap of EUR 2.50 for all modes, keeping the different operator prices for non-transfer trips.

It doesn't necessarily mean a simplification of the tariffs (although that would be preferable) but rather that all modes when combined are treated equally.

Where it really starts to confuse me is the fact that they're all state companies involved!

Stevek101

Carawaystick wrote: »

So if I take 5 busses in less than 90 mins I'll only pay 1.85? same as a transfer 90 ticket?

Or no matter how many darts I take in a year I won't pay more than 1030?

Don't know about Irish Rail, but I'd assume it remain the same as what they already have on offer with their epurse smart card.

Dublin Bus/Luas's integrated offering will come first, maybe CIE and Veolia will come to some sort of integrated agreement... But as it stands you are correct on DB. The idea is to have a 90min fare, daily, weekly and monthly cap on the epurse. Yearly tickets I am not sure about...

One of the reasons they've asked for a cash fare increase is to encourage people to use the smart card. Not the right approach I know but this is the country we live in.

Aircoach already offered Dublin Bus to have an interim epurse ticket but that offer was decline by Dublin Bus.

AlekSmart

[QUOTE=Stevek101;70065994

One of the reasons they've asked for a cash fare increase is to encourage people to use the smart card. Not the right approach I know but this is the country we live in.

Aircoach already offered Dublin Bus to have an interim epurse ticket but that offer was decline by Dublin Bus.[/QUOTE]

This entire sham that DB is "applying" for a fare increase needs to be put-to-bed right now.

This is already a done-deal,with only the P`s and Q`s to be tided up.
The main reason for the increase at this low-point in the State`s history is to prevent the company having to offer an actual discount to pre-paid ticket holders.

What has been agreed (confirmed by the recent announcemen by the Integrated Ticketing Board) is that cash-fares will rise in advance of IT introduction.

This will allow the IT product to be introduced at the "Old" rate (ie: The Current cash-fare scale) and voila!!! the sorcerers can point to a "Discount !!".

In other,less corrupt countries,such as Haiti,this type of stunt would be characterised as black-magic or mal-voodoo and those responsible boiled in a big vat,but in modern Ireland it`s a whizz-bang spot-on idea which will revitalize Public Transport usage etc etc...:mad:

It remains clear that after a decade of faffing about and endorsing a seriously flawed Ticket Integration Plan what we are now being presented with is a SCAM......Nothing more-Nothing Less.

The cost of this scam thus far exceeds €38 MILLION and nobody of substance appears tom find this exceptional....Éire Nua indeed...:o

Whilst the Aircoach "offer" might be on the surface a good move,the reality is that all the companies signed up to the IT plan are legally committed to accepting it`s product formulae upon introduction so the actual gains would be minimal in this case.....:)

antoinolachtnai

Well, integrated ticketing is a very complex project. It is mainly complex because the obvious entity to lead it (CIE) did not lead it and if anything has been holding it back with fairly stupid requirements.

EUR 38m will be very cheap for this project if it delivers. It is a lot cheaper than other similar projects elsewhere. However, that doesn't figure in the marketing budget. The marketing budget is set at around EUR 1.8m, whilst around 15m will be required over 3 years (in my view).

I would not say the project is a scam. It is basically a good project that has been screwed up by its largest participants.

A large part of the reason it is so far over time and budget is that all the estimates at the beginning of the project were totally unrealistic.

The main reason DB is applying for a fare increase at this point would seem to be the reduction in passenger numbers and hence the loss of fares.

The reality is that DB/CIE is not breaking even as it currently stands. There are three obvious ways to fix that. (Obviously, a combination is possible)

1. Increase the subsidy (this has actually happened already. The subsidy per journey has increased from 2008 to 2009 and could turn out to have risen again for 2010 and 2011).

2. Increase the fares.

3. Reduce the costs. Within this, there are two main ways to reduce costs. That is, reduce operating costs / kilometre or reduce number of kilometres operated.

Really what the company needs is restructuring to do no. 3 above, but also to increase the number of passenger journeys.

Re Integrated Ticket Products - nobody is committed to anything. No contracts have been signed. The ITS as proposed has no multi-operator products on it, other than the purse and the monthly/annual tickets. It is an integrated ticket, not an integrated fare.

The NTA can introduce products and impose them on operators if it wishes, as part of a fare scheme under Section 59 of the DTA Act 2008.

Swords Express sought an arrangement to accept Dublin Bus commuter tickets. Dublin Bus rejected this proposal without any negotiations or serious consideration.

Personally, I think that a radical rethink of the whole fare system is required. It needs some sort of zonal system, possibly with a premium charge for certain types of services. There needs to be a high differential (a euro or so) between the cash fare and the card fare to encourage use of the new system, phased in over two or three years.

I think the 'cap' should become the core of the system of discounts for commuters. (I am told that the card as designed only supports a weekly cap. It doesn't do monthly or yearly caps. The reason for this is that there are only a limited number of counters on the card. However, there is still a way of retrofitting a monthly or yearly cap through credits to the card.) The tax break on public transport commuter tickets should be abolished and the money put directly towards public transport.

AlekSmart

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Well, integrated ticketing is a very complex project. It is mainly complex because the obvious entity to lead it (CIE) did not lead it and if anything has been holding it back with fairly stupid requirements.

EUR 38m will be very cheap for this project if it delivers. It is a lot cheaper than other similar projects elsewhere.

I would not say the project is a scam. It is basically a good project that has been screwed up by its largest participants.


Re Integrated Ticket Products - nobody is committed to anything. No contracts have been signed. The ITS as proposed has no multi-operator products on it, other than the purse and the monthly/annual tickets. It is an integrated ticket, not an integrated fare.

The NTA can introduce products and impose them on operators if it wishes, as part of a fare scheme under Section 59 of the DTA Act 2008.

Swords Express sought an arrangement to accept Dublin Bus commuter tickets. Dublin Bus rejected this proposal without any negotiations or serious consideration.

Personally, I think that a radical rethink of the whole fare system is required. It needs some sort of zonal system, possibly with a premium charge for certain types of services. There needs to be a high differential (a euro or so) between the cash fare and the card fare to encourage use of the new system, phased in over two or three years.

I think the 'cap' should become the core of the system of discounts for commuters. (I am told that the card as designed only supports a weekly cap. It doesn't do monthly or yearly caps. The reason for this is that there are only a limited number of counters on the card. However, there is still a way of retrofitting a monthly or yearly cap through credits to the card.) The tax break on public transport commuter tickets should be abolished and the money put directly towards public transport.

Thank you Antoin for those clarifications.

I have to reaffirm my belief that a scam of a particular hue is still a scam.

The €38 Million thus far spent still does not equate to being "cheap" in my mind,particularly as you point out,there remains a big IF in terms of the products functionality.

To clarify,I was indeed thinking of the Section 59 powers in my OP as it gives the NTA effective regulatory power in relation to ALL fares on ALL operators within it`s sphere of influence.

However what really does fail to impress me here is your revelation that the ITS "Product" is on the verge of introduction with already severely limited parameters,ie inability to cap beyond one week :eek:...crikey I know we as a nation were never great on the oul forward planning,but this represents a new low.

Once I see references to "retro-fitting" being made in reference to a brand-spanking-new system I become somewhat fidgety and suspicious of the thing and I`m sad to say ITS is causing this itch right now

This system remains at the very core of what the Dublin Public Transport region urgently needs now.

Why we remain bogged down in this introductory phase is down to power struggling pure and simple !

Carawaystick

AlekSmart wrote: »

Thank you Antoin for those clarifications.

I have to reaffirm my belief that a scam of a particular hue is still a scam.

The €38 Million thus far spent still does not equate to being "cheap" in my mind,particularly as you point out,there remains a big IF in terms of the products functionality.

To clarify,I was indeed thinking of the Section 59 powers in my OP as it gives the NTA effective regulatory power in relation to ALL fares on ALL operators within it`s sphere of influence.

However what really does fail to impress me here is your revelation that the ITS "Product" is on the verge of introduction with already severely limited parameters,ie inability to cap beyond one week :eek:...crikey I know we as a nation were never great on the oul forward planning,but this represents a new low.

Once I see references to "retro-fitting" being made in reference to a brand-spanking-new system I become somewhat fidgety and suspicious of the thing and I`m sad to say ITS is causing this itch right now

This system remains at the very core of what the Dublin Public Transport region urgently needs now.

Why we remain bogged down in this introductory phase is down to power struggling pure and simple !

We really need a facepalm `smiley'

my first reaction to what you've highlighted in red was jaysus feicin crist.

My taxes are paying to introduce a product about 10 years after Oyster managed this and the system here won't do that and more.

To give an example of an actual irish improvement, DTT here is being rolled out many years after the brits rolled out theirs. However, we are using a better system, as technology has moved on.

Anyway. Does anyone know if I buy an annual dublin bus and commuter rail ticket will it be smartcard or a magstripe thing that'll stop working before March is out?

antoinolachtnai

Oyster was actually the result of around 6 or 7 years of development, and benefited from a lot of the brainiest people around.

The Oyster system is much simpler than the Dublin system, in that the Dublin system is designed to cater for multiple fareboxes. Oyster does not have this requirement at all.

A lot of the problems are to do with the unusual requirements, rather than the technological issues.

Most of the odd technological requirements come from Dublin Bus and to a lesser extent, the rest of the CIE group.

Carawaystick

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Oyster was actually the result of around 6 or 7 years of development, and benefited from a lot of the brainiest people around.

The Oyster system is much simpler than the Dublin system, in that the Dublin system is designed to cater for multiple fareboxes. Oyster does not have this requirement at all.

A lot of the problems are to do with the unusual requirements, rather than the technological issues.

Most of the odd technological requirements come from Dublin Bus and to a lesser extent, the rest of the CIE group.

Not that I'm a trekkie or even a trekker, but ffs, they're all companies owned by Noel (i'll retire for my pay rise thanks) Dempsey. Make It So

Those 7 years were all history when the its was starting to waste out 30 odd million....

antoinolachtnai

The answer (and I am not in the business of making apologies for Noel Dempsey, or Martin Cullen, or Mary O'Rourke) is that the minister does not have any meaningful control over what the CIE companies do.

AlekSmart

antoinolachtnai : The answer (and I am not in the business of making apologies for Noel Dempsey, or Martin Cullen, or Mary O'Rourke) is that the minister does not have any meaningful control over what the CIE companies do.
Today 00:54

I would have to say Au Contraire to Antoin on this point.

I would in fact suggest the direct opposite and historically I suspect the evidence will point to a high degree of micro-management by a rag-tag assortment of Ministers or perhaps more relevantly by Departmental Secretaries General (an oft-neglected,but highly important group).

Given the history of CIE as an entity It`s perhaps only to be expected that Political thinking would play a significant part in it`s direction and role,and it was ever thus.

In my own 30+ years working in the group I have seen at first hand the absolute terror which a Ministerial visit could bring and even better the almost immediate action which would result bfrom a Ministerial nod or a well placed Hmmmm...

The CIE group down through the decades has encouraged a great number of bright innovative thinkers in several differing Transport Related fields.

However the products of these fertile minds had at all times to pass the Political acceptability test and thus were so many good sound ideas lost to Ireland and it`s Public Transport users.

Most folks might have a passing accquaintance with the Bachelors Walk/Transport House-South Lotts Transport Hub plan which CIE devised and almost brought to fruition in the late 1960`s early 1970`s.

The mechanics of how the plan was abandoned,and particularly the ability of the Late-Night Telephone Call from a Departmental Secretary General to stop and reverse a multi-million pound long term development indicates a level of Political Control far beyond the vaguely interested level.

Whilst the Temple Bar remains the best known of the Political decisions,the history of CIE is littered with the buried (deeply in some cases) projects,ideas,and even relatively innocious operational adjustments which recieved the kiss of death most accurately described by David McWilliams in his book "Follow The Money".....

The response of his Civil Service "senior" to a particularly innovative suggestion.....

"Ah David,don`t you think that would be unwise ?"

Followed quickly by..."Make sure you shut the door behind you,like a good young man".

I would suggest that those words or a version thereof,were heard by hundreds if not thousands of free-thinking innovative CIE staff throughout it`s history.

Whilst I too would share Antoins reluctance to apologise for the cast of Political characters he names,I would still have to keep them onstage a while longer until the tumbril and rotten fruit arrive !!

Losty Dublin

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

A lot of the problems are to do with the unusual requirements, rather than the technological issues.

Most of the odd technological requirements come from Dublin Bus and to a lesser extent, the rest of the CIE group.

Early on in this thread you say that CIE group are the largest partner in this yet you also say that they have awkward requests that is holding back the project. Surely if this is the case then the ticket solution offered for integrated ticketing is wrong as it's not addressing two of it's largest partner requirements regardless of what they are.

I'd be more inclined to agree with Alek that the control rendered by the DoT and it's agencies is too much of the wrong control and not enough of the right control as can be seen in this debacle. If the CIE group have the wrong machines or fare structures to co-operate here then their shareholder either should get them new machines so we can expect it to work out of the box or to adapt to the market technology as it stands and make it work. You can blame CIE for certain woes that it can deal with within it's own structure/s but you cannot blame it when it's overlords and external bodies are not co-operating with it or other bodies.

antoinolachtnai

For instance, Dublin Bus wanted to control its own ticket sales network, which was pointless. To this day, the CIE companies are unable to agree on a protocol for under-16's. Again this is pointless The CIE companies insist they have to have separate fareboxes. This too is pointless

For sure, the Department of Transport should have knocked some heads together. But it just wasn't (and isn't) that easy in practice. It is very difficult for the minister to reform the fare scheme, for instance, at a time when the operating cost of the company was spiraling upwards. If he were to do this, he would have had to immediately increase the subsidy to the company.

This was the approach of the company, to continuously find new ways to leverage more money out of the government, whilst not providing much improvement in service. The interests of the company and its hangers-on were always put ahead of the needs of the city and the country. If they had a serious objection to what the government was doing, then why didn't they refuse some of the extraordinary funding they received?

If you don't believe me, look at the figures. CIE is now an incredibly wealthy company, with a book sheet value of 2.7 billion euros and practically no debt. In 2001 it was worth only 1.2 billion euros in today's money.

Despite all this building up of the company of the resources by the taxpayer, the company is now carrying fewer passengers than it carried in 2001.

sitstill

Just to bump this, has there been any update since FG/Lab came into power?

Bazzer2

The Minister for Transport was a guest on the Pat Kenny Show this morning and said he expects the roll-out of an Integrated Ticketing system this year.