Leap - should tag on/off machines not have been put at bus stops?

n97 mini

Instead of in buses. Just like the tag on/off machines are in train stations, and not on the trains themselves.

I just read that on a blog. Makes huge sense in terms of delivering a quality service, and with the trains the idea is staring them in the face already.

Makes for greatly reduced dwell times and journeys can be billed for properly. I would imagine it makes it more operator friendly too.

Sure, it'll cost a bit more. Money could have been saved (but wasn't) by rolling out machines and RTPI signs at the same time.

schemingbohemia

5k bus stops vs 1k buses in the current economic climate?

Plus you see a bus coming tag on - it's full so you can't get on, what do you do?

I think they may have thought about this a bit more than some guy on a blog.

bk

Dublin Bus has 5,000 bus stops. Each stop would need a reader (basically a PC), power and internet connection.

How would you deal with vandalism of these machines?

How would a driver know if a person actually tagged on before getting on a bus? You would need to hire lots of revenue protection people like on LUAS or face increase loses from fraud.

What would happen if a passenger got off, only to find the reader not working? They are now charged the full fare possible.

It would be much cheaper for DB to just go flat fare with tag on only.

n97 mini

schemingbohemia wrote: »

what do you do?

Tag off again. 0 stages. Simples.

@bk - 5,000 bus stops. 1,000 buses this year. Buses get replaced frequently, stops don't. All the other questions, just refer to IE for the answers... they've done it already.

LXFlyer

Eh who is going to pay for that?

I'm afraid that is a totally unworkable solution.

Aard

Which blog?

bk

n97 mini wrote: »

@bk - 5,000 bus stops. 1,000 buses this year. Buses get replaced frequently, stops don't. All the other questions, just refer to IE for the answers... they've done it already.

I assume the card readers, gps, ticket machines, radios, etc. are transferred from the old to new buses.

And you didn't answer any of the other issues I raised.

Totally unworkable.

dazberry

Maybe a few key stops in the city centre could have had tag off facilities (e.g Dame St) where a lot of people would get off at the same time, otherwise tagging off would be done on the bus. Every stop having a tag on/off facility I don't see as practical.

D.

penexpers

n97 mini wrote: »

Tag off again. 0 stages. Simples.

@bk - 5,000 bus stops. 1,000 buses this year. Buses get replaced frequently, stops don't. All the other questions, just refer to IE for the answers... they've done it already.

I doubt IE have anything near 5000 readers.

n97 mini

bk wrote: »

I assume the card readers, gps, ticket machines, radios, etc. are transferred from the old to new buses.

Yes, and all that costs money.

bk wrote: »

And you didn't answer any of the other issues I raised.

I did: All the other questions, just refer to IE for the answers... they've done it already.

n97 mini

lxflyer wrote: »

Eh who is going to pay for that?

The same people that are paying for the current one.

As mentioned, fitting to 1,000 buses is not a once-off. They'll have to be refitted time and time and time again.

lxflyer wrote: »

I'm afraid that is a totally unworkable solution.

No, it'd work better than the "solution" than we're getting.

Stevek101

I am baffled.

schemingbohemia

n97 mini wrote: »

Yes, and all that costs money.


I did: All the other questions, just refer to IE for the answers... they've done it already.

So you expect DB to put in exit validators on all their buses not allowing you off the bus if you've overstayed your ticket on the bus? That's what IE are doing.

Your proposal is nonsense. Re-fitting a tag system from 1 bus to another costs very little - putting in a new system with new power requirements at 5k stops is a huge cost. You keep saying IE do the same thing, they've less than 40 stops with the readers at them - not 5,000.

foggy_lad

n97 mini wrote: »

Tag off again. 0 stages. Simples.

@bk - 5,000 bus stops. 1,000 buses this year. Buses get replaced frequently, stops don't. All the other questions, just refer to IE for the answers... they've done it already.

Busses get replaced and new busses come wired up for the machines so the old readers are very easily moved to new busses.

penexpers wrote: »

I doubt IE have anything near 5000 readers.

two in most stations afaik

n97 mini wrote: »

The same people that are paying for the current one.

As mentioned, fitting to 1,000 buses is not a once-off. They'll have to be refitted time and time and time again.


No, it'd work better than the "solution" than we're getting.

Refitting to new busses is a lot easier than replacing damaged vandalised units, Irish rail don't have this problem because their machines are hidden away in stations on platforms and are under surveillance 24/7. How do you propose protecting 5000 machines on bus stops? How are they going to be powered? Serviced?

Aard

Your arguments are dwell times and correct fares.

Having a tag off on the street as opposed to in the bus will only reduce dwell times if there are a lot of people getting off at a certain stop. Out of the 5,000 stops, how many fall into this category? I'd imagine not a lot. Certainly in the city centre it might have merit, along with strategic stops in the burbs. But for the rest, there'd only ever be a few alighting at the same time. Cost-benefit would be little.

For the correct fares, you have to remember that the same bus stop could be part of different stages for different routes. Your proposal tackles problems that should be sorted out at the drivers machine.

That's not even to begin with vandalism and maintenance.

Really, I think it would be an exercise in wasteful spending.

n97 mini

foggy_lad wrote: »

Busses get replaced and new busses come wired up for the machines so the old readers are very easily moved to new busses.

Yes but once again, it's not free. Not a case of 1,000 buses and that's it, done.

And IE have readers in unmanned unsupervised stations.

Stevek101

Big difference between 1,000 and 5,000+ readers to be honest. This is going no where...

LXFlyer

n97 mini wrote: »

The same people that are paying for the current one.

As mentioned, fitting to 1,000 buses is not a once-off. They'll have to be refitted time and time and time again.


No, it'd work better than the "solution" than we're getting.

What are you on about?

The buses are already fitted with the equipment and have been for several years. They only need fitting once.

I'm sorry but that idea is completely unworkable. It's far too expensive for one let alone considering the vandalism aspect.

While railway stations may not be manned they all have CCTV.

Jehuty42

Out of interest, does the LEAP system(or the IE smartcard) need a backhaul network connection to update a central system when a card tags on/off? Or is all the info stored on the card?

RFID tech requires the scanner to be powered, so with that(either cabling or something solar) + a 3g modem being fitted to every piddling bus stop, like this one, it's a ridiculous idea.

markpb

Jehuty42 wrote: »

Out of interest, does the LEAP system(or the IE smartcard) need a backhaul network connection to update a central system when a card tags on/off? Or is all the info stored on the card?

Leap will do both. The card stores the transaction details and updates the available cash balance (if applicable) locally. The card reader also stores a record of the transaction details. This is uploaded to the host system sometime later on (presumably at night when the buses are back at their garage).

xper

Jehuty42 wrote: »

Out of interest, does the LEAP system(or the IE smartcard) need a backhaul network connection to update a central system when a card tags on/off? Or is all the info stored on the card?

I've worked with the software end of smart card systems (not transport) a couple of times. Depending on the nature of transaction, it may or may not require a link back to the central system to be completed. Wherever possible, for speed and because networks aren't 100% reliable if not for any other reason, the option will be for the card to have enough information to tell the reader what to do and the central system will get updated later, sometimes much later.

For a bus tag-on transaction at the point of boarding, speed is going to be paramount so it is almost certainly a card/scanner interaction only. For tram/train platforms or bus stop tag-on/off, you could conceivably include a link to the central system for a card update but it might still be too slow.
Card updates from the central system would definitely be done during the top-up transaction.

RFID tech requires the scanner to be powered, so with that(either cabling or something solar) + a 3g modem being fitted to every piddling bus stop, like this one, it's a ridiculous idea.

Actually, many systems using RFID technology can have a large proportion of standalone readers that are offline and powered by battery. They are self-contained, relatively low cost, low maintenace units. The outcome of the transaction is stored on the card and the central system is updated when the card next interacts with a different, online reader.
For example, in a system that handles access to a secure building, the internal room door readers will often be offline/battery powered and the handful of building access doors which all cardholders must regularly use will be the ones connected to a mains power supply and a computer network, exchanging entrance records, access right changes and messages from the standalone hardware ("Door 14A - Low battery").

But such a setup does require that the cardholder will frequently use an online reader as part of their normal interaction with the system and I am not sure that that would be achieved with bus passengers using standalone readers strapped to bus stop poles.

Wiring up and maintaining all stops would be very expensive, as pointed out, and I just don't see the advantage for the passenger or service supplier in this approach. At the end of the day, lets not re-invent the wheel. Tag-on only on a citynetwork bus works very well in London and elsewhere. All we need then is a flat fare structure to prevent the proposed queing to ask the driver for a less-than-maximum fare, multiple door vehicles to allow simultaneous boarding and egress and day- and week fare charge capping and we might actually have the makings of an integrated fare card system.

Cookie_Monster

1. Number of bus-stops, though they do really need to get rid of about 20% of them...

2. Vandalism, lots and lots of bus stops get totally wrecked with alarming frequency, glass smashed, plastic set on fire and timetables defaced. Adding expensive equipment to that mix is not a good idea.

3. Cost, aside from the sheer number, you have higher installation costs and higher power costs to run them. More units to be maintained, mobile maintenance rather than centrally when buses in de opts, so more expensive there too.

loyatemu

in fairness - they could've incorporated card-readers into the RTPI poles - they already have power, they're already at the busiest stops and they're already owned by the NTA. All 5,000 stops is clearly not a runner (there are far too many bus stops in Dublin but that's a different discussion).

Conway635

The service life of a Dublin Bus is 12 years, other than in exceptional circumstances (fire, accident, or getting rid of 20 bendis early).

Even that 12 year life is only a temporary measure while the fleet is being converted to lowfloor - the standard life is 16 years, and the company is reverting to this once the last non-accessible buses are replaced.

I would say that even 12 years is not "frequent" replacement. And upon withdrawal from service, the smartcard machine is quickly transferred by a fitter, along with other reusuable components - radio systems and underfloor safes are moved from old to new.

C635

AlekSmart

xper wrote: »

But such a setup does require that the cardholder will frequently use an online reader as part of their normal interaction with the system and I am not sure that that would be achieved with bus passengers using standalone readers strapped to bus stop poles.

Tag-on only on a citynetwork bus works very well in London and elsewhere. All we need then is a flat fare structure to prevent the proposed queing to ask the driver for a less-than-maximum fare, multiple door vehicles to allow simultaneous boarding and egress and day- and week fare charge capping and we might actually have the makings of an integrated fare card system.

Post-Of-The-Day on the topic

IF the sole aim of the ITS (Irish Style) programme was to ensure faster dwell times and thus allow for more expedited total journeys then the Flate Fare would have been Item 1 on this menu.

However,as this thread itself demonstrates,we have a monumental ability to complicate the simplest of ideas until they explode.

The real issue here is a substantial politically inspired turf-war between several competing bodies both corporate and Governmental with everybody else forced to stand and watch...:(

goingnowhere

The problem is not the technology its a refusal to move the 21st century in Dublin Bus who seem to be willing to dig in and retain a fare structure which a DUTC tram conductor would still understand.

Irish Rail and Luas give a discount so finger of blame points to only one suspect Dublin Bus

AngryLips

loyatemu wrote: »

in fairness - they could've incorporated card-readers into the RTPI poles - they already have power, they're already at the busiest stops and they're already owned by the NTA. All 5,000 stops is clearly not a runner (there are far too many bus stops in Dublin but that's a different discussion).

Bit off topic but I have no idea why the RTPI poles were not incorporated into the bus stop itself. The approach adopted just adds to street clutter as would any additional tag-off pole (a la Luas)

AlekSmart

AngryLips wrote: »

Bit off topic but I have no idea why the RTPI poles were not incorporated into the bus stop itself. The approach adopted just adds to street clutter as would any additional tag-off pole (a la Luas)

Well...erm...if you had an....erm..."interest" in an entity manufacturing or distrubuting Stainless Steel roadside furniture it might not be so hard.....:rolleyes:

Goingnowhere:The problem is not the technology its a refusal to move the 21st century in Dublin Bus who seem to be willing to dig in and retain a fare structure which a DUTC tram conductor would still understand.

True,to a point...however it may well have more to do with defining Leap or ITS in accounting terms as we struggle with the rule that the NTA/DOT is responsible for seting cash-fare levels whilst BAC itself has such discretion with Off-Bus Sales...ie Pre-Paids......anybody seen Solomon lately....

bk

AngryLips wrote: »

Bit off topic but I have no idea why the RTPI poles were not incorporated into the bus stop itself. The approach adopted just adds to street clutter as would any additional tag-off pole (a la Luas)

The reason is most bus stops are owned by Dublin Bus, while the RTPI is run by the NTA and is supposed to support all bus companies, including DB, BE, Aircoach, etc.

The solution is that the NTA should take over the ownership of all bus stops and also the location of stops and allow different companies to use the same stops, thus reducing street clutter and making better use of valuable street space.

However DB don't want this as bus stops give them extra revenue via advertising on bus stop shelters.

This is also the reason there are no bus stop shelters in the core city centre. Dublin City Council don't want DB bus shelter ads taking money from their own ad space.

So you see the various vested interests all working together to ensure the bus service possible to the people of Ireland :mad:

Cookie_Monster

Conway635 wrote: »

underfloor safes are moved from old to new.

C635

Conway635

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

The secure safe that all the money drops into, which is located under the floor at the front of the bus - these can only be emptied in the depot for safety reasons, and are removed and transferred from old buses to new when old ones are withdrawn from service along with radio and ticket reader systems.

C635

Flukey

I got my Leapcard this morning. One thing that immediately strikes me as being a pain is that tagging on when getting on a bus needs to be done through the driver for up to 13 stages. If it is a cashless system you should not have to go to the driver, just like all other cards enable you to avoid the driver. It will slow things down in the cash queue, as many of the current card users will find themselves having to move back to the cash queue. There are practicalities in tagging off and so measuring the length of your journey, as being discussed in this thread, but tagging on should be possible exclusively through the validator. I understand why they are doing this, so as to measure your journey and deduct the correct fare, but it will still be slow. The argument for the flat fare gets stronger alright.