Automatic Fare Collection For Commuter/Regional Rail

First post here so I apologize if it's been covered elsewhere, but I didn't see it comprehensive covered in one thread. Working through constructive suggestions with some fellow transit advocates to push the MBTA to think more creatively about bettering rail service, particularly commuter rail. Better fail collections enabling saving in personnel costs or allowing them to be used elsewhere was one of my ideas.

I noticed a few months ago when I was using NJ Transit from Seacaucus to Penn Station that they used fare gates in lieu of on board fare collection. What other commuter/regional rail agencies do this? Are fair gates only in inner zone stations? From a insider/wonk perspective how do think it's worked?

Secaucus requires proof of payment to access the platforms. One still has to present one's ticket aboard the train.

It would be amazingly expensive to reconfigure systems stationwide to allow for such an automated payment system like the type found on subway or metro systems. Plus, you'd still need a conductor aboard for safety reasons so you'd probably not save anything as no jobs would be eliminated.

Besides, if you get rid of conductors, who would be there to make surly remarks to paying customers? It used to be they were in the minority, but as time goes by it seems more and more of the newer hires are mumbling, nasty, and sometimes just plain rude...but I'm off topic.

Welcome aboard the forum. Ask away and enjoy the responses. Some will be more...colorful...than others. But most folks here are really nice and very intelligent.

SemperFidelis wrote:Secaucus requires proof of payment to access the platforms. One still has to present one's ticket aboard the train.

When was the last time you went? I went in November and went through fare gates. I did not see any conductors on either the trip to Penn or the return leg?

SemperFidelis wrote:It would be amazingly expensive to reconfigure systems stationwide to allow for such an automated payment system like the type found on subway or metro systems. Plus, you'd still need a conductor aboard for safety reasons so you'd probably not save anything as no jobs would be eliminated.

Besides, if you get rid of conductors, who would be there to make surly remarks to paying customers? It used to be they were in the minority, but as time goes by it seems more and more of the newer hires are mumbling, nasty, and sometimes just plain rude...but I'm off topic.

Welcome aboard the forum. Ask away and enjoy the responses. Some will be more...colorful...than others. But most folks here are really nice and very intelligent.

Thanks for the warm welcome!

ExCon90 wrote:Many years ago the Illinois Central used them on its electrified suburban service in Chicago (I think at all stations, even outlying). As far as I know it was a source of continuing frustration for a long time, slowed things down, and was later scrapped as impracticable. SEPTA in Philadelphia is planning on putting them in at Center City stations, being apparently appalled at the thought of people getting a free ride from 30th St. to Suburban Station. The plan is regarded by many outside SEPTA as a disaster in the making, resulting in huge jams at the turnstiles in peak hours, although we will evidently have to wait a few more years to find out.

This is the idea I had: putting fare gates in the inner stations (Zone 1A). There are way too many stations to put faregates in.

ExCon90 wrote:I believe the closest thing to it in current practice in the U. S. is on heavy-rail rapid-transit systems like WMATA in Washington, BART in the San Francisco area, and PATCO in Philadelphia, and it seems to work well enough on the RER in Paris and on the London Underground (although the Underground is not commuter rail in the sense that the RER is).

Yes, I've seen that one some YouTube videos and photos. I think they did it two years ago and short of the London Bridge disaster last year the gates seem to be able to handle the crowds there.

BostonJarred wrote:First post here so I apologize if it's been covered elsewhere, but I didn't see it comprehensive covered in one thread. Working through constructive suggestions with some fellow transit advocates to push the MBTA to think more creatively about bettering rail service, particularly commuter rail. Better fail collections enabling saving in personnel costs or allowing them to be used elsewhere was one of my ideas.

I noticed a few months ago when I was using NJ Transit from Seacaucus to Penn Station that they used fare gates in lieu of on board fare collection. What other commuter/regional rail agencies do this? Are fair gates only in inner zone stations? From a insider/wonk perspective how do think it's worked?

BostonJarred wrote:

ExCon90 wrote:Many years ago the Illinois Central used them on its electrified suburban service in Chicago (I think at all stations, even outlying). As far as I know it was a source of continuing frustration for a long time, slowed things down, and was later scrapped as impracticable. SEPTA in Philadelphia is planning on putting them in at Center City stations, being apparently appalled at the thought of people getting a free ride from 30th St. to Suburban Station. The plan is regarded by many outside SEPTA as a disaster in the making, resulting in huge jams at the turnstiles in peak hours, although we will evidently have to wait a few more years to find out.

This is the idea I had: putting fare gates in the inner stations (Zone 1A). There are way too many stations to put faregates in.

Faregates at 1A stations will not save a cent in personnel costs, for two main reasons:

* if they're only in 1A, that only relieves the on board staff from having to check fares on most outbound passengers: the on board staff would still have to check fares for inbound passengers (unless, I suppose, you also had the faregates charge an exit fare for inbounds).
* low-platform stations effectively require on board staff to facilitate boarding and de-boarding

The thing to do is proof-of-payment. No fare-gates, no conductors checking tickets, no station access choke points and broke turnstiles. Just random sweeps handing out fines to people who didn't validate a ticket. Level boarding should be dealt with on it's own merits.

From what I understand the IC's attempt to modernize fare collection was killed by labor arbitration, and instead of the high-volume rapid transit system that the IC electric was built to be Chicago instead has another low-ridership high cost metra line.

The Illinois Central/Metra Electric fare gates ultimately failed because the riders hated them and rose up in rebellion. The complaints included having to present a ticket THREE times to ride the train: at the boarding station, to the conductor on the train and at the departing station. In addition, Metra required riders on other lines to present their tickets only once --- to the conductor on the train. This lead Metra Electric riders, a high percentage of them minorities, to feel that Metra did not trust them, like it did riders on other lines. At least the Metra Electric stations were configured to allow gates, they are high platforms with only one or two entrances. Stations on other Metra lines are basically open platforms that would have to be fenced in. All, in all, a really bad idea. The new Ventra smart phone application seems like a better system __ and more acceptable to commuter rail patrons and allows for quicker and more comprehensive ticket collection. Commuter rail is a different animal than heavy rail/subway or light rail operations. In most operations, proof of purchase seems to be an invitation to try to get a free ride, unless sweeps are made on every run. A number of years ago, a group of my friends rode the Calgary LRT to the annual Stampede and were advised by a number of locals to not even brother buying a ticket since "nobody ever bothered to check." Not want to cause an international incident, we bought tickets --- and nobody checked!!!

bdawe wrote:The thing to do is proof-of-payment. No fare-gates, no conductors checking tickets, no station access choke points and broke turnstiles. Just random sweeps handing out fines to people who didn't validate a ticket. Level boarding should be dealt with on it's own merits.

From what I understand the IC's attempt to modernize fare collection was killed by labor arbitration, and instead of the high-volume rapid transit system that the IC electric was built to be Chicago instead has another low-ridership high cost metra line.

PoP only works on systems with short headways and lots of service. It is inappropriate for most United States commuter rail systems, in fact I would say all except Denver's new line since even the New York systems have sparse service at the outer ends. What happens if there's a line at the machine? Miss work or face a fine? How is that an option (I'm looking at you VRE).

PoP only works on systems with short headways and lots of service

Why? Conductors are ruinously expensive, especially when we're talking about multiples per train, and that expense is a considerable part of the marginal cost of frequent service.

What if there's a line at the machine? Put in more machines! Put a machine on the train. Let people buy books of tickets that can be validated with a quick swipe. Anything is cheaper than paying human beings and their pensions and split shifts and health plans to collect tickets from everyone, and it's a problem that's been solved many, many times in jurisdictions both in the United States and the rest of the world.

Every time someone looks empirically at fare evasion rates (not, "my buddy said that no one checks") it's almost always the case that things more complicated than random checks and PoP cost more for the benefit they bring in.

Conductors are "ruinously expensive" in the same way lifeboats are "wasted deckspace". They seem like such an easily eliminated frivolity, right up until there's a problem that needs to be dealt with. Having been aboard more than a few NJT trains when there was a...hmmm...human caused problem taking place, I was always glad someone with actual authority over the train was there to deal with the issue until other, better equipped, forces arrived.

BostonJarred, my last trip was only a month or so ago from Newark Airport to Port Jervis. I hear it isn't uncommon for people to not see a conductor, especially on the very crowded trains, betweenn Secaucus and NY Penn. For my part, a conductor reached me before the train even made Newark Penn from the airport stop, and the train was surprisingly full.

SemperFidelis wrote:Conductors are "ruinously expensive" in the same way lifeboats are "wasted deckspace". They seem like such an easily eliminated frivolity, right up until there's a problem that needs to be dealt with. Having been aboard more than a few NJT trains when there was a...hmmm...human caused problem taking place, I was always glad someone with actual authority over the train was there to deal with the issue until other, better equipped, forces arrived.

There are places in this world with entirely zero-person operation transit systems. They are highly reliable and safe, because fixed guideway transportation is already very safe, (and an order of magnitude safer than the highways most Americans subject themselves too) and because they invest in sufficient service quality to prevent issues rather than paying people to stand around waiting for disasters to happen.

And putting aside the notion that we need someone on suburban trains in the passenger area, one conductor is still dramatically fewer than current practice on many trains

BDawe, I suppose we'll just have to disagree on this point. I tend to err on the side of control, extremely tight oversight, heavy staffing, large bureaucracies, big government etc., and, as a consequence, believe that every passenger train in America (commuter train anyway) should be staffed with a goodly number of well trained, polite, and knowledgeable professionals.

As to your point about highways, I don't really know what that has to do with the idea of having conductors aboard trains. I have no idea why people accept anything other than a minimal level of risk in any daily activity, be that commuting by train or by car. So I suppose I agree with you, highways and the people who use them tend to be dangerous places that people make all the more dangerous through thier habits.

For the 99.999999% of the time that the train arrives on time, stays on the rails, and does what it is supposed to do, of course no one is needed per say. It's those pesky times when bad things happen that we need professionals to help us.

My house isn't aflame, yet I don't mind paying taxes to support my city's firemen. And my wife LOVES visiting the firehouse because all it is down there is strong guys, lefting weights, being paid to wait for something bad to happen.

I'm not being robbed but I don't mind supporting my city's police. Same with them, more people just sitting around waiting for crimes to be committed.

ISIL / ISIS isn't much of a threat to me or our nation in any great way, but I'm glad we have a strong, standing military, and not one that has to wait until something bad happens to be brought into existence.

Most times, those stupid life vests and oxygen masks on my Dreamliner will do nothing more than give me somethng to do while I wait to become a black smudge in the middle of a field or a debris field on the surface of the Atlantic, and boy do they cost a TON of money to install and maintain, but I'll be glad they're there if we lose cabin pressure above 15000 or successfully ditch and are forced to deplane.

I've never been aboard a train during anything worse than a pedestrian strike, but if I were, I'd imagine I'd be more comfortable with a trained professional to answer my questions and assist those in need than I would were the only people to turn to other passengers who know as little as I do about the resent emergency.

I suppose it's just differing philosophies. I don't mind high operating costs/taxes/whatever else if it means the system is the best it can be for that money. Living near NJ Transit service I obviously have more of the first part than the second...

To revisit the "ruinously expensive" costs of conductors. I seem to recall that Amtrak, in its entirety, is running something like a $1.4 billion deficit per year. That, the entire deficit of a large, rather poorly run, passenger railroad, including maintenance, acquisitions, operations, payroll, advertising and oand on, is less than the cost of 3 F-22 fighters. I think you might be placing too much emphasis on the cost of conductors.

Oh, the IC thing. I would doubt that the nasty, greedy Unions had anything to do with making the electric line into a low ridership Metra property. Would ridership be higher without conductors?

I say more, you say less. I suppose we'll both get our way depending on location, mode, design etc.

Spare us the digression on public safety and the pooling of risk. Clearly we are arguing about points of degree, not principle. After all, do you encase yourself in ballistic foam whenever you go outside? Do you wear a helmet when you walk down the sidewalk? No, people don't do that because people weigh the trade-off of risk and come to sensible conclusions most of the time.

So is this expenditure providing the 'best system that it can be for the money?' Or is it providing a service with goddawful off-peak frequencies? Well, unless your commuter railroad is actually BART. And why do you suppose that is? It's because the marginal cost of a frequency is so high that agencies can only justify it during the time of day that the trains are full of commuters. A huge component of that marginal cost are all the fleets of onboard staff that our agencies insist on requiring for a given length of train. You're not getting the 'best system,' rather you're getting a system that by international practice is skeletal. Meanwhile, odds are they're punting signalling upgrades that improve safety down the road, and thanks to crap service outside rush-hour more people are forced out into the dangers of driving themselves on the highways.

I don't want to cut the transit budget - I want to turn that transit budget into actual transit, and the low hanging fruit is to go after a fare-collection system and staffing paradigm that most of the world of passenger railroading, and for that matter most of the world of public transportation, decided many decades ago was an expensive anachronism.

Now, on the subject of metra-electric, ME was built mostly as a rapid transit system - short stop spacing, ten minute headways, separation from freight and intercity traffic. And it moved hundreds of thousands of people per day. Back when this was built, it was common practice for buses, trolleys, streetcars, and all sorts of have two-man crews, with out such new-fangled inventions as ticket machines this made sense. Of course, over the years the buses, streetcars (the ones that didn't go bankrupt), well run subways, and so forth figured out how to do away with the second onboard crew-member in favor of other fare collection systems. Why? Because labor productivity growth in most of the economy drives up wages, and what was economical to pay a person for before ceases to be so as wages rise. But IC Electric , being a railroad property and a railroad labor entity, found itself unable to similarly cut costs. By the middle of the century it was marginally profitable or unprofitable, and IC proposed to replace conductor fare collection with fare-gates and reduce onboard staffing. They were unable to reduce of the onboard staff, and instead cut frequency down to commuter rail levels, helping kill ridership and leaving it very underused. This is because the marginal cost of another frequency is made artificially high by the requirement to overstaff trains, and agencies try to run fewer bigger trains focused more and more on peak service, which reduce the ridership of the system because it's less convenient and less useful.

But hey, go wrap yourself in bubble wrap and eagerly await the coming of a conductor to come check your ticket. Meanwhile, passenger rail can remain a mostly peak-only downtown service that is mostly useless for the vast majority of the population because fighter jets or something