Riders respond to a fare deal - innovations in light and commuter rail collection technology

Railway Age, May, 1998 by William D. Middleton

NYCT ridership is up, thanks to incentives made possible by A PC. chicago has a similar system, Boston is getting one, Philadelphia is still shopping. Next: smart cards.

Change continues to sweep through the technology and methodology of fare collection.

It began several decades ago with the introduction of automated ticket vending machines (TVMs), magnetically coded tickets and fare cards, and electronic fare gate technology fir a new generation of metro systems pioneered by San Francisco's BART. At the same time, the European methodology of barrier-free, proof-of-payment fare collection, supported by advanced automated TVMs and validation equipment, became the system of choice for new light or commuter rail systems.

Seeking more efficient collection, better revenue control, more "customer friendly" service, or the marketing opportunities they create, older transit systems are now rapidly moving toward these newer technologies. Other systems are testing or adopting even newer technology, electronic "smart card" systems.

OLDER SYSTEMS UPGRADE

The largest automated fare collection program anywhere in North America is now nearing completion on MTA New York City Transit. NYCT awarded a $300 million contract to Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc., in 1991 following a two-year test program. The test indicated that New Yorkers preferred a swipe rather than a transporter system for reading a magnetic farecard, while NYCT wanted a system that newly encoded a magnetic farecard each time it was used, Cubic achieved this with a new swipe/read/write (SRW) system that could determine if a farecard was valid and that sufficient value was available to deduct the appropriate fare, write the new remaining value, and verify that the transaction had been properly recorded. The resulting MetroCard employs a two-line magnetic stripe, one carrying a fixed line of code that includes the card's individual serial identification number, expiration date, and other information, while revenue data is encoded on the second stripe.

Initial acceptance of MetroCard was slow, but completion of installation in all 468 subway stations and 3,900 buses by early 1997 made it possible for MTA to introduce new fare policies and marketing incentives. The first was introduced in July 1997, when MTA initiated free transfers between NYC Transit buses and the subway. At the same time, seven private bus lines franchised by the New York City DOT convened to MetroCard and were added to the transfer program. As a result, utilization of MetroCard increased to 50% by year-end.

Still other applications and incentives are helping to further increase MetroCard use. Since early 1997, commuters on MTA's Metro-North and Long Island Rail Road have been able to purchase a combined monthly commuter rail pass/MetroCard. In January, MTA introduced a 10% discount for MetroCards purchased for $15 or more. At the same time, MTA Long Island Bus converted to new fareboxes that accept MetroCard, and free transfers were extended to Nassau County riders. Senior and handicapped passengers are able to purchase half-fare MetroCards, and school children now use a special MetroCard rather than the school passes formerly issued. Still another incentive will become available in July, when MTA will add unlimited-ride one-day, weekly, and monthly passes. Expansion of MetroCard to PATH, NJ Transit, and the bus systems in Westchester and Suffolk counties are other possibilities.

The reduced cost of bus-subway travel, made possible by MetroCard marketing incentives, has substantially increased NYC Transit ridership-more than enough to make up for the revenue lost through free transfers.

Second in size only to New York's AFC project is the Chicago Transit Authority's conversion to a similar system. Also supplied by Cubic and completed last year, the $106 million CTA system employs a similar, stored value Transit Card. It is employed on CTA rail and bus lines and Pace suburban buses. Acceptance of Transit Card by CTA patrons was rapid. Within two months, one-third of riders were using it. Fully half were using transfer cards or monthly passes, and token sales had dropped by more than half.

Boston MBTA is planning a similar AFC system with magnetic stripe read/write farecards, ticket vending machines, and transporter turnstiles for its Red, Blue, Orange, and Green line metro and light rail systems. The planned procurement will also include prototypes for future application to MBTA's bus, commuter rail, and ferry lines, and will have a capability for interoperability with an electronic toll collection system planned by the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority. The procurement was launched in 1994 but terminated because of a dispute over the contract award. A new specification is now nearing completion, but funding has not yet been reestablished.

Still undecided about a technology is Philadelphia's SEPTA, which is planning to develop AFC under a new five-year business plan. Last month SEPTA launched a 22-month AFC study that will address technology and pricing. According to Assistant General manager Bernard Cohen, the study results are expected to help determine the most effective fare collection technology.