My Business in Vancouver column:
.
TransLink’s Compass Card needs course correction before rollout
I am a creature of habit. You are too. It’s the brain’s way of being efficient. By not having to concentrate on something done by rote, the brain uses less energy. We go into a kind of Zen state.
At least that’s what seems to happen when I’m on a bus or trolley. Once I’ve boarded, shown my pass or registered my FareSaver card and found my seat or a stable place to stand, that’s all I have to focus on. I’m in a state of timelessness until my destination.
I was part of a beta test for TransLink’s Compass Card – the stored-value, all-purpose card being slowly introduced by TransLink. It was then that I discovered how changing a habit can be quite traumatic.
Compass requires that passengers tap the card on a mounted pad when getting on – and again at the rear door when getting off. That’s not a problem when using a card to get through a turnstile for a subway (you’re already alert), but it’s quite another thing when required to exit a bus or tram.
Chances are, your brain has geared down; you are unprepared. All of a sudden, on hearing your stop, you have to find your card, locate the pad, make sure the swipe has registered, get through the door and not cause a backup. When a crowd is piling up behind, with the doors closing and the bus about to pull away, yes, it can be traumatic.
In that situation I found my brain went into panic mode. I jumped off the bus, swipeless, only to realize I would be charged extra as a penalty when the system was up and running – an automatic three-zone fare deducted from my card. And this happened repeatedly.
I realized that being prepared to tap out would take time and practice. In other words, it had to be a habit.
Unfortunately, when Compass is rolled out onto the bus and trolley system, the trauma part of the process is going to happen to tens of thousands of people all at the same time.
And it won’t be because the system is too slow; TransLink has insisted on a high level of performance from the vendor. This is not a technological problem; it is a human one.
How many new users will jump off the bus like me, especially under crowded conditions and be frustrated, annoyed or angry? Maybe some might push back; others will yell at the bus driver.
Even if it’s a fraction of 1% of riders, the number will be in the thousands. There will be hundreds, every day, of pissed-off passengers.
Take the 1.8% tap-out failure rate in places where they have done this, such as Perth, and apply that to the bus riders in Vancouver at about 700,000 per day. They will be told to call a help centre, and many will. If it is overloaded or unhelpful, it will only reinforce the hate-on that is the typical response to TransLink failure.
The backlash will be vocal, and it will get political, especially leading into the transit referendum likely happening this spring.
After the mechanical and accidental failures of the last month, TransLink needs a win, and Compass could deliver it for them – eventually. Transit riders want something easy to use, easily rechargeable, easily replaced when lost. In time, it may even allow for replacement of the zone system with a distance charge, so customers pay only for how far they travel. That’s one reason for embedding the tap-off system now, as well as for providing an immense amount of data for the more efficient management of the entire system.
But at the time of launch, there will be no purpose for the swipe-off system on buses, only for turnstiles. It’s not surprising, in fact, that no sizable bus system in North America has a swipe-off requirement.
Since a lot of data can be provided simply be having a swipe-on system, transit providers decided the additional cost and risk was not worth it.
And risk is what TransLink will be taking with the Compass rollout if it occurs before the spring referendum. There will be no shortage of frustrated transit users willing to speak into cameras to express their unhappiness. Perceived failure might be sufficient to doom the referendum if even the most ardent transit users vote against it.
The board of TransLink needs to take this into account, and not just focus on a technologically smooth execution. After the two system failures in one week in July, the media will be primed for anything that smells of incompetence – no matter how minor or how small a percentage of people affected.
But the decision to forgo a tap-off requirement on buses and trolleys must be made now, before the system is given a green light. If that light turns red after execution, there’s probably no way to reverse direction.
•
I wonder if TL is keeping track of how much charging customers a fare costs in itself (in enforcement, in technology, in slowing the system while people swipe/tap). I would love to see our system become fare-free and avoid all of this technical nonsense. Sometimes the real solution isnt a technical solution…
The problem is that without a tap-off you’re just back to the honour system again. It kind of defeats the purpose of the whole exercise (which is basically a stupid one, I agree)
Perhaps an unpublished forgiveness period for each pass would work. Say the first 5 or 10 screw ups don’t cost you anything extra, just default back to a 1 zone ticket.
It could also be built into the cost of buying the pass, which most people probably wouldn’t notice. This potentially could cost TL $25 per pass, but assuming people don’t intentionally abuse it the cost would be much less.
It should also be possible to send a text message or email along with the fare forgiveness as a reminder for fairly cheap.
Ho would the system know it’s a screw up? What if you screwed up on a two- or three-zone fare?
If a passenger failed to tap off on a route that doesn’t cross zone boundaries (many if not most routes?), surely it’d be possible to limit the charge to a one-zone fare, since there isn’t the potential that the trip could’ve been 2+ zones. Of the 1.8% of passengers failing to tap out, how many of them are doing so on multiple-zone bus routes?
This of course changes should TL explore fare structures that more accurately reflect the marginal cost of providing service on each route, or introducing off-peak discounts, or charging by distance, or etc, but for now, this really should be a fairly minor problem, easily solvable by adjusting the penalty to reflect the route.
I’ve lived in cities with similar systems, you get used it and figure it out. I don’t like the idea of catering to the laziest/stupidest/slowest just because they’ll complain loudest. Using this type of system is not rocket science and in Seoul and other cities people of all ages and abilities do it without a problem.
I was thinking that a useful addition could be tap off stations at bus stops. You leave the bus, then tap the card off. Or you leave the bus, walk down the street and see another tap off station, and are reminded that you forgot to tap off. And actually, I would suspect that fixed tap off stations would be simpler to wire that the bus based tap off stations.
buses travel multi zone, in Vancouver, that concerns at least buses 19, 28, 100, 135,…
if people are not tapping off, how the system can know how many zone the rider want to travel?
the reality on Compass (I was a better tester too) is that:
* transaction on bus can be awfully long (matter of seconds)…may be it has been fixed, since the test…but may be not, who knows?
*tapping off slow painfully down the unloading.
*tapping off reduce the capacity of the bus (actually people are standing where there is card reader on the back door)
*tapping off increase by order of magnitude the cost of the system (due to the readers at the back of the bus otherwise unecessary).
Yes Translink should forgo the tapp off requirement on buses (*) …but that means it needs to revise its bus tariff policy…it is not as simple as suggested in this post but feasable (see link below)
and obviously it must forgo the idea of distance fare on buses (a reason advanced for the tapp off) see why here: http://voony.wordpress.com/2013/10/03/the-short-coming-of-a-distance-based-transit-fare-system/
The card reader on the rear door enables a future switch to all-door boarding on all bus routes.
I would have been happier with an RFID system with a higher read range so that you would just walk on the bus or train and the card would be read automatically from your pocket or purse. Yes there would be privacy issues, but in time, the replacement system will probably be facial recognition for all regular users, so privacy will have to be a concept that is subject to change.
This is a great point Gordon. In Auckland when using the HOP Card I never experienced a problem mostly because the buses are not crowded so tagging off was easy. But coming back to Vancouver the first thing you notice is how incredibly packed the buses are at all hours of the day. Trying to move inside a 99 bline bus is impossible. those rapid bus system should have pre-boarding loading areas where tagging on and off can happen off the bus.
the system to exit should be a passive system, perhaps RFID or other technology.
In addition to tap off stations at bus stops — there could also be auto-tap-off for people making a transfer when they tap in at the next leg of their journey. So many people use transit for return trips — the system could be designed to figure out when you’ve forgotten to tap out, by noticing where you get on the next time you use transit.
I agree that the tap-off stations would make sense.
The system already does auto-tap-out feature called a “Forced tap-out” which is supposedly the expiration of the 90 minute transfer time (and when the penalty three zone fare can come into play). However, if you forget to tap-out on one bus but transfer within the same zone onto another bus the system will tap your card off the the previous bus and you will be charged the zones actually travelled (provided you remember to tap-out the subsequent bus/skytrain/seabus trip). It’s not well publicized but it was a question on Ask Compass
This was what the question was;
“What happens if I tap in twice? What would happen if I tap in on a bus, forget to tap out, tap in on a SkyTrain, then tap out of the train?”
I think many people with passes that cover all three zones (three zone bus pass, U-pass, BC government bus pas etc.) will likely not tap off at all as there’s no penalty to forget tapping out (three zones already covered what’s the point). University students will be least likely to tap-out mainly due to time constraints.
Gordon’s right, the simplest solution is to just get rid of the bus tapouts completely. The price of a single bus trip should always be one zone. If you transfer onto a bus/skytrain/seabus in another zone, then you’re charged the incremental price of travelling multiple zones. Simple.
Veggie – you’re charged for an extra zone on SeaBus even if you don’t transfer. This is unfair for a 10 minute trip.
I really don’t see this as a massive potential problem. Unless TL is looking for problems (well, who knows? ) I’m sure there will be a prolonged roll-out where not tapping out will not cause onerous penalties.
Tap in/out is a similar system to that in the Netherlands. It is a crowded system, but people there seem to have little issue with it. If you don’t tap out, there is an online system that allows for account correction.
https://www.ov-chipkaart.nl/reizen/gebruikovchipkaart/inenuitchecken/
Tapping out will allow for a lot of useful information – how long does a bus route take? how fast/good are connections? the data will be poorer if there is no incentive for tapping out.
How can current transit zones be charged if people don’t tap out? and if we are moving to distance based-fares, tapping out will be necessary anyway.
TAPPING LOTTERY WOULD WORK BEST (& help solve tap-out problem)
No offense Gordon, but if Toronto can do it – Why can’t we ? – Only better, of course !
Quote from TTC website – “PRESTO can be used across the entire GO Transit network at all GO Train stations and on all GO Buses.” (Including Tapping-OFF Buses.)
http://www.gotransit.com/public/en/fares/presto.aspx
By better I mean not just technically better, but also by offering better – value – by actually REWARDING transit users for using transit (& using their cards properly) !
Just imagine having a chance to WIN a reward every time you TAPPED on then off after each trip ! Free transit, Free Product & Services, Cash Prizes, you name it ! ALL is possible !
It would essentially turn Public Transit into a Public Lottery – who would not want to use it ?
ALSO, just imagine if rewards could include improving riders health and saving the government money on healthcare costs – see my proposal for a TransLink Wellness-Hub – http://www.bcwellnesshub.ca/
I have received letters of interest, support and encouragement regarding my TransLink Wellness-Hub idea, from the two former Premiers (Glen Clark and Gordon Campbell) who advocated for the use of SmartCard technology by TransLink in the first place, yes, mainly to help reduce fare-evasion, but also to boost efficiency and reduce costs.
Bottlenecks and failures in the transit system are simply proof that more investments in the system is needed (less investment will only mean worsening service)…. Offering additional value to put a spring in riders step (and a smile of their face) would be a value worth more than money…. and all the more reason for them to make sure the referendum succeeds.
It’ll just take transition time. Many cities in the world including Beijing have mandatory tap-out, and you’ll soon get used to it. There should be 1 “oops” per month if you forget to tap out, just like how you get one free parking ticket in COV.
The tap-in tap-out data is super valuable to Translink, as it will be able to take in huge data and make transit services much more efficient. Expect to see huge changes in service frequencies after the rollout.
It will be much easier when everyone taps out, not just the few beta users. If the guy in front of you taps out, then you will remember too. I don’t think it’s as bad as you make it out to be. Compared with Taipei for example, where some buses are only tap-on and other only tap-off (even on the same route), the TransLink tap-on + tap-off is at least predictable. You always have to tap.
But TransLink should work on making the process easier. They need to allow people to use their smartphone (from a TransLink app) to tap in and out instead of making them carry an extra card. In addition, by placing one or two cheap low-energy bluetooth range beacons on each bus, smartphone users can get automatically tapped out. I would guess that something like this is already in the planning, it’s probably best to go one step at a time.
And while I am at it, TransLink needs develop native apps that combines routing like what google does with their NextBus. But not as a slow web app like they already have but as a native app so that people use it and TransLink gets better data on what the end-to-end routes are that people are actually interested in, not just the closest bus stop to closest bus stop connection. And what choices people make when presented with alternative routes. Hopefully they have been working hard on that….
Nowadays companies are judged to a non-neglegiable extent by their smartphone app. Having no dedicated app like TransLink is a clear malus. Having a poorly working app is disastrous. But having a well-working app that is pleasant to use and effective in facilitating the needs of people goes a long way in boosting public opinion.
Pairing a TransLink routing app with tap-on/off capability adds the ability to notify all regular sky-train users immediately on their phone of alternative options and re-route them the next time the sky-train breaks down. It would be better to not have the train brake down in the first place, but having effective information on how to work around issues like this goes a long way at maintaining customer trust.
Lastly, I don’t see a way around the tap-on + tap-off in Vancouver. Long distance buses are an integral part of Vancouver’s transit network, it’s not like in many other places where buses mostly serve short connections or are just a slower option in the transit system so few people will use them for long-distance trips (and the ones that do probably deserve the extra subsidy they would be getting). And transit it slowly arriving in the connected world, where trips are build from multiple pieces of different modes. Maybe starting with taxi or ride share, transferring to bus and subway, capped off by bike share. Having the ability to fine-tune charges for individual legs of the trip is essential for that.
Well stated, Jens. TransLink needs some forward thinking folks like you and/or market place trained managers, not just their navel gazing “invented in BC is best” politically appointed execs capping off a civil servant career plus unionized folks down the line.
What’s to stop someone from getting on the bus at a stop in zone 1 and then immediately tapping out at the back door and getting a basically free ride to their final destination in zone 2/3?
Random fare enforcement, just like now with cash fares or tickets.
And the feeling of shame when you keep wondering how many people on the bus realized you are cheating the system when they heard your ‘beep’ and saw you stay on the bus…
There is still a problem with slow response times on the mobile Compass readers. Yesterday I took the bus home and saw two people get off with their Compass cards. The first tapped and I saw the machine register it. The second person then tapped and the machine continued to display the default “tap here” screen. So I’m pretty sure only one “tap out” event was recorded. Unless and until that situation is resolved nobody is going to trust Compass.
We in Ottawa are getting the Metrolinx’s PRESTO system. It has a tap-off capability (using in Greater Toronto to allow charging by zones), but this is not used in Ottawa. That is bad, as transit use should be charged by distance and by congestion factors.
I would suggest a solution, or rather two: when a user forgets to tap-off, but are going to transfer to another transit vehicle, allow the tap-on for the second (and succeeding) vehicles serve to “amend” the distance recorded for the first ride. Also, as was suggested, install off-vehicle tapping stations so that a person who has forgotten to tap-off, will be offered a second chance.
“But at the time of launch, there will be no purpose for the swipe-off system on buses, only for turnstiles.” – Isn’t that plainly incorrect? The swipe-off would be used to determine whether the fare should be registered as a 1-, 2-, or 3-zone fare. Right?
Perhaps use the system of New York: no tap out. It is a one zone system, bigger in area than MetroVan. As such it encourages folks in Surrey or Tsawwassen to use the bus/SkyTrain more as it costs the same as a 2 stop CanadaLine ride.
A second option is a tap out at every major bus stop.
Vancouver really ought to copy what other major cities have done for years.
‘Tap-out’ glitch may force changes to Compass Card transit fare system