MBTA Charlie Card.
Dec. 4th, 2006 03:47 pmMostly a note to self.
Got one at Haymarket T this afternoon, after tracking down a friendly T employee. They'd stopped handing them out for the day, but he had an extra one. (Later discovered that they were still handing them out at Davis, but it was still necessary to find the employee and ask for one.)
Tested that my card holder blocked read of the card at a gate, which it did, just like the way it did the SmarTrip card I tested at a Metro faregate. So that's good. Otherwise reads fine, which is also good.
Edit: corrected link to the card holder.
Got one at Haymarket T this afternoon, after tracking down a friendly T employee. They'd stopped handing them out for the day, but he had an extra one. (Later discovered that they were still handing them out at Davis, but it was still necessary to find the employee and ask for one.)
Tested that my card holder blocked read of the card at a gate, which it did, just like the way it did the SmarTrip card I tested at a Metro faregate. So that's good. Otherwise reads fine, which is also good.
Edit: corrected link to the card holder.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-04 09:34 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-05 05:06 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-05 05:13 am (UTC)I believe the reason that the Charlie Tickets are significantly slower than the old swipe cards is that the old swipe card readers on the bus fareboxes and subway turnstiles were read-only, while the new ones are read-write; they read the card, decide what kind it is, if it's a cash-value card they deduct the fare and write it back, and then they return it to you. That involves mechanically swiping the card twice, and while a card can be read at the variable speed of a human swipe it can't be accurately written that way. The subway turnstiles have a separate read head and write head, so it doesn't have to reverse anything to give it back to you. I think.
I think the T has been so aggressive about the CharlieCard because the tickets have been more of a pain to deal with than they expected. I remember the press about them earlier this year said they'd charge $5 for them but that the cash/ticket fares would be even higher to convince you to switch. Now they'll probably charge $5 sometime after January, once they think they've distributed the million plus they have allocated for free distribution.
I don't think they expected the lines that formed at the machines so people could buy exactly one subway fare on a card and then toss the card on the ground, when this was both the behavior that you'd see at the collector's booth at stations beforehand and something you might expect when the transit authority says "Put money on this card! Oh, it doesn't work at half of the stations, so you'll have to keep some cash to buy tokens too." And I'm guessing they underestimated the extra time for people to figure out where to insert the card and in what orientation on bus boardings. What kills me there is the coin slot, on a 90c fare -- exact change requires 5 coins.
So the whole process should go faster with the contactless cards, with rider and operator experience, with finishing the conversion to the new turnstiles and fare boxes later this month, with shaking the bugs out (like the failure of the fare machine credit card transaction system at the beginning of the month) and with riders leaving some money on their cards. At least I think the T management is fervently hoping so.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-05 05:25 pm (UTC)I haven't tested one of those, although I have no reason to think it would be less effective.
If someone gets one, I'll be glad to try it out. Or if you get one, test it and let me know what happens.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-05 06:04 pm (UTC)Chicago and Atlanta have also had programs where they waived the initial fee to issue a card--Atlanta's is ongoing--in those cases they've required that you register in order to get a free card. I guess Boston's even more eager to get cards out there than either Chicago or Atlanta.
Atlanta's Breeze Ticket/Card rollout has not been without its problems, either:
http://www.cobbrides.com/MARTA'sSoleTole.htm
http://www.gophernet.org/archives/2006/10/#e2006-10-15T22_44_50.txt
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-07 07:20 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-07 08:39 am (UTC)LiveJournal misparsed that first URL, so their link fails.
Date: 2006-12-05 06:06 pm (UTC)http://www.cobbrides.com/MARTA'sSoleTole.htm
(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-05 05:06 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-04 08:55 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-05 03:09 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-04 09:59 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-04 10:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-04 10:48 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-04 10:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-05 02:31 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-05 05:43 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-06 06:16 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-12-06 10:14 am (UTC)Talk about unintended results! Bet the MBTA's real glad the drivers have hit upon that solution.