Comment box Scope: summary Tone: neutral Opinion: none Sarcasm/humor: none Actual bus speeds depend on a few factors: Bus right-of-way: whether it's shared with automobile traffic, whether it has...
Comment box
Scope: summary
Tone: neutral
Opinion: none
Sarcasm/humor: none
Actual bus speeds depend on a few factors:
Bus right-of-way: whether it's shared with automobile traffic, whether it has a painted bus-only lane, or whether it's physically separated from cars. The more separation, the less the bus gets stuck in traffic, and the faster it goes.
Number of stops/stop spacing: the more stops on a bus route, the more it has to decelerate (which takes time), stop (which takes time), and accelerate again (which takes time). But of course, if the bus stops in more places, it can also encourage higher ridership by being more convenient to board.
Dwell time during boarding: the longer passengers spend boarding the bus, the longer its "dwell time." This can be resolved by having dedicated bus boarding islands, level boarding platforms (no vertical height difference and a minimal horizontal one), and ideally off-bus (on-station) fare payments, similar to a subway.
Transit priority signaling: in the computer age we have figured out how to dynamically prioritize traffic light timings to allow buses to squeeze through so that they aren't waiting at reds. This significantly improves on-time performance.
Physical power delivery and acceleration speeds: lighter vehicles can accelerate more quickly, slightly reducing the impact of station stops, but you can only make a bus so light, especially an electric battery-powered one. Some cities try to alleviate this with "trackless trolleys," which are catenary-powered buses (overhead wires) to reduce the onboard weight, an intermediary between conventional buses and light rail.
This blog post from Alon Levy delves into some of the mathematics behind optimal bus stop spacing. The question is: "Would you rather walk a little further to get to your bus if it meant that bus would go that much faster on its route?"
They present some mathematical formulas that they've used in their own professional analysis to make suggestions on bus route redesigns. The formulas are supposed to find the optimal spacing by evaluating the time it takes to walk a certain distance and the time saved by the bus not stopping every single block. I'll leave you to read the results. It's an interesting analysis.
This right here is the best reason to just have unlimited transit passes in day/week/month/year increments. Doot your pass, don't worry about fare collection. Of course, the absolute best way...
Dwell time during boarding
This right here is the best reason to just have unlimited transit passes in day/week/month/year increments. Doot your pass, don't worry about fare collection.
Of course, the absolute best way would be to tax the entire area appropriately and not have to worry about fares at all.
Comment box Scope: comment response Tone: neutral Opinion: none Sarcasm/humor: none An unlimited transit pass still needs to be scanned in some way. On buses in my city this is done on the bus, in...
Comment box
Scope: comment response
Tone: neutral
Opinion: none
Sarcasm/humor: none
An unlimited transit pass still needs to be scanned in some way. On buses in my city this is done on the bus, in front of the bus driver. They take credit cards and SEPTA keys, but this is still a slow process relative to boarding the subway. It's much faster for people to just step onto the bus and sit down without waiting in line to scan their card, one-by-one.
I see the rationale for a fareless system. Unfortunately, in a city like mine (ours?), whose state government (PA) is actively hostile to public transportation funding, it would immediately and irrecoverably (in the short term) destroy the city's system. Fareless systems are subject to the whims of the state legislature. Even if that legislature is somewhere generally favorable to transit like New York, this is risky, because unforeseen events/disasters can leave transit agencies in difficult situations. We are always hearing about "transit funding cliffs" because state governments hate subsidizing transit. It is generally safer for local transit agencies to have multiple income streams to manage operating expenses. Most city agencies can manage about 60-70% farebox recovery ratios for operations, which means that 60-70% of their day-to-day funding comes from fares, and it's only that remaining portion that comes from the state. That's more reliable than the thoughts and prayers we normally get from the Pennsylvania state legislature.
Also, progressive yuppies won't talk about it, but fares are often the only thing keeping homeless drug addicts from living full-time in transit systems, which the transit agency cannot support and which is harmful to safety (both for those people themselves and for other riders) and ridership metrics in general. When stations have full-height fare gates that people can't sneak around, those who refuse or are unable to pay the fare simply will not use the system at all. While this is terribly inequitable and ought to be resolved by better housing policy and social services for people experiencing homelessness, it is worth pointing out that the immediate impact of implementing fareless services in cities that have an active and unaddressed opioid crisis would perhaps be to unfairly strain the transportation network and significantly discourage ridership, which would worsen traffic congestion and therefore increase roadway tear, etc. and probably not end up saving the municipality any money. It is pretty hard to implement fareless service without such externalities without simultaneously investing heavily into social services for people experiencing homelessness and very high transit police presence to enforce correct use of transit.
But I understand that in an ideal world, public transportation would be effectively free, subsidized by more equitable forms of income taxation, and there should be no worry about "who's using the system." If everyone had a home then this wouldn't be a problem in the first place.
Not necessarily -- or at least, not often! For example, Germany offers the Deutschlandticket, which allows unlimited travel on regional trains, trams, and buses. However, instead of scanning the...
An unlimited transit pass still needs to be scanned in some way.
Not necessarily -- or at least, not often! For example, Germany offers the Deutschlandticket, which allows unlimited travel on regional trains, trams, and buses. However, instead of scanning the ticket when boarding, Germany employs a sort of "honor system" where tickets are (infrequently) checked by ticket inspectors. (Emphasis on infrequently: I have literally gone months at a time without having a ticket checked.)
Also, progressive yuppies won't talk about it, but fares are often the only thing keeping homeless drug addicts from living full-time in transit systems, which the transit agency cannot support and which is harmful to safety (both for those people themselves and for other riders) and ridership metrics in general.
Again, not necessarily! Public transportation is entirely free in Luxembourg except for first class upgrades. I didn't encounter any "homeless drug addicts" when I took the public transport, though of course I can't speak for all cases.
Comment box Scope: comment response, information, personal experiences Tone: neutral Opinion: some Sarcasm/humor: none This is a nice system that I think we could implement on regional trains in...
Comment box
Scope: comment response, information, personal experiences
Tone: neutral
Opinion: some
Sarcasm/humor: none
Germany employs a sort of "honor system" where tickets are (infrequently) checked by ticket inspectors.
This is a nice system that I think we could implement on regional trains in the United States. I don't think it would work as well on subway systems or buses just given their spatial geometry. And unfortunately, the US' extremely bad history of racial profiling would probably result in violence or discrimination against black, gay, or disabled people in some form.
This model you described seems to be the case for several systems connecting to airports I have been on. I believe the Toronto airport line did not have fare gates or anyone checking fares, and if I recall correctly, neither did the Stockholm airport line. I liked those systems and will take them in the future. And I'm pretty sure no Swiss CFF/SBB train I've ever been on has had anyone checking a ticket of mine.
Public transportation is entirely free in Luxembourg except for first class upgrades.
Luxembourg is not experiencing the confluence of crises in homelessness + rampant opioid addictions + very few social services that Philadelphia and other American cities are. It is also a very wealthy country, and Pennsylvania is not a particularly wealthy state; Philadelphia in particular is on the poorer side as major metros go. Somewhat as an effect of its stratified poverty, social norms are extremely eroded in the United States, especially in large metros; many people do not respect those systems and will not honor them.
But yes, I have heard of that model working successfully under the right conditions. There are some American cities that are fareless, I think Albuquerque, New Mexico is one, but I have not been there. My impression of those cities I have heard of trying this is that they are not experiencing the "confluence of crises" that Philly is, and they tend to have much smaller populations.
Looking up lists of "fareless" systems in the US online, I am seeing various cities mentioned which are absolutely not fareless (from personal experience), so I don't know where these sites are getting their information from.
I thought some of the systems in California were or are this way. I remember taking the L.A. Metro like 10yrs ago. You had to buy a paper ticket for the subway (some parts were at-grade) if you...
Germany employs a sort of "honor system" where tickets are (infrequently) checked by ticket inspectors.
This is a nice system that I think we could implement on regional trains in the United States. I don't think it would work as well on subway systems or buses just given their spatial geometry.
I thought some of the systems in California were or are this way. I remember taking the L.A. Metro like 10yrs ago. You had to buy a paper ticket for the subway (some parts were at-grade) if you didn't have a day/weekly/monthly pass, you walked on, but there were transit cops around, walking trains. They weren't on every train and I don't even think they check everyone when they are around (which leads to issues of profiling like you mentioned), but if they did check for tickets and you didn't have one, you'd get cited. I think it's still like this, as I've taken the Metro more recently (last few years), but now they have a tap card.
San Diego's streetcars are like that as well. You just walk on. You're supposed to "tap" once you get the station platform, and there are multiple kiosks to tap/scan, but it's wide open; there are no turnstyles. In both cities, it's an honor system. You could get a free trip and some people certainly chance that.
For regional, the Chicago Metra is like that. Just get on, and the conductors will check for tickets as the train is moving. Sometimes you've already passed a stop or two before the conductor comes around. Though it's not infrequent checking. They literally check every passenger or try to. You either show a paper ticket or a digital one. So maybe not exactly the same.
The only free system I'm aware of is in Kansas City, MO (my hometown). The Streetcar has been free since it's opening in 2016. And the busses are currently free, but I don't think that's going to last. I think the transit authority was able to go no-fare for last few years due to pandemic funds or something. Terribly...I've never taken either the Streetcar or the busses because I have a car (have to have one here).
Betting Luxembourg has much better resources for the homeless than the USA in general and Pennsylvania in particular. Which is to say literally anything more than overcrowded shelters and...
Betting Luxembourg has much better resources for the homeless than the USA in general and Pennsylvania in particular. Which is to say literally anything more than overcrowded shelters and methadone clinics.
No doubt Luxembourg does -- it's a European country, after all. But I would point out that it's incorrect to say that fares are the only thing preventing "homeless drug addicts" from loitering on...
No doubt Luxembourg does -- it's a European country, after all. But I would point out that it's incorrect to say that fares are the only thing preventing "homeless drug addicts" from loitering on public transport. Solving that problem doesn't require adding fares; one could alternatively allocate more resources towards addressing homelessness and addiction, as you said.
Comment box Scope: comment response Tone: neutral Opinion: none Sarcasm/humor: none I agree with you in principle and I appreciate that you have pointed this out. Installing full-height fare gates...
Comment box
Scope: comment response
Tone: neutral
Opinion: none
Sarcasm/humor: none
I agree with you in principle and I appreciate that you have pointed this out.
Installing full-height fare gates at subway stations is an immediate and tangible (and not super expensive) way to relieve pressure from overburdened transportation systems, and "addressing homelessness and addiction" is a multi-billion dollar and multi-decade process which involves bipartisan buy-in from neighbors and politicians alike. Most such efforts to address things like addiction have been stymied in most American cities by bad actors in government and NIMBY neighbors. For example, in Philadelphia, every attempt to build opioid addiction treatment centers are immediately shut down by the city's (fake-elected, and soon-to-be indemnified) Registered Civic Associations, whom Councilmembers defer to when making decisions.
As a result, the city is looking at installing more full-height fare gates at subway stations. SEPTA has hired more transit police and some social workers to help homeless people, but it is not really a complete solution without better resources from the mayor's office and more importantly the state (the former cares a little, the latter does not care at all).
The principles of a good society should enable a good and trusting transportation system. Though I am pretty optimistic about infrastructure and the ability of people to do great things, the immediate drawbacks to fareless transit systems in the United States make it hard for me to advocate for them.
Card readers aren't even that slow, really. Every bus I've taken in the past 2-3 decades either had a motorized reader which made reading the mag-stripe very fast, or used RFID which only needed...
Card readers aren't even that slow, really. Every bus I've taken in the past 2-3 decades either had a motorized reader which made reading the mag-stripe very fast, or used RFID which only needed to be tapped.
Comment box Scope: comment response, personal experiences Tone: neutral Opinion: implicitly I suppose Sarcasm/humor: none Surprised you've seen so many electronic readers on buses. My city has...
Comment box
Scope: comment response, personal experiences
Tone: neutral
Opinion: implicitly I suppose
Sarcasm/humor: none
Surprised you've seen so many electronic readers on buses. My city has upgraded theirs, but I feel like half the time I take a bus in a new place, especially in a rural place, they want me to pay in cash.
The RFID tap-anything-to-pay is definitely the way of the future. Part of the problem is that not all RFID readers take credit cards and phone Apple/Google payments: some only take the city's proprietary transit debit cards. The inevitable fumbling from the infrequent transit user or visitor for such things is a significant problem. (In addition to being slow, it is also embarrassing for them and discourages ridership.) Also, the time it takes for many older seniors to swipe their card means there is a good 15+ seconds of unnecessary dwell time (per slow person) with bus riders at rush hour literally standing in a line outside the bus waiting to board. If the purpose of Bus Rapid Transit is to be rapid, better to address the problem by avoiding swipes during boarding.
The issue is not the card reader as a machine, it's the people using it, and the fact that they have to do it one-by-one. This is why regional rail conductors scan after riders are seated instead of while they enter the train.
In Sweden we buy the tickets on our phones using an app (theoretically there's a person in the station you could buy them from if your phone dies or something, but almost no one uses it) and it...
In Sweden we buy the tickets on our phones using an app (theoretically there's a person in the station you could buy them from if your phone dies or something, but almost no one uses it) and it gives you a QR code that you can scan on the bus. It takes almost no time, you don't really have to stop at the scanner on the way to your seat, you just walk past it slowly. If the scanner isn't working or you have trouble with it, the driver can still see your ticket and just waves you on. In my small town there's just one reader at the front of the bus, but in larger cities like Goteborg, there's one at each of the three doors, so many people can get on at once.
Yeah my city replaced their RFID readers with new devices in 2022 with the plan to accept "transit passes in mobile wallets" (but not credit cards). For whatever reason, they still haven't enabled...
Yeah my city replaced their RFID readers with new devices in 2022 with the plan to accept "transit passes in mobile wallets" (but not credit cards). For whatever reason, they still haven't enabled that feature yet so everyone still has to have the physical transit card.
The longest part of boarding the bus is waiting for people to get their transit cards out of their wallets/etc. The tap itself is pretty fast.
Most of my experience with public transportation was when I was living in Las Vegas years ago. My memory is fuzzy because it was so long ago but the reader for the cards was the same as for cash;...
Most of my experience with public transportation was when I was living in Las Vegas years ago. My memory is fuzzy because it was so long ago but the reader for the cards was the same as for cash; everything just fell into it and it worked. The last time I took a bus in LA it was RFID- just the tap required. I have no idea how one would deal with cash on it, or if it's even an option.
There's no perfect solution to this, though. Random checks for tickets means a lot of people will get free rides, and with only one operator that means that it will slow down service. Ticket machines at bus stops are expensive and will be vandalized or destroyed by hooligans. Passes of any sort mean that one has to go out to get them wherever they are sold, or to have them mailed to them.
Come to think of it, the last time I was in Las Vegas they had an app to ride the busses. They didn't use RFID but they displayed something like a QR code which would be used by an optical reader. It was very clunky and a bit confusing to purchase a pass with it, but I think that in theory a phone-based faring solution is ideal because phones are fairly ubiquitous. But the important thing is that it shouldn't be the only option.
Eh, who am I kidding? The real best solution is not having to collect payments from riders to begin with. That's the answer I'm sticking with.
Used to be mine, so yes I grok all the stuff. Main reason I'm not there still is how bad PA fucks up the school funding... hopefully that will get better given the success of William Penn vs PA...
Used to be mine, so yes I grok all the stuff. Main reason I'm not there still is how bad PA fucks up the school funding... hopefully that will get better given the success of William Penn vs PA DoE. Moved nearish to the shore when the housing market went b, a-n-a-n-a-s. Anyway....
Philly would at least have a chance given the wage tax, but I could see how this would cause many of the suburbanites to lose their minds at a 1-2% increase in tax which would be comparable to a monthly regional rail pass. An added sales tax would also do well, given that would collect a lot more tourist monies. I'd love to see a $5 tax added to the parking garages as well....make the cars pay for making busses worse.
And yea, it would be great if there was a better support system for the homeless such that they weren't perpetually relegated to mass transit hubs.
And oh how badly are the busses and trams utterly wreaked by the endless 4-way stops and traffic lights, especially in West Philly along Baltimore Ave? Abandoning the roundabout was the worst thing the USA ever did for having smooth city traffic. Tight roundabouts double as a fantastic traffic calming measure.
Comment box Scope: comment response, information Tone: neutral Opinion: only about the taxes Sarcasm/humor: none Baltimore Ave has not seen much improvement. There are some new bike lanes on...
Comment box
Scope: comment response, information
Tone: neutral
Opinion: only about the taxes
Sarcasm/humor: none
Baltimore Ave has not seen much improvement. There are some new bike lanes on nearby streets since that's Gauthier's district and she supports multi-modal transit, though I believe they're still unprotected on Baltimore itself. The trolley tracks make it a hazard so I avoid it personally.
The new bus-only lanes in Center City along Chestnut St and Market St have really improved bus times on those corridors. People don't drive in them much because they're painted red. It still happens a little, but enforcement is pretty good. The new red light camera ticketing systems are working, I think. The city is also expanding that program to Roosevelt Boulevard, and possibly some other streets (but I'd have to check).
They are installing a large roundabout at Penrose, where it insersects with 20th, Moyamensing, and Packer underneath I-76. Construction is ongoing. Major improvement to bus throughput so far, and I assume car throughput in general, even though they've just directed vehicles along the final shape using temporary barriers and not yet finished the concrete. When the workers are all done I think it will be even more efficient.
Philly's "Bus Revolution" is ongoing... we'll see how effective it is. It's finished its final public comment stages and the agency will actual vote on the revised plan today (May 23). Edit: the Bus Revolution was approved. Part of that, I think, involves removing some bus stops that are too close together and consolidating a few duplicative lines. It was watered down a little after public commentary. I think the new routes are better and certainly less confusing. They have simpler operational patterns (fewer variants) and fewer time-wasting turnarounds.
The Trolley Modernization program is apparently SEPTA's top priority right now. That's mostly buying new rolling stock, but apparently some station and signaling improvements:
Goal #1: Accessible / Accessibility is about more than legal compliance. Trolley Modernization will remove barriers to access for all riders—those with disabilities, seniors, small children and their families, new users, and anyone who needs a little more help to get where they are going.
Goal #2: Fast / Trolley Modernization will speed up travel by reducing time stuck in traffic and at red lights, making the boarding process quicker, and creating new stations that take advantage of these improvements.
Goal #3: Easy / Many trolley stops today are simple signs along the sidewalk with few amenities. Trolley Modernization will introduce new stations that make it easy to find, level boarding that makes it easy to get on, and consistent service that makes it easy to get where you are going.
Along with the new "SEPTA Metro" rebranding program, it should certainly be easier to use the system when all this work is done, but the exact extent of the time savings from the infrastructure upgrades are unclear to me.
Philly would at least have a chance given the wage tax, but I could see how this would cause many of the suburbanites to lose their minds at a 1-2% increase in tax which would be comparable to a monthly regional rail pass. An added sales tax would also do well, given that would collect a lot more tourist monies. I'd love to see a $5 tax added to the parking garages as well....make the cars pay for making busses worse.
A wage tax would go a long way and would be a bit more equitable than a general sales tax. It could even be half a percent or something. That would still raise hundreds of millions of dollars per year. But between education and transit, I think many advocates would want that money to go toward education. Hard to say. I think both would be well-spent. I agree very much that a tax on car-related businesses would be useful for the city, especially parking garages, and especially especially surface parking lots (who I think should pay at least a quadruple tax relative to garages, corresponding to their utter waste of real estate).
For me the issue with buses is motionsickness. I'm more or less ok on trains and airplanes (as long as I don't read or look at my phone if on a train; and as long as there's not much turbulence on...
For me the issue with buses is motionsickness. I'm more or less ok on trains and airplanes (as long as I don't read or look at my phone if on a train; and as long as there's not much turbulence on an airplane), not fantastic in cars, and utterly miserable on buses. Trolleys tend to be ok but I haven't taken many. If there were a combination of better/different engineering and less frequent acceleration & deceleration due to traffic via bus lanes, I would probably take buses. But as is, I avoid them like the plague.
Separate bus lanes. They'll stop only at a bus stop. But that's a big ask for many cities because it requires a lot of real estate. I've lived in a city with a separate bus lane and it makes the...
Separate bus lanes. They'll stop only at a bus stop. But that's a big ask for many cities because it requires a lot of real estate.
I've lived in a city with a separate bus lane and it makes the bus automatically one of the best public transports for intra city travel.
Comment box
Actual bus speeds depend on a few factors:
This blog post from Alon Levy delves into some of the mathematics behind optimal bus stop spacing. The question is: "Would you rather walk a little further to get to your bus if it meant that bus would go that much faster on its route?"
They present some mathematical formulas that they've used in their own professional analysis to make suggestions on bus route redesigns. The formulas are supposed to find the optimal spacing by evaluating the time it takes to walk a certain distance and the time saved by the bus not stopping every single block. I'll leave you to read the results. It's an interesting analysis.
This right here is the best reason to just have unlimited transit passes in day/week/month/year increments. Doot your pass, don't worry about fare collection.
Of course, the absolute best way would be to tax the entire area appropriately and not have to worry about fares at all.
Comment box
An unlimited transit pass still needs to be scanned in some way. On buses in my city this is done on the bus, in front of the bus driver. They take credit cards and SEPTA keys, but this is still a slow process relative to boarding the subway. It's much faster for people to just step onto the bus and sit down without waiting in line to scan their card, one-by-one.
I see the rationale for a fareless system. Unfortunately, in a city like mine (ours?), whose state government (PA) is actively hostile to public transportation funding, it would immediately and irrecoverably (in the short term) destroy the city's system. Fareless systems are subject to the whims of the state legislature. Even if that legislature is somewhere generally favorable to transit like New York, this is risky, because unforeseen events/disasters can leave transit agencies in difficult situations. We are always hearing about "transit funding cliffs" because state governments hate subsidizing transit. It is generally safer for local transit agencies to have multiple income streams to manage operating expenses. Most city agencies can manage about 60-70% farebox recovery ratios for operations, which means that 60-70% of their day-to-day funding comes from fares, and it's only that remaining portion that comes from the state. That's more reliable than the thoughts and prayers we normally get from the Pennsylvania state legislature.
Also, progressive yuppies won't talk about it, but fares are often the only thing keeping homeless drug addicts from living full-time in transit systems, which the transit agency cannot support and which is harmful to safety (both for those people themselves and for other riders) and ridership metrics in general. When stations have full-height fare gates that people can't sneak around, those who refuse or are unable to pay the fare simply will not use the system at all. While this is terribly inequitable and ought to be resolved by better housing policy and social services for people experiencing homelessness, it is worth pointing out that the immediate impact of implementing fareless services in cities that have an active and unaddressed opioid crisis would perhaps be to unfairly strain the transportation network and significantly discourage ridership, which would worsen traffic congestion and therefore increase roadway tear, etc. and probably not end up saving the municipality any money. It is pretty hard to implement fareless service without such externalities without simultaneously investing heavily into social services for people experiencing homelessness and very high transit police presence to enforce correct use of transit.
But I understand that in an ideal world, public transportation would be effectively free, subsidized by more equitable forms of income taxation, and there should be no worry about "who's using the system." If everyone had a home then this wouldn't be a problem in the first place.
Not necessarily -- or at least, not often! For example, Germany offers the Deutschlandticket, which allows unlimited travel on regional trains, trams, and buses. However, instead of scanning the ticket when boarding, Germany employs a sort of "honor system" where tickets are (infrequently) checked by ticket inspectors. (Emphasis on infrequently: I have literally gone months at a time without having a ticket checked.)
Again, not necessarily! Public transportation is entirely free in Luxembourg except for first class upgrades. I didn't encounter any "homeless drug addicts" when I took the public transport, though of course I can't speak for all cases.
Comment box
This is a nice system that I think we could implement on regional trains in the United States. I don't think it would work as well on subway systems or buses just given their spatial geometry. And unfortunately, the US' extremely bad history of racial profiling would probably result in violence or discrimination against black, gay, or disabled people in some form.
This model you described seems to be the case for several systems connecting to airports I have been on. I believe the Toronto airport line did not have fare gates or anyone checking fares, and if I recall correctly, neither did the Stockholm airport line. I liked those systems and will take them in the future. And I'm pretty sure no Swiss CFF/SBB train I've ever been on has had anyone checking a ticket of mine.
Luxembourg is not experiencing the confluence of crises in homelessness + rampant opioid addictions + very few social services that Philadelphia and other American cities are. It is also a very wealthy country, and Pennsylvania is not a particularly wealthy state; Philadelphia in particular is on the poorer side as major metros go. Somewhat as an effect of its stratified poverty, social norms are extremely eroded in the United States, especially in large metros; many people do not respect those systems and will not honor them.
But yes, I have heard of that model working successfully under the right conditions. There are some American cities that are fareless, I think Albuquerque, New Mexico is one, but I have not been there. My impression of those cities I have heard of trying this is that they are not experiencing the "confluence of crises" that Philly is, and they tend to have much smaller populations.
Looking up lists of "fareless" systems in the US online, I am seeing various cities mentioned which are absolutely not fareless (from personal experience), so I don't know where these sites are getting their information from.
I thought some of the systems in California were or are this way. I remember taking the L.A. Metro like 10yrs ago. You had to buy a paper ticket for the subway (some parts were at-grade) if you didn't have a day/weekly/monthly pass, you walked on, but there were transit cops around, walking trains. They weren't on every train and I don't even think they check everyone when they are around (which leads to issues of profiling like you mentioned), but if they did check for tickets and you didn't have one, you'd get cited. I think it's still like this, as I've taken the Metro more recently (last few years), but now they have a tap card.
San Diego's streetcars are like that as well. You just walk on. You're supposed to "tap" once you get the station platform, and there are multiple kiosks to tap/scan, but it's wide open; there are no turnstyles. In both cities, it's an honor system. You could get a free trip and some people certainly chance that.
For regional, the Chicago Metra is like that. Just get on, and the conductors will check for tickets as the train is moving. Sometimes you've already passed a stop or two before the conductor comes around. Though it's not infrequent checking. They literally check every passenger or try to. You either show a paper ticket or a digital one. So maybe not exactly the same.
The only free system I'm aware of is in Kansas City, MO (my hometown). The Streetcar has been free since it's opening in 2016. And the busses are currently free, but I don't think that's going to last. I think the transit authority was able to go no-fare for last few years due to pandemic funds or something. Terribly...I've never taken either the Streetcar or the busses because I have a car (have to have one here).
Betting Luxembourg has much better resources for the homeless than the USA in general and Pennsylvania in particular. Which is to say literally anything more than overcrowded shelters and methadone clinics.
No doubt Luxembourg does -- it's a European country, after all. But I would point out that it's incorrect to say that fares are the only thing preventing "homeless drug addicts" from loitering on public transport. Solving that problem doesn't require adding fares; one could alternatively allocate more resources towards addressing homelessness and addiction, as you said.
Comment box
I agree with you in principle and I appreciate that you have pointed this out.
Installing full-height fare gates at subway stations is an immediate and tangible (and not super expensive) way to relieve pressure from overburdened transportation systems, and "addressing homelessness and addiction" is a multi-billion dollar and multi-decade process which involves bipartisan buy-in from neighbors and politicians alike. Most such efforts to address things like addiction have been stymied in most American cities by bad actors in government and NIMBY neighbors. For example, in Philadelphia, every attempt to build opioid addiction treatment centers are immediately shut down by the city's (fake-elected, and soon-to-be indemnified) Registered Civic Associations, whom Councilmembers defer to when making decisions.
As a result, the city is looking at installing more full-height fare gates at subway stations. SEPTA has hired more transit police and some social workers to help homeless people, but it is not really a complete solution without better resources from the mayor's office and more importantly the state (the former cares a little, the latter does not care at all).
The principles of a good society should enable a good and trusting transportation system. Though I am pretty optimistic about infrastructure and the ability of people to do great things, the immediate drawbacks to fareless transit systems in the United States make it hard for me to advocate for them.
Card readers aren't even that slow, really. Every bus I've taken in the past 2-3 decades either had a motorized reader which made reading the mag-stripe very fast, or used RFID which only needed to be tapped.
Comment box
Surprised you've seen so many electronic readers on buses. My city has upgraded theirs, but I feel like half the time I take a bus in a new place, especially in a rural place, they want me to pay in cash.
The RFID tap-anything-to-pay is definitely the way of the future. Part of the problem is that not all RFID readers take credit cards and phone Apple/Google payments: some only take the city's proprietary transit debit cards. The inevitable fumbling from the infrequent transit user or visitor for such things is a significant problem. (In addition to being slow, it is also embarrassing for them and discourages ridership.) Also, the time it takes for many older seniors to swipe their card means there is a good 15+ seconds of unnecessary dwell time (per slow person) with bus riders at rush hour literally standing in a line outside the bus waiting to board. If the purpose of Bus Rapid Transit is to be rapid, better to address the problem by avoiding swipes during boarding.
The issue is not the card reader as a machine, it's the people using it, and the fact that they have to do it one-by-one. This is why regional rail conductors scan after riders are seated instead of while they enter the train.
At least in my area, rear doors that used to be for exit only are being fitted with card readers to allow for faster boarding.
In Sweden we buy the tickets on our phones using an app (theoretically there's a person in the station you could buy them from if your phone dies or something, but almost no one uses it) and it gives you a QR code that you can scan on the bus. It takes almost no time, you don't really have to stop at the scanner on the way to your seat, you just walk past it slowly. If the scanner isn't working or you have trouble with it, the driver can still see your ticket and just waves you on. In my small town there's just one reader at the front of the bus, but in larger cities like Goteborg, there's one at each of the three doors, so many people can get on at once.
Yeah my city replaced their RFID readers with new devices in 2022 with the plan to accept "transit passes in mobile wallets" (but not credit cards). For whatever reason, they still haven't enabled that feature yet so everyone still has to have the physical transit card.
The longest part of boarding the bus is waiting for people to get their transit cards out of their wallets/etc. The tap itself is pretty fast.
Most of my experience with public transportation was when I was living in Las Vegas years ago. My memory is fuzzy because it was so long ago but the reader for the cards was the same as for cash; everything just fell into it and it worked. The last time I took a bus in LA it was RFID- just the tap required. I have no idea how one would deal with cash on it, or if it's even an option.
There's no perfect solution to this, though. Random checks for tickets means a lot of people will get free rides, and with only one operator that means that it will slow down service. Ticket machines at bus stops are expensive and will be vandalized or destroyed by hooligans. Passes of any sort mean that one has to go out to get them wherever they are sold, or to have them mailed to them.
Come to think of it, the last time I was in Las Vegas they had an app to ride the busses. They didn't use RFID but they displayed something like a QR code which would be used by an optical reader. It was very clunky and a bit confusing to purchase a pass with it, but I think that in theory a phone-based faring solution is ideal because phones are fairly ubiquitous. But the important thing is that it shouldn't be the only option.
Eh, who am I kidding? The real best solution is not having to collect payments from riders to begin with. That's the answer I'm sticking with.
Luxembourg's GDP per Capita is also 60% higher than the US's, for context. By many measures it is the highest in the world.
Used to be mine, so yes I grok all the stuff. Main reason I'm not there still is how bad PA fucks up the school funding... hopefully that will get better given the success of William Penn vs PA DoE. Moved nearish to the shore when the housing market went b, a-n-a-n-a-s. Anyway....
Philly would at least have a chance given the wage tax, but I could see how this would cause many of the suburbanites to lose their minds at a 1-2% increase in tax which would be comparable to a monthly regional rail pass. An added sales tax would also do well, given that would collect a lot more tourist monies. I'd love to see a $5 tax added to the parking garages as well....make the cars pay for making busses worse.
And yea, it would be great if there was a better support system for the homeless such that they weren't perpetually relegated to mass transit hubs.
And oh how badly are the busses and trams utterly wreaked by the endless 4-way stops and traffic lights, especially in West Philly along Baltimore Ave? Abandoning the roundabout was the worst thing the USA ever did for having smooth city traffic. Tight roundabouts double as a fantastic traffic calming measure.
Comment box
Baltimore Ave has not seen much improvement. There are some new bike lanes on nearby streets since that's Gauthier's district and she supports multi-modal transit, though I believe they're still unprotected on Baltimore itself. The trolley tracks make it a hazard so I avoid it personally.
The new bus-only lanes in Center City along Chestnut St and Market St have really improved bus times on those corridors. People don't drive in them much because they're painted red. It still happens a little, but enforcement is pretty good. The new red light camera ticketing systems are working, I think. The city is also expanding that program to Roosevelt Boulevard, and possibly some other streets (but I'd have to check).
They are installing a large roundabout at Penrose, where it insersects with 20th, Moyamensing, and Packer underneath I-76. Construction is ongoing. Major improvement to bus throughput so far, and I assume car throughput in general, even though they've just directed vehicles along the final shape using temporary barriers and not yet finished the concrete. When the workers are all done I think it will be even more efficient.
Philly's "Bus Revolution" is ongoing... we'll see how effective it is. It's finished its final public comment stages and the agency will actual vote on the revised plan today (May 23). Edit: the Bus Revolution was approved. Part of that, I think, involves removing some bus stops that are too close together and consolidating a few duplicative lines. It was watered down a little after public commentary. I think the new routes are better and certainly less confusing. They have simpler operational patterns (fewer variants) and fewer time-wasting turnarounds.
The Trolley Modernization program is apparently SEPTA's top priority right now. That's mostly buying new rolling stock, but apparently some station and signaling improvements:
Along with the new "SEPTA Metro" rebranding program, it should certainly be easier to use the system when all this work is done, but the exact extent of the time savings from the infrastructure upgrades are unclear to me.
A wage tax would go a long way and would be a bit more equitable than a general sales tax. It could even be half a percent or something. That would still raise hundreds of millions of dollars per year. But between education and transit, I think many advocates would want that money to go toward education. Hard to say. I think both would be well-spent. I agree very much that a tax on car-related businesses would be useful for the city, especially parking garages, and especially especially surface parking lots (who I think should pay at least a quadruple tax relative to garages, corresponding to their utter waste of real estate).
For me the issue with buses is motionsickness. I'm more or less ok on trains and airplanes (as long as I don't read or look at my phone if on a train; and as long as there's not much turbulence on an airplane), not fantastic in cars, and utterly miserable on buses. Trolleys tend to be ok but I haven't taken many. If there were a combination of better/different engineering and less frequent acceleration & deceleration due to traffic via bus lanes, I would probably take buses. But as is, I avoid them like the plague.
Separate bus lanes. They'll stop only at a bus stop. But that's a big ask for many cities because it requires a lot of real estate.
I've lived in a city with a separate bus lane and it makes the bus automatically one of the best public transports for intra city travel.