Thoughts on smart card ticketing

[RailAleFan]

In the first instance, I would just like there to be a "simple" cross-TOC implementation of proof of purchase that does not require a physical ticket.

I don't want a different app for every TOC, I would like to be able to install the National Rail app to my phone, use it to select any journey / ticket type I like, purchase them as "mTickets" and then simply present my phone to activate gate lines / show to ticket inspectors as required.

Using a phone would be my preference, but simple dual mode optical / RFID scanners on gate lines and around train manager's waists would provide almost universal support for either smart cards, phones with RFID support, phones without RFID support (barcode displayed on screen) and of course "print at home" tickets.

Once that infrastructure is in place, the sky is then the limit in terms of "pay as you go" and all sorts of other flexibility - I just don't see why any project to move towards e/m/iTicketing has to be a quantum leap consisting of both technology and commercial changes at the same time...

 

[Deerfold]

In the first instance, I would just like there to be a "simple" cross-TOC implementation of proof of purchase that does not require a physical ticket.

I don't want a different app for every TOC, I would like to be able to install the National Rail app to my phone, use it to select any journey / ticket type I like, purchase them as "mTickets" and then simply present my phone to activate gate lines / show to ticket inspectors as required.

Using a phone would be my preference, but simple dual mode optical / RFID scanners on gate lines and around train manager's waists would provide almost universal support for either smart cards, phones with RFID support, phones without RFID support (barcode displayed on screen) and of course "print at home" tickets.

Once that infrastructure is in place, the sky is then the limit in terms of "pay as you go" and all sorts of other flexibility - I just don't see why any project to move towards e/m/iTicketing has to be a quantum leap consisting of both technology and commercial changes at the same time...

Of course you also have to have this all linked to a central system to stop two people using the same virtual ticket.

 

[jon0844]

I don't think having all staff 'connected' at all times will be an issue in the future. There will be plentiful access to the Internet and sufficient speeds to make all of this viable.

Of course there's the cost element, but once everything is connected then it opens up loads of opportunities.

 

[infobleep]

Do existing smart tickets contain all possible routes that tickets between two stations are valid for? Do they open the gates at every intermediate stations where a break of journey is permitted on all the permitted routes?

If not then I think paper tickets are still superior as I think member of gateline staff is likely to be more understanding when a paper ticket doesn't open a gate than when a smart card doesn't.

 

[Deerfold]

Do existing smart tickets contain all possible routes that tickets between two stations are valid for? Do they open the gates at every intermediate stations where a break of journey is permitted on all the permitted routes?

If not then I think paper tickets are still superior as I think member of gateline staff is likely to be more understanding when a paper ticket doesn't open a gate than when a smart card doesn't.

I'm not sure how other smart card schemes apart from Oyster work, but in West Yorkshire you get a receipt showing what's on the card - thus making it very like the Metrocard but without a photo.

 

[anme]

If not then I think paper tickets are still superior as I think member of gateline staff is likely to be more understanding when a paper ticket doesn't open a gate than when a smart card doesn't.

Why? A smart card will either show where you boarded (for pay as you go), or will contain a "virtual ticket" with origin and destination. Presumably staff will have readers for these smart cards, so they can check what ticket you have, and then make a judgement in the same way as a paper ticket. I don't see how why the smart card makes any difference.

 

[infobleep]

Why? A smart card will either show where you boarded (for pay as you go), or will contain a "virtual ticket" with origin and destination. Presumably staff will have readers for these smart cards, so they can check what ticket you have, and then make a judgement in the same way as a paper ticket. I don't see how why the smart card makes any difference.

Some paper tickets when currently put through a ticket fate say this ticket is not valid. The ticket is actually valid at that staying, just that it's not valid to open the gate line.

If the same happens with a smart card, will staff the k the ticket isn't valid to that station? Or will it be designed so that all smart cards open every barrier along the routes for which the smart card is valid?

 

[anme]

Some paper tickets when currently put through a ticket fate say this ticket is not valid. The ticket is actually valid at that staying, just that it's not valid to open the gate line.

If the same happens with a smart card, will staff the k the ticket isn't valid to that station? Or will it be designed so that all smart cards open every barrier along the routes for which the smart card is valid?

First paragraph: I know.

First sentence second paragraph: assuming the smart card contains a virtual ticket of some kind, and the staff can read that from the smart card - the ticket will say, for example, off peak return from Inverness to Norwich for 34th Marvenber 2354. If a member of staff is shown it, they will have to decide whether it's valid at that point. Exactly the same as for a paper ticket.
If it's a "pay as you go" system, then see oyster card today.

Second sentence second paragraph: you need to ask the designers of this theoretical system, but I don't see why it would need to be designed in such a way.

 

[Hadders]

First paragraph: I know.

First sentence second paragraph: assuming the smart card contains a virtual ticket of some kind, and the staff can read that from the smart card - the ticket will say, for example, off peak return from Inverness to Norwich for 34th Marvenber 2354. If a member of staff is shown it, they will have to decide whether it's valid at that point. Exactly the same as for a paper ticket.
If it's a "pay as you go" system, then see oyster card today.

Second sentence second paragraph: you need to ask the designers of this theoretical system, but I don't see why it would need to be designed in such a way.

But what benefits are there going to be for passengers with this system. Looks like an awful lot of faff to me.

 

[radamfi]

But what benefits are there going to be for passengers with this system. Looks like an awful lot of faff to me.

See my earlier post. The principal benefit is no more queuing for ticket purchase or collection.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=2090179&postcount=34

 

[Hadders]

See my earlier post. The principal benefit is no more queuing for ticket purchase or collection.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=2090179&postcount=34

I get what you're saying with mobile tickets but how do you load a ticket on to a smart card without queuing up at a machine of some sort?

This is the British Rail industry we're talking about, you can guarantee it won't be simple.

 

[jon0844]

Tap your card against your NFC enabled smartphone or tablet? Buy on your phone/PC and tap a validator at any station.

I am sure more people will eventually think it easier to use an app to buy tickets than queue up to buy from a window or machine. For one, you have more time and are more likely to understand or be guided how to buy what you want, and know the cost in advance.

 

[infobleep]

First paragraph: I know.

First sentence second paragraph: assuming the smart card contains a virtual ticket of some kind, and the staff can read that from the smart card - the ticket will say, for example, off peak return from Inverness to Norwich for 34th Marvenber 2354. If a member of staff is shown it, they will have to decide whether it's valid at that point. Exactly the same as for a paper ticket.
If it's a "pay as you go" system, then see oyster card today.

Second sentence second paragraph: you need to ask the designers of this theoretical system, but I don't see why it would need to be designed in such a way.

Well with regard to my last point on opening barriers. Why would it not need to be designed that way?

 

[anme]

Well with regard to my last point on opening barriers. Why would it not need to be designed that way?

For a system that used virtual tickets (e.g. Ticket stored on card/phone from Liverpool to Manchester): this works exactly the same as a paper ticket system, i.e. The barrier will open if the card contains a valid ticket, and not if it doesn't. This will work as well or as badly as it works today.

For a pay as you go system: the card will open any barrier, and you will be billed for the journey you made, as with oyster pay as you go. The barriers might not open if you didn't touch in or don't have sufficient credit. Note - a pay as you go system is not very suitable for long journeys.

Why do you think smart cards/phones would need to open all barriers in all circumstances?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do existing smart tickets contain all possible routes that tickets between two stations are valid for? Do they open the gates at every intermediate stations where a break of journey is permitted on all the permitted routes?

If not then I think paper tickets are still superior as I think member of gateline staff is likely to be more understanding when a paper ticket doesn't open a gate than when a smart card doesn't.

Why, when they could simply scan your smartcard on a hand held device and see exactly what was on it and whether you were valid to do what you intended to?

Neil
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am sure more people will eventually think it easier to use an app to buy tickets than queue up to buy from a window or machine. For one, you have more time and are more likely to understand or be guided how to buy what you want, and know the cost in advance.

If this existed I would (except when I expected I might have battery issues[1]) stop using the ticket office/machine today.

But I will only use it if I can buy walk-ups on the same terms as paper ones.

[1] IMO it should be possible to print such a ticket at a TVM in such a case, perhaps for a nominal fee, say £2. As they would be bound to a particular name and would require ID (or the phone turned on!) to be shown, there is no issue with two of the same thing existing.

Neil

 

[infobleep]

Why, when they could simply scan your smartcard on a hand held device and see exactly what was on it and whether you were valid to do what you intended to?

Neil
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


If this existed I would (except when I expected I might have battery issues[1]) stop using the ticket office/machine today.

But I will only use it if I can buy walk-ups on the same terms as paper ones.

[1] IMO it should be possible to print such a ticket at a TVM in such a case, perhaps for a nominal fee, say £2. As they would be bound to a particular name and would require ID (or the phone turned on!) to be shown, there is no issue with two of the same thing existing.

Neil

Would the staff readers cover all route possibilities for a ticket? For example if you were able to go via a different route to that of your ticket because it was a cheaper route than the route you usually take, you the reader class the ticket as valid?

Am example would be Guildford to Brighton via Clapham Junction. The ticket has the route via Clapham Junction. Their is a cheaper route via Gomshall which I believe to be valid on the above ticket.

 

[sheff1]

I get what you're saying with mobile tickets but how do you load a ticket on to a smart card without queuing up at a machine of some sort?

Book it online then it is uploaded the first time it is inspected
That's how it seems to work with Stagecoach Smart on Supertram, although I do not know the technicalities.

 

[anme]

Would the staff readers cover all route possibilities for a ticket? For example if you were able to go via a different route to that of your ticket because it was a cheaper route than the route you usually take, you the reader class the ticket as valid?

Am example would be Guildford to Brighton via Clapham Junction. The ticket has the route via Clapham Junction. Their is a cheaper route via Gomshall which I believe to be valid on the above ticket.

I imagine the gates and the staff readers will be similar to the gates and staff readers today. They will cover the common tickets seen at the station, and the staff readers will show the ticket(s) stored on the cards. Maybe they will be better than now, but I expect not all obscure routes will be covered. When a ticket is not validated by the reader or the gate, it will be up to the member of staff to decide whether it is indeed valid. This is *exactly how it works today*.

I think this is now the fourth time I've answered given this answer, so maybe I don't understand your question.

 

[maniacmartin]

They could do it how you imagine.

However, I suspect that they will instead follow the same thoughts as when Oyster was introduced in London. The smartcard format may forbid Break of Journey, justified by it being slightly cheaper and some excuse about technical difficulties. Step 2 is to hike up the paper fares, and get away with it as 'passengers can just use the smartcard to get the old fares. Net result, break of journey rights are lost.

 

[Clip]

Would the staff readers cover all route possibilities for a ticket? For example if you were able to go via a different route to that of your ticket because it was a cheaper route than the route you usually take, you the reader class the ticket as valid?

Am example would be Guildford to Brighton via Clapham Junction. The ticket has the route via Clapham Junction. Their is a cheaper route via Gomshall which I believe to be valid on the above ticket.

This raises issues about taking the cheapest route which may not be the quickest. A way around this would be to give the Guard a reader which is capable of telling the card and system that you went the cheaper route.

Where that isnt possible then validators on trains that are going the cheaper slower route so again it tells you but all this will cost money.

 

[infobleep]

I imagine the gates and the staff readers will be similar to the gates and staff readers today. They will cover the common tickets seen at the station, and the staff readers will show the ticket(s) stored on the cards. Maybe they will be better than now, but I expect not all obscure routes will be covered. When a ticket is not validated by the reader or the gate, it will be up to the member of staff to decide whether it is indeed valid. This is *exactly how it works today*.

I think this is now the fourth time I've answered given this answer, so maybe I don't understand your question.

My point is, would staff be less likely to believe a ticket is valid when using a hand held reader against a smart card then when checking a paper ticket against the knowledge in their head?

Are people more likely to believe what is written on an electronic device screen vers a situation where one doesn't exist and they only have there own knowledge or that of a gate line error code to go by.

Perhaps it makes no difference. However I have come across non railway situations in the past where staff have assumed a situation must be true because it says so in their computer screen. In one case the information they were looking at on screen was out of date.

Yes the existing barriers may reject a ticket currently but I've not known staff to ever say what the error codes mean. I'm not even sure if they check which one it is when an error occurs. Even then if a passengers knows the ticket to be at a station where they are breaking their journey they may not even put the ticket through a barrier, generating no error. However if a card reader says ticket not valid, will staff assume that to mean the ticket is not valid at that station, rather than this ticket is not valid to work this barrier.

 

[Deerfold]

My point is, would staff be less likely to believe a ticket is valid when using a hand held reader against a smart card then when checking a paper ticket against the knowledge in their head?

I don't think we're getting your point. If an electronic ticket is literally an electronic version of the paper ticket, what is different? If all the reader does is tell the person using it what the ticket is, there's no difference.

If you're suggesting the reader could act as a portable routeing guide, then that's possible - but a far bigger programming job - and one could be produced now to do that for paper tickets.

 

[infobleep]

I don't think we're getting your point. If an electronic ticket is literally an electronic version of the paper ticket, what is different? If all the reader does is tell the person using it what the ticket is, there's no difference.

If you're suggesting the reader could act as a portable routeing guide, then that's possible - but a far bigger programming job - and one could be produced now to do that for paper tickets.

My point is simply would staff treat information on a reader differently to any other source of information they may or may not have if a reader didn't exist? That was is. Simple as that.

What people seem to be saying is that staff treat all sources of information equally regardless of whether they are using a reader or not.

 

[Deerfold]

My point is simply would staff treat information on a reader differently to any other source of information they may or may not have if a reader didn't exist? That was is. Simple as that.

What people seem to be saying is that staff treat all sources of information equally regardless of whether they are using a reader or not.

Why would the source of the information (print on ticket or reader) make any difference if the information being provided is exactly the same.

I could understand if you're suggesting the readers provide some additional information.

I'm really not getting the point you're trying to make if it's not what I suggested in my last post or above. If anyone else does, please do see if you can explain it to me differently from the way infobleep is doing.

 

[infobleep]

Why would the source of the information (print on ticket or reader) make any difference if the information being provided is exactly the same.

I could understand if you're suggesting the readers provide some additional information.

I'm really not getting the point you're trying to make if it's not what I suggested in my last post or above. If anyone else does, please do see if you can explain it to me differently from the way infobleep is doing.

What do the readers tell staff? Is it simply the same as the error codes on the barriers?

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what the readers actually do. I was expecting them to validate the ticket for that particular station, like a barrier accepts or rejects a ticket.

If they only read the contents of a ticket then yes it is the same information.

 

[Deerfold]

What do the readers tell staff? Is it simply the same as the error codes on the barriers?

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what the readers actually do. I was expecting them to validate the ticket for that particular station, like a barrier accepts or rejects a ticket.

If they only read the contents of a ticket then yes it is the same information.

Well, we're talking about hypothetical situations here, so I can't tell you what the readers would tell staff. At the moment in the small existing schemes with stored tickets they confirm what ticket is held on the cards - I don't understand what you mean by "validate the ticket for that particular station" if you don't mean it to act as an automatic routing guide as I suggested earlier.

 

[infobleep]

Well, we're talking about hypothetical situations here, so I can't tell you what the readers would tell staff. At the moment in the small existing schemes with stored tickets they confirm what ticket is held on the cards - I don't understand what you mean by "validate the ticket for that particular station" if you don't mean it to act as an automatic routing guide as I suggested earlier.

I was simply think it worked more like a barrier. In that it says whether a ticket is valid. However if it only tells you what ticket you have then it doesn't do that.

I was thinking it didn't things that it doesn't currently do and may never do.

 

[Deerfold]

I was simply think it worked more like a barrier. In that it says whether a ticket is valid. However if it only tells you what ticket you have then it doesn't do that.

I was thinking it didn't things that it doesn't currently do and may never do.

A barrier does not say whether a ticket is valid, only whether or not it has been programmed to allow it through. That's not the same thing.

 

[jon0844]

Smartcards could contain loads of detailed data, and gates being connected could verify said data in real time assuming a fast enough connection with very low latency.

I'm sure that's being looked at and it's only the connectivity issue holding it back.

4.5G LTE coming next year will offer sub 10ms latency, and gatelines in remote locations could be connected wirelessly. That could be a real game changer.

 

[dutchflyer]

In the Netherlands you choose whether your OV-Chipkaart is for First or Second. I *think* you can also put a flag on it for one journey at a ticket machine, but might be wrong on the latter point.

Neil

no, not for 1 trip, only for the whole day. One can change on a daily base. Has to do with the current limitations in the system.
I recall that in DE/Berlin they decided against this smarttype, as it simply could not accomodate all various permutations and ticketing options that DB allows/accepts.
For certain to have it work smoothly a complete make over of your Brit system will be needed. Validators on trains-in the peaks with standing loads and >1000 pax seems to me out of order. Besides: how would that be enforced?