+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: Grand River Transit (/showthread.php?tid=13)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
RE: Grand River Transit - bgb_ca - 03-01-2018
Argh Kevin beat me to it...
RE: Grand River Transit - robdrimmie - 03-01-2018
I picked up my fare card today, I'm part of the "stored value" beta. I confirmed with the GRT employee at the ticket window that value on the card would not expire at the end of the month. The maximum value that can be stored on the card is $100.
I thought the documentation about Fare Products might be of interest, given the earlier conversation:
RE: Grand River Transit - Canard - 03-01-2018
That’s great it displays information. I loved how Suica did that in Japan, too.
RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 03-01-2018
Pro tip: don't have any other RFID cards, particularly Presto, in your hand at the same time, or the machine will misread.
RE: Grand River Transit - bgb_ca - 03-01-2018
(03-01-2018, 02:06 PM)KevinL Wrote: Pro tip: don't have any other RFID cards, particularly Presto, in your hand at the same time, or the machine will misread.
This is because Presto and EasyGO use the same card technology, MiFare DESFire. If the cards used a different technology it would not happen.
It will likely happen if you use a card from another region as well. I believe Montreal also uses MiFare cards, which would result in the same conflict.
RE: Grand River Transit - bgb_ca - 03-01-2018
I just learned if I leave my old monthly paper pass card and the new card in the same sleeve it seems to cause a misread.
RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 03-01-2018
(03-01-2018, 07:06 PM)bgb_ca Wrote: I just learned if I leave my old monthly paper pass card and the new card in the same sleeve it seems to cause a misread.
That doesn't make much sense. There's a thin foil where the month is embossed, but that shouldn't cause a problem...
RE: Grand River Transit - bgb_ca - 03-01-2018
Yes I know but that's all I can figure why it failed while in my holder. I'll find out for sure tomorrow.
RE: Grand River Transit - tvot - 03-01-2018
I picket up my beta card today on the way to work this morning and loaded it with cash. I decided to take the bus home to try it out. Usually I bus to work and walk home, but today I took the bus home to try out the card.
It worked as expected; displayed $2.76 fare price on the first tap then "transfer" on the others -- after getting home I still had time left so I went to get food. I only loaded up $40 of credit but am now tempted to load up more while it's 20% off. However, I bike to work in warmer weather and coincidentally the 2018 Nissan Leaf I pre-ordered came early (picked it up yesterday), so I'll probably be using transit less in the foreseeable future -- but I signed up for the beta, so I'll make sure to commute via GRT a few days a week for the month.
RE: Grand River Transit - KevinT - 03-01-2018
(03-01-2018, 03:51 PM)bgb_ca Wrote:(03-01-2018, 02:06 PM)KevinL Wrote: Pro tip: don't have any other RFID cards, particularly Presto, in your hand at the same time, or the machine will misread.
This is because Presto and EasyGO use the same card technology, MiFare DESFire. If the cards used a different technology it would not happen.
It will likely happen if you use a card from another region as well. I believe Montreal also uses MiFare cards, which would result in the same conflict.
That shouldn't matter at all. I work with card readers for a living and a Mifare reader will happily detect multiple cards in the read field and individually address them by Unique ID to read their application directory. It shuts down each wrong card it comes across until it's talking to the one with the application it wants, then carries out its dialog with that card only.
If the presence of other ISO14443 based cards is messing it up it's either because there are more than it can energize simultaneously (it should do at least three, I've seen a reader identify up to six at once) or they've implemented it wrong. Mifare, Mifare Ultralight, Mifare DESfire, NXP Smart MX (the basis for Interac, Visa, and MasterCard contactless payment), and NFC on mobile devices are all ISO14443 based and can coexist in the same read field simultaneously.
RE: Grand River Transit - Pheidippides - 03-01-2018
Has anyone ever seen any statistics on the number of motorists charged under the section 142.1 of the HTA (yielding right of way to buses exiting from bus bays)? The law has been around for a while now, but I don't think I've ever seen or heard of anyone pulled over for this offense.
Anecdotally, it feels to that more and more drivers are not all yielding according to the law, let alone being plain old courteous, and are making unsafe choices. This results in the bus driver taking evasive action to avoid a collision that usually involves slamming on the brakes or accelerating hard to get back in to traffic after unsuccessfully waiting for a gap or someone to yield because they are getting behind schedule. Which then results in a poor experience for the passenger due to the delays and the jerky ride.
Like the SUV driver SB on King at Willis the other day who decided to floor it to beat the bus that was already halfway in to the lane and ended up driving parallel to the bus in the on-coming (NB) lane of King before over-taking the bus just before ducking in front of the bus to avoid smashing in to oncoming traffic (resulting in the bus having to brake hard).
RE: Grand River Transit - bgb_ca - 03-01-2018
kevint I knew you'd know a lot more about it than me
Good to know they can keep it separate if implemented right. I'll have to do some tests the next few days to see what combos I can have.
RE: Grand River Transit - ijmorlan - 03-02-2018
(03-01-2018, 11:19 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: Has anyone ever seen any statistics on the number of motorists charged under the section 142.1 of the HTA (yielding right of way to buses exiting from bus bays)? The law has been around for a while now, but I don't think I've ever seen or heard of anyone pulled over for this offense.
Anecdotally, it feels to that more and more drivers are not all yielding according to the law, let alone being plain old courteous, and are making unsafe choices. This results in the bus driver taking evasive action to avoid a collision that usually involves slamming on the brakes or accelerating hard to get back in to traffic after unsuccessfully waiting for a gap or someone to yield because they are getting behind schedule. Which then results in a poor experience for the passenger due to the delays and the jerky ride.
Like the SUV driver SB on King at Willis the other day who decided to floor it to beat the bus that was already halfway in to the lane and ended up driving parallel to the bus in the on-coming (NB) lane of King before over-taking the bus just before ducking in front of the bus to avoid smashing in to oncoming traffic (resulting in the bus having to brake hard).
They should start by easing off on bus drivers who are involved in minor collisions. Buses are big enough it would be more or less safe to just signal and pull out with relatively little regard for whether or not private vehicles are actually yielding (not “no regard”, just “relatively little regard”). OK, I don’t know how safe that really is, but I know they are too hard on drivers: I was talking to one who mentioned that banging a mirror on a sign results in a multi-hour delay while they go through the whole accident procedure. Something like that should be understood as just something that happens in the course of driving around the city. And we need a way of rapidly exonerating drivers whose buses are hit by another vehicle due to bad driving by somebody else, including failure to yield.
Really they should just have enforcement cameras installed on buses. This would also be useful for reviewing incidents. Driver could have a button that sends the immediately preceding timecode to a review office which would have the power to issue tickets just like a red light camera. I’m not sure if we need reform of the rules around charging people for moving offenses without a traffic stop. The way it should work is that the vehicle owner should be assumed legally to be responsible for the offense; if they weren’t driving, they may then respond by either reporting the vehicle stolen, or by pointing the finger at another specific individual who was authorized to use the vehicle at the time of the offense. If that person denies responsibility, it goes back to the vehicle owner. The whole issue of proving who was behind the wheel is, ethically and morally, a red herring. Cars are sufficiently dangerous that it’s reasonable to require their owners to have responsibility for who is driving them.
RE: Grand River Transit - creative - 03-02-2018
My experience is that most bus drivers signal to pull back into traffic and then make sure that it is safe to exit the stop before proceeding. I have experienced a number of incidents where the driver signals and proceeds to enter the lane all at once as I have started to pass the stopped bus. I would also like to see buses that are stopped for an extended period of time turn their flashers on to indicate such. I have had a number of experiences where I slow down behind a stopped bus, anticipating that it is about to merge into traffic, only to discover that it is not proceeding immediately after dropping off or picking up.
RE: Grand River Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 03-02-2018
(03-01-2018, 11:19 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: Has anyone ever seen any statistics on the number of motorists charged under the section 142.1 of the HTA (yielding right of way to buses exiting from bus bays)? The law has been around for a while now, but I don't think I've ever seen or heard of anyone pulled over for this offense.
Anecdotally, it feels to that more and more drivers are not all yielding according to the law, let alone being plain old courteous, and are making unsafe choices. This results in the bus driver taking evasive action to avoid a collision that usually involves slamming on the brakes or accelerating hard to get back in to traffic after unsuccessfully waiting for a gap or someone to yield because they are getting behind schedule. Which then results in a poor experience for the passenger due to the delays and the jerky ride.
In a word...no.
On Hespeler Road, to the exclusive benefit of drivers, the region recently installed bus bays, so that stopped buses would not impede the flow of traffic at all. However, this was with the caveat that the buses could get back into the flow of traffic. I believe there were campaigns and signs exhorting this of drivers, and these new bays would have easily been a boon to WRPS if they wanted to enforce and educate on the matter...but after just a few months, the bus bays were removed because Hespeler drivers were so bad at letting the buses back into traffic that it disrupted the routes of all Hespeler-bound buses. So no, it is a law that is never enforced here.
In Ottawa at least, their buses have (had?) a warning on the back left of the bus that yielding to their return to the traffic flow was the law. I believe they even installed cameras on select buses which enabled them to determine if a return-to-traffic signal was on, and to ticket the plates of cars who would continue to fail to yield to said bus.