(06-22-2020, 08:01 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote:

(06-22-2020, 07:32 PM)KevinL Wrote: Isn't that down to the equipment vendor? Why would the Region have to be the one to order spare parts?

It's unclear who is paying for the additional units since they just put it under Transit Services.

Quote:Platform Validators continue to be an area of significant concern. Of the 44 deployed units, seven have been returned for repair under warranty. Research during project development indicated that the validators were at low risk of failure, and as a result, Transit Services maintained only a 5% spare ratio. As the number of failed units now exceeds 15%, staff has relocated units from less used platforms to the busiest areas to minimize inconvenience to customers. Additional spare units have been ordered. Vendor staff are analyzing returned units to identify the root causes of the failures, and hardware updates are expected to be provided in the coming months.

(06-22-2020, 07:51 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Which leads to the second part...it is completely insane that we are inspecing 11% of fares. That's absurdly high.  That is probably, I dunno, between five and seven orders of magnitude (that's 10,000 and 1,000,000 times) as high a frequency as we inspect drivers.

And 3% no fare rate is also very low.  (Ungodly low compared with driver who approach a 100% violation rate for minor offenses like speeding <10km/h over limit, failure to signal, or running amber, and still very very low compared with the number of drivers with major offenses like texting and driving, major speeding, and reckless driving).

But most disturbing of all, that we are laying charges. Tom Galloway claimed this wasn't the case publicly on twitter. It is extremely concerning that we are charging people in the face of a payment system that was, at least last time I tried to use it, nearly completely unusable. I have ridden without paying my fare due to broken equipment, and I am extremely fastidious and technically capable, if I am unable to make it work sometimes, I know with certainty others will be having issues.

(06-22-2020, 08:07 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:

(06-22-2020, 08:01 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: It's unclear who is paying for the additional units since they just put it under Transit Services.

It sounds like we are indeed paying for these spares...basically throwing good money after bad.

(06-22-2020, 09:43 PM)tomh009 Wrote:

(06-22-2020, 08:07 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: It sounds like we are indeed paying for these spares...basically throwing good money after bad.

I agree with Bob -- it's not clear. The wording says they have been "ordered", not "purchased", so the vendor may be providing them at full price, for free or at a discount. We don't know.  (If I were the vendor, I would provide spares free of charge until the reliability is where it should be.)

(06-22-2020, 08:04 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:

(06-22-2020, 08:01 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: It's unclear who is paying for the additional units since they just put it under Transit Services.

So 10% of platform readers are out of commission, but we are still validating fares and ticketing offenders?

That is insane!

Basically where as drivers get a free pass on virtually every traffic offense, we've taken down the speed limit signs and are still ticketing people for speeding on transit...

You know..."fuck the police" sounds about right right now.

(06-23-2020, 09:37 AM)KevinL Wrote: There has to be an in-service guarantee for a device like this - a failure to operate less than a year after installation, on so many units in an order, can't be pinned on the customer.

(06-22-2020, 10:17 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:

(06-22-2020, 09:43 PM)tomh009 Wrote: I agree with Bob -- it's not clear. The wording says they have been "ordered", not "purchased", so the vendor may be providing them at full price, for free or at a discount. We don't know.  (If I were the vendor, I would provide spares free of charge until the reliability is where it should be.)

I mean, it's possible...but a vendor wouldn't provide free units (these are outside of the contract, so if we aren't paying, they are freee) out of the "goodness of their heart"...they would only provide them in an attempt to avoid punative measures we could take under the contract, but that would be optimistic on their part. Frankly, I'd be surprised if this was the case.

(06-23-2020, 09:51 AM)tomh009 Wrote:

(06-22-2020, 10:17 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I mean, it's possible...but a vendor wouldn't provide free units (these are outside of the contract, so if we aren't paying, they are freee) out of the "goodness of their heart"...they would only provide them in an attempt to avoid punative measures we could take under the contract, but that would be optimistic on their part. Frankly, I'd be surprised if this was the case.

As I said, if I were the vendor, I would provide them free (as loaners) to salvage the relationship. It absolutely happens in business, I have done it in the past, and I have had vendors do it for us.

That said, I don't know whether it's the case here.

(06-23-2020, 10:04 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: That being said, I may be biased, I don't want this relationship "salvaged"...there's nothing of value I see here.  Very disappointed that this has happened.

(06-22-2020, 05:16 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: Also I was looking at the latest council report on ION and there are a few interesting points.

• A bunch of revenue, boarding, and ridership data that's hard to draw any conclusions from due to the transit strike and COVID-19.
  
• Bombardier has essentially halted warranty deficiency work on the LRVs since February, again due to COVID-19.
  
• Bombardier is replacing deficient welds on 11 of the region's LRVs at the OMSF over the next two years. They claim the issue poses no safety risk but is being done to meet the expected 30 years service life.
  
• Bombardier is building a spare LRV for the region in Kingston, to be delivered late 2020 or early 2021.
  
• Approximately 11% of fares are inspected daily. 3% of inspected riders have not paid their fare, and approximately 35 people are charged with provincial offences related to fares every month.
  
• The region didn't anticipate the failure rate with platform validators and had to order more spare units as a result.
  
• Various work was done on the fare system during the free fare period, including altering the fare payment terminals to improve cashless transaction speed (has anyone noticed improvements?).
  

(06-23-2020, 11:12 AM)tomh009 Wrote:

(06-23-2020, 10:04 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: That being said, I may be biased, I don't want this relationship "salvaged"...there's nothing of value I see here.  Very disappointed that this has happened.

The problem is that switching to another supplier at this point is not likely to be easy, quick or inexpensive. I don't know anything about the root causes of the problems we are seeing but it may be quicker to address those than to start over again.

(06-23-2020, 12:21 PM)bgb_ca Wrote:

(06-22-2020, 05:16 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: Also I was looking at the latest council report on ION and there are a few interesting points.

• A bunch of revenue, boarding, and ridership data that's hard to draw any conclusions from due to the transit strike and COVID-19.
  
• Bombardier has essentially halted warranty deficiency work on the LRVs since February, again due to COVID-19.
  
• Bombardier is replacing deficient welds on 11 of the region's LRVs at the OMSF over the next two years. They claim the issue poses no safety risk but is being done to meet the expected 30 years service life.
  
• Bombardier is building a spare LRV for the region in Kingston, to be delivered late 2020 or early 2021.
  
• Approximately 11% of fares are inspected daily. 3% of inspected riders have not paid their fare, and approximately 35 people are charged with provincial offences related to fares every month.
  
• The region didn't anticipate the failure rate with platform validators and had to order more spare units as a result.
  
• Various work was done on the fare system during the free fare period, including altering the fare payment terminals to improve cashless transaction speed (has anyone noticed improvements?).
  

I wonder if the 3% includes expired fares. I will admit I did get caught the other day with a transfer that expired about 2 minutes before the fare inspector boarded. I tapped on at Conestoga, which still had 10 mins left on my card, and the LRV lingered for a few minutes like it usually does, and the fare inspectors got on at Northfield. When he mentioned the fare expired two minutes earlier, he just asked if I tapped at Conestoga or not, and then went on to the next person.

I used to get the monthly pass, but where my ridership dropped significantly due to me working from home, its no longer feasible for me to get one until the office reopens.

(06-23-2020, 01:46 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:

(06-23-2020, 11:12 AM)tomh009 Wrote: The problem is that switching to another supplier at this point is not likely to be easy, quick or inexpensive. I don't know anything about the root causes of the problems we are seeing but it may be quicker to address those than to start over again.

Fixing things is relative, given my experience with the software, "fixing" things won't ever result in a good user experience...the company simply isn't capable of it...even the things which work, are bad...

I suspect the regional staff see it the same as you do, but I am not looking to using this trash indefinitely.

(06-23-2020, 03:22 PM)tomh009 Wrote:

(06-23-2020, 01:46 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Fixing things is relative, given my experience with the software, "fixing" things won't ever result in a good user experience...the company simply isn't capable of it...even the things which work, are bad...

I suspect the regional staff see it the same as you do, but I am not looking to using this trash indefinitely.

Forever is a rather long time, and I do expect we'll see something new yet. But this type of system is not plug-and-play, so, even if contracts allow, I don't think we could do a switch to a different supplier quickly. But I really don't know the internals of this.