ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[danbrotherston]

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.

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.

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

It's not that we are buying replacement units, we are buying additional spares because the failure rate is so astronomically high, that we don't have enough spares to cover the repair work.

Can I get paid for delivering garbage to the region too?  Then get paid more when they realize I've delivered garbage?

[ijmorlan]

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.

That’s an interesting framing I hadn’t heard before. Especially given the reduction in recent years in traffic enforcement, it stands out that fare enforcement is the one thing that is being done thoroughly.

As to the charges, when did Tom Galloway say that? My impression is they started with warnings and eventually moved to charging (which is the right way to go anyway). Depending on how they handle problems with the machines, this could be perfectly reasonable. The fact that some machines are broken isn’t a legitimate reason for all riders to have not paid — only those who were unable to pay. I have no idea what the procedures are however — it’s entirely possible that people who tried to pay have been charged; but it’s also possible that hasn’t happened.

One suggestion I would make if you do make a presentation to Regional Council: try to make it clear that you aren’t saying that fare enforcement shouldn’t happen, just that it needs to be done fairly and that it’s being overdone compared to other important enforcement priorities. The way some people talk, one wonders if they believe in enforcement at all. With no enforcement at all, there is no rule. Which may be fine; I think the notion of making GRT free (or sometimes free) has a lot of merit. But anybody who wants that should advocate for it straightforwardly.

Another thought just occurred to me: I wonder how enforcement varies between time periods. It’s very hard to properly enforce fares on a packed-to-the-rafters vehicle, yet that is when the enforcement is in some senses most important: a non-paying rider actually is occupying a spot that could have been used by a paying rider, rather than a spot that would have gone empty. By contrast if there are 5 people on the train, it’s easy to inspect them all, and even if 20% haven’t paid a ticket can be issued.

[tomh009]

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.

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.)

[danbrotherston]

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.)

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.

[KevinL]

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.

[Coke6pk]

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.

You are assuming that all of those charged attempted to pay.  I would likely disagree.

If you went to court and said you had a valid payment card, and attempted to validate it but it didn't read, and there was known issues with the validator's, you would be found not guilty.

Perhaps those charged made ZERO attempt to pay.  Maybe they admitted it.  Maybe there was CCTV footage, I don't know, I don't work there.

I know if I put a pack of gum on the grocery belt and the cashier doesn't scan it and I walk out without paying for it, I won't be charged for theft.  If I put the gum in my pocket before I get to cash, then I would be guilty.  I would like to think our fare enforcement uses similar guidelines.

That being said, I don't know enough to comment on their level of enforcement.

Coke

[danbrotherston]

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.

I'm sure there is, and I am sure that the contractor is in breach of contract for it, and I very much hope we are seeking damages, but that doesn't mean that the contract would include free units if they fail. We could seek free units as damages, but that would be at a minimum a negotiation. The contractor could choose to give us free units under the belief that doing so would mitigate our damages and thus weaken any legal claim we would have to damages.

[tomh009]

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.

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.

[danbrotherston]

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.

That's fair.

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.

[tomh009]

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.

[bgb_ca]

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.

[danbrotherston]

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.

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.

[danbrotherston]

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.

We were (eventually) told that this is an acceptable use of the system, and that it wouldn't be considered non-payment of fares, so it shouldn't be included in the 3%...although it absolutely could be, because they often don't seem to be on the same page.  Of course, it's on the honour system anyway....so I'll ask again, why are we inspecting 10% of fares...that is absolutely nuts.

[tomh009]

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.

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.

[trainspotter139]

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.

User Experience can be updated to be more cohesive. Definitely should have started the system with the cardholders, and the platform fair validators definitely should have been more reliable. But overall the system is working fairly well. It certainly isn't having as many issues as the TTC has had with Presto.