On Thu, 18 Dec 2008, Robert wrote:

This could be adopted for all sorts of other transactions. even ruggedised to
work on buses. The buses in Munich are fitted with coin operated ticket
issuing machines and I have never yet found one that hasn't worked.

When first tried the disasterous implementation of on-bus ticketing on the
ftr they neatly avoided "how to give change" problem by .. not giving any.
It wouldn't even let you get two tickets at 2.50 each with five pound
coins. If you were lucky it would be broken and so not only was the
jouyrney free, but it was also a lot quicker.

Other than perhaps the "chuck your cash in the bucket" type of machine
(such as used on the Dartford crossing) i think it's generally quicker to
pay cash by handing it to someone than feeding it into a machine.

I am not familiar with this 'Oyster' thing, so I have no experience of the
reduced dwell times. If dwell times do cause a significant cost, then the
dwell time can be reduced to zero (i.e., excess time above that required for
getting on and off) by bringing back the conductor....

Which is what they had to do in the end on the ftr.

Smartcards only save dwell times if most people use them. It's no good
having two people us them on a full double decker if everyone else is
going to pay by cash - especially when they don't even start to look for
their money until the driver has told them how much it'll be.
--
Chris Johns

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:11:12 +0000, Robert
wrote:

I have seen supermarkets (on the continent I will admit) where the
change (in coin) was held in an automatic machine at the checkout. You
handed the check-out person your money, the amount was registered in
the till and the change was automatically delivered down a chute. Only
notes were handed out by hand. It was very quick.

Very common in Germany. It's not complex technology - basically just
part of a vending machine. The clever thing about it is that the
chute leads to a "pot" that's exactly the right size/shape for picking
up your coins in one go. Far better than the cashier handing you them
together with the notes underneath which has always seemed to me to be
the wrong way around.

Wouldn't surprise me if these popped up in Aldi and the likes, to be
honest, these being German supermarkets where costs are kept down by
making the checkout service very quick rather than throwing staff at
the problem as UK ones tend to.

This could be adopted for all sorts of other transactions. even
ruggedised to work on buses. The buses in Munich are fitted with coin
operated ticket issuing machines and I have never yet found one that
hasn't worked.

It would be ideal for buses, and if change was only issued because the
machine determined it should be, and not on demand from the driver, it
would offer the security of a farebox system yet the flexibility of
the driver giving change.

But could UK bus operators maintain them properly?

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:45:27 +0000, Chris Johns
wrote:

When first tried the disasterous implementation of on-bus ticketing on the
ftr they neatly avoided "how to give change" problem by .. not giving any.
It wouldn't even let you get two tickets at 2.50 each with five pound
coins. If you were lucky it would be broken and so not only was the
jouyrney free, but it was also a lot quicker.

When there was a gbp1 ticket on offer, the ****-poor London off-bus
machines wouldn't allow that either. (This has been dealt with by
increasing the fare to be equal to the smallest coin they take)

Those machines were in principle a nice idea, but were poorly-located.
In the right place, they would have allowed people to pay for their
journey while the bus was already moving. But smartcards and period
tickets are a far better way to deal with the problem.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On 18 Dec, 11:45, Chris Johns wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008, Robert wrote:
This could be adopted for all sorts of other transactions. even ruggedised to
work on buses. The buses in Munich are fitted with coin operated ticket
issuing machines and I have never yet found one that hasn't worked.

When first tried the disasterous implementation of on-bus ticketing on the
ftr they neatly avoided "how to give change" problem by .. not giving any.
It wouldn't even let you get two tickets at 2.50 each with five pound
coins. If you were lucky it would be broken and so not only was the
jouyrney free, but it was also a lot quicker.

Other than perhaps the "chuck your cash in the bucket" type of machine
(such as used on the Dartford crossing) i think it's generally quicker to
pay cash by handing it to someone than feeding it into a machine.

I am not familiar with this 'Oyster' thing, so I have no experience of the
reduced dwell times. If dwell times do cause a significant cost, then the
dwell time can be reduced to zero (i.e., excess time above that required for
getting on and off) by bringing back the conductor....

Which is what they had to do in the end on the ftr.

Smartcards only save dwell times if most people use them. It's no good
having two people us them on a full double decker if everyone else is
going to pay by cash - especially when they don't even start to look for
their money until the driver has told them how much it'll be.


A slight tangent, but when Oyster was first introduced in LU/NR
barriers it was actually a lot slower, in that an Oyster touch took
longer to release the barrier than sticking a ticket through (and it
was variable from barrier to barrier).

Now it seems to have been speeded up.

On 18 Dec, 11:11, Robert wrote:

On 2008-12-18 10:13:36 +0000, Peter Campbell Smith
said:

Robert wrote in news:2008121807091316807-
coppercapped@googlemailcom:

The technology is a solution looking for a problem. Somebody, somewhere
is trying to skim a few percent off small everyday transactions. Why
else would they be pushing the idea? Why increase the costs of small
transactions and complicate something that is very simple - and above
all, works?

I don't disagree with what you say, but there are some other reasons. One
is the cost of handling cash, especially when it has to be collected from
otherwise unmanned places like vending machines. The other is security and
audit; for example vending machines are frequently stolen or broken into
and the cost of repair or replacement usually greatly exceeds the value of
the money inside.

I assume the machines have to be visited to be re-stocked. Then remove
the money at the same time. It is not necessary to make two visits.

If they are so often stolen or broken into then they can't be very
profitable because of all the extra costs. Remove them.

The argument is that they wouldn't be broken in to (or at least not
nearly as often) if they didn't contain cash. I think that's a pretty
strong argument, to be honest.

Plus with a number of such vending/self-service machines is it not the
case that sometimes the restocking and the cash emptying are carried
out separately? I'm not enough of an observer of such matters to know
that much about them. With some, such as car parking payment machines,
the predominant issue will be emptying them of cash as opposed to
restocking them - especially in the case of multi-storey car park
payment machines (though I suppose these may issue a receipt, so that
roll needs would need to be restocked - they'll certainly need to if
payment is made via credit/debit card).


Coin, and especially note, accepting equipment is expensive and much less
reliable and prone to vandalism than RFID interfaces.

Agreed.


Much the point I was making above.


Even at a manned position, RFID transactions are faster than cash, so that
at a busy place fewer counter staff are required, or queues can be handled
faster (as can be seen by reduced dwell times on buses since the
introduction of Oyster).

I have seen supermarkets (on the continent I will admit) where the
change (in coin) was held in an automatic machine at the checkout. You
handed the check-out person your money, the amount was registered in
the till and the change was automatically delivered down a chute. Only
notes were handed out by hand. It was very quick.

This could be adopted for all sorts of other transactions. even
ruggedised to work on buses. The buses in Munich are fitted with coin
operated ticket issuing machines and I have never yet found one that
hasn't worked.

Do they issue change?


I am not familiar with this 'Oyster' thing, so I have no experience of
the reduced dwell times. If dwell times do cause a significant cost,
then the dwell time can be reduced to zero (i.e., excess time above
that required for getting on and off) by bringing back the conductor....


Oyster has basically been revolutionary on London's buses. Dwell times
have been greatly reduced, as hardly anyone pays cash on board any
more - I'm serious, it is very rare to find people actually buying a
ticket from the driver (and when they do it's quick as there's a flat
cash fare of £2). Reduced dwell times means faster and more reliable
journeys, leading to a more reliable service that is far more
attractive to passengers - in essence buses are faster and more
frequent.

To be fair, before Oyster buses in London had a significant number of
passengers who already held pre-paid tickets - either season tickets
or day tickets (in either case Travelcards or bus passes), both of
which were available for purchase in many local newsagents - so there
were already many people flashing tickets at the driver (though it's
likely these people were commuters on their regular journey). However
lots of people were still paying cash on board (and at the time there
was not a flat fare scheme either so they had to request a destination
or alternatively the correct fare).

The Oyster card is an electronic smart card - it works by the
passenger touching the card on a reader. It has two modes - either
loaded with a Travelcard or bus pass, or alternatively in pay-as-you-
go (PAYG) mode whereby the passenger tops up their card with a load of
credit (this can be done at many newsagents and corner shops, and also
at Underground stations and a few rail stations).

The appropriate amount is then deducted from the PAYG balance when the
passenger travels - a flat fare of 90p (£1 from January) for bus
journeys where all a passenger needs to do is 'touch-in' on boarding,
differing fares on the Underground (and a few rail routes) where a
passenger needs to 'touch-in' and then 'touch-out' for the correct
fare to be deducted (if they don't touch-out the highest fare is
charged).

The amount deducted and PAYG balance is shown on a display on the bus
ticket machine (though it is hard too see and catch in time), it can
also be obtained by checking on the readers in the aforementioned
shops, and also at self-service ticket machines at Underground and a
few rail stations. If one registers their card appropriately the
balance can also be found online, albeit updated every night.

It's a great system, and really does make a difference to bus travel.

Regarding conductors - it is simply very expensive to put conductors
on buses, and where smartcard ticketing exists it would be an
unjustifiable luxury.

On 18 Dec, 11:45, Chris Johns wrote:

(snip)

Smartcards only save dwell times if most people use them. It's no good
having two people us them on a full double decker if everyone else is
going to pay by cash - especially when they don't even start to look for
their money until the driver has told them how much it'll be.


The vast majority of people on London buses are now using Oyster (or
the Oyster-compatible Freedom Pass for residents who are 60+ or
disabled). And if they're not using Oyster they'll be using a pre-paid
paper ticket (e.g. season or Day Travelcard), or an English national
bus pass.

One thing I omitted to mention in my reply to Robert is that in
central London there is now a 'pay-before-you-board' regime for buses
- actually this is something of a misnomer considering that these days
most people already have pre-paid tickets, but for those that don't
they need to buy a ticket (or a one-day bus pass) from the roadside
ticket machine at the bus stop.

In uk.transport.london Robert wrote:
I cannot for the life of me see what the advantages are, for the
customer, of an electronic form of payment over cash for small amounts.

Cash is well developed, the bugs have been ironed out of it and it's
easy to see your current balance.

Being cynical, I think you'll find that's a misfeature. Plastic has the
'advantage' (for the retailer) that the customer cannot easily see their
balance and is tempted to spend more. Hence the reason why cash is on the
rise again, as people are trying to keep more control over their finances.

Theo

Theo Markettos wrote:
In uk.transport.london Robert wrote:
I cannot for the life of me see what the advantages are, for the
customer, of an electronic form of payment over cash for small
amounts.

Cash is well developed, the bugs have been ironed out of it and it's
easy to see your current balance.

Being cynical, I think you'll find that's a misfeature. Plastic has
the 'advantage' (for the retailer) that the customer cannot easily
see their balance and is tempted to spend more. Hence the reason why
cash is on the rise again, as people are trying to keep more control
over their finances.

I find that only buying stuff I need works for me.

On 2008-12-18 13:46:50 +0000, Mizter T said:

On 18 Dec, 11:45, Chris Johns wrote:

(snip)

Smartcards only save dwell times if most people use them. It's no good
having two people us them on a full double decker if everyone else is
going to pay by cash - especially when they don't even start to look for
their money until the driver has told them how much it'll be.


The vast majority of people on London buses are now using Oyster (or
the Oyster-compatible Freedom Pass for residents who are 60+ or
disabled). And if they're not using Oyster they'll be using a pre-paid
paper ticket (e.g. season or Day Travelcard), or an English national
bus pass.

One thing I omitted to mention in my reply to Robert is that in
central London there is now a 'pay-before-you-board' regime for buses
- actually this is something of a misnomer considering that these days
most people already have pre-paid tickets, but for those that don't
they need to buy a ticket (or a one-day bus pass) from the roadside
ticket machine at the bus stop.

I didn't know that, thank you.
--
Robert

On 2008-12-18 13:27:27 +0000, Mizter T said:


On 18 Dec, 11:11, Robert wrote:

On 2008-12-18 10:13:36 +0000, Peter Campbell Smith
said:

Robert wrote in news:2008121807091316807-
coppercapped@googlemailcom:

The technology is a solution looking for a problem. Somebody, somewher
e
is trying to skim a few percent off small everyday transactions. Why
else would they be pushing the idea? Why increase the costs of small
transactions and complicate something that is very simple - and above
all, works?

I don't disagree with what you say, but there are some other reasons.
One
is the cost of handling cash, especially when it has to be collected fr
om
otherwise unmanned places like vending machines. The other is security
and
audit; for example vending machines are frequently stolen or broken int
o
and the cost of repair or replacement usually greatly exceeds the value
of
the money inside.

I assume the machines have to be visited to be re-stocked. Then remove
the money at the same time. It is not necessary to make two visits.

If they are so often stolen or broken into then they can't be very
profitable because of all the extra costs. Remove them.

The argument is that they wouldn't be broken in to (or at least not
nearly as often) if they didn't contain cash. I think that's a pretty
strong argument, to be honest.

Plus with a number of such vending/self-service machines is it not the
case that sometimes the restocking and the cash emptying are carried
out separately? I'm not enough of an observer of such matters to know
that much about them. With some, such as car parking payment machines,
the predominant issue will be emptying them of cash as opposed to
restocking them - especially in the case of multi-storey car park
payment machines (though I suppose these may issue a receipt, so that
roll needs would need to be restocked - they'll certainly need to if
payment is made via credit/debit card).


Coin, and especially note, accepting equipment is expensive and much le
ss
reliable and prone to vandalism than RFID interfaces.

Agreed.


Much the point I was making above.


Even at a manned position, RFID transactions are faster than cash, so t
hat
at a busy place fewer counter staff are required, or queues can be hand
led
faster (as can be seen by reduced dwell times on buses since the
introduction of Oyster).

I have seen supermarkets (on the continent I will admit) where the
change (in coin) was held in an automatic machine at the checkout. You
handed the check-out person your money, the amount was registered in
the till and the change was automatically delivered down a chute. Only
notes were handed out by hand. It was very quick.

This could be adopted for all sorts of other transactions. even
ruggedised to work on buses. The buses in Munich are fitted with coin
operated ticket issuing machines and I have never yet found one that
hasn't worked.

Do they issue change?

I don't know if all of them do. The buses on my local route were run by
a bus company on the edge of Munich which took part in the transport
co-operative, but ran routes further out into the country. These
machines did give change, as long as the 'change' side of the machine
had any money in it. If not then it defaulted to exact fare only. In
the centre the machines on buses run by the MVG (the city run bus, tram
and U-bahn organisation) looked to be slightly different. I never used
one as I had my inner-city season ticket for such journeys so I don't
know if they gave change. The next time I go there I'll have a look.



I am not familiar with this 'Oyster' thing, so I have no experience of
the reduced dwell times. If dwell times do cause a significant cost,
then the dwell time can be reduced to zero (i.e., excess time above
that required for getting on and off) by bringing back the conductor....


Oyster has basically been revolutionary on London's buses. Dwell times
have been greatly reduced, as hardly anyone pays cash on board any
more - I'm serious, it is very rare to find people actually buying a
ticket from the driver (and when they do it's quick as there's a flat
cash fare of £2). Reduced dwell times means faster and more reliable
journeys, leading to a more reliable service that is far more
attractive to passengers - in essence buses are faster and more
frequent.

Snipped

It's a great system, and really does make a difference to bus travel.

Regarding conductors - it is simply very expensive to put conductors
on buses, and where smartcard ticketing exists it would be an
unjustifiable luxury.

Thank you for the explanation - I didn't realise that it was a flat
fare system.
--
Robert