|
|
|
nfitz
Superstar
I assume you aren't simply taking the same route in both directions.
Sometimes I am. Streetcar to Union and then back again, sometimes including the subway, sometimes not. I expect that because I scan my card getting on the streetcar when I start out, and then I scan it at Union on my return, it registers as a transfer because there is no way for the system to know that I am getting back on a return trip on the streetcar or taking the subway.
Or, if I scan on the streetcar, then get on the subway at Union (no scanning needed), go to say the Eaton Centre and then scan back in at Dundas and take the subway back to Union and return to the streetcar (again, no scanning needed), it just registers as a transfer at Dundas and again doesn't recognize a return trip.
Or, if I scan on the streetcar, then get on the subway at Union (no scanning needed), go to say the Eaton Centre and then scan back in at Dundas and take the subway back to Union and return to the streetcar (again, no scanning needed), it just registers as a transfer at Dundas and again doesn't recognize a return trip.
nfitz
Superstar
Ah yes, if both scans are not on the 509 vehicle (or one is on a 509, and the other on a 510), then free ride.
That would work too.
I have seen now, many, many examples of short trips on a 506, followed a few minutes later by another short trip on a 506 in the opposite direction - and they all end up with a second fare - except the odd occasion when it doesn't detect the location, and shows '0' (though I'm seeing less of those, and less wrong locations).
On the flip side though, I took a 511 and was transferring to a 501, but there was a delay with the 501, so I went back on the 511 after waiting about 20 minutes (in the same direction) and was charged for two trips.
amnesiajune
Senior Member
It's not location-based. The Presto readers know which route they're operating. That's a necessity for later on when the TTC starts charging the express route double-fare on Presto.
By the TTC's policy, you should've been charged for two separate trips there.
Yes, and I should have been charged for two separate trips on the other scenarios too but wasn't. So I often get a return trip for the price of a one-way.
amnesiajune
Senior Member
That's not TTC policy though. It's just a loophole.
Yes, that's my point. There are loopholes. They should just do a 2 hour timed transfer and be done with it, because in effect it exists where the system can't clearly identify a return trip.
nfitz
Superstar
The Presto readers can only figure out which route they are running from their location. If location isn't working, they can't figure it out, and you get the 0.
If you're trip is interrupted by a TTC disruption, and you have to get back on the route you just got off to continue a journey, it shouldn't be a new charge. Normally you just explain to the operator and he understands.
Though you can ask for a refund ... though I wasn't bothering with that, given the number of free rides I've been getting, between not getting charged twice, and faulty presto readers, as I was still ahead of the game.
Exactly. That's why I didn't bother.
amnesiajune
Senior Member
If that's the case, how would a streetcar know if it's running the 509 or 510 when it's on Queen's Quay? How would it know if it's running the 509 or 511 as it leaves Exhibition? How would a bus travelling down Avenue Road know if it's the $3.25 61A bus or the $6.50 142 bus?
The way it works is that the Presto reader is connected to the rest of the bus so it can be told which route it's operating and which fare should be charged.
crs1026
Superstar
On Spadina, I recently re-boarded at Sullivan - ie midway between College and Dundas - after meeting a friend for lunch. The tap-on was treated as a transfer from my trip downtown. It's not a location with an intersecting route, so treating it as a transfer point is nonsensical.
My conclusion is that TTC's attempt at a transfer table, with the 2-hour rule hidden underneath as a fallback, is just muddled. The programming quite possibly results in more lost revenue than wilful fare evasion does. Time to throw in the towel, TTC.
- Paul
My conclusion is that TTC's attempt at a transfer table, with the 2-hour rule hidden underneath as a fallback, is just muddled. The programming quite possibly results in more lost revenue than wilful fare evasion does. Time to throw in the towel, TTC.
- Paul
nfitz
Superstar
Good question. Does it know? Does the transfer machine always give you the right number?
When I've ridden a new streetcar on King Street, that was signed 501, it's given me a 504 transfer at the machine. Meanwhile, Nextbus data (I checked) was showing it was a 510.
It's not like anyone in the garage, or the operator, is providing any input to the machine. So how does it know what route it's supposed to be on? It's not coming from what the run number the operator enters, or else I wouldn't have got a 504 transfer on a 510 run signed as a 501.
Are you sure? Where's the input? Who is entering it?
That's odd. Where did you board initially (and where did Presto think you boarded initially). Though if it was a subway station, that would explain it.
It's not really a transfer table. It's block on re-entering the subway, or re-using the same route number in a row. Though from what I saw in August, it looked like they'd added a block on a couple of very obvious things as well.
Implementing the entire transfer table is nigh impossible. And would completely fail, as soon as a route starts detouring.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
I'm not even sure that implementing the 2-hour timed rule would result in ANY lost revenue at all. I think it would be a benefit during these Presto teething problems for peace-of-mind. The increase in revenue by people who would otherwise walk, would more than offset revenue lost. There are times I walk or BIXI at lunch to save the cost of two TTC fares.
Yes, time to throw in the towel, TTC.
Yes, time to throw in the towel, TTC.