The Transportation and Mass Transit Megathread

[nashmoney]

I was in Jacksonville this past weekend and noticed they have a people mover called the Jacksonville Skyway. It is 2.5 mile of track, with eight stations, traveling up to 35 mph. It was closed on the so I did not get a chance to ride it. I'm sure probably the same as the one in Vegas.

 

It hasn't been successful in it's 20 year life due to the fact that Downtown Jax is dead and on life support after 5pm and there is hardly anything going on on the weekends, except for the Landing. Also, Downtown residential is dead as I only counted about 2-3 condo/apartment buildings downtown. Most of the their urban residential is across the river and on the Southside of Downtown.

 

I wonder if something like this would work instead of the AMP. I know the AMP's route is longer, but would a monorail type train work for the AMP route? I couldn't find the total cost of Jax's system, but initial cost in 1989 was $34.6 for .7 miles 

 

I think we might have discussed a people mover for downtown before but couldnt remember.

 

I applaud Jax for taking the initial in the late 80's to invest in mass transit. They definitely were ahead of Nashville in planning mass transit.

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacksonville_Skyway

Edited July 21, 2014 by nashmoney

[Neigeville2]

I love elevated trains, both in terms of how they look in the urban landscape and how they feel when you ride them, much nicer views than at street level and safer than running at grade, plus there's less here to freak out the Broadway-is-too-narrow crowd.  I would think fully automated systems (no drivers) would have to be cheaper in the long run?

 

A starter line from Music City Central to Broadway and out to the east end of Vanderbilt (the new Kissam dorms) would be about 2 miles per Google maps, with later expansion to 5 points and out to 440.  Screw Belle Meade.

 

Way more people would want to ride this than a bus.  If it went to the stadium it would make a great park-and-ride, even for some people who work at Vanderbilt, as long as it actually stopped in the parking lot so people don't have to walk too far.

 

On some of these systems, after regular service has stopped you can call a train by pressing a button, which would be great for the drunks and tourists.  

 

People movers have a mixed success rate (failure in Detroit, huge success in Miami) which seems to correspond to the density of the area served.  We're obviously increasing our density here in Nashville.

Edited July 22, 2014 by Neigeville2

[timmay143]

I think Miami has a people mover too.

[nashvylle]

Couldn't agree more. Ex-Transportation Head from Chicago weighs in on The Amp. 

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/2014/08/ex-chicago-transportation-head-weighs-in-on-the.html?page=3

Edited August 4, 2014 by nashvylle

[grilled_cheese]

I know it's not new but Nashville MTA unveiled a new mobile site.  I checked it out today on my phone and http://www.nashvillemta.org/ does not even re-direct to their mobile site http://m.nashvillemta.org/.

 

Everything on the mobile site only links to functionality of the main site but there is something called 'Transit Tix' which you can buy via the mobile site.  I'm not really sure what these are, how they are different, or how you would use them via a mobile device.

 

I'm still waiting on the live GPS tracking.

[East Side Urbanite]

I was in Jacksonville this past weekend and noticed they have a people mover called the Jacksonville Skyway. It is 2.5 mile of track, with eight stations, traveling up to 35 mph. It was closed on the so I did not get a chance to ride it. I'm sure probably the same as the one in Vegas.

 

It hasn't been successful in it's 20 year life due to the fact that Downtown Jax is dead and on life support after 5pm and there is hardly anything going on on the weekends, except for the Landing. Also, Downtown residential is dead as I only counted about 2-3 condo/apartment buildings downtown. Most of the their urban residential is across the river and on the Southside of Downtown.

 

I wonder if something like this would work instead of the AMP. I know the AMP's route is longer, but would a monorail type train work for the AMP route? I couldn't find the total cost of Jax's system, but initial cost in 1989 was $34.6 for .7 miles 

 

I think we might have discussed a people mover for downtown before but couldnt remember.

 

I applaud Jax for taking the initial in the late 80's to invest in mass transit. They definitely were ahead of Nashville in planning mass transit.

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacksonville_Skyway

 

 

I rode the Skyway in 2005. Very efficient and useful. And GREAT views of the city. 

[drewbert]

I know it's not new but Nashville MTA unveiled a new mobile site.  I checked it out today on my phone and http://www.nashvillemta.org/ does not even re-direct to their mobile site http://m.nashvillemta.org/.

 

Everything on the mobile site only links to functionality of the main site but there is something called 'Transit Tix' which you can buy via the mobile site.  I'm not really sure what these are, how they are different, or how you would use them via a mobile device.

 

I'm still waiting on the live GPS tracking.

Huh. As far as I can tell the major difference between the new online ticket sales and the old one is now you have an account with a username, password and security question. It will now remember your mailing address, but not your credit card number. Doesn't exactly seem like a major technological breakthrough, but maybe it's more secure on their end *shrug*. So when can I buy an RFID tap card like state workers have?

 

I asked Transit Now Nashville on Facebook about GPS tracking app. They're now saying spring/summer next year. Meanwhile, every Lyft and Uber car and nearly every taxi in the city already has it.

[Guest]

Difference in the private sector and a government monopoly..... no joke.

You would think an organization that is attempting to convince taxpayers to fund a new AMP system could produce a simple GPS bus tracking and ticketing app. We have many in our family that use the busses and the service has gotten worse. My son waited 45 minutes last Tuesday afternoon for a bus on West End.... 

I do hope they get their act together.

Edited August 25, 2014 by Guest

[grilled_cheese]

Huh. As far as I can tell the major difference between the new online ticket sales and the old one is now you have an account with a username, password and security question. It will now remember your mailing address, but not your credit card number. Doesn't exactly seem like a major technological breakthrough, but maybe it's more secure on their end *shrug*. So when can I buy an RFID tap card like state workers have?

 

I asked Transit Now Nashville on Facebook about GPS tracking app. They're now saying spring/summer next year. Meanwhile, every Lyft and Uber car and nearly every taxi in the city already has it.

 

Can you elaborate on the online ticket sales?

 

I have only ever paid via cash on the bus or purchased a 20 ride ticket at the Music City Central.  If you buy via the app do they reload one of your cards or does it just send a new card to your mailing address?  If it's the latter then that seems, to me, a waste of time.

 

Hmm, last I heard the GPS tracking would be sometime this fall, and that is now year old info.  If they're pushing it back again then I'm not going to hold my breathe.  Since they can't seem to get their crap together in regard to GPS tracking then they need to update their route/time system on their website.  At the very least I should be able to isolate one or two routes and then see what the times are for that day.  It's frustrating having to study what is basically an excel document to even get an idea of when the bus should arrive, especially on the weekends.

Edited August 25, 2014 by grilled_cheese

[nashvillwill]

The RFID tags and GPS tracking are a no-brainer. They want to target a young demographic? Then that's how you do it. These are the tools that everyone is using these days.

[ruraljuror]

Difference in the private sector and a government monopoly..... no joke.

You would think an organization that is attempting to convince taxpayers to fund a new AMP system could produce a simple GPS bus tracking and ticketing app. We have many in our family that use the busses and the service has gotten worse. My son waited 45 minutes last Tuesday afternoon for a bus on West End.... 

I do hope they get their act together.

 

 

What government monopoly are you referring to? 

[Guest]

"Government Monopoly" would have been a more apt description. Quasi non-profit/government entity, limited accountability, subsidized via public dole. This public money creates a de facto monopoly because it reduces the price of a trip to such an extent that a private entity can not enter the market.

If the 'true' cost of a passenger mile is 'x' and the public subsidy to the municipal 'transit authority' takes the cost down to x-subsidy, then a private sector entity can not enter the market.... innovation and efficiency becomes retarded.
 

Table One

2008 Costs and Subsidies Per Passenger Mile and Per Trip
Cost/Mile       Subsidy/Mile       Co2t/Trip        Subsidy/Trip

0.95                       0.79                   4.33                  3.62

​(Admittedly, this is skewed to the extent that the Music City Start is included for Nashville. The per MTA trip subsidy is over $1/trip which sounds manageable until you learn that the avg, fare is only $0.70.... so taxpayer are 60% of each avg. MTA passenger trip."
 

Sources: Transit from 2008 National Transit Database, operating expense, capital cost, and service spreadsheets; driving from Bureau of Economic Analysis, “Personal Incomes Expenditures by Type of Expenditure,” table 2.5.5 and Highway Statistics 2008, table VM-1. 

[rookzie]

...

...

I asked Transit Now Nashville on Facebook about GPS tracking app. They're now saying spring/summer next year. Meanwhile, every Lyft and Uber car and nearly every taxi in the city already has it.

...

You would think an organization that is attempting to convince taxpayers to fund a new AMP system could produce a simple GPS bus tracking and ticketing app. We have many in our family that use the busses and the service has gotten worse. My son waited 45 minutes last Tuesday afternoon for a bus on West End....

I do hope they get their act together.

...

Hmm, last I heard the GPS tracking would be sometime this fall, and that is now year old info. If they're pushing it back again then I'm not going to hold my breathe. Since they can't seem to get their crap together in regard to GPS tracking then they need to update their route/time system on their website. At the very least I should be able to isolate one or two routes and then see what the times are for that day. It's frustrating having to study what is basically an excel document to even get an idea of when the bus should arrive, especially on the weekends.

Gospel truth! There is no decent reason that the Nashville MTA, by now, could not have had some real-time display of bus scheduling at each stop, since they first announced the proposal to do so (I believe) at least 3 years ago.

 

 

Holeywell, Ryan. "Top Reasons People Stop Using Public Transit." Governing - The States and Localities. GOVERNING Institute, 16 Jan. 2013. Web. 25 Aug. 2014. <http://www.governing.com/blogs/view/gov-reasons-riders-abandon-public-transit.html>

 

Nothing ruins a public transportation rider's day quite like waiting around for a train or bus that never shows up. Turns out that if it happens enough, riders will start giving up on transit, according to a new report.

 

University of California, Berkeley researchers examined exactly what effect a transit system's unreliability has on its customers. While it's well-known that reliability is important to riders, it's less understood how, exactly, common transit problems impact the public's likelihood to reduce their ridership in the long-term.

 

Some studies show that transit riders value consistent travel times even more than shorter travel times, making reliability an especially important issue for agencies to consider if they want to retain customers.…

 

…Frequent, consistent service -- and in particular, reliable transfers between stops -- are what's most important to riders, according to the study. Riders care most about getting picked up from their stop in 10 minutes or less, and they especially value being able to make their scheduled connections….

 

Please read the entire article – it’s not long. And while you’re at it, click on the topic shown under “RELATED”, in the mid-top of the same Web page:

Bus Rapid Transit Gaining Traction Despite Concerns

Please read it also in its entirety. Note particularly the sections shown bold, the discussion near the middle-to-end of the article about the reference to a BRT-like spin-off in NYC and the (implied) success with Eugene’s highly popular EmX, and the highlights on the positives and the negatives in implementing BRT, in contrast to the philosophy of its virtues.

Also from another related article (from theTransitWire.com), similar sentiment is summarized:

 

(from “Why transit reliability is such a big deal”. Jan 18. 2013)

“…Riders were much more forgiving of incidents that they perceived to be beyond the control of the agency, like traffic delays or emergencies. “On the other hand,” they wrote, “out of all reliability problems, the strongest influence on transit use reduction comes from experiencing delays due to operational problems – other transit vehicles being backed up or problems downstream on the route that are not immediately visible to the passenger (resulting in vehicles being held upstream).” The location of the delay also matters. Riders were more likely to reduce their transit use because of delays at a transfer point than at their starting point.”

 

This perhaps is my biggest peeve with the Nashville MTA as a whole (second to rattly buses on the less used routes and buses with the audible annunciators set so loud that they drive a blind and a deaf man mean). As I and others have stated one way or another during the past, real-time arrival information on both a smart-phone app and the company’s Web site can go far in gaining ridership. This is especially true for choice riders, obviously who do have at least one alternative. Real-time arrival can go even farther and faster in inducing more patronage, than any proposed BRT or LRT project can, here and now, IMHO. Transit availability and reliability is definitely an issue of disparity for such a city the size and popularity of greater Nashville, I would conclude.

Also, as far as the Web site is concerned, and while it may be common practice to publish schedules and maps as downloadable pdf documents, it is not a best practice in site design to do so exclusively. These schedules should be available alternatively as formatted Web pages with tabulated scheduling. This would permit faster and more reliable loading on a user’s device – computer or smart-phone app – and would give the user a choice of downloading the pdf (for retention or printing) and of simply viewing interactively. I’m sure that the pdfs were created from the same master docs used to provide the printed schedules provided at the information racks at various locations throughout the city, but also it is a cheap “cop-out” way of delivery to the cyber-public, when done as an attempt to avoid perceived replication.

And as far as transfers are concerned, a number of us have observed that transfers are no longer available – and haven’t been for years – that an additional full fare or a day-pass is required for passage onto each bus boarded in route. At least transfers with reduced charge and a time constraint could be offered in lieu of a double or triple fare each way (or an expensive daily pass) for a round trip. Or at least they could consider a modified version of the use of 2-hr, 24-hr-, and 3-day passes in practice in Clark Co. Nevada (Las Vegas RTC transit), with a fare structure basis like that of the RTC’s Deuce, SDX, MAX, and residential routes, while retaining the single-ride fair.

 

(btw, the Deuce and SDX and MAX buses have one of the most detailed and descriptive onboard GPS-based text-to-speech annunciator system of transfer points and local landmarks [e.g. "7-Eleven at Las Vagas Blvd and Oakley Blvd.]" and real-time display of upcoming and passed stop points of any bus transit system that I have experienced. [CAD/AVL - computer aided dispatch/automatic vehicle location system, integrated with an Audio Visual Annunciation System - AVAS])

Again, real-time info provision is a single measure that should be accomplished before pushing any "high-minded" connector project. Yeah, it takes funding, but you start with incremental steps with what you already have, as I see it. It may qualify as a "very small start" in funding, just as the signal priority, shelters (et.al) were for the recent Nº55 M'boro Road BRT-lite, last year.

-==-

Edited August 26, 2014 by rookzie

[Vrtigo]

Please read the entire article – it’s not long.  And while you’re at it, click on the topic shown under “RELATED”, in the mid-top of the same Web page:

  Bus Rapid Transit Gaining Traction Despite Concerns

Please read it also in its entirety.  Note particularly the sections shown bold, the discussion near the middle-to-end of the article about the reference to a BRT-like spin-off in NYC and the (implied) success with Eugene’s highly popular EmX, and the highlights on the positives and the negatives in implementing BRT, in contrast to the philosophy of its virtues.

 

-==-

 

Fascinating article. Well worth the read if you are invested in Nashville transit growth!

[ruraljuror]

 

"Government Monopoly" would have been a more apt description. Quasi non-profit/government entity, limited accountability, subsidized via public dole. This public money creates a de facto monopoly because it reduces the price of a trip to such an extent that a private entity can not enter the market.

If the 'true' cost of a passenger mile is 'x' and the public subsidy to the municipal 'transit authority' takes the cost down to x-subsidy, then a private sector entity can not enter the market.... innovation and efficiency becomes retarded.

 

Table One

2008 Costs and Subsidies Per Passenger Mile and Per Trip

Cost/Mile       Subsidy/Mile       Co2t/Trip        Subsidy/Trip

0.95                       0.79                   4.33                  3.62

​(Admittedly, this is skewed to the extent that the Music City Start is included for Nashville. The per MTA trip subsidy is over $1/trip which sounds manageable until you learn that the avg, fare is only $0.70.... so taxpayer are 60% of each avg. MTA passenger trip."

 

Sources: Transit from 2008 National Transit Database, operating expense, capital cost, and service spreadsheets; driving from Bureau of Economic Analysis, “Personal Incomes Expenditures by Type of Expenditure,” table 2.5.5 and Highway Statistics 2008, table VM-1. 

 

I'm a little confused about what you're advocating for here.

 

Are you saying that you think that mass transit shouldn't be subsidized so that a private entity might be enticed to enter in the market and create a mass transit system to compete with the one operated by the city?  Also, if a private entity did want to enter the market, what makes you think that some of those subsidies couldn't be made available to them as well, similar to subsidies for Charter Schools, or privatized prisons, or TIF money in a way, right?  Has anyone ever attempted to do this or are you just blindly speculating that the only thing keeping away the competition in the bus market is the subsidies?

 

More importantly, what makes you think that mass transit systems could or should be a profitable businesses as opposed to just being public utilities in the first place?  It would seem to me that the reason we subsidize the bus systems is because they are a public benefit--to the merchants who gain a larger customer base, to the property owners who have to dedicate less of their land to parking, to the car drivers who have to deal with fewer other cars on the road, and of course for the people that ride the buses, both locals and visitors who came to town to spend money.  All the stakeholders involved benefit from keeping the cost as low as possible, and as a community we've theoretically agreed that's it's worth paying to do so.  The only thing keeping us from cutting the subsidies and operating at cost or even raising ticket prices above cost to make a profit is that we as a city decide not to do that. 

 

But what's the alternative?  Why not cut the subsidies, level the playing field, and see if Branson wants to launch Virgin Roadways to compete with MTA?  He can get a bunch of really nice buses, charge a significant premium for tickets and only make stops in places with high volume ridership capable of affording the premium.   He'll make a killing.  Or do you anticipate that any new entrant into the bus market will be forced to service the existing routes, with the same regularity as a part of the deal?  I'm earnestly asking these questions because I genuinely don't have any idea about how you see this playing out.  In either case, what do you expect MTA to do?  Should they start operating as business and drop all the unprofitable routes in order to compete with Virgin, etc.?  Or do they have to raise ticket prices even higher, further reducing ridership in a downward spiral beyond those lost to the nice, new, expensive Virgin buses? 

 

And why not take it one step further?  Why not cut the taxpayer dole on sidewalks in order to invite some competition.  We could be going city block by city block on airport terminal conveyor belts if we sell off the rights and people are willing to put a couple quarters in the slot each time.  Why not operate the city streets like for-profit businesses?  One sure way to clear up some of the traffic on West End would be putting a bunch of toll booths on it.  Better yet, maybe Virgin Tollbooths can maintain West End and collect the tolls in exchange for giving Metro a small cut of the profits!

 

I'm sorry if that got a little too concrete there, but I honestly don't know what you're trying to promote other than making the blanket statement that government monopolies are bad and the private sector is good.  If that's all you were going for, first I'd agree that MTA has not met expectations with their development of the gps and ticketing app.  That said, your case against government monopolies is somewhat weakened here by the fact that government R&D is pretty much exclusively responsible for much of the technology that makes gps and apps possible in the first place.  Also, comparing Uber against MTA and declaring Uber the obvious winner on behalf of the private sector doesn't take into account all of the companies that are/were would-be Ubers and tried (or are trying) but failed to build similar platforms.  Competition certainly breeds innovation, but MTA isn't trying to win a first-to-market race, and more importantly, can't afford to spend the amount of money wasted by the vast majority of entities that attempt to build the best new thing but don't succeed. 

[Vrtigo]

Good arguments on both sides, in my opinion. However, I think you're both arguing entirely different points... The fundamental argument I picked up from rookzie is that MTA has no incentive to improve its dreadful performance because there is no competition or other incentive to do otherwise. 

[Hey_Hey]

Without getting into larger issues of competition and public transit customer service, I have to say that it has taken an exceedingly long time to get real time arrival in an app based platform. There are two primary issues that MTA had to address to get the real time information. The first was the actual GPS units located on the busses.  IIRC they received funding to do this back in 2012.  Here's a link to an article discussing this: http://www.thetransitwire.com/2012/11/01/nashville-buses-are-going-high-tech/

 

The second issue is that of developing an app that uses the raw data and presents it in a usable form. This seems to be where the slow down has occurred. There is no way that it should take 2 years to develop an app that tracks the GPS location of the buses in Nashville. In a day and age where every church, interest group, and business that is the least bit tech savvy has an app there really isn't an excuse to not have a fully functional app within a few months of deploying GPS on the busses. I'd be willing to bet that the MTA could put up a $25,000 prize and have a hack-a-thon and develop an app in a few days.  Or they could just make all the data public and let anyone with any coding ability go at it on their own free time in order to make money on it in the future.

[rookzie]

....no intention of sponsoring a back-yard pit-bull cock session.  Each of you's guys (y'all) has a valid, well-made point.

 

I've just ridden the MTA daily so long continuously (since April 2006), that I can readily perceive a performance issue.

 

Oh, and one more thing to add to my soap-box: The so-called "transfer points" automatically announced to riders in each bus during transit, as it approaches such GPS designated locations, is a a total joke. (e.g. between Nº2 and Nº2, Nº10 and Nº21).  Rarely if ever have I observed or experienced such a route transfer that was actually capable of being maintained (because these are not scheduled points of departure).

 

-==-

[Guest]

RJ

To be honest I was not attempting to break new ground. I simply agreed that MTA has been incredibly tardy in bringing innovative (circa 2009) GPS tracking and payment options to the ridership ....

(I will insert here a thought that came to me this morning... do you think MTA is purposely slow-walking the location and payment upgrades to make the promised AMP that much better? What I mean is that AMP literature focuses on speed/convenience/information as big selling points. If you can get 2 of the 3 without AMP does that lower the AMP value proposition??? Just a thought)

... I then gave an example of how not having the location information affected one of my son's trips last week. I attributed this lack of urgency to the fact that there was not any apple-to-apple competition forcing MTA's hand ("government monopoly") and I think that is a widely held view.

My follow-up post was just to clarify why I called in a "government monopoly". Nothing new.....

_____________________________________________________


I have numerous responses to your lengthy post but that would involve getting off-topic. For example, your statement,

 

 

 

your case against government monopolies is somewhat weakened here by the fact that government R&D is pretty much exclusively responsible for much of the technology that makes gps and apps possible in the first place

 

Is easily refuted. Government money Yes, but The DoD used many, many private sector contractors to develop the GPS technology and all of the satellites
 

 

35Originally, the Air Force planned to buy 51 satellites. However, concerns over the legal and polit- ical ramifications of issuing such a large contract caused the service to scale back its planned buy to 33 satellites. “House Appropriators Cut GPS Block IIF, Add $100 Million For SBIRS,” Aerospace Daily, Vol. 175, No. 17, July 27, 1995, pp. 129–130. 

used in the system..... (actually all) weapons and technology systems. And all of this GPS 'magic' would have remained the for the exclusive use of the war machine ..... except Pres. Reagan opened up the GPS system to international civilian use.

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR614/MR614.appb.pdf

We can continue discussing market forces v statist enterprises in the coffeehouse if you wish, but there is little doubt that when th government wants to innovate, they contract it out to the private sector.......



 

I'm a little confused about what you're advocating for here.

 

Are you saying that you think that mass transit shouldn't be subsidized so that a private entity might be enticed to enter in the market and create a mass transit system to compete with the one operated by the city?  Also, if a private entity did want to enter the market, what makes you think that some of those subsidies couldn't be made available to them as well, similar to subsidies for Charter Schools, or privatized prisons, or TIF money in a way, right?  Has anyone ever attempted to do this or are you just blindly speculating that the only thing keeping away the competition in the bus market is the subsidies?

 

More importantly, what makes you think that mass transit systems could or should be a profitable businesses as opposed to just being public utilities in the first place?  It would seem to me that the reason we subsidize the bus systems is because they are a public benefit--to the merchants who gain a larger customer base, to the property owners who have to dedicate less of their land to parking, to the car drivers who have to deal with fewer other cars on the road, and of course for the people that ride the buses, both locals and visitors who came to town to spend money.  All the stakeholders involved benefit from keeping the cost as low as possible, and as a community we've theoretically agreed that's it's worth paying to do so.  The only thing keeping us from cutting the subsidies and operating at cost or even raising ticket prices above cost to make a profit is that we as a city decide not to do that. 

 

But what's the alternative?  Why not cut the subsidies, level the playing field, and see if Branson wants to launch Virgin Roadways to compete with MTA?  He can get a bunch of really nice buses, charge a significant premium for tickets and only make stops in places with high volume ridership capable of affording the premium.   He'll make a killing.  Or do you anticipate that any new entrant into the bus market will be forced to service the existing routes, with the same regularity as a part of the deal?  I'm earnestly asking these questions because I genuinely don't have any idea about how you see this playing out.  In either case, what do you expect MTA to do?  Should they start operating as business and drop all the unprofitable routes in order to compete with Virgin, etc.?  Or do they have to raise ticket prices even higher, further reducing ridership in a downward spiral beyond those lost to the nice, new, expensive Virgin buses? 

 

And why not take it one step further?  Why not cut the taxpayer dole on sidewalks in order to invite some competition.  We could be going city block by city block on airport terminal conveyor belts if we sell off the rights and people are willing to put a couple quarters in the slot each time.  Why not operate the city streets like for-profit businesses?  One sure way to clear up some of the traffic on West End would be putting a bunch of toll booths on it.  Better yet, maybe Virgin Tollbooths can maintain West End and collect the tolls in exchange for giving Metro a small cut of the profits!

 

I'm sorry if that got a little too concrete there, but I honestly don't know what you're trying to promote other than making the blanket statement that government monopolies are bad and the private sector is good.  If that's all you were going for, first I'd agree that MTA has not met expectations with their development of the gps and ticketing app.  That said, your case against government monopolies is somewhat weakened here by the fact that government R&D is pretty much exclusively responsible for much of the technology that makes gps and apps possible in the first place.  Also, comparing Uber against MTA and declaring Uber the obvious winner on behalf of the private sector doesn't take into account all of the companies that are/were would-be Ubers and tried (or are trying) but failed to build similar platforms.  Competition certainly breeds innovation, but MTA isn't trying to win a first-to-market race, and more importantly, can't afford to spend the amount of money wasted by the vast majority of entities that attempt to build the best new thing but don't succeed. 

[ruraljuror]

RJ

To be honest I was not attempting to break new ground. I simply agreed that MTA has been incredibly tardy in bringing innovative (circa 2009) GPS tracking and payment options to the ridership ....

(I will insert here a thought that came to me this morning... do you think MTA is purposely slow-walking the location and payment upgrades to make the promised AMP that much better? What I mean is that AMP literature focuses on speed/convenience/information as big selling points. If you can get 2 of the 3 without AMP does that lower the AMP value proposition??? Just a thought)

... I then gave an example of how not having the location information affected one of my son's trips last week. I attributed this lack of urgency to the fact that there was not any apple-to-apple competition forcing MTA's hand ("government monopoly") and I think that is a widely held view.

My follow-up post was just to clarify why I called in a "government monopoly". Nothing new.....

_____________________________________________________

I have numerous responses to your lengthy post but that would involve getting off-topic. For example, your statement,

 

 

Is easily refuted. Government money Yes, but The DoD used many, many private sector contractors to develop the GPS technology and all of the satellites

 

used in the system..... (actually all) weapons and technology systems. And all of this GPS 'magic' would have remained the for the exclusive use of the war machine ..... except Pres. Reagan opened up the GPS system to international civilian use.

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR614/MR614.appb.pdf

We can continue discussing market forces v statist enterprises in the coffeehouse if you wish, but there is little doubt that when th government wants to innovate, they contract it out to the private sector.......

 

 

 

I agree that the MTA has been behind schedule and I think you raise some interesting points about how the MTA might be dragging their heels in order to maintain the value proposition of the AMP.  It's troubling, but certainly possible.  Then again, maybe most of the MTA's forward thinking and technologically capable staff are busy spending their time building a whole new and improved system (for the AMP or otherwise) instead of trying to fix the existing system.  To be honest, I have no idea what they're doing over there, so it's all speculation to me.

 

Also, I understand that you weren't trying to break new ground when lamenting the tardiness of the MTA's gps and ticketing app.  I definitely see how your son's trip up West End would've been improved had the gps tracker been up and running (though his trip would've been improved even more still if the bus he was waiting for had dedicated lanes so it wasn't sitting in traffic 45 minutes behind schedule). 

 

What I didn't understand is your follow up post clarifying what you meant by a government monopoly.  All you did was show that the MTA is subsidized, as though the presence of a subsidy was in itself evidence of a government monopoly.  There are no shortage of farmers, and oil companies, and airlines who would disagree with that statement.   Further, the government certainly doesn't have a monopoly on mass transit.  There are cabs, and uber, and limo companies, tour buses, and rickshaws.  I could hire a party bus to take me and my friends to and from work everyday if I wanted to.  The only monopoly that the government has is a monopoly on public transportation, because by it's very nature any mass transit system run by the government would be public and any mass transit system run by a private entity would not. 

 

To be clear, I have no interest in discussing 'market forces vs. statist enterprises' in the abstract, I was just trying to understand how you thought the policy you were advocating would play out in real life with real buses.  I think it's totally valid to ask why the MTA isn't doing a better job, but to claim that private sector competition is the secret sauce that's currently missing from the equation is the statement that I take issue with, largely because I don't even know what that means when it comes to mass transit, which is why I tried to lay out the Virgin Roadways scenarios in my last post. 

 

Does anyone honestly think that the best way to get MTA to operate more efficiently is to take away their subsidy funding in order to entice "apple-to-apple competition"?  How does that help?  With less funding, how is it possible that the MTA will get better still when an entrepreneur decides  to enter the market and challenge them for a share of some of the more profitable ridership/routes?  Even if the city decided to dump twice the amount of the current subsidies into MTA to try and compete, that's no match for the backing of private capital with no responsibility whatsoever to service the less profitable routes.  Under those conditions, MTA wouldn't stand a chance at surviving, let alone at improving on the service we currently get.  The choice for MTA would either be to stop servicing non profitable routes, in which case we no longer have a public transportation service, or to provide a more expensive service to fewer people with less money coming in.  I don't see how either scenario is an improvement, but I'd love to hear the counter perspective with the hope of shedding a little light on it for me. 

 

And finally, with regard to the portions of my last post that are easily refuted (which are probably many), I would say that I'm aware of the work of some of the many private enterprises that has gone into the development of gps and satellite technology and would in no way try to downplay their importance in the process, but if you want to talk about government monopolies, there's not many better examples for most of the last 50 years than the monopoly on launching rockets into space.  That said, I understand and agree with what you're saying here though, so no need to quibble about it. 

Edited August 25, 2014 by ruraljuror

[drewbert]

Can you elaborate on the online ticket sales?

 

I have only ever paid via cash on the bus or purchased a 20 ride ticket at the Music City Central.  If you buy via the app do they reload one of your cards or does it just send a new card to your mailing address?  If it's the latter then that seems, to me, a waste of time.

 

I just tried it out, and aside from keeping your address stored, it is exactly the same as before. They'll mail you your new pass, for a $3.50 shipping charge. Meanwhile I tried four ticket kiosks in the transit center this morning, none of them would take my perfectly good credit card.

 

I haven't read all the discussion since my last post, but as for funding of an app, Transit Now Nashville had been trying to do some crowdsourced fundraising for an app. They've been at it for I think a couple years now, and have made barely a dent in the goal. Less than $5k out of a $14k goal. No idea what's sort of agreement there is between MTA and TNN on this...

Edited August 25, 2014 by drewbert

[rookzie]

I agree that the MTA has been behind schedule and I think you raise some interesting points about how the MTA might be dragging their heels in order to maintain the value proposition of the AMP.  It's troubling, but certainly possible.  Then again, maybe most of the MTA's forward thinking and technologically capable staff are busy spending their time building a whole new and improved system (for the AMP or otherwise) instead of trying to fix the existing system.  To be honest, I have no idea what they're doing over there, so it's all speculation to me.

...

....

 

Relevant to what I had stated earlier today, concerning reliability with respect to transit-use reduction, I could not have stated this any better (if as well).  I have banged my own head in an attempt to glean some sense of resolve from the inordinately lengthy delay in implementing real-time arrival info (and even other more nominal and tenable amenities), and I am glad to hear others think along the same parallels, as I have supposed, in trying to rationalize the MTA's underlying M-O, during these recent and storied times of the current municipal administration and the transit initiatives.

 

I also recognize that the MTA recently has transitioned from an interim period between outgoing CEO Paul Ballard (and some corporate followers) and incoming Steve Bland.  There just might be an understood (if not mandated) constraint in focus and priorities conferred on the MTA at present, although this perhaps only can be a matter of conjecture, rather than of evidence.

 

-==-

[12Mouth]

I'm not going to wade into the public/private sector debate, but I am baffled by our transit system. It seems that the local government has been remarkably successful in certain areas, but has been absolutely terrible at implementing transit. As I have said before, I still believe that humans are (mostly) rational actors. If you have any other option, are you going to wait 40 minutes for a bus that may or may not come?

I (mostly) support the AMP, but I think we need a bold vision and overhaul of our entire public transit system, and I certainly hope that Bland (unfortunate name) is the guy to do it. There are plenty of non-controversial changes that could be made and Nashville is going to be punished in the next few years if we don't make them. Forget private sector competition - we've got Austin, Charlotte, etc.

[grilled_cheese]

Lots of good discussion here.  I like the idea that MTA is holding back on improving the current setup to further push the AMP but I also like the other thought that we're still in a transitional stage so not much is happening.

 

If real time GPS tracking is such a large obstacle then they should start with the BRT lites.  Due to the very nature of how they operate that should be a less monumental task for the group to take on.  After that has been accomplished they can move on to all the unlimited stops buses.

 

For me, personally, the way the ticketing mobile site works is pretty useless but I do see how it would be advantageous for someone who doesn't have a stable home internet connection and only has a phone.  I too have experienced the kiosk machines not liking my card but they have enough that there shouldn't (keyword) be a large scale failure and you're stuck, especially after hours, when there aren't live people at the ticket window and you could be stuck without a pass.

 

I'm going to assume that I'm a 'choice rider' since I do not rely on the bus for day to day travel, as I have other options.  The reliability for me is not so much an issue but I would rather have the live tracking so I know A) when is the latest I can leave and B) should I take the #26 or #56 based on who is the closest or who will arrive when I'd prefer to leave.  Although, this is not how MT is designed to work so I understand why this is not a feasible option.

 

Has anyone ever ridden on the greenline?  I see it drive around, I know where the stops are but I can never see anyone ride it and can't imagine any locals let alone tourists using it.  Anyone know how successful or non-successful it is?  Let's scrap that project if need be and throw the money to other parts of the city.

[Guest]

I would love to ride the Green line but the way they have the route set-up I (180 9th North) am as close to the Gulch as to the nearest stop. And yes, when I do see them driving by they are invariably empty...

 

 

Lots of good discussion here.  I like the idea that MTA is holding back on improving the current setup to further push the AMP but I also like the other thought that we're still in a transitional stage so not much is happening.

 

If real time GPS tracking is such a large obstacle then they should start with the BRT lites.  Due to the very nature of how they operate that should be a less monumental task for the group to take on.  After that has been accomplished they can move on to all the unlimited stops buses.

 

For me, personally, the way the ticketing mobile site works is pretty useless but I do see how it would be advantageous for someone who doesn't have a stable home internet connection and only has a phone.  I too have experienced the kiosk machines not liking my card but they have enough that there shouldn't (keyword) be a large scale failure and you're stuck, especially after hours, when there aren't live people at the ticket window and you could be stuck without a pass.

 

I'm going to assume that I'm a 'choice rider' since I do not rely on the bus for day to day travel, as I have other options.  The reliability for me is not so much an issue but I would rather have the live tracking so I know A) when is the latest I can leave and B) should I take the #26 or #56 based on who is the closest or who will arrive when I'd prefer to leave.  Although, this is not how MT is designed to work so I understand why this is not a feasible option.

 

Has anyone ever ridden on the greenline?  I see it drive around, I know where the stops are but I can never see anyone ride it and can't imagine any locals let alone tourists using it.  Anyone know how successful or non-successful it is?  Let's scrap that project if need be and throw the money to other parts of the city.