HelloBostonHi
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2018
- Messages
- 820
- Reaction score
- 767
Yep! They're unrelated to AFC 2, just Fairmount improvements. Don't know why it took so long to do this for 1A stations.
MBTA Fare System (Charlie, AFC 2.0, Zone, Discounts)
- Thread starter Mongo
- Start date
HelloBostonHi
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2018
- Messages
- 820
- Reaction score
- 767
Just want to remind everyone that had the MBTA competently managed this project, AFC 2.0 was supposed to have been in full revenue service as of last month, and instead they haven't even approved the modified design build contract yet. We have now spent three years in community engagement and contract negotiations with absolutely nothing to show for it beyond a much more expensive and drawn out project with no end in sight.
I remember when that was announced it seemed wildly faster than I expected given the scope. At the time I optimistically thought it was a sign of a new era for the T, where projects could be measured in a few years instead of a few decades like the GLX. That optimism is now firmly gone.
I remember them saying that it was critcal to hit the date because Charlie was old and not supported and if we didnt move fast everything would catch fire
I think we'll be seeing a LOT more push-back on fare enforcement after the recent protests
HelloBostonHi
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2018
- Messages
- 820
- Reaction score
- 767
Big news that was slipped out without a word today: https://www.mbta.com/news/2020-06-18/mbta-fare-transformation-program-finalizes-contract-amendment
They finally managed to approve the contract for AFC 2 which means it's actually happening. Still on the delayed schedule but it was getting increasingly close to cancelled.
"The contract amendment signed Monday incorporates improvements to the original “AFC 2.0” contract based on feedback from customers, advocates, and policy makers. "
That's a nice way of saying the contract has ballooned with unnecessary politics.
They finally managed to approve the contract for AFC 2 which means it's actually happening. Still on the delayed schedule but it was getting increasingly close to cancelled.
"The contract amendment signed Monday incorporates improvements to the original “AFC 2.0” contract based on feedback from customers, advocates, and policy makers. "
That's a nice way of saying the contract has ballooned with unnecessary politics.
Last edited:
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 6,651
- Reaction score
- 1,544
How much more money are we shoveling down Cubic's gullet this time on the latest amendment for the privilege of continuing to be worst-case late? It's been a whole 2 months since we last wrote them a blank cheque, so I figured we were about due. 
HelloBostonHi
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2018
- Messages
- 820
- Reaction score
- 767
There were notably no numbers mentioned in the press release so its probably not goodHow much more money are we shoveling down Cubic's gullet this time on the latest amendment for the privilege of continuing to be worst-case late? It's been a whole 2 months since we last wrote them a blank cheque, so I figured we were about due.
HelloBostonHi
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2018
- Messages
- 820
- Reaction score
- 767
Low quality but here's the most detailed timeline I have seen yet, starts on Route 28 and Route 39 (articulated buses) and two orange line stations (given the bus routes I'd expect Ruggles to be included), then SL4 and SL5 (articulated buses) and the remainder of the Orange Line, then Green Line, then transit, then commuter rail starting with Fairmount and Haverhill.
HelloBostonHi
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2018
- Messages
- 820
- Reaction score
- 767
AFC 1.7 perhaps? What is the point in replacing them now to replace them again in two years, I simply don't get it.
What I've been asking this whole time. The phased approach is so confusing. All while they're facing potential layoffs and a multi-hundred million dollar budget deficit.
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 6,651
- Reaction score
- 1,544
Cubic's gotta get paid, y'all. This thing doesn't not-build itself.
I wonder if just having free transit during implementation would end up being faster and cheaper than all the man-hours and infrastructure to make it a phased transition.
QR codes are useful for a lot of reasons -- social service agencies would be able to hand out passes to their clients for example. Another reason would be for mobile payment (for lower-grade smartphones without NFC + mobile payment). QR is also a quite common way of ticketing in Mobility as a Service platforms -- who knows if they take root here, but seemingly, we should at least have some technological openness to the QR readers at this moment, non?
Why cant the social service agency hand out a charlie card?
NJT uses it for the mobile payment aspect, but thats where most of the trouble lies. People have a lot of trouble getting it to read their screen - too much variety in screen sizes, quality, and brightness.
The cost to the T for a CharlieCard is around $1 ea. They really really don't want to distribute more of the CharlieCards. Before smartcard driven fare collection, social service agencies handed out coupons (or systems that used them -- tokens). And often gave people enough for a roundtrip. However, these things were relatively "disposable". If SSAs could return to printing out coupons or otherwise
While the time it takes the QR reader to register something is like the longer time that a debit/credit card chip payment takes (in comparison to a magswipe or NFC tap), it is clearly within an acceptable realm for a lot of people to have a slightly slower transaction in order to expand the possible sources of revenue and fare media.