MBTA Fare System (Charlie, AFC 2.0, Zone, Discounts)

1000054709.jpg

Fare gates going in at Ruggles
 
TheRatmeister said:
are these ones indoors?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't personally say indoors. Covered yes, but nothing in Ruggles is indoors. This area gets damp when it rains and is fully exposed to outdoor temperatures. The layers of tarps on the roof and the tent covering them suggests the installation team has already noticed the generally dampness of Ruggles.
 
Took an inbound to South Station last night. Despite a pretty full train, no on-board ticket checks were performed, which isn't unusual even before the fare gates as conductors usually assume you'll have activated a weekend pass on an outbound trip. I will say that I've noticed more on-board outbound checks (even on the way from South Station to Back Bay) than before, dating back even to shortly after the gates were installed. I assume this is a policy change to put the finger on the scale so they can point to "fare recovery metrics" being improved by the gates.

At South, 3/4 of the fare gates were left open. I'm a bit surprised the remaining 1/4 were left in a closed position. There seemed to be no logic to which were open or closed. It was also surprising to see that the new/archway connector to the bus terminal still isn't open, but the Track 1 "interior" connection has been shut, forcing all bus passengers to walk outside. This is one of the infuriating things about the T - they designed a new covered connection, but then for some reason closed the old one well before opening the new one. Obviously, that's the wrong order. I understand the reason was because of the fare gates, but in that case the activation should have been paused until the new connection was open - and now that the gates are basically offline, the old connection should have been reopened. It's been a rainy winter, and it's a simple customer experience improvement.
 
This month’s board meeting has a Fare Changes & Programs Update, but still no update on the retirement of the AFC 1.0 system. It’s just a recap of the pre-announced fare pilots and a car-free senior credential.

It’s beyond frustrating that they have been radio silent about finishing up the migration to AFC 2.0.
 
RandomWalk said:
This month’s board meeting has a Fare Changes & Programs Update, but still no update on the retirement of the AFC 1.0 system. It’s just a recap of the pre-announced fare pilots and a car-free senior credential.

It’s beyond frustrating that they have been radio silent about finishing up the migration to AFC 2.0.
Click to expand...
Just curious, are their ongoing contract payments for operation and maintenance on both systems to third-party vendors? (I know there is to Cubic for AFC 2.0.) Is somebody (cough cough) benefiting from the parallel operation?
 
JeffDowntown said:
Just curious, are their ongoing contract payments for operation and maintenance on both systems to third-party vendors? (I know there is to Cubic for AFC 2.0.) Is somebody (cough cough) benefiting from the parallel operation?
Click to expand...
I thought it was more of a concession structure - new system operator taking upto a certain limit for operations and then splitting the rest? At least that was my interpretation for how much they ballyhoo tap-to-ride payments and encourage it.
 
RandomWalk said:
This month’s board meeting has a Fare Changes & Programs Update, but still no update on the retirement of the AFC 1.0 system. It’s just a recap of the pre-announced fare pilots and a car-free senior credential.

It’s beyond frustrating that they have been radio silent about finishing up the migration to AFC 2.0.
Click to expand...
My take on it is that's this is from the fare & tariff policy team - their piece of the pie is the "what we charge" for service, not so much the "how do we accept payment" for it.
JeffDowntown said:
Just curious, are their ongoing contract payments for operation and maintenance on both systems to third-party vendors? (I know there is to Cubic for AFC 2.0.) Is somebody (cough cough) benefiting from the parallel operation?
Click to expand...
as02155 said:
I thought it was more of a concession structure - new system operator taking upto a certain limit for operations and then splitting the rest? At least that was my interpretation for how much they ballyhoo tap-to-ride payments and encourage it.
Click to expand...
5975.jpg
The last public update we got was the 2024 change order that allowed for Tap-to-Pay - if I read the presentation correctly, it was structured as $105M for the contactless capital assets + $26M to operate them until the annual payments kick in upon full roll out.

That said... Yea it's problematic. The same update also said the contract has a "Long Stop" ie, a drop dead date, of June 2027 when all contract terms must be complete. That's a little more than 8 months from now, and there's been basically zero public progress on anything in that Spring 2025 box yet. Here, remember the State Auditors report - the T didn't require a performance bond for this project.
5978.jpg
5981.jpg

Back in march of this year, the MBTA issued an RFP for consultants to help it "evaluate functionality, identify vulnerabilities, and support issue resolution within their focus area and leverage their experience to reduce risk to the project overall.” And, its priority work streams, sound a lot like this that were part of the yellow box "back office" stuff, and some of the Spring 25 New-Charlie sales things. That... Isn't particularly optimistic sounding. @StreetsblogMASS, wanna FOIA the contract and it's deliverables?
5987.jpg
 

Attachments

  • RFP 11-26 AFC 2.0 CHARLIE PROJECT TEST PHASE WORKSTREAM SERVICES_fv.pdf
    812.4 KB · Views: 28

The MBTA vowed to step up fare enforcement. A year later, few warnings and even fewer fines​

The MBTA has steadily ramped up fare enforcement over the last several years, adding fare gates to Boston’s largest commuter rail stations and deploying a team across its network to keep watch for those skirting payment. On paper, a rider caught dodging a fare on the T can be fined $50 to $100.
Yet one year after that team of “fare engagement representatives” began issuing warnings to those it caught — with the possibility of fines for repeat offenders — those penalties are few and far between.
Since September 2025, the team has issued formal warnings to 200 riders and citations to three riders for fare evasion, on a transit system that routinely averages more than 900,000 riders on weekdays, according to MBTA data MassLive obtained through a public records request.
[...]
Another challenge is the T’s years-long process to modernize its fare collection system. The fare engagement team does not yet have handheld devices that allow staff to check riders’ recent taps and payment histories, an important capability for enforcing fares in the field. However, those devices are being tested, T officials said.
Click to expand...
 
IMG_3411.jpeg

Nine years and a Billion $$$ later:

  • An even more disjointed fare system (inexplicably still without free out of station transfers)
  • Klugey, dwell generating CR exit gates (mostly due to above disjointed fare system)
  • One door boarding on buses and GL
  • Tap to pay (which is admittedly V nice)
  • Full implementation……. eventually
Hard to blame people who fall for the Pioneer Institute’s crap when the T delivers results like these.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top