Please Swipe Again...
Agent_C
-
Please Swipe Again...
-
Please Swipe Again...
-
Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
-
Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
-
Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
<expletive shouted>
This is exactly what happened to me this morning at Grand Central - damn
frustrating and occurring with increasing frequency. I finally gave up
and tried the next turnstile, where I went through on the first try. I
never have this problem coming home at night from Brooklyn Borough Hall,
so it must be the equipment at GS and not my card. From what others tell
me, this appears to be a chronic problem in some stations.
Can anyone shed some light on why this is happening and what (if
anything), the TA is doing about it?
Regards,
A_C
--
Beware of People Who Offer Credentials Instead of Answers.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Michael Hamm
> Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...<snip>
> Can anyone shed some light on why this is happening and what (if
> anything), the TA is doing about it?
Dirty readers, and cleaning them every so often (seldom).
Michael Hamm
BA, Math, Sept. '00
Reach me at mh...@gc.cuny.edu
http://www.crosswinds.net/~msh210/
Mike Thompson
news:8oobi0$h1b$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Please Swipe Again....
> -
> Please Swipe Again...
> -
> Please Swipe Again...
> -
> Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
> -
> Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
> -
> Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
>
> <expletive shouted>
>
> This is exactly what happened to me this morning at Grand Central - damn
This happens to me frequently at Grand Central... and the people behind me
always seem to get annoyed at me for it. It also happens a lot at Willets
Pt. and Columbus Circle... other stations only occasionally. It does seem to
be happening more frequently, maybe they should start cleaning the readers
more often...
Mike
Freedom Fighter
>Please Swipe Again....
< snip >
>Can anyone shed some light on why this is happening and what (if
>anything), the TA is doing about it?
PROFITING.
Joel Rubin
wrote:
>Please Swipe Again....
>-
>Please Swipe Again...
>-
>Please Swipe Again...
>-
>Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
>-
>Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
>-
>Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
>
><expletive shouted>
>
>This is exactly what happened to me this morning at Grand Central - damn
>frustrating and occurring with increasing frequency. I finally gave up
>and tried the next turnstile, where I went through on the first try. I
>never have this problem coming home at night from Brooklyn Borough Hall,
>so it must be the equipment at GS and not my card. From what others tell
>me, this appears to be a chronic problem in some stations.
>
>Can anyone shed some light on why this is happening and what (if
>anything), the TA is doing about it?
>
Try the iron maidens (NOT after you get a "swipe again at this
turnstile") if they're there. (The tall turnstiles with bars intended
for use at entrances without manned booths, not the mediaeval torture
box with spikes.)
They seem to be more efficient probably because they're less used
because they look threatening and greying boomers like me remember
when the old incoming iron maidens rarely worked.
Of course, if you go to another turnstile after you get a "SWIPE AT
THIS TURNSTILE" message you risk paying another fare on a per fare
card or having an 18 minute lockout on a pass.
It might also help to have a clean, non-linty cloth especially on a
rainy day to wipe the strips of cards.
Thor Lancelot Simon
Agent_C <fair...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>Can anyone shed some light on why this is happening and what (if
>anything), the TA is doing about it?
This happens because the idiotic design of the swipe-through readers
requires three heads to be in perfect alignment with each other and all
be clean in order for the pass to successfully go through the read-write-read
cycle. You *also* have to stay at about the same speed over the whole
(extremely long, for a swipe-type card "reader", which is why people have so
much trouble with it) read-write-read path.
It was utter idiocy on the TA's part to use swipe reader/writers on the
turnstiles. Worse, even after they switched to the motorized readers for
the buses, and *every* other transit system using compatible cards bought
turnstiles using the motorized readers, the MTA stubbornly continued (and
continues) to install new swipe turnstiles, because if they switched now
it would seem like an acknowledgement that they fucked up, and there would
be massive public pressure to replace all the broken swipe turnstiles, which
they don't want to do for obvious reasons.
Great, the way the MTA works, isn't it?
--
Thor Lancelot Simon t...@rek.tjls.com
"And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"
kenneth lin
"Thor Lancelot Simon" <t...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:8p4l4q$gk7$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> In article <8oobi0$h1b$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Agent_C <fair...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> >Can anyone shed some light on why this is happening and what (if
> >anything), the TA is doing about it?
>
> This happens because the idiotic design of the swipe-through readers
> requires three heads to be in perfect alignment with each other and all
> be clean in order for the pass to successfully go through the
read-write-read
> cycle. You *also* have to stay at about the same speed over the whole
> (extremely long, for a swipe-type card "reader", which is why people have
so
> much trouble with it) read-write-read path.
>
> It was utter idiocy on the TA's part to use swipe reader/writers on the
> turnstiles. Worse, even after they switched to the motorized readers for
> the buses, and *every* other transit system using compatible cards bought
> turnstiles using the motorized readers, the MTA stubbornly continued (and
> continues) to install new swipe turnstiles, because if they switched now
> it would seem like an acknowledgement that they fucked up, and there would
> be massive public pressure to replace all the broken swipe turnstiles,
which
> they don't want to do for obvious reasons.
Many of the Swipe Again problems could be eliminated if contactless smart
cards (such as Octopus) were used. Swiping repeatedly reduces turnstile
throughput, among other problems.
Never had a swipe problem using Octopus.
Chicago Transit Authority installed the same type of Cubic turnstiles as
NYCT. However, they have also installed a contactless smart card module to
those turnstiles. Thus, you have a choice-- magnetic farecards or
contactless smart cards.
Kenneth Lin
Thor Lancelot Simon
No, they did *not* install the same turnstiles as NYCT did.
Because the CTA aren't stubborn morons, they didn't install the *swipe*
version of the turnstile; they installed the motorized version that uses the
same single-head mechanism the bus readers here in New York do. The MTA
is AFAIK the *only* customer for the dumbass swipe readers that can't work
right by design.
danny burstein
>Because the CTA aren't stubborn morons, they didn't install the *swipe*
>version of the turnstile; they installed the motorized version that uses the
>same single-head mechanism the bus readers here in New York do. The MTA
>is AFAIK the *only* customer for the dumbass swipe readers that can't work
>right by design.
How about the bank card (ATM) readers that involve manually slipping in
your mag-stripe card, and then pulling it out? Do they just do a read
these days or do they still do a write-to-card as well? (And if so, do
they verify the writing?).
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Thor Lancelot Simon
danny burstein <dan...@panix.com> wrote:
>In <8p6m70$kbg$1...@panix3.panix.com> t...@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) writes:
>
>>Because the CTA aren't stubborn morons, they didn't install the *swipe*
>>version of the turnstile; they installed the motorized version that uses the
>>same single-head mechanism the bus readers here in New York do. The MTA
>>is AFAIK the *only* customer for the dumbass swipe readers that can't work
>>right by design.
>
>How about the bank card (ATM) readers that involve manually slipping in
>your mag-stripe card, and then pulling it out? Do they just do a read
>these days or do they still do a write-to-card as well? (And if so, do
>they verify the writing?).
AFAIK, they don't write.
Ken Krompinger
>
> --
> Thor Lancelot Simon t...@rek.tjls.com
> "And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"
>
>
$15 on my card at the machine (shouldn't hurt my free transfer, right?
at least, it
doesn't if the token clerk does it) then proceeded to the turnstile. All
I got was SWIPE AGAIN and SWIPE AGAIN AT THIS TURNSTILE after about 50
tries (I thought that if I changed turnstiles when it says SWIPE AGAIN
PLEASE I wouldn't lose a fare). Anyway, I went back to the machine and
got a replacement card. But what should have been a free transfer turned
into a 3.00 bonus for the MTA. Not only did my fare get deducted (SWIPE
AGAIN...) but I lost the free transfer.
The only consolation when I lose money to the TA are the times the bus
farebox isn't working and you get a free ride. God Bless the person at
the TA who decided that buses with broken fareboxes should complete their
runs.
Ken
Cyrus Afzali
>In <8p6m70$kbg$1...@panix3.panix.com> t...@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) writes:
>
>>Because the CTA aren't stubborn morons, they didn't install the *swipe*
>>version of the turnstile; they installed the motorized version that uses the
>>same single-head mechanism the bus readers here in New York do. The MTA
>>is AFAIK the *only* customer for the dumbass swipe readers that can't work
>>right by design.
>
>How about the bank card (ATM) readers that involve manually slipping in
>your mag-stripe card, and then pulling it out? Do they just do a read
>these days or do they still do a write-to-card as well? (And if so, do
>they verify the writing?).
They just read. The "smart card" systems that require you to insert
the card and leave it until you get an indication from the system
actually read and rewrite. However, that process takes a lot longer
than the MetroCard's manual swipe or bus auto swipe.
JOHN PAZMINO
JR> Subject: Re: Please Swipe Again...
JR> Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 07:40:23 -0400
JR> Organization: Entropic
JR> >
JR> Try the iron maidens (NOT after you get a "swipe again at this
JR> turnstile") if they're there. (The tall turnstiles with bars intended
JR> for use at entrances without manned booths, not the mediaeval torture
JR> box with spikes.)
JR>
JR> They seem to be more efficient probably because they're less used
JR> because they look threatening and greying boomers like me remember
JR> when the old incoming iron maidens rarely worked.
JR>
JR> Of course, if you go to another turnstile after you get a "SWIPE AT
JR> THIS TURNSTILE" message you risk paying another fare on a per fare
JR> card or having an 18 minute lockout on a pass.
I did learn after a couple mishaps at iron maidens, which I posted
about a couple weeks ago, that there's a booby trap built in. You
must, after swiping the card, push IN THE FIRST INSTACE on the
RIGHTHAND arms to pass thru. If by mistake you push the lefthand arms,
of course they pin and you then push on the righthand arms. They pin,
too. What is NOT obvious is that the pressing on the lefthand arms
ALREADY knicked you for a fare. On a limitless card you are in the
18-minute lockout; the turnstile reports, 'used once'. On the stored
value card you pay a SECOND fare often without realizing it.
---
þ RoseReader 2.52á P005004
Terry Kennedy
> Apples to oranges comparison. The CTA doesn't have more than 3 million
> people swiping through its rail system every day. No other system
> would face the load that NYC's would. That's why they decided that a
> system with no movable parts made the most since for the subways.
I bet that PATH stations like WTC have approximately the same number
of people per turnstile when compared with similar subway stations,
like the 2/3/9/A/C/E complex at WTC.
Total size of the system doesn't count. Performance of a given turn-
style does.
I have had a total of *one* card screwup on the PATH since they in-
stitued the current QuickCards. And when I got to the WTC, the on-site,
friendly station agent gave me a replacement card on the spot. None of
this send-it-to-the-mountain-and-wait nonsense.
I've had far, far more problems with my MetroCard. While WTC has
gotten much better, some of the lower-use entrances are horrible - I
saw an entire string of folks fighting with the pair of Iron Maidens
at 23rd St./8th Ave. northbound. There are apparently some major sta-
tions that are also bad - perhaps the agents at those stations don't
do enough cleaning (or there aren't enough agents).
My normal traffic pattern is taking the PATH to the WTC and then
getting on the subway, so I use both cards equally. And the subway
gives me a lot more grief.
Terry Kennedy http://www.tmk.com
te...@tmk.com Jersey City, NJ USA
kenneth lin
"Cyrus Afzali" <pns...@rznvy.pbz> wrote in message
news:q28ersknpdmbtuedf...@4ax.com...
> On 6 Sep 2000 20:06:56 -0400, t...@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
> people swiping through its rail system every day. No other system
> would face the load that NYC's would. That's why they decided that a
> system with no movable parts made the most since for the subways.
Invalid comparison.
First, all 3 million pax per day do not swipe through at a single turnstile
or station.
A more reasonable approach would be to compare levels of boardings at
different NYCT and CTA stations, then per turnstile swipes may not be so
different.
Second, there are other metro systems which are busier than NYCTA, and which
are likely busier on a per station basis as well. Some stations in Mexico
City and Tokyo I'm certain will be busier than the TA's busiest stations.
Third, MTA turnstiles do have moving parts to read the farecard... it is
called the hand. It provides the movement through the TA turnstiles.
Moscow, Chicago, Hong Kong, etc. are all going with contactless smart cards
which truly allow reading of farecards without any moving parts.
Kenneth Lin
Agent_C
Cyrus Afzali <pns...@rznvy.pbz> wrote:
>
> ........ Right now, when there's a problem, the
> station agent just has to clean the turnstyle. You can argue they
> don't do it enough, but at least the solution is simple.
Assuming that dirty readers are the only cause of delays... Maybe, maybe
not. If that's the case, the station master at Grand Central should be
reprimanded.
[Asked in another thread also] In the alternative, is it possible that
the TA is using a fare evasion algorithm in some stations that can be
causing delays like this? It seems that certain categories of cards have
more problems than others. A colleague of mine uses a transitpass
provided by his employer and has significantly more problems that I do,
at the very same station. I've never has to actually go up to the token
booth clerk to be buzzed through, but he has to at least twice a week.
I have suspicion that theres more to this than just dirty readers.
Regards,
A_C
A_C
Thor Lancelot Simon
>people swiping through its rail system every day. No other system
>would face the load that NYC's would. That's why they decided that a
>system with no movable parts made the most since for the subways.
My understanding from discussing this with MTA folks involved with the
turnstile procurement process is that, actually, the MTA *insisted* on
the development of the motorized reader for bus use after the systematic
problems with the swipe turnstiles reared their head in the test
deployment. So I don't think your analysis of their reasoning is
correct. However, the MTA had already ordered the rest of the swipe
turnstiles and chose not to attempt to force the vendor to deliver
motorized-reader turnstiles instead. Now, the part about why they
continue to buy swipe turnstiles (because they're afraid a switch to
motorized turnstiles would result in massive pressure to replace
the broken old one) is just my speculation, but the rest is pretty
much straight from the horse's mouth.
Per-turnstile, I think there are probably CTA stations that are
just as busy as many or most NYCT stations.
Unfortunately, the MTA commissioned a Plan on how to do Metrocard,
and the Plan was written by people who weren't all particularly
bright or particularly dilligent, and once they had a Plan they
proceeeded to execute it despite copious evidence that in some
ways is was seriously flawed. Not too surprising, really. For
example, they knew about at least one of the possible methods of
systematic fraud during the initial test period -- because
John Hawkinson and I discovered it and made sure we told fairly
high-up MTA people we knew because they were Panix users -- but
chose to do nothing. Later they were massively defrauded using
the exact method we'd discovered. The initial consultant's report
on the test deployment highlighted the problems with the swipe
turnstiles -- but the MTA continuted to buy them. The MTA's
claim that an exit swipe was impractical due to passenger
throughput issues was demonstrated to be false given the example
of the Paris system, which uses powered gates at busy stations
to sustain mugh higher rates per-turnstile; the MTA stubbornly
stuck to a system which couldn't do exit swipe, and thus can't
be extended to cover the regional transit system on the same
pass. Mmmmmmmmm, bureaucracy.
>I and many others agree. Right now, when there's a problem, the
>station agent just has to clean the turnstyle. You can argue they
>don't do it enough, but at least the solution is simple.
No, it isn't! The swipe reader/writer design is a particular work
of idiocy, with three independent heads which must be kept in
precise alignment and which must *all* be clean in order for the
unit to work correctly. The design *guarantees* a much higher
failure rate than any other, and ensures that cleaning won't
always solve the problem due to the alignment issues, which don't
appear with a single-head system. Remember: if any head is not
clean or is out of alignment, you'll be told to swipe again. Worse,
if the "write" and "reread" heads on a particular turnstile are both
screwed up, the *next* turnstile you use won't be able to read your
card. It's a pretty simple and obvious example of poor design;
this is why nobody but the NYCT subway uses it.
danielk...@my-deja.com
having a system where the card was taken from their hands. Other
cities, such as Washington DC, have systems where the card is sucked in
by the reader and expelled from a slot further forward, so you pick it
up as you walk through (which means there's no delay waiting for the
card to pop back up like from the bus readers). I guess the MTA
figured that cards could get stolen once they popped out of the return
slot, which would be a big deal for a monthly card or a pay-per-ride
card with a lot of value left.
-Dan
t...@rek.tjls.com wrote:
> My understanding from discussing this with MTA folks involved with the
> turnstile procurement process is that, actually, the MTA *insisted* on
> the development of the motorized reader for bus use after the
systematic
> problems with the swipe turnstiles reared their head in the test
> deployment. So I don't think your analysis of their reasoning is
> correct. However, the MTA had already ordered the rest of the swipe
> turnstiles and chose not to attempt to force the vendor to deliver
> motorized-reader turnstiles instead.
Hank Eisenstein
they'll ask for some info, and they'll send you a new card, with the value
you lost on it.
-Hank
"Cyrus Afzali" <pns...@rznvy.pbz> wrote in message
news:q28ersknpdmbtuedf...@4ax.com...
> people swiping through its rail system every day. No other system
> would face the load that NYC's would. That's why they decided that a
> system with no movable parts made the most since for the subways.
>
Terry Kennedy
> No, it isn't! The swipe reader/writer design is a particular work
> of idiocy, with three independent heads which must be kept in
> precise alignment and which must *all* be clean in order for the
> unit to work correctly. The design *guarantees* a much higher
> failure rate than any other, and ensures that cleaning won't
> always solve the problem due to the alignment issues, which don't
> appear with a single-head system.
Agreed. However...
> Remember: if any head is not
> clean or is out of alignment, you'll be told to swipe again. Worse,
> if the "write" and "reread" heads on a particular turnstile are both
> screwed up, the *next* turnstile you use won't be able to read your
> card. It's a pretty simple and obvious example of poor design;
> this is why nobody but the NYCT subway uses it.
The upper track is never written after the card is manufactured, and
therefore any other reader/writer (turnstile, token booth machine, etc.)
in the same "local pool" (single control point) should be able to re-
write both lower half-tracks, even if both are destroyed, since the data
about the card is cached locally. But it should be very rare to lose both
lower half-tracks, since it only writes one of them (alternating between
the leading and trailing ones).
For others: to see what we're talking about, look at:
http://www.tmk.com/transient/metro.jpg
Thor Lancelot Simon
>I'd heard that the MTA figured New Yorkers would be uncomfortable
>having a system where the card was taken from their hands. Other
>cities, such as Washington DC, have systems where the card is sucked in
>by the reader and expelled from a slot further forward, so you pick it
>up as you walk through (which means there's no delay waiting for the
>card to pop back up like from the bus readers). I guess the MTA
>figured that cards could get stolen once they popped out of the return
>slot, which would be a big deal for a monthly card or a pay-per-ride
>card with a lot of value left.
The farebox-style reader/writers use one slot, and the card comes out
the same place it went in -- it's literally just like what's used on
the buses.
JOHN PAZMINO
PT> Subject: Re: Please Swipe Again...
PT> Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 11:21:45 GMT
PT> Organization: AT&T Worldnet
PT> > JR>
PT> > JR> Of course, if you go to another turnstile after you get a "SWIPE AT
PT> > JR> THIS TURNSTILE" message you risk paying another fare on a per fare
PT> > JR> card or having an 18 minute lockout on a pass.
PT> >
PT> > I did learn after a couple mishaps at iron maidens, which I posted
PT> > about a couple weeks ago, that there's a booby trap built in. You
PT> > must, after swiping the card, push IN THE FIRST INSTACE on the
PT> > RIGHTHAND arms to pass thru. If by mistake you push the lefthand arms,
PT> > of course they pin and you then push on the righthand arms. They pin,
PT> > too. What is NOT obvious is that the pressing on the lefthand arms
PT> > ALREADY knicked you for a fare. On a limitless card you are in the
PT> > 18-minute lockout; the turnstile reports, 'used once'. On the stored
PT> > value card you pay a SECOND fare often without realizing it.
PT>
PT> Hunh??
PT>
PT> Except, of course, in the case of blind people, you can tell by looking
PT> at the device which direction it rotates; the direction you can't go has
PT> bars across it.
PT>
PT> Plus the rotating wings are curved to welcome you in (so that if you
PT> have to exit by one of those, as at the north end of 207th on the A
PT> train, you're going through in the "wrong" direction).
This is not obvious. For one thing the stator bars and the rotor
bars are both stainless steel of the same color and texture. On the
old machines the stator bars wre painted yellow and the rotor bars
were black.
The bars are indeed curved. But it took a couple tries to note
how the direction of curvature (convex or concave) related to the
rotation.
The point I made remains. If you try to press the left arms, by
mistake or ignorance, your fare from the card you just swiped falls
thru.
---
ţ RoseReader 2.52á P005004
Peter T. Daniels
> The point I made remains. If you try to press the left arms, by
> mistake or ignorance, your fare from the card you just swiped falls
> thru.
The point I made in a follow-up remains. That's wrong; at least at 207th
St., you enter through the left arms and it turns clockwise.
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@worldnet.att.net
Will MacGhee
>Please Swipe Again....
>-
>Please Swipe Again...
>-
>Please Swipe Again...
>-
>Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
>-
>Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
>-
>Please Swipe Card Again At This Turnstile...
><expletive shouted>
>This is exactly what happened to me this morning at Grand Central - damn
>frustrating and occurring with increasing frequency. I finally gave up
[...]
>Can anyone shed some light on why this is happening and what (if
>anything), the TA is doing about it?
The other responses to this thread talk about what the TA may or may not be doing about
it. But what I do when I get this error message is to reverse my card so the magnetic
strip is out of the reader, I then run it through the reader several times back and forth.
I've found that this seems to dislodge whatever is in there (Pocket Lint), and allows the
reader to see my magnetic strip.
Try it next time.
Will
--
[this .sig left intentionally blank]
mac...@panix.com