^^ Expensive mistakes with the price of gas..

Those mistakes happened in the mid-1990s. And one of the mistakes, the drive to Chicago instead of New York City, saved them some miles (about 150) and thus money on gas.

 

Back to RTA chit chat......

PD Sound Off on RTA:

 

http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/stories/index.ssf?/base/opinion/121429629257390.xml&coll=2

 

 

PD Sound Off on RTA:

 

http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/stories/index.ssf?/base/opinion/121429629257390.xml&coll=2

 

This comment speaks exactly to the POV I have been trying to get across:  "In the suburbs, you can hardly ever get a bus. On the sales tax, it seems like the people in the suburbs are the ones really supporting the system and there is no service in a lot of those areas." - Parma"

 

I know none of you care about what people in the suburbs think, I am posting this as an FYI for the RTA peeps.

Here would be my sound off:

 

"The Green Line Rapid gets you from Shaker/Green to the Terminal Tower in 28 minutes.  Bad weather nonwithstanding, this 28 minutes time is fairly constant and takes less time than driving the same distance in one's car.  Having used this route well over 1000 times, I have only seen one incident and feel completely safe, no matter what the hour.  My only complaint: the last train runs at midnight and patrons may not park their vehicles at the free lot from 2-6am.  This can put a damper on the night if I wish to stay out past that hour.

 

- Cleveland

"I know none of you care about what people in the suburbs think, I am posting this as an FYI for the RTA peeps."

 

Get off the cross :roll: Sure, *some* people have busted your chops, but that's unfair to the rest of us.

"I know none of you care about what people in the suburbs think, I am posting this as an FYI for the RTA peeps."

 

Get off the cross :roll: Sure, *some* people have busted your chops, but that's unfair to the rest of us.

 

LOL.  I wasn't referring to anyone busting my chops specifically, just generally speaking whenever the POV of a suburbanite is brought up, it's usually responded to with many comments by about how they shouldn't complain, just move back to the city, or how this isn't a concern for them because they live in the city proper, etc.  I was just trying to avoid the responses.  We are real people too, just because we don't live DT and I think RTA should hear what we have to say.

Yeah, I know what you mean, rockandroller.  I recently had to move (back) to the Eastside because I couldn't afford downtown anymore and have noticed how surprisingly anti-suburban people can be on these forums.   

Simply put, it's a tradeoff that some suburbanites just don't understand - if you want the most constant transit service, you move to a more dense/urban area. If you move to an area that wasn't built for constant transit service, why should RTA completely rework their business model and infrastructure to accomodate an inefficiently planned area?

 

More people in a more compact area (city) = more customers = revenue for transit operations, and a more efficient business model for RTA (or any other system). Taken to an extreme, you have NYC - and guess what, they have transit service out the wazoo.

 

Less people in a more spread out area (suburbs, specifically outer burbs) = less revenue and more distance needed to travel, more fuel to buy, more wear & tear on vehicles. Taken to an extreme, you have Streetsboro - and guess what, they have barely existent service.

 

People can make whatever choices they want, but at some point the onus is on THEM to adapt to the choices they've made.

Simply put, it's a tradeoff that some suburbanites just don't understand - if you want the most constant transit service, you move to a more dense/urban area. If you move to an area that wasn't built for constant transit service, why should RTA completely rework their business model and infrastructure to accomodate an inefficiently planned area?

 

More people in a more compact area (city) = more customers = revenue for transit operations, and a more efficient business model for RTA (or any other system). Taken to an extreme, you have NYC - and guess what, they have transit service out the wazoo.

 

Less people in a more spread out area (suburbs, specifically outer burbs) = less revenue and more distance needed to travel, more fuel to buy, more wear & tear on vehicles. Taken to an extreme, you have Streetsboro - and guess what, they have barely existent service.

 

People can make whatever choices they want, but at some point the onus is on THEM to adapt to the choices they've made.

 

It's not that we're stupid and we don't understand.  It's that a) we'd like to voice our opinions on the forum without bashing, and b) we are also customers and we think services we help pay for should serve us better, and that our voices should be heard by RTA.  We've all agreed there needs to be better communication between RTA and the riders as to why the services are what they are, but it doesn't negate our opinions or make us stupid or make them invalid opinions to have. There are plenty of places in the world where a 12 mile radius wouldn't be an unheard of distance to expect regular and reliable public trans, I don't know why this is posited as a ridiculous notion except for the fact that RTA doesn't have the MONEY to serve those people.  Money is different than whether or not it makes sense to serve those people because they're oh-so-far away.  As people expand out into other areas around a downtown area, I don't see why it's considered a dumb way to think to expect public transit service within a reasonable radius.  We're not talking about Medina or Sandusky here.

Maybe RTA should just have front door service for every suburban transit rider.  Yes, 3,000,000 stops, but at least more people would use public transit.  I mean, the greatest city in the history of the civilized freaking world, Chicago, has that right?

 

-Uninformed Cleveland Suburbs

"It's not that we're stupid and we don't understand."

 

Yes, I clearly see where I called you and all suburbanites "stupid".  :wtf:

 

"It's that a) we'd like to voice our opinions on the forum without bashing"

 

Let's be fair - I think you're being hypersensitive. Whenever someone says "you 'stupid' suburbanites, don't you know better?", I send them a reprimand and if they continue "bashing", they get suspended. Whenever it's suggested to people that they adapt, or might have to change their routine, they complain. It's human nature, we all do it. But when someone offers an explanation as to why things are the way they are, how is that "bashing"? The most caustic thing I would say is that some suburbanites just don't get it. That's hardly "bashing".

 

"There are plenty of places in the world where a 12 mile radius wouldn't be an unheard of distance to expect regular and reliable public trans,"

 

Examples? More to the point - examples that are comparable to Cleveland in areas of geography/sprawl, economy and population? I'm all ears.

 

"I don't know why this is posited as a ridiculous notion except for the fact that RTA doesn't have the MONEY to serve those people."

 

See above. :-)

 

 

 

 

Maybe RTA should just have front door service for every suburban transit rider. Yes, 3,000,000 stops, but at least more people would use public transit. I mean, the greatest city in the history of the civilized freaking world, Chicago, has that right?

 

-Uninformed Cleveland Suburbs

 

^^^This is exactly what I'm talking about.  This is really unnecessary.

It's as generalizing, inaccurate, and unnecessary as the "I know none of you care about what people in the suburbs think" comment. That said, play nice kids. :whip:

It's as generalizing, inaccurate, and unnecessary as the "I know none of you care about what people in the suburbs think" comment. That said, play nice kids. :whip:

 

w28th's post is exactly what I and eparabola are trying to say. I'll state it again but clearer - my post was not directed towards, hmm, how to be REALLY specific - those members of UO who don't care about what people in the suburbs think, which may or may not be all members, it was directed towards the RTA people, and all I was asking for (and didn't get) was the opportunity to post that opinion to those people without some sarcastic barb being thrown back at me.  Clearly that's not possible.  I'll send future remarks to RTA people via PM only.

 

 

---- hmm, how to be REALLY specific - those members of UO who don't care about what people in the suburbs think, which may or may not be all members......

 

as someone who lives in the suburbs, even I have to say, THE WEBSITE IS NAMED URBAN OHIO!!!!!!

There are plenty of places in the world where a 12 mile radius wouldn't be an unheard of distance to expect regular and reliable public trans, I don't know why this is posited as a ridiculous notion except for the fact that RTA doesn't have the MONEY to serve those people.  Money is different than whether or not it makes sense to serve those people because they're oh-so-far away.

 

Let me just weigh in to say that I don't think it's a ridiculous notion. In fact, it is a desirable goal.

 

However, as your second sentence suggests, oftentimes noble goals have to be tempered by economic reality. If this sentiment was in any way miscommunicated by any of the posters on this board, I'd like to apologize on their behalf.

 

If an area has a sufficient population density to support an urban transit model, then working toward that model should be encouraged, regardless of whether it's a one-mile radius or a twenty-mile radius. Keep in mind, though, a circle of one-mile radius has an area of ~ 3.14 square miles, while a circle of twenty-mile radius has an area of just over 1,256 square miles. If you have 12,000 people living in that one-mile radius (a density of ~ 4,000/square mile), you'd have to have slightly over 5,000,000 in the twenty-mile circle to result in the same density. Also, assumptions that the density is evenly-spread over a given area (another factor that weighs in to efficiency of service provision) become less realistic as the area increases.

 

Finally, regardless of frequency, regular and reliable are goals that should be pursued by any transit agency. If the bus is scheduled to arrive once an hour, it needs to be there once an hour. Such reliability is even more necessary as the scheduled frequency decreases. If we're not putting out the service we've advertised, please let us know, and we'll work to correct that.

 

And to reiterate what MayDay said: PLAY NICE, or no cookie  :-D

I think rockandroller has a good point, actually. As much of an advocate that I am for urban living, it can seem a bit unfair that, since all of Cuyahoga County pays for the RTA, shouldn't suburban service be just as good?

 

Honestly, and here's the funny part: I think it is. The reason that MOST people live in the suburbs is because they're not looking to live in the urban lifestyle. That's kinda a "duh" statement, but along with suburban living comes more of a desire for the automobile, I think. Because of that fact, suburban people don't support mass transportation as much as urban dwellers do.

 

If you look at metro areas of cities like Chicago and NYC (specifically suburbs like Long Island, Westchester, etc), the mass transportation options there pale in comparison to their urban counterparts. It's the same in Cleveland, only Cleveland is a much smaller city. You can't compare the two areas based on surface area. You have to compare them based on URBAN proportions.

 

I'm sorry, but I agree with MayDay .. if you want better mass transit service, you'll have to move to areas that are more naturally inclined to that service, which traditionally has been urban, more pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods. That's not to say that suburban mass transit doesn't have room to improve and SHOULD. But, you'll always get better mass transit service in the central urban core.

If you look at metro areas of cities like Chicago and NYC (specifically suburbs like Long Island, Westchester, etc), the mass transportation options there pale in comparison to their urban counterparts. It's the same in Cleveland, only Cleveland is a much smaller city. You can't compare the two areas based on surface area. You have to compare them based on URBAN proportions.

 

Along those lines, growing up in surburban St. Louis (less than 20 miles from downtown), I used to take the bus home from high school when I didn't have a carpool.  Both of the bus lines I used to take from both places we lived throughout that time don't exist any more.  Why?  They just couldn't support enough ridership.  MetroBus still has express lines that run during rush hour like Cleveland does, but as for the local routes?  They suffer the same exact problems as they do here.

It's not fair, to some extent. I really think it's up to people, though, to make the switch to mass transit to show that there is demand for it. It is very much the chicken/egg problem, though; this isn't a clear-cut answer.

 

Hopefully, federal and state governments will finally wake up and see that there needs to be more funding diverted to mass transit projects to get people off of their cars, even in the suburbs. But I still think that people living in the suburbs will want to rely on their cars more, anyway; it's much more than a funding issue. It's an American MENTALITY issue. The suburbs, in my opinion, afford people a certain kind of lifestyle, and unfortunately, it's always been catered to the automobile. It's all a part of urban sprawl/flight.

 

In my opinion .. BLEH to suburbs. But to each their own. ;)

I think rockandroller has a good point, actually. As much of an advocate that I am for urban living, it can seem a bit unfair that, since all of Cuyahoga County pays for the RTA, shouldn't suburban service be just as good?

 

Honestly, and here's the funny part: I think it is. The reason that MOST people live in the suburbs is because they're not looking to live in the urban lifestyle. That's kinda a "duh" statement, but along with suburban living comes more of a desire for the automobile, I think. Because of that fact, suburban people don't support mass transportation as much as urban dwellers do.

 

If you look at metro areas of cities like Chicago and NYC (specifically suburbs like Long Island, Westchester, etc), the mass transportation options there pale in comparison to their urban counterparts. It's the same in Cleveland, only Cleveland is a much smaller city. You can't compare the two areas based on surface area. You have to compare them based on URBAN proportions.

 

I'm sorry, but I agree with MayDay .. if you want better mass transit service, you'll have to move to areas that are more naturally inclined to that service, which traditionally has been urban, more pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods. That's not to say that suburban mass transit doesn't have room to improve and SHOULD. But, you'll always get better mass transit service in the central urban core.

 

This is because the main purpose of public transportation on Long Island/Westchester is NOT for your errands, etc.. it's a commute rail that is used to get to and from the city.

This is because the main purpose of public transportation on Long Island/Westchester is NOT for your errands, etc.. it's a commute rail that is used to get to and from the city.

 

I'd agree with your assessment of Long Island, but only so far as LIRR is concerned (Nassau/Suffolk County local transit are entirely different animals), and I'd disagree when it comes to Westchester (I'm a Yonkers native originally) -- public transit there serves much the same variety of purposes that it does here, albeit for a denser population (no jokes about use of the word "denser", please!); commuter rail from the northern NY suburbs is provided via Metro North, again, a horse of a different color

Simply put: more mileage + higher fuel costs + stagnant regional population growth + oh hell, you get the idea... but then again, it's only up to RTA staff to lobby for funds, right? ;-)

 

From cleveland.com:

RTA service cuts expected despite increased ridership

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/06/rta_service_cuts_expected_desp.html

 

Posted by Patrick O’Donnell June 24, 2008 21:00PM

Categories: Breaking News, Environment, Traffic

Want more RTA bus service to relieve the overcrowding you're enduring since gas prices skyrocketed?

 

Not going to happen.

 

Instead, brace yourself for more possible route cuts, fare hikes or fuel surcharges.

 

.....

Rail! Rail! Rail!

 

Kidding (sort of).

 

This really is horrible. It's so ironic that, at a time when public transportation needs to be there (and it's such a GREAT time for it to be able to step up to the plate), it can't be. I guess the economics behind it all are bit more complicated than just getting more riders.

From what I've read, there are some buses that regularly have few patrons.  These cuts will hopefully force RTA to get rid of excessive routes. 

 

Also, the Green line was PACKED today.  Standing room only and a few people didn't even bother getting on.

From what I've read, there are some buses that regularly have few patrons.  These cuts will hopefully force RTA to get rid of excessive routes. 

 

Also, the Green line was PACKED today.  Standing room only and a few people didn't even bother getting on.

 

.......and in both directions, during non peak hours.

There's got to be a better way to pay for transit. Maybe a countywide carbon tax instead of the sales tax? In economics, you tax destructive activities and leave alone the productive activities.

Aside: I was just in Orange County California last week and gasoline there was 4.59-4.69 per gallon of regular; but it sure is beautiful by the ocean, sigh.

 

Anyway, I am curious about one statistic that was mentioned above.  If I remember correctly it was that RTA ridership was up 10% since this time last year, when gasoline was about 2.60?  Does that mean that a 50% increase in the price of gasoline produced a 10% transit ridership increase?  Does that say anything about the effectiveness (or lack of effectiveness) of RTA's ability to serve commuters etc in general across the region.  What is the expectation if gas continues to rise in price?  At what point does ridership max out, because additional potential riders cannot reasonably take advantage of the bus or rapid?  I commute from Lyndhurst to Beachwood, not very far.  I could take the 94 bus down Richmond which does some weird stuff around Chagrin Bl, but the endpoints of that route are not really that close to my house and would require a drive, a significant walk, and/or a transfer, compared to a car ride of 15 minutes.  The headways on the 94 are not stellar, which makes one schedule dependent, when by car and can come and go with no waiting.  Gasoline could go to 10.00 and I don't think the bus would really work for me, not to mention that RTA would be hurting as well, because they use fuel too.  My inclination would be to buy a Prius, as some of my environmentally conscious colleagues have already done, hoping that electric cars are not that far off.  At one point we were rumored to be moving to the southwest suburbs.  In that case we would be inclined to carpool I 480 in the short as opposed to using transit, which would force an odyssey through downtown cleveland.  I am sure there are many in this situation. 

If gas goes to $10/gal, you may see cities such as Lyndhurst decline in population vary fast.

Ironically bad for RTA customers... If the Green Line’s that packed, maybe RTA should consider a few 2-car jobbies during rush hour.  Hate seeing seniors unnecessarily stand…

 

Oh, btw, for those suburbanites (including my Mom), a few times when rail extensions have been proposed, they've been shot down by NIMBY suburbanites (like Berea when the Red Line extension was proposed)... Sadly, there's often a (foolish) bigoted rationale behind it --- couched in such nicey terms like too much "traffic" and "parking problems". ... Yeah, right!

 

Ironically bad for RTA customers... If the Green Line’s that packed, maybe RTA should consider a few 2-car jobbies during rush hour.  Hate seeing seniors unnecessarily stand…

 

Oh, btw, for those suburbanites (including my Mom), a few times when rail extensions have been proposed, they've been shot down by NIMBY suburbanites (like Berea when the Red Line extension was proposed)... Sadly, there's often a (foolish) bigoted rationale behind it --- couched in such nicey terms like too much "traffic" and "parking problems". ... Yeah, right!

 

 

Funny you say that Clvlndr.  My parents and their neighbors would often say things like "The train is so nice" or "It's part of the charm of Shaker" but never take it.  Keep in mind no house on South Park is more than a 5-7 (10 tops) minute walk for the closest train station on Shaker Blvd.

 

My Mom had to attend an event downtown and took the train for the first time in 15 years, then complained it didn't go fast enough (:roll: :roll:) and that they had, two cars but only allowed people in the front car. 

If gas goes to $10/gal, you may see cities such as Lyndhurst decline in population vary fast.

 

Lyndhurst is still "somewhat" walkable with decent transit. Now Mentor, Solon, Westlake, Strongsville and points beyond. Well...

 

 

That's one of many photos from....

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,16015.0.html

 

^I know, and those cities will most likely empty at a lower gas price.  But Lyndhurst is still underserved by transit for people who want to ride it regularly (which would most likely be the case at $10/gallon, Lyndhurst is not one of the cities full of wealthy residents that could pay for gas no matter what it costs).

Actually, if oil prices rise high enough to spark $10 gasoline, I suspect we will have other major concerns.  Anyway, I would like to hear the rationale for the supposition that a city like Lyndhurst, which actually has jobs, a large variety of shopping, schools and services in a concentrated area nearby (meaning short car trips), would empty.  Where would everyone go?  Also, there is RTA's trusty number 9 bus for downtown and University Circle or Eastgate trips, which by the way I used to use when I worked downtown and would use if I worked downtown now, because it creates a real benefit relative to driving.  The 94 on Richmond goes to Chagrin via the Shaker/Green station (wish that rapid line went at least to Richmond: probably wouldn't cost that much, lol), so we are definitely not disconnected transit-wise.  By the way, this is not to promote Lyndhurst in any way.  It really is more of a response to a previous point.  If it really gets to the point that people are forced to "concentrate" into a denser population distribution, the concentration just might occur around multiple centers of jobs, shopping etc. throughout the region, not just one.  These could be connected by robust transit service, hehe

OK, you know more people are taking public transit when you're on the same train as two other people from work...in an office of less than 30 people!

VIDEO from WKYC

 

http://www.wkyc.com/news/local/news_article.aspx?storyid=92171&catid=3

 

 

How about this for the next Rapid transit trains in Cleveland for use on all lines? And a variation of this can also be ordered which converts from electricity to diesel operation for use on lightly used freight lines beyond the existing RTA rail network....

 

See the video at:

http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df2/df07092007.wmv

 

 

Bombardier’s “Autorail Grande Capacité” commuter trains

 

The AGC is available in either diesel or electric versions AND a dual-mode version, which will enable French commuters to get to work in a single-seat ride in regions where the more lightly travelled suburban lines, which are not always electrified, connect to the electrified urban intercity rail network. Transportation consultants have long known that requiring passengers to change trains to complete a trip cuts usage by 30-50%; a single seat ride is a feature that might make these dual-mode trains particularly attractive to eventual U.S. use.

 

“For suburban services, a four-car configuration with two doors per intermediate car allows for a maximum passenger capacity and passenger flow. For regional services, a two-, three- or four car configuration makes it possible to adapt the offered capacity to the various transportation requirements. In that case, the intermediate cars are equipped with one door only. Finally, for interregional services it is also possible to omit the door on the intermediate car. The product family AGC offers numerous trainset configurations from two to four cars, a seating capacity from 120 seats up to 240 and a maximum speed from140 to 160 km/h,” Bombardier said.

 

Industry sources say that one American system, NJ Transit, is likely to be the leader in ordering this type of dual-mode modern trainset.

 

Partial specifications, diesel:

 

2-car; 3-car; or 4-car

 

Minimum curve radius 80 m (all)

 

Length over couplers 42 m; 57.4 m; 72.8 m

 

Width 2.95 m (all)

 

Height 4.02 m (all)

 

Motor power 1 x 622 kW; 2 x 622 kW; 2 x 622 kW

 

Maximum speed 140 km/h; 160 km/h; 140 km/h

 

Total number of seats (“grand confort” version) 120; 160; 220

- 2nd class 108; 138; 198

– including tip-up seats 16; 22; 28

- 1st class 12; 22; 22

 

Maximum number of seats 144; 208; 272

 

Standing passengers (4p/m2) 130; 200; 251

 

Toilets (“grand confort” version) 1 2 2

 

Weight (normal load) 92.6 t 130.6 t 158.5 t

Electric/Dual Mode:

 

Available as triple voltage version 15 kV 16 Hz 2/3 or 3 kV; also available as bi-mode diesel version 25 kV, Electric 25 kV and 1.5 kV Bi-mode Diesel 1.5 kV

 

For additional specifications and technical layout click here for the AGC PDF brochure.... http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df2/df07092007.pdf

 

 

 

Those bike racks are awesome...

 

Also when RTA does update/get new trains (i forget when this is happening 5-7 years? or something like that)... is there any chance we will replace our antiquated and outdated fare system?  Is it really too much to ask for to have something like MTA or CTA, where you can get a single reusable card that you can just add money too.  It makes using transit immensley easier than our system.

They are in the process of replacing the fare system - they've already put in new fareboxes on all trains and buses.

I guess i just want to be able to get a reusable card that i can simply add money too (even with a debit or credit card) and be able to swipe it and have the money deducted.  Our fare system seems so behind the times.

I know what you mean, and I totally agree.  I believe fare machines at stations are in the future plans.  I read it on RTA's webpage, although I can't find the link right now...

I agree, the fare system is terrible and confusing....I never know when to pay. 

 

I think when Chicago's original farecard system was put in place, the revenue generated made a huge jump, and the upgrade actually paid for itself after a few years because of employee theft,  token fraud and the situation where a huge crowd would bottleneck, and they would end up just opening the gates to get people through.  There was a Mexican coin that would work as a token and it was virtually worthless in the US.

I agree, the fare system is terrible and confusing....I never know when to pay. 

 

I think when Chicago's original farecard system was put in place, the revenue generated made a huge jump, and the upgrade actually paid for itself after a few years because of employee theft,  token fraud and the situation where a huge crowd would bottleneck, and they would end up just opening the gates to get people through.  There was a Mexican coin that would work as a token and it was virtually worthless in the US.

 

With the exception of the Shaker Rapid (westbound), you pay when boarding on RTA vehicles.  someone correct me if I'm wrong.

It drives me crazy.  Every time I want to take rta I have to make sure i have plenty of change or at the bare minimum multiple singles on me... and for someone who RARELY carries or uses cash that's a real pain.  And if you don't happen to be at a place with a change machine, you just lose 25 cents.

I agree, the fare system is terrible and confusing....I never know when to pay.

 

I think when Chicago's original farecard system was put in place, the revenue generated made a huge jump, and the upgrade actually paid for itself after a few years because of employee theft, token fraud and the situation where a huge crowd would bottleneck, and they would end up just opening the gates to get people through. There was a Mexican coin that would work as a token and it was virtually worthless in the US.

 

With the exception of the Shaker Rapid (westbound), you pay when boarding on RTA vehicles. someone correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Green and Blue lines operate like that yes.....  However, sometimes they don't collect fare when you exit.  I have also boarded the red line at Cedar and instructed to pay at TC but then didn't have to.

I wonder how much RTA actually loses on fares this way?

Oh RTA peeps.........  Please update us on the future of fare collection!  Thanks :-D

we really have to have one of the worst most confusing fare card and collection systems for any large system in the country.  I barely know what's going on and I live here... I couldn't imagine being an out of towner.

 

Seriously.  Let me walk up to a machine insert my credit/debit card and get a little reusable card back with $20 worth of fare on it.  Then let me swipe it each time i get on a bus/train and it can deduct $1.75.  Then when i am almost out i will go refill it at another fare machine.... This can't be that hard.

we really have to have one of the worst most confusing fare card and collection systems for any large system in the country. I barely know what's going on and I live here... I couldn't imagine being an out of towner.

 

Seriously. Let me walk up to a machine insert my credit/debit card and get a little reusable card back with $20 worth of fare on it. Then let me swipe it each time i get on a bus/train and it can deduct $1.75. Then when i am almost out i will go refill it at another fare machine.... This can't be that hard.

 

I think I would ride a lot more if I didn't need friggin' exact change all the time!  And I don't want to have to go to a certain grocery store to buy x number of rides on a pass either!  In undergrad, we had RTA passes that were good for the academic year....  Those were so nice.

Green and Blue lines operate like that yes.....  However, sometimes they don't collect fare when you exit.  I have also boarded the red line at Cedar and instructed to pay at TC but then didn't have to.

 

Then Jerry, you've got operators/booth clerks (i know..don't laugh) that are causing RTA to be short changed.