The MT Position

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit magazine editor

Transit is usually leading the way when it comes to technology. From hybrids to hydrogen, transit systems across the globe are on the leading edge of breakthroughs in alternative fuels among other technologies. Of course, sometimes transit strays into that “bleeding edge” category and at other times it is just … odd.

So I saw this story the other day. I know that biofuels are being used in a host of transit agencies across the country, but for most of those the “bio” part consists of some sort of vegetable product. I’ve never heard of “rendered beef fat” being considered a part of the process before. Of course, if it’s anywhere that this is going to be tested, it’s Texas, the beef capital of the United States.

I hope to see some new technologies at next week’s APTA Bus & Paratransit Conference in Cleveland. The conference is always the best place to find the latest and greatest bus-related transit technologies (and a bunch of ‘universal’ technologies). That’s the best part about traveling to trade shows, seeing new things that you had never heard of before.

I attend at least a half dozen trade shows each year and they never fail to amaze me. You’d think they would all be the same after awhile, and in some ways they are, but for the most part you can find something new everywhere you go.

Sometimes that thing is so new and cool that I can’t wait to find out more information and write about it. Sometimes it’s just odd enough to catch your attention and stick with you.

So what odd new technologies have you seen related to transit?

Also, I wanted to make a final pitch for this year’s Top 40 Under 40. From the numbers it looks like we’ve had a lot more interest in it this year — which is great — but I want to emphasize that everyone has someone in their company or at their agency that could and should be nominated.

Don’t miss out on your chance to nominate somebody you think is worthy. Take the five minutes and fill out the form. The deadline is approaching, and I can’t count on one hand the number of people who called me after the deadline last year asking to get someone in.

Support the next generation of transit leaders. Nominate someone now.

Thanks for reading the MT Position, updated every Friday. For those interested in instant updates, you can now get your latest Mass Transit fix via Twitter.

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com
Check out our LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter pages!

By Mark Foss

At 5:00 a.m. daily I log into a CAD/AVL system. As the software boots up, two windows appear. One is the computer-aided dispatch software (CAD) the other window is the automated vehicle locator (AVL) software. The AVL window displays a map of the transit service area. The AVL tracks buses using a combination of data drawn from the schedule, odometer and signpost transmitters on select bus stop poles. It is a relatively old system. But it’s still very cool; and I rely on it daily.

Little triangle-shaped icons representing buses appear on the map. The icons are color coded to show which buses are on time, which buses are late and which buses are early. Each icon has text indicating route, run and schedule performance. Normally, these icons march along pre-highlighted routes indicating where the buses are. However, some anomalies occur. Sometimes an icon turns black, turns sideways and quits moving. That indicates the tracking isn’t working — at least for that bus. This could happen because a bus is off route or the tracking information isn’t transmitting for some other reason. In this event, determining the location of a bus would require direct radio communication, a field supervisor or information from another bus driver. Eventually we will have an AVL system with GPS. Reliability should improve remarkably.

I recently purchased an Android smart phone. I’ve downloaded an application called OneBusAway that can help me determine when the next bus is scheduled to arrive at a given location. The data the app uses is derived from King County Metro tracking data — the same data I use. OneBusAway recently added Pierce Transit real-time data to its system. The app works differently than the AVL software I use. With the app, I use my current location to find a bus stop, tap on the stop and get information about the next bus. The display shows the route number, predicted arrival time, the bus status (early, late, on time) and the number of minutes until the bus arrives. Of course, my toys are better. But it is still really cool to get bus information delivered to my phone.

Potential benefits of similar applications are enormous. In January 2010, King County Metro hosted a workshop for app developers. About 50 people attended the event. King County Metro and TriMet (Portland, Ore.) were on the discussion panel. The workshop clearly demonstrated demand for transit agency generated data. Third-party use of transit data isn’t new. MyBus.org, an ITS Research Program of University of Washington, has been working with this data for a long time. TriMet has been providing MyBus.org with data since 2000. TriMet also now has a web page for developers working on transit-related apps. Demand from app developers is growing. But how should transit agencies respond?

Developers want to move with the speed of the market. Transit agencies move with the speed of a government agency. The data developed by transit agencies is public but it isn’t without cost. Should agencies charge? If so, how much? What is the downstream benefit to the transit agencies? Can agencies enhance in-house expertise by working with developers? Should agencies have some control (influence) over how the data is used commercially?

It is hard to tell what standards to apply. From my perspective as a non-technical, but proficient computer user, I want to see applications that are easy to use and deliver value. As a transit professional I would like to see our customers get quality information delivered efficiently. I am excited about applications like OneBusAway. However, I have concerns. First, I think agencies should hire industry professionals that can put business practices in place to safeguard agency interests and ensure, at a minimum, cost-neutral delivery of the data to private developers. Second, universal standards might make it easier for developers to create apps. And transit customers across the country could use a familiar app when traveling. Finally, I am concerned that information services are delivered realistically — no hype. It might sound like a “Murphy” truism but when we depend on our systems most — during inclement weather, for example — failures are most acute. Multiple sources of information can help. Transparency about what to expect would also help avert a backlash, if things don’t go well.

Tomorrow, I’ll log into the system. Sooner or later one of the icons will turn sideways, turn black and stop moving. Hello, Murphy.

Mark Foss has more than 24 years experience working for King County Metro Transit. His experience includes work as a bus operator, special ridership coordinator in accessible services and 1st line transit supervisor. Currently, he works as a communications coordinator in the transit control center (TCC). Contact him via LinkedIn.

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit magazine editor

How many of us have ever been left stranded in our lifetime? Not waiting on someone who is chronically late, but stuck someplace (possibly with little to no idea where you are) with no idea how you are going to get to your destination. Unfortunately, the transit industry is starting to look more and more like that every day.

This week rallies were held across the nation to bring attention to the growing funding issues facing the transit industry. Most of the press has focused on Atlanta, but the Twin Cities, Washington, D.C., and other cities gathered support for their flagging systems.

I hate to be a downer, but to what avail? New York MTA is laying off hundreds of workers and Washington Metro is in such poor shape that former general manager David Gunn found a broken rail and several concrete platforms shored up by wood on a walkthrough.

The problem transit is facing is that it’s a “there” problem. It always seems to be a problem somewhere else. Here in the Midwest it would be easy to look at transit’s issues in Atlanta, New York and Washington and say that’s the East Coast. Not our problem. Meanwhile our own systems are being ignored.

It’s a vicious circle with less revenue, meaning less service, meaning less revenue. And so the chicken and egg are meeting as more than 80 percent of our systems make cuts. Personally, I haven’t spoken with a transit director in the last year who isn’t looking at making cuts if they haven’t already.

Where does that leave us? Not in a good place. Transit is hurting. And, unfortunately, it seems that no one is (or very few are) listening. Transit is an easy thing to take shots at. With all the boondogglers running around screaming foul at any mention of rail, how can transit hope to get the traction it needs.

We need to get the message out. We need to tell our stories. We need to make people understand that transit isn’t a local issue, a regional issue or even a national issue. It’s an everyone issue. Transit is so ingrained into our national fabric that it’s almost invisible until you pluck one of those strands connected to it.

But that’s the funny thing most people find when they are left stranded, they don’t plan for it until next time. Let’s not let there be a next time.

If you haven’t done so already, please help us to celebrate and salute the youth movement in transit. Nominate someone you know for our second annual Top 40 Under 40. The deadline is May 7, so don’t wait until the last minute to get your nominations in.

Thanks for reading the MT Position, updated every Friday. For those interested in instant updates, you can now get your latest Mass Transit fix via Twitter.

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com
Check out our LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter pages!

By Mark Foss

Over the past five days airports all over Europe were closed as a result of the eruption of the Eyjafjallajoekull volcano in Iceland. On Saturday about 17,000 flights were cancelled. Some flights began to lift off today (Monday) but progress is slow. The estimates of the cost of the volcano run to $200 million per day. The full economic impact of the disaster is yet to be determined. There is even talk of possible “bail outs” for affected airlines.

In the meantime Europe’s rail lines are benefiting from the air travelers’ misfortune. On Saturday all trains from Sofia, Bulgaria to Western Europe were sold out. Rail stations in London and Paris were no less busy. Stranded passengers took buses, Scandinavian ferries, high-cost cruise ships and $5,000 taxi rides to continue to their destinations. Air cargo shipments of perishable goods were held up; some stores reported shortages.

It is interesting to me that the American press hasn’t mentioned much regarding the impact on rail or other means of transportation. Perhaps it is because we are so car and airline dependent. It would have been interesting to hear less repetition regarding stranded passengers — and more transportation system analysis.

The natural disaster affecting Europe is unique to the location and situation. However, it makes me wonder how well our modes of mass transportation would hold up under similar circumstances. We do not have the kind of rail system Europe has — even regionally. Imagine for a moment an American disaster that might disrupt car traffic and airline flights in and out of a region. How would we move people in and out of the area? How could aid get in?

I don’t have a pat answer. Long-distance travelers face unique problems, of course. Travelers bound for Europe from the United States last week were simply stuck. Over shorter distances, however, we should maintain alternate (non-airline) means for moving people and goods in and out of population centers. For example, the Pacific Northwest would benefit from high-speed rail that connects regional cities — e.g. Portland-Seattle. Back in January, it was announced that Washington and Oregon were in line for $590 million in federal government funds for high-speed rail from Seattle to Portland. Unfortunately, it will take until 2017 for the line to deliver 110 mph trips from Seattle to Portland. All aboard?

Mark Foss has more than 24 years experience working for King County Metro Transit. His experience includes work as a bus operator, special ridership coordinator in accessible services and 1st line transit supervisor. Currently, he works as a communications coordinator in the transit control center (TCC). Contact him via LinkedIn.

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit magazine editor

For some of you reading this summer never ends. For those of us in the upper Midwest, we’re just starting to drop the parkas for shorts. I had a great weekend working on my yard and in my garage — which ended when I saw the prices posted at the gas station a couple blocks from my house. Summer is here and so are high gas prices.

In my house we don’t look at the price of a gallon of gas as the proverbial measuring stick. With three kids, it’s the price of a gallon of milk that’s the real litmus for us. As gas prices continue to climb, things like milk and other essentials go up. Can we expect any less of public transit?

Gas price estimates are all over the place, but not to worry because we can always fall back on public transit, right. Right? Unfortunately, public transit agencies are already feeling the economy’s effects and are struggling to keep their essential services running. Higher gas prices might drive people to their bus and train doors, but that may not be the best thing for them.

What most people seem to (perhaps conveniently) forget is that all of those transit vehicles run on fuel, too. Sure, they carry a lot more people than your average car, but that also means they use a lot more fuel. People are ecstatic about the Prius and its 30-or-so miles per gallon, but what does a bus get? Less than 5 mpg?

Sure, transit has bore the brunt of higher gas prices in both fuel costs and increased passenger loads, but even then it was standing-room only on some systems’ most popular routes. What happens now after those systems have had to cut down on their routes to offset deficits in operating funds?

Fuel costs are the killer for most transit systems and higher fuel costs this summer may be the proverbial straw for struggling systems.

Please help us to celebrate and salute the youth movement in transit. Nominate someone you know for our second annual Top 40 Under 40. The deadline is May 7, so don’t wait until the last minute to get your nominations in.

Thanks for reading the MT Position, updated every Friday. For those interested in instant updates, you can now get your latest Mass Transit fix via Twitter.

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com
Check out our LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter pages!

By Mark Foss

A study published by the American Public Transit Association (APTA) reported that commuters in the Washington, D.C., area could save about $9,000 per year by taking public transit. This good news took into consideration the fare hikes implemented by the Metro (D.C.). The devil is in the details, however. The study also considers the high cost of parking in the D.C. area and assumes the elimination of one vehicle in a household.

Last week I had the opportunity to ride the Sounder, Sound Transit’s commuter train. The trip was short. I was off work to serve on jury duty. I only traveled from one station to the next — an eight-minute ride. The ride was quick and pleasant; I really like riding the Sounder. Normally, I can’t ride the rail.

My commute is much farther — about 25 miles one way. The train would be a great benefit, but the timing doesn’t work. Currently, I have to leave home at about 4:00 a.m. and I start at 5:00. Since I work for a transit agency, I have a pass that allows me to ride the service of four agencies in our region. The economic incentive doesn’t work for me. My situation isn’t typical. The people I work with and I commute to work to get ready to provide commuters with transit service. What about the average commuter?

King County Metro (KCM), Washington State, announced that ridership on trolleys and buses has dipped about 6 percent since its high in 2008 (In Transit March-April, p. 7). KCM attributes the drop in ridership to lower employment numbers and lower gas prices in 2009. KCM’s fares increased in 2009 as well. Even considering the drop in ridership, KCM reports that the ridership in 2009 was the second highest on record, after 2008. And gas prices are expected to spike again.

Although the number of motor and trolley bus boardings fell, King County’s VanPool and VanShare ridership went up by 1 percent — despite a 10 percent reduction in the number of vans on the road (In Transit March-April, p. 7).  More empty seats well filled in the vans.

Convenience wins over price. Commuters want to save money. If a commuter saves on gas, parking and can afford to give up a car, traditional high-capacity commuting vehicle — trains, buses etc. — are more inviting. The rise and fall of fuel prices also have an influence on ridership. However, availability and convenience — practical issues — heavily influence how much money commuters spend daily travel. For a host of reasons, I’m not likely to leave my home of 20 years to move closer to work. I work odd hours and, occasionally, stay late or come in on my days off. So, for now, I’ll be in my car at 4:00 a.m. headed for the freeway. Commuters who work the right hours and have a cohort willing to use the VanPool option get a piece of both worlds — convenience and savings.

Mark Foss has more than 24 years experience working for King County Metro Transit. His experience includes work as a bus operator, special ridership coordinator in accessible services and 1st line transit supervisor. Currently, he works as a communications coordinator in the transit control center (TCC). Contact him via LinkedIn.

By Conrad Sheehan

For tens of millions in the United States, mass transit is a fundamental part of daily living. Commuters can spend 10 percent or more of their workday riding transit and $1,000 per year.  From another perspective, mass transit is also important.  It is probably the most socially inclusive activity Americans participate in and, to that extent, is something of a great equalizer.  Billionaires and the homeless, immigrants and Daughters of the Revolution all “hang on the strap.”

A key part of mass transit is the payment process and as proprietary fare systems become obsolete, municipalities and transit authorities are looking for new payment systems to meet the needs of constituents and budgets.  A tendency might be to turn to legacy payment schemes — e.g. Visa and MasterCard — because of their marketing presence and influence, but these types of traditional payment schemes are inadequate solutions for transit payments for several reasons:

• Traditional cards (credit, bank debit, pre-paid Visa and MasterCard) are inaccessible or prohibitively costly for a large constituency of riders, namely the unbanked and under-banked, which can represent 50 percent of ridership. Pre-paid cards come with numerous fees, including activation, monthly maintenance and non-activity fees. In addition, pre-paid cards do not eliminate the need for unbanked consumer’s need for other fee-based financial services provided by currency exchanges such as check cashing and bill payment. The combined total of these fees vastly exceed the cost of a bank account, especially given the fact that the majority (62 percent) of low-income households never bounce a check, according to the November 2008 FDIC Study on Overdrafts.
• They cannot support the dynamic and often complex fare structures of transit authorities, e.g., seniors, students, military and pre-tax.
• They are built around magnetic stripes, which are too slow to meet the existing and growing throughput needs of transit. A benchmark of 350 milliseconds or less was cited in an October 2009 “Payments Sourcw” report on London’s transit throughput needs. This is not only way too fast for magnetic stripes, but also too fast for even Visa and MasterCard European contactless cards. Mass transit needs to move millions of people in a couple of short bursts each day.
• They contain sensitive financial data. Cards were designed in an off-line, mechanical world where this data needed to be on the card and facilitate carbon imprints — and this model has not changed much since. Whether in this data magnetic stripe, on chips or embossed right on the card, the traditional card will always be vulnerable to compromise at attended turnstiles and vending machines, and while fraud may not be a major issue in transit, the liability of stolen card data is. This was the case with TJ Maxx stores, which recorded a $118,000,000 charge due to a data breach.
• They are expensive. Securing data will remain a perpetual cat-and-mouse game fought by escalating technology costs on cards and readers; interchange will only rise, various and sundry fees will be introduced and re-introduced raising the cost for both riders and transit authorities.

Furthermore, there is evidence that legacy payment schemes and bank card issuers are interested in transit payments to get contactless cards into people’s hands to reduce their own fraud losses in the broader retail market and to use contactless chips as a mechanism to steer all payments into their preferred networks, namely signature-based transactions. This was evidenced recently by Best Buy’s cancellation of contactless Visa cards, which automatically routed any contactless Visa transaction into Visa’s own signature-based network, as opposed to a lower cost PIN debit transaction.

These should not be transit’s problem, not their job to solve and not their financial obligation to fund — it is a false choice between proprietary, closed-loop payments and Visa- and MasterCard-backed payment schemes.

Fortunately there are the successful transit payment systems, e.g., Hong Kong and London, which provide insight. Both systems have avoided the legacy payment schemes. In the case of Hong Kong, even in the face of direct competition from global behemoths Visa and MasterCard, the Octopus payment solution prevailed and has captured more than 95 percent market share. Both systems are built around contactless fare media and make card acquisition and reloading convenient. Both systems can be used on multiple modes of transportation and even Hong Kong has successfully opened up its payment platform to serve the broader retail market.

Newer, more efficient, secure and flexible solutions exist that do not shift the structural flaws and costs of card payment schemes onto transit authorities or merchants in general. The ideal payment solution will:

• Issue accounts to both banked and unbanked consumers
• Be agnostic to fare media form factor
• Be account-centric, not card-centric, which offers numerous advantages including (1) keeps cost of card down, (2) does not require financial data to reside on card, (3) allows transit authorities to more easily migrate fare media as they see fit (e.g. mobile).
• Allow accounts to be topped-up in a store, on the Internet or from mobile devices, or they can be linked to a bank account for low-cost debit processing outside the legacy credit card network.
• Provide for contactless RFID and magnetic stripe fare media to broaden its acceptance and increase its utility. Logical extensions would include bill payment and frequently visited stores.
• Ensure that transactions can be authorized in batch or real time, reflecting the physical realities of mass transit and have no sensitive financial data is resident on the fare media or transmitted through a network.

The ideal mass transit payment solution will provide a cost-effective solution for riders, transit authorities, contiguous (non-contiguous) transit modes and surrounding retail merchants.

Conrad Sheehan is the founder and CEO of mPayy, an alternative payment system enabling secure, efficient payment processing for consumers and businesses.

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit magazine editor

April is an interesting month in Wisconsin. Spring starts to, well, spring — except for the odd snow shower or two — and thoughts turn to all those summer things you couldn’t do in the winter. It’s also a nexus for events in both the sporting and transit worlds.

They say we have five seasons in Wisconsin (and most other states I hear): spring, summer, fall, winter and construction. April marks the real beginning of the latter as the weather warms to the point that orange barrels mysteriously sprout from asphalt along the state’s highways.

It’s also the first instance each year when Major League Baseball (MLB) and the National Football League (NFL) collide. The Brewers’ season is getting underway, yet with the draft coming up, the Packers will steal a headline or three.

This got me to thinking how similar professional sports is to transit, especially when it comes to inequities. You may not be a big sports fan, but it’s hard to miss the steroid scandal MLB has suffered under for the past few years. Congressional hearings, the Mitchell Report and media hounds searching for the latest big name player to admit he used performing-enhancing substances.

Quietly off to the side the NFL is going about its business with its players seemingly immune to the scrutiny that MLB players have been under. The reasons are too numerous to get into here — that’s better served while having your favorite tasty beverage while watching the games — but it’s clear that the NFL doesn’t get the same focus that MLB does.

The same goes for transit. Here in the Badger State the talk is about rail — the “governor’s choo choo” for some and the Madison-to-Milwaukee rail corridor for others. What I find interesting is the amount of scrutiny being given to the rail line — especially negative scrutiny. Meanwhile roads are the NFL of transit, doing their thing off to the side waving their hands and saying, “Nothing to see here. Move along.”

A lot of recent discussion revolves around the $800 million price tag for the Milwaukee-to-Madison line and the annual upkeep (about $7 million). It’s outrageous people say. Your taxes are going to pay for that even if you don’t ride it. The usual rhetoric.

Now over behind the “don’t pay attention to what I am doing here” curtain in Milwaukee we have the recently renovated Marquette Interchange and soon-to-be undertaken Zoo Interchange. Both of these major freeway interchanges were dilapidated and in need of repair. There’s no arguing that point.

The Marquette Interchange was completed for $810 million — far less than its budgeted $1 billion — and the Zoo Interchange has an expected price tag of around $2.3 billion. What the rail naysayers don’t want you to know is that 51 percent of the Marquette Interchange renovation came from the state, not the federal government. That’s more than $400 million. It’s too early to tell how much the state will end up paying for its portion of the Zoo Interchange project, but it will definitely be more than what the Milwaukee-to-Madison rail line is costing since that $800 million price tag was matched with an $800 million stimulus fund investment from the Feds.

Nothing to see here, of course, move along. Boondoggle! Boondoggle! It’s easy to compare apples to oranges when you shove the orange in your mouth first.

Just like the NFL taking a deep breath as MLB garnered all the steroid scrutiny, so too are those decrying rail investments. Rail is gaining all the attention while we continue to pour money into our roads with no thought of the real costs involved.

Oh and those saying that your taxes are paying for the railroad even if you don’t use it? Ask someone in Stevens Point about their taxes going to fund a road project in Milwaukee even if they never drive there.

Nothing to see here.

Oh, one more thing. Please help us to celebrate and salute the youth movement in transit. Nominate someone you know for our second annual Top 40 Under 40. The deadline is May 7, so don’t wait until the last minute to get your nominations in.

Thanks for reading the MT Position, updated every Friday. For those interested in instant updates, you can now get your latest Mass Transit fix via Twitter.

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

Check out our LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter pages!

by Mark Foss

In 2000, a friend and I rode the train from Chita, Russia to Irkutsk, Russia. The trip is roughly 1,100 kilometers (about 680 miles). We settled into a compartment that had two seats with upper levels that doubled as bunk beds at night. The bottom bunks served as seats during the day with storage under each seat. There was a short table under the window. The quarters were cramped but worked.

A person servicing the car issued us flannel-like sheets tied with string. The packet of bedding also contained a pillow case and some other smaller items. I didn’t pay much attention; I was very tired. I untied the packet and took what I wanted — throwing the rest on the table.

Since there were two of us in a car that could serve four, other travelers joined us and left us as we passed various stops along our journey. People came and went throughout the day and night. Each passenger was allotted sheets. Each was responsible for returning all of the items in the packet.

We approached our destination sometime early in the morning. When we got ready to leave, the attendant asked for our bedding. I gave her what I had. Unfortunately, I hadn’t counted the pieces the night before and I couldn’t find what was supposed to have been in the packet. The attendant made us search. In the process of searching, a police officer who was riding on the train decided to get involved. He made us search more. We still couldn’t find the items. The missing items, I think, were probably being used by some of the sleeping passengers in our compartment. The whole process began to take on a surreal feeling — lost items, police and a big ruckus.

Finally the attendant told the policeman, who didn’t really need to be involved, that it was no big deal; the officer left. Then the attendant confided that lost items were taken out of her salary. I asked her how much they cost. She gave me an amount that worked out to less than two dollars in U.S. currency. I gave plenty of rubbles to cover it. At first she declined, saying she would probably find the bedding later. I told her that, if she found it, to have a cup of tea on us. She was happy; I was happy.

On Sunday, Senator Joe Lieberman, stated that ground transport is the most vulnerable part of our transportation system. Lieberman is chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee. In the wake of the latest bombings in Moscow’s subway system, New York City increased its security on the subway system. In November of 2009, a Russian train, not unlike the one I rode on in 2000, was attacked by means of a bomb on the tracks, killing 25 people. The most recent bombing included the Lyubyanka station, located under the headquarters of the Russian Federal Security Service. The message from the terrorists seems clear. They could strike at the center of Russia — police or no police.

In America we also have good reason to be concerned by terrorist threats. They are real. Our government continues to refine its approach to address international (and home-grown) terrorist activities. It is far better to detect, intercept and prevent these activities before they get to their intended targets. But it is hard to say how to do this perfectly.

Of course, the police and the public should be vigilant. However, we must continue to live our lives freely. We are more often confronted with mundane security issues. The truth of the matter is, security personnel on ground transportation systems, bus and rail, encounter criminal activity more often than terrorist issues. Violence, drugs, theft and other bad behavior on transit property and vehicles disrupt peaceful travel.

Many years ago, before Sound Transit remodeled Seattle’s Downtown Transit Tunnel, for dual use of light rail vehicles and busses, King County ran the facility for dual mode busses. I worked as a service supervisor responsible for one of the tunnel stations. We employed off-duty Seattle police officers to work security. One of the officers, a sergeant, was particularly efficient. He would start his shift by walking the entire station both below and above ground; he would set the mood. When he observed people loitering, he would engage them in conversation. If they stayed around without catching a bus for more than an hour he would challenge their behavior. Scrutiny tended to dampen bad behavior. He would observe; he would be present.

Homeland Security training is good. Vigilant observation for potential threats is also good. At the end of the day, however, it is mundane but diligent police work (with citizen support) that creates a foundation for security.

Mark Foss has more than 24 years experience working for King County Metro Transit. His experience includes work as a bus operator, special ridership coordinator in accessible services and 1st line transit supervisor. Currently, he works as a communications coordinator in the transit control center (TCC). Contact him via LinkedIn.

The question of rail safety reared its ugly head again this week with two terrorist attacks on Russian rail systems. And the U.S. rail systems responded with what upgraded security they could, but it just won’t be enough.

If you haven’t heard there were two bombings on Russian trains this week. The first was earlier this week and the second was just a few days ago. Across the United States major rail systems increased security as a precaution, but the question remains: How does an agency protect an open system?

The quick and simple answer to this is they don’t. In reality transit agencies can’t police every section of a rail line 24/7. And with the funding crunch being the way it is, they are likely to have security stretched thinner than before.

So how does an agency protect against these attacks? By marshalling the riders. The questions shouldn’t be how does an agency protect an open system, it should be:

How do you protect an open system?

Or to lift from Smokey the Bear:

Only you can protect an open system.

And it’s true. Rider vigilance is the key to protecting most rail systems. Railfans (you know, those guys who love to take photos of trains and know everything about them) often see things that most agencies or freight rail companies overlook. Once shooed away from rail lines, they are now looked at as valuable informants about irregularities on a line.

So what do we as an industry do to protect ourselves against attacks like the ones that happened in Russia? By communicating with riders through every means at our disposal. Placards, ads, fliers, everything we can.

Want to know who sees everything? Kids. They aren’t caught up in the work day shuffle and pay attention a lot more than most adults. Make sure they get the message that it isn’t just the right thing to do to report something strange on a system, but it’s cool for them to help out.

Thank them.

Spread the word. Only we can protect our systems.

Thanks for reading the MT Position, updated every Friday. For those interested in instant updates, you can now get your latest Mass Transit fix via Twitter.

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com

Check out our LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter pages!