🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <wb8fozDssFv7.4ID@netcom.com>,
wb8foz@netcom.com (David Lesher) wrote:

>mmitchel@libertynet.org (Matthew Mitchell) writes:
>
>
>>POP (proof of payment) for short
>
>>>That might work on the L.A. Metro, where I imagine there's very light
>>>ridership, but I could anticipate chaos if New York went to the same
>>>system.
>
>>Not necessarily.  The inspections can also be done on the platform, as
>>people are waiting and as people queue at the exits.
>
>But this defeats the basic advantage of a POP system. Look at
>Baltimore LR; you don't have ""a"" exit -- rather open the doors
>& let'em out.... No choke point.

See above.  I was speaking about NYC.  And yes, Harvey, I've seen the TA in
Manhattan at 8:30 in the morning.  I've commuted to Manhattan.  Trolleys in
some cities of Europe are just as crowded.

You need not inspect the tickets of every single person for the POP
enforcement to be effective.  As the system works in an underground system,
there is a token barrier (something putting up little or no obstruction,
not a barrier you put a token in) at the entrances to the platform.  When
you pass by that, there is a sign saying that you must have POP to go any
further and if not you are subject to fine.  Since the capital cost of the
'barriers' is minimal, and the operating cost is zero (compared to
servicing a turnstile/ pass reader), you can put in a whole lot more--short
queues at the exits.

The practice in most cities is for POP inspectors to work in teams.  In
NYC, you just have to make the teams larger.



    /_\      Matthew Mitchell, Newsletter Editor
   /[ ]\     Delaware Valley Association of Railroad Passengers
  /  |  \    PO Box 7505, Philadelphia PA 19101-7505
 /  _|_  \   voice: 215-673-6445-message box 3, fax 215-885-7448
 ---------   http://www.libertynet.org/~dvarp