David,

Will the "invisible tunnel" also allow free travel within a single station? For example, right now, if I enter a turnstile, notice that it's going to be 20 minutes until the next train, and exit the station so that I can walk instead, I get charged. Considering that I'm not using the trains, though, that cancelled trip should be free, or at least face a very minimal fee. If Metro is worried about people joy-riding the system all day, then they could have cancelled trips only be free if you're in the station for less than 3 minutes.

by tom veil on May 5, 2009 10:24 am • link • report

Tom, I think the PIDs they installed outside the fare gates were to allow people to know how long the wait would be before "committing" by going down to the platform. Based on that, I'd guess that we're not going to see the charge for exiting the same station you enter disappear - which is a pain, because I tend to be pretty absent minded; also you can miss a train just waiting for those PIDs to go from displaying systemwide elevator outages to displaying local arrival times.

by Lucre on May 5, 2009 10:42 am • link • report

The second set of numbers is total ridership, not absolute change in ridership.

by Ben Ross on May 5, 2009 10:44 am • link • report

How does the "invisible tunnel" work? Why would anyone walk from Metro center to Gallery and vice versa when they could just ride the one extra stop and do the transfer? Maybe I don't ride enough to understand the need for this.

by cbr on May 5, 2009 11:45 am • link • report

The PIDs are a good idea in theory, but their implementation has been all wrong. Nine times out of ten, when I look up at a PID, I see a long scrolling list of stations with elevator outages. This is important information, but does not belong on a PID. The PID should be reserved for train arrival times and emergency messages, things that are time sensitive. The elavator outages should be posted on a board near the entrance, but they don't need to be clogging up the PID system.

As for the posting of PIDs outside of the fare gates, a good start, but to be truly effective they need to be outside of the stations themselves. Metro is known for its long and slow escalators, and getting to the bottom, only to then find that there is a 20 minute wait for a train, is annoying to say the least.

by tivonia on May 5, 2009 12:01 pm • link • report

@tom

I've never understood why the put the digital signs down in the tunnel anyway; you've already paid your fare, you're going to catch the next train. However, if the signs were at the top of the escalators one could decide to run an errand or two before catching the train. But that's just me.

by MarkM on May 5, 2009 12:07 pm • link • report

Psychological research shows that if people can see how long the wait will be, they perceive it to be less than if they don't know. Therefore, even if people will wait for the train regardless, having the signs makes passengers believe the trains are more frequent and more reliable.

by David Alpert on May 5, 2009 12:09 pm • link • report

While I am too annoyed at the constant elevator SPAM on the PIDs, I can not sympathize with people who are disappointed after a long escalator ride. However, did you know that metro actually allows you to check all PIDs online?

http://www.wmata.com/rider_tools/pids/real_time_arrivals.cfm

So, for everybody with a PDA, you can bookmark your stations and check your PID just before you go down that long escalator. It's amazingly accurate, and a great help, even at rush hour.

And yes, I said SPAM. PIDs should only display arrival times. Metro should install other information boards elsewhere to display tips, delays, game day info, elevator outages, escalator outage and whatever else they feel a need displaying. Preferably some large flat screens so they can display more than on the PIDs.

by Jasper on May 5, 2009 12:10 pm • link • report

Metro is working on something called Metro TV which I believe will replace the PIDs with displays that can show a lot more info. Unfortunately, we don't have more details.

by David Alpert on May 5, 2009 12:11 pm • link • report

@ Dave: I don't want other crap on the PIDs. Just arrival times please.

by Jasper on May 5, 2009 12:14 pm • link • report

I think it's irrelevant where the PIDs are to the question of whether you should get money refunded if you enter and there are delays. 3 minutes or 20 minutes at same station should be a refund. It's not like in 20 minutes you can go somewhere else and return, unless you have a very sophisticated system of swapping fare cards with a buddy 1 or 2 stations away.

by ah on May 5, 2009 12:19 pm • link • report

Jasper,

What about those of us that don't have a PDA?

by Art on May 5, 2009 12:25 pm • link • report

ah; I suppose there's some sense in charging a "fine" for adding momentary unnecessary platform congestion.

by Lucre on May 5, 2009 12:30 pm • link • report

@Lucre:

Whatever, when there's a 20-minute headway there's little to speak of in terms of platform congestion.

Not a big supporter of charging for congestion for things that aren't really congested.

by Michael Perkins on May 5, 2009 12:43 pm • link • report

Lucre, perhaps, but by that rationale everyone entering the station should be charged that fee (tax?) as well. You're not "using" the system when you don't take a train.

by ah on May 5, 2009 12:47 pm • link • report

cbr,

It's mainly for when you are transfering between orange/blue and green/yellow (say from Foggy Bottom to U Street). If you can walk between the two stations, you can skip the red line transfer or the riding four extra stations by transfering at L'Enfant

by Steven on May 5, 2009 12:47 pm • link • report

I agree with most of the commenters on PID SPAM--just the arrival times, please, unless there are very rare circumstances. I'd also add that most of the PID SPAM messages are rather verbose, sometimes taking two or three screenfulls to display, when better editing could cut it down to one screen.

But I have a question: does anyone who needs to use an elevator actually rely on the PID SPAM for elevator outage information? I'd think that those who need the elevator would either call or check online and not try to rely on either the PID or the station-wide announcements. Is there anyone for whom the PID SPAM is actually useful?

by thm on May 5, 2009 12:50 pm • link • report

@cbr The invisible tunnel for farragut would be very welcome actually. When transferring from the eastbound orange to a westbound red line, riding the extra 3 stops including the transfer at metro center can waste time when the farragut west and farragut north station entrances are literally a block apart. I've done it before and it saved me a good 5 minutes, which can mean the difference between being on time to an appointment or catching a bus.

by Mark on May 5, 2009 12:58 pm • link • report

@ Art: You'll just have to go down that loooong escalator and look at the PID in the hallway. I know. Life sucks. Or you can check online. WMATA might even have the train schedules somewhere in paper. But obviously, that's not as current as real time info.

I was just giving a tip on how to get your info. Here in downtown, I see very few people without a Blackberry, iPhone, or Palm. All those folks can check their departure times easily.

I wouldn't mind a PID outside a station. However, I am sure that NIMBY folks can think of many arguments why outside PIDs would cause their neighborhood to turn into a living hell.

by Jasper on May 5, 2009 1:11 pm • link • report

Michael, ah

I don't really see the justification either, and I sure as heck don't like it, but it's as near I can come to understanding why it's there. I really doubt that the energy it takes to open and close a faregate, and air condition your one-person's-more-body-heat justifies a charge of nearly a buck and a half.

Could it be to discourage panhandling captive audiences on platforms?

When I first moved to Washington, I thought using the tunnel as a shortcut that was sheltered from the rain seemed like a good idea; that "non-use" adds platform congestion without regard for how soon the next train arrives. Does the fare structure represent consciousness of people like me?

by Lucre on May 5, 2009 1:13 pm • link • report

Lucre -- I assume the original justification was that they really couldn't program the card readers any other way--basically you were charged the minimum fare--and that carried over to smart trip.

by ah on May 5, 2009 1:18 pm • link • report

Oh, and the panhandling issue is easily prevented by placing a time limit on the exit, as they do with transfers (except it could be less).

by ah on May 5, 2009 1:19 pm • link • report

Awesome, thanks for posting that! I tried to get the ridership numbers a few months ago from WMATA and what they gave me wasn't usable. I'm not surprised that CH is number 1.

by Andrew on May 5, 2009 3:09 pm • link • report

Why not just stick the pids on top of the obelisk outside of the stations. It can be a bitch no matter how you put it to walk down the escalators at say Woodley Park, Bethesda, or Van Ness and then see a sign that says next train 10, 15 or 20 minutes depending on where you were going you could have walked there, or caught a bus in time it takes to wait for the train.

I understand where people are coming from where they dont want the pids outside but I say put it at places with long esclators and at entrances where there are buses stopping at ( Metro Center 11 & G , Gallery Place 7th & H, all stations between Dupont Circle & Bethesda, Eastern Market, Union Station etc).

Perhaps we could have giant screens on the sides of stations where the platforms are next to the wall where different sections of the screen could show different things.

@ thm

I have seen people and know people that have used the pids to find out the info. Checking online or calling wouldn't help much as there would still need to be info in the station; say a person calls or checks online before the leave where they are something could change in the time between when they checked and when they get to the station.

Everybody isn't going to waste minutes on the phone to keep calling WMATA some might not have mobile phones or internet so that would be a disadvantage to them.

by Kk on May 5, 2009 3:41 pm • link • report

Jasper,

That's generally what I do, although I wish that the PID displays were larger at Metro Center, they can only display information on 3 trains, and when you've got 6 trains (or 8 at L') to keep track of, it ends up with people not knowing when their next train is going to arrive.

I would be all for having the PID's above ground, so that I could know before I head down into the station that it would be quicker to hop on the S9.

by Art on May 5, 2009 3:51 pm • link • report

I think the invisible tunnel thing would be pretty useless. Yes, the walk between the Farragut stations is pretty small, but when you take into account walking across the platform, up the escalator, across the square, down the escalator and across the platform again, never mind congestion and faregates, it's not worth it.

It would, however, make sense for streetcars or other above-ground transportation where you don't have to go up and down escalators ... like buses do (do light rail systems do this?).

Then again, I guess implementing the capability wouldn't really hurt.

by Tim on May 5, 2009 4:56 pm • link • report

I make the orange to green transfer going from Ballston to College Park every day. I've tried exiting at Metro Center and walking to Gallery Place. It doesn't save too much time (a few minutes if you're lucky) but on an hour long train ride it's nice to get some fresh air. I see no reason to not enable walking transfers for stations that are within a certain (say quarter mile) distance from one another.

by Chris Seay on May 5, 2009 5:04 pm • link • report

They should change the PID's to 2 "frames"

Top frame

Shady Grove 2 Mins

No Passenger

Shady Grove 10 mins

Bottom frame

--->Escalator outage @ Dupont--->

by WestIndianArchie on May 5, 2009 5:58 pm • link • report

I heard somewhere that an actual tunnel connecting the two farraguts already exists, or half-exists. How cool would it be to connect them and make it 'Farragut Square'?

by Nomad on May 6, 2009 12:06 pm • link • report

Close, Nomad, but your friend might be confusing two things. There is a rail spur that connects the "A route" to the "C route" for moving railcars around.

All that exists for pedestrians are removable panels in both stations, where the tunnel under the street will someday enter the stations.

by цarьchitect on May 6, 2009 12:32 pm • link • report

I thought the charge for entering and leaving the same station was to prevent fare cheating by using two cards for round trips, using one card for both entering and leaving station A, and the other card for both entering and leaving station B.

by David desJardins on May 18, 2009 2:59 am • link • report