MTA Technology

Approximately a year ago, the MTA announced an expansion of their On The Go kiosks. As part of a creative advertising arrangement in which the MTA would shell out no dollars and draw in money after a certain threshold, two licensees — CBS Outdoor and Control Group Inc. — will foot the bill for installation and earn back the costs off of the ads they can sell. In exchange, the MTA gets touch-screen kiosks installed throughout the subway system and a cut of they money once the two companies recoup their initial investments.

Recently, the first batch of screens have popped up in Grand Central, and Gizmodo profiled the work behind building a computer sturdy enough to withstand the rigors of the subway. As with many things MTA, this is a story about false starts and delayed promises. Mario Aguilar writes:

The initial plan for the kiosks was to populate the city’s busiest stations, to help make the dynamic and often confusing system a little easier to work with. By the end of 2013, however, Control Group had only managed to install a single testing unit at Bowling Green station, near the company’s headquarters across from City Hall. After a 30-day trial period, it was apparent that everything from the hardware to the user interface had to be improved before the units would be ready to meet the needs of millions of commuters. “We wanted a better experience,” says Control Group partner Colin O’Donnell, “and we were willing to wait for it.”

Unfortunately, there’s no such thing as a minor course adjustment when it comes a massive agency like MTA. “It’s a behemoth,” says O’Donnell. Moving millions of passengers every day necessitates a certain amount of bureaucracy, and when every last person in that bureaucracy needs to sign off on a decision, approving something as simple as a hardware change can take, well, six months.

O’Donnell says that the initial run’s core problem was the touchscreen it had chosen. The prototype we tried last year used a surface outfitted with 3M’s dispersive signal technology (DST), which calculates the position of a touch on a screen by sensing the vibrations the touch creates. It’s rugged and cost-effective, but also a bit clumsy…User testing proved that people found the firm pokes unintuitive, but more importantly it turned out that subway stations are full of vibration-causing ambient noise and rumbling trains—no kidding!—which confused the touchscreen’s contact microphones and drastically undermined performance. As one staffer put it, the tech worked well in Control Group’s lab on the 21st floor of a skyscraper, but simply didn’t cut it underground with the trains rumbling by.

It’s worth reading Aguilar’s entire piece as it provides a rare glimpse into why technology takes forever to spread throughout the MTA’s vast system. We often scoff at the notion that the world underneath the city is a challenging one and question why simple tasks such as escalator repair can take so long. But as Control Group’s experiences show, it isn’t easy building something that can stand up to 24-hour use, and the dirt, dust, debris and vibrations of the transit network under our feet.

As the video shows, these things aren’t perfect. I haven’t used them yet, but the navigation looks clunky and the touch aspect sensitive. Furthermore, MTA’s own Trip Planner, the underlying software for the navigation system, for instance, isn’t perfect. The system routes people standing on the IRT platform at Grand Central to the 7 and Q for a ride out to Coney Island when the intuitive trip would involve an express ride to Atlantic Ave. and a transfer. Still, it’s a start, and hopefully, with the promises of revenue based on user engagement, these will only get better with time.

The update to the MTA’s SubwayTime app includes real-time information for trains on the L line.

L train riders, rejoice: The MTA’s real-time subway tracking app and developer feeds have been updated today with location information for the BMT Canarsie line. The update was originally due by the end of 2013, but missing a deadline by two weeks seems minor in the grand scheme of things. With the latest update to the MTA’s own iOS app and the web-based interface as well as the open-data feeds for third-party developers, L train riders can find out how long — or short — their waits will be before heading underground.

For the MTA, this is the first upgrade to the Subway Time app, and while the design or scrolling experience haven’t improved, the data available now includes arrival time estimates for eight of the city’s subway routes. Unfortunately, it’s also likely to be the last update for a few years. The CBTC signal project currently underway on the 7 line is expected to wrap in 2016, and the Flushing line could be added thereafter. The MTA is still eying a three- to five-year rollout of some sort of digital tracking system on the remainder of the lettered lines, but it’s unclear if the agency can meet that deadline.

In any event, today’s upgrade is a welcome one, even if it underscores the time we’ll have to wait for information on the rest of the system’s trains at the same time.

Citymapper, a iOS app that uses real-time transit information and up-to-date service advisories to provide its users with a wealth of travel information within the five boroughs, won a $20,000 prize in the MTA and AT&T’s 2013 App Quest contest, the agency announced today. The app comes with a web component and can even tell users how many calories they’ve burned on a trip throughout the city. It’s not quite transformational or quirky, but it works.

This year’s App Quest launched in May and featured 49 submissions. My personal favorite in terms of creativity was an Android app called MetroNap that uses motion sensors to wake up the user when he or she reaches a destination. It did not walk away with a prize though from the panel of nine members of the city’s burgeoning tech and V.C. industry.

In addition to Citymapper, five other apps walked away with cash prizes. Subculture.FM allows uses to get more information on the artists who participate in the Music Under New York program; Transit App, my current go-to for train arrival times and trip instructions, took home $5000. Accessway, an accessibility app for visually impaired riders, and Bus NYC, which taps into the BusTime API, garnered honorable mentions, and Moovit, yet another mapping app, was the winner of the popular vote.

“The app developers who competed in this challenge have shown that they have the know-how, the enthusiasm, and the energy to do great things with the open data we and others provide,” Thomas Prendergast, MTA Chairman and CEO, said. “And we are glad that so many in the tech community have put their efforts into helping the MTA, and, more importantly, our customers. That’s why we are going to continue to expand the amount of open data we provide.”

Once again, the MTA, with a fiscal assist from AT&T, decided to outsource app programming to the benefit of the riders, and we have a new series of apps to use, enjoy and, sometimes, delete. Check out all of the submissions right here.

Apologies for the short post tonight. I have an early morning meeting on Wednesday, but I’ll be back with a new edition of the podcast, among others, later on this morning.

When the MTA dismissed an arbitrator who has often sided with the TWU in resolving disputes, an old issue reared its head. In discussing Richard Adelman’s past rulings, I noted that he had stopped one-person train operation on the L train back in 2005. It was but one story in the MTA’s never-ending saga to see through some form of OPTO in the New York City subway system.

As is often the case when OPTO comes out, a debate over its future arose in the comments. I’ve long believed that OPTO is a necessity in some form or another if the MTA is to realize significant cost savings on the labor front. Although the initial capital costs at readying the system for OPTO may be challenging, the year over year savings would more than justify the initial outlay. The trick in implementing such a system would be in identifying the proper form. Does OPTO make sense on the Lexington Ave. trains at rush hour? Does it make sense on the Brighton Line during the weekend? The answer may not be the same to both questions.

The opponents of OPTO — union workers who stand to lose their jobs — are strong though, and they’ve run the table on this argument for years. On the one hand, OPTO is a tough sell from the MTA. They’re basically telling everyone that there will be fewer employees on train cars, and the psychology of such a stick without a corresponding carrot is a tough one to swallow. On the other, those who oppose OPTO have made their case and stick to it.

Essentially, the opposition breaks down as follows:

1. New York City’s subway system is older than other systems that use OPTO, and its platforms are too curvy. It’s trains are longer; it wasn’t built for OPTO.
2. It’s not safe for passengers and leads to delays. Imagine how long it would a T.O./conductor to walk from the first car to the last in the event of a problem.
3. It’s not safe for the T.O./Conductor and puts too much stress on them.

The first argument is New York exceptionalism at its finest. If it wasn’t invented in New York, then we can’t have it, and clearly, we’ll never be able to have it. It’s also the weakest of the arguments. There are automated lines in the Paris Metro and OPTO in place in similar systems to ours. It’s simply a matter of will and ingenuity, and it wouldn’t even take much to see it through. New York is exceptional in some ways but not in this regard.

The other two are legitimate concerns that prevent the public from getting behind OPTO, and this is where implementation would have to be done delicately and properly. An in-car intercom system would have to be developed; better security responses would have to be created. Again, it’s a challenge, but it’s not insurmountable. Meanwhile, moving conductors out of the train cars would allow the MTA to place some on platforms for crowd control purposes or others in stations as agents. Not all would have to be dismissed.

In this safety argument lies the delicate balancing act the MTA needs to execute to see through OPTO. It’s not right for every train line at every moment in time. It likely wouldn’t be a smart move for peak-hour trains along the most crowded of routes but certainly could be effective nearly everywhere on the weekends. It wouldn’t have to lead to more delays or more problems and could help the MTA free up operating money for other purposes.

Ultimately, this is hardly a scientific study on the costs and benefits for OPTO. I’m almost thinking off the cuff here, but it’s a conversation worth revisiting. Ultimately, the MTA should be working toward automation where possible, and OPTO is a good first step. If anything, it can cut down on unnecessary labor costs. But we’re stuck in this rut. It didn’t happen first in New York City so it can’t happen here.