The TfL ticket machines are a UX disaster. Being a London native I am very comfortable with the transport system and how it works and how to get around etc, but fuck me the machines are an incomprehensible mess. They present so much information at once in small text - this popup is a good example, lots to read but you are in a rush to get somewhere and there are 25 impatient other people in the line behind you.
I now just always tell people to just tap in with their phone.
That does indeed sound enticing, but I also really like the Deutsche Bahn ticket machines: not only do these have options for the most usual tickets, they also have the full journey planner system built in. That means you can purchase tickets valid across multiple fare zones - like the National Rail website in Great Britain, but in a vending machine! Additionally, you can use this to find information in advance, like what the platform for arrival will be, which can save some time when making connections.
If you're going to put a touchscreen on something, you might as well do it properly! :)
I find staff are even better for journey planning. Shame we've mostly replaced them with machines
Now we get to stand there tapping 13 times because the touchscreen sucks. And worry about being taken to court because the machine was broken. Yes "most" people have phones but public transport needs to cater to all
Last ticket machine I used was at Stafford, tap the "Birmingham" button, Offpeak return, tap phone on the pad, ticket prints.
Obviously that one was well maintained as the touchscreen was calibrated correctly. But old machines used to be broken too.
If you want a ticket to say Gloucester from Stafford then it's something like "other, g, l, Gloucester, Offpeak return, tap phone". The old style physical machines wouldn't sell a ticket to anywhere other than a few locations.
The point this story is trying to make is that the machines themselves are unnecessary - just tap in with your normal contactless credit card, debit card, oyster, or phone to get the best fare.
I disagree the machines are not needed. Often when it comes to the railway people argue for things that conveniently ignore edge cases and pretend public transport isn't for all the public. Our railway system is incredibly complicated.
Maybe this is fixed, but they used to not even give you the cheapest ticket in all cases. I've used one for travelling just outside the oyster zone, and it recommended me a ticket that was 2x the price of the daily travel card to that location.
I always say to just use your bank card instead of your phone as that is much faster than phone. Always waiting for people getting there phone ready at the gates.
I mean, if I was running TfL, I might be tempted to make the ticket machines difficult to use, to discourage people from using them. From TfL’s pov, it is always preferable for people to use contactless.
(I was in Lisbon recently, and am convinced that that was going on there; there was no possible reason for the ticket machines to be so awkward to use, other than deliberate deterrence.)
Yeah this info, very condensed, should just be on big signs at station. ”You can just tap your credit card and travel, no need to do anything else at all”.
Which is also how it _should_ work.
Of course seniors, kids, period tickets etc are always going to be messy but at least describe the base case: single journey adult - what do I need to do?
> Yeah this info, very condensed, should just be on big signs at station. ”You can just tap your credit card and travel, no need to do anything else at all”.
This messaging is all over TfL stations and advertising. If you're stood at a London train or Underground stop for any length of time, you're likely to hear the overhead tannoy repeating a message about how convenient contactless cards are, and how they charge the same (cheapest) fare as the official Oyster system.
It's a testament to how hard telling people anything is, that having a popup on the ticket machine is still effective.
I’d interpret ”Constactless card” as some form of RF variant of a traditional ticket card. Not as a way of describing your regular visa/mastercard debit/credit cards. Is “contactless card” a normal way of describing a debit/credit card? Can’t any rf card be said to be contactless?
The big revolution elsewhere was the transition from RF based ticket cards to RF based regular credit/debit cards. They’re both “contactless” though but one is s a hassle.
I never heard the term EMV either and had to Google it now. I think my point is: for signs, use stupidly simple language, understandable by everyone. These signs are for tourists perhaps more than Londoners.
The constant reference to “Oyster cards” for 20 years without specifying that “yeah that’s codespeak for ticket” was a very similar UX failure. They should have called them the 3 seashells…
Everywhere seems to have a name for their equivalent of Oyster cards though. The bay area has Clipper cards, and the seattle area has Orca cards.
Conactless cards includes those (but your Orca card probably doesn't work in London...) and credit/debit cards, and your phone if that's how you roll.
Not every credit/debit card includes contactless yet, afaik, telling people they can just use their credit card when there's no way to swipe or insert is going to lead to confusion and delay at the entrance gates.
Yeah I think if a sign says you can use your contactless credit card or “touch your credit card at the gate” or some language like that, then it should be clear enough.
With validity of credit cards being <5 years you’d think we are at 100% now having no magnetic strip. Perhaps cards issued in some countries do have magnetic strip (but hopefully 100% have contactless too)
"I now just always tell people to just tap in with their phone."
This is all very well but what happens if you have no phone, or it's just been lost, or you left it at home? What happens if there's no credit and you thought there was?
And what happens if you've only cash and or you're a visitor who doesn't know the system and only wants a once-off one-way ticket? And why should one have to top up a card for a once-off journey (how does one recover the residual funds and or how much does the System rake off because residual amounts are too difficult to redeam)?
These systems work for the cognoscenti who know both the system and the workings of their phone but little thought is given to those who don't or when the system breaks down.
Let me give you an instance, I often use a feature/dumb phone and I deliberately do not have a Google account (or any accounts other than the phone number itself) on my smartphone.
Why should I be forced to comply and be spyed on by Google et all just to get a rail ticket which people have done without difficulty for over 150 years?
> What happens if there's no credit and you thought there was
Initial authorization only takes £0.10 and is there to validate your card is active.
The actual charge gets applied 24h later and can overdraw even an account with no arranged overdraft through a transport-only exception with the card networks.
In the end it means you only need 0.10£ to travel for 24 hours, and can keep doing so as long as you fund your account before the initial 24h period (if you fail and it declines it'll retry up to a few days, and there's a way to make it retry online - until it succeeds, that particular card will get refused at the barriers).
The system is used by millions of people per day - and it's these people who pay for it. They don't want to pay for any combination of "what ifs".
As a commuter there I'm sorry, but I'd rather have saved a few quid a month on my ticket than pay for some tourist who can't figure out a credit/debit card despite travelling to one of the world's most expensive cities.
150 years ago you could lose a paper ticket or leave it at home, or it could have been out-of-date when you thought it wasn't, and you'd also be walking.
> 150 years ago you could lose a paper ticket... you'd also be walking.
150 years ago was 1874. Although printed tickets were well and truly established by this point, buying tickets from the conductor was also common. So perhaps you would not be walking home?
The key issue is human engineering and ergonomics which are all too often overlooked by over zealous advocates of new technology.
These issues are not just 'what ifs' but actual problems for a significant percentage of the population, and it's simply discrimination to ignore these people.
For example, a personal instance: I live in Sydney and only last Thursday, I needed to top up the credit on my equivalent of London's
Oyster card (which we copied) and I went to the only machine on Central Station's Grand Concourse only to find that it refused to read three brand new $50 bills (each bill was inserted multiple times and rejected). I then went to the nearby information centre where each of the three persons in the booths had a sign in front saying 'no cash accepted.' I was then told that except for the machine that the Station did not take cash and to top up the card with cash that I had to go to independent shops which were technically outside the Station's precinct.
Frankly, that's a fucking outrageous situation. The Government still issues cash as legal tender, and yet the main railway station in Australia's biggest city won't take cash for a ticket. Keep in mind Central Station is not [yet] run by private enterprise but by the NSW State Government!
BTW, I am no Luddite, I've worked in high tech for years. In fact, I ran the IT Operation for a Government Department [so I'm well acquainted with the ways of bureaucracy], and the rude awakening one has in such a job is that tech that's seemingly straightforward for most people and certainly a no-brainer for technical people—and of course those 'selling' the tech—is actually a problem for a percentage of the population. In fact that percentage can be typically as high as 15%.
If you think this 15% of the population should be relegated to a Soylent Green - like solution then that's your prerogative but it's certainly not mine.
As tech becomes more advanced this dichotomy will become even more pronounced and unless taken into account then social disruption could easily result. (I know this message isn't popular with tech elites—as witnessed by those who down-voted my original comment—but shooting the messenger won't solve anything.)
If you're in tech then you ought to take cognizance of these issues.
I now just always tell people to just tap in with their phone.