Zbornik radova Koridor 10 - Kirilo SaviÄ

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3rd International Scientific and Professional Conference CORRIDOR <strong>10</strong> - a sustainable way of integrations Figure 5: Interoperable Fare Management System [23] Figure 5 shows components and relations of an interoperable fare management system. The EN standard describes the components of the application necessary to support an interoperable environment: - accessing the Interoperable Public Transport Application, - data structure and presentation, - sizing and enumeration of data, - data access methodology, - security and access considerations and - dealing with legacy systems. The standard specifies sets of data in a structured form as well as the rules for dealing with those data to enable products such as tickets to be written and used on Machine Readable Card in a manner to minimize the amount of data to be held on a card. Associated with the data is the set of processes which applies to the data within the application. The inclusion of process provides for similar data to be treated in a similar way by all external services and terminals leading to true interoperability. Standard EN 15320 builds data model from data elements primarily originated in EN 1545. Data elements are grouped together in data structures of different types: mandatory (always presented), additional (data written at creation of product) and logging (changing data and log data). Data structures are combined to create 5 different types of data group: application environment, products, holder, event log and wrapper (intended specifically for migration of legacy systems). Using these 5 data groups with 4 fundamental products (Stored travel rights, Charge to account, Customer entitlement, Ticket) all functionality of ticketing in public transport can be covered. The proposed common data model is very extensive and use of optional data elements and data structures in the processes define typical implementation of a ticketing system. While the EN 15320 represents just a frame the final data model for the implementation can only be prepared after the common products and pertaining rules and processes have been defined by the public transport network manager. Using EN 15320 we must be aware that despite standardization of data elements, data structures and data groups the standard still allows partially different implementations due to optional data groups and data elements ensuing from its wide conception. At the moment there is no commercial implementation based on the EN 15320 standard but there is a long term commitment for the existing ticketing systems in Europe to migrate to EN 15320. For all these reasons we propose that Slovenia should apply the EN 15320 standard as a basis for interoperable ticketing system in public transport. Belgrade, 2012 181
3rd International Scientific and Professional Conference CORRIDOR <strong>10</strong> - a sustainable way of integrations 7. IMPLEMENTATION ANALYSIS OF TICKETING SYSTEM Before analysis of country wide use of an interoperable electronic ticket other implementations of country ticketing system were considered. Scattered population settlement with small urban centres and many isolated hilly regions don’t allow implementation of a mass transit ticketing conception. To solve an imposing problem of sporadic passengers from remote areas with usually weak technology skills, also parallel use of paper-based or ultra-light tickets was examined. Use of parallel systems makes an impact to the overall ticketing costs. Use of ultra-light tickets (chippaper ticket like MIFARE Ultralight) allows good integration of sporadic passengers in the system. Ultra-light tickets permit transaction monitoring on the account of additional costs induced by maintenance of parallel systems and keeping selling post and ticket stock at the driver in the vehicle. Introduction of ultra-light tickets seems irrational also in terms of upcoming technologies like NFC and debit/credit cards that should cover single journey passengers. The logical solution is to keep the existing paper tickets to provide a soft transition and serve for the sporadic passengers without a plastic card. This system partially loses integration of transaction management but with incentives on chip card use the amount of paper ticket users is expected to be negligible low. Good attitude of users towards chip card was additionally proved in a public survey. Coming back to the standard electronic ticket, we are faced by two feasible options bearing quick and country-wide implementation. The first option is to extend one of the existing ticketing systems now scoping on a city use and footing on a custom designed solution. The second option refers to a completely new system that needs to be developed from the scratch, based on a national standard. An option with bank cards was ruled out as a single one since it excludes a population share without their own bank account (e.g. children). It is only regarded as a supporting solution in the future. Adoption of the existing ticketing system by one provider and its extension to the whole country is favourable for its quicker implementation but on the other hand entails a dependency on a single provider imposing its own standard and development pace. It also brings big problems (and costs) in integration of new ticketing systems with existing back-office systems of transport operators. Such a closed solution may result in long-term costs rise due to exercising of a monopoly status. Standardized electronic ticketing makes an optimal solution allowing competency of all providers on the market and thereby easier integration of new technologies, better control of operation, maintenance and development costs and impact on system adaptation. This solution induces higher costs in the implementation phase for more implementation steps to be made, but the aforementioned facts make it long-term highly sustainable in long-term phases of maintenance, adaptation and HW and SW development. Ticketing system implementation costs for a transition from the existing paper based ticketing to electronic ticketing are broken down in a table 4. SW/HW/certification Option 1 Option 2 HW terminal equipment & electronic cards 1.651.600 1.651.600 Terminals and back-office SW for transport operators 3.070.000 3.120.000 Central transactions and clearing information system 900.000 900.000 Implementation of a certification centre / 500.000 Total 5.621.600 6.171.600 Table 4: Breakdown of ticketing system implementation costs (in EUR) [1] The costs are based on assumption that the electronic ticketing technology adopted by public transport management is based on MIFARE DESFIRE card. The costs of HW terminal equipment (validation, purchase, mobile terminals, SAM modules) and electronic cards are the same in both options [25]. Operators’ back-office software needs to be upgraded and connected to the central Belgrade, 2012 182
Page 1 and 2:
3rd International Scientific and Pr
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140: 3rd International Scientific and Pr
Page 189: 3rd International Scientific and Pr
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
R [m] V [km/h] n n [mm] 3rd Interna
Page 307 and 308:
QNx [%] QNx [%] 3rd International S
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325:
show all

Zbornik radova Koridor 10 - Kirilo SaviÄ

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?

Zbornik radova Koridor 10 - Kirilo SaviÄ