November 4, 2026 — New results from New York and San Francisco's BART show why modern fare gates are being evaluated on revenue protection, accessibility and operating performance rather than on hardware alone.
Modern fare gates are attracting attention for a measurable reason: their performance after installation. On October 7, 2026, New York State announced that fare evasion had fallen by an average of 35% across 20 subway stations participating in a modern fare gate pilot. Two stations recorded reductions of 72%, and a further 20 stations were named for the next installation phase. Together with BART's completed systemwide replacement, these results give transit operators and system integrators concrete evidence for entrance upgrade planning.
| Project Indicator | Reported Result | Scope and Qualification |
|---|---|---|
| New York subway pilot coverage | 20 stations | Some stations received complete fare gate arrays; others received only a new wide-aisle gate |
| Average fare evasion reduction | 35% | Reported across pilot stations, not the entire subway network |
| Largest reported reductions | 72% at two stations | Recorded at Hoyt St and Nostrand Av |
| Recorded pilot usage | About 29 million entries and 34 million exits | Cumulative passage counts since the pilot began |
| BART replacement programme | 715 new fare gates across 50 stations | Systemwide installation completed in August 2025 |
| BART estimated revenue benefit | About US$10 million annually | Preliminary annual estimate reported in September 2026 |
Sources: New York State announcement distributed through PublicNow and official BART publications. The projects use different reporting periods and measures; the figures are not a direct performance comparison.
New York's evaluation went well beyond whether a gate opened and closed correctly. It examined fare evasion, accessibility, customer experience, entry and exit throughput, maintenance, integration, and data and detection accuracy, with technology adjusted during the pilot in response to performance results and passenger feedback. For suppliers, these criteria highlight the importance of demonstrating how equipment performs under real operating conditions.
A fast opening time alone does not establish passenger throughput. The complete journey includes credential reading, authorisation, gate movement and the passenger's passage through the lane, and luggage, wheelchairs and groups can all affect how an entrance performs. Our assessment: suppliers able to support realistic passage testing, clear integration procedures and practical maintenance planning will explain long-term value to buyers far more convincingly.
BART's official project information describes tall swing barriers and mechanical locking mechanisms designed to discourage pushing through, jumping over and crawling under the gates. The same equipment uses sensors to detect wheelchair users and passengers travelling with luggage, strollers or bicycles, while lighting and audible signals communicate when passage is available. For project planners, this illustrates the central design challenge: security, safety and accessibility have to work together. A taller barrier requires careful attention to detection coverage and movement control; a wider lane needs suitable passage logic; and an effective entrance must also account for emergency operation and its connection to surrounding barriers.
| Purchasing Priority | What to Confirm With the Supplier |
|---|---|
| Tailgating and forced entry | Detection behaviour, alarm outputs, locking design and proposed test conditions |
| Accessible passage | Clear passage width and testing with wheelchairs, strollers and luggage |
| Peak-hour throughput | Measured performance including credential reading, authorisation and passenger movement |
| System integration | Interfaces, reader compatibility and responsibilities during commissioning |
| Maintenance | Fault records, component replacement procedures, spare parts and remote support |
| Emergency operation | Fire alarm integration, power-loss behaviour and applicable local evacuation requirements |
These are project selection recommendations, not a common technical specification adopted by the operators mentioned above.
BART reported preliminary indications that reduced fare evasion could generate about US$10 million in additional annual revenue. Its announcement also described the combined role of new gates and visible police patrols, so operational improvements should not be attributed entirely to gate hardware. Other operators will need to calculate potential returns using their own passenger volumes, fare levels, existing losses, installation costs and maintenance requirements. Even so, the latest results give procurement a clear direction: evaluate a fare gate across its operating life, including reliability, passenger experience, revenue protection and serviceability.
Share your lane layout, peak passenger demand, credential requirements and installation environment with our team to discuss a suitable turnstile configuration and integration approach.
November 4, 2026 — New results from New York and San Francisco's BART show why modern fare gates are being evaluated on revenue protection, accessibility and operating performance rather than on hardware alone.
Modern fare gates are attracting attention for a measurable reason: their performance after installation. On October 7, 2026, New York State announced that fare evasion had fallen by an average of 35% across 20 subway stations participating in a modern fare gate pilot. Two stations recorded reductions of 72%, and a further 20 stations were named for the next installation phase. Together with BART's completed systemwide replacement, these results give transit operators and system integrators concrete evidence for entrance upgrade planning.
| Project Indicator | Reported Result | Scope and Qualification |
|---|---|---|
| New York subway pilot coverage | 20 stations | Some stations received complete fare gate arrays; others received only a new wide-aisle gate |
| Average fare evasion reduction | 35% | Reported across pilot stations, not the entire subway network |
| Largest reported reductions | 72% at two stations | Recorded at Hoyt St and Nostrand Av |
| Recorded pilot usage | About 29 million entries and 34 million exits | Cumulative passage counts since the pilot began |
| BART replacement programme | 715 new fare gates across 50 stations | Systemwide installation completed in August 2025 |
| BART estimated revenue benefit | About US$10 million annually | Preliminary annual estimate reported in September 2026 |
Sources: New York State announcement distributed through PublicNow and official BART publications. The projects use different reporting periods and measures; the figures are not a direct performance comparison.
New York's evaluation went well beyond whether a gate opened and closed correctly. It examined fare evasion, accessibility, customer experience, entry and exit throughput, maintenance, integration, and data and detection accuracy, with technology adjusted during the pilot in response to performance results and passenger feedback. For suppliers, these criteria highlight the importance of demonstrating how equipment performs under real operating conditions.
A fast opening time alone does not establish passenger throughput. The complete journey includes credential reading, authorisation, gate movement and the passenger's passage through the lane, and luggage, wheelchairs and groups can all affect how an entrance performs. Our assessment: suppliers able to support realistic passage testing, clear integration procedures and practical maintenance planning will explain long-term value to buyers far more convincingly.
BART's official project information describes tall swing barriers and mechanical locking mechanisms designed to discourage pushing through, jumping over and crawling under the gates. The same equipment uses sensors to detect wheelchair users and passengers travelling with luggage, strollers or bicycles, while lighting and audible signals communicate when passage is available. For project planners, this illustrates the central design challenge: security, safety and accessibility have to work together. A taller barrier requires careful attention to detection coverage and movement control; a wider lane needs suitable passage logic; and an effective entrance must also account for emergency operation and its connection to surrounding barriers.
| Purchasing Priority | What to Confirm With the Supplier |
|---|---|
| Tailgating and forced entry | Detection behaviour, alarm outputs, locking design and proposed test conditions |
| Accessible passage | Clear passage width and testing with wheelchairs, strollers and luggage |
| Peak-hour throughput | Measured performance including credential reading, authorisation and passenger movement |
| System integration | Interfaces, reader compatibility and responsibilities during commissioning |
| Maintenance | Fault records, component replacement procedures, spare parts and remote support |
| Emergency operation | Fire alarm integration, power-loss behaviour and applicable local evacuation requirements |
These are project selection recommendations, not a common technical specification adopted by the operators mentioned above.
BART reported preliminary indications that reduced fare evasion could generate about US$10 million in additional annual revenue. Its announcement also described the combined role of new gates and visible police patrols, so operational improvements should not be attributed entirely to gate hardware. Other operators will need to calculate potential returns using their own passenger volumes, fare levels, existing losses, installation costs and maintenance requirements. Even so, the latest results give procurement a clear direction: evaluate a fare gate across its operating life, including reliability, passenger experience, revenue protection and serviceability.
Share your lane layout, peak passenger demand, credential requirements and installation environment with our team to discuss a suitable turnstile configuration and integration approach.
