AVL Systems for Bus Transit: Update (2008) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 13-43
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 13... ...
13 This chapter summarizes results from the synthesis survey. Question 1.
|
From page 14... ...
14 TABLE 1 SURVEY RESPONDENTS Region Name and Title of Respondent Transit Agency Name Fixed-Route Fleet Size Category Paratransit Fleet Size Category CAN/EUR Steve Lassey, Program Manager, ITS OC Transpo 901–1,200 CAN/EUR Rajeev Roy, Manager, TMS York Region Transit 101–300 CAN/EUR Kimmo Sinisalo, IT Manager YTV (Helsinki Metropolitan Area Council) 601–900 E Renee Mosura, Technology Manager Beaver County (PA)
|
From page 15... ...
15 TABLE 1 (Continued) Region Name and Title of Respondent Transit Agency Name Fixed-Route Fleet Size Category Paratransit Fleet Size Category MW John Cullen, Technical Transit Authority of River City (KY)
|
From page 16... ...
16 TABLE 3 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT STATUS Status % In revenue service and is being currently enhanced 56.3 In revenue service and is not being currently enhanced 28.1 Being implemented 6.3 Being procured 6.3 Being planned 3.1 No current interest 0.0 TABLE 4 TECHNOLOGIES INVOLVED IN CURRENT SYSTEM ENHANCEMENTS Technologies % GPS Receivers 43.8 Operator Display/Keypad 40.6 APC 37.5 Covert Alarm Monitoring 37.5 AVL Software for Fixed-Route Operations 37.5 Next Arrival Predictions via Signs at Stops 37.5 Fixed-Route Scheduling Software Integration 34.4 Covert Microphone Monitoring 31.3 WLAN Integration 31.3 Onboard Computer 28.1 Interior Next Stop Announcements 28.1 Next Arrival Predictions via Website 28.1 Odometer Integration 25.0 Headsign Integration 25.0 Mobile Radio Integration 25.0 Paratransit Scheduling/Dispatch Software Integration 25.0 Next Arrival Predictions via Automated Telephone System 25.0 Transit Signal Priority 21.9 Next Arrival Predictions via Website, for Access with Mobile Personal Devices 21.9 Farebox Integration 18.8 Mobile Radio System Enhancements 18.8 Cellular Data Service Integration 18.8 Supervisor Mobile Access to AVL Software 18.8 Digital Video Recorder Integration 15.6 Data Warehouse Integration 15.6 Exterior Announcements at Stops 12.5 Display/Keypad and Location Monitoring for Non-Revenue Vehicles 9.4 Next Arrival Predictions via E-Mail Subscription 9.4 Drivetrain Monitoring 6.3 Other 6.3 Heading Sensor 3.1 most responses for deployment after 2003. The technologies most commonly (i.e., with at least 20% of responses)
|
From page 17... ...
17 TABLE 5 TIME PERIODS WHEN VARIOUS TECHNOLOGIES WERE IMPLEMENTED Technologies 1997 or Earlier 1998– 2000 2001– 2003 2004 or Later Currently Under Warranty? GPS Receivers 9.4% 15.6% 25.0% 25.0% 31.3% APCs 6.3% 9.4% 15.6% 25.0% 18.8% Paratransit Scheduling/Dispatch Software Integration 0.0% 3.1% 12.5% 25.0% 9.4% Operator Display/Keypad 9.4% 15.6% 18.8% 21.9% 25.0% AVL Software for Fixed-Route Operations 15.6% 15.6% 15.6% 21.9% 18.8% Supervisor Mobile Access to AVL Software 0.0% 3.1% 6.3% 21.9% 9.4% Next Arrival Predictions via Signs at Stops 0.0% 9.4% 18.8% 21.9% 18.8% Next Arrival Predictions or Paratransit Trip Information via Automated Telephone System 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 21.9% 6.3% Interior Next Stop Announcements 3.1% 9.4% 9.4% 18.8% 12.5% Covert Alarm Monitoring 15.6% 12.5% 25.0% 18.8% 21.9% Covert Microphone Monitoring 12.5% 12.5% 15.6% 18.8% 18.8% WLAN Communications 0.0% 9.4% 12.5% 18.8% 6.3% Fixed-Route Scheduling Software Integration 12.5% 9.4% 18.8% 18.8% 15.6% Data Management System Integration 3.1% 12.5% 9.4% 18.8% 9.4% Central System Hardware/Software Upgrades 3.1% 15.6% 18.8% 18.8% 6.3% Odometer Integration 3.1% 15.6% 18.8% 15.6% 18.8% Onboard Computer 6.3% 12.5% 18.8% 15.6% 21.9% Headsign Integration 3.1% 6.3% 6.3% 15.6% 9.4% Cellular Data Service Communications 0.0% 0.0% 3.1% 15.6% 6.3% Dispatch Center Workstation Furniture 9.4% 21.9% 18.8% 15.6% 15.6% Transit Signal Priority 0.0% 3.1% 6.3% 12.5% 6.3% Integrated Digital Video Recorder 0.0% 3.1% 3.1% 12.5% 0.0% Next Arrival Predictions or Paratransit Trip Information via Website 0.0% 3.1% 3.1% 12.5% 3.1% Exterior Announcements at Stops 3.1% 9.4% 9.4% 9.4% 6.3% Farebox Integration 0.0% 3.1% 9.4% 9.4% 18.8% Mobile Radio Voice Communications Integration 9.4% 12.5% 25.0% 9.4% 15.6% Mobile Radio Data Communications 9.4% 12.5% 25.0% 9.4% 21.9% Mobile Radio System Enhancements 3.1% 0.0% 6.3% 6.3% 3.1% Display/Keypad and Location Monitoring for NonRevenue Vehicles 3.1% 6.3% 9.4% 6.3% 6.3% Next Arrival Predictions or Paratransit Trip Information via Website, for Access with Mobile Personal Devices 0.0% 0.0% 6.3% 6.3% 3.1% Next Arrival Predictions or Paratransit Trip Information via E-Mail Subscription 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.3% 0.0% Heading Sensor 0.0% 0.0% 3.1% 3.1% 3.1% Drivetrain Monitoring 0.0% 0.0% 6.3% 3.1% 3.1% Other 0.0% 3.1% 0.0% 3.1% 0.0% Transponder or Transponder Receiver (ìSi gnpost" Technology)
|
From page 18... ...
18 • Passenger information by means of an interactive voice response (IVR) telephone information system.
|
From page 19... ...
19 TABLE 6 REPORTED SUBSYSTEMS BY AGENCY Transit Agency Name G PS R ec ei ve rs O pe ra to r D isp la y/ K ey pa d In te rio r N ex t S to p A nn ou n ce m en ts A PC Co ve rt A la rm M on ito rin g Tr an sit S ig n al P rio rit y D riv et ra in M on ito rin g H ea ds ig n In te gr at io n Fa re bo x In te gr at io n Ce llu la r D at a Se rv ic e Co m m u n ic at io ns W LA N C om m u n ic at io ns CA D /A V L So ftw ar e fo r F ix ed -R ou te Fi xe dRo u te S ch ed u lin g So ftw ar e In te gr at io n Pa ra tr an sit S ch ed u lin g/ D isp at ch S of tw ar e Su pe rv iso r M ob ile A cc es s t o CA D /A V L So ftw ar e N ex t A rri va l P re di ct io ns v ia D M S at S to ps Pa ss en ge r In fo rm at io n vi a IV R Pa ss en ge r In fo rm at io n vi a W eb sit e AC Transit X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Antelope Valley Transit Authority X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Beaver County Transit Authority X X X X X Broward County Transit X X X X X Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority X X City of Phoenix -- Public Transit Department X X X X X X X X X X Central New York Regional Transportation Authority (Centro) X X X X X King County Metro -- Access Transportation X X X X X X King County Metro Transit X X X X X X X X X Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority X X X X X X X X X X X X Metro/Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority X X X X X X X X X Metro Transit -- Minneapolis X X X X X X X X X X X X Montgom ery County Ride On X X X X X X OC Transpo X X X X X X X X X X Orange County Transportation Authority X X X X X X X X X X X X X PACE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission (PRTC)
|
From page 20... ...
• INIT, Twin Vision Signs. • Orbital Sciences Corp., GFI, Luminator, Twin Vision, Hastus.
|
From page 21... ...
21 TABLE 7 PORTION OF FIXED-ROUTE FLEET EQUIPPED WITH VARIOUS TECHNOLOGIES 1%–20% 21%–40% 41%–60% 61%–80% 81%–100% Heading Sensor 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Drivetrain Monitoring 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Other 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Mobile Radio Voice Communications Integration 0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0 94.1 Mobile Radio Data Communications 5.6 0.0 5.6 0.0 88.9 Onboard Computer 0.0 5.9 5.9 0.0 88.2 Operator Display/Keypad 0.0 9.5 4.8 0.0 85.7 Transponder or Transponder Receiver ("signpost" technology) 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.3 Covert Microphone Monitoring 0.0 5.6 5.6 5.6 83.3 GPS Receivers 4.2 8.3 8.3 0.0 79.2 Covert Alarm Monitoring 0.0 8.7 8.7 4.3 78.3 Exterior Announcements at Stops 0.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 70.0 Odometer Integration 5.6 11.1 5.6 11.1 66.7 Farebox Integration 0.0 11.1 22.2 0.0 66.7 Interior Next Stop Announcements 7.7 7.7 7.7 15.4 61.5 WLAN Communications 38.5 7.7 0.0 0.0 53.8 Headsign Integration 0.0 20.0 20.0 10.0 50.0 Cellular Data Service Communications 25.0 12.5 0.0 12.5 50.0 Transit Signal Priority 62.5 12.5 0.0 0.0 25.0 Integrated Digital Video Recorder 42.9 28.6 0.0 14.3 14.3 APCs 44.4 22.2 16.7 5.6 11.1 Technologies TABLE 8 PORTION OF PARATRANSIT FLEET EQUIPPED WITH VARIOUS TECHNOLOGIES 1%–20% 21%–40% 41%–60% 61%–80% 81%–100% Mobile Radio Data Communications 12.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 87.5 Mobile Radio Voice Communications Integration 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.3 GPS Receivers 13.3 0.0 0.0 6.7 80.0 Operator Display/Keypad 13.3 0.0 0.0 6.7 80.0 Cellular Data Service Communications 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 80.0 Onboard Computer 18.2 0.0 0.0 9.1 72.7 Covert Alarm Monitoring 10.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 70.0 Covert Microphone Monitoring 16.7 0.0 0.0 16.7 66.7 Odometer Integration 25.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 50.0 Drivetrain Monitoring 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 WLAN Communications 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 Other 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 Heading Sensor 66.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 Farebox Integration 25.0 0.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Integrated Digital Video Recorder 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Technologies
|
From page 22... ...
The question asked whether agencies deployed the system with a single or multiple procurements, and whether they deployed a single procurement using multiple rollout stages. The most common staging approach (at more than 50% of the responses to this question)
|
From page 23... ...
23 Question 19. Please indicate the approximate breakdown for the sources of the capital costs for your bus AVL system, on a percentage basis.
|
From page 24... ...
eXpress (MAX) BRT of the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority (KCATA)
|
From page 25... ...
25 • King County Metro Transit • Metro Transit -- Minneapolis • Metro/Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority • Montgomery County Ride On • OC Transpo • Orange County Transportation Authority • PRTC • San Diego Metropolitan Transit System • San Mateo County Transit District • Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority • Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority • Transit Authority of River City • Triangle Transit Authority • Waukesha Metro Transit • York Region Transit • YTV (Helsinki Metropolitan Area Council)
|
From page 26... ...
• Wayside signage -- Positive customer response real-time data -- accurate planning passenger counters -- accurate planning. • GPS location for operations management.
|
From page 27... ...
27 Question 28. Please specify for any "other" response in the previous question.
|
From page 28... ...
28 TABLE 17 STAFFING IMPACTS IN OPERATIONS Dispatcher Position #1 Position #2 6 Data Administrator 1 Field Management Control 3 Manager of Support Programs 1 15 Road Supervisors/Other Operation's Staff 0 8 0 Dispatcher 1 Transit Supervisor 1 IBS Coordinator 1 Technical Services Technician 1 MIS Database Coordinator 2 Manager, TMS 1 Specialist, No. of FTEs Avoided No.
|
From page 29... ...
29 responses for Operations, where there was a significant reported effect involving the hiring or retraining of staff, or where the need to increase staff was felt to have been avoided. • Retraining for dispatchers, supervisors, and operators was commonly reported.
|
From page 30... ...
• Agencies commonly reported retraining for staff with customer service duties. For the most part Customer Service Representatives were retrained, although in some cases retraining was also reported for dispatchers or supervisors (i.e., for agencies where these positions have some customer service responsibilities)
|
From page 31... ...
31 system. In some cases this was coupled with retraining several of the existing IT personnel.
|
From page 32... ...
The following provides some specific insights into an example of how the Planning function at one agency uses the AVL system and how it has affected its staffing (for Metro Transit in Minneapolis, Minnesota, which responded that Planning had hired one analyst and retrained eight more)
|
From page 33... ...
33 Question 39. Please indicate the number of staff (full-time equivalents)
|
From page 34... ...
Question 42. Please specify for any "other" response in the previous question.
|
From page 35... ...
35 Revenue. Less than 30% of the responses from Training and Human Resources, Marketing, and Information Technology indicated "alter procedures." Question 44.
|
From page 36... ...
As shown in Table 29, scheduling and planning were the most common responses to this survey question. Another reported use was for following up on customer complaints.
|
From page 37... ...
37 • Inability to meet expectations for staff reductions. • Resistance to accepting validity of system data that varies from data gathered using more conventional methods (e.g., on-time performance data)
|
From page 38... ...
• Proprietary system attitude by technology providers; not willing to interface. • Stand alone system with little integration.
|
From page 39... ...
39 • Make sure your contract has "teeth" (e.g., liquidated damages) , and require that the systems integrator do the same with subcontracts, to help ensure timely performance.
|
From page 40... ...
It is interesting to note that one of the less commonly reported factors was "benefits expected to exceed costs." This likely indicates that agencies recognize that many of the benefits are difficult to quantify, which makes it challenging to show benefits exceeding costs in purely numeric terms. Question 55.
|
From page 41... ...
41 • Cost versus functionality (would have liked to install on light rail vehicles, and purchase Dynamic Passenger Info system at the same time)
|
From page 42... ...
Specific responses are as follows: • Stakeholder participation is a critical requirement for building support and acceptance for system deployment. That participation can take a lot of time that you do not want to spend on the front of the project but will pay off later.
|
From page 43... ...
43 • Spokane Transit; TriMet, Portland, Oregon; Kitsap Transit; WMATA; Dallas DART; Houston Metro. • Kansas City Area Transportation Authority, Long Beach Transit, Lane Transit, PACE, MetroTransit -- Minneapolis.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.