The Relationship Between Transit Asset Condition and Service Quality (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 81-86
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 81... ...
B-1 This appendix expands on the framework discussion in Chapter 3 of this document and pre sents the equations and assumptions required for calculating EJT. As discussed in Chapter 3, EJT is calculated as follows: 2EJT f t ki i i i i= Σ + Σ σ where • ti is the average travel time for segment i, which may include waiting, instation conveyance or IVT.
|
From page 82... ...
B-2 The Relationship Between Transit Asset Condition and Service Quality The above approach is conceptually similar to that in the NZTA Economic Evaluation Manual (B-2) described further in the NZTA case study in Appendix C
|
From page 83... ...
EJT Formulation B-3 The adjusted variance in travel time per passenger incorporating the failure rate is predicted to be 1 12 2 12 22rv rv ld rvm rvm ldP P ( )
|
From page 84... ...
B-4 The Relationship Between Transit Asset Condition and Service Quality and the 2nd percentile of vehicle departure time (plus an additional "synchronization time") to approximate the wait time people typically experience in such situations.
|
From page 85... ...
EJT Formulation B-5 Infrastructure feature values Stop / Shelter Condition 0.1 Excellent condition, looks like new compared with basic working order but parts worn and tatty Size 0.1 Double-sized shelters compared with single-sized Seating 0.1 Seats plus shelter versus no shelter and seats Cleanliness 0.1 Spotlessly clean compared with some dirty patches Litter 0.1 No litter compared with lots of litter Graffiti 0.1 No graffiti compared with lots of/offensive graffiti Type 0.1 Glass cubicle giving good all-around protection compared with no shelter Security CCTV 0.3 Recorded and monitored by staff if alarm raised compared with no CCTV Lighting 0.1 Very brightly lit compared with reasonably well lit Attribute Sub-attribute EJT (minutes) Comment Vehicle feature values for bus transit service Boarding No steps 0.1 Difference between two steps up and no steps Cleanliness Litter 0.4 No litter compared with lots of litter Windows 0.3 Clean windows with no etchings compared with dirty windows and etchings Graffiti 0.2 No graffiti compared with lots of graffiti Exterior 0.3 Very clean everywhere compared with some very dirty areas Interior 0.3 Very clean everywhere compared with some very dirty areas Facilities Clock 0.1 Clearly visible digital clock showing correct time compared with no clock CCTV 0.7 CCTV, recorded, visible to driver, and driver panic alarm compared with no CCTV Information External 0.2 Large route number and destination front/side/rear, plus line diagram on side relative to small route number on front/side/rear Interior 0.2 Easy to read route number and diagram display compared with no information inside bus Info of next stop 0.2 Electronic sign and announcements of next stop and interchange compared with no information next stop Seating Type/layout 0.1 Individual-shaped seats with headrests, all seats facing forward compared with basic, double-bench seats with some facing backwards Tip-up 0.1 Tip-up seats in standing/wheelchair area compared with all standing area in central aisle Comfort Legroom 0.2 Space for small luggage compared with restricted legroom and no space for small luggage Ventilation 0.1 Push-opening windows giving more ventilation compared with slide opening windows giving less ventilation 1.0 Air conditioning (vs none)
|
From page 86... ...
B-6 The Relationship Between Transit Asset Condition and Service Quality References B1. Littman, T
|
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.