Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context
Part 2: Operator Perspective
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para- transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Indian Institute of Technology, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Kharagpur, India Government of India
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context Part 2: Operator Perspective
Editor: Dr. Debapratim Pandit, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
This handbook is part of the deliverables for the research project ‘Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor’, sponsored by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA), Government of India as per sanction letter no. K-14011/18/2011-UT dated 29-12-2015.
Published on February, 2019.
Copyright © 2019 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India All rights reserved.
This handbook, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval system now known or to be invented, without written permission from the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India.
Disclaimer Certain commercial software products are identified in this handbook. These products were used only for demonstration purposes. This use does not imply approval or endorsement by IIT, Kharagpur, not does it imply that these products are necessarily the best for the purpose.
Chapters and Authors
Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Krishanu Santra, Tiyali Bose, Debapratim Pandit
Chapter 2: Bus Transit Service Attributes based on Operator’s Perspective 35 Krishanu Santra, Debapratim Pandit
Chapter 3: Willingness-to-pay for Improved Service Level 48 Tiyali Bose, Debapratim Pandit
Chapter 4: Optimisation Model and Software to Determine Bus Frequency for a 59 Particular Route Krishanu Santra, Debapratim Pandit
Chapter 5: Full Day Operation, Timetable Development and Vehicle 114 Scheduling Krishanu Santra, Debapratim Pandit
Chapter 6: Conclusion 130 Debapratim Pandit
Project team Principal Investigator Research Team Debapratim Pandit Krishanu Santra, Tiyali Bose Project Staff Deepa Sharma, Vaibhav Bhatnagar, V K Sharat, Aditi Debnath, Himadri Prasad Das, Parita Dey
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Acknowledgement
We take this opportunity to thank Shri Durga Shankar Mishra, Principal Secretary of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Government of India, Shri Mukund Kumar Sinha, OSD (UT) & EOJS, Ms. M. Janaki DS (UT-I) and Ms. Parveen Kumari, DO (UT- IV) for providing us the opportunity to work on this research project.
We express our sincere gratitude to Mr. Narayan Swaroop Nigam (Managing Director, CSTC), Mr. N. Sandilya (Joint Managing Director, CSTC, CTC, WBSTC), Mr. B. Barik (Deputy Managing Director, CSTC, CTC, WBSTC), Mr. M. Hari Narayanan (Commissioner, GVMC), Mr. G. Satyanarayana (Ex- Deputy City Traffic Manager, Urban, Visakhapatnam, APSRTC), Ms. Sudha Bindu (Deputy City Traffic Manager, Urban, Visakhapatnam, APSRTC), Mr. Banchha Nidhi Pani (Municipal Commissioner, RMC), Mr. Y. K. Goswami (Ex- General Manager, Rajkot Rajpath Limited), Mr. Rasik Raiyani (General Manager, Rajkot Rajpath Limited), Mr. Manish Vora (Assistant Manager, RMTS) and Mr. Karanrajsinh Zala (research Officer, RMTS) for their support and co-operation. We are thankful to all the officers and staff at West Bengal Transport Corporation (WBTC), Greater Visakha Municipal Corporation (GVMC), Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC), Rajkot Municipal Corporation (RMC), Rajkot Rajpath Limited (RRL) and Rajkot Municipal Transport Service (RMTS) for their co-operation. We are thankful to Sponsored Research and Industrial Consultancy (SRIC), Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur and the staff, faculty and students at the Department of Architecture and Regional Planning, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur for their support and co-operation.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs i Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning ii Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Table of Contents
Acknowledgement ...... i
List of Tables ...... vi
List of Figures ...... viii
List of Maps ...... x
List of Equations ...... xi
List of Abbreviations ...... xii
1. Introduction ...... 1
1.1. Aim and objectives ...... 3
1.2. Study area ...... 4
1.2.1. Kolkata ...... 4
1.2.2. Visakhapatnam ...... 9
1.2.3. Rajkot ...... 10
1.3. Data collection ...... 15
1.3.1. Expert opinion survey ...... 15
1.3.2. Primary survey ...... 15
1.1.1. Secondary sources ...... 21
1.1.2. Electronic sources ...... 21
2. Bus Transit Service Attributes based on Operator’s Perspective ...... 35
2.1. Route attributes ...... 37
2.2. Operation attributes ...... 38
2.3. Vehicle attributes ...... 39
2.4. User level attributes ...... 39
2.5. Cost attributes ...... 40
2.1. Conclusion ...... 42
3. Willingness to pay for improved service level ...... 45
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs iii Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
3.1. Review of WTP methods ...... 48
3.2. Survey ...... 48
3.3. Methodology ...... 49
3.4. Results and discussion ...... 51
3.4.1. Waiting time at bus stop ...... 51
3.4.2. Headway of buses ...... 52
3.4.3. On-time performance of services ...... 52
3.4.4. Delay in total journey time ...... 53
3.4.5. Crowding inside bus ...... 53
3.4.6. Transit information ...... 54
3.4.7. Safety and security ...... 55
3.4.8. Bus type ...... 55
4. Optimisation Model and Software to Determine Bus Frequency for a Particular Route ...... 59
4.1. Review of frequency setting problem ...... 62
4.2. Aim and objectives ...... 65
4.3. Model formulation ...... 65
4.3.1. Assumptions ...... 66
4.3.2. Model overview ...... 67
4.3.3. Cost minimisation function ...... 70
4.3.4. Relationships/ Functions ...... 77
4.4. Software ...... 79
4.5. Data collection of case study area ...... 83
4.6. Results ...... 86
4.7. Discussion of results ...... 94
4.7.1. Cost of improvement of crowding level at recommended headways ...... 95
4.7.2. Cost improvement of headways at recommended crowding levels ...... 104
4.7.3. Seat availability at different crowding level at recommended headways .... 108
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning iv Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
4.8. Conclusion ...... 111
5. Full Day Operation, Timetable Development and Vehicle Scheduling ...... 113
5.1. Aim and objectives ...... 115
5.2. Model formulation ...... 115
5.2.1. Assumptions ...... 116
5.2.2. Model overview ...... 116
5.3. Data collection ...... 122
5.4. Results and discussion ...... 125
5.5. Conclusion ...... 126
6. Conclusion ...... 129
Reference ...... xv
Appendix A ...... xxiii
Appendix B ...... xxix
Appendix B1: Survey questionnaire for willingness- to- pay survey in Kolkata ...... xxix
Appendix B2: Survey questionnaire for willingness- to- pay survey in Visakhapatnam ...... xxxv
Appendix B3: Survey questionnaire for willingness- to- pay survey in Rajkot ...... xli
Appendix C ...... xlvii
Appendix D ...... xlix
Appendix E ...... lxi
Appendix F ...... lxxiii
Appendix G ...... lxxxi
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs v Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
List of Tables
Table 1-1 Surveyed WBTC bus routes in Kolkata ...... 16 Table 1-2 Household survey locations in Kolkata ...... 17 Table 1-3 Sample characteristics in Kolkata ...... 17 Table 1-4 Surveyed APSRTC bus routes in Visakhapatnam ...... 18 Table 1-5 Household survey locations in Visakhapatnam ...... 18 Table 1-6 Sample characteristics in Visakhapatnam ...... 19 Table 1-7 Surveyed RMTS bus routes in Rajkot ...... 19 Table 1-8 Household survey locations in Rajkot ...... 20 Table 1-9 Sample characteristics of Rajkot ...... 20 Table 1-10 Stop- to- stop travel time data sample ...... 29 Table 1-11 Boarding-alighting matrix prepared from ETM data for WBTC route S37A in Kolkata ...... 30 Table 1-12 Boarding-alighting matrix prepared from ETM data for APSRTC route 541 in Visakhapatnam ...... 32 Table 1-13 Boarding-alighting matrix prepared from ETM data for APSRTC route 001 in Rajkot ...... 34 Table 3-1 Willingness to pay (in INR) for improvement in quantitative bus service attributes of bus users in Kolkata, Visakhapatnam and Rajkot...... 56 Table 3-2 Willingness to pay (in INR) of bus users for provision of real-time transit information in bus services in Kolkata, Visakhapatnam and Rajkot ...... 57 Table 3-3 Willingness to pay (in INR) of bus users for provision of safety and security infrastructure in bus systems, provision of AC buses and improved bus stops in Kolkata, Visakhapatnam and Rajkot ...... 58 Table 4-1 Route characteristics parameters ...... 67 Table 4-2 Bus service operation parameters ...... 68 Table 4-3 Bus service user level parameters ...... 68 Table 4-4 Bus service constraints ...... 69 Table 4-5 Bus service cost attributes ...... 69 Table 4-6 Simulation data summary table ...... 84 Table 4-7 Generalized user cost values ...... 85 Table 4-8 Base line bus service condition and bus service cost ...... 86
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning vi Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Table 4-9 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the morning peak hour in up direction ...... 89 Table 4-10 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the morning peak hour in down direction ...... 90 Table 4-11 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the afternoon off-peak hour in up direction ...... 91 Table 4-12 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the afternoon off-peak hour in down direction ...... 92 Table 4-13 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the evening peak hour in up direction ...... 93 Table 4-14 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the evening peak hour in down direction ...... 94 Table 4-15 Recommended headway and crowding level at different time periods ...... 95 Table 5-1 Bus route stop details ...... 123 Table 5-2 Bus route service time periods ...... 124 Table 5-3 Bus route service attributes and parameters ...... 124 Table 5-4 Full day bus service simulation result with 43- seater bus for WBTC bus route S 37A plying between Garia bus terminus to Airport Gate No.1 ...... 127 Table 5-5 Full day bus service simulation result with 28- seater bus for WBTC bus route S 37A plying between Garia bus terminus to Airport Gate No.1 ...... 128
Table C- 1 Stop- to- stop travel time ...... xlvii Table C- 2 Stop to stop distance ...... xlvii Table C- 3 Passenger arrival rate ...... xlviii Table C- 4 Fare chart ...... xlviii Table C- 5 Hourly service information ...... xlviii
Table D- 1 Vehicle timetable for 28- seater bus ...... xlix
Table E- 1 Vehicle schedule for 28- seater bus ...... lxi
Table F- 1 Vehicle timetable for 43- seater bus ...... lxxiii
Table G- 1 Vehicle schedule for 43- seater bus ...... lxxxi
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs vii Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Screenshot of WBTC ETM data ...... 29 Figure 1-2 Sample stage-wise passenger boarding- alighting count data obtained from APSRTC bus depots in Visakhapatna ...... 31 Figure 1-3 Screenshot of RMTS ETM data ...... 33 Figure 3-1 Input- Output table for user’s willingness to pay for various improvement in bus service quality attributes ...... 51 Figure 4-1 Simulation model flow chart ...... 79 Figure 4-2 Initial screen of the software ...... 80 Figure 4-3 Data entry screen for route and service hour details ...... 80 Figure 4-4 Data entry screen for stop to stop travel time ...... 81 Figure 4-5 Data entry screen for passenger arrival rate ...... 81 Figure 4-6 Data entry screen for observed boarding- alighting count at each stop ...... 82 Figure 4-7 Bus service operation and user parameters ...... 82 Figure 4-8 Cost estimates for different bus service combination ...... 87 Figure 4-9 Operator cost during morning peak hour in up direction ...... 88 Figure 4-10 User cost during morning peak hour in up direction ...... 88 Figure 4-11 Overall cost during morning peak hour in up direction ...... 88 Figure 4-12 Operator cost during morning peak hour in down direction ...... 89 Figure 4-13 User cost during morning peak hour in down direction ...... 89 Figure 4-14 Overall cost during morning peak hour in down direction ...... 89 Figure 4-15 Operator cost during afternoon off- peak hour in up direction ...... 90 Figure 4-16 User cost during afternoon off- peak hour in up direction ...... 90 Figure 4-17 Overall cost during afternoon off- peak hour in up direction ...... 90 Figure 4-18 Operator cost during afternoon off- peak hour in down direction ...... 91 Figure 4-19 User cost during afternoon off- peak hour in down direction ...... 91 Figure 4-20 Overall cost during afternoon off- peak hour in down direction ...... 91 Figure 4-21 Operator cost during evening peak hour in up direction ...... 92 Figure 4-22 User cost during evening peak hour in up direction ...... 92 Figure 4-23 Overall cost during evening peak hour in up direction ...... 92 Figure 4-24 Operator cost during evening peak hour in down direction ...... 93 Figure 4-25 User cost during evening peak hour in down direction ...... 93 Figure 4-26 Overall cost during evening peak hour in down direction ...... 93
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning viii Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Figure 4-28 Morning peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2) ...... 96 Figure 4-29 Morning peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2) ...... 96 Figure 4-30 Morning peak hour, up direction. Operator cost vs. crowding level for all headway ...... 97 Figure 4-31 Morning peak hour, down dir.: Op. cost vs. crowding level for all headway ... 98 Figure 4-32 Afternoon off-peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2) .. 99 Figure 4-33 Afternoon off-peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2) ...... 99 Figure 4-34 Afternoon off-peak hour, up dir.: Op. cost vs. crowding level for all headway ...... 100 Figure 4-35 Afternoon off-peak hour, down dir.: Op. cost vs. crowding level for all headway ...... 101 Figure 4-36 Evening peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2) ...... 101 Figure 4-37 Evening peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2) .... 102 Figure 4-38 Evening peak hour, up dir.: Op. cost vs. crowding level for all headway ...... 103 Figure 4-39 Evening peak hour, down dir.: Op. cost vs. crowding level for all headway .. 103 Figure 4-40 Morning peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2) ...... 105 Figure 4-41 Morning peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2) ...... 105 Figure 4-42 Afternoon off-peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2) ...... 106 Figure 4-43 Afternoon off-peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2) ..... 106 Figure 4-44 Evening peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2) ...... 107 Figure 4-45 Evening peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2) ...... 107 Figure 4-46 Morning peak hour, up dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway ... 108 Figure 4-47 Morning peak hour, down dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway ...... 109 Figure 4-48 Afternoon off-peak hour, up dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway ...... 109 Figure 4-49 Afternoon off-peak hour, dn. dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway ...... 110 Figure 4-50 Evening peak hour, up dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway .... 110 Figure 4-51 Evening peak hour, down dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway ...... 111 Figure 5-1 Service timetable (example) for Terminal A and Terminal B ...... 118 Figure 5-2 Vehicle schedule for Terminal A and Terminal B ...... 119 Figure 5-3 Interface for efficiency constraints ...... 120
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs ix Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
List of Maps
Map 1-1 Transport map of Kolkata ...... 6 Map 1-2 WBTC bus routes in Kolkata ...... 7 Map 1-3 Route of WBTC bus route S37A along the EM Bypass ...... 8 Map 1-4 Transport map of Visakhapatnam ...... 11 Map 1-5 APSRTC bus routes in Visakhapatnam ...... 12 Map 1-6 Transport map of Rajkot ...... 13 Map 1-7 RMTS bus routes in Rajkot ...... 14 Map 1-8 Bus boarding- alighting count locations in Kolkata ...... 22 Map 1-9 Surveyed WBTC bus routes in Kolkata ...... 23 Map 1-10 Surveyed household locations in Kolkata ...... 24 Map 1-11 Surveyed APSRTC bus routes in Visakhapatnam ...... 25 Map 1-12 Surveyed household locations in Visakhapatnam ...... 26 Map 1-13 Surveyed BRTS and RMTS bus routes in Rajkot ...... 27 Map 1-14 Household survey locations in Rajkot ...... 28
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning x Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
List of Equations
4-1 Overall bus service cost ...... 70 4-2 Operator cost ...... 70 4-3 Fuel consumption ...... 71 4-4 Maintenance cost ...... 71 4-5 Vehicle depreciation cost ...... 72 4-6 Crew cost ...... 72 4-7 Operator penalty cost ...... 72 4-8 User cost equation ...... 72 4-9 Total waiting time estimation ...... 73 4-10 Total passengers leaving the stop ...... 73 4-11 Passenger waiting time ...... 74 4-12 Travel time seating ...... 74 4-13 Travel time standing ...... 74 4-14 Passenger inconvenience cost (penalty) ...... 75 4-15 On-board crowding level constraint ...... 75 4-16 Passenger waiting time threshold condition ...... 75 4-17 Minimum seat availability threshold ...... 76 4-18 Passengers per vehicle kilometre constraint ...... 76 4-19 Minimum passengers per trip ...... 76 4-20 Maximum operation cost per passenger ...... 76 4-21 Minimum cost recovery ratio threshold ...... 77 4-22 Maximum percentage of passengers lost during a service period ...... 77 4-23 Minimum crowding level threshold ...... 77
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xi Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
List of Abbreviations
O-D Origin-Destination BRT Bus Rapid Transit KMC Kolkata Municipal Corporation CBD Central Business District EM Bypass Eastern Metropolitan Bypass WBTC West Bengal Transport Corporation MoUD Ministry of Urban Development GVMC Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation APSRTC Andhra Pradesh State Road transport Corporation JnNURM Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission SPV special purpose vehicle VUTCO Visakhapatnam Urban Transport Company RMC Rajkot Municipal Corporation GSRTC Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation RRL Rajkot Rajpath Limited RMTS Rajkot Municipal Transport Service WTP willingness-to-pay INR Indian National Rupee LIG Lower Income Group MIG Middle Income Group HIG High Income Group ITS Intelligent Transportation System ETM Electronic ticketing machine AVL Automatic vehicle location GPS Global Positioning System ARAI Automotive Research Association of India RP Revealed preference SP stated preference CVM Conjoint Valuation Methods DCE Discrete Choice Experiments MNL multinomial logit ML mixed logit RPL random parameter logit ZOT zone of tolerance FSP frequency setting problem
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xii Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
VOT value of time PDF passenger demand function TF terminal function BSF bus stop level function VF vehicle level function CF cost functions DBMS Database Management System VTS Vessel Traffic Service API Application Interface GPRS General Packet Radio Services IVT in-vehicle time
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xiii Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xiv Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
1. Introduction
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 1 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 2 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Service delivery level for bus transit along a particular route depends on several factors such as the passenger travel demand along the route, the variability of the demand throughout the day, the route level Origin-Destination (OD) details, the traffic characteristics along the route and operator resources and constraints such as available fleet, fare set for the route, available bus sizes etc. Depending on the operator objectives of minimizing fleet size, operation cost, generalized cost or maximising patronage, service schedules needs to be prepared while conforming to service constraints or feasible service delivery ranges decided from both operator and user perspective. All these parameters discussed above are linked to each other through a complex set of relationships and could be modelled using a simulation based mathematical programming model which would help in determining appropriate service level for a particular bus route. While, this could be undertaken to evaluate service level for a particular time period of the day, determining the same for the entire day brings in new challenges in form of constraints like utilization of each vehicle, earnings from each vehicle etc. This also increases the number of service combinations i.e., combination of service delivery level for several service attributes to evaluate. Additionally, operators would also like to evaluate the effect of improving each service attribute to decide on final service delivery level for each attribute. While some of these service attributes can be changed others needs to be fixed before any cost evaluation. Some of these fixed attributes are decided based on the operators’ service rules or policy such as mandatory layover time after a trip or holding strategy in case of bus bunching, others are decided on market forces such as fuel cost and passengers’ willingness to pay for improved services which could be used to determine generalized cost of service. Thus, before we could embark on developing a model for determination of appropriate service delivery level, we need to understand the different service attributes and parameters related to bus service operation, cost etc. Additionally, there is a need for a comprehensive study to determine willingness to pay for improvement in bus services in the Indian context.
1.1. Aim and objectives
The aim of this study is to determine the optimal service delivery level for public bus transit in terms of fleet size, vehicle capacity, headway, etc. for a bus route in the Indian context.
The detail objectives are:
i. To identify the different service attributes and parameters related to bus service operation, cost, route etc.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 3 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
ii. To determine the passengers’ willingness to pay for improvement in bus services in the Indian context. iii. To develop a model for determining appropriate service level for a bus route. a. To develop a model for frequency/headway setting for a particular route b. To develop a software for determining cost of service for different service combinations for a particular route and time period c. To develop a model for bus scheduling for a particular route d. To develop a bus scheduling software e. To evaluate mix fleet operations using different bus capacity
1.2. Study area
As part of this study, Kolkata, Visakhapatnam and Rajkot were selected as case study areas. These three Class I towns in India are located in different regions of the country and are of different sizes with very different transportation systems. Kolkata, located in eastern India is the largest of the three cities and is one of the largest metropolis in the country. Bus forms a major mode of transportation in the city and the demand for the mode is catered to by both private and public operators. The city is served by buses of various sizes as well as different service types like mini buses, midi buses, standard non- AC buses and AC bus services. Visakhapatnam on the other hand located in the south-eastern coast of India is catered by a public bus service operator. Rajkot, the third case study area is located in western India and is the smallest in size amongst the three. However, Rajkot is catered to by both BRT and municipal bus services.
1.2.1. Kolkata
Kolkata is the largest metropolis in eastern India, housing a population of 44,96,694 (Census 2011) in an area of 1,480 square kilometres. Kolkata Municipal Corporation (hereon KMC) area has an average population density of about 25,000 persons per square kilometres. The city is well connected to Delhi and Chennai by the Kolkata–Delhi and Kolkata–Chennai links of the Golden Quadrilateral. The street structure of Kolkata is arranged in a North-South and East-West pattern. The Central Business District (hereon CBD) is centrally located and has residential areas spread to the north, east and south side of it. Due to its diverse and abundant public transportation, private vehicles are not as common in Kolkata as in other major Indian cities.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 4 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
The city is catered to by various types of urban public transportation systems namely, the regional rail services, the metro rail services, urban bus services, tram services and ferry services. The famous ‘Yellow Taxi’ of the city along with the more recent hired cab service operators UBER and OLA work alongside the public transport system, to meet the mobility needs of the city. Fixed route shared auto-rickshaw services operate as feeder services along numerous major and minor corridors of the city. The Eastern Metropolitan Bypass (hereon EM Bypass) is chosen as the study corridor for this research.
The EM Bypass is an 18 km stretch located on the eastern periphery of the Kolkata municipal area that connects the northwest region of the city with the major residential zones at the southern end. The corridor connecting Rajpur-Sonarpur to Bidhannagar observes mixed land use pattern which directly impacts traffic. The corridor experiences heavy traffic during morning and evening peak hours and the travel time variation is also significant between peak and off-peak hours. In 2008, a six lane wide grade separated BRT system had been proposed in this corridor. An elevated metro rail system which is also aligned through the same corridor is expected to soon initiate operation. Fixed route shared auto-rickshaw service is also a well- recognized mode of transport in this zone. The para-transit mode acts mostly as a feeder to the bus transit system. The EM Bypass is served by 55 WBTC bus routes that cater to 15 major bus stops and 17 minor bus stops and has a significant load of daily commuters. The public bus operator in Kolkata (WBTC) mitigate considerable passenger demand but often fall short of the service level standard set by the Government of India (MoUD 2008).
Urban public bus transportation system in Kolkata- West Bengal Transport
Corporation
Bus transit system in Kolkata serves about 54 percent of the total passenger travel demand and plays an important role in urban public transportation. As stated earlier, both public and private bus services operate in the city. A total of 260 bus routes operate in the city, of which currently 55 WBTC bus routes operate along the EM Bypass corridor. WBTC operates air-conditioned, non- air-conditioned executive (passengers are not allowed to board the bus if all the seats in the bus are occupied and standing while travelling in the bus is not permitted) and non- air- conditioned standard bus services in the city. Executive buses do not operate along the EM Bypass corridor. The standard non-air-conditioned and air-conditioned buses are mainly in operation. The private operators on the other hand operate only non- air-conditioned services and uses buses of various capacities. In this study, data has been collected for bus route number S37A that connects Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose International Airport to Garia bus depot.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 5 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Map 1-1 Transport map of Kolkata
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 6 Indian Institute of Technology
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Map 1-2 WBTC bus routes in Kolkata
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 7 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Map 1-3 Route of WBTC bus route S37A along the EM Bypass
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 8 Indian Institute of Technology
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
1.2.2. Visakhapatnam
Visakhapatnam is the largest city and is the financial capital of Andhra Pradesh. It is located on the coast of Bay of Bengal and has a population of 2,091,811 (Census, 2011). The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation (hereon GVMC) administers for an area of 681.96 square kilometres. The city is easily accessible through roadways, railways, airways and waterways. It is connected by NH 5 to cities like Chennai and Kolkata and is a part of the Golden Quadrilateral system of Indian Highways. The state runs inter-city bus services connecting the city to places like Kakinada, Guntur, Kadapa, Vijayawada, Kurnool, Rajahmundry, Ongole etc. and also to major cities like Chennai, Bangalore, Kolkata and Bhubaneswar.
The APSRTC runs a city bus service, which is a major mode of transportation for the economically weak sections of the society. However, shared auto-rickshaw services with flexible routes of varying capacity are also a major mode of transportation in the city. Para- transit modes especially auto-rickshaws contribute to around 45 percent of the travel demand and act as a major competition to the public transport system (GVMC, 2008). The para-transit service provides flexible service operations with the three-seater auto-rickshaws providing door-to-door service.
A closed BRT system has been planned for easing out the traffic constraints in the city under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (hereon JnNURM) scheme in 2009. A special purpose vehicle (SPV) named Visakhapatnam Urban Transport Company (VUTCO) was created for handling the operations related to BRTS. Two corridors have been planned- Pendurthi Transit Corridor (20.4 km) and Simhachalam Transit Corridor (22.6 km). The two corridors will connect Pendurthi to Dwaraka Nagar through two different routes. Around 47 bus stops lie along the two corridors. Major portion of the planned BRT corridors have already been constructed and are used currently by APSRTC buses. The current study focuses on bus service plying along the BRT corridors.
Urban public bus transportation system in Visakhapatnam- Andhra Pradesh
State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC)
Buses run by the APSRTC are an important mode of commute within the city. APSRTC operates along 121 routes with a fleet size of 670 buses. There are around six hundred buses carrying around 2.9 lakh passengers per day. On an average, the service hours range from
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 9 Government of India
eight hours a day in certain routes to twenty hours a day in certain other routes. Buses are available from 5 am to 11 pm in Visakhapatnam. It provides a peak hour service of about 4 buses per hour per direction. Buses contribute to about 20 percent of the total travel demand. There are five bus depots located at Visakhapatnam Steel City, Gajuwaka, Waltair, Simhachalam, and Maddilapalem respectively. Three types of buses are operational with the city: City Ordinary, Metro Express, and Metro Luxury AC. The metro luxury AC buses are a rare sight in the city.
1.2.3. Rajkot
Rajkot is the major centre of the Saurashtra region in Gujarat. It is the fourth largest city in the state. The Rajkot Municipal Corporation (hereon RMC) administers the city and covers an area of 104.86 square kilometres. The city has a population of 12,86,678 as per the 2011 Census and has a population density of about 12,000 persons per square kilometres. Rajkot is also well connected with other cities in India. The NH 8 connecting Ahmedabad and Gondal passes through the city while the SH 23, SH 24 and SH 25 connect the city to Jamnagar, Porbandar and Morbi respectively. The Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (hereon GSRTC) bus services also connect Rajkot to other major cities of Gujarat.
The city has a dense network of roads especially in the inner city areas. There are six important radial roads and one major ring road which form the backbone of the city. The total length of the road network within RMC area is approximately 1799 km. The right-of-way (hereon ROW) inside the city ranges from 8.8 meter to 64.4 metre, with undivided lanes along majority of the roads. Auto-rickshaws, both standard three-seaters and the larger chhakdas are the dominant mode of transportation in the city. Public bus transportation is also another major mode of transportation in the city and is catered to by both BRT services and municipal bus service.
Urban public bus transportation system in Rajkot
As stated earlier, the city is catered to by two types of bus transportation systems- The BRT system operated by Rajkot Rajpath Limited (hereon RRL) and the municipal bus service known as the Rajkot Municipal Transport Service (hereon RMTS).
Rajkot Rajpath Limited (RRL) RRL is a special purpose vehicle (SPV) that operates as a BRT service along dedicated bus corridors along the centre of the ROW along the radial road in Rajkot. A total length of 63.5km of dedicated BRT network have been proposed with three corridors- blue corridor (29km),
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 10 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Map 1-4 Transport map of Visakhapatnam
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 11 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Map 1-5 APSRTC bus routes in Visakhapatnam
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 12 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Map 1-6 Transport map of Rajkot
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 13 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Map 1-7 RMTS bus routes in Rajkot
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 14 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
1.3. Data collection
Data for this study has been collected through mainly three sources- primary survey, secondary and electronic sources. The details of data collected are discussed in the following section. An expert opinion survey was also conducted to help in identification of parameters, and understand the practical challenges of bus service operation.
1.3.1. Expert opinion survey
The expert opinion survey was carried out amongst bus service operators including depot managers, bus owners, bus service operators, and civic authorities in all the three cities. The aim of this survey was to gain an understanding of the challenges of public bus service operation, the revenue and expenditure components, fleet and crew allocation strategies and cost minimisation strategies.
1.3.2. Primary survey
Boarding- alighting count
Boarding-alighting count was undertaken along the EM Bypass in Kolkata at 19 bus stops (refer to Map 1-8). The surveys were carried out from 7:00 am to 8:00 pm for both the directions repeatedly on weekdays and weekends. The survey helped to collect information on frequency of buses on various routes and the number of passengers boarding and alighting from a bus for a particular route at a given point of time. The survey aided in understanding passenger demand variations and average passenger arrival rate at various categories of bus stops during peak and off- peak hours.
User’s willingness- to- pay survey
User’s willingness-to-pay (WTP) survey was conducted in all the three cities in order to understand their choice behaviour, their value for improvement and their willingness to pay for improvement in various quantitative and qualitative bus service quality attributes at various fare points. User’s WTP survey was conducted both on-board buses and at household level. A total of 800 samples were collected from each of the three cities. The data collected was also used for analysis on the basis of various socio-economic and trip characteristics. The user categories were on the basis of age, sex, income, vehicle ownership, bus usage, trip purpose, time of survey, and bus type. On the basis of their age, users were categorised into less than 30 years or young adults, 30- 59 years or middle- aged users, and more than 60 years or the
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 15 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
elderlies. On the basis of their sex, users were categorised as male and female; on the basis of their income, users were categorised as lower income group (monthly income less than INR 10,000 per month) or LIG, middle income group (monthly income of INR 10,000- 50,000 per month) or MIG and higher income group (monthly income of more than INR 50,000 per month) or HIG. Users were categorised as owners and non- owners on the basis of their motorised vehicle ownership. Users who use bus service on a daily basis or atleast 4-5 times in a week were categorised as regular users while those using bus services less than 4-5 times in a week were categorised as irregular users. Trip purpose of users were classified as compulsory trips and non- compulsory trips. Compulsory trips included work and education trips while non- compulsory trips included religious, health, shopping, leisure trips etc. Users who accompany their children to school were considered as compulsory trip makers. Since survey was conducted throughout the day, the data was classified as peak hour user survey and off- peak hour user survey. Finally, in Kolkata and in Rajkot where various types of bus services are prevalent, the user data was analysed on the basis of bus type the users uses. In Kolkata users were categorised as AC and non- AC users and in Rajkot the users were categorised as BRT or RRL users and RMTS users.
Kolkata In Kolkata, the WTP survey was conducted on board WBTC buses that ply along the EM Bypass corridor. The WBTC bus routes selected for survey was based on the criteria that 60% of the total bus route lies on the EM Bypass corridor. A total of 13 WBTC bus routes were surveyed (refer to Table 1-1). The selected bus routes included both AC and non- AC bus routes. The household survey was conducted in 15 residential areas that lie along the EM Bypass corridor (refer to Table 1-2)
Table 1-1 Surveyed WBTC bus routes in Kolkata
Sl. No. Bus route number Sl. No. Bus route number Sl. No. Bus route number i. AC 51 vi. AC 14 xi. S 21 ii. AC 50 vii. AC 24 xii. S 9C iii. AC 37A viii. S 37 A xiii. S 4 iv. AC 9B ix. S 24 v. AC 9 x. S 14
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 16 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Table 1-2 Household survey locations in Kolkata
Sl. No. Household location Sl. No. Household location Sl. No. Household location i. Ultadanga vi. China Mandir xi. Jadavpur ii. Karunamoyee vii. Kayasthapara xii. Patuli iii. Chingrighata viii. Hiland Park xiii. Kamalgazi iv. Ruby More ix. Bagha-Jatin xiv. Mukundapur v. Kalikapur x. Dhakuria xv. Garia
The 800 samples collected in Kolkata were finally analysed on the basis of various socio- economic and trip characteristics of the users. The sample characteristics in Kolkata is presented in Table 1-3.
Table 1-3 Sample characteristics in Kolkata
User category Percentage of sample (in %) < 30 years 26 Age 30 -59 years 57 ≥ 60 years 17 Female 37 Sex Male 63 Lower income group 23 Income group Middle income group 67 Higher income group 11 Non- owner 73 Vehicle ownership Owner 27 Irregular 29 Bus usage Regular 71 Non- compulsory 83 Trip purpose Compulsory 46 Off- peak 54 Time of survey Peak 56 Non- AC 57 Bus type AC 43
Visakhapatnam In Visakapatnam surveys were conducted on- board APSRTC buses that ply along the proposed Pendurthi and Simhachalam BRT corridor. In case of Visakhapatnam also,
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 17 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
APSRTC whose 60% of their route lie along either of the corridor. Thus, of the 54 bus routes that ply along the corridor, 30 bus routes were selected for study (refer to Table 1-4). The household surveys were conducted in 18 locations (refer to Table 1-5) that lie along the proposed Pendurthi and Simhachalam BRT corridor. The sample characteristics of the data analysed in Visakhapatnam in presented in Table 1-6
Table 1-4 Surveyed APSRTC bus routes in Visakhapatnam
Sl. No. Bus route number Sl. No. Bus route number Sl. No. Bus route number i. 28K Metro xi. 99 Ordinary xxi. 38K ii. 300C Metro xii. 222 Sub xxii. 222 iii. 25P xiii. 700 xxiii. 222A iv. 52D xiv. 6 xxiv. 12D v. 60C xv. 6A/H xxv. 12D Ordinary vi. 541 Ordinary xvi. 300C Ordinary xxvi. 555 Ordinary vii. 28 xvii. 68 Ordinary xxvii. 69 viii. 28K Ordinary xviii. 20A xxviii. 55 ix. 48A xix. 38H xxix. 55D x. 900 xx. 38J xxx. 55K
Table 1-5 Household survey locations in Visakhapatnam
Sl. No. Household location Sl. No. Household location Sl. No. Household location i. Pendurthi vii. Kancharapalem xiii. Madhurwada ii. Vepagunta viii. Convent Junction xiv. Simhachalam iii. Gopalapatnam ix. Venkojipalem xv. Arilova iv. NAD Crossroad x. Hanumanthawaka xvi. Waltair v. TC Palem xi. Yendada xvii. Jagadamba vi. Maddillapalem xii. Law College xviii. RK Beach
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 18 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Table 1-6 Sample characteristics in Visakhapatnam
User category Percentage of sample < 30 years 58 Age 30 -59 years 38 ≥ 60 years 4 Female 20 Sex Male 80 Lower income group 31 Income group Middle income group 52 Higher income group 17 Non- owner 56 Vehicle ownership Owner 44 Irregular 8 Bus usage Regular 92 Non- compulsory 24 Trip purpose Compulsory 76 Off- peak 35 Time of survey Peak 65
Rajkot In Rajkot surveys were conducted on-board both BRT (also known as RRL) as well as RMTS buses. The blue line of the BRTS is currently in operation. Thus, BRT surveys were conducted only on the Blue line while surveys for RMTS routes were conducted on those routes that act as feeder or ply along the blue line BRT corridor. The household level surveys were conducted at 15 locations (Table 1-8) that lie along the operational BRT corridor. 33 RMTS bus routes have been selected for study in Rajkot (Table 1-7). The sample characteristics of WTP survey in Rajkot is presented in Table 1-9.
Table 1-7 Surveyed RMTS bus routes in Rajkot
Sl. No. Bus route number Sl. No. Bus route number Sl. No. Bus route number i. 1 xii. 17 xxiii. 36 ii. 2 xiii. 18 xxiv. 38 iii. 3 xiv. 20 xxv. 40 iv. 4 xv. 21 xxvi. 41 v. 5 xvi. 23 xxvii. 42 vi. 7 xvii. 24 xxviii. 43
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 19 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Sl. No. Bus route number Sl. No. Bus route number Sl. No. Bus route number vii. 8 xviii. 25 xxix. 45 viii. 9 xix. 27 xxx. 47 ix. 11 xx. 28 xxxi. 51 x. 14 xxi. 34 xxxii. 54 xi. 15 xxii. 35 xxxiii. 57
Table 1-8 Household survey locations in Rajkot
Sl. No. Household location Sl. No. Household location Sl. No. Household location i. Saurasthra vi. Indira Circle xi. Rampir Chowk University ii. Akashwani Chowk vii. J K Chowk xii. Ruiya Chowk iii. Gondal Chowk viii. West Zone Office xiii. Mavdi Chowk iv. Ayodhya Chowk ix. Umiya Chowk xiv. Madhapur Chowk v. Govardhan Chowk x. Sardar Patel Chowk xv. Kotecha Chowk
Table 1-9 Sample characteristics of Rajkot
User category Percentage of sample < 30 years 48 Age 30 -59 years 45 ≥ 60 years 7 Female 32 Sex Male 68 Lower income group 57 Income group Middle income group 35 Higher income group 9 Non- owner 53 Vehicle ownership Owner 47 Irregular 25 Bus usage Regular 75 Non- compulsory 23 Trip purpose Compulsory 77 Off- peak 39 Time of survey Peak 61 RMTS 51 Bus type RRL 49
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 20 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
1.1.1. Secondary sources
Data related to bus operation along a route and the various costs associated with bus operation were collected from various bus depots in Kolkata. Buses operating along the EM Bypass, are served by 8 bus depots namely, Howrah, Garia, Thakurpukur, Kasba, Belghoria, Maniktala and Taratala (refer to Map 1-1). Information on average running cost for a route is obtained from monthly depot level reports, which is a log of all the expenditures of various cost factors to run the service. In this study, all the depot level expenses are summed up under the major operation attributes like, capital, fuel, crew wages and maintenance. The capital cost includes the cost of the vehicles, fuel cost (is the cost of total fuel consumed during the service), wages of personnel and supporting staff and cost of maintenance including the lubricants, wheels, parts and fixed cost of periodic maintenance. Details related to cost of operation is presented in Table 4-5 of Chapter 4.
1.1.2. Electronic sources
All the three cities have some form of ITS (Intelligent Transportation System) component installed where tickets were collected through an ETM (Electronic ticketing machine). This ensured passenger Origin-Destination (OD) data being recorded along with fare details. In addition to ETMs buses in Rajkot and Kolkata also have GPS based AVL (Automatic vehicle location) broadcast systems installed which stored stop to stop travel time and vehicle dispatch details. An API based JSON data parsing application was developed to get stop-to-stop travel time by estimating arrival time differences at each consecutive stops in case of both Rajkot and Kolkata. However, ETM data was difficult to decipher particularly in Vishakhapatnam where data is stored in a LINUX based system. A special program was written to extract data and re-organize the same in the form of an O-D matrix.
Kolkata
Electronic and secondary data for the bus route S37A was obtained for the month of November, 2018. In Kolkata, the standard public buses are GPS enabled and have provision for on-board electronic ticketing system as per the BS-IV standard. Stop-to-stop travel time data for the bus routes were obtained from API based web service of WBTC, which feeds GPS based live bus location at 4-7 seconds refresh rate. An API based JSON data parsing application was developed to get stop-to-stop travel time by estimating arrival time differences at each consecutive stops (refer to Table Table 1-10). The GPRS enabled on-board electronic ticketing machine (ETM) collects and remotely stores the ticketing information with reference
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 21 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Map 1-8 Bus boarding- alighting count locations in Kolkata
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 22 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Map 1-9 Surveyed WBTC bus routes in Kolkata
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 23 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Map 1-10 Surveyed household locations in Kolkata
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 24 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Map 1-11 Surveyed APSRTC bus routes in Visakhapatnam
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 25 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Map 1-12 Surveyed household locations in Visakhapatnam
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 26 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Map 1-13 Surveyed BRTS and RMTS bus routes in Rajkot
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 27 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Map 1-14 Household survey locations in Rajkot
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 28 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
to the bus and personnel identifier. The ETM information includes time of purchase, passenger origin and destination stops and the ticket amount (refer to Figure 1-1). Passenger boarding alighting count for every stops along with the total earnings from tickets sold on the route was obtained from the ETM information. The extracted passenger boarding-alighting count matrix obtained from the ETM data is listed in Table 1-10.
Table 1-10 Stop- to- stop travel time data sample
Route S37A Direction UP Date 08-11-2018 Time 17:56
Station ID (From) Station ID (To) Minute Seconds 1 2 1 28 2 3 4 4 3 4 9 12 4 5 3 35 5 6 2 10 6 7 3 41 7 8 3 29 8 9 7 17 9 10 2 5 10 11 8 22 11 12 7 11 12 13 4 32 13 14 2 2 14 15 8 44
Figure 1-1 Screenshot of WBTC ETM data
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 29 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Table 1-11 Boarding-alighting matrix prepared from ETM data for WBTC route S37A in Kolkata
R
Bus stop -
etropolitan
Garia Baishnabghata PS Patuli Ajaynagar Kalikapur Hospital Ruby Panchannyagram City Science M CIT Building HUDCO Avenue Bangur Baguihati Raghunathpur Gate Airport No.1 Total boarding
Garia 0 1 10 8 12 31 19 11 4 0 27 0 36 4 0 161
Baishnabghata 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 9
Patuli PS 0 0 0 3 1 4 1 1 0 0 12 0 4 0 0 26
Ajaynagar 0 0 0 0 2 12 2 1 1 0 9 0 6 7 0 40
Kalikapur 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 8 0 1 0 0 11
Ruby Hospital 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 1 0 7 0 20 3 0 36
Panchannyagram 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 2 0 8 1 0 14
Science City 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 13 0 0 14
Metropolitan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 5
CIT Building 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HUDCO-R 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
Bangur Avenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baguihati 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Raghunathpur 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Airport Gate No.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total alighting 0 1 10 12 15 49 25 17 9 0 69 0 95 16 0 318
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 30 Government of India
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Visakhapatnam
In Visakhapatnam, though ticketing is conducted using ETMs, the data is not available online and is instead in instead stored in individual servers of APSRTC bus depots. In Maddillapalem, Waltair, Steel Plant and Gajuwaka depots, the operating systems are Linux based. This made extraction of data manually difficult. Hence, a computer program had to be coded that could extract data and re-organise the same in the form of a boarding-alighting matrix. The code was written in Python (for reference refer to Appendix A). The stage-wise passenger boarding- alighting count data obtained from APSRTC bus depot is presented in Figure 1-2 and a sample boarding-alighting count matrix for a unidirectional trip for route no. 541 extracted using the Python code is presented in Table 1-12.
Figure 1-2 Sample stage-wise passenger boarding- alighting count data obtained from APSRTC bus depots in Visakhapatna
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 31 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Table 1-12 Boarding-alighting matrix prepared from ETM data for APSRTC route 541 in Visakhapatnam
Bus stop
Maddillapalem Gurudwara TC Palem Kancharapalem Birla junction CrossroadNAD Gopalapatnam Bunk Vepagunta Purushottapuram Chinnamushidiwada Pendurthi Saripalli Chintalapalem Desapatrunipalem Mangalapalem Kottavalasa Total boarding Maddillapalem 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 22 28 53 Gurudwara 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 6 TC Palem 2 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 12 Kancharapalem 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 Birla Junction 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 NAD Crossroad 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 10 Gopalapatnam Bunk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vepagunta 3 10 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Purushottapuram 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chinnamushidiwada 2 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pendurthi 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Saripalli 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chintalapalem 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Desapatrunipalem 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mangalapalem 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kottavalasa 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total alighting 51 11 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 158
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 32 Government of India
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Rajkot
In Rajkot, both RMTS and RRL buses are GPS enabled and data is collected through ETM machines and are accessible through APIs. Boarding- alighting count data was derived from ETM data and similar to that of Kolkata, a boarding-alighting matrix was generated to understand the demand and travel pattern of the users. A sample of the ETM data for RMTS services is presented in Figure 1-3 and a sample boarding-alighting matrix generated from the ETM data is presented in Table 1-13.
Figure 1-3 Screenshot of RMTS ETM data
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 33 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Table 1-13 Boarding-alighting matrix prepared from ETM data for APSRTC route 001 in Rajkot
ayan Bus stop
Saurashtra Saurashtra University Kidney Hospital Shakti Shiv Colony Chowk Akashwani Jivan Jyoti School Panchayat Nagar Chowk Circle Indira Chowk Bank SBI Kotecha Chowk Swami Nar Temple Mahila College Chowk Astron Hemu Hall Gadhvi Ramkrishna Ashram Malviya Chowk Trikon Baug Total boarding Saurashtra University 0 0 1 6 3 10 15 0 12 3 0 1 1 2 0 17 71 Kidney Hospital 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 2 0 1 1 0 0 13 24 Shiv Shakti Colony 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 7 0 0 0 0 16 Akashwani Chowk 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 7 Jivan Jyoti School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 3 0 5 12
Panchayat Nagar Chowk 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 7 Indira Circle 18 0 6 5 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 0 2 0 11 49 SBI Bank Chowk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Kotecha Chowk 14 1 2 1 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 32 Swami Narayan Temple 1 7 2 2 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 7 29 Mahila College 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Astron Chowk 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 12 Hemu Gadhvi Hall 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 Ramkrishna Ashram 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 Malviya Chowk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trikon Baug 14 0 4 1 4 2 7 4 23 7 6 2 4 0 0 0 79 Total alighting 56 10 16 16 12 23 34 4 43 18 9 16 10 10 1 76 354
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 34 Government of India
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
2. Bus Transit Service Attributes based on Operator’s Perspective
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 35 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 36 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
In this section, we list the various bus transit service attributes which are useful in determining bus service operations in the Indian context. This list is based on literature review and detail interviews with transit operators and has been classified under five major categories:
i. Route attributes ii. Operation attributes iii. Vehicle Attributes iv. User level attributes v. Cost attributes
The detailed attributes and sub- attributes of each of the following parameters in discussed in the following section.
2.1. Route attributes
Route attributes refer to various corridor and route level characteristics that influence bus transit operation along a route and are listed below:
i. Number of bus stops- Refers to the total number of bus stops along a route inclusive of both the terminals at the beginning and end of the route. ii. Service hours- Refers to the total number of bus service operation hours per day for a route. iii. Service design period- Service design period can be defined as the span of time during which service frequency for a route is determined based on the assumption that the route level Origin-Destination (OD) is homogeneous. iv. Stop to stop distance- Refers to the actual path distance between two consecutive bus stops. v. Stop to stop travel time- Refers to the average time taken by a bus to travel from one bus stop to the next bus stop. vi. Arrival time of bus at a bus stop- Refers to the specific point in time at which a bus reaches a specific bus stop. vii. Dwell time of bus- Refers to the time spent by a bus at a bus stop while waiting for passengers to board and alight the bus. It is measured in seconds. Additionally, the default dwell time refers to the minimum span of time the bus waits at the bus stop. viii. Departure time of bus from a bus stop- Refers to the specific point in time at which a bus departs from a bus stop.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 37 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
2.2. Operation attributes
The attributes that directly affect the operation of bus service for a specific route are classified as operation attributes. These are based on the work of Ceder (2007) and are assumed to be independent of the user preferences and perceptions, except for passengers lost who could not be served due to the capacity constraint. The various operation attributes are listed below.
i. Fleet size- Refers to the total number of vehicles currently in operation on a specific bus route. ii. Pool size- Refers to the total number of spare vehicles available for dispatch at each terminal of a specific bus route. iii. Vehicle departure ID- It refers to the sequential number of departures from either terminals of a specific bus route. iv. Service headway- Refers to the time span between two consecutive buses on a particular bus route. v. Vehicle seat status- Refers to the number of empty and occupied seats inside a bus at any given time on a specific bus route. vi. Vehicle trips- Refers to the total number of one way trips undertaken by a particular vehicle on a particular route on a typical working day. vii. Vehicle kilometre- Refers to the cumulative distance traversed by all the vehicles within a specific service period for a specific bus route. viii. Crew working days- Refers to the average number of working days of a bus crew member (specifically a driver or a bus conductor) in a typical month engaged in bus operation activities. ix. Passenger kilometres per bus- Refers to the cumulative passenger-distance served by a particular bus in specific service period for a specific bus route. x. Passenger per bus- Refers to the total number of passengers served by a particular bus within a specific service period along a specific bus route. xi. Total passengers lost- Refers to the total number of passengers who failed to board any bus due to overcrowding during a service period for a specific bus route. xii. Maximum number of buses left- Refers to the maximum number of buses a particular passenger doesn’t board due to overcrowding. xiii. Layover time-This refers to the mandatory time gap between two trips. This could be used by the crew to take rest or settle accounts or for the bus to get a quick cleaning service etc.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 38 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
xiv. Bus holding time in case of bus bunching-This is the time that a bus needs to be held at a stop in case of bus bunching. This ensures higher utilization of the bus service.
2.3. Vehicle attributes
The vehicle itself is a major component in bus operation and has both service and cost implications. The vehicle design attributes considered here are derived from Automotive Research Association of India (ARAI) (AISC, 2008) standards. These attributes help in defining the characteristics of vehicle and its identification. The relevant attributes used in our study are listed below.
i. Life span of the vehicle- Refers to maximum service life of a vehicle in terms of vehicle kilometres and/or time duration. ii. Vehicle type- Refers to the type of vehicle in terms of whether it is air- conditioning enabled (AC) or not(non-AC). iii. Vehicle door binary- Refers to the number of doors facilitating entry and exit to the bus. It is represented as 1 referring to single door for entry and exit to the bus and 0 referring to separate doors for entry and exit to the bus. iv. Vehicle size or vehicle capacity- Refers to the total passenger seating capacity of a bus. v. Load factor- Refers to the ratio between the total on-board passengers to the actual seating capacity of a bus. vi. Vehicle fuel consumption- Vehicle fuel consumption refers to the rate at which an engine of a vehicle uses fuel. With reference to bus service operation, vehicle fuel consumption is of two types: a. Vehicle fuel consumption when the vehicle is running- Refers to the total fuel used by the engine while the vehicle is in motion. It is measured in kilometres per litre. b. Vehicle fuel consumption when the engine is idle- Refers to the total fuel used by the engine of a vehicle when the bus is stationed and the engine is running at idle. It is measured in litres per hour.
2.4. User level attributes
The user level parameters used in this study are listed below.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 39 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
i. Passenger waiting time- Refers to the time span an individual passenger spends while waiting at the bus stop before boarding a bus of a specific bus route. ii. Number of waiting passenger- Refers to the total number of passengers waiting at a bus stop for a bus to arrive of a specific bus route. iii. Passenger boarding time- Average time required by each passenger for boarding a bus iv. Passenger alighting time- Average time required by each passenger to alight a bus. v. Passenger in-vehicle travel time- Refers to the span of time a passenger spends on-board. In-vehicle travel time can fe further categorized as: a. Passenger in-vehicle travel time while the passenger is seated, and b. Passenger in-vehicle travel time while the passenger is standing vi. Passenger arrival rate- Refers to the average number of passengers arriving at a bus stop per unit span of time. vii. Passenger origin-destination- Refers to the trip itinerary of the individual passenger, in terms of their origin bus stop and their destination bus stop. viii. Passenger failed to board- Refers to the number of passengers who failed to board a bus due to overcrowding. ix. Passengers left- Refers to the total number of passengers who have left the stop after not being served by the service and having waited to their maximum acceptable waiting threshold. x. Boarding passengers- Refers to the total number of passengers boarding a particular bus at a particular bus stop. xi. Passenger alighting rate- Refers to the alighting probability of on-board passengers, at different bus stops. xii. Alighting passengers- Refers to the total number of alighting passengers at a particular bus stop from a particular bus. xiii. Number of on-board passengers- Refers to total number of passengers inside a bus at a given point in time. xiv. Passenger count- Refers to the total number of passengers served by a bus in a single trip.
2.5. Cost attributes
Any service incurs expenses and earns revenues which are both fixed and variable and are incurred both by the operators and the users. The various cost attributes associated with bus
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 40 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
operation can thus be classified into operator cost and user cost, of which the operator cost can be further sub-divided into operator costs and operator earning. The various financial attributes used in this study are listed below.
i. Overall cost- Refers to the total user cost, and operator cost incurred while operating a bus system.
Operator cost attributes
Operator expenses i. Operator cost- Refers to the total fixed and variable costs incurred by the bus service operator in order to provide bus service. ii. Fuel cost- Refers to the unit cost of fuel. iii. Vehicle cost- Refers to the unit on-road cost of a vehicle which is ready for operation. iv. Maintenance cost- Refers to the average expenditure incurred in periodic maintenance of each vehicle expressed per unit vehicle-kilometre run. v. Crew monthly wages- The average amount of money spent as salary per crew per month. vi. Operator penalty- Refers to the opportunity cost in terms of average revenue lost per passenger in failing to serve a passenger due to overcrowding constraint. vii. Total cost per bus- Refers to the total fixed and variable costs incurred by a particular bus in operation within a specific service period for a specific bus route.
Operator revenue i. Farebox revenue- Refers to the total earnings of a public transit operator from the operation of a specific bus for a specific service period on a specific bus route.
User cost attributes
i. User cost- Refers to the time and inconvenience costs incurred by a user while using a bus service system. ii. Fare- Refers to the amount of money that a passenger pays to travel in a bus between two given stops on a particular bus route. iii. Average passenger waiting cost- Refers to the monetary value of time spent by a user while waiting at a bus stop for a bus to arrive. a. Average passenger travel cost- Refers to the monetary value of time spent by a user while travelling in a bus. Passenger travel costs could be again
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 41 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
measured as two separate components i.e., cost while seating and cost while standing. The cost of standing is more than seating due to the added discomfort of standing in a moving bus. b. Passenger travel cost while the passenger is seating c. Passenger travel cost while the passenger is standing iv. User penalty/inconvenience cost- Refers to the cost incurred by each passenger who leaves the bus stop after waiting up to their maximum acceptable waiting time threshold or failing to board even after leaving a certain number of buses due to overcrowding.
2.1. Conclusion
The attributes listed above are necessary in developing bus schedules and solving the frequency setting problem that addresses the needs of both the users’ expectation and the operators financial and resource constraints. The listed below table summarises the various bus service operation attributes and their unit of measurement.
Sl. No. Parameters Unit of measurement Route attributes i. Number of bus stops in numbers ii. Service hours in hours ii. Service design period in hours iii. Stop to stop distance in metres/ kilometres iv. Stop to stop travel time in minutes v. Arrival time at bus stop time vi. Departure time at bus stop time vii. Dwell time of bus in minutes Operation attributes i. Fleet size in numbers ii. Pool size in numbers iii. Vehicle departure ID in code iv. Service headway in minutes v. Vehicle seat status in numbers vi. Vehicle trips in numbers vii. Vehicle kilometre in kilometres viii. Crew working days in number ix. Passenger kilometres per bus in kilometres x. Passenger per bus in numbers
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 42 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Sl. No. Parameters Unit of measurement xi. Total passenger lost in numbers xii. Maximum number of buses left in numbers xiii. Layover time in minutes xiv. Bus holding time in case of bus bunching in minutes Vehicle attributes i. Life span of the vehicle in kilometres/ in hours ii. Vehicle type AC/ Non- AC iii. Vehicle door binary 1 and 0 iv. Vehicle size or capacity in total seating capacity v. Load factor ratio vi. Vehicle fuel consumption a. Vehicle fuel consumption when the vehicle is in kilometres per litres running b. Vehicle fuel consumption when the vehicle is idle in litres per hour User level attributes i. Passenger waiting time in minutes ii. Number of waiting passenger in numbers iii. Passenger boarding time in seconds iv. Passenger alighting time in seconds Passenger in-vehicle travel time a. Passenger in- vehicle travel time while the in minutes passenger is standing b. Passenger in-vehicle travel time while the in minutes passenger is seating v. Passenger arrival rate in number of passengers arriving per minute vi. Passenger origin- destination bus stop ID pair vii. Passenger failed to board in numbers viii. Passengers left in numbers ix. Boarding passengers in numbers x. Passenger alighting rate ratio xi. Alighting passengers in numbers xii. Number of on-board passengers in numbers xiii. Passenger count in numbers Cost attributes i. Overall cost in INR
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 43 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Sl. No. Parameters Unit of measurement ii. Operator cost attributes a. Operator expenses - Operator cost in INR - Fuel cost in INR - Vehicle cost in INR - Maintenance cost in INR - Crew monthly wages in INR - Operator penalty in INR - Total cost per bus in INR b. Operator revenue - Farebox revenue in INR iii. User cost parameters a. User cost in INR b. Fare in INR c. Average passenger waiting cost in INR per minute d. Average passenger travel cost in INR per minute - Passenger travel cost while the in INR per minute passenger is seating - Passenger travel cost while the in INR per minute passenger is standing e. User penalty/inconvenience cost in INR
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 44 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
3. Willingness to pay for improved service level
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 45 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 46 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
There is a constant gap between users’ needs and the operators’ ability to suffice those needs in case of public transit. Most bus service operators in developing countries like India are financially constrained especially in cities where fare is determined by the government considering the significant number of captive riders using bus transit and not the operating agency. Researchers harp on the need to improve service quality to attract passengers, but any service improvement entails cost which necessitates fare increase. However, increase in fare leads to loss in patronage (Paulley, et al., 2006) and fare-box revenue is fundamental to the operation of public transport service. Studies however also highlight that users are willing to pay higher fare for improved services (Dzeikan & Kottenhoff, 2007)and that customer deflection rates are often higher due to poor service quality rather than increase in fare (Zeithaml, L., & Parasuraman, 1993). Thus, there is a need to understand the user’s perceived value for improvement, and one of the most commonly used methods is that to understanding the user’s willingness to pay for service.
In the field of transportation, especially public transport the concept of willingness to pay (WTP) have been used to understand user’s value for improvement in terms of travel time savings (Li, Gao & Tu, 2017; Athira, Muneera, Krishnamurthy & Anjaneyulu, 2014; Litman, 2008; Hensher, Greene & Rose, 2006; Wardman, 2001), waiting time at bus stops (Hensher, Greene & Rose, 2006; Wardman, 2001), travel time reliability (Li, Gao & Tu, 2017; Li, Hensher & Rose, 2010; Eboli & Mazzulla, 2008), crowding (Li, Gao & Tu, 2017; Batarace, Munoz & Ortuzar, 2016; Drevs, Tscheulin, Lindenmeier & Renner, 2014; Li & Hensher, 2011; Eboli & Mazzulla, 2008), real-time transit information (Eboli & Mazzulla, 2008; Molin & Timmermans, 2006), assured seat in a bus (Horcher, Graham & Anderson, 2018; Ramanayya, Nagadevara & Roy, 2007), reduced access time (Eboli & Mazzulla, 2008; Litman, 2008; Hensher, Greene & Rose, 2006; Wardman, 2001), transfer (Wardman, 2001) (Wardman, 2001) and safety and security infrastructure (Jones-Lee & Loomes, 1995). Accordingly, WTP values has also been used to determine generalized cost of service by several authors (Phanikumar & Maitra, 2006) even though, it varies significantly among different user groups and as per the trip and travel conditions.
In this study, we have identified a few quantitative and qualitative service quality attributes which we felt to be pertinent for a WTP study considering service quality improvement tasks undertaken by public bus operators. The four major attributes in this regard are waiting time/headway, crowding, fare and travel time. Improvement in travel time is however difficult to implement and requires huge infrastructure investments particularly in form of BRT corridors. Thus, we have considered either on-time performance (Vishakhapatnam and
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 47 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Rajkot) or delay in journey time (Kolkata) as alternative ways to ensure bus passengers reaches their destination in time with reliability. In addition to these attributes we also selected some qualitative attributes such as transit information, safety and security, bus type and bus structure (Rajkot) as per the results of our user perception survey explained in detail in the first part of this handbook.
3.1. Review of WTP methods
Willingness to pay refers to the maximum amount a person is ready to pay to avail a service or a good. It is often used to also understand users’ preferences and priorities (Rashid, 2018). In transportation WTP is often used to understand the value of time, crowding and other qualitative attributes. There exist numerous methods of WTP estimation some of which are direct methods like Vickry auction (Breidert, Hahsler, & Reutterer, 2006) and lottery (Miller, Hofsetter, Krohmer, & Zhang, 2012). Revealed preference (RP) methods are also used where the system actually exists and the users are accustomed to its functioning. However, if a system does not exist and the operator wants to understand user’s preference for a hypothetical service then indirect methods using stated preference (SP) surveys are used where the users are provided with attributes of a hypothetical service and are asked to state their choices. Conjoint analysis, Conjoint Valuation Methods (CVM) and Discrete Choice Experiments (DCE) are the common indirect methods used in WTP analysis (Eboli & Mazzulla, 2008; Breidert, Hahsler, & Reutterer, 2006; Phanikumar & Maitra, 2006; Hensher & Greene, 2001). In studies based in developing countries, CVM is the most commonly used approach which itself encompasses numerous analytical techniques like dichotomous choice, open-ended format, bidding game and payment card (Rashid, 2018). Both RP and SP data are analysed using econometric models. These models are based on the utility theory which states that every element has an observed component and a random component. There are numerous econometric models like binary logit models (or binary logistic regression), multinomial logit (MNL), mixed logit (ML), random parameter logit (RPL), etc. with various advantages and limitations. For this study we have used the payment card method and have used binary logistic regression to analyse the SP survey data.
3.2. Survey
Willingness-to-pay survey aims to understand the increased price or fare that a user is willing to pay for a unit improvement in service quality. It is a tool to understand the user’s willingness to pay for improved service quality, identify service attributes that are of highest priority to the user and helps the service operator to take decisions while setting fare for public bus transit
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 48 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
service. The questionnaire format for a WTP survey consists of four sections which are as follows:
i. Survey location, date and time of survey ii. Socio-economic characteristics of the interviewee iii. Public bus transport trip characteristics of the interviewee iv. Willingness to pay choice sets for the interviewee
The first section collects information on the date, time, type of bus service the interviewee uses, the bus route number and the boarding and alighting stop. This information helps to understand the variation in user’s perception during peak and off-peak hours, types of bus services, etc.
The second section of the survey obtains information regarding socio-economic characteristics of the interviewee. Information related to the interviewee’s sex, age, income, vehicle ownership is recorded which helps in gaining a detailed understanding about the variation in perception amongst various user categories.
Trip characteristics of the users are recorded in the third section of the survey. Information related to the user’s trip origin, access mode, access distance, access cost, distance travelled in public transport, the fare paid, the egress distance, the egress cost and the trip destination are recorded. Users are also requested to state their purpose of travel, their frequency of bus usage and alternative modes availed. This section helps in analysing the WTP information based on variation in trip length, bus usage characteristics and trip purpose.
In the final section of the survey, the users are asked to state their choices for various bus service combinations. In this section, the users are presented with various choice set combinations of quantitative and qualitative bus service attributes at various fare levels. The interviewees were asked to state whether they would choose bus service or not for a given service combination at a stated price point.
For further reference refer to Appendix B
3.3. Methodology
As stated in previous section, various bus service quality attributes were selected based on their criticality as per user perception and their importance in operation of bus services. Six service quality attributes were identified for Kolkata and Visakhapatnam and seven for Rajkot. In Kolkata, the quantitative attributes waiting time at bus stop, delay in total journey time and
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 49 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
crowding inside buses were identified. In Visakhapatnam, the quantitative attributes remained same except that, delay in journey time was replaced with on-time performance of services. In Rajkot, the identified quantitative attributes were headway of service, on-time performance of service and crowding inside bus. The quantitative attributes were presented at three different categories of service delivery levels. The qualitative attributes remained same across all the three cities which included transit information, safety and security infrastructure and bus type. In Rajkot, the qualitative attribute bus stop structure was an additional service quality attribute which we included since the city municipal bus service lacked properly designed bus stops in most cases. Similar to the quantitative service quality attributes, type of transit information was categorised into three types of services namely, A, A+B and A+B+C, where A represented route and schedule information at bus stop, B represented real time information on arrival and departure and C represented real time information on disruption in services. Similarly, safety and security infrastructure was categorised as W, W+X, W+X+Y, W+X+Y+Z, where W referred to disciplined driving practice, X represented CCTV cameras inside buses, Y refers to CCTV cameras at bus stops and Z represents infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops. Bus stop design categories were represented as P, Q and R which represented bus stops demarcated using sign posts, semi- permanent structured bus stops and permanent structures for bus stops respectively. AC buses and non AC buses are the only two categories identified in bus types. Along with these various categories of bus service attributes, five different price/ fare categories were also chosen, namely no change in fare, 1.25 times increase in fare, 1.5 times increase in fare, 1.75 times increase in fare and 2 times increase in fare. Next, the attributes and their service levels for the three cities were combined into various choice set combinations using fractional factorial design. A total of 32 choice sets were generated for each of the three cities which were further grouped into sets of 4 and each user was presented with two such sets, i.e. 8 choice cards.
Finally, binary logistic regression and ratio of parameters (Athira, Muneera, Krishnamurthy, & Anjaneyulu, 2016) were used to analyse the obtained data in order to understand the user’s WTP value for improvement of bus service quality. The steps involved in mathematical computation for binomial logistic regression and ratio of parameters to determine user’s willingness to pay for a unit improvement in service quality attributes is as follows:
i. Estimate the frequency of responses for each choice set ii. Run binary logistic regression model including all attributes iii. Remove insignificant attributes (p value >0.09) iv. Calculate ratio of parameters for a given service attribute with context to fare
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 50 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
For easier understanding of the methodology, Figure 3-1 schematically explains the inputs required, the process adopted to analyse the data and the final outputs obtained while determining user’s willingness to pay for improvement in various service quality attributes.
Figure 3-1 Input- Output table for user’s willingness to pay for various improvement in bus service quality attributes
3.4. Results and discussion
Table 3-1, Table 3-2 and Table 3-3 shows the user’s willingness to pay for improvement of both quantitative and qualitative bus service quality attributes.
3.4.1. Waiting time at bus stop
The WTP for reduced waiting time for AC bus users in Kolkata is INR 6.25/minute. Table … highlights that, there is a distinct difference in the perception in regards to WTP values amongst peak and off- peak users, male and female users, regular and irregular users, vehicle owners and non- owners and compulsory (work and education trips) and non-compulsory trip makers. Young adults (age < 30 years of age) are ready to pay higher for lesser waiting time in comparison to middle aged adults and the elderly people. A similar observation is made in case of off- peak users in comparison to peak users which are due to lower frequency of buses
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 51 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
during off- peak hours. Regular users are ready to pay more for lower waiting time than irregular users. Only MIG passengers are found to value waiting time since LIG users in most cases lack the financial ability whereas, HIG users may have the ability to choose from numerous alternatives. The WTP values estimated for AC bus users are more compared to the same estimated for non-AC bus users since AC bus fare is approximately five times more than non-AC buses and all WTP values are estimated as a ratio of existing bus fare.
Non- AC bus users in Kolkata are willing to pay an amount of INR .31 for reduction in unit waiting time. The heterogeneity in perception among users of various socio-economic categories is similar to AC bus users except for elderly users who are willing to pay the most for improvement in waiting time. Irregular users value waiting time more than the regular users and so does vehicle owners in comparison to non- vehicle owners. Waiting time is also a significant attribute for LIG users in case of non-AC buses.
In Visakhapatnam, APSRTC bus users are ready to pay INR 2.90/ minute for decrease in waiting time. Young adults, females, LIG users and non-compulsory users are ready to pay relatively higher amount for unit reduction in waiting time compared to their comparison groups. Elderly users, off-peak users and non- vehicle owners are also willing to pay more than INR 3/ minute reduction in waiting time in the city.
3.4.2. Headway of buses
Compared to Kolkata, where there is a distinct difference in perception related to WTP for reduction in waiting time between the AC and non-AC bus users, there is not much difference in perception amongst the RRL-BRTS and RMTS bus users in Rajkot in regards to WTP for improvement in bus headway.
BRTS users are willing to pay INR .23/ minute for reduction in bus headway. Similar to Kolkata, off-peak users are willing to pay more than peak users. However elderly people are willing to pay relatively more at INR .81p/ minute. Heterogeneity in perception among socio- economic groups of RMTS users are similar to that of RRL users though value of WTP for headway reduction in RMTS is lower than that in RRL.
3.4.3. On-time performance of services
APSRTC users in Vishakhapatnam are willing to pay INR .33/ unit percent improvement in on- time performance of service. Female users are ready to pay the highest at INR .70/ unit percent. In Rajkot, BRTS users are willing to pay marginally more for better reliability than RMTS users. However, the WTP value is relatively less.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 52 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
3.4.4. Delay in total journey time
Delay in total journey time is identified as a critical attribute by bus users in Kolkata (refer to Chapter 6 in Handbook 1). AC bus users are willing to pay approximately INR 2.30/minute towards reduction in delay of AC bus services in Kolkata. While, elderly users and the HIG users are willing to pay INR 4.02/ minute and INR 3.14/ minute respectively, LIG users are willing to pay only INR .16/ minute. In case of non-AC bus users, the young adults and the elderly users are willing to pay the highest among all user categories. Male users of non- AC buses also value delay in journey time to be more than female users and are willing to pay INR .24/ minute in comparison to INR .16/ minute by female users.
3.4.5. Crowding inside bus
AC bus users in Kolkata are willing to pay as high as INR 15.83 per unit reduction in load factor of buses. In comparison, non- AC bus user’s willingness to pay is INR 1.36 per unit reduction in load factor. Considering the different user groups, young adult users of AC buses in Kolkata are willing to pay approximately INR 30 per unit reduction in load factor. Off- peak bus users and regular bus users also value crowding at INR 21.18 and INR 22.63 respectively per unit reduction in load factor. In case of non-AC buses in Kolkata, off- peak users of bus service and middle aged adults are willing to pay the highest for reduction in bus crowding. Female users are willing to pay more in comparison to male users which probably highlight the need for improvement in the journey experience of females in non-AC overcrowded buses.
In Visakhapatnam women are willing to pay as high as INR 31.88 per unit reduction in load factor of buses. Most buses in Visakhapatnam have physical partition in the form of a metal door inside buses that segregates space for men and women inside buses. However, in over- crowded buses, such seat segregation is rarely adhered to. Crowding inside bus however is an insignificant attribute for LIG bus users.
In Rajkot, crowding inside buses is assumed to be an insignificant service attribute for most socio-economic user categories for both RRL and RMTS users (refer to Table…). RRL buses usually have frequency as high as 12 buses per hour during peak hours and 4 buses per hour during off- peak hours. As a result, crowding in RRL buses is a rare occurrence and thus is observed to be insignificant for most socio- economic user categories, except for vehicle owners who are willing to pay INR 3.67 per unit reduction in load factor. Female RMTS users are willing to pay highest for reduction in crowding in RMTS buses.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 53 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
3.4.6. Transit information
In Kolkata, it is observed that AC bus users are willing to pay more for quality transit information in comparison to non- AC bus users (refer to Table…). AC bus users are willing to pay for provision of schedule and route information and real- time information on arrival and departure of buses to the extent of INR 27.60. Users undertaking leisure or non- compulsory trips are willing to pay as high as INR 70.04 for A+ B types of transit information. Only off-peak and HIG users are willing to pay a fare increase of INR 12.28 and INR 10.92 respectively for provision of real-time information on disruption in services.
Provision of real-time information on disruption in services is an insignificant attribute for all bus users of every socio-economic category in non-AC buses in Kolkata (refer to Table…). Non- AC bus users are willing to pay a maximum of INR 3.97 (peak hour users) for provision of real-time information on arrival and departure of buses and schedule and route information, followed by male users who are willing to pay INR 3.23. It is observed that provision of real- time information in non- AC buses is significant for peak hour service users, middle aged adults (30-59 years), male users, vehicle non- owners and users undertaking work or education trips. All these user categories form the constitute the majority of bus users in Kolkata, and thus they value the provision of real time information more than irregular, minor user categories.
Provision of bus schedules and route information along with real- time information on arrival and departure of buses is perceived as significant across all user categories while provision of real-time information on disruption in services is perceived as insignificant by all user categories. APSRTC bus users are willing to pay INR 9.46 for improvement in transit information. Female users are willing to pay more than male users and young adults are willing to pay more than other age categories. Similarly, regular bus users are willing to pay more than irregular users.
Similar to Kolkata, in Rajkot too, Ac bus users (here BRT users) are willing to pay more for improved transit information and even consider additional information in disruption is services as significant. RRL users are willing to pay for all types of transit information, though preference for real-time information on arrival and departure of buses is higher than real-time information on disruption in services. Peak service users, young adults and middle aged adults, male users, regular users, vehicle non-owners, middle income group users and users making compulsory trips are willing to pay more for real-time information than other user categories. In case of RMTS, most users are not willing to pay for additional real-time information and real-time information on disruption in services is insignificant across all user categories. Only
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 54 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
HIG users of RMTS are willing to pay a fare hike of INR 5.98 for provision of real-time information on arrival and departure of services along with bus route and schedule information.
3.4.7. Safety and security
Non- AC bus users in Kolkata show more concern for safety and security infrastructure compared to AC bus users. However, elderly users are willing to pay as high as INR 20.76 for additional security infrastructure of CCTVs in AC buses and are even willing to pay INR 25.36 for additional bus stops CCTV cameras and infrastructure for pedestrian prioritisation while accessing bus stops. This is probably due to their physical vulnerability to theft and harassments. It is also observed that, female users are willing to pay more for safety and security infrastructure than male users. Non- AC bus users are willing to pay only for additional CCTV cameras inside buses and at bus stops. Similar to AC buses, female users of non-AC buses are willing to pay for additional security compared to male users.
In Visakhapatnam, users are willing to pay for CCTV cameras both inside buses and at bus stops. Female users are also willing to pay more for additional safety and security infrastructure than other user categories.
In Rajkot, RRL users are willing to pay INR 2.45 for (W+X) type of safety and security measure and INR 6.56 for (W+X+Y+Z) type of safety and security measure. However, unlike in other cities, in Rajkot female BRT users are not willing to pay higher amount for additional safety and security infrastructure compared to male users. Only the elderly RRL users are willing to pay significantly higher values. RMTS users are willing to pay for additional CCTV cameras inside buses and at bus stops only.
3.4.8. Bus type
In regards to bus type, non- AC bus users in Kolkata are willing to pay a fare hike of INR .21 for AC bus services which is insignificant considering the current fare of AC bus services. However, in Visakhapatnam, most user categories are eager to pay for upgrading to AC buses with HIG users willing to pay a fare hike of INR 10.76. Users undertaking leisure or non- compulsory trips in APSRTC buses are also willing to pay a higher fare of INR 9.96 for AC buses. Peak users of bus service in Visakhapatnam however are willing to pay only INR 91 which again points to the inability of general users to afford AC bus service. However, AC services could be introduced for a niche segment of users if demand permits. Similarly, in Rajkot, though most RMTS users are willing to pay for air-conditioned RMTS buses, it is only
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 55 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Table 3-1 Willingness to pay (in INR) for improvement in quantitative bus service attributes of bus users in Kolkata, Visakhapatnam and Rajkot
Delay in total journey Waiting time at bus stop Headway of service On-time performance Crowding in a bus Socio-economic time characteristics Kolkata Rajkot Rajkot Kolkata Kolkata Rajkot Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam AC Non-AC RRL RMTS RRL RMTS AC Non-AC AC Non-AC RRL RMTS Overall 6.25 0.31 2.90 0.23 0.12 0.33 0.10 0.07 2.28 0.22 15.83 1.36 10.88 - - Peak 2.45 0.03 2.42 0.19 0.07 0.30 0.09 0.06 2.02 0.09 5.64 0.39 11.19 - 0.42 Off-peak 7.26 0.46 3.73 0.30 0.17 0.37 0.12 0.08 - 0.29 21.18 2.49 9.20 - - <30 years 7.33 0.35 4.26 0.12 0.23 0.37 0.10 0.15 3.03 0.36 29.11 - 7.59 - 0.67 30-59 years 6.74 0.21 1.34 0.29 0.04 0.29 0.10 0.01 1.68 0.12 17.88 2.46 15.12 - 0.97 >=60 years 5.07 0.66 3.85 0.81 0.57 - 0.10 - 4.02 0.31 - - - 0.29 - Male 5.70 0.25 2.27 0.27 0.28 0.26 0.08 0.08 2.22 0.24 16.91 0.70 7.68 - - Female 7.21 0.43 6.45 0.16 0.16 0.70 0.15 0.06 2.57 0.16 13.57 1.82 31.88 0.48 3.25 Regular 7.20 0.27 2.88 0.18 0.25 0.35 0.11 0.09 1.41 0.22 22.63 1.72 11.55 - - Irregular 4.28 0.50 2.52 0.33 0.27 - 0.09 0.02 2.88 0.24 - - 3.81 - 0.01 Owner 4.36 0.35 2.32 0.34 0.39 0.42 0.11 0.14 2.81 0.28 6.62 - 16.14 3.67 - Non-owner 7.70 0.28 3.24 0.12 - 0.25 0.09 0.02 1.42 0.20 - 1.76 6.82 0.65 0.89 LIG - 0.21 4.66 0.17 - 0.47 0.10 0.04 0.16 0.21 - 0.80 - 0.71 - MIG 6.66 0.35 2.25 0.24 0.25 0.30 0.11 0.14 2.36 0.20 14.80 1.68 11.05 - 1.21 HIG - - 2.13 0.63 0.51 - - 0.05 3.14 - - - 11.37 - - Compulsory 5.66 0.25 2.32 0.11 0.22 0.28 0.09 0.08 2.29 0.20 19.60 1.82 8.09 - - Non-compulsory 8.99 0.50 4.85 0.48 - 0.51 0.13 0.03 1.26 0.24 - - 21.99 - 0.27
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 56 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Table 3-2 Willingness to pay (in INR) of bus users for provision of real-time transit information in bus services in Kolkata, Visakhapatnam and Rajkot
Transit information infrastructure in public bus transit system A + B A + B + C Socio-economic characteristics Kolkata Rajkot Kolkata Rajkot Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam AC Non-AC RRL RMTS AC Non-AC RRL RMTS Overall 27.60 2.13 9.46 0.60 - 0.83 - - 1.07 - Peak 12.20 3.97 9.17 0.93 0.02 - - - 1.21 - Off-peak 41.80 - 9.88 - - 12.28 - - 0.65 - <30 years 47.84 - 15.06 0.51 - - - - 0.95 - 30-59 years 21.86 2.85 3.61 0.97 - 1.57 - - 1.39 - >=60 years - - 3.70 - - 4.95 - - 3.75 - Male 33.48 3.23 8.89 1.25 - - - - 1.60 - Female 19.19 - 12.59 - 0.61 8.71 - - - - Regular 38.75 - 9.43 1.07 - - - - 0.89 - Irregular - - 8.87 - - - - - 1.25 - Owner 15.97 - 7.07 - - - - - 1.54 - Non-owner 40.80 2.27 10.81 1.13 - 3.04 - - 0.46 - LIG 32.41 - 9.44 0.08 - - - - 0.11 - MIG 33.52 2.55 11.06 1.27 - - - - 2.11 - HIG - - 3.09 - 5.98 10.92 - - 1.70 - Compulsory 21.68 2.16 7.42 1.30 - 1.49 - - 1.71 - Non-compulsory 70.04 - 16.34 - 1.20 - - - - - A- Provision of bus and route schedule B- Provision of real-time information on arrival and departure of buses C- Provision of real-time information on disruption in services
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 57 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Table 3-3 Willingness to pay (in INR) of bus users for provision of safety and security infrastructure in bus systems, provision of AC buses and improved bus stops in Kolkata, Visakhapatnam and Rajkot
Safety and security infrastructure in public bus transit system Bus type Bus stop structure Semi- Permanent Socio-economic W +X W+ X+Y W + X +Y + Z AC bus permanent structure characteristics structure Kolkata Rajkot Kolkata Rajkot Kolkata Rajkot Kolkata Rajkot Rajkot Rajkot Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam AC Non-AC BRTS RMTS AC Non-AC BRTS RMTS AC Non-AC BRTS RMTS Non-AC RMTS RMTS RMTS Overall 2.51 3.00 1.88 2.45 1.76 - 1.87 5.32 2.06 5.48 6.56 - - 2.43 - 0.21 3.41 1.53 - - Peak 4.67 4.73 1.82 1.67 0.66 - 3.66 7.49 1.96 - 8.69 - - 1.96 - - 0.91 1.48 - - Off-peak - - 1.52 4.19 4.33 21.78 0.40 0.83 2.32 9.59 - - - 3.33 - 1.67 7.36 2.76 - - <30 years 16.16 - 2.75 4.93 0.17 11.87 - 6.36 3.59 - 9.48 - - 3.90 - 0.75 6.70 - 1.02 - 30-59 years - 3.80 0.15 0.46 4.33 - 2.38 3.73 0.22 7.35 1.00 - - 1.35 - 0.68 - 2.89 - - >=60 years 20.76 - - 4.53 - 25.36 - - 14.09 - 25.36 - - 8.68 ------Male 0.54 2.80 1.21 2.85 2.09 - 1.50 4.16 2.42 6.39 6.57 - - 3.01 - 0.32 1.97 1.37 - - Female 6.72 3.67 6.45 1.80 1.10 5.31 2.72 11.69 0.13 - 8.86 - - 1.18 - - - 1.75 - - Regular - 2.99 2.83 3.20 1.02 - 1.83 4.95 2.44 4.60 - - - 2.58 - 0.44 3.59 0.50 0.50 - Irregular 11.16 3.20 - 0.56 3.38 - - 7.11 1.29 7.19 16.31 - - 2.23 - - 1.09 4.39 - - Owner 8.01 - - 1.58 1.07 - - 9.15 1.03 5.86 19.77 - - - - - 2.00 1.47 - - Non-owner - 3.04 4.83 3.18 2.47 22.44 2.05 2.57 2.95 5.33 - - - 2.60 - 0.42 - 1.74 - - LIG - - - 3.94 2.17 - - - 2.70 4.53 - - - 2.90 ------MIG 3.22 4.16 - 0.19 - - 2.24 4.76 0.87 7.90 6.66 - - - - 0.03 1.09 - 2.67 - HIG 9.21 - 2.23 3.78 - - 2.12 3.09 6.77 - 16.08 - - 8.38 - - 10.76 9.33 - - Compulsory 2.63 2.85 - 2.61 -0.11 - 1.71 3.91 2.01 4.93 4.27 - - 1.65 - - 1.35 2.24 - - Non-compulsory - 3.20 - 1.76 8.57 18.83 - 9.67 2.00 7.87 16.72 - - 4.55 - - 9.96 - - - W- Safe driving practices X- CCTV cameras inside bus Y- CCTV cameras at bus stops Z- Infrastructure prioritising pedestrian access to bus stops
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 58 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
4. Optimisation Model and Software to Determine Bus Frequency for a Particular Route
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 59 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 60 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Optimal frequency setting and time table development for public transit, considering hourly passenger arrival rates at bus stops, period wise origin-destination (O-D) matrix and stop-to- stop travel time data along major bus routes is an important step in bus transit planning. The optimization model used to solve this problem is developed as a function of social wellbeing which considers both user and operator costs, subject to demand satisfaction and service constraints (Herbon and Hadas 2015). While, vehicle capacity, permitted occupancy, passenger waiting time and policy headway are common constraints used in previous research works, in-vehicle comfort and convenience experienced by the users have never been considered. This optimization problem could be either taken up for full day operations considering both up and down directions of travel or could be considered for each time period independently. Accordingly, bus operators in most cases operate buses in each time period and each direction with different frequency setting which is based on both passenger travel demand, traffic conditions during that period and the number of buses available at each terminal. Additionally, bus operators have limited resources and have to stress on minimizing the fleet size while maintaining full roundtrip operations during each service period. The problem is much severe while maintaining full day operations in both directions.
Recent studies on service quality improvement of public transit have highlighted the importance of service attributes related to user comfort and convenience such as, seat availability (Qu et al. 2016; Das and Pandit 2016a; Tirachini et al. 2016; Das and Pandit 2016b; Tirachini, Hensher, and Jara-Díaz 2010) and on- board crowding level (Ceder 1991; Martínez, Mauttone, and Urquhart 2014; De Palma and Lindsey 2001) experienced by the users in addition to the attributes related to bus service operation such as, vehicle capacity and occupancy, perceived waiting time, dwell time, in-vehicle travel time and service headway (Grosfeld-Nir and Bookbinder 1995; De Palma and Lindsey 2001; Ceder 2002; Herbon and Hadas 2015; Szeto and Jiang 2014). While, acceptable service levels for these attributes could be determined by estimating the users’ zone of tolerance (ZOT) which is bounded by their ‘minimum acceptable’ and ‘desired level of service’ (Pandit and Das 2013; Oña and Oña 2015; Das and Pandit 2016a), the same could be also be based on operator resources and productivity criteria such as, passengers per vehicle-kilometre, passengers per trip, operation cost per passenger and cost recovery ratio (Ceder 2007).
While, bus service operation attributes could be easily introduced as constraints in the bus frequency optimization problem, comfort and convenience attributes such as, seat availability are difficult to measure since its require us to quantify the experience of individual passengers during their journey. This research proposes a novel approach by introducing a simulation
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 61 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
model emulating the journey experiences of each individual passenger by measuring their in- vehicle travel time using two components, in-vehicle travel time standing and in-vehicle travel time seating. While this adds a new dimension to our study, it comes at a cost which is the computation time for the optimization model. Additionally, this simulated bus operation also considers penalty cost for the operators against each of the un-served passengers, which reduce the chances of loss of ridership due to unfeasible bus service operation.
In this section, we propose a frequency optimization model for each time period for an isolated bus route for each direction while simulating continuous bus operations between two terminals using numerical examples. The novelty of this model is in the inclusion of user comfort and convenience factors which are increasingly gaining importance in bus service design.
4.1. Review of frequency setting problem
In public-transit planning there are five major components namely, network design, frequency setting, timetable development, vehicle scheduling and crew scheduling (Ceder and Wilson 1986). In practice, the frequency setting problem (FSP) could be taken up at the network level or at the route level. While, the network level frequency setting problem minimizes aggregate travel and transfer time by setting frequency for each bus route (Desaulniers and Hickman 2007) within each route set serving the peak hour passenger travel demand in one direction(in most cases), at the route level, service frequency or headway for a single bus route is set considering the variation in passenger travel demand, OD matrix and traffic conditions during the entire day.
Passenger waiting time, on- board crowding level and transfer time are the service quality attributes those can be directly controlled by setting service headway (Jara-Diaz, Gschwender, and Ortega 2012; Sun et al. 2014; Ceder 1991; Herbon and Hadas 2015). Similarly, from the operators’ perspective, fleet size and undesirable operation conditions like bus bunching can be also controlled by setting appropriate headway (Michael 2009; Daganzo 2009; Xuan, Argote, and Daganzo 2011; Bellei and Gkoumas 2010). Passenger crowding level is another policy level constraint that improves the passengers’ perception towards the service quality (Jara-Díaz and Gschwender 2009). In reality, passenger demand is a function of space and time (Newell 1971) and attempts to maintain uniform crowding level results in inconsistent service headway. On the other hand, variable headway is practically impossible to operate, maintain and monitor in reality. Thus, researchers have derived the service headway with an assumption of uniform passenger demand over the study period. Alternatively, maintaining a fixed route bus service with uniform frequency and capacity throughout the entire service
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 62 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
period would either yield underutilization of resources or undesired quality of service (Jara- Díaz and Gschwender 2009).
The frequency setting problem is classified under three major groups:
i. a set of conceptualized public transport problem, ii. simulation based problems, and iii. mathematical programming model (Ceder 2009).
The first set of problems consider a theoretical propositions and solve the same to identify optimal headway for a given bus route. In the work of Newell (1971), passenger arrival rate is considered as a smooth function of time, where service frequency and passengers served per vehicle varies with time with approximation of the square root of passenger arrival rate. Similar problem is solved by Hurdle (1973) to derive optimal dispatch strategy, where he used a continuum fluid model to jointly minimize the cost of passenger waiting time and service operation. De Palma and Lindsey (2001) developed a single line model where each individual passenger trip time is assumed to be known and fixed and the model minimized total delay in passenger journey time for an ideal scenario. In simulation based problems, the dispatch system is simulated for a given time period with pre-set scenarios to check the effect of passenger demand variations, passenger delay during journey or at the transfer stations, operation feasibilities and cost for the designed service through interactive computer-support system (Marlin et al. 1988; Dessouky et al. 1999; Hall, Dessouky, and Lu 2001). In the mathematical approaches, the net social benefit is maximized inclusive of waiting time savings (Furth and Wilson 1981), constrained fleet size and optimum passenger load. The work of Koutsopoulos, Odoni, and Wilson (1985) solved a non- linear programming model considering cost of passenger crowding discomfort.
Additionally, Ceder (2009) has put forward another method to obtain optimal service frequency with respect to maximum crowding level and maximum load points along the direction of the operation. In his work he has shown three different procedures to obtain optimal frequency for a bus service with given passenger demand. Firstly, the service headways are assumed to be evenly spaced for each service hours and hourly interchanges are also assumed to be smooth. The inputs considered in this procedure are, hourly maximum passenger load, desired occupancy and policy headway while bus size remains identical. In his second consideration, the maximum load point or stop is considered instead of hourly load and headway is determined considering average load for each vehicle. In the third procedure, appropriate headway is obtained from observing passenger load profile of all buses operating
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 63 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
on same direction while satisfying the desired crowding level. In all three procedures, outcome is the departure time obtained by satisfying different load criteria set for three individual cases.
Simulation and mathematical optimization based FSP derive the optimal frequency by maximizing social benefit of the bus service by jointly minimizing user and operator cost incurred over a fixed period of service. Relevant studies on generalized cost of the public transit system claims that, users perceive journey time as cost because, the productivity considering journey time is less or the journey could be made in more desired environment (K. A. Small and Verhoef 2010; Jara-Díaz and Gschwender 2009; Wardman 2004; Jara-Diaz and Guevara 2003). Public transit use also requires significant out of vehicle time inclusive of walking to and from the transit stops, waiting at the stops for the service and optional transfers to other modes or line. Hence, the cost of journey time is also perceived as the aggregate of different activity based cost segments like, access and egress time cost, waiting time cost, in- vehicle travel time cost and transfer cost (Kim and Schonfeld 2013; Hadas and Shnaiderman 2012; Dell’Olio, Ibeas, and Ruisánchez 2012; Casello and Hellinga 2008; K. Small 1997; Chang and Schonfeld 1991). In transportation economic studies, the value of time is derived with respect to the passengers’ perception of benefit of time savings (Jara-Diaz and Guevara 2003), which is estimated with respect to willingness to pay for unit time savings. The average payable amount for unit time savings considering different class of users yields the value of time (VOT) with reference to that time and space (K. A. Small and Verhoef 2010). More recent studies, conclude that, the mean access time cost is valued between 1.6 to 2.5 (2 for simplicity) times, whereas the mean of waiting time cost is 2.4 to 3 times the in-vehicle travel time cost perceived by the passengers (Wardman 2004) and the in-vehicle travel time standing is valued about 1.5 times more than in-vehicle travel time. While, the user cost is derived from the generalized cost of different user time impedance factors, the operator cost is estimated from the fixed and running cost of the bus service (Ibeas et al. 2010; Leiva et al. 2010; Dell’Olio, Ibeas, and Ruisánchez 2012; Delle Site and Filippi 1998; Cortés et al. 2010; Tirachini, Hensher, and Jara-Díaz 2010). In recent works, the average running cost of operation is estimated with respect to the vehicle-kilometre of service provided and the fixed operation cost is considered as the sum of establishment cost of the infrastructure, capital cost and fixed wages of the officials and personnel. The running cost accounts for the cost of average fuel consumed, average maintenance and cost of vehicle wear-n-tear (Dell’Olio, Ibeas, and Ruisánchez 2012; Ibeas et al. 2010). In the work of Ibeas et al. (2006), running cost of school vehicles also considered the cost of vehicles standing idle. The same cost attribute has also been used to estimate the cost of urban bus service during their dwell time at the stops (Ibeas et al. 2010). The objective function of aggregate cost of bus service is often minimized
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 64 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
against the constraints like passenger waiting time, transfer time, number of transfers, maximum delay in journey time, total subsidy, fleet size, minimum and maximum headway, vehicle capacity and passenger-load. Passenger load factor or crowding level inside the bus is considered as a constraint to bind the maximum number of on- board standees.
Setting the crowding level constraint according to the desirability of users ensures service attractiveness and improves user comfort and conveniences. However, the crowding level attributes does not account the inconveniences caused for each standing individual or his probability of getting a seat. In state of the art literature, the seat availability factor is often seen as a qualitative service quality attribute and covered under the passenger comfort factors (Golob et al. 1972; Garrido and Ortúzar 1994; Das and Pandit 2014). However, probability of getting a seat while making the journey is one of the important user level factor apart from crowding level and maximum waiting time in the context of urban bus service of India (Das and Pandit 2014) and should be considered while determining optimal frequency for a bus route.
4.2. Aim and objectives
The aim of this study is to develop an optimal frequency setting model for bus services along a bus route considering the variations in passenger demand and traffic conditions for different times of the day. The optimal headway is obtained against the minimum social cost of the service. The simulation model is proposed to estimate the appropriate headway for any given demand scenario considering real life bus operation challenges and complexities and estimates the social cost of the service inclusive of user and operator cost. The social cost estimation is deterministic in nature and is minimized by generating and comparing all possible headway combinations, subject to satisfying user and operator level constraints.
The objectives of the study are as to:
i. Develop an optimal bus frequency setting model for any time period of the day for any bus route ii. Develop a software based on the model to facilitate cost comparison for different service variations along a bus route to facilitate decision making
4.3. Model formulation
The bus route simulation model estimates period wise social cost of bus service inclusive of operator cost and user cost for fixed frequency of service. Periods could be morning peak,
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 65 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
afternoon off-peak or any time period which could be set by observing the bus route demand characteristics. While, the model considers hourly passenger arrival rate and hourly stop to stop travel time, O-D share is assumed to be fixed for a particular time period.
4.3.1. Assumptions
The model has been developed based on the following assumptions and considerations.
i. Time period considered in the model could be of any size (hours) as long as it is less than or equal to the daily service period. The model also assumes only integer values for hours. ii. Bus size and capacity could vary but a mixed fleet of buses with different sizes is not considered. iii. Buses are assumed to start and end from terminal stops and operation cost to travel from depot to terminal is not considered. iv. A minimum dwell time rule is followed at every stop. v. The cost of passenger loss is accounted for the operators as loss of opportunity and a penalty value is considered for every passenger that cannot be served. Passenger opts out when his wait to avail a bus with available capacity exceeds his waiting time threshold or when more than a certain number of buses have passed i.e., (푛) number of headway time. vi. The seat availability factor is defined in this scope of work as the fraction of seated passenger-km out of total passenger-km. vii. The passenger journey time components like transfer and the access to the service has not been considered in this model. viii. The vehicle performance in terms of manoeuvring, acceleration, deceleration and other perceived quality are indifferent for all the available fleet. ix. The simulated bus service never allows overtaking, short-turning, stop skipping etc. The bus departure sequence will always be maintained if bus bunching occurs. x. Passengers’ perception towards the discomfort of standing is equal and independent of the seating and standing location inside the vehicle. xi. Passengers’ perception of seating is equal and independent of the seating location inside the vehicle. xii. Passengers’ preference and perception towards the bus service quality, and their travel behaviour (boarding, alighting and availing a seat) are assumed to be identical.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 66 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
xiii. The onboard passengers are always in search for a seated trip irrespective of their perception towards the duration of seating. xiv. A token sequence is followed while available seats are distributed among the standees unless the passenger with preceding token number has already alighted.
4.3.2. Model overview
The simulation model executes three major steps to estimate the user and operator cost of the emulated bus service.
i. Dispatching buses at given headway. ii. Passenger assignment procedure that assigns passenger at stops according to the passenger demand and assigns passengers to the vehicles following the user and operator level constraints. iii. Estimates user and operator cost for the entire service period with given cost values.
The bus dispatching mechanism follows the hourly travel time dataset and other route level characteristics (number of stops, stop to stop distance, service hours etc.). Passenger assignment procedure uses the historical passenger demand dataset (average passenger arrival rate and passenger origin-destination) to estimate the number of boarding and alighting passengers followed by the passenger load. The overall cost of simulated bus transit service is estimated from the bus operation parameters and the cumulative cost of passenger time impedance factors.
The simulation environment is set with the following route characteristics parameters as shown in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1 Route characteristics parameters
Annotation Unit Description 푗 = 1, 2,3, … , 푆 - Number of bus Stops h in hours Number of hours during service period = 1, 2,3, … , 퐻 푃푟푠 in am/pm Start time of the period (e.g. Peak, Off-peak hours) under consideration 푃푟푒 in am/pm End time of the period (e.g. Peak, Off-peak hours) under consideration 푑(푗−1),푗 in Stop to stop distance (푗 − 1) 푡표 푗 kilometres ℎ 푡푗,(푗−1) in minutes Stop to Stop travel time 푎푟푟 푡푖푗 in am/pm Arrival time of bus 푖 at bus stop 푗 푑푤푒푙푙 푡푖푗 in seconds Dwell time of bus 푖 at bus stop 푗 푑푒푝 in am/pm Departure time of bus 푖 from bus stop 푗 푡푖푗
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 67 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
The bus operation parameters are identified following the work of (Ceder 2007) along with the other parameters are shown in Table 4-2.
Table 4-2 Bus service operation parameters
Annotation Unit Description 푖 = 1, 2,3, … , 푉 - Number of vehicles dispatched or, number of one-way trips
푖푧 - Vehicle of type 푧 푧 푄푖 - Seating capacity of the bus type 푧 푝 = 1, 2,3, … , 푃 - Number of passengers
휇푘 in minutes Service headway 휗푥 - Vehicle door binary (1=single, 0=separate entry exit) 휗푑 in kilometres Vehicle life - in kilometre 휗푡 in years Vehicle life - in years of operation 푚푓 in Vehicle fuel consumption (running) kilometres/litre 푚̂ 푓 in litres/hour Vehicle fuel consumption (engine idle) 푛푡푟푖푝 - Number of daily target round trips for each crew 푦푐푟푒푤 in days Average number of working days per crew per month 푚푐푟푒푤 - Number of crew per bus
푖푧 - Trips made by each vehicle 푛 - Maximum number of overcrowded buses passenger will tolerate before availing other mode 훼 Minimum load factor (Crowding Level)
The user related parameters used in this model are shown in Table 4-3.
Table 4-3 Bus service user level parameters
Annotation Unit Description 푤 푡푝 in minutes Passenger waiting time 푑 푡푝 in seconds Passenger dwell time 푡 푡푝 in minutes Passenger in-vehicle travel time 푡 푡̂푝 in minutes Passenger in-vehicle travel time seating 푡 푡푝̅ in minutes Passenger in-vehicle travel time standing
푎푗 - Passenger arrival rate at stop 푗 ′ 푏푗,푗′ - Passenger origin (푗) – destination (푗 )
(훽푖푗,푗′) - Passenger random token sequence 푤 푃푖푗 - Number of waiting passengers at each stop 푤′ 푃푖푗 - Number of passengers failed to board the last bus (푖 − 1) at stop(푗) 푤′′ 푃푖푗 Passenger lost 푏 푃푖푗 - Number of boarding passengers
휏푗 - Passenger alighting rate. 푎 푃푖푗 - Number of alighting passenger
푃푖푗 - Number of on-board passengers (passenger load)
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 68 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Annotation Unit Description 푐 푃푖푗 - Total passenger count for the (푖푧)
휕푝 - Passenger seating binary (0 = not seated, 1 = seated)
휕푤 - Waiting passenger boarding binary (0 = not boarded, 1 = boarded) 푡푏 in seconds Average boarding time per passenger 푡푎 in seconds Average alighting time per passenger
The service level constraints like; in-vehicle crowding level, seat availability and maximum passenger waiting time are considered as the threshold criterion for this model to determine the cost for the desired bus service environment only. The constraint parameters for the desired bus service design is set from the zone of tolerance range values following the work of Das and Pandit (2016a) are shown in the Table 4-4.
Table 4-4 Bus service constraints
Annotation Unit Description
훼푖 - Maximum load factor (Crowding Level) 푧 휑푖 - Seat availability factor W 푡푗 in minutes Waiting time threshold 훽 훽 푃푛 Number of buses left due to overcrowding by passenger 푃푖푗 휇ℎ in minutes Headway range (ZOT value) 휑푑푤푒푙푙 Minimum dwell time
The annotations used for all relevant cost parameters in this model are shown in Table 4-5.
Table 4-5 Bus service cost attributes
Annotation Unit Description
퐶푆 in INR Overall cost 퐶푂 in INR Operator cost 퐶푈 in INR User Cost 푓푎푟푒 in INR Fare between stop 푗 and 푗′ 퐶푗,푗′ 푓 in INR/litres Fuel cost per litre 퐶표 푣 퐶표 in lakhs-INR/unit Capital cost per vehicle unit 푚 퐶표 in thousand-INR Maintenance cost per vehicle-kilometre 푐푤 퐶표 in thousand-INR Average crew monthly wages 퐶푤 in INR/minute Average passenger waiting cost (Per minute) 퐶푡, 푠푒푎푡 in INR/minute Average passenger travel cost (Seating) (Per minute)
퐶푡, 푠푡푎푛푑 in INR/minute Average passenger travel cost (Standing) (Per minute) 푝푒푛 퐶표 in INR/passenger Cost of penalty for each lost passenger for operator (revenue loss)
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 69 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Annotation Unit Description 퐶̅푝푒푛 in INR/passenger Cost of penalty for each lost passenger for user (inconvenience cost)
The bus dispatch system has been automated based on the headway range which is also considered as the decision variable while formulating the overall cost minimization function and assumed to be uniform for each service period. Therefore, the model takes a single headway value at a time to run the bus service for each service hour in both up and down directions independently. The fleet size is assumed to be unlimited and readily available at the time of departure at both the terminals. The numbers of boarding passengers are then estimated with respect to the service constraints like maximum waiting time and crowding level. This model also simulates the on-board passengers to estimate the seat availability factor emulating real life passenger travel experiences.
The input variables regarding the operations, historical traffic conditions, passenger demand data, route level information and user &operator cost attributes are assigned to the respective functions. Further detailed discussion regarding each of the functions and the model working principle are discussed in subsequent sections.
4.3.3. Cost minimisation function
In this work we have adopted the generalized cost minimization function following the work
of dell’Olio, Ibeas, and Ruisánchez (2012) to estimate minimum overall cost (퐶푆) of the bus service for a given time period where, the passenger demand and other service related attributes remain unchanged. Hence, the objective function in its simplest form has been expressed below.
4-1 Overall bus service cost
푴풊풏풊풎풊풛풆: 푪푺 = 푪푼 + 푪푶
The construct of the objective function (4-1) for this model aims to minimize overall cost of
bus transit service consisting of user cost (퐶푈) and operator cost (퐶푂). The expanded form of the operator and user cost is shown below.
4-2 Operator cost
푭 푫 풄풓풆풘 푴 푷 푪푶 = 푪 + 푪 + 푪 + 푪 + 푪
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 70 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
The operator cost is derived as the sum of consumed fuel, capital/ depreciation cost, crew wages, maintenance cost of the vehicle and penalty for passengers lost due to the capacity constraint during the period under consideration.
The operation cost function is framed under three broad procedures related to vehicle, crew and penalty. The vehicle operation procedure estimates the operation cost attributes like, fuel consumption, maintenance and vehicle depreciation.
The fuel consumption parameter is sensitive to the total vehicle-km run of each vehicle and considers the fuel consumption both while a vehicle is running or at engine idle state (Dell’Olio, Ibeas, and Ruisánchez 2012) as shown in the following equation.
4-3 Fuel consumption
푉 푆 푆 1 1 퐹푢푒푙: 푪푭 = 퐶푓 ∙ ( ∙ ∑ ∑ 푑 + ∙ ∑ 푡푑푤푒푙푙) 표 푚푓 푖(푗−1),푗 푚̂ 푓 푖푗 푖 푗=2 푗=1
In the above expression, total fuel consumption is estimated for the distance covered and dwell time separately as each vehicle(푖) covers each stop(푗). The simulation model estimates the total vehicle-km. of service from the stop-to-stop distance matrix table whereas, the dwell time is estimated with respect to the number of boarding and alighting passengers or the minimum dwell time specification, whichever is maximum.
In regard to maintenance cost, it is assumed that, the vehicle is maintained periodically or in 푚 case of breakdown. Hence, the average maintenance cost (퐶표 )per vehicle-kilometre run is multiplied to the total vehicle-kilometre of bus service provided during the period under consideration. The total maintenance cost for a fixed range of service period is estimated using the following expression.
4-4 Maintenance cost
푉 푆 푴 푚 푀푎푖푛푡푒푛푎푛푐푒: 푪 = 퐶표 ∙ ∑ ∑ 푑푖(푗−1),푗 푖 푗=2
푣 Vehicle depreciation cost is estimated as the proportion of the vehicle capital cost (퐶표 ) utilized during its run considering vehicle service life(휗푑) in terms of vehicle-kilometres. The total vehicle-kilometre run is cumulatively estimated at the end of each trip for each vehicle utilized within the service period under consideration.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 71 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
4-5 Vehicle depreciation cost
푉 푆 푣 푫 퐶표 퐷푒푝푟푒푐푖푎푡푖표푛 ∶ 푪 = ( ∙ ∑ ∑ 푑푖(푗−1),푗) 휗푑 푖 푗=2
Crew cost is estimated for each trip considering standard working rules which include length of work shifts in terms of the number of target round trips per day (푛푡푟푖푝),average number of working days per month (푦푐푟푒푤) and number of crew assigned to each bus (푐푟푧) and average 푐푤 crew wages per month (퐶표 ). Given a standard BS-IV (Bharat Stage - IV) bus with one door 푧 in operation (휗푥 = 1) and only on-board ticketing, there are only two crew members (driver and ticket collector) who are assigned to a bus in each trip in Kolkata. Crew scheduling is beyond the scope of this study, hence, the model only estimates the average crew resources spent in the service for the operation kilometres/ trips only. In this simulation, the crew cost is estimated using the following equation.
4-6 Crew cost
푐푟푧 ∙ 퐶푐푤 ∙ 푉 퐶푟푒푤: 푪풄풓풆풘 = 표 2 푛푡푟푖푝 ∙ 푦푐푟푒푤
In this model, penalty cost is accounted for each of the passengers who failed to board 푛 consecutive overcrowded buses or who leaves the stop after waiting till the waiting threshold time, whichever is minimum, due to overcrowding. Penalty cost is assumed to be
푝푒푛 푤′′ uniform (퐶표 ) for all the lost passengers (푃푖푗 )refer equation 4-10 irrespective of the individual passenger’s trip characteristics or other exogenous factors. The penalty cost is estimated using the following expression.
4-7 Operator penalty cost
푉 푆 푷 푝푒푛 푤′′ 푃푎푠푠푒푛푔푒푟 푙표푠푠 푝푒푛푎푙푡푦: 푪 = 퐶표 ∙ ∑ ∑ 푃푖푗 푖 푗
The user cost is estimated using the following equation,
4-8 User cost equation
′ 푾 푻풔풆풂풕 푻풔풕풂풏풅 푷 푪푼 = 푪 + 푪 + 푪 + 푪
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 72 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
where, the user cost is the sum of cost of user time impedances like, waiting time (푪푾), in- vehicle seating time (푪푻풔풆풂풕 ), in-vehicle standing time (푪푻풔풕풂풏풅 ) and the additional cost for
′ shifting (푪푷 ) to other modes after waiting for 푛 consecutive buses due to overcrowding or when the waiting time threshold is violated.
푤 The passenger waiting time (푡푖푗 ) is estimated assuming that the passengers are unaware of the service schedule and arrive randomly. Thus, the waiting time for each fresh arriving passenger is equal to half of the service headway at all the bus stops (Hassold and Ceder 2013; Kim and 푤 Schonfeld 2013). The total waiting time at stop (푗)for all the fresh passengers (푝푗 ) waiting for vehicle (푖) is estimated using the following equation.
4-9 Total waiting time estimation
푉 푆 푃푊 1 푡푤 = ∑ ∑ ∑ (푡푑푒푝 − 푡푎푟푟) ∙ 푝푤 ∀ 푗 ∈ {2, 푆} 푖푗 2 (푖−1)푗 푖푗 푗 푖 푗 푝
In addition to the fresh boarding passengers, this simulation model also considers the passengers who have failed to board the (푛) previous buses due to overcrowding. Those passengers who experience additional waiting time are expected to wait till the defined W maximum waiting time threshold (푡푗 ) before they leave the stop or choose other mode of transport. The number of passengers who leave the stop due to the condition stated above is estimated with the following equation.
4-10 Total passengers leaving the stop
푖−1 푤′′ 푤 푏 푃푖푗 = 푃푖′푗 − ∑ 푃(푖−푛)푗 푛=1 푤′′ 푏 푤′ 푤 ′ ∀ 푃(푖−푛)푗 ≥ 0 ; 1 ≤ 푛 ≤ (푖 − 1); 푃(푖−1)푗 ≤ 푃푖푗 ≪ 푃푖푗 ; 푖 = 1
Hence, the total passenger waiting time equation 4-9 is now derived as the sum of the total waiting time of the fresh arriving passengers and also the waiting time incurred for the passengers who have failed to board previous buses and are still waiting.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 73 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
4-11 Passenger waiting time
푉 푆 푃푤 푖−1 1 ′ 푡푤 = (∑ ∑ ∑ 푝푤 (푡푑푒푝 − 푡푎푟푟) + ∑ 푃푤 ) 푖푗 2 푗 (푖−1)푗 푖푗 (푖−푛)푗 푖 푗 푝 푛=1
The user level penalty cost is introduced in this model that considers each of the passengers who could not avail the service while the above condition is held. The user level discomfort cost could be estimated as a generalized cost function based on the choice of modes available other than the bus service and their respective fare and travel time.
The total in vehicle travel time is estimated as an aggregate of both the seated and standing passenger travel time. Total passenger standing time and seating time is estimated by calibrating each passenger’s journey experience. A seat allotment procedure is introduced in this simulation model which simulates individual passenger journey and estimates the seated and standing travel time with respect to the passenger origin-destination, on-board crowding level and number of seats.
4-12 Travel time seating
푆 푃훽 ̂푡 훽푎푟푟 훽푑푒푝 푡푝 = ∑ ∑ (푡푗′ − 푡푗̂ ) 푗 푝훽
The equation above estimates the seated travel time of the passengers and covers three practical scenarios i.e., when a passenger boards the bus at (푗) and gets seat immediately, when he gets a seat at (푗̂) after standing a part of his journey and lastly, when a passenger does not get a seat during the entire journey(푗, 푗′). The standing travel time is estimated with the following expression.
4-13 Travel time standing
푆 푃훽 푡̅푡 = (∑ ∑ (푡훽푎푟푟 − 푡훽푑푒푝) – 휕훽 ∙ 푡푡 ) 푝 푗′ 푗 푗̂ 푃̂훽 푗,푗′ 푗 푝훽
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 74 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
4-14 Passenger inconvenience cost (penalty)
푖−1 푷′ ̅푝푒푛 푤 푏 푪 = 퐶 ∙ ∑(푃(푖−푛)푗 − 푃(푖−푛)푗) 푛=1
Constraints
The objective function (4-15) is formulated to satisfy the following constraints. The constraints ensure that the bus service is provided with the interest of both the user and the operator. The user level constraints are formulated to set the bus service within the passenger’s zone of tolerance, in terms of maximum in-vehicle crowding level (4-16), the lower value of either the maximum time a passenger is willing to wait at the bus stop or leave a number of overcrowded buses (4-16) and passenger seat availability (4-17). These constraints ensure passenger comfort and convenience while designing the bus service. In addition to the above, operator level constraints such as passengers served per unit vehicle-km, passenger per trip, operation cost per passenger and cost recovery ratio also helps to maintain the efficiency of the service. Additionally, operators can set two more constraints i.e., the minimum crowding level and the total percentage of passengers lost during a service period.
4-15 On-board crowding level constraint
(푃 + 푃푏 − 푃푎) 푖(푗−1) 푖푗 푖푗 푧 푧 ≤ 훼푖 , 푄푖
Equation 4-16 shows that, any waiting passenger may fail to board any bus due to overcrowding and needs to wait for next buses to arrive, whereas, the following constraint ensures that the passenger is served before he fails to board n number of consecutive buses or waits more than the maximum time a passenger is willing to wait at the bus stop.
4-16 Passenger waiting time threshold condition
푖−1 푑푒푝 푎푟푟 푤∗ 푤′ ∑ (푡(푖−푛)푗 − 푡푖푗 ) ≤ 푡푖푗 ≤ 푡 푛=1
This equation ensures that, the passenger must be served within the specified passenger defined waiting time threshold limit or the maximum number of overcrowded buses the passenger can tolerate before the passenger opts for other means of transportation.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 75 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
The following constraint (4-17) ensures that, the proportion of total seated passenger-km to the total passenger-km per trip(푧) remains above the minimum seat availability threshold value(휑).
4-17 Minimum seat availability threshold
푆 푃 푆 푃 ∗ 푝 ∗ ′ ′ ∑ ∑ 푏푗∗푗′ ≥ 휑 ∑ ∑ 푏푗푗′ ∀ 0 < 휑 ≤ 1; 푗 ≤ 푗 < 푗 ; 푗 ∈ {2, 푆} 푗 푝 푗 푝
Designing a bus service with only the above service quality constraints would definitely benefit the bus users but it will also increase the operation cost significantly which in the long run would not be possible to maintain. Thus, operator interests also need to be satisfied by introducing minimum service utilization thresholds to recover the operation cost. Hence, the following operation level constraints are introduced such as passengers per vehicle-km, passengers per trip, operation cost per passenger and cost recovery ratio. The operator can also ensure bus utilization through introducing a constraint ensuring a minimum crowding level threshold (4-22) and a cap on the total percentage of passengers lost during a service period 4-23).
4-18 Passengers per vehicle kilometre constraint
푉 푆 푏 ∑푖 ∑푗 푃푖푗 휗 ′ ⁄ 푉 푆 ≥ 휑 ∀ 0 < 휑 ≤ 1; 푗 ∈ {2, 푆} ∑푖 ∑푗 푑푖푗,푗′
The above constraint (4-18) is estimated as a ratio of the sum of all passengers served over total vehicle kilometre of service provided within a fixed time period in a single direction.
4-19 Minimum passengers per trip
∑푉 ∑푆 푏 푖 푗 푃푖푗⁄ 푣 V ≥ 휑 0 < 휑 ≤ 1; 푍 > 0
The above constraint ensures vehicle utilization to the desired level by the operators. Number of passengers per trip is either estimated at the end of each single direction trip, or as the fraction of the total passengers served over all single trips made within a fixed time period.
4-20 Maximum operation cost per passenger
퐶푂 표 ⁄ 푉 푆 푏 ≤ 휑 ∑푖 ∑푗 푃푖푗
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 76 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Operation cost per passenger is estimated as the ratio of total operation cost(퐶푂) (4-15) for a fixed time period, over the number of passengers served during the service provided in each direction.
4-21 Minimum cost recovery ratio threshold
푉 푃 푝푓푎푟푒 ∑푖 ∑푝 퐶 ′ 푖푗,푗 ⁄ ≥ 휑′ 퐶푂
In the above constraint, earning per passenger is ensured for the operator.
4-22 Maximum percentage of passengers lost during a service period
′′ 100 ∙ 푃푤 푖푗 ⁄ ≥ 휑̅ 푉 푆 푃 푏 ∑푖 ∑푗 ∑푝 푃푖푗
4-23 Minimum crowding level threshold
푃푖푗 ⁄ 푧 ≥ 훼 푄푖
This has to be less than or equal to maximum crowding level as well.
All the above constraints ensure that the service remains within a desired range where the interest of both passengers and operator is considered.
4.3.4. Relationships/ Functions
The bus service simulation procedure could be classified broadly under five functions namely, passenger demand function (PDF), terminal function (TF), bus stop level function (BSF), vehicle level function (VF) and cost functions (CF). These functions define the relationships between the different parameters required to define the objective function and the constraints.
Passenger demand function (PDF)
This function estimates the passenger demand for each of the periods in terms of the passenger arrival rate and the passenger boarding alighting count. It develops a origin-destination matrix for each of the period with the given inputs. Thereafter, the processed O-D and the passenger arrival rate are utilized to generate the possible headway and crowding level combinations possible for each time period and each direction using the point check method and considering
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 77 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
the headway and crowding level constraints. The PDF also consider the passenger demand variations in accordance to the time of the day.
Terminal function
The terminal level function ensures timely despatch of vehicle from the terminal. Similarly, this function also takes account for the arriving vehicles. A vehicle pool is maintained at each terminal which gets updated as soon a dispatch or arrival happens. New vehicles are added when there are no vehicles in the pool to serve a particular headway.
Bus stop level function (BSF)
The bus stop level function takes the input from the PDF and estimates the number of passengers waiting at the stop and correspondingly, the aggregate waiting time for all the passengers. This same function also estimates the additional waiting time (if any) the passenger experiences due to failure to board the first bus or the following buses (up to a particular number) due to overcrowding or until the waiting time threshold constraint satisfies.
Vehicle level function (VF)
The vehicle level function calibrates the on-board seating condition with inputs like number of boarding and alighting passengers following the passenger O-D as determined by the PDF. Thereafter, the number of seated and standing passengers is also estimated for each bus with the same function. Finally, this function produces total seated and standing travel time for all passengers in each trip and subsequently the total travel time of tall the passengers served.
Cost function (CF)
The cost function takes the different user and operation cost variables as the inputs and estimates the total social cost of the bus service for the given service design period.
All the functions discussed above are simulated through an integrated simulation procedure as shown in the following flow diagram.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 78 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Figure 4-1 Simulation model flow chart
4.4. Software
This stand-alone software is titled “Bus Service Frequency Setting Software” (BSS), which is developed within a Visual Basic (VB6) environment. For simplicity, Microsoft Excel is used as the database for the static dataset. However, that could be easily upgraded to other dedicated DBMS like, Oracle, MySQL etc. This software is developed with three different modules, where the first module takes into account all the input variables and stores the data upon validation. The next module calibrates the PDF function with appropriate inputs and independently stores the calibrated demand matrices and other service criteria required as input in the following procedures and functions. The last module produces the overall social cost of bus service considering the inputs from the previous two modules. Figure 4-1 shows the initialising screen of the software
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 79 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Figure 4-2 Initial screen of the software
Figure 4-3 shows the screen where the route details and service period details are entered. These include stop to stop distance and the start and end time for each time period. Figure 4-4, Figure 4-5 and Figure 4-6 shows the data input screens for stop to stop travel times, passenger arrival rate and observed boarding alighting count at each stop for each hour during the service period in both up and down direction.
Figure 4-3 Data entry screen for route and service hour details
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 80 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Figure 4-4 Data entry screen for stop to stop travel time
Figure 4-5 Data entry screen for passenger arrival rate
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 81 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Figure 4-6 Data entry screen for observed boarding- alighting count at each stop
Figure 4-7 Bus service operation and user parameters
Figure 4-7 shows the data input screen for the different user level and operation level constraints and parameters which needs to be provided to the software to generate results. In
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 82 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
addition, operation and user cost parameters are also provided. For detail explanation the software manual for the full day bus scheduling software “PUBBS Transit” could be explored.
Once the database is successfully created, the user can run the software to produce the results for each headway and bus loading combination. This software can generate the social cost of bus service independently for both the up and down service direction for the given time period. This software requires a 64-bit operation environment and Microsoft Excel 2016 and can produce a set of 840 results at an average of 1 minute 35 seconds in a system with Intel Xeon CPU E3-1270 @ 3.50GHz, 3.50GHz, 8.00 GB RAM configuration. The results are generated separately for up and down direction.
4.5. Data collection of case study area
As mentioned earlier in section 1.2.1 of Chapter 1, route number S37A has been selected for the purpose of case study. The route is a standard, non- AC urban bus route in Kolkata that connects Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose International Airport and Garia bus terminal cum depot. The route has been simulated for three different hours across a typical working day (morning peak, afternoon off-peak and evening peak). The raw ETM and VTS electronic data is collected for the month of May, 2018 and is used as input to this simulation model after processing along with data collected from primary and secondary sources. The electronic data includes stop-to-stop travel time and passenger boarding alighting count data. The boarding alighting count data is used to generate passenger Origin- Destination matrix whereas, passenger arrival rate is obtained by estimating the number of passengers boarding the concerned bus route with reference to the time interval between two consecutive buses. Stop level passenger arrival rate survey was also done for two full days at all the stops on both the directions of service to ascertain the actual arrival rate of passengers at the bus stops. Other route operation related issues such as route starter sheet (time record of bus dispatch), bus availability at different time of the day and various cost related data are obtained through WBTC depot level secondary sources.
Stop-to-stop travel time data for the bus routes in Kolkata is obtained from the API of the web service of WBTC, which gives GPS based live bus location at 4-7 seconds interval. An API based JSON data parsing application is developed to get stop-to-stop travel time data by estimating arrival time differences at each consecutive stop. The GPRS enabled on- board electronic ticketing machine (ETM) collects and remotely stores the ticketing information with reference to the bus. The ETM information includes time of purchase, passenger origin and destination stops and the ticket amount. Passenger boarding alighting count for each of
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 83 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
the stops along with the total earnings from tickets sold on the route is obtained from the ETM data. The average running cost for the route is obtained from monthly depot level report, which is a log of all the expenditures of various cost factors to run the service. In this study, all the depot level expenses are summed up under the major operation attributes like, capital, fuel, crew (bus drivers, conductors and supporting staff) wages and maintenance cost which include the cost of lubricants, wheels, parts and fixed cost of periodic maintenance. Table 4-6 shows the data that was used for simulation.
Table 4-6 Simulation data summary table
Default Variable Definition Annotation Category Values/ Unit Ranges The time span of the bus Service time period h = 1,2, 퐻 Variable 18 in hours service. Service headway is set Decision Service headway 휇 1 – 20 in minutes as the decision variable. 푘 Variable Total number of seats Vehicle capacity 푄 Variable 43 - inside the bus. 푖 Maximum waiting time for passengers is Maximum waiting estimated as the time 푡W Constraint 20 in minutes time interval between two 푗 consecutive buses at any given stop. Least number of passengers desired for Minimum load factor each vehicle trip in ratio 훼̅푖 Constraint 0.5 - to the vehicle seat capacity. Maximum number of passengers allowed to Maximum load factor travel inside the bus in 훼푖 Constraint 2.5 - ratio to the vehicle seat capacity. 푓 Fuel cost Unit cost of fuel. 퐶표 Variable 65 in INR /litre Average fuel Fuel consumption consumption rate of 푚푧 Variable 5 in Km./litre (running) running vehicle. Average fuel Fuel consumption in litre/ consumption rate of idle 푚̂ 푧 Variable 2 (idle) hours engine running vehicle. On-road cost of vehicle Vehicle cost 퐶푣 Variable 70,00,000 in INR unit. 표 Maximum vehicle-km in Vehicle life run allowed before 휗푧 Variable 8,00,000 푑 kilometres discarded. Average salary per crew in INR/ Average crew wage 퐶푐푤 Variable 27,500 member. 표 month Periodic maintenance in INR per Maintenance cost 퐶푚 Variable 50,000 cost per unit vehicle. 표 10000 km Unit cost of passenger in INR/ Waiting time Cost 퐶 Variable 0.80 waiting time. 푤 minute Travel time Cost Unit cost of passenger in INR/ 퐶 Variable 0 (Seated) travel time while seated. 푡, 푠푒푎푡 minute Travel time Cost Unit cost of passenger in INR/ 퐶 Variable 0.40 (Standing) travel time standing. 푡, 푠푡푎푛푑 minute
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 84 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Default Variable Definition Annotation Category Values/ Unit Ranges Percentage of in Seat availability passengers getting a seat 휑푧 Constraint 65 – 75 percentage factor 푖 during the journey. (%) Penalty cost of failing to in INR/ Operator penalty serve any passenger due 퐶푝푒푛 Variable 10 표 passenger to overcrowding. User level inconvenience charges in INR/ User penalty 퐶푖푛푐 Variable 0 in travelling by other passenger modes. Total cost of operation Operator cost incurred for the service 푪푶 Indicators in thousand - INR time period. Total user cost of User cost incurred for the service 푪푼 Indicators in thousand - INR time period. Total social cost of bus Total overall cost service incurred for the 푪푺 Indicators in thousand - INR service time period.
The generalized cost of user in-vehicle time (IVT) is assumed to be INR48 per hour, following the work of Athira et al. (2016). In vehicle travel time can be spent either seating or standing. While, availing a seat should be considered to be a basic requirement and could be assumed to cost the same as IVT, standing adds to the inconvenience of the passengers and is considered to be more costlier than IVT (Tirachini et al. 2016). In the current study, we have assumed it to be 1.5 times of IVT. Additionally, we assume that, each passenger experiences the same IVT at different service levels (combination of headway and bus crowding) even though there may be minor change due to traffic. The cost of seating time is exempted from cost calculations in the current scenario since we are comparing between different service level combinations of a single bus type (different bus types may result in different stop to stop travel time). Similarly, the waiting time is estimated as two times of that of IVT (Wardman 2004). However, the generalized cost is extremely sensitive to various contexts like, location, weather, time of the day, direction of the service etc. Hence, the user impedances like, waiting and standing are estimated for three different cost scenarios as shown in Table 4-7.
Table 4-7 Generalized user cost values
IVT Standing time Waiting time Seating time cost Waiting time cost Scenario (in INR/ cost weightage factor (in INR/hour) (in INR/hour) hour) (in INR/hour) 1 48 0.5 0 24 24
2 48 1.0 0 24 48
3 48 2.0 0 24 96
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 85 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
4.6. Results
The bus route simulation model is used to estimate hourly social cost of bus service inclusive of operator cost and user cost for three different demand scenarios, representing the morning peak (9 to 10 am), afternoon off-peak (1 pm to 2 pm) and evening peak (6pm to 7 pm) respectively. Service periods are selected by observing the bus route demand characteristics. The model also considers the service period as one hour and uses hourly passenger arrival rate, O-D data and stop to stop travel time as discussed earlier and other operation and cost factors as shown in Table 6 and 7. The simulated bus service operation cost is then compared with the cost incurred for existing or baseline service condition. The cost for baseline bus service conditions for the three different time periods mentioned above are estimated using the combinations of observed service headway and maximum crowding level shown in the table below.
Table 4-8 Base line bus service condition and bus service cost
Observed Cost (in thousand-INR) Observed Time Service maximum Headway period direction crowding (in minutes) Operator User Overall level 9:00 – UP 12 2.2 16.80 22.08 38.89 10:00 Hrs. DN 15 1.5 9.52 10.35 19.88 13:00 – UP 18 1.8 13.57 16.16 29.74 14:00 Hrs. DN 10 2.0 8.80 10.95 19.75 18:00 – UP 12 1.7 16.89 17.86 34.76 19:00 Hrs. DN 8 2.5 12.88 20.56 33.45
The simulated bus service operation cost is obtained in a matrix for different time periods, direction of service and for three scenarios of generalized user cost values. The result produced by the model is shown below. The costs are estimated for all the different user and operator cost aspects as shown in the following example in Figure 4-8.
Next, 3d surface plots are generated for operator cost, user cost and overall cost for six instances which include both up and down directions and for each service period. While, one plot is generated for operator cost for each scenario, 3 user and overall cost plots are generated considering the three scenarios of generalized cost. Additionaaly, for each instance, the operation cost for the lowest overall cost scenario is identified and the different cost components are shown in a stacked bar chart. While, the crowding level range used in this simulation is 0.7 to 2.5, the minimum crowding level is considered to be 1.0 considering the operator’s interest. This ensures that the bus seats get filled up atleast once.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 86 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Figure 4-8 Cost estimates for different bus service combination
Operator cost increases with increase in vehicle-kilometer of service provided or alternatively on the number of dispatches. However, the number of the departures within a fixed time period which is in this case is just one hour, depends on the headway and doesnot change for every increase of headway. Thus, while capital, maintenance, fuel and crew related costs remains almost same, the penalty due to passenger lost changes significantly at different headway.Accordingly, the 3D plot shows sudden jumps along the axis showing changes in headway. This could be further explained by the fact that, relaxing the crowding level constraint further allows more passengers to board the bus reducing the chances of loosing passengers and resulting in lower cost of operations.
Generally, the user cost factor improves as the waiting time and crowding level decreases. Hence the least user cost is always observed at the lowest crowding and headway scenario. However, that is not always possible to be provided by the operators. Hence, the overall cost aggregating the user and operator cost is estimated which balances the service taking interests of both the user and operatior into considaration. The different assumptions regarding the cost of waiting time also demonstrate the impact of user cost in service provision determination.
The figures below show the operator cost, user cost and overall cost for the morning peak hour, up direction instance. A table containing the headway and crowding level combination for the lowest 10 overall cost values are provided for all the three scenarios of generalized user cost values. This is repeated for all the instances namely,
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 87 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
- Morning peak hour, down direction - Afternoon off-peak hour, up direction - Afternoon off-peak hour, down direction - Evening peak hour, up direction - Evening peak hour, down direction
Figure 4-9 Operator cost during morning peak hour in up direction
Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 1
Figure 4-10 User cost during morning peak hour in up direction
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 4-11 Overall cost during morning peak hour in up direction
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 88 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Table 4-9 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the morning peak hour in up direction
푪풘= INR24/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR48/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR96/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = INR24/hr. INR24/hr. INR24/hr. Rank Headway Cost Headway Cost Headway Cost Crowding Crowding Crowding (in (in (in (in (in (in Level Level Level minutes) INR) minutes) INR) minutes) INR) 1 1.0 16 27633.3 1.0 10 26662.6 1.0 4 31831.1 2 1.1 16 28887.1 1.0 7 27112.7 1.1 4 32811.6 3 1.2 16 29735.4 1.1 10 27193.4 1.0 5 33098.4 4 1.0 13 30413.6 1.1 7 27685.9 1.2 4 33530.7 5 1.0 10 30825.4 1.2 10 27860.2 1.0 7 33568.5 6 1.1 13 31597.5 1.2 7 28001.6 1.1 5 33587.4 7 1.5 16 32109.2 1.0 4 28370.8 1.1 7 34152.7 8 1.1 10 32210.1 1.0 5 28512.1 1.2 5 34284.3 9 1.4 16 32481.6 1.0 9 28514.7 1.2 7 34518.2 10 1.0 14 32624.3 1.3 10 28561.6 1.3 4 34574.3
Figure 4-12 Operator cost during morning peak hour in down direction
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 4-13 User cost during morning peak hour in down direction
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 4-14 Overall cost during morning peak hour in down direction
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 89 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Table 4-10 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the morning peak hour in down direction
푪풘= INR24/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR48/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR96/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = INR24/hr. INR24/hr. INR24/hr. Rank Headway Cost Headway Cost Headway Cost Crowding Crowding Crowding (in (in (in (in (in (in Level Level Level minutes) INR) minutes) INR) minutes) INR) 1 1.5 10 15154.5 1.2 10 15158.2 2.4 7 19242.1 2 1.2 10 15162.2 1.1 10 15224.0 1.7 7 19262.1 3 1.1 10 15224.0 1.3 10 15243.6 2.2 7 19274.7 4 1.0 10 15250.6 1.0 10 15250.6 1.0 7 19288.8 5 1.3 10 15366.4 1.4 10 15334.0 2.3 7 19292.1 6 1.4 10 15434.7 2.4 10 15345.0 1.8 7 19317.4 7 2.5 10 15499.5 1.5 10 15373.4 2.0 7 19327.3 8 2.4 10 15513.0 1.9 10 15467.1 1.6 7 19331.3 9 1.6 10 15516.5 1.8 10 15548.2 2.1 7 19334.6 10 1.9 10 15554.6 2.1 10 15613.5 1.1 7 19344.4
Figure 4-15 Operator cost during afternoon off- peak hour in up direction
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 4-16 User cost during afternoon off- peak hour in up direction
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 4-17 Overall cost during afternoon off- peak hour in up direction
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 90 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Table 4-11 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the afternoon off-peak hour in up direction
푪풘= INR24/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR48/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR96/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = INR24/hr. INR24/hr. INR24/hr. Rank Headway Cost Headway Cost Headway Cost Crowding Crowding Crowding (in (in (in (in (in (in Level Level Level minutes) INR) minutes) INR) minutes) INR) 1 1.0 15 14539.0 1.0 15 18859.0 1.0 7 24877.1 2 1.1 15 14802.6 1.1 15 19122.6 1.1 7 25117.4 3 1.2 15 15060.9 1.2 15 19356.8 1.0 5 25415.0 4 1.3 15 15626.0 1.3 15 19855.7 1.2 7 25695.3 5 1.5 15 15963.3 1.4 15 20229.8 1.0 6 25758.9 6 1.4 15 16163.8 1.5 15 20541.3 1.3 7 25783.1 7 1.6 15 16789.4 1.0 7 20716.2 1.1 5 25881.5 8 1.8 15 16858.0 1.0 13 20906.4 1.0 9 26356.6 9 1.0 13 16876.4 1.1 7 20962.7 1.1 6 26392.7 10 1.1 13 17324.5 1.0 9 20963.8 1.4 7 26487.8
Figure 4-18 Operator cost during afternoon off- peak hour in down direction
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 4-19 User cost during afternoon off- peak hour in down direction
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 4-20 Overall cost during afternoon off- peak hour in down direction
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 91 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Table 4-12 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the afternoon off-peak hour in down direction
푪풘= INR24/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR48/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR96/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = INR24/hr. INR24/hr. INR24/hr. Rank Headway Cost Headway Cost Headway Cost Crowding Crowding Crowding (in (in (in (in (in (in Level Level Level minutes) INR) minutes) INR) minutes) INR) 1 1.0 15 11615.8 1.0 15 15071.8 1.2 7 19599.8 2 1.1 15 11937.2 1.1 15 15463.4 1.0 7 19741.1 3 1.2 15 12272.3 1.2 15 15756.1 1.3 7 19766.1 4 1.3 15 12480.6 1.3 15 15871.6 1.1 7 19951.5 5 1.4 15 12579.0 1.4 15 16252.5 1.4 7 20114.3 6 1.5 15 13031.9 1.3 7 16358.8 1.5 7 20350.8 7 1.0 13 13395.2 1.2 7 16361.0 1.0 6 20606.5 8 1.6 15 13490.9 1.0 9 16476.2 1.8 7 20615.9 9 1.7 15 13639.0 1.0 7 16488.9 1.1 6 20621.3 10 1.8 15 13658.6 1.0 13 16593.2 1.6 7 20634.8
Figure 4-21 Operator cost during evening peak hour in up direction
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 4-22 User cost during evening peak hour in up direction
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 4-23 Overall cost during evening peak hour in up direction
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 92 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Table 4-13 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the evening peak hour in up direction
푪풘= INR24/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR48/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR96/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = INR24/hr. INR24/hr. INR24/hr. Rank Headway Cost Headway Cost Headway Cost Crowding Crowding Crowding (in (in (in (in (in (in Level Level Level minutes) INR) minutes) INR) minutes) INR) 1 1.0 15 18931.7 1.0 15 25123.7 1.0 5 30812.4 2 1.1 15 19081.5 1.1 15 25227.4 1.0 4 31328.6 3 1.2 15 19408.1 1.0 7 25738.6 1.1 4 31699.8 4 1.3 15 19763.8 1.2 15 25885.0 1.1 5 31727.5 5 1.4 15 20045.9 1.1 7 26035.8 1.0 7 31740.5 6 1.5 15 20548.6 1.3 15 26056.7 1.1 7 31937.3 7 1.7 15 21517.4 1.2 7 26108.1 1.2 7 32214.5 8 1.6 15 21583.6 1.4 15 26492.1 1.2 5 32233.4 9 1.8 15 21666.2 1.0 5 26604.4 1.3 5 32482.9 10 1.0 13 21892.1 1.0 9 26823.3 1.2 4 32611.7
Figure 4-24 Operator cost during evening peak hour in down direction
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 4-25 User cost during evening peak hour in down direction
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 4-26 Overall cost during evening peak hour in down direction
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 93 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Table 4-14 The lowest ten minimum overall cost scenarios for the evening peak hour in down direction
푪풘= INR24/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR48/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = 푪풘= INR96/hr. | 푪풕, 풔풕풂풏풅 = INR24/hr. INR24/hr. INR24/hr. Rank Headway Cost Headway Cost Headway Cost Crowding Crowding Crowding (in (in (in (in (in (in Level Level Level minutes) INR) minutes) INR) minutes) INR) 1 1.0 15 22137.8 1.0 7 28801.9 1.2 4 33977.0 2 1.2 15 22392.2 1.1 7 29337.0 1.0 4 34618.5 3 1.1 15 22432.3 1.9 7 29464.6 1.1 4 34702.6 4 1.4 15 23035.9 1.4 7 29497.2 1.3 4 34852.4 5 1.3 15 23176.8 1.3 7 29609.6 1.5 4 35089.6 6 1.5 15 23657.5 1.2 7 29716.4 2.0 4 35220.4 7 1.8 15 24720.7 1.5 7 29789.4 1.4 4 35281.1 8 2.5 15 25017.5 1.2 4 29826.1 2.2 4 35417.7 9 1.6 15 25062.0 1.0 15 29835.8 1.9 4 35430.7 10 1.0 7 25069.6 1.7 7 30053.4 2.1 4 35534.9
4.7. Discussion of results
The overall cost of bus service including both user and operator cost varies with the service headway and maximum crowding level. While, the operator cost increases with the number of departures, user inconvenience costs increase with the increase in crowding when users are not able to find a seat. User inconvenience cost also increases with increase in waiting time. Additionally, operator cost increases when passengers are lost due to overcrowded buses due to consideration of operator penalty resulting from loss of passengers. Thus, in case the generalized cost of user in-vehicle time is high, the minimum overall cost of service is found to be at lower service headways and at lower crowding level which is infeasible to be provided in real life particularly in developing countries where fare amount is kept very low. Thus, bus operators should relax the crowding level as much as possible for a moderate headway setting during morning peak hours to keep the number of departures lower and should relax the service headway during afternoon off-peak hours, while maintaining moderate headways so that more passengers can be served. This is also evident in our results during the morning peak hour service (UP direction) and during the afternoon off-peak hour. Table 4-15 shows the recommendations for service headways and crowding level for different time periods. A range of headways is suggested since it is difficult to maintain exact headways due to limited fleet size except for the peak hour period in down direction which is fixed at 10. This will ensure availability of buses during the non-peak hour. The average overall cost for the recommended headway and crowding range is compared with the baseline data which shows a significant improvement in the overall cost.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 94 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Table 4-15 Recommended headway and crowding level at different time periods
Average Recommended Time Service Recommended Overall Cost Reduction Headway period direction crowding level (in Thousand- (in %) (in minutes) INR) 9:00 – UP 7 – 10 1.0 – 1.5 29.17 24.99 10:00 Hrs. DN 10 1.0 – 1.5 15.26 23.23 13:00 – UP 10 – 15 1.0 – 1.5 22.68 23.73 14:00 Hrs. DN 10 – 15 1.0 – 1.5 17.93 9.21 18:00 – UP 10 – 15 1.0 – 1.5 29.84 14.15 19:00 Hrs. DN 7 – 10 1.0 – 1.5 32.42 3.07
The results also show that, it’s very difficult to find a trend in the overall cost of service since several parameters used to estimate operator and user costs are interrelated. The results also depend on certain parameters and assumptions which when changed may give completely different results. Thus, bus operators may use this software to analyse the effects of changing headway and crowding for particular bus routes in terms of passengers served, total user and operator cost, total bus kilometre travelled and revenue earned.
4.7.1. Cost of improvement of crowding level at recommended headways
The cost of improvement of crowding level at recommended headway for each service period and at each direction is shown in the figures below. This will help operators to decide on actual service delivery levels during the service period. Figure 4-27 and Figure 4-28 shows the user, operator and total cost of bus service at headway of ten minutes for different crowding conditions during morning peak hour in both directions. User cost increases and operator cost decreases with increase in crowding level due to the increase in the number of passengers standing and decrease in number of passengers lost respectively. The user and operator costs are equal at crowding of 1.9 (up) and 2 (down) (approx.) in this time period. While, this could be a point of consideration for determination of target crowding level, operators can also consider user’s zone of tolerance to improve ridership. The above figures also show the cost of bus service at present service levels (including penalty due to passenger lost) which is at 12 minutes of headway and 2.2 crowding level in the up direction during peak hour and at 15 minutes of headway and 1.5 crowding level in the down direction and is higher than the cost of service at the recommended headway at the same crowding level.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 95 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Figure 4-27 Morning peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2)
Figure 4-28 Morning peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2)
Figure 4- 30 and Figure 4-31 shows the operator cost of bus service for all possible headways at different crowding conditions during morning peak hour in up and down direction respectively. While, in general, operator cost decrease at lower crowding level due to decrease
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 96 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
in number of people lost, sometimes cost is more at higher headways since passenger lost is a result of interaction between number of dispatches per hour, passenger arrival rate and crowding level. For example, while the number of dispatches per hour is same for a headway of 9 and 10 minutes, the amount of passenger per bus is more in case of 10 minutes and at lower allowed crowding level there is more chance of passenger not being served. Thus, operators need to perform similar sensitivity analysis to determine final headway and crowding combination for a particular route. Additionally, determining operation cost per hour may not be the right approach since while the number of dispatch remains same within an hour, during the course of the entire day it may result in much lower number of dispatches. Thus, operators should analyse cost of service provision for the entire day and should decide upon headway and crowding combination for a particular route in both directions simultaneously. Figure 23 also shows that, at service headway of 4 minutes and above crowding level of 2.2, operation costs becomes flat which indicates that at this level all passengers are served. This will also result in lower waiting time cost since passengers will not have to wait for the next bus. However, user cost at this service level may be very high for the bus occupants due to higher crowding level. Thus, operators may provide service at this level only if their mandate is to serve all passengers.
Figure 4-29 Morning peak hour, up direction. Operator cost vs. crowding level for all headway
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 97 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Figure 4-30 Morning peak hour, down dir.: Op. cost vs. crowding level for all headway
Figure 4-32 and Figure 4-33 shows the user, operator and total cost of bus service at headway of 15 minutes at different crowding conditions during afternoon off-peak in both directions. User and operator costs are equal at crowding of 1.3 (up) and 1.2 (down) (approx.) in this time period which indicates that, operators can relax the crowding level during off-peak hours.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 98 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Figure 4-31 Afternoon off-peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2)
Figure 4-32 Afternoon off-peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2)
Figure 4-34 and Figure 4-35 shows the operator cost of bus service for all possible headways at different crowding conditions during afternoon off-peak hour in up and down direction respectively. Due to lower passenger arrival rate during this hour, all passengers are served at relatively lower crowding level for headways of 4, 5 and 6 minutes in the up direction and
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 99 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
operation cost cannot be lowered below this level of crowding. This phenomenon is more prominent in Figure 27(down direction) where we can start evaluating headway and crowding combinations for headways of 7 minutes and higher since above this level, operation cost is more or less constant at all crowding level.
Figure 4-33 Afternoon off-peak hour, up dir.: Op. cost vs. crowding level for all headway
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 100 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Figure 4-34 Afternoon off-peak hour, down dir.: Op. cost vs. crowding level for all headway
Figure 4-36 and Figure 4-37 shows the cost at various crowding level at recommended headways for the evening peak hour period in both up and down direction. While, we can adopt a relaxed crowding level in the up direction we can recommend a little high crowding level at 1.9 at 7 minute of headway.
Figure 4-35 Evening peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2)
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 101 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Figure 4-36 Evening peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. crowding level (Scenario 2)
Figure 4-38 and Figure 4-39 shows the operator cost of bus service for all possible headways at different crowding conditions during evening peak hour in up and down direction respectively. For certain headways such as 15 minutes or 7 minutes in the up direction, the operation cost per hour is lower compared to headways which are immediately higher which is due to the lower number of passenger lost at same number of dispatches. However, for longer time periods with same headway i.e. more than one hour, the results will differ since the dispatches will vary at all headway and the only change in cost will be due to penalty due to passenger lost. Thus operators should be careful in interpreting these results while deciding on headway and crowding combinations.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 102 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Figure 4-37 Evening peak hour, up dir.: Op. cost vs. crowding level for all headway
Figure 4-38 Evening peak hour, down dir.: Op. cost vs. crowding level for all headway
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 103 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
4.7.2. Cost improvement of headways at recommended crowding levels
Using similar graphs used in Figure 4-27 and Figure 4-28, operators could also decide on headways at recommended crowding level. For example, Figure 4-39 and Figure 4-40 shows the user, operator and total cost of bus service at recommended crowding level of 1(up) and 1.2 (down) for different possible headways during the morning peak hour in both up and down direction respectively. User cost increases and operator cost decreases with increase in headway due to the increase in the passengers waiting time at bus stops and decrease in number of dispatches per hour respectively. However, the operator cost curve is not uniformly descending since; at certain increase in headways the dispatches remain same but number of passengers lost increases. In Figure 4-40 the initial dip in operator cost signify that, there is no/insignificant passenger lost till headway of 10 minutes for a crowding level of 1.2, after which operators should be careful to prevent passenger lost.
Figure 4-41, Figure 4-42, Figure 4-43 and Figure 4-44 shows the cost of bus service at different recommended crowding level for different possible headways during the afternoon off-peak and evening peak hour in both up and down direction. Another interesting observation is related to overall cost. If we ignore the small crests due to per hour dispatch issues discussed earlier, we find the overall cost initially comes down and then again rises in some situations such as morning and afternoon off-peak hour down direction which indicates that at lower ranges of headway, the effect of operation cost reduction is more whereas, in higher headways the effect of user cost is more.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 104 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Figure 4-39 Morning peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2)
Figure 4-40 Morning peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2)
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 105 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Figure 4-41 Afternoon off-peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2)
Figure 4-42 Afternoon off-peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2)
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 106 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Figure 4-43 Evening peak hour, up direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2)
Figure 4-44 Evening peak hour, down direction: Cost vs. headway (Scenario 2)
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 107 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
4.7.3. Seat availability at different crowding level at recommended headways
The following figures show the resulting seat availability at different crowding level for different recommended headways. This will help operators to set crowding level at different headways so that passengers are able to avail seat for a part of the journey which again could be decided from feasible service delivery level ranges set from user’s perspective. Figure 4-45 to Figure 4-50 shows seat availability at different crowding level for each possible headway during different service periods in both up and down direction. The figures show that, seat availability reduces at a higher rate initially when crowding level is set at lower values for all headways and then gradually becomes flatter which indicates that, even though the crowding level is raised i.e., further relaxed there is not much increase in the number of passengers which allows the seat availability factor to remain almost same. Thus, at lower headways, the seat availability factor becomes flat at lower crowding level since at lower headway passenger boarding is also limited. Thus, we can also say that, during low demand period operators may not be concerned about seat availability as long as crowding levels are within the range of feasible service delivery level whereas, during peak periods operators should consider both crowding level and seat availability to ensure a pleasant journey experience for passengers.
Figure 4-45 Morning peak hour, up dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 108 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Figure 4-46 Morning peak hour, down dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway
Figure 4-47 Afternoon off-peak hour, up dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 109 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Figure 4-48 Afternoon off-peak hour, dn. dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway
Figure 4-49 Evening peak hour, up dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 110 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Figure 4-50 Evening peak hour, down dir.: Seat avail. vs. crowding level for all headway
4.8. Conclusion
In this study, we have developed a simulation framework and test bed for simulating bus services along a bus route. This is used to determine the optimal bus service frequency for a particular period considering the variations in passenger demand and traffic conditions during the same time period. The optimal headway is obtained against the minimum social cost of the service which is minimized by generating and comparing all possible headway combinations, subject to satisfying user and operator level constraints. The simulation model perfectly establishes the relationship among the user and operator cost parameters and shows reasonably practical outcome. The user level parameters like in-vehicle travel (standing and seated), waiting time etc. and operator level parameters like the various costs, penalty for passengers lost etc. explains the bus service realistically. This simulation model could also be used to study the sensitivity among the service attributes like headway, crowding and seat availability for a bus route to help operators on deciding on appropriate service level. Finally, software is developed to facilitate cost comparison for different service variations along a bus route which will make this model accessible for both bus operators and bus service design consultants.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 111 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 112 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
5. Full Day Operation, Timetable Development and Vehicle Scheduling
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 113 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 114 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Out of the five major components in public-transit planning namely, network design, frequency setting, timetable development, vehicle scheduling and crew scheduling (Ceder and Wilson 1986), this study focuses on full day timetable development and individual vehicle scheduling for a single bus route. This is an extension of the previous chapter on frequency setting for individual time periods.
5.1. Aim and objectives
The aim of this study is to develop a generic vehicle scheduling model for a bus route considering the variations in passenger travel demand, route level Origin-Destination (OD) details and traffic conditions for full day operation. A simulation model is proposed to estimate the appropriate headway in both up and down directions for each time period under various service constraints such as minimum and maximum crowding level, maximum waiting time of passengers at bus stop, minimum number of trips made per vehicle, minimum amount of earning/profit per vehicle etc. and operation parameters such as bus capacity, bus type, layover time etc. with the objective to minimize fleet size, maximise patronage, minimize operation cost or generalized cost. While, some of the constraints could be validated at the overall level i.e., for the entire service period others requires formulation of individual vehicle schedules. Thus, in this study, we extend our earlier model of frequency setting for a particular route and assign buses to serve this timetable with practical considerations and constraints such as vehicle utilization and earnings. Thus the final timetable developed is subject to both overall fleet level and individual vehicle level constraints.
The objectives of the study are as to:
i. Develop a generic bus frequency setting model for full day continuous operation for any bus route considering both fleet level and individual vehicle level objectives. ii. Develop a bus scheduling software based on the model which will be able to generate timetable for full day operation and individual vehicle schedules iii. To compare cost of service using different variations of service constraints and parameters to facilitate decision making
5.2. Model formulation
The model simulates full day bus operation with hourly stop to stop travel time and passenger arrival rate at bus stop and period wise passenger OD which could be generated from observed boarding alighting count at bus stops. Time periods are set based on the homogeneity of the
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 115 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
passenger OD in each direction. However, passenger demand (arrival rate) and stop to stop travel time is assumed to vary hourly along the route and in each direction of the service. Next, based on the user and operator service level constraints (crowding, headway etc.) and parameters (bus capacity etc.) feasible frequency is set for each periods and direction along the bus route with the point load check method. Then, taking each feasible headway value for each period and direction a set of headway and crowding combinations are prepared for full day bus operation for the entire bus route in both directions which is then put into the simulation environment to estimate operator, user and the overall cost of the service for each of the scenarios. The simulation results are then analysed to identify the time table and vehicle schedules which meet both fleet and vehicle level constraints to identify minimum operation cost, user cost or overall cost of service.
5.2.1. Assumptions
In addition to the assumptions given in the previous chapter, we consider a few more for developing vehicle schedules.
i. A vehicle is dispatched following the first in first out principal from the terminal pool after its arrival there and the mandatory layover period. ii. In case a vehicle is not available in the terminal pool a new vehicle is added to the fleet. While, some of this excess vehicle requirement could be reduced through deadheading, we have kept it out of scope since earlier studies have found that deadheading increases operation cost significantly and an alternative strategy is to use an underutilized vehicle in other routes. iii. Fleet size is determined based on number of buses required to meet the timetable. iv. Buses are added to the vehicle pool as per requirement.
5.2.2. Model overview
While, the general objective remains similar to the period wide frequency estimation model, i.e., we try to minimize the overall cost of the full day bus operation, which is estimated as the sum of operation cost and user cost, considering full day bus operation other additional challenges needs to be addressed. Period wise change in passenger demand, passenger OD, and traffic conditions often results in undesired service conditions like, un-served passengers, bus bunching and imbalanced fleet at the two terminals. Some of these challenges could be handled by checking vehicle utilization both in terms of passenger served and trips made which results in choice of more balanced service combinations. A bus scheduling system
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 116 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
allows us to track and estimate the utilization, operation cost and earnings incurred for each bus which helps the operator or the decision maker to choose appropriate frequency/timetable for a given bus route. Thus, we introduce a set of new functions namely, timetable development function, fleet calibration function and vehicle scheduling function that helps in selecting appropriate service time table and vehicle schedule for a bus route.
Relationships/ functions
In this version of the model/software, we introduce the timetable development function, fleet calibration function and the vehicle scheduling function to estimate the efficiency of each timetable and identify the best solution based on the set of constraints provided by the users. The functions are explained below followed by the full day bus service simulation procedure.
Timetable development function The time table development function prepares dispatch time schedules for a given bus route with known demand and route characteristics based on a set of feasible headway range for each of the demand periods in each direction using the point load check method and other service level constraints like crowding level. All possible combinations of headway value from each time periods and direction is tested by simulating bus operations for full day while the time table function collects all the time stamps associated with bus arrival time, dwell time and departure time at all stops including terminals. The time table function later recalls all the time stamp values and prepares a timetable for the bus route.
Fleet calibration function The fleet calibration function is run for each timetable. A vehicle is assigned at each terminal at the time of dispatch. The function first checks for any available fleet at the vehicle fleet pool before initiating a dispatch; else, it assigns a fresh vehicle. The time table and the fleet calibration function output is shown in the next figure where dispatch sequence, pool status, bus id, dispatch time stamp and arrival bus id and arrival time of the same is recorded in a sequence following increments of time which could be set as per headway gaps for a typical bus route where the terminals are named as A and B respectively. The timetable for the terminal A and terminal B shows the dispatch and arrival timings of each bus. Dispatches are made with 11min and 19 min of headway from 6:00:00 Hrs. from terminal A and B respectively. Thus, while A1, A2 etc. in terminal A signifies new bus added to maintain timetable, B1, B2 in terminal A signifies buses from terminal B which have arrived at terminal B and ready for dispatch. The first bus from terminal B reaches A at 7:03:03 Hrs and the first bus from terminal A reaches B at 7:26:07 Hrs. and increase the vehicle pool. Due to imbalance
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 117 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
in headway in up and down direction we need to add on buses at the terminal where the headway is low or frequency is high. Hence, the cumulative shortage of buses on either terminal throughout the day, gives the minimum fleet size that is required to maintain the time table.
Figure 5-1 Service timetable (example) for Terminal A and Terminal B
Vehicle scheduling function The vehicle schedule is prepared after the timetable and fleet calibration is completed. From the fleet calibration function the system can precisely estimate the minimum fleet size required to run the bus service for full day according to the given time table. This particular function extracts all the trips made by each vehicle along with details like departure time, arrival time, travel time, vehicle-kilometre travel, operation expenses, passengers served and total fare box revenue. Subsequently, this function also estimates the profit earned by each vehicle and produces the vehicle schedule for the entire day. The following illustration shows a typical output of the vehicle schedule function where number of trips, total vehicle kilometre,
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 118 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
operation cost, earnings and profit is listed for each vehicle after full day operation along with its schedule.
Figure 5-2 Vehicle schedule for Terminal A and Terminal B
Constraints
The software also allows some fleet and vehicle level constraints to identify the time table and vehicle schedules which results in minimum operation cost, user cost or overall cost of service. These are designated as efficiency constraints and its software interface is shown in the figure below.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 119 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Figure 5-3 Interface for efficiency constraints
Minimum cost per passenger Refers to the average operation cost incurred for each of the passengers served during the entire service period. The average operation cost per passenger is estimated from the ratio of total number of passengers served during the entire service period to the overall operation cost incurred for bus service during the same time span.
Minimum passenger per vehicle- kilometre This constraint ensures overall vehicle utilization all thorough the service period and is measured using the proportion of total number of passengers served during the entire time period to the total vehicle-kilometres of service provided.
Minimum passenger per trip Similar to the constraint discussed above, this constraint also ensures vehicle utilization and is measured as the proportion of total number of passengers served to the total number of vehicle trips made within the total service span.
Minimum cost recovery ratio The cost recovery ratio is estimated as the ratio of earning made from ticket sale to operation expenses. This constraint ensures operator profit margin in terms of the recovery rate specified.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 120 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Minimum number of trips per vehicle This constraint is devised to minimize vehicle underutilization. Constraining minimum number of trips per day for all the vehicles ensures that each vehicle has at least the specified number of one-way trips.
Minimum earnings per vehicle Minimum earning per vehicle also ensures that, the minimum on- board ticket sale must be at least what is specified. This constraint satisfies operator interests in terms of minimizing vehicle underutilization by setting the minimum earning threshold.
Minimum profit per vehicle In highly uncertain passenger demand scenario the earning from each vehicle may not be enough to ensure sufficient profit for the operator. Hence, minimum profit criteria is also introduced to ensure the operators’ interest.
Maximum fleet size The fleet size for the bus service operation is also introduced as a criterion where the maximum number of fleet utilized to serve a certain passenger demand must remain within the specified fleet size constraint.
Maximum operation cost per trip Maximum operation cost per vehicle trip is also introduced as a constraint to ensure that, operation expenses per one-way trip per vehicle must not exceed the specified value.
Maximum operation cost per passenger The operation cost per passenger changes significantly from off-peak hour to peak hour period. To ensure the operators’ interest this constraint has been introduced to ensure that the average operation cost per passenger remain within a specified value.
Maximum operation cost per vehicle Operation cost per vehicle is also important for the operators to check, especially in high traffic varying scenario. This constraint ensures that the operation cost never exceeds the specified limit.
All the above constraints may or may not yield a feasible time table and vehicle schedule which also depends on the number of combinations tested. However, operators may relax the service constraints and parameters set earlier to increase the number of headway and crowding combinations to be tested to arrive at the desired timetable and vehicle schedule.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 121 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Software
The bus scheduling software (PUBBS transit) is developed using similar interfaces as the BSS software developed for bus frequency setting. An additional data entry screen as shown in Figure 5-3 is added to ensure entry of user defined constraints. The output of the software is stored in four data files. The first file contains the results for all runs i.e. for all headway combinations for each time period for both up and down direction and includes information on the simulation id, overall cost, total user cost, total operator cost, number of passengers served and lost, waiting time cost, travel time cost etc. The second, third and fourth files provide the schedule for each vehicle for the headway combination which is either resulting in the least overall cost, least operator cost and the least fleet size without deadheading respectively. In addition to the standard information all the three files include the dispatch sequence for each vehicle from each terminal as per the headway combination and also includes the schedule for each vehicle along with details like number of trips, total vehicle kilometres travelled, operation cost, earnings and profit as explained in Figure 5-1 and Figure 5-2. The detail manual for the software is also provided in the project website.
5.3. Data collection
The model/ software developed in this research is applied on a bus route (WBTC bus route (S37A)) in the city of Kolkata in India, to demonstrate the results obtained from the model. The route connects Garia, a residential zone and the Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose Airport, Kolkata, via major nodes like, Ruby intersection, Chingrighata, CIT, Ultadanga and Beliaghata. The stop details are listed in Table 5-1. The full day bus service operation is divided into five passenger demand periods, namely, early morning off-peak period (6:00:00 hrs. to 7:59:59 hrs.), morning peak period (8:00:00 hrs. to 11:59:59 hrs.), afternoon off-peak period (12:00:00 hrs. to 15:59:59 hrs.), evening peak period (16:00:00 hrs. to 19:59:59 hrs.) and late evening off-peak period (20:00:00 hrs. to 23:59:59 hrs.) as shown in Table 5-2. The periods are defined based on the observed passenger demand and O-D. Travel time is assumed to vary with respect to each service hour along the route and in each direction of the service. Next, the full day time table development function first prepares a set of feasible headway range for each of the demand periods using point load check method and the service level constraints like maximum and minimum crowding level. Then taking each of the headway value from corresponding feasible range of each periods and direction, a total set of headway combination is generated. For the present study, the size of the combination set for a standard BS-IV 43- seater bus with headway range of 1-20 minutes and crowding range of 0.9 to 1.5 is
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 122 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
4,03,200. For each of these combinations, full day bus operation for the bus route S37A is then simulated to estimate operator, user and the overall cost of the service for each of the scenarios. The simulation results are then analysed to identify the optimal time table and vehicle schedules for the minimum operation cost, user cost and overall cost service conditions. Table 5-3 lists the different bus service attributes and parameters that were considered for the simulation. The simulation was conducted separately for two bus sizes namely 43(seat size) and 28(seat size). Operator penalty cost was taken as INR10 per passenger lost whereas, user penalty was not considered. Waiting cost was considered as INR .8/minute which is same as in-vehicle travel time cost. In-vehicle travel time was not considered since we assumed no difference in the travel time between two buses of different sizes even though some difference is likely to result from difference in dwell time at bus stops. In-vehicle travel time standing is considered to be 1.5 times costlier than sitting and is thus considered to be INR 0.4/minute (1.5*INR 0.8-1*INR 0.8). Seat availability constraint was also not set to reduce computation time. Apart from the information presented here, the hourly stop-to-stop travel time data, passenger demand data in terms of passenger arrival rate and the passenger boarding alighting count for the designated periods and the bus route fare chart have also been used as the input to the software and also listed in Appendix C.
Table 5-1 Bus route stop details
Bus Stop Code Name 1 Garia bus depot (Terminal A) 2 Baishanbghata 3 Patuli crossing 4 Ajaynagar 5 Kalikapur 6 Ruby hospital 7 Panchannya Gram/ VIP bazar 8 Science City 9 Metropolitan 10 CIT building (Beliaghata) 11 Hudco (Ultadanga) 12 Bangur Avenue 13 Baguihati 14 Raghunathpur 15 Airport gate no. 1 (Terminal B)
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 123 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Table 5-2 Bus route service time periods
Period Hours Duration Hour 1 6:00:00 6:59:59 1 Hour 2 7:00:00 7:59:59 Hour 3 8:00:00 8:59:59 Hour 4 9:00:00 9:59:59 2 Hour 5 10:00:00 10:59:59 Hour 6 11:00:00 11:59:59 Hour 7 12:00:00 12:59:59 Hour 8 13:00:00 13:59:59 3 Hour 9 14:00:00 14:59:59 Hour 10 15:00:00 15:59:59 Hour 11 16:00:00 16:59:59 Hour 12 17:00:00 17:59:59 4 Hour 13 18:00:00 18:59:59 Hour 14 19:00:00 19:59:59 Hour 15 20:00:00 20:59:59 Hour 16 21:00:00 21:59:59 5 Hour 17 22:00:00 22:59:59 Hour 18 23:00:00 23:59:59
Table 5-3 Bus route service attributes and parameters
Values/ Variable Definition Category Unit Ranges Service time The time span of the para-transit Variable 18 hours period service. Service demand Number of demand periods Variable 5 - periods Service Service headway is set as the Decision 1 - 20 minutes Headway decision variable (integer range). Variable Vehicle capacity Total number of seats inside the Variable 43/28 - vehicle. Max Waiting Maximum waiting time for Constraint 15 minutes Time passengers is estimated as the time interval between two consecutive buses at any given stop. Min Load factor Minimum of maximum number of Constraint 0.9 - passengers for each vehicle trip as a ratio of the vehicle capacity. Max Load factor Maximum number of passengers Constraint 1.5 - allowed to travel inside the vehicle as a ratio of the vehicle capacity. Fuel Cost Unit cost of fuel. Variable 65 INR /litre
Fuel Average fuel consumption rate of Variable 5 (43 seat) km./litre Consumption running vehicle. 7.3 (28 seat) (Running)
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 124 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Values/ Variable Definition Category Unit Ranges Fuel Average fuel consumption rate of Variable 2 (43seat) litre/hour Consumption idle engine running vehicle. 1.2 (28 seat) (Idle) Vehicle cost On-road cost of vehicle unit. Variable 70,00,000 INR (43 seat) 55,00,000 (28 seat) Vehicle Life Maximum vehicle-km run Variable 8,00,000 kilometre allowed before discarded. Average crew Average salary per crew member. Variable 25,500 INR/month wage Maintenance Periodic maintenance cost per unit Variable 14,000 INR per Cost vehicle. 10,000 km Waiting time Unit cost of passenger waiting Variable 0.80 INR/mins. Cost time. Travel time Cost Unit cost of passenger travel time Variable 0 INR/mins. (Seated) while seated. Travel time Cost Unit cost of passenger travel time Variable 0.4 INR/mins. (Standing) while standing. Operator penalty Penalty cost of failing to serve Variable 10 INR/pax. any passenger due to overcrowding. User penalty User level inconvenience charges Variable 0 INR/pax. due to availing of other modes. Operator Cost Total cost of operation incurred Indicators Thousand - INR during the service time period. User Cost Total user cost incurred during the Indicators Thousand - INR service time period. Total Overall Total social cost of bus service Indicators Thousand - INR Cost incurred during the service time period. Total fleet size Total number of buses required to Indicators - run the service
5.4. Results and discussion
Results for full day operation along WBTC bus route S37A using 43 and 28 seater buses are shown in Table 5-4 and Table 5-5 respectively. While, the total number of feasible service combinations simulated for the 43 seater bus was 4,03,200 the same was found to be only 5,184 for the 28 seater bus. The minimum fleet size (lowest cost), operation cost, user cost and overall cost timetable and schedules are obtained from both the simulations and compared to understand the effect of bus size in full day bus service operation. The timetables and vehicle schedules are also generated similar to Figure 5-1 and Figure 5-2 and is presented in details in Appendix D, Appendix E, Appendix F and Appendix G.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 125 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Comparing full day simulation result for both the bus types show that, for this particular bus route, operator will be able to reduce cost and serve more passengers using the larger bus. The operation cost of the 43 seater bus is found to be 24% less than the 28 seater bus comparing the results of the minimum operation cost cases. The fleet size is also reduced by 25% which signifies a huge reduction in parking area requirement in the terminals. On the other hand, user cost incurred for the 43 seater bus service is 5.4% higher than that of the smaller variant due to significant reduction in the waiting time of passengers and some minor reduction in the number of standing passengers in case of the 28 seater bus. Finally, operating 28 seater buses for an entire day instead of standard 43 seater buses on this route results in 9 % increase in the overall cost and is thus not recommended for this route. However, the same can be feasible in case a route has larger variability in travel demand.
5.5. Conclusion
The model and software developed in this study emulates the actual bus service operation to a large extent and also highlights the complexity of timetable development and vehicle scheduling considering full day operation. Comparing these results with the results obtained in the previous chapter where only individual periods were considered, we could easily observe the limitations of designing service frequency for individual periods. Not only it is difficult to predict a service frequency for an individual time period without considering its effect on the subsequent periods and in both directions it could give us a partial picture in terms of minimum cost which may result in selection of wrong service combinations. Currently, most bus operators in India use peak hour demand to determine service frequency and adjust the frequency for the remaining periods based on bus availability. The current software will help in designing balanced bus service operations between the different periods and will result in significant reduction of coverall cost and passenger lost thus making bus service attractive to both current and potential users.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 126 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Table 5-4 Full day bus service simulation result with 43- seater bus for WBTC bus route S 37A plying between Garia bus terminus to Airport Gate No.1
Minimum cost Minimum fleet size Minimum operator cost Minimum user cost Minimum overall cost UP DN UP DN UP DN UP DN Period 1 12 16 12 19 9 13 12 19 UP DN UP DN UP DN UP DN Period 2 5 6 5 6 5 5 5 6 UP DN UP DN UP DN UP DN Service headway (Min.) Period 3 6 7 6 10 4 7 6 10 UP DN UP DN UP DN UP DN Period 4 6 4 8 4 6 4 8 4 UP DN UP DN UP DN UP DN Period 5 16 11 16 11 11 7 16 11 Maximum Load factor 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Departures from 152 163 142 151 183 185 142 151 Terminal A | Terminal B Minimum Fleet size 41 48 47 48 Maximum Fleet size 48 53 60 53 Vehicle- km 9450.0 8790.0 11040.0 8790.0 Fuel Consumption (litres) 1855.8 1726.3 2167.7 1726.3 Fuel cost (INR) 120631.2 112215.3 140903.9 112215.3 Vehicle Depreciation (INR) 82687.6 76912.5 96600.34 76912.5 Crew Cost (INR) 160650 149430 187680 149430 Maintenance cost (INR) 13230.02 12306 15456.0 12306 Total waiting time (min) 95678.6 104515.8 78485.3 104515.8 Waiting time cost (INR) 76542.9 83612.6 62788.2 83612.6 Travel Time cost – standing (INR) 413579.7 409425.8 416666.3 409425.8 Fare collected (INR) 421570 414085 428890 414085 Number of passengers served 24898 24613 25017 24613 Number of passengers lost 671 1125 149 1125 Operator penalty (INR) 6710 11250 1490 11250 User penalty (INR) 0 0 0 0 Total operation cost (INR) 302499.8 286479.8 346808.5 286479.8 User Cost (INR) 490122.6 493038.4 479454.6 493038.4 Overall cost (INR) 750077.9 732102.6 790868.8 732102.6 Simulation run ID 312610 321840 40326 321840
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 127 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Table 5-5 Full day bus service simulation result with 28- seater bus for WBTC bus route S 37A plying between Garia bus terminus to Airport Gate No.1
Minimum cost Minimum fleet size Minimum operator cost Minimum user cost Minimum overall cost UP DN UP DN UP DN UP DN Period 1 7 13 8 12 6 12 7 12 UP DN UP DN UP DN UP DN Period 2 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 UP DN UP DN UP DN UP DN Service headway (Min.) Period 3 4 5 4 7 3 7 4 7 UP DN UP DN UP DN UP DN Period 4 4 3 5 3 5 3 5 3 UP DN UP DN UP DN UP DN Period 5 10 7 11 7 10 7 10 7 Maximum Load factor 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Departures from 241 250 226 216 251 216 229 216 Terminal A | Terminal B Minimum Fleet size 51 60 58 58 Maximum Fleet size 64 87 105 86 Vehicle- km 14730.1 13260.0 14010.0 13350.0 Fuel consumption (liters) 2106.2 1896.1 2003.3 1909.0 Fuel cost (INR) 136906.7 123250.1 130217.4 124086.1 Vehicle Depreciation (INR) 101269.4 91163.01 96319.34 91781.7 Crew Cost (INR) 250410 225420 238170 226950 Maintenance cost (INR) 17676.1 15912.0 16812.1 16020.0 Total waiting time (min) 59919.5 66270.7 62513.3 64863.4 Waiting time cost(INR) 47935.6 53016.5 50010.6 51890.7 Travel Time cost – standing (INR) 410685.7 404704.6 403412.9 402569.2 Fare collected (INR) 425770 415785 414730 413860 Number of passengers served 23670 23335 23268 23249 Number of passengers lost 747 1387 1121 1309 Operator penalty(INR) 7470 13870 11210 13090 User penalty(INR) 0 0 0 0 Total operation cost (INR) 413467.3 379456.7 397414.1 381150.8 User Cost (INR) 458621.3 457721.2 453423.6 454460 Overall cost (INR) 844239.1 806415.4 820075.2 804848.3 Simulation run ID 2883 5148 720 3312
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 128 Government of India
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
6. Conclusion
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 129 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 130 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
This handbook presents a methodology to determine the optimal service delivery level for public bus transit in terms of fleet size, vehicle capacity, headway, etc. for a bus route in the Indian context. The methodology adopted in the study involves identification of different service attributes and parameters related to bus service operation, cost, route etc. based on literature review and detail interaction with bus operators. Next, these attributes and parameters are used to develop a model for determining optimal frequency/headway for a bus route during a particular time period. Once the basic relationships among the parameters and cost functions for determining both user and operator costs were determined a simulation framework was developed in form of software which could simulate bus operations along the bus route in both directions during a particular time period. This software was then used to determine optimal frequency for three time periods namely, morning peak, afternoon off-peak and evening peak in both up and down directions. The software (BSS-Bus service setting) could be also used for analysing cost of improvement for varying levels of a particular service attributes for a bus route while keeping either frequency or crowding level fixed. Accordingly, sensitivity analysis was performed on three attributes namely, headway, crowding and seat availability for each time period and direction separately. The results while specific for a bus route shows that, interaction amongst these parameters are not straight forward and sometimes operation cost per hour for certain headways are lower compared to headways which are immediately higher which is due to the lower number of passengers lost at same number of dispatches. Similarly, it can be also stated that, in regards to seat availability operators need not be concerned during low demand period as long as crowding levels are within the range of feasible service delivery level whereas, during peak periods operators should consider both crowding level and seat availability to ensure a pleasant journey experience for passengers.
This study also involved user surveys to identify bus transit service quality indicators from a preselected list for which users are willing to pay (WTP) for improvement. The WTP values for improvement were also estimated for each of the three cities and also for the different user groups. While, many studies have used these values directly to determine possibilities and amount of fare increase while taking up service level improvement tasks, many studies have also used these to determine generalized cost of service. However, we recommend operators give ample consideration to the local context and existing fare and distribution of various user groups to set a fair value for fare increase for any service improvement. The same could be also set within our BSS or PUBBS-transit software either as generalized cost or fare.
PUBBS-transit is the bus scheduling software developed in this study which could be used to determine service delivery level for bus transit along a particular route based on the passenger
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 131 Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
travel demand along the route and the route level Origin-Destination (O-D) details while considering the variability of the demand and traffic conditions throughout the day. The software also takes into account the route and operator resources and constraints such as available fleet, fare, bus sizes etc. Depending on the operator objectives service schedules are prepared for each vehicle while conforming to service constraints or feasible service delivery ranges decided from both operator and user perspective. The software can determine optimal headways for different time periods in both up and down directions for the entire day which also allows operators to use constraints related to utilization of each vehicle, earnings from each vehicle etc. The software can be also used to test various scenarios such as optimal bus size for a particular route or to minimize fleet size, user cost, operator cost etc.
Thus, it can be concluded that, optimal service delivery level varies from bus route to bus route and depends on a multitude of factors such as operator service rules and policies, various service and technical parameters such as bus cost, fuel cost, bus design etc., feasible service delivery ranges for bus attributes based on user perception and operator level targets. Additionally, frequency for different time periods should be determined in conjunction and not for each time period separately since frequency of a single time period influences fleet availability and frequency in other time periods and in the opposite direction and balanced frequencies among up and down directions leads to lower fleet size. Another important consideration is user cost and value of time. Incorporating user cost always results in service levels more acceptable to users. However, in case value of time is too high the result is a skewed service with very high service level which is both unnecessary and also not practical considering the low fare levels in developing countries.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning 132 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Reference
Automotive Industry Standards Committee. (2008). Code of Practice for Bus Body Design and Approval. Pune: Automotive Research Association of India.
Batarace, M., Munoz, J. C., & Ortuzar, J. d. (2016). valuing crowding in public transport: implications for cost-benefit analysis. Transportation Research Pasrt A: Policy and Practice, 91(1), 358-378. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2016.06.025
Breidert, C., Hahsler, M., & Reutterer, T. (2006). A review of methods for measuring willingness-to-pay. Innovative Marketing, 2(4), 8-32. doi:10.3111/13696998.2011.644408
Drevs, F., Tscheulin, D. K., Lindenmeier, J., & Renner, S. (2014). Crowding-in or crowding out: an empirical analysis on the effect of subsidies on individual willingness-to-pay for public transportation. Transportation Research Pasrt A: Policy and Practice, 59, 250-261. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2013.10.023
Dzeikan, K., & Kottenhoff, K. (2007). Dynamic at-stop real-time information displays for public transport: effects on customers. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 41(6), 489-501. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2006.11.006
Eboli, L., & Mazzulla, G. (2008). Willingness-to-pay of public transport users for improvement in service quality. European Transport, 38(13), 107-118.
Hensher, D. A., Greene, W. H., & Rose, J. M. (2006). Deriving willingness-to-pay estimates of travel-time savings from individual-based parameters. Environment and Planning A, 38, 2365-2376. doi:10.1068/a37395
Horcher, D., Graham, D. J., & Anderson, R. J. (2018). The economics of seat provision in public transport. Transportation Research Pasrt E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 109, 277-292. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2017.11.011
Jones-Lee, M., & Loomes, G. (1995). Scale and context effects in the valuation of transport safety. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 11(3), 183-203. doi:10.1007/BF01207785
Li, H., Gao, K., & Huizhao, T. (2017). Variations in mode-specific valuations of travel time reliability and in-vehicle crowding: implications for demand estimation. Transportation Research Part A, 103, 250-263. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2017.06.009
Li, Z., & Hensher, D. A. (2011). Crowding and public transport: A review of willingness to pay evidence and its relevance in project appraisal. Transport Policy, 18(6), 880-887. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.06.003
Li, Z., Hensher, D. A., & Rose, J. M. (2010). Willingness to pay for travel for travel time reliability in passenger transport: a review and some new empirical evidence. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 46(3), 384-403. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2009.12.005
Litman, T. (2008). Valuing transit service quality improvements. Journal of Public Transportation, 11(2), 43-63. doi:10.5038/2375-0901.11.2.3
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xv Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Miller, K. M., Hofsetter, R., Krohmer, H., & Zhang, Z. J. (2012). Measuring consumers' willingness to pay. Which method fits best? Marketing Intelligence Review, 4(1), 42-49. doi:10.2478/gfkmir-2014-0040
Molin, E. J., & Timmermans, H. J. (2006). Traveler expectations and willingness-to-pay for web-enabled public transport information services. Transportation Research Par C: Emerging Technologies, 14(2), 57-67. doi:10.1016/j.trc.2006.05.003
Paulley, N., Balcombe, R., Mackett, R., Titheridge, H., Preston, J., Wardman, M., . . . White, P. (2006). The demand for public transport: the effects of fares, quality of service, income and car ownership. Transport Policy, 13(4), 295-306. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.12.004
Phanikumar, C. V., & Maitra, B. (2006). Valuing urban bus attributes: an experience in Kolkata. Journal of Public Transportation, 9(2), 69-87. doi:10.5038/2375-0901.9.2.4
Ramanayya, V., Nagadevara, S., & Roy, S. (2007). Quality expectations of transport services and willingness to pay: case of KSRTC. AIMS International, 1(1), 39-52.
Rashid, M. (2018). Determination of Quality of Sanitation Services in Rural Settlements of India based on User perception. Kharagpur: Indian Institute of Technology.
Wardman, M. (2001). A review of British evidence on time and service quality valuations. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 37(2-3), 107-128. doi:10.1016/S1366-5545(00)00012-0
Zeithaml, V. A., L., B. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1993). The nature and determinants of customer expectations of service. Journal of the Academy Marketing Science, 21(1), 1-12. doi:10.1177/0092070393211001
Bellei, Giuseppe, and Konstantinos Gkoumas. 2010. “Transit Vehicles’ Headway Distribution and Service Irregularity.” Public Transport 2 (4): 269–89. doi:10.1007/s12469-010-0024-7.
Casello, Jeffrey M, and Bruce Hellinga. 2008. “IMPACTS OF EXPRESS BUS SERVICE ON Passenger Demand.” Public Transportation 11 (2003): 1–23.
Ceder, Avishai. 1991. “Transit Scheduling.” Journal of Advanced Tramportation 25 (2): 137–60.
———. 2002. “Urban Transit Scheduling: Framework, Review and Examples.” Journal of Urban Planning and Development 128 (4): 225–44. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733- 9488(2002)128:4(225).
———. 2007. Public Transit Planning and Operation : Theory, Modelling and Practice. First. Burlington, Massachusetts, US: Butterworth-Heinemann.
———. 2009. “Public-Transport Automated Timetables Using Even Headway and Even Passenger Load Concepts.” In The 32nd Australasian Transport Research Forum, 1–17. Auckland, New Zealand. http://www.atrf.info/papers/2009/2009_Ceder.pdf.
Ceder, Avishai, and Nigel H.M. Wilson. 1986. “Bus Network Design.” Transportation Research B 20B (4): 331–44. https://books.google.com.pe/books?id=Z3PzAAAAMAAJ.
Chang, Shyue Koong, and Paul M Schonfeld. 1991. “Optimization Models for Comparing Conventional and Subscription Bus Feeder Services.” Operations Research Society of
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xvi Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
America. Transportation Science Section. Transportation Science 25 (4): 281–98. doi:10.1287/trsc.25.4.281.
Chen, Jingxu, Zhiyuan Liu, Senlai Zhu, and Wei Wang. 2015. “Design of Limited-Stop Bus Service with Capacity Constraint and Stochastic Travel Time.” Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 83. Elsevier Ltd: 1–15. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2015.08.007.
Correia, Anderson R., S. C. Wirasinghe, and Alexandre G. de Barros. 2008. “Overall Level of Service Measures for Airport Passenger Terminals.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 42 (2): 330–46. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2007.10.009.
Cortés, Cristián E., Doris Sáez, Freddy Milla, Alfredo Núñez, and Marcela Riquelme. 2010. “Hybrid Predictive Control for Real-Time Optimization of Public Transport Systems’ Operations Based on Evolutionary Multi-Objective Optimization.” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 18 (5). Elsevier Ltd: 757–69. doi:10.1016/j.trc.2009.05.016.
Daganzo, Carlos F. 2009. “A Headway-Based Approach to Eliminate Bus Bunching: Systematic Analysis and Comparisons.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 43 (10). Elsevier Ltd: 913–21. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2009.04.002.
Das, Shreya. 2013. “A Methodology to Determine Level of Service for Bus Transit.” Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur.
Das, Shreya, and Debapratim Pandit. 2014. “Determination of Level-of-Service Scale Values for Quantitative Bus Transit Service Attributes Based on User Perception.” Transportmetrica A: Transport Science 11 (1): 1–21. doi:10.1080/23249935.2014.910563.
———. 2016a. “Methodology to Determine Service Delivery Levels for Public Transportation.” Transportation Planning and Technology 39 (2): 195–217. doi:10.1080/03081060.2015.1127541.
———. 2016b. “Qualitative Assessment of Public Facilities: The ‘Public Bus.’” The TQM Journal 28 (2): 275–94. doi:10.1108/TQM-11-2014-0096. dell’Olio, Luigi, Angel Ibeas, and Patricia Cecín. 2010. “Modelling User Perception of Bus Transit Quality.” Transport Policy 17 (6): 388–97. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.04.006.
Dell’Olio, Luigi, Ángel Ibeas, and Francisco Ruisánchez. 2012. “Optimizing Bus-Size and Headway in Transit Networks.” Transportation 39 (2): 449–64. doi:10.1007/s11116-011- 9332-2.
Delle Site, Paolo, and Francesco Filippi. 1998. “Service Optimization for Bus Corridors with Short-Turn Strategies and Variable Vehicle Size.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 32 (1): 19–38. doi:10.1016/S0965-8564(97)00016-5.
Desaulniers, Guy, and Mark D. Hickman. 2007. “Chapter 2 Public Transit.” Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science 14 (C): 69–127. doi:10.1016/S0927- 0507(06)14002-5.
Dessouky, M. 2003. “Real-Time Control of Buses for Schedule Coordination at a Terminal” 37 (2): 145–64. doi:10.1016/S0965-8564(02)00010-1.
Dessouky, Maged, Randolph Hall, Ali Nowroozi, and Karen Mourikas. 1999. “Bus Dispatching at Timed Transfer Transit Stations Using Bus Tracking Technology.”
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xvii Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 7 (4): 187–208. doi:10.1016/S0968-090X(99)00019-4.
Eboli, Laura, and Gabriella Mazzulla. 2007. “Service Quality Attributes Affecting Customer Satisfaction for Bus Transit.” Journal of Public Transportation 10 (3): 21–34. doi:10.5038/2375-0901.10.3.2.
Furth, P G, and N H M Wilson. 1981. “Setting Frequencies on Bus Routes: Theory and Practice.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 818: 1–7.
Garrido, Rodrigo A, and Juan De Dios Ortúzar. 1994. “Deriving Public Transport Level of Service Weights from a Multiple Comparison of Latent and Observable Variables” 45 (10): 1099–1107. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2584473.
Golob, Thomas F., Eugene T. Canty, Richard L. Gustafson, and Joseph E. Vitt. 1972. “An Analysis of Consumer Preferences for a Public Transportation System.” Transportation Research 6 (1): 81–102. doi:10.1016/0041-1647(72)90113-X.
Grosfeld-Nir, A., and J. H. Bookbinder. 1995. “The Planning of Headways in Urban Public Transit.” Annals of Operations Research 60 (1): 145–60. doi:10.1007/BF02031944.
Hadas, Yuval, and Matan Shnaiderman. 2012. “Public-Transit Frequency Setting Using Minimum-Cost Approach with Stochastic Demand and Travel Time.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 46 (8). Elsevier Ltd: 1068–84. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2012.02.010.
Hafezi, Mohammad Hesam, and Muhammad Ahsanul Habib. 2014. “Bus Travel Time Optimization With Unequal Headway Pattern.” Rethinking Canadian Transportation Policies in the Age of Globalization: Innovations in Planning, Infrastructure and Finance, 1–16.
Hall, Randolph, Maged Dessouky, and Quan Lu. 2001. “Optimal Holding Times at Transfer Stations.” Computers and Industrial Engineering 40 (4): 379–97. doi:10.1016/S0360- 8352(01)00039-0.
Hassold, Stephan, and Avishai Ceder. 2013. “Public Transport Time-Tabling Based on Maximum-Load Points Using Multisize Vehicles.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2352: 104–13. doi:10.3141/2352-12.
Herbon, Avi, and Yuval Hadas. 2015. “Determining Optimal Frequency and Vehicle Capacity for Public Transit Routes: A Generalized Newsvendor Model.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 71. Elsevier Ltd: 85–99. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2014.10.007.
Hurdle, V F. 1973. “Minimum Cost Schedules for a Public Transportation Route II. Examples.” Transportation Science 7 (2): 138. doi:10.1287/trsc.7.2.109.
I-JY Chien, Steven. 2005. “Optimization Of Headway, Vehicle Size and Route Choice for Minimum Cost Feeder Service.” Transportation Planning and Technology 28 (5): 359–80. doi:10.1080/03081060500322565.
Ibeas, Ángel, Luigi dell’Olio, Borja Alonso, and Olivia Sainz. 2010. “Optimizing Bus Stop Spacing in Urban Areas.” Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 46 (3). Elsevier Ltd: 446–58. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2009.11.001.
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xviii Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Ibeas, Ángel, José Luis Moura, Luigi Dell’Olio, and Juan de Dios Ortuzar. 2006. “Costing School Transport in Spain.” Transportation Planning and Technology 29 (6): 483–501. doi:10.1080/03081060601075757.
Iseki, Hiroyuki, and Brian D Taylor. 2010. “Style versus Service ? An Analysis of User Perceptions of Transit Stops and Stations.” Journal of Public Transportation 13 (3): 39–63. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.13.3.2.
Jara-Díaz, Sergio R., and Antonio Gschwender. 2009. “The Effect of Financial Constraints on the Optimal Design of Public Transport Services.” Transportation 36 (1): 65–75. doi:10.1007/s11116-008-9182-8.
Jara-Diaz, Sergio R., Antonio Gschwender, and Meisy Ortega. 2012. “Is Public Transport Based on Transfers Optimal? A Theoretical Investigation.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 46 (7). Elsevier Ltd: 808–16. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2012.02.002.
Jara-Diaz, Sergio R., and Cristián A. Guevara. 2003. “Behind the Subjective Value of Travel Time Savings.” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy (JTEP) 37 (1): 29–46. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/search/download?pub=infobike://lse/jtep/2003/00000037/ 00000001/art00002&mimetype=application/pdf.
Kim, Myungseob (Edward), and Paul Schonfeld. 2013. “Integrating Bus Services with Mixed Fleets.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 55 (September). Elsevier Ltd: 227–44. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2013.06.013.
Kim, Yu Kyoung, and Hyung Ryong Lee. 2011. “Customer Satisfaction Using Low Cost Carriers.” Tourism Management 32 (2). Elsevier Ltd: 235–43. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2009.12.008.
Koutsopoulos, Harilaos N, A Odoni, and Nigel H M Wilson. 1985. “Determination of Headways as a Function of Time Varying Characteristics on a Transit Network.” Computer Scheduling of Public Transport 2 (1). Elsevier Amsterdam: 391–413.
Lai, Wen Tai, and Ching Fu Chen. 2011. “Behavioral Intentions of Public Transit Passengers-The Roles of Service Quality, Perceived Value, Satisfaction and Involvement.” Transport Policy 18 (2). Elsevier: 318–25. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.09.003.
Leiva, Carola, Juan Carlos Muñoz, Ricardo Giesen, and Homero Larrain. 2010. “Design of Limited-Stop Services for an Urban Bus Corridor with Capacity Constraints.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 44 (10). Elsevier Ltd: 1186–1201. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2010.01.003.
Li, Zheng, Kung-E Cheng, Yuanqiong Wang, and Starr Roxanne Hiltz. 2001. “Thurstone’s Law of Comparative Judgment for Group Support.” Americas Conference on Information Systems, 241–44. http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2001/48.
Maparu, Tuhin Subhra, and Debapratim Pandit. 2010. “A Methodology for Selection of Bus Rapid Transit Corridors : A Case Study of Kolkata,” no. December: 21–36.
Marlin, Paul G., Robert M. Nauss, L. Douglas Smith, and Malcolm Rhoades. 1988. “Computer Support for Operator Assignment and Dispatching in an Urban Transit System.” Transportation Research Part A: General 22 (1): 13–26. doi:10.1016/0191- 2607(88)90059-3.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xix Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Martínez, Héctor, Antonio Mauttone, and María E. Urquhart. 2014. “Frequency Optimization in Public Transportation Systems: Formulation and Metaheuristic Approach.” European Journal of Operational Research 236 (1): 27–36. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2013.11.007.
Michael, Joshua. 2009. “An Approach to Reducing Bus Bunching.” University of California. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6zc5j8xg Abstract:
Morton, Craig, Brian Caulfield, and Jillian Anable. 2016. “Customer Perceptions of Quality of Service in Public Transport: Evidence for Bus Transit in Scotland.” Case Studies on Transport Policy 4 (3): 199–207. doi:10.1016/j.cstp.2016.03.002.
MoUD. 2008. “Service Level Benchmarks for Urban Transport at a Glance.”
Newell, G. F. 1971. “Dispatching Policies for a Transportation Route.” Transportation Science 5 (April 2016): 91–105. doi:10.1287/trsc.5.1.91.
Oldfield, R. H., and P. H. Bly. 1988. “An Analytic Investigation of Optimal Bus Size.” Transportation Research Part B 22 (5): 319–37. doi:10.1016/0191-2615(88)90038-0.
Oña, Juan de, and Rocio de Oña. 2015. “Quality of Service in Public Transport Based on Customer Satisfaction Surveys : A Review and Assessment of Quality of Service in Public Transport Based on Customer Satisfaction Surveys : A Review and Assessment of Methodological Approaches.” Transportation Science 49 (3): 605–22. doi:dx.doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2014.0544.
Oña, Juan De, Rocío De Oña, Laura Eboli, and Gabriella Mazzulla. 2013. “Perceived Service Quality in Bus Transit Service: A Structural Equation Approach.” Transport Policy 29. Elsevier: 219–26. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2013.07.001.
Palma, André De, and Robin Lindsey. 2001. “Optimal Timetables for Public Transportation.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 35 (8): 789–813. doi:10.1016/S0191-2615(00)00023-0.
Pandit, Debapratim, and Shreya Das. 2013. “A Framework for Determining Commuter Preference Along a Proposed Bus Rapid Transit Corridor.” In Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 104:894–903. Elsevier B.V. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.184.
Qu, He zhou, Steven I.Jy Chien, Xiao bo Liu, Pei tong Zhang, and Athanassios Bladikas. 2016. “Optimizing Bus Services with Variable Directional and Temporal Demand Using Genetic Algorithm.” Journal of Central South University 23 (7): 1786–98. doi:10.1007/s11771-016-3232-8.
Ruisanchez, Francisco, Luigi Dell’Olio, and Angel Ibeas. 2016. “Evaluating Competitiveness Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Case Study of Port Enterprises in Turkey.” Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 2016 (july): 248–54. doi:10.1002/atr.
Shen, Weiwei, Weizhou Xiao, and Xin Wang. 2016. “Passenger Satisfaction Evaluation Model for Urban Rail Transit: A Structural Equation Modeling Based on Partial Least Squares.” Transport Policy 46. Elsevier: 20–31. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.10.006.
Simon, J, and P G Furth. 1985. “Generating a Bus Route O-D Matrix from on-off Data.” Journal of Transportation Engineering 111 (6): 583–93. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733- 947X(1985)111:6(583).
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xx Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Small, Ka. 1997. “Economics and Urban Transportation Policy in the United States.” Regional Science and Urban Economics 27: 671–91.
Small, Kenneth A., and Erik T. Verhoef. 2010. The Economics of Urban Transportation. Taylor & Francis. New York, US: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
Sun, Lijun, Jian Gang Jin, Der Horng Lee, Kay W. Axhausen, and Alexander Erath. 2014. “Demand-Driven Timetable Design for Metro Services.” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 46. Elsevier Ltd: 284–99. doi:10.1016/j.trc.2014.06.003.
Szeto, W. Y., and Y. Jiang. 2014. “Transit Route and Frequency Design: Bi-Level Modeling and Hybrid Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm Approach.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 67. Elsevier Ltd: 235–63. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2014.05.008.
Thompson, Karen, and Peter Schofield. 2007. “An Investigation of the Relationship between Public Transport Performance and Destination Satisfaction.” Journal of Transport Geography 15 (2): 136–44. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2006.11.004.
Tirachini, Alejandro, David A. Hensher, and Sergio R. Jara-Díaz. 2010. “Comparing Operator and Users Costs of Light Rail, Heavy Rail and Bus Rapid Transit over a Radial Public Transport Network.” Research in Transportation Economics 29 (1). Elsevier Ltd: 231–42. doi:10.1016/j.retrec.2010.07.029.
Tirachini, Alejandro, Lijun Sun, Alexander Erath, and Artem Chakirov. 2016. “Valuation of Sitting and Standing in Metro Trains Using Revealed Preferences.” Transport Policy 47. Elsevier: 94–104. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.12.004.
Tyrinopoulos, Yannis, and Georgia Aifadopoulou. 2008. “A Complete Methodology for the Quality Control of Passenger Services in the Public Transport Business.” European Transport \ Trasporti Europei 38: 1–16.
Tyrinopoulos, Yannis, and Constantinos Antoniou. 2008. “Public Transit User Satisfaction: Variability and Policy Implications.” Transport Policy 15 (4): 260–72. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2008.06.002.
Wardman, Mark. 2004. “Public Transport Values of Time.” Transport Policy 11 (4): 363– 77. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2004.05.001.
Xuan, Yiguang, Juan Argote, and Carlos F. Daganzo. 2011. “Dynamic Bus Holding Strategies for Schedule Reliability: Optimal Linear Control and Performance Analysis.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 45 (10). Elsevier Ltd: 1831–45. doi:10.1016/j.trb.2011.07.009.
Yang, Yingxiang, David Gerstle, Peter Widhalm, Dietmar Bauer, and Marta Gonzalez. 2013. “Potential of Low-Frequency Automated Vehicle Location Data for Monitoring and Control of Bus Performance.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2351: 54–64. doi:10.3141/2351-07.
Yu, Bin, Shanhua Wu, Baozhen Yao, Zhongzhen Yang, and Jian Sun. 2012. “Dynamic Vehicle Dispatching at a Transfer Station in Public Transportation System.” Journal of Transportation Engineering 138 (2): 191–201. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943- 5436.0000311.
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xxi Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xxii Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
Appendix A
Python code used for extracting boarding-alighting data of APSRTC bus services in Vishakhapatnam from xlrd import open_workbook import xlwt import xlrd import datetime tb = open_workbook('new/All_TIMET.xlsx') #op1 = open_workbook('new/output1.xlsx') op = open_workbook('new/output.xlsx') journey = [] output_data = [] o_data = {} trip_time = {} ser_trip = {} def is_int(no): try: no = int(no) return True except Exception as e: return False def add_data(start_dest, end_dest, no_of_people): found = False for path in journey: if(path['from'] == start_dest and path['to'] == end_dest): found = True try: #print path['people'] path['people'] = int(path['people'])+int(no_of_people) except Exception as e: #path['people'] = no_of_people start_dest = "error" if(found == False): journey.append({'from':start_dest, 'to':end_dest, 'people':no_of_people}) date = raw_input("Date/monthly(date in number eg:5, monthly as m):") start_time = raw_input("start time(HH:MM):") stop_time = raw_input("stop time(HH:MM):")
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xxiii Government of India
Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor
start_time = start_time.split(":") start_time = datetime.timedelta(hours = int(start_time[0]), minutes = int(start_time[1])) stop_time = stop_time.split(":") stop_time = datetime.timedelta(hours = int(stop_time[0]), minutes = int(stop_time[1]))
#print wb.sheet_names() for sheet in tb.sheets(): number_of_rows = sheet.nrows number_of_columns = sheet.ncols pointer = 1 ser_no = '' for row in range(pointer, number_of_rows-1): if(sheet.cell(row, 0).value == "Service Number"): ser_no = sheet.cell(row, 1).value #print ser_no if(sheet.cell(row, 0).value == "Trip Number"): row = row+1 while(is_int(sheet.cell(row, 0).value)): time = str(sheet.cell(row, 2).value).split(":") srt = datetime.timedelta(hours = int(time[0]), minutes = int(time[1])) time = str(sheet.cell(row, 3).value).split(":") stt = datetime.timedelta(hours = int(time[0]), minutes = int(time[1])) trip_time[ser_no] = {'no':int(sheet.cell(row, 0).value),'srt':srt, 'stt':stt} #print srt, stt row = row+1 if(row>number_of_rows-1): break #break files = ["new/SteelPlant.xlsx", "new/Gajuwaka.xlsx", "new/Maddilapalem.xlsx", "new/Waltair.xlsx"] for f in files: print "\n\nGetting data for"+f wb = open_workbook(f) for sheet in wb.sheets(): number_of_rows = sheet.nrows number_of_columns = sheet.ncols if sheet.name != date and date !='m': continue #print "Checking for date"+date #print number_of_columns #print number_of_rows pointer = 0 #print "she"
Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xxiv Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective
for row in range(pointer, number_of_rows-1): if(sheet.cell(row, 0).value == "SERVICE NO"): ser_no = sheet.cell(row, 1).value trip_no = sheet.cell(row, 3).value row = row+1 start_row = row row = row+4 column = 2 srt = datetime.timedelta(hours = 6 , minutes = 30) stt = datetime.timedelta(hours = 23, minutes = 30) interval = (stt-srt)/25 if(ser_no in trip_time.keys()): tt = trip_time[ser_no] srt = tt['srt'] stt = tt['stt'] interval = (stt-srt)/25
while(sheet.cell(start_row+1, column).value != "BDG"): #print (sheet.cell(start_row_pointer+1, 0).value != "Total"): start_dest = sheet.cell(start_row_pointer, 0).value #print end_dest = sheet.cell(start_row, column).value
no_of_people = sheet.cell(start_row_pointer, column-1).value #print start_dest + "-" + end_dest + "=" + str(no_of_people)
if(ser_no == trip_time[ser_no]['no']):
#print ser_no
#print bus_start_time, start_time, stop_time
if(bus_start_time>start_time and bus_start_time no_of_people = no_of_people else: no_of_people = 0 #print "making 0" Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xxv Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor add_data(start_dest, end_dest, no_of_people) start_row_pointer = start_row_pointer + 1 bus_start_time = bus_start_time + interval #print "*" #break files = ["new/Simhachalam.xlsx"] for f in files: print "\n\nGetting data for"+f wb = open_workbook(f) for sheet in wb.sheets(): number_of_rows = sheet.nrows number_of_columns = sheet.ncols if(sheet.name != date and date !='m'): continue #print "Checking for date"+date #print number_of_columns #print number_of_rows pointer = 0 #print "she" for row in range(pointer, number_of_rows-1): if(sheet.cell(row, 1).value == "SERVICE NO"): ser_no = sheet.cell(row, 3).value trip_no = sheet.cell(row, 3).value row = row+4 start_row = row row = row+4 column = 1 srt = datetime.timedelta(hours = 6, minutes = 30) stt = datetime.timedelta(hours = 23, minutes = 30) interval = (stt-srt)/25 if(ser_no in trip_time.keys()): tt= trip_time[ser_no] srt = tt['srt'] stt = tt['stt'] interval = (stt-srt)/25 #print sheet.cell(start_row, column).value Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xxvi Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective while(sheet.cell(start_row, column).value != "UP"): #print (sheet.cell(start_row, column).value) column = column+1 start_row_pointer = row-1 bus_start_time = srt while("------" not in (sheet.cell(start_row_pointer+1, 0).value)): start_dest = sheet.cell(start_row_pointer, 0).value end_dest = sheet.cell(start_row, column).value no_of_people = sheet.cell(start_row_pointer, column-1).value #print start_dest + "-" + end_dest + "=" + str(no_of_people) if(ser_no == trip_time[ser_no]['no']): #print bus_start_time, start_time, stop_time if(bus_start_time>start_time and bus_start_time no_of_people = no_of_people else: no_of_people = 0 #print "making 0" add_data(start_dest, end_dest, no_of_people) start_row_pointer = start_row_pointer + 1 bus_start_time = bus_start_time + interval #print "*" #break for sheet in op.sheets(): number_of_rows = sheet.nrows number_of_columns = sheet.ncols for row in range(2, number_of_rows): if(sheet.cell(row, 1) == ''): break #print sheet.cell(row, 1) output_data.append(sheet.cell(row, 1).value) Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xxvii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor break book = xlwt.Workbook(encoding="utf-8") sh = book.add_sheet("sheet 1") c = 1 r = 1 for d in output_data: sh.write(0, c, str(d)) o_data[d] = c c = c+1 sh.write(r, 0, str(d)) r = r+1 #print journey for path in journey: if((path['from'] in output_data) and (path['to'] in output_data)): sh.write(o_data[path['from']], o_data[path['to']], str(path['people'])) #print yes for time_d in trip_time: #print trip_time[time_d] book.save('output.xls') import os os.startfile('output.xls') Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xxviii Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Appendix B Appendix B1: Survey questionnaire for willingness- to- pay survey in Kolkata Questionnaire for Willingness- to- Pay Survey for Improved Bus Services Willingness- to- Pay Survey Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Service Level Optimization between Public Bus and Para- transit Services along a Transport Corridor To be filled by Surveyor Surveyor Name: Date of Survey: Time of Survey: Location: Bus Type: BRTS / Mini bus / Others Bus Route No.: AC / Non- AC ______ All information collected as part of this survey will remain confidential and will be used only for research purpose. User Profile Boarding Stop: ______Alighting Stop: ______ Age: ______yrs Sex: Male / Female / Transgender - Do you regularly travel on this route? Yes / No - How often do you use bus services? Everyday / 3-4 times in a week / Weekly / Others ______ - If you do not avail bus services, then what other alternate modes do you use? Auto-rickshaw / Private Vehicle / Taxi / BRTS / Metro/ Others ______ - Do you have a driving license? Yes / No Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xxix Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor - Do you own a private vehicle: Yes / No Two- wheeler ___ / Four- wheeler __ - Monthly Income: < 6,000/ 6,000- 10,000 / 10,000- 20,000 / 20,000- 50,000 / 50,000- 2,00,000 / 2,00,000- 5,00,000 / >5,00,000 - Kindly state your current trip details: Access PT Egress Access Access PT PT Egress Egress Origin Distance Distance Distance Destination Mode Cost Mode Cost Mode Cost (mins) (mins) (mins) *In case of trip chaining and escort trips, then kindly make note of such trips - Trip Purpose: Work / Education / Health / Shopping (in terms of grocery shopping to the market)/ Leisure / Home / Others ______ Rank the choice options as per your preference with 1 referring to most preferred and 5 referring to least preferred - Set 1 Card No. Waiting Delay in Crowding Transit Safety and Type of Bus fare Requirement Rank time at total level inside information* security in bus bus stop journey buses the service time system@ Existing X X Card 1 5 minutes 10 All seated + A + B + C W + X + AC + 25% minutes few Y increase Yes / No standing Card 6 15 5 All seated + A W + X + Non- + 50% minutes minutes 0 empty Y AC increase Yes / No seats Card 13 5 minutes 5 All seated + A W + X + AC No minutes few empty Y increase Yes / No seats in fare Card 18 10 5 All seated + A + B W + X AC + 50% minutes minutes few increase Yes / No standing * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xxx Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective - Set 2 Card No. Waiting Delay in Crowding Transit Safety and Type of Bus fare Requirement Rank time at total level inside information* security in bus bus stop journey buses the system@ service time Existing X X Card 5 5 minutes 5 minutes All seated + A + B + C W + X + Y Non- + 25% few AC increase Yes / No standing Card 11 5 minutes 5 minutes All seated + A + B W + X + Y Non- + 100% 0 empty + Z AC increase Yes / No seats Card 17 10 5 minutes All seated + A + B + C W AC + 50% minutes 0 empty increase Yes / No seats Card 22 10 10 All seated + A W + X + Y Non- + 25% minutes minutes few empty + Z AC increase Yes / No seats * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops - Set 3 Card No. Waiting Delay in Crowding Transit Safety and Type of Bus fare Requirement Rank time at total level inside information* security in bus bus stop journey buses the system@ service time Existing X X Card 19 5 minutes 10 All seated + A + B W Non- + 75% minutes few AC increase Yes / No standing Card 24 5 minutes 20 All seated + A + B + C W AC + 50% minutes few empty increase Yes / No seats Card 30 5 minutes 20 All seated + A + B + C W + X Non- + 25% minutes 0 empty AC increase Yes / No seats Card 36 15 20 All seated + A W + X Non- No minutes minutes few AC increase Yes / No standing in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xxxi Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor - Set 4 Card No. Waiting Delay in Crowding Transit Safety and Type of Bus fare Requirement Rank time at total level inside information* security in bus bus stop journey buses the system@ service time Existing X X Card 23 5 minutes 10 All seated + A W + X AC + 50% minutes few empty increase Yes / No seats Card 29 5 minutes 20 All seated + A W + X + Y AC + 75% minutes 0 empty + Z increase Yes / No seats Card 35 5 minutes 5 minutes All seated + A W AC + 100% few increase Yes / No standing Card 2 5 minutes 5 minutes All seated + A + B + C W Non- No few empty AC increase Yes / No seats in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops - Set 5 Card No. Waiting Delay in Crowding Transit Safety and Type of Bus fare Requirement Rank time at total level inside information* security in bus bus stop journey buses the system@ service time Existing X X Card 15 15 5 minutes All seated + A + B + C W + X + Y Non- + 50% minutes few + Z AC increase Yes / No standing Card 20 5 minutes 5 minutes All seated + A + B + C W + X AC + 25% 0 empty increase Yes / No seats Card 26 5 minutes 5 minutes All seated + A + B + C W + X + Y AC No few empty + Z increase Yes / No seats in fare Card 31 5 minutes 20 All seated + A + B W + X + Y Non- + 50% minutes few empty AC increase Yes / No seats * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xxxii Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective - Set 6 Card No. Waiting Delay in Crowding Transit Safety and Type of Bus fare Requirement Rank time at total level inside information* security in bus bus stop journey buses the system@ service time Existing X X Card 32 10 5 minutes All seated + A W Non- + 25% minutes few empty AC increase Yes / No seats Card 3 15 20 All seated + A + B W AC + 25% minutes minutes few empty increase Yes / No seats Card 4 15 10 All seated + A + B + C W + X AC + 100% minutes minutes few empty increase Yes / No seats Card 9 10 20 All seated + A + B + C W + X + Y AC No minutes minutes few + Z increase Yes / No standing in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops - Set 7 Card No. Waiting Delay in Crowding Transit Safety and Type of Bus fare Requirement Rank time at total level inside information* security in bus bus stop journey buses the system@ service time Existing X X Card 10 5 minutes 5 minutes All seated + A + B W + X Non- No few empty AC increase Yes / No seats in fare Card 16 15 10 All seated + A + B + C W Non- No minutes minutes 0 empty AC increase Yes / No seats in fare Card 21 15 5 minutes All seated + A + B + C W + X + Y AC + 75% minutes few empty increase Yes / No seats Card 27 15 5 minutes All seated + A + B W + X + Y AC + 25% minutes few empty + Z increase Yes / No seats * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xxxiii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor - Set 8 Card No. Waiting Delay in Crowding Transit Safety and Type of Bus fare Requirement Rank time at bus total level inside information* security in bus stop journey buses the system@ service time Existing X X Card 28 5 minutes 10 All seated + A + B + C W + X + Y Non- + 50% minutes few empty + Z AC increase Yes / No seats Card 33 10 20 All seated + A + B + C W + X + Y Non- + 100% minutes minutes few empty AC increase Yes / No seats Card 7 10 10 All seated + A + B W + X + Y AC No minutes minutes 0 empty increase in Yes / No seats fare Card 14 10 5 minutes All seated + A + B + C W + X Non- + 75% minutes few empty AC increase Yes / No seats * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xxxiv Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Appendix B2: Survey questionnaire for willingness- to- pay survey in Visakhapatnam Questionnaire for Willingness- to- Pay Survey for Improved Bus Services Willingness- to- Pay Survey Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Service Level Optimization between Public Bus and Para- transit Services along a Transport Corridor To be filled by Surveyor Surveyor Name: Date of Survey: Time of Survey: Location: Bus Type: BRTS / Mini bus / Others Bus Route No.: AC / Non- AC ______ All information collected as part of this survey will remain confidential and will be used only for research purpose. User Profile Boarding Stop: ______Alighting Stop: ______ Age: ______yrs Sex: Male / Female / Transgender - Do you regularly travel on this route? Yes / No - How often do you use bus services? Everyday / 3-4 times in a week / Weekly / Others ______ - If you do not avail bus services, then what other alternate modes do you use? Auto-rickshaw / Private Vehicle / Taxi / BRTS / Metro/ Others ______ - Do you have a driving license? Yes / No - Do you own a private vehicle: Yes / No Two- wheeler ___ / Four- wheeler __ Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xxxv Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor - Monthly Income: < 6,000/ 6,000- 10,000 / 10,000- 20,000 / 20,000- 50,000 / 50,000- 2,00,000 / 2,00,000- 5,00,000 / >5,00,000 - Kindly state your current trip details: Access PT Egress Access Access PT PT Egress Egress Origin Distance Distance Distance Destination Mode Cost Mode Cost Mode Cost (mins) (mins) (mins) *In case of trip chaining and escort trips, then kindly make note of such trips - Trip Purpose: Work / Education / Health / Shopping (in terms of grocery shopping to the market)/ Leisure / Home / Others ______ Rank the choice options as per your preference with 1 referring to most preferred and 5 referring to least preferred - Set 1 Card No. Waiting On- time Crowding Transit Type of Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank time at performance of level inside information* bus security in bus stop the bus service buses service the system@ Existing X X Card 1 5 mins 90% All seats A Non- W + X + 75% are full + AC Y increase Yes / No few are in fare standing Card 2 10 mins 65% All seats A + B + C Non- W No are full + AC increase Yes / No few are in fare standing Card 3 5 mins 90% All seated A + B + C Non- W 25% + 0 seats AC increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 4 5 mins 50% All seats A + B AC W + X + 50% are full + Y + Z increase Yes / No few are in fare standing * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xxxvi Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective - Set 2 Card No. Waiting On- time Crowding Transit Type of Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank time at performance of level inside information* bus security in bus stop the bus service buses service the system@ Existing X X Card 5 10 mins 90% All seated A + B + C Non- W + X 50% + few seats AC increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 6 5 mins 65% All seated A + B + C Non- W + X 25% + few seats AC increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 7 15 mins 90% All seated A + B + C Non- W + X + 50% + few seats AC Y increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 8 15 mins 50% All seats A Non- W + X No are full + AC increase Yes / No few are in fare standing * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops - Set 3 Card No. Waiting On- time Crowding Transit Type of Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank time at performance of level inside information* bus security in bus stop the bus service buses service the system@ Existing X X Card 9 5 mins 65% All seated A Non- W + X + Y 100% + few seats AC + Z increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 10 5 mins 90% All seated A + B + C AC W + X + Y No + few seats + Z increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 11 10 mins 50% All seated A + B + C AC W 75% + few seats increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 12 5 mins 90% All seated A + B AC W + X + Y No + few seats increase Yes / No are empty in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xxxvii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor - Set 4 Card No. Waiting On- time Crowding Transit Type of Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank time at performance of level inside information* bus security in bus stop the bus service buses service the system@ Existing X X Card 13 15 mins 90% All seated A Non- W 50% + few seats AC increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 14 5 mins 90% All seated A + B Non- W + X 75% + 0 seats AC increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 15 10 mins 90% All seats A + B + C AC W + X 100% are full + increase Yes / No few are in fare standing Card 16 5 mins 90% All seated A AC W + X No + few seats increase Yes / No are empty in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops - Set 5 Card No. Waiting On- time Crowding Transit Type of Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank time at performance of level inside information* bus security in bus stop the bus service buses service the system@ Existing X X Card 17 15 mins 65% All seated A + B AC W + X 25% + few seats increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 18 15 mins 90% All seated A + B + C AC W + X + Y 100% + 0 seats increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 19 10 mins 50% All seated A AC W + X + Y 25% + few seats increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 20 5 mins 90% All seated A + B + C AC W No + few seats increase Yes / No are empty in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xxxviii Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective - Set 6 Card No. Waiting On- time Crowding Transit Type of Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank time at performance of level inside information* bus security in bus stop the bus service buses service the system@ Existing X X Card 21 10 mins 90% All seated A + B Non- W + X + 50% + few AC Y + Z increase Yes / No seats are in fare empty Card 22 5 mins 50% All seated A + B + C AC W + X 50% + 0 seats increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 23 10 mins 90% All seated A AC W + X + 25% + 0 seats Y + Z increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 24 15 mins 65% All seated A + B + C AC W + X + 75% + few Y + Z increase Yes / No seats are in fare empty * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops - Set 7 Card No. Waiting On- time Crowding Transit Type of Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank time at performance of level inside information* bus security in bus stop the bus service buses service the system@ Existing X X Card 25 5 mins 65% All seats A + B + C AC W + X + Y 50% are full + increase Yes / No few are in fare standing Card 26 5 mins 90% All seats A + B + C Non- W + X + Y 25% are full + AC + Z increase Yes / No few are in fare standing Card 27 10 mins 65% All seated A + B Non- W + X + Y No + 0 seats AC increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 28 5 mins 50% All seated A + B Non- W 100% + few seats AC increase Yes / No are empty in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xxxix Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor - Set 8 Card No. Waiting On- time Crowding Transit Type of Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank time at performance of level inside information* bus security in bus stop the bus service buses service the system@ Existing X X Card 29 15 mins 50% All seated A + B + C Non- W + X + No + 0 seats AC Y + Z increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 30 5 mins 65% All seated A AC W 50% + 0 seats increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 31 5 mins 50% All seated A + B + C Non- W + X + 25% + few seats AC Y increase Yes / No are empty in fare Card 32 15 mins 90% All seats A + B AC W 25% are full + increase Yes / No few are in fare standing * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xl Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Appendix B3: Survey questionnaire for willingness- to- pay survey in Rajkot Willingness- to- Pay Survey Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Service Level Optimization between Public Bus and Para- transit Services along a Transport Corridor To be filled by Surveyor Surveyor Name: Date of Survey: Time of Survey: Location: Bus Type: BRTS / RMTS / Others Bus Route No.: AC / Non- AC ______ All information collected as part of this survey will remain confidential and will be used only for research purpose. User Profile Boarding Stop: ______Alighting Stop: ______ Age: ______yrs Sex: Male / Female / Transgender - Do you regularly travel on this route? Yes / No - How often do you use bus services? Everyday / 3-4 times in a week / Weekly / Others ______ - If you do not avail bus services, then what other alternate modes do you use? Auto-rickshaw / Private Vehicle / Taxi / BRTS / Metro/ Others ______ - Do you have a driving license? Yes / No Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xli Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor - Do you own a private vehicle: Yes / No Two- wheeler ___ / Four- wheeler __ - Monthly Income: < 6,000/ 6,000- 10,000 / 10,000- 20,000 / 20,000- 50,000 / 50,000- 2,00,000 / 2,00,000- 5,00,000 / >5,00,000 - Kindly state your current trip details: Access PT Egress Access Access PT PT Egress Egress Origin Distance Distance Distance Destination Mode Cost Mode Cost Mode Cost (mins) (mins) (mins) *In case of trip chaining and escort trips, then kindly make note of such trips - Trip Purpose: Work / Education / Health / Shopping (in terms of grocery shopping to the market)/ Leisure / Home / Others ______ Rank the choice options as per your preference with 1 referring to most preferred and 5 referring to least preferred - Set 1 Card Headway On- time Crowding Transit Bus Type Safety and Bus Requirement Rank No. performance level information* stop of bus security in fare of the bus inside design service the system@ service buses Existing X X Card 1 Every 70% All seats A+B+C P Non- W+X+Y+Z No full + few AC increase Yes / No 10 mins standing in fare Card 2 Every 90% All seats A P AC W+X 25% full + 0 increase Yes / No 10 mins standing in fare Card 3 Every 70% All seats A+B Q Non- W+X+Y No full + 0 AC increase Yes / No 10 mins standing in fare Card 4 Every 60% All seats A+B+C R AC W+X+Y 50% full + 0 increase Yes / No 5 mins standing in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xlii Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective - Set 2 Card Headway On- time Crowding Transit Bus Type Safety and Bus Requirement Rank No. performance level information* stop of bus security in fare of the bus inside design service the system@ service buses Existing X X Card 17 Every 60% All seats A R Non- W+X No full + few AC increase Yes / No 15 mins standing in fare Card 18 Every 90% All seated A+B P Non- W 50% + few seats AC increase Yes / No 10 mins empty in fare Card 19 Every 90% All seated A+B+C P AC W+X+Y+Z No + few seats increase Yes / No 5 mins empty in fare Card 20 Every 90% All seated A R AC W+X+Y No + few seats increase Yes / No 5 mins empty in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops - Set 3 Card Headway On- time Crowding Transit Bus Type Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank No. performance level inside information* stop of bus security in of the bus buses design service the service system@ Existing X X Card 5 Every 60% All seated + A+B+C Q Non- W 25% few seats AC increase Yes / No 5 mins empty in fare Card 6 Every 90% All seated + A P Non- W+X+Y+Z 50% few seats AC increase Yes / No 15 mins empty in fare Card 7 Every 90% All seats full A+B R Non- W+X+Y+Z 75% + 0 standing AC increase Yes / No 5 mins in fare Card 8 Every 70% All seated + A+B+C R Non- W+X+Y+Z 25% few seats AC increase Yes / No 5 mins empty in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xliii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor - Set 4 Card Headway On- time Crowding Transit Bus Type of Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank No. performance level inside information* stop bus security in of the bus buses design service the service system@ Existing X X Card 22 Every 90% All seats full A Q Non- W 75% + few AC increase Yes / No 5 mins standing in fare Card 23 Every 90% All seats full A+B P AC W+X+Y 25% + few increase Yes / No 15 mins standing in fare Card 24 Every 90% All seated + A+B+C R Non- W+X 50% few seats AC increase Yes / No 10 mins empty in fare Card 26 Every 60% All seated + A+B P Non- W+X 100% few seats AC increase Yes / No 5 mins empty in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops - Set 5 Card Headway On- time Crowding Transit Bus Type Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank No. performance level inside information* stop of bus security in of the bus buses design service the service system@ Existing X X Card 9 Every 60% All seats full A+B P AC W+X+Y+Z 50% + few increase Yes / No 5 mins standing in fare Card 10 Every 70% All seated + A+B+C P AC W+X 75% few seats increase Yes / No 15 mins empty in fare Card 11 Every 90% All seats full A+B+C P Non- W+X+Y 25% + few AC increase Yes / No 5 mins standing in fare Card 12 Every 90% All seats full A+B+C R AC W 100% + few increase 10 mins standing in fare Yes / No * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xliv Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective - Set 6 Card Headway On- time Crowding Transit Bus Type of Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank No. performance level inside information* stop bus security in of the bus buses design service the service system@ Existing X X Card 27 Every 90% All seated + A+B+C Q Non- W+X+Y 50% few seats AC increase Yes / No 15 mins empty in fare Card 28 Every 60% All seated + A+B+C P AC W+X+Y 75% few seats increase Yes / No 10 mins empty in fare Card 29 Every 90% All seated + A+B+C P AC W No few seats increase Yes / No 5 mins empty in fare Card 30 Every 70% All seats full A+B+C Q AC W+X 50% + few increase Yes / No 5 mins standing in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops - Set 7 Card Headway On- time Crowding Transit Bus Type Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank No. performance level inside information* stop of bus security in of the bus buses design service the service system@ Existing X X Card 13 Every 70% All seats full A P AC W 50% + 0 standing increase Yes / No 5 mins in fare Card 14 Every 90% All seats full A+B+C Q AC W+X+Y+Z 100% + 0 standing increase Yes / No 15 mins in fare Card 15 Every 70% All seated + A+B R AC W 25% few seats increase Yes / No 15 mins empty in fare Card 16 Every 60% All seats full A+B+C P Non- W No + 0 standing AC increase Yes / No 15 mins in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xlv Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor - Set 8 Card Headway On- time Crowding Transit Bus Type of Safety and Bus fare Requirement Rank No. performance level inside information* stop bus security in of the bus buses design service the service system@ Existing X X Card 31 Every 60% All seated + A Q AC W+X+Y+Z 25% few seats increase Yes / No 10 mins empty in fare Card 32 Every 70% All seated + A P Non- W+X+Y 100% few seats AC increase Yes / No 5 mins empty in fare Card 33 Every 90% All seated + A+B Q AC W+X No few seats increase Yes / No 5 mins empty in fare Card 34 Every 90% All seats full A+B+C P Non- W+X 25% + 0 standing AC increase Yes / No 5 mins in fare * A= Bus route network information; B= Real time information on arrival and departure of buses; C= Real time information on disruption in services @W=Disciplined driving practice; X= CCTV cameras inside buses; Y= CCTV cameras at bus stops; Z= Infrastructure to prioritise pedestrians for accessing bus stops Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xlvi Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Appendix C Software inputs Table C- 1 Stop- to- stop travel time UP DN Stops - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Stops - 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 Hours 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Hours 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 4.6 3.5 7.7 3.6 1.2 2.3 3.0 5.8 4.6 7.0 5.7 3.0 2.0 4.8 1 5.2 1.7 5.3 6.5 13.2 4.8 3.2 3.5 3.4 1.4 2.8 7.2 3.1 2.2 2 5.8 7.1 10.2 3.5 1.5 4.3 5.0 8.0 5.9 8.6 7.8 2.8 3.2 5.2 2 6.9 2.0 4.9 6.1 13.2 6.3 2.6 3.5 3.1 1.2 2.9 7.7 2.3 4.0 3 5.3 9.2 8.8 3.0 3.2 3.3 4.0 7.1 5.1 9.0 6.6 4.3 2.0 4.6 3 4.2 1.8 7.6 8.9 19.0 4.8 3.0 6.5 4.9 2.3 3.7 12.3 3.5 6.6 4 4.6 6.8 6.7 4.0 3.6 3.2 3.7 7.3 11.9 9.7 6.8 4.5 2.6 6.0 4 3.4 3.0 4.4 5.2 10.6 3.8 3.5 3.7 3.4 1.2 2.5 7.1 3.5 1.5 5 6.1 9.5 8.5 4.2 2.9 3.8 4.0 7.8 10.6 10.3 8.4 4.3 2.5 6.3 5 4.1 2.0 5.0 3.5 8.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 2.2 0.8 2.3 6.4 2.1 2.0 6 5.6 6.5 7.9 4.8 2.2 3.3 3.5 8.1 9.4 10.4 6.7 4.0 2.5 5.9 6 4.9 3.4 12.4 6.1 4.2 12.9 2.8 2.8 4.2 3.0 0.8 3.3 7.7 3.0 7 5.7 6.0 7.0 4.5 1.7 3.0 3.0 7.5 9.2 7.9 6.0 3.2 2.2 5.7 7 6.6 3.0 6.5 6.0 9.7 7.0 3.1 3.4 4.0 1.2 2.5 8.0 2.3 2.2 8 6.7 4.5 6.5 3.9 1.6 2.7 3.6 7.9 7.8 8.0 8.0 4.2 1.8 6.7 8 3.5 3.2 7.5 5.5 12.5 5.0 4.0 4.2 3.5 3.6 8.0 10.2 3.7 5.5 9 2.9 6.7 7.3 3.7 1.6 2.8 4.6 6.5 8.3 8.6 6.7 3.5 2.0 5.2 9 5.0 1.7 6.8 5.0 15.3 6.0 2.5 4.6 3.1 1.8 3.7 8.9 2.6 2.3 10 2.3 8.0 9.1 3.8 2.5 2.6 4.1 7.0 10.7 10.0 7.8 4.7 2.1 5.9 10 5.3 2.0 5.5 4.3 8.5 3.5 2.8 3.2 3.8 0.5 3.0 7.0 2.5 1.5 11 5.1 11.1 9.4 4.5 2.9 2.9 3.2 8.6 7.4 9.2 6.3 4.0 2.3 5.7 11 7.9 1.7 6.0 4.8 10.5 2.4 2.6 3.9 2.8 1.2 2.2 7.5 2.8 2.7 12 7.5 9.6 8.8 4.0 2.7 3.3 3.7 7.4 7.9 9.7 8.0 4.8 2.2 6.3 12 6.6 2.6 4.8 5.5 10.2 6.0 2.5 4.0 3.0 1.0 2.6 7.7 3.0 2.5 13 5.2 12.2 9.5 3.7 3.0 4.5 3.2 7.8 6.2 8.9 7.2 3.6 3.2 7.7 13 7.6 12.4 6.1 4.2 12.9 2.8 2.8 4.2 3.0 0.8 3.3 7.7 3.0 2.5 14 5.5 15.0 8.6 3.4 3.1 4.8 4.3 10.0 5.2 9.5 9.2 3.2 3.2 7.1 14 5.0 1.8 4.7 5.5 14.4 3.4 2.8 3.6 3.1 0.7 2.5 6.9 2.8 1.9 15 5.1 10.4 7.1 3.3 2.9 5.5 4.2 7.7 5.5 9.8 12.1 1.1 5.1 9.3 15 5.9 1.6 5.1 3.5 8.3 2.5 2.0 3.2 2.6 1.1 2.1 5.9 1.9 2.7 16 5.2 4.6 6.5 3.3 2.6 5.1 4.0 7.5 8.0 9.3 9.2 3.0 3.1 7.7 16 6.1 3.1 2.2 5.3 4.8 9.3 3.5 2.7 3.6 3.2 1.0 2.7 9.0 3.0 17 3.8 4.6 6.5 3.2 2.4 4.6 3.7 7.3 8.1 8.6 6.7 2.8 2.5 5.8 17 5.7 5.6 7.8 4.7 10.5 3.3 2.5 3.9 3.1 1.2 2.3 7.2 2.5 2.3 18 3.3 3.6 6.1 2.8 2.0 4.1 3.3 6.9 5.6 8.1 6.1 2.7 2.1 4.9 18 4.1 3.3 6.5 8.7 11.5 6.8 4.3 6.0 5.2 1.6 6.6 11.4 3.4 3.8 Table C- 2 Stop to stop distance Bus stop 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Stop to stop distance (in kilometres) 2.2 1.7 3.2 1.8 2.3 1.4 1.6 2.1 2.2 2 3 2.1 2.4 2 Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xlvii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Table C- 3 Passenger arrival rate UP DN Stops 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Stops 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 Hours Hours 1 1.4 1.6 0.2 0.35 0.4 0.7 0.65 0.42 0.45 0.25 0.15 0.2 0.1 0.1 1 0.8 1.3 0.4 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.7 0.2 0.1 0 0 0 0 2 2.3 2.1 1.2 1.8 2.3 1.4 1.15 1.15 1.18 1.77 1.1 0.72 0.57 0.41 2 2.4 2.9 1.8 0.87 0.45 1.63 1.72 1.2 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.1 3 1.9 1.7 0.8 1.1 1.55 1.17 0.73 1.14 0.6 1.56 1.2 0.5 0.28 0.23 3 1.4 1.8 1.15 0.72 0.85 1.17 0.94 0.52 0.34 0.41 0.22 0.28 0.17 0.3 4 0.9 2 1.3 1.05 1.25 0.86 0.57 0.71 0.52 1.12 1.44 0.37 0.14 0.34 4 2.57 2.44 2.68 1.97 1.82 1.92 0.31 1.34 1.66 1.48 1.14 0.85 0.42 0.5 5 0.4 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.45 0.25 0.19 0.12 0.45 0.8 0.1 0.22 0 0 5 1.45 0.8 1.17 0.8 1.1 0.82 1.12 0.75 0.84 0.77 0.42 0.51 0.62 0.2 Table C- 4 Fare chart Origin / Destination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 5 5 5 10 10 15 15 20 20 20 25 25 30 30 2 5 5 5 5 10 10 15 15 20 20 20 25 25 30 3 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 15 15 20 20 20 25 25 4 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 15 15 20 20 20 25 5 10 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 15 15 20 20 20 6 15 10 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 15 15 20 20 7 15 15 10 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 15 15 20 8 15 15 15 10 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 15 15 9 20 15 15 15 10 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 15 10 20 20 15 15 15 10 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 11 25 20 20 15 15 15 10 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 12 25 25 20 20 15 15 15 10 10 5 5 5 5 5 13 30 25 25 20 20 15 15 15 10 10 5 5 5 5 14 30 30 25 25 20 20 15 15 15 10 10 5 5 5 15 30 30 30 25 25 20 20 15 15 15 10 10 5 5 Table C- 5 Hourly service information Hours - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 From 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 To 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Department of Architecture and Regional Planning xlviii Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Appendix D Vehicle timetable for 28- seater bus Table D- 1 Vehicle timetable for 28- seater bus Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time 1 0 A 1 06:00:00 ------2 0 A 2 06:07:00 ------1 0 B 1 06:00:00 ------3 0 A 3 06:14:00 ------2 0 B 2 06:12:00 ------4 0 A 4 06:21:00 ------3 0 B 3 06:24:00 ------5 0 A 5 06:28:00 ------4 0 B 4 06:36:00 ------6 0 A 6 06:35:00 ------5 0 B 5 06:48:00 ------7 0 A 7 06:42:00 ------6 0 B 6 07:00:00 ------8 0 A 8 06:49:00 ------7 0 B 7 07:12:00 ------9 0 A 9 06:56:00 ------8 0 B 8 07:24:00 ------1 ------B 1 07:00:26 -- 1 ------A 1 07:24:26 10 0 B 1 07:03:00 ------2 ------A 2 07:31:33 11 0 A 10 07:10:00 ------9 1 A 1 07:36:00 ------12 0 A 11 07:17:00 ------2 ------A 3 07:38:33 -- 1 ------B 2 07:17:07 -- 3 ------A 4 07:44:10 13 0 B 2 07:24:00 ------10 2 A 2 07:48:00 ------14 0 A 12 07:31:00 ------3 ------A 5 07:52:19 15 0 A 13 07:38:00 ------11 2 A 3 08:00:00 ------1 ------B 3 07:38:38 -- 3 ------A 6 07:59:15 16 0 B 3 07:45:00 ------4 ------A 7 08:06:15 17 0 A 14 07:52:00 ------12 3 A 4 08:12:00 ------1 ------B 4 07:52:25 -- 4 ------A 8 08:11:59 18 0 B 4 07:59:00 ------13 3 A 5 08:16:00 ------1 ------B 5 08:04:22 -- 4 ------A 9 08:18:15 19 0 B 5 08:06:00 ------14 3 A 6 08:20:00 ------20 0 A 15 08:09:00 ------4 ------B 1 08:22:07 21 0 A 16 08:12:00 ------15 3 A 7 08:24:00 ------1 ------B 6 08:12:06 16 2 A 8 08:28:00 ------22 0 B 6 08:15:00 ------3 ------A 10 08:29:58 23 0 A 17 08:18:00 ------17 2 A 9 08:32:00 ------24 0 A 18 08:21:00 ------18 1 B 1 08:36:00 ------1 ------B 7 08:21:35 -- 2 ------A 11 08:37:24 25 0 B 7 08:24:00 ------19 1 A 10 08:40:00 ------26 0 A 19 08:27:00 ------20 0 A 11 08:44:00 ------27 0 A 20 08:30:00 ------1 ------B 2 08:44:24 Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs xlix Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time 28 0 A 21 08:33:00 ------21 0 B 2 08:48:00 ------1 ------B 8 08:33:50 -- 1 ------A 12 08:50:55 29 0 B 8 08:36:00 ------22 0 A 12 08:52:00 ------30 0 A 22 08:39:00 ------23 0 B 9 08:56:00 ------31 0 A 23 08:42:00 ------1 ------A 13 08:57:57 32 0 A 24 08:45:00 ------24 0 A 13 09:00:00 ------1 ------A 1 08:44:19 25 0 B 10 09:04:00 ------33 0 A 1 08:48:00 ------1 ------B 3 09:04:57 34 0 A 25 08:51:00 ------26 0 B 3 09:08:00 ------35 0 A 26 08:54:00 ------27 0 B 11 09:12:00 ------36 0 A 27 08:57:00 ------1 ------A 14 09:12:44 -- 1 ------A 2 08:56:19 28 0 A 14 09:16:00 ------37 0 A 2 09:00:00 ------29 0 B 12 09:20:00 ------38 0 A 28 09:03:00 ------1 ------B 4 09:20:59 39 0 A 29 09:06:00 ------30 0 B 4 09:24:00 ------1 ------A 3 09:07:17 31 0 B 13 09:28:00 ------40 0 A 3 09:09:00 ------32 0 B 14 09:32:00 ------41 0 A 30 09:12:00 ------1 ------B 5 09:34:37 42 0 A 31 09:15:00 ------33 0 B 5 09:36:00 ------43 0 A 32 09:18:00 ------1 ------A 15 09:35:57 44 0 A 33 09:21:00 ------2 ------A 16 09:38:39 45 0 A 34 09:24:00 ------34 1 A 15 09:40:00 ------46 0 A 35 09:27:00 ------2 ------B 6 09:41:06 -- 1 ------A 4 09:27:21 35 1 A 16 09:44:00 ------47 0 A 4 09:30:00 ------36 0 B 6 09:48:00 ------1 ------A 5 09:29:40 -- 1 ------A 17 09:47:12 48 0 A 5 09:33:00 ------2 ------A 18 09:49:29 -- 1 ------A 6 09:33:04 37 1 A 17 09:52:00 ------49 0 A 6 09:36:00 ------2 ------B 7 09:53:01 -- 1 ------A 7 09:36:48 38 1 A 18 09:56:00 ------50 0 A 7 09:39:00 ------2 ------A 19 09:55:58 -- 1 ------A 8 09:40:28 -- 3 ------A 20 09:58:11 51 0 A 8 09:42:00 ------39 2 B 7 10:00:00 ------52 0 A 36 09:45:00 ------3 ------A 21 10:01:16 -- 1 ------A 9 09:44:24 40 2 A 19 10:04:00 ------53 0 A 9 09:48:00 ------3 ------B 8 10:04:16 -- 1 ------B 1 09:48:32 -- 4 ------A 22 10:06:55 54 0 B 1 09:51:00 ------41 3 A 20 10:08:00 ------1 ------A 10 09:52:12 -- 4 ------A 23 10:10:05 55 0 A 10 09:54:00 ------42 3 A 21 10:12:00 ------56 0 A 37 09:57:00 ------4 ------A 24 10:13:05 Department of Architecture and Regional Planning l Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time -- 1 ------A 11 09:56:19 43 3 B 8 10:16:00 ------57 0 A 11 10:00:00 ------4 ------A 1 10:15:23 -- 1 ------B 2 10:00:12 -- 5 ------A 25 10:18:25 58 0 B 2 10:03:00 ------44 4 A 22 10:20:00 ------59 0 A 38 10:06:00 ------5 ------A 26 10:21:25 -- 1 ------A 12 10:05:31 -- 6 ------A 27 10:22:45 60 0 A 12 10:09:00 ------45 5 A 23 10:24:00 ------1 ------B 9 10:09:45 -- 6 ------A 2 10:25:26 61 0 B 9 10:12:00 ------7 ------A 28 10:26:24 -- 1 ------A 13 10:12:07 46 6 A 24 10:28:00 ------2 ------B 10 10:13:39 -- 7 ------A 29 10:28:42 62 1 A 13 10:15:00 ------8 ------A 3 10:30:40 63 0 B 10 10:18:00 ------47 7 A 1 10:32:00 ------1 ------B 3 10:17:33 -- 8 ------A 30 10:33:49 64 0 B 3 10:21:00 ------48 7 A 25 10:36:00 ------1 ------B 11 10:22:17 -- 8 ------A 31 10:36:49 65 0 B 11 10:24:00 ------49 7 A 26 10:40:00 ------1 ------A 14 10:25:55 -- 8 ------A 32 10:39:49 66 0 A 14 10:27:00 ------9 ------A 33 10:42:12 67 0 A 39 10:30:00 ------50 8 A 27 10:44:00 ------1 ------B 12 10:29:44 -- 9 ------A 34 10:45:06 68 0 B 12 10:33:00 ------51 8 A 2 10:48:00 ------1 ------B 4 10:33:51 -- 9 ------A 35 10:47:21 69 0 B 4 10:36:00 ------10 ------A 4 10:50:08 -- 1 ------B 13 10:37:51 52 9 A 28 10:52:00 ------70 0 B 13 10:39:00 ------10 ------A 5 10:51:49 71 0 A 40 10:42:00 ------53 9 A 29 10:56:00 ------1 ------B 14 10:41:51 -- 10 ------A 6 10:55:12 72 0 B 14 10:45:00 ------11 ------A 7 10:58:12 -- 1 ------B 5 10:45:51 54 10 A 3 11:00:00 ------73 0 B 5 10:48:00 ------11 ------A 8 11:01:12 -- 1 ------A 15 10:49:51 55 10 A 30 11:04:00 ------74 0 A 15 10:51:00 ------11 ------A 36 11:04:12 75 0 A 41 10:54:00 ------56 10 A 31 11:08:00 ------1 ------A 16 10:53:51 -- 11 ------A 9 11:07:44 76 0 A 16 10:57:00 ------12 ------B 1 11:10:40 -- 1 ------B 6 10:57:51 57 11 A 32 11:12:00 ------77 0 B 6 11:00:00 ------12 ------A 10 11:13:40 -- 1 ------A 17 11:01:51 58 11 A 33 11:16:00 ------78 0 A 17 11:03:00 ------12 ------A 37 11:17:33 79 0 A 42 11:06:00 ------59 11 A 34 11:20:00 ------ Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs li Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time -- 1 ------A 18 11:05:41 -- 12 ------A 11 11:19:20 -- 2 ------B 7 11:07:13 60 11 A 35 11:24:00 ------80 1 A 18 11:09:00 ------12 ------B 2 11:25:01 -- 2 ------A 19 11:09:59 61 11 A 4 11:28:00 ------81 1 B 7 11:12:00 ------12 ------A 38 11:27:39 -- 2 ------A 20 11:11:12 -- 13 ------A 12 11:30:39 82 1 A 19 11:15:00 ------62 12 A 5 11:32:00 ------2 ------A 21 11:14:15 -- 13 ------B 9 11:34:10 83 1 A 20 11:18:00 ------63 12 A 6 11:36:00 ------2 ------B 8 11:18:56 -- 13 ------A 13 11:37:10 84 1 A 21 11:21:00 ------64 12 A 7 11:40:00 ------85 0 B 8 11:24:00 ------13 ------B 10 11:40:10 -- 1 ------A 22 11:23:07 65 12 A 8 11:44:00 ------86 0 A 22 11:27:00 ------13 ------B 3 11:43:51 -- 1 ------A 23 11:27:09 -- 14 ------B 11 11:46:41 87 0 A 23 11:30:00 ------66 13 A 36 11:48:00 ------1 ------A 24 11:30:58 -- 14 ------A 14 11:49:41 88 0 A 24 11:33:00 ------67 13 A 9 11:52:00 ------89 0 A 43 11:36:00 ------14 ------A 39 11:51:03 -- 1 ------A 1 11:35:05 68 13 B 1 11:56:00 ------90 0 A 1 11:39:00 ------14 ------B 12 11:55:21 -- 1 ------A 25 11:39:05 -- 15 ------B 4 11:58:05 91 0 A 25 11:42:00 ------69 14 A 10 12:00:00 ------1 ------A 26 11:43:05 -- 15 ------B 13 12:01:05 92 0 A 26 11:45:00 ------16 ------A 40 12:04:05 93 0 A 44 11:48:00 ------70 15 A 37 12:07:00 ------1 ------A 27 11:47:05 -- 16 ------B 14 12:08:31 94 0 A 27 11:51:00 ------17 ------B 5 12:12:31 -- 1 ------A 2 11:51:05 71 16 A 11 12:14:00 ------95 0 A 2 11:54:00 ------17 ------A 15 12:15:31 -- 1 ------A 28 11:55:05 -- 18 ------A 41 12:17:07 96 0 A 28 11:57:00 ------72 17 B 2 12:21:00 ------97 0 A 45 12:00:00 ------18 ------A 16 12:20:14 -- 1 ------A 29 11:59:05 -- 19 ------B 6 12:23:14 98 0 A 29 12:03:00 ------20 ------A 17 12:25:20 99 0 A 46 12:07:00 ------73 19 A 38 12:28:00 ------100 0 A 47 12:11:00 ------20 ------A 42 12:28:41 -- 1 ------A 3 12:11:07 -- 21 ------A 18 12:31:41 -- 2 ------A 30 12:13:32 -- 22 ------B 7 12:33:44 101 1 A 3 12:15:00 ------74 21 A 12 12:35:00 ------2 ------A 31 12:17:23 -- 22 ------A 19 12:36:53 Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lii Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time 102 1 A 30 12:19:00 ------23 ------A 20 12:39:53 -- 2 ------A 32 12:21:57 75 22 B 9 12:42:00 ------103 1 A 31 12:23:00 ------23 ------A 21 12:42:32 -- 2 ------A 33 12:25:51 -- 24 ------B 8 12:44:00 104 1 A 32 12:27:00 ------25 ------A 22 12:47:30 105 0 A 33 12:31:00 ------76 24 A 13 12:49:00 ------1 ------A 34 12:30:10 -- 25 ------A 23 12:50:30 106 0 A 34 12:35:00 ------26 ------A 24 12:52:42 -- 1 ------A 35 12:34:38 77 25 B 10 12:56:00 ------107 0 A 35 12:39:00 ------26 ------A 43 12:56:00 -- 1 ------A 4 12:38:21 -- 27 ------A 1 12:59:00 108 0 A 4 12:43:00 ------28 ------A 25 13:02:00 -- 1 ------A 5 12:42:28 78 27 B 3 13:03:00 ------109 0 A 5 12:47:00 ------28 ------A 26 13:05:00 -- 1 ------A 6 12:46:21 -- 29 ------A 44 13:08:00 110 0 A 6 12:51:00 ------79 28 B 11 13:10:00 ------1 ------A 7 12:50:28 -- 29 ------A 27 13:10:25 111 0 A 7 12:55:00 ------30 ------A 2 13:13:24 -- 1 ------A 8 12:54:28 -- 31 ------A 28 13:16:00 112 0 A 8 12:59:00 ------80 30 A 14 13:17:00 ------1 ------A 36 12:58:16 -- 31 ------A 45 13:19:00 113 0 A 36 13:03:00 ------81 30 A 39 13:24:00 ------1 ------A 9 13:02:09 82 29 B 12 13:31:00 ------2 ------B 1 13:05:40 -- 30 ------A 29 13:31:47 114 1 A 9 13:07:00 ------31 ------A 46 13:35:52 -- 2 ------A 10 13:08:20 83 30 B 4 13:38:00 ------115 1 B 1 13:11:00 ------31 ------A 47 13:39:35 -- 2 ------A 37 13:10:14 -- 32 ------A 3 13:42:28 -- 3 ------A 11 13:13:55 84 31 B 13 13:45:00 ------116 2 A 10 13:15:00 ------32 ------A 30 13:46:28 117 1 A 37 13:19:00 ------85 31 A 40 13:52:00 ------2 ------B 2 13:20:09 -- 32 ------A 31 13:52:48 118 1 A 11 13:23:00 ------33 ------A 32 13:57:41 119 0 B 2 13:27:00 ------86 32 B 14 13:59:00 ------1 ------A 38 13:26:43 -- 33 ------A 33 14:01:34 120 0 A 38 13:31:00 ------87 32 B 5 14:06:00 ------1 ------A 12 13:33:44 -- 33 ------A 34 14:05:36 121 0 A 12 13:35:00 ------34 ------A 35 14:11:49 122 0 A 48 13:39:00 ------88 33 A 15 14:13:00 ------1 ------B 9 13:40:44 -- 34 ------A 4 14:17:47 123 0 B 9 13:43:00 ------89 33 A 41 14:20:00 ------ Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs liii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time 124 0 A 49 13:47:00 ------34 ------A 5 14:19:35 -- 1 ------A 13 13:47:44 -- 35 ------A 6 14:23:40 125 0 A 13 13:51:00 ------90 34 A 16 14:27:00 ------126 0 A 50 13:55:00 ------35 ------A 7 14:30:42 -- 1 ------B 10 13:54:44 91 34 B 6 14:34:00 ------127 0 B 10 13:59:00 ------35 ------A 8 14:34:36 128 0 A 51 14:03:00 ------36 ------A 36 14:38:23 129 0 A 52 14:07:00 ------92 35 A 17 14:41:00 ------1 ------B 3 14:08:12 -- 36 ------A 9 14:40:57 130 0 B 3 14:11:00 ------37 ------B 1 14:45:00 131 0 A 53 14:15:00 ------93 36 A 42 14:48:00 ------1 ------B 11 14:14:02 -- 37 ------A 10 14:49:31 132 0 B 11 14:19:00 ------38 ------A 37 14:53:22 -- 1 ------A 14 14:20:23 94 37 A 18 14:55:00 ------133 0 A 14 14:23:00 ------38 ------A 11 14:54:48 134 0 A 54 14:27:00 ------39 ------B 2 14:59:02 -- 1 ------A 39 14:26:06 95 38 B 7 15:02:00 ------135 0 A 39 14:31:00 ------39 ------A 38 15:03:00 -- 1 ------B 12 14:33:08 -- 40 ------A 12 15:07:00 136 0 B 12 14:35:00 ------96 39 A 19 15:09:00 ------137 0 A 55 14:39:00 ------40 ------A 48 15:09:20 -- 1 ------B 4 14:40:05 -- 41 ------B 9 15:13:20 138 0 B 4 14:43:00 ------97 40 A 20 15:16:00 ------139 0 A 56 14:47:00 ------41 ------A 49 15:17:11 -- 1 ------B 13 14:47:05 -- 42 ------A 13 15:21:11 140 0 B 13 14:51:00 ------98 41 A 21 15:23:00 ------141 0 A 57 14:55:00 ------42 ------A 50 15:25:11 -- 1 ------A 40 14:54:05 -- 43 ------B 10 15:26:11 142 0 A 40 14:59:00 ------99 42 B 8 15:30:00 ------1 ------B 14 15:01:05 -- 43 ------A 51 15:33:07 143 0 B 14 15:03:00 ------100 42 A 22 15:37:00 ------144 0 A 58 15:07:00 ------43 ------A 52 15:36:28 145 0 A 59 15:11:00 ------44 ------B 3 15:40:19 -- 1 ------B 5 15:13:37 101 43 A 23 15:44:00 ------146 0 B 5 15:15:00 ------44 ------A 53 15:46:56 -- 1 ------A 15 15:17:25 102 43 A 24 15:51:00 ------147 0 A 15 15:19:00 ------44 ------B 11 15:50:53 148 0 A 60 15:23:00 ------45 ------A 14 15:54:40 149 0 A 61 15:27:00 ------103 44 A 43 15:58:00 ------1 ------A 41 15:26:38 -- 45 ------A 54 15:58:27 150 0 A 41 15:31:00 ------46 ------A 39 16:02:27 Department of Architecture and Regional Planning liv Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time 151 0 A 62 15:35:00 ------104 45 A 1 16:05:00 ------1 ------A 16 15:34:39 -- 46 ------B 12 16:06:27 152 0 A 16 15:39:00 ------105 45 A 25 16:08:00 ------1 ------B 6 15:41:39 -- 46 ------A 55 16:08:31 153 0 B 6 15:43:00 ------106 45 A 26 16:11:00 ------154 0 A 63 15:47:00 ------46 ------B 4 16:11:54 -- 1 ------A 17 15:48:39 107 45 A 44 16:14:00 ------155 0 A 17 15:51:00 ------46 ------A 56 16:15:41 156 0 A 64 15:55:00 ------108 45 A 27 16:17:00 ------1 ------A 42 15:55:39 109 44 A 2 16:20:00 ------157 0 A 42 15:59:00 ------45 ------B 13 16:19:41 158 0 A 65 16:03:00 ------46 ------A 57 16:21:05 -- 1 ------A 18 16:02:39 110 45 A 28 16:23:00 ------159 0 A 18 16:08:00 ------111 44 A 45 16:26:00 ------160 0 A 66 16:13:00 ------45 ------A 40 16:25:12 -- 1 ------B 7 16:14:04 112 44 A 29 16:29:00 ------161 0 B 7 16:18:00 ------45 ------B 14 16:30:03 -- 1 ------A 19 16:19:47 113 44 A 46 16:32:00 ------162 0 A 19 16:23:00 ------45 ------A 58 16:33:35 163 0 A 67 16:28:00 ------114 44 A 47 16:35:00 ------1 ------A 20 16:27:40 115 43 A 3 16:38:00 ------164 0 A 20 16:33:00 ------44 ------A 59 16:37:34 -- 1 ------A 21 16:33:34 116 43 A 30 16:41:00 ------165 0 A 21 16:38:00 ------44 ------B 5 16:41:34 -- 1 ------B 8 16:40:29 117 43 A 31 16:44:00 ------166 0 B 8 16:43:00 ------44 ------A 15 16:45:20 167 0 A 68 16:48:00 ------118 43 A 32 16:47:00 ------1 ------A 22 16:47:29 119 42 A 33 16:50:00 ------168 0 A 22 16:53:00 ------43 ------A 60 16:49:02 -- 1 ------A 23 16:54:29 120 42 A 34 16:53:00 ------169 0 A 23 16:58:00 ------43 ------A 61 16:53:02 -- 1 ------A 24 17:01:29 121 42 A 35 16:56:00 ------170 0 A 24 17:03:00 ------43 ------A 41 16:57:02 171 0 A 69 17:08:00 ------122 42 A 4 16:59:00 ------1 ------A 43 17:10:57 123 41 A 5 17:02:00 ------172 0 A 43 17:13:00 ------42 ------A 62 17:01:02 -- 1 ------A 1 17:14:38 124 41 A 6 17:05:00 ------173 0 A 1 17:18:00 ------42 ------A 16 17:05:02 -- 1 ------A 25 17:21:25 125 41 A 7 17:08:00 ------174 0 A 25 17:23:00 ------42 ------B 6 17:08:13 175 0 A 70 17:28:00 ------126 41 A 8 17:11:00 ------ Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lv Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time -- 1 ------A 26 17:28:43 -- 42 ------A 63 17:11:45 -- 2 ------A 44 17:31:28 127 41 A 36 17:14:00 ------176 1 A 26 17:33:00 ------42 ------A 17 17:15:45 -- 2 ------A 27 17:36:55 128 41 A 9 17:17:00 ------177 1 A 44 17:38:00 ------129 40 B 1 17:20:00 ------178 0 A 27 17:43:00 ------41 ------A 64 17:19:02 -- 1 ------A 2 17:42:01 130 40 A 10 17:23:00 ------2 ------A 28 17:46:27 -- 41 ------A 42 17:23:07 179 1 A 2 17:48:00 ------131 40 A 37 17:26:00 ------2 ------A 45 17:49:13 132 39 A 11 17:29:00 ------180 1 A 28 17:53:00 ------133 38 B 2 17:32:00 ------2 ------A 29 17:52:13 -- 39 ------A 65 17:31:04 -- 3 ------A 46 17:55:13 -- 40 ------A 18 17:32:35 181 2 A 45 17:58:00 ------134 39 A 38 17:35:00 ------3 ------A 47 17:58:00 135 38 A 12 17:38:00 ------4 ------A 3 18:00:58 -- 39 ------A 66 17:37:38 182 3 A 29 18:03:00 ------136 38 A 48 17:41:00 ------4 ------A 30 18:03:58 -- 39 ------B 7 17:42:08 -- 5 ------A 31 18:06:58 137 38 B 9 17:44:00 ------183 4 A 46 18:08:00 ------138 37 A 49 17:47:00 ------5 ------A 32 18:09:58 -- 38 ------A 19 17:46:43 184 4 A 47 18:13:00 ------139 37 A 13 17:50:00 ------5 ------A 33 18:12:54 -- 38 ------A 67 17:51:43 -- 6 ------A 34 18:15:52 140 37 A 50 17:53:00 ------185 5 A 3 18:18:00 ------141 36 B 10 17:56:00 ------6 ------A 35 18:18:52 -- 37 ------A 20 17:56:43 -- 7 ------A 4 18:21:52 142 36 A 51 17:59:00 ------186 6 A 30 18:23:00 ------143 35 A 52 18:02:00 ------187 5 A 31 18:28:00 ------36 ------A 21 18:01:43 188 4 A 32 18:33:00 ------144 35 B 3 18:05:00 ------5 ------A 5 18:35:51 -- 36 ------B 8 18:06:43 189 4 A 33 18:38:00 ------145 35 A 53 18:08:00 ------5 ------A 6 18:39:23 146 34 B 11 18:11:00 ------6 ------A 7 18:40:30 -- 35 ------A 68 18:11:43 190 5 A 34 18:43:00 ------147 34 A 14 18:14:00 ------6 ------A 8 18:42:03 148 33 A 54 18:17:00 ------7 ------A 36 18:45:35 -- 34 ------A 22 18:16:43 -- 8 ------A 9 18:46:38 149 33 A 39 18:20:00 ------191 7 A 35 18:48:00 ------34 ------A 23 18:21:43 -- 8 ------B 1 18:48:05 150 33 B 12 18:23:00 ------9 ------A 10 18:49:49 151 32 A 55 18:26:00 ------ Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lvi Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time 192 8 A 4 18:53:00 ------33 ------A 24 18:25:02 -- 9 ------A 37 18:52:46 152 32 B 4 18:29:00 ------10 ------A 11 18:56:04 -- 33 ------A 69 18:29:55 193 9 A 5 18:58:00 ------153 32 A 56 18:32:00 ------10 ------B 2 18:58:46 154 31 B 13 18:35:00 ------194 9 A 6 19:03:00 ------32 ------A 43 18:34:55 -- 10 ------A 38 19:02:04 155 31 A 57 18:38:00 ------11 ------A 12 19:04:46 -- 32 ------A 1 18:39:55 195 10 A 7 19:08:00 ------156 31 A 40 18:41:00 ------11 ------A 48 19:08:04 157 30 B 14 18:44:00 ------12 ------B 9 19:10:46 -- 31 ------A 25 18:44:55 196 11 A 8 19:13:00 ------158 30 A 58 18:47:00 ------12 ------A 49 19:14:04 159 29 A 59 18:50:00 ------13 ------A 13 19:16:46 -- 30 ------A 70 18:49:55 197 12 A 36 19:18:00 ------160 29 B 5 18:53:00 ------13 ------A 50 19:20:04 -- 30 ------A 26 18:54:55 198 12 A 9 19:23:00 ------161 29 A 15 18:56:00 ------13 ------B 10 19:22:46 162 28 A 60 18:59:00 ------14 ------A 51 19:26:04 -- 29 ------A 44 18:59:55 199 13 B 1 19:28:00 ------163 28 A 61 19:02:00 ------14 ------A 52 19:30:43 164 27 A 41 19:05:00 ------200 13 A 10 19:33:00 ------28 ------A 27 19:04:55 -- 14 ------B 3 19:32:23 165 27 A 62 19:08:00 ------15 ------A 53 19:36:01 -- 28 ------A 2 19:09:55 201 14 A 37 19:38:00 ------166 27 A 16 19:11:00 ------15 ------B 11 19:39:13 167 26 B 6 19:14:00 ------16 ------A 14 19:40:44 -- 27 ------A 28 19:14:55 -- 17 ------A 54 19:41:43 168 26 A 63 19:17:00 ------202 16 A 11 19:43:00 ------169 25 A 17 19:20:00 ------17 ------A 39 19:43:19 -- 26 ------A 45 19:19:55 -- 18 ------B 12 19:46:35 170 25 A 64 19:23:00 ------203 17 B 2 19:48:00 ------26 ------A 29 19:22:07 -- 18 ------A 55 19:47:47 -- 27 ------A 46 19:24:49 -- 19 ------B 4 19:50:25 171 26 A 42 19:26:00 ------204 18 A 38 19:53:00 ------172 25 A 65 19:29:00 ------19 ------A 56 19:54:16 -- 26 ------A 47 19:29:36 -- 20 ------B 13 19:56:18 173 25 A 18 19:32:00 ------205 19 A 12 19:58:00 ------174 24 A 66 19:35:00 ------20 ------A 57 20:00:16 -- 25 ------A 3 19:34:36 206 19 A 48 20:03:00 ------175 24 B 7 19:38:00 ------20 ------A 40 20:02:18 -- 25 ------A 30 19:39:36 Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lvii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time -- 21 ------B 14 20:06:16 176 24 A 19 19:41:00 ------22 ------A 58 20:08:18 177 23 A 67 19:44:00 ------207 21 B 9 20:13:00 ------24 ------A 31 19:44:36 -- 22 ------A 59 20:12:16 178 23 A 20 19:47:00 ------23 ------B 5 20:14:18 179 22 A 21 19:50:00 ------24 ------A 15 20:18:16 -- 23 ------A 32 19:49:36 -- 25 ------A 60 20:20:18 180 22 B 8 19:53:00 ------208 24 A 49 20:23:00 ------23 ------A 33 19:54:36 209 23 A 13 20:33:00 ------181 22 A 68 19:56:00 ------24 ------A 61 20:34:59 182 21 A 22 19:59:00 ------25 ------A 41 20:37:40 -- 22 ------A 34 19:59:36 -- 26 ------A 62 20:39:59 183 21 A 23 20:02:00 ------210 25 A 50 20:43:00 ------22 ------A 35 20:04:36 -- 26 ------A 16 20:42:56 184 21 A 24 20:09:00 ------27 ------B 6 20:45:56 -- 22 ------A 4 20:09:36 -- 28 ------A 63 20:48:56 -- 23 ------A 5 20:14:36 -- 29 ------A 17 20:51:49 185 22 A 69 20:16:00 ------211 28 B 10 20:53:00 ------23 ------A 6 20:17:47 -- 29 ------A 64 20:54:36 -- 24 ------A 7 20:20:22 -- 30 ------A 42 20:57:34 186 23 A 43 20:23:00 ------31 ------A 65 21:00:34 -- 24 ------A 8 20:23:06 212 30 A 51 21:03:00 ------25 ------A 36 20:28:03 -- 31 ------A 18 21:03:34 187 24 A 1 20:30:00 ------32 ------A 66 21:06:34 -- 25 ------A 9 20:33:03 -- 33 ------B 7 21:09:33 188 24 A 25 20:37:00 ------213 32 A 52 21:13:00 ------25 ------B 1 20:38:03 -- 33 ------A 19 21:12:28 189 24 A 70 20:44:00 ------34 ------A 67 21:15:28 -- 25 ------A 10 20:43:03 -- 35 ------A 20 21:18:28 -- 26 ------A 37 20:48:03 -- 36 ------A 21 21:21:28 190 25 A 26 20:51:00 ------214 35 B 3 21:23:00 ------26 ------A 11 20:53:03 -- 36 ------B 8 21:24:28 191 25 A 44 20:58:00 ------37 ------A 68 21:27:28 -- 26 ------B 2 20:58:03 -- 38 ------A 22 21:30:28 -- 27 ------A 38 21:03:03 215 37 A 53 21:33:00 ------192 26 A 27 21:05:00 ------38 ------A 23 21:34:53 -- 27 ------A 12 21:08:03 216 37 B 11 21:43:00 ------193 26 A 2 21:12:00 ------38 ------A 24 21:42:42 -- 27 ------A 48 21:13:21 -- 39 ------A 69 21:49:33 194 26 A 28 21:19:00 ------217 38 A 14 21:53:00 ------27 ------B 9 21:22:33 -- 39 ------A 43 21:56:33 195 26 A 45 21:26:00 ------ Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lviii Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time 218 38 A 54 22:03:00 ------196 25 A 29 21:33:00 ------39 ------A 1 22:03:33 -- 26 ------A 49 21:32:27 -- 40 ------A 25 22:10:33 197 25 A 46 21:40:00 ------219 39 A 39 22:13:00 ------26 ------A 13 21:42:25 -- 40 ------A 70 22:17:33 198 25 A 47 21:47:00 ------220 39 B 12 22:23:00 ------26 ------A 50 21:52:25 -- 40 ------A 26 22:24:33 199 25 A 3 21:54:00 ------41 ------A 44 22:31:33 200 24 A 30 22:01:00 ------221 40 A 55 22:33:00 ------25 ------B 10 22:02:25 -- 41 ------A 27 22:35:10 201 24 A 31 22:08:00 ------222 40 B 4 22:43:00 ------25 ------A 51 22:09:48 -- 41 ------A 2 22:42:50 202 24 A 32 22:15:00 ------42 ------A 28 22:49:47 -- 25 ------A 52 22:20:09 223 41 A 56 22:53:00 ------203 24 A 33 22:22:00 ------42 ------A 45 22:56:47 204 23 A 34 22:29:00 ------224 41 B 13 23:03:00 ------24 ------B 3 22:30:02 -- 42 ------A 29 23:03:47 205 23 A 35 22:36:00 ------43 ------A 46 23:10:47 -- 24 ------A 53 22:40:02 225 42 A 57 23:13:00 ------206 23 A 4 22:43:00 ------43 ------A 47 23:17:47 207 22 A 5 22:50:00 ------226 42 A 40 23:23:00 ------23 ------B 11 22:50:02 -- 43 ------A 3 23:24:47 208 22 A 6 22:57:00 ------44 ------A 30 23:29:42 -- 23 ------A 14 23:00:02 227 43 B 14 23:33:00 ------209 22 A 7 23:04:00 ------44 ------A 31 23:37:16 -- 23 ------A 54 23:09:34 228 43 A 58 23:43:00 ------210 22 A 8 23:11:00 ------44 ------A 32 23:44:13 211 21 A 36 23:18:00 ------45 ------A 33 23:51:13 -- 22 ------A 39 23:19:34 -- 46 ------A 34 23:58:13 212 21 A 9 23:25:00 ------47 ------A 35 00:05:13 -- 22 ------B 12 23:29:34 -- 48 ------A 4 00:12:13 213 21 B 1 23:32:00 ------49 ------A 5 00:19:13 214 20 A 10 23:39:00 ------50 ------A 6 00:26:13 -- 21 ------A 55 23:39:34 -- 51 ------A 7 00:33:13 215 20 A 37 23:46:00 ------52 ------A 8 00:40:13 -- 21 ------B 4 23:49:34 -- 53 ------A 36 00:47:13 216 20 A 11 23:53:00 ------54 ------A 9 00:54:13 -- 21 ------A 56 23:59:33 -- 55 ------B 1 01:01:13 -- 22 ------B 13 00:09:33 -- 56 ------A 10 01:08:13 -- 23 ------A 57 00:19:33 -- 57 ------A 37 01:15:13 -- 24 ------A 40 00:29:38 -- 58 ------A 11 01:22:13 -- 25 ------B 14 00:39:33 Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lix Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time Departure Pool Departed bus Departure time Arrivalbus Arrival time -- 26 ------A 58 00:49:33 -- 27 ------00:59:33 Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lx Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Appendix E Vehicle schedule for 28- seater bus Table E- 1 Vehicle schedule for 28- seater bus Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit A1 8 240 5021.73 7450 B1 9 270 5264.016 8460 3195.984 2428.27 From : A :06:00:00 To : B : 07:24:26 | From : B :06:00:00 To : A : 07:00:26 | From : B :07:36:00 To : A : 08:44:19 | From : A :07:03:00 To : B : 08:22:07 | From : A :08:48:00 To : B : 10:15:23 | From : B :08:36:00 To : A : 09:48:32 | From : B :10:32:00 To : A : 11:35:05 | From : A :09:51:00 To : B : 11:10:40 | From : A :11:39:00 To : B : 12:59:00 | From : B :11:56:00 To : A : 13:05:40 | From : B :16:05:00 To : A : 17:14:38 | From : A :13:11:00 To : B : 14:45:00 | From : A :17:18:00 To : B : 18:39:55 | From : B :17:20:00 To : A : 18:48:05 | From : B :20:30:00 To : A : 22:03:33 | From : A :19:28:00 To : B : 20:38:03 | From : B :23:32:00 To : A : 01:01:13 | A2 8 240 5021.676 7140 2118.324 From : A :06:07:00 To : B : 07:31:33 | B2 8 240 5021.874 7780 2758.126 From : B :07:48:00 To : A : 08:56:19 | From : B :06:12:00 To : A : 07:17:07 | From : A :09:00:00 To : B : 10:25:26 | From : A :07:24:00 To : B : 08:44:24 | From : B :10:48:00 To : A : 11:51:05 | From : B :08:48:00 To : A : 10:00:12 | From : A :11:54:00 To : B : 13:13:24 | From : A :10:03:00 To : B : 11:25:01 | From : B :16:20:00 To : A : 17:42:01 | From : B :12:21:00 To : A : 13:20:09 | From : A :17:48:00 To : B : 19:09:55 | From : A :13:27:00 To : B : 14:59:02 | From : B :21:12:00 To : A : 22:42:50 | From : B :17:32:00 To : A : 18:58:46 | From : A :19:48:00 To : B : 20:58:03 | A3 8 240 5021.754 7570 2548.246 From : A :06:14:00 To : B : 07:38:33 | B3 8 240 5021.766 7515 2493.234 From : B :08:00:00 To : A : 09:07:17 | From : B :06:24:00 To : A : 07:38:38 | From : A :09:09:00 To : B : 10:30:40 | From : A :07:45:00 To : B : 09:04:57 | From : B :11:00:00 To : A : 12:11:07 | From : B :09:08:00 To : A : 10:17:33 | From : A :12:15:00 To : B : 13:42:28 | From : A :10:21:00 To : B : 11:43:51 | From : B :16:38:00 To : A : 18:00:58 | From : B :13:03:00 To : A : 14:08:12 | From : A :18:18:00 To : B : 19:34:36 | From : A :14:11:00 To : B : 15:40:19 | From : B :21:54:00 To : A : 23:24:47 | From : B :18:05:00 To : A : 19:32:23 | From : A :21:23:00 To : B : 22:30:02 | A4 8 240 5021.914 7835 2813.086 From : A :06:21:00 To : B : 07:44:10 | B4 8 240 5021.751 6060 1038.249 From : B :08:12:00 To : A : 09:27:21 | From : B :06:36:00 To : A : 07:52:25 | From : A :09:30:00 To : B : 10:50:08 | From : A :07:59:00 To : B : 09:20:59 | From : B :11:28:00 To : A : 12:38:21 | From : B :09:24:00 To : A : 10:33:51 | Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxi Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B From : A :12:43:00 To : B : 14:17:47 | From : A :10:36:00 To : B : 11:58:05 | From : B :16:59:00 To : A : 18:21:52 | From : B :13:38:00 To : A : 14:40:05 | From : A :18:53:00 To : B : 20:09:36 | From : A :14:43:00 To : B : 16:11:54 | From : B :22:43:00 To : A : 00:12:13 | From : B :18:29:00 To : A : 19:50:25 | From : A :22:43:00 To : B : 23:49:34 | A5 8 240 5021.856 7705 2683.144 From : A :06:28:00 To : B : 07:52:19 | B5 7 210 4457.917 6740 2282.083 From : B :08:16:00 To : A : 09:29:40 | From : B :06:48:00 To : A : 08:04:22 | From : A :09:33:00 To : B : 10:51:49 | From : A :08:06:00 To : B : 09:34:37 | From : B :11:32:00 To : A : 12:42:28 | From : B :09:36:00 To : A : 10:45:51 | From : A :12:47:00 To : B : 14:19:35 | From : A :10:48:00 To : B : 12:12:31 | From : B :17:02:00 To : A : 18:35:51 | From : B :14:06:00 To : A : 15:13:37 | From : A :18:58:00 To : B : 20:14:36 | From : A :15:15:00 To : B : 16:41:34 | From : B :22:50:00 To : A : 00:19:13 | From : B :18:53:00 To : A : 20:14:18 | A6 8 240 5021.958 7355 B6 7 210 4457.831 6890 2432.169 2333.042 From : A :06:35:00 To : B : 07:59:15 | From : B :07:00:00 To : A : 08:12:06 | From : B :08:20:00 To : A : 09:33:04 | From : A :08:15:00 To : B : 09:41:06 | From : A :09:36:00 To : B : 10:55:12 | From : B :09:48:00 To : A : 10:57:51 | From : B :11:36:00 To : A : 12:46:21 | From : A :11:00:00 To : B : 12:23:14 | From : A :12:51:00 To : B : 14:23:40 | From : B :14:34:00 To : A : 15:41:39 | From : B :17:05:00 To : A : 18:39:23 | From : A :15:43:00 To : B : 17:08:13 | From : A :19:03:00 To : B : 20:17:47 | From : B :19:14:00 To : A : 20:45:56 | From : B :22:57:00 To : A : 00:26:13 | B7 7 210 4457.838 6710 2252.162 A7 8 240 5021.852 7265 From : B :07:12:00 To : A : 08:21:35 | 2243.148 From : A :06:42:00 To : B : 08:06:15 | From : A :08:24:00 To : B : 09:53:01 | From : B :08:24:00 To : A : 09:36:48 | From : B :10:00:00 To : A : 11:07:13 | From : A :09:39:00 To : B : 10:58:12 | From : A :11:12:00 To : B : 12:33:44 | From : B :11:40:00 To : A : 12:50:28 | From : B :15:02:00 To : A : 16:14:04 | From : A :12:55:00 To : B : 14:30:42 | From : A :16:18:00 To : B : 17:42:08 | From : B :17:08:00 To : A : 18:40:30 | From : B :19:38:00 To : A : 21:09:33 | From : A :19:08:00 To : B : 20:20:22 | From : B :23:04:00 To : A : 00:33:13 | B8 7 210 4457.744 6805 2347.256 From : B :07:24:00 To : A : 08:33:50 | A8 8 240 5021.789 7285 From : A :08:36:00 To : B : 10:04:16 | 2263.211 From : A :06:49:00 To : B : 08:11:59 | From : B :10:16:00 To : A : 11:18:56 | From : B :08:28:00 To : A : 09:40:28 | From : A :11:24:00 To : B : 12:44:00 | From : A :09:42:00 To : B : 11:01:12 | From : B :15:30:00 To : A : 16:40:29 | From : B :11:44:00 To : A : 12:54:28 | From : A :16:43:00 To : B : 18:06:43 | From : A :12:59:00 To : B : 14:34:36 | From : B :19:53:00 To : A : 21:24:28 | From : B :17:11:00 To : A : 18:42:03 | From : A :19:13:00 To : B : 20:23:06 | B9 6 180 3893.838 5910 2016.162 Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxii Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B From : B :23:11:00 To : A : 00:40:13 | From : B :08:56:00 To : A : 10:09:45 | From : A :10:12:00 To : B : 11:34:10 | A9 8 240 4700.111 7295 From : B :12:42:00 To : A : 13:40:44 | 2594.889 From : A :06:56:00 To : B : 08:18:15 | From : A :13:43:00 To : B : 15:13:20 | From : B :08:32:00 To : A : 09:44:24 | From : B :17:44:00 To : A : 19:10:46 | From : A :09:48:00 To : B : 11:07:44 | From : A :20:13:00 To : B : 21:22:33 | From : B :11:52:00 To : A : 13:02:09 | From : A :13:07:00 To : B : 14:40:57 | B10 6 180 3893.871 5580 1686.129 From : B :17:17:00 To : A : 18:46:38 | From : B :09:04:00 To : A : 10:13:39 | From : A :19:23:00 To : B : 20:33:03 | From : A :10:18:00 To : B : 11:40:10 | From : B :23:25:00 To : A : 00:54:13 | From : B :12:56:00 To : A : 13:54:44 | From : A :13:59:00 To : B : 15:26:11 | A10 8 240 4700.083 6950 From : B :17:56:00 To : A : 19:22:46 | 2249.917 From : A :07:10:00 To : B : 08:29:58 | From : A :20:53:00 To : B : 22:02:25 | From : B :08:40:00 To : A : 09:52:12 | From : A :09:54:00 To : B : 11:13:40 | B11 6 180 3893.817 4895 1001.183 From : B :12:00:00 To : A : 13:08:20 | From : B :09:12:00 To : A : 10:22:17 | From : A :13:15:00 To : B : 14:49:31 | From : A :10:24:00 To : B : 11:46:41 | From : B :17:23:00 To : A : 18:49:49 | From : B :13:10:00 To : A : 14:14:02 | From : A :19:33:00 To : B : 20:43:03 | From : A :14:19:00 To : B : 15:50:53 | From : B :23:39:00 To : A : 01:08:13 | From : B :18:11:00 To : A : 19:39:13 | From : A :21:43:00 To : B : 22:50:02 | A11 8 240 4699.992 6450 1750.008 From : A :07:17:00 To : B : 08:37:24 | B12 6 180 3893.828 4810 916.1724 From : B :08:44:00 To : A : 09:56:19 | From : B :09:20:00 To : A : 10:29:44 | From : A :10:00:00 To : B : 11:19:20 | From : A :10:33:00 To : B : 11:55:21 | From : B :12:14:00 To : A : 13:13:55 | From : B :13:31:00 To : A : 14:33:08 | From : A :13:23:00 To : B : 14:54:48 | From : A :14:35:00 To : B : 16:06:27 | From : B :17:29:00 To : A : 18:56:04 | From : B :18:23:00 To : A : 19:46:35 | From : A :19:43:00 To : B : 20:53:03 | From : A :22:23:00 To : B : 23:29:34 | From : B :23:53:00 To : A : 01:22:13 | B13 6 180 3893.83 4655 761.1704 A12 7 210 4457.833 6670 From : B :09:28:00 To : A : 10:37:51 | 2212.167 From : A :07:31:00 To : B : 08:50:55 | From : A :10:39:00 To : B : 12:01:05 | From : B :08:52:00 To : A : 10:05:31 | From : B :13:45:00 To : A : 14:47:05 | From : A :10:09:00 To : B : 11:30:39 | From : A :14:51:00 To : B : 16:19:41 | From : B :12:35:00 To : A : 13:33:44 | From : B :18:35:00 To : A : 19:56:18 | From : A :13:35:00 To : B : 15:07:00 | From : A :23:03:00 To : B : 00:09:33 | From : B :17:38:00 To : A : 19:04:46 | From : A :19:58:00 To : B : 21:08:03 | B14 6 180 3893.828 5030 1136.172 From : B :09:32:00 To : A : 10:41:51 | A13 7 210 4457.804 6520 From : A :10:45:00 To : B : 12:08:31 | 2062.196 From : A :07:38:00 To : B : 08:57:57 | From : B :13:59:00 To : A : 15:01:05 | Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxiii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B From : B :09:00:00 To : A : 10:12:07 | From : A :15:03:00 To : B : 16:30:03 | From : A :10:15:00 To : B : 11:37:10 | From : B :18:44:00 To : A : 20:06:16 | From : B :12:49:00 To : A : 13:47:44 | From : A :23:33:00 To : B : 00:39:33 | From : A :13:51:00 To : B : 15:21:11 | From : B :17:50:00 To : A : 19:16:46 | From : A :20:33:00 To : B : 21:42:25 | A14 7 210 4457.744 6360 1902.256 From : A :07:52:00 To : B : 09:12:44 | From : B :09:16:00 To : A : 10:25:55 | From : A :10:27:00 To : B : 11:49:41 | From : B :13:17:00 To : A : 14:20:23 | From : A :14:23:00 To : B : 15:54:40 | From : B :18:14:00 To : A : 19:40:44 | From : A :21:53:00 To : B : 23:00:02 | A15 6 180 3893.937 5790 1896.063 From : A :08:09:00 To : B : 09:35:57 | From : B :09:40:00 To : A : 10:49:51 | From : A :10:51:00 To : B : 12:15:31 | From : B :14:13:00 To : A : 15:17:25 | From : A :15:19:00 To : B : 16:45:20 | From : B :18:56:00 To : A : 20:18:16 | A16 6 180 3893.903 5775 1881.097 From : A :08:12:00 To : B : 09:38:39 | From : B :09:44:00 To : A : 10:53:51 | From : A :10:57:00 To : B : 12:20:14 | From : B :14:27:00 To : A : 15:34:39 | From : A :15:39:00 To : B : 17:05:02 | From : B :19:11:00 To : A : 20:42:56 | A17 6 180 3893.881 5640 1746.119 From : A :08:18:00 To : B : 09:47:12 | From : B :09:52:00 To : A : 11:01:51 | From : A :11:03:00 To : B : 12:25:20 | From : B :14:41:00 To : A : 15:48:39 | From : A :15:51:00 To : B : 17:15:45 | From : B :19:20:00 To : A : 20:51:49 | A18 6 180 3893.863 5695 1801.137 From : A :08:21:00 To : B : 09:49:29 | From : B :09:56:00 To : A : 11:05:41 | Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxiv Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B From : A :11:09:00 To : B : 12:31:41 | From : B :14:55:00 To : A : 16:02:39 | From : A :16:08:00 To : B : 17:32:35 | From : B :19:32:00 To : A : 21:03:34 | A19 6 180 3893.898 5590 1696.102 From : A :08:27:00 To : B : 09:55:58 | From : B :10:04:00 To : A : 11:09:59 | From : A :11:15:00 To : B : 12:36:53 | From : B :15:09:00 To : A : 16:19:47 | From : A :16:23:00 To : B : 17:46:43 | From : B :19:41:00 To : A : 21:12:28 | A20 6 180 3893.865 5505 1611.135 From : A :08:30:00 To : B : 09:58:11 | From : B :10:08:00 To : A : 11:11:12 | From : A :11:18:00 To : B : 12:39:53 | From : B :15:16:00 To : A : 16:27:40 | From : A :16:33:00 To : B : 17:56:43 | From : B :19:47:00 To : A : 21:18:28 | A21 6 180 3893.816 5545 1651.184 From : A :08:33:00 To : B : 10:01:16 | From : B :10:12:00 To : A : 11:14:15 | From : A :11:21:00 To : B : 12:42:32 | From : B :15:23:00 To : A : 16:33:34 | From : A :16:38:00 To : B : 18:01:43 | From : B :19:50:00 To : A : 21:21:28 | A22 6 180 3893.842 5630 1736.158 From : A :08:39:00 To : B : 10:06:55 | From : B :10:20:00 To : A : 11:23:07 | From : A :11:27:00 To : B : 12:47:30 | From : B :15:37:00 To : A : 16:47:29 | From : A :16:53:00 To : B : 18:16:43 | From : B :19:59:00 To : A : 21:30:28 | A23 6 180 3893.817 5435 1541.183 From : A :08:42:00 To : B : 10:10:05 | From : B :10:24:00 To : A : 11:27:09 | From : A :11:30:00 To : B : 12:50:30 | From : B :15:44:00 To : A : 16:54:29 | From : A :16:58:00 To : B : 18:21:43 | Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxv Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B From : B :20:02:00 To : A : 21:34:53 | A24 6 180 3893.806 5510 1616.194 From : A :08:45:00 To : B : 10:13:05 | From : B :10:28:00 To : A : 11:30:58 | From : A :11:33:00 To : B : 12:52:42 | From : B :15:51:00 To : A : 17:01:29 | From : A :17:03:00 To : B : 18:25:02 | From : B :20:09:00 To : A : 21:42:42 | A25 6 180 3893.824 5640 1746.176 From : A :08:51:00 To : B : 10:18:25 | From : B :10:36:00 To : A : 11:39:05 | From : A :11:42:00 To : B : 13:02:00 | From : B :16:08:00 To : A : 17:21:25 | From : A :17:23:00 To : B : 18:44:55 | From : B :20:37:00 To : A : 22:10:33 | A26 6 180 3893.902 5650 1756.098 From : A :08:54:00 To : B : 10:21:25 | From : B :10:40:00 To : A : 11:43:05 | From : A :11:45:00 To : B : 13:05:00 | From : B :16:11:00 To : A : 17:28:43 | From : A :17:33:00 To : B : 18:54:55 | From : B :20:51:00 To : A : 22:24:33 | A27 6 180 3893.82 5440 1546.18 From : A :08:57:00 To : B : 10:22:45 | From : B :10:44:00 To : A : 11:47:05 | From : A :11:51:00 To : B : 13:10:25 | From : B :16:17:00 To : A : 17:36:55 | From : A :17:43:00 To : B : 19:04:55 | From : B :21:05:00 To : A : 22:35:10 | A28 6 180 3893.778 5270 1376.222 From : A :09:03:00 To : B : 10:26:24 | From : B :10:52:00 To : A : 11:55:05 | From : A :11:57:00 To : B : 13:16:00 | From : B :16:23:00 To : A : 17:46:27 | From : A :17:53:00 To : B : 19:14:55 | From : B :21:19:00 To : A : 22:49:47 | A29 6 180 3893.949 5565 Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxvi Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B 1671.051 From : A :09:06:00 To : B : 10:28:42 | From : B :10:56:00 To : A : 11:59:05 | From : A :12:03:00 To : B : 13:31:47 | From : B :16:29:00 To : A : 17:52:13 | From : A :18:03:00 To : B : 19:22:07 | From : B :21:33:00 To : A : 23:03:47 | A30 6 180 3893.834 5550 1656.166 From : A :09:12:00 To : B : 10:33:49 | From : B :11:04:00 To : A : 12:13:32 | From : A :12:19:00 To : B : 13:46:28 | From : B :16:41:00 To : A : 18:03:58 | From : A :18:23:00 To : B : 19:39:36 | From : B :22:01:00 To : A : 23:29:42 | A31 6 180 3893.836 5645 1751.164 From : A :09:15:00 To : B : 10:36:49 | From : B :11:08:00 To : A : 12:17:23 | From : A :12:23:00 To : B : 13:52:48 | From : B :16:44:00 To : A : 18:06:58 | From : A :18:28:00 To : B : 19:44:36 | From : B :22:08:00 To : A : 23:37:16 | A32 6 180 3893.834 5650 1756.166 From : A :09:18:00 To : B : 10:39:49 | From : B :11:12:00 To : A : 12:21:57 | From : A :12:27:00 To : B : 13:57:41 | From : B :16:47:00 To : A : 18:09:58 | From : A :18:33:00 To : B : 19:49:36 | From : B :22:15:00 To : A : 23:44:13 | A33 6 180 3893.777 5595 1701.223 From : A :09:21:00 To : B : 10:42:12 | From : B :11:16:00 To : A : 12:25:51 | From : A :12:31:00 To : B : 14:01:34 | From : B :16:50:00 To : A : 18:12:54 | From : A :18:38:00 To : B : 19:54:36 | From : B :22:22:00 To : A : 23:51:13 | A34 6 180 3893.798 5610 1716.202 From : A :09:24:00 To : B : 10:45:06 | From : B :11:20:00 To : A : 12:30:10 | From : A :12:35:00 To : B : 14:05:36 | Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxvii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B From : B :16:53:00 To : A : 18:15:52 | From : A :18:43:00 To : B : 19:59:36 | From : B :22:29:00 To : A : 23:58:13 | A35 6 180 3893.842 5695 1801.158 From : A :09:27:00 To : B : 10:47:21 | From : B :11:24:00 To : A : 12:34:38 | From : A :12:39:00 To : B : 14:11:49 | From : B :16:56:00 To : A : 18:18:52 | From : A :18:48:00 To : B : 20:04:36 | From : B :22:36:00 To : A : 00:05:13 | A36 6 180 3893.847 5320 1426.153 From : A :09:45:00 To : B : 11:04:12 | From : B :11:48:00 To : A : 12:58:16 | From : A :13:03:00 To : B : 14:38:23 | From : B :17:14:00 To : A : 18:45:35 | From : A :19:18:00 To : B : 20:28:03 | From : B :23:18:00 To : A : 00:47:13 | A37 6 180 3572.119 5420 1847.881 From : A :09:57:00 To : B : 11:17:33 | From : B :12:07:00 To : A : 13:10:14 | From : A :13:19:00 To : B : 14:53:22 | From : B :17:26:00 To : A : 18:52:46 | From : A :19:38:00 To : B : 20:48:03 | From : B :23:46:00 To : A : 01:15:13 | A38 5 150 3329.94 4845 1515.06 From : A :10:06:00 To : B : 11:27:39 | From : B :12:28:00 To : A : 13:26:43 | From : A :13:31:00 To : B : 15:03:00 | From : B :17:35:00 To : A : 19:02:04 | From : A :19:53:00 To : B : 21:03:03 | A39 5 150 3329.828 4520 1190.172 From : A :10:30:00 To : B : 11:51:03 | From : B :13:24:00 To : A : 14:26:06 | From : A :14:31:00 To : B : 16:02:27 | From : B :18:20:00 To : A : 19:43:19 | From : A :22:13:00 To : B : 23:19:34 | A40 5 150 3329.839 4640 Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxviii Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B 1310.161 From : A :10:42:00 To : B : 12:04:05 | From : B :13:52:00 To : A : 14:54:05 | From : A :14:59:00 To : B : 16:25:12 | From : B :18:41:00 To : A : 20:02:18 | From : A :23:23:00 To : B : 00:29:38 | A41 4 120 2765.876 3920 1154.124 From : A :10:54:00 To : B : 12:17:07 | From : B :14:20:00 To : A : 15:26:38 | From : A :15:31:00 To : B : 16:57:02 | From : B :19:05:00 To : A : 20:37:40 | A42 4 120 2765.89 3850 1084.11 From : A :11:06:00 To : B : 12:28:41 | From : B :14:48:00 To : A : 15:55:39 | From : A :15:59:00 To : B : 17:23:07 | From : B :19:26:00 To : A : 20:57:34 | A43 4 120 2765.879 3905 1139.121 From : A :11:36:00 To : B : 12:56:00 | From : B :15:58:00 To : A : 17:10:57 | From : A :17:13:00 To : B : 18:34:55 | From : B :20:23:00 To : A : 21:56:33 | A44 4 120 2765.953 3845 1079.047 From : A :11:48:00 To : B : 13:08:00 | From : B :16:14:00 To : A : 17:31:28 | From : A :17:38:00 To : B : 18:59:55 | From : B :20:58:00 To : A : 22:31:33 | A45 4 120 2765.883 3795 1029.117 From : A :12:00:00 To : B : 13:19:00 | From : B :16:26:00 To : A : 17:49:13 | From : A :17:58:00 To : B : 19:19:55 | From : B :21:26:00 To : A : 22:56:47 | A46 4 120 2765.934 3810 1044.066 From : A :12:07:00 To : B : 13:35:52 | From : B :16:32:00 To : A : 17:55:13 | From : A :18:08:00 To : B : 19:24:49 | From : B :21:40:00 To : A : 23:10:47 | A47 4 120 2765.903 3910 Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxix Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B 1144.097 From : A :12:11:00 To : B : 13:39:35 | From : B :16:35:00 To : A : 17:58:00 | From : A :18:13:00 To : B : 19:29:36 | From : B :21:47:00 To : A : 23:17:47 | A48 3 90 2201.968 2585 383.0322 From : A :13:39:00 To : B : 15:09:20 | From : B :17:41:00 To : A : 19:08:04 | From : A :20:03:00 To : B : 21:13:21 | A49 3 90 2201.912 2760 558.0884 From : A :13:47:00 To : B : 15:17:11 | From : B :17:47:00 To : A : 19:14:04 | From : A :20:23:00 To : B : 21:32:27 | A50 3 90 2201.958 2745 543.0415 From : A :13:55:00 To : B : 15:25:11 | From : B :17:53:00 To : A : 19:20:04 | From : A :20:43:00 To : B : 21:52:25 | A51 3 90 2201.922 2695 493.0776 From : A :14:03:00 To : B : 15:33:07 | From : B :17:59:00 To : A : 19:26:04 | From : A :21:03:00 To : B : 22:09:48 | A52 3 90 2201.929 2745 543.0708 From : A :14:07:00 To : B : 15:36:28 | From : B :18:02:00 To : A : 19:30:43 | From : A :21:13:00 To : B : 22:20:09 | A53 3 90 2201.92 2685 483.0801 From : A :14:15:00 To : B : 15:46:56 | From : B :18:08:00 To : A : 19:36:01 | From : A :21:33:00 To : B : 22:40:02 | A54 3 90 2201.91 2560 358.0903 From : A :14:27:00 To : B : 15:58:27 | From : B :18:17:00 To : A : 19:41:43 | From : A :22:03:00 To : B : 23:09:34 | A55 3 90 2201.91 2720 518.0903 From : A :14:39:00 To : B : 16:08:31 | From : B :18:26:00 To : A : 19:47:47 | Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxx Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B From : A :22:33:00 To : B : 23:39:34 | A56 3 90 2201.91 2765 563.0903 From : A :14:47:00 To : B : 16:15:41 | From : B :18:32:00 To : A : 19:54:16 | From : A :22:53:00 To : B : 23:59:33 | A57 3 90 2201.902 2750 548.0977 From : A :14:55:00 To : B : 16:21:05 | From : B :18:38:00 To : A : 20:00:16 | From : A :23:13:00 To : B : 00:19:33 | A58 3 90 2201.916 2665 463.084 From : A :15:07:00 To : B : 16:33:35 | From : B :18:47:00 To : A : 20:08:18 | From : A :23:43:00 To : B : 00:49:33 | A59 2 60 1637.949 1950 312.0511 From : A :15:11:00 To : B : 16:37:34 | From : B :18:50:00 To : A : 20:12:16 | A60 2 60 1637.975 1860 222.0251 From : A :15:23:00 To : B : 16:49:02 | From : B :18:59:00 To : A : 20:20:18 | A61 2 60 1637.949 2065 427.0511 From : A :15:27:00 To : B : 16:53:02 | From : B :19:02:00 To : A : 20:34:59 | A62 2 60 1637.949 1955 317.0511 From : A :15:35:00 To : B : 17:01:02 | From : B :19:08:00 To : A : 20:39:59 | A63 2 60 1637.949 1935 297.0511 From : A :15:47:00 To : B : 17:11:45 | From : B :19:17:00 To : A : 20:48:56 | A64 2 60 1637.944 1910 272.0564 From : A :15:55:00 To : B : 17:19:02 | From : B :19:23:00 To : A : 20:54:36 | A65 2 60 1638.023 2085 446.9773 From : A :16:03:00 To : B : 17:31:04 | Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxxi Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B From : B :19:29:00 To : A : 21:00:34 | A66 2 60 1637.964 1950 312.0355 From : A :16:13:00 To : B : 17:37:38 | From : B :19:35:00 To : A : 21:06:34 | A67 2 60 1637.946 1945 307.0544 From : A :16:28:00 To : B : 17:51:43 | From : B :19:44:00 To : A : 21:15:28 | A68 2 60 1637.939 1945 307.0605 From : A :16:48:00 To : B : 18:11:43 | From : B :19:56:00 To : A : 21:27:28 | A69 2 60 1637.937 1965 327.0626 From : A :17:08:00 To : B : 18:29:55 | From : B :20:16:00 To : A : 21:49:33 | A70 2 60 1637.945 1960 322.0553 From : A :17:28:00 To : B : 18:49:55 | Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxxii Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Appendix F Vehicle timetable for 43- seater bus Table F- 1 Vehicle timetable for 43- seater bus Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus 1 0 A 1 06:00:00 ------2 0 A 2 06:12:00 ------1 0 B 1 06:00:00 ------3 0 A 3 06:24:00 ------2 0 B 2 06:19:00 ------4 0 A 4 06:36:00 ------3 0 B 3 06:38:00 ------5 0 A 5 06:48:00 ------4 0 B 4 06:57:00 ------6 0 A 6 07:00:00 ------5 0 B 5 07:16:00 ------1 ------B 1 07:03:03 -- 1 ------A 1 07:26:35 7 0 B 1 07:12:00 ------6 0 A 1 07:35:00 ------8 0 A 7 07:24:00 ------1 ------A 2 07:38:40 9 0 A 8 07:36:00 ------2 ------A 3 07:49:48 -- 1 ------B 2 07:36:49 7 1 A 2 07:54:00 ------10 0 B 2 07:48:00 ------2 ------A 4 08:02:24 -- 1 ------B 3 07:57:07 8 1 A 3 08:13:00 ------11 0 B 3 08:00:00 ------2 ------A 5 08:13:06 12 0 A 9 08:12:00 ------9 1 A 4 08:19:00 ------1 ------B 4 08:11:46 -- 2 ------A 6 08:22:55 13 0 B 4 08:17:00 ------10 1 A 5 08:25:00 ------14 0 A 10 08:22:00 ------11 0 A 6 08:31:00 ------15 0 A 11 08:27:00 ------1 ------B 1 08:33:42 -- 1 ------B 5 08:28:09 12 0 B 1 08:37:00 ------16 0 B 5 08:32:00 ------13 0 B 6 08:43:00 ------17 0 A 12 08:37:00 ------1 ------A 7 08:45:02 18 0 A 13 08:42:00 ------14 0 A 7 08:49:00 ------1 ------A 1 08:45:53 15 0 B 7 08:55:00 ------19 0 A 1 08:47:00 ------1 ------A 8 08:58:06 20 0 A 14 08:52:00 ------16 0 A 8 09:01:00 ------21 0 A 15 08:57:00 ------17 0 B 8 09:07:00 ------22 0 A 16 09:02:00 ------1 ------B 2 09:10:51 -- 1 ------A 2 09:04:05 18 0 B 2 09:13:00 ------23 0 A 2 09:07:00 ------19 0 B 9 09:19:00 ------24 0 A 17 09:12:00 ------20 0 B 10 09:25:00 ------25 0 A 18 09:17:00 ------1 ------B 3 09:25:12 26 0 A 19 09:22:00 ------21 0 B 3 09:31:00 ------ Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxxiii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus 27 0 A 20 09:27:00 ------22 0 B 11 09:37:00 ------28 0 A 21 09:32:00 ------23 0 B 12 09:43:00 ------1 ------A 3 09:33:10 -- 1 ------A 9 09:44:18 -- 2 ------A 4 09:35:16 24 0 A 9 09:49:00 ------29 1 A 3 09:37:00 ------1 ------B 4 09:49:30 -- 2 ------A 5 09:40:52 25 0 B 4 09:55:00 ------30 1 A 4 09:42:00 ------1 ------A 10 09:54:58 31 0 A 5 09:47:00 ------2 ------A 11 09:58:52 -- 1 ------A 6 09:46:42 26 1 A 10 10:01:00 ------32 0 A 6 09:52:00 ------2 ------B 5 10:03:44 -- 1 ------B 1 09:51:56 27 1 A 11 10:07:00 ------33 0 B 1 09:57:00 ------2 ------A 12 10:08:15 -- 1 ------B 6 09:57:59 28 1 B 5 10:13:00 ------34 0 B 6 10:02:00 ------2 ------A 13 10:12:53 -- 1 ------A 7 10:04:56 -- 3 ------A 1 10:17:05 35 0 A 7 10:07:00 ------29 2 A 12 10:19:00 ------36 0 A 22 10:12:00 ------3 ------A 14 10:22:07 -- 1 ------B 7 10:11:15 30 2 A 13 10:25:00 ------2 ------A 8 10:12:38 -- 3 ------A 15 10:25:27 37 1 B 7 10:17:00 ------4 ------A 16 10:27:01 -- 2 ------B 8 10:19:33 31 3 A 1 10:31:00 ------38 1 A 8 10:22:00 ------4 ------A 2 10:30:59 -- 2 ------B 2 10:24:31 32 3 A 14 10:37:00 ------39 1 B 8 10:27:00 ------4 ------A 17 10:36:11 40 0 B 2 10:32:00 ------5 ------A 18 10:41:11 -- 1 ------B 9 10:31:15 33 4 A 15 10:43:00 ------41 0 B 9 10:37:00 ------5 ------A 19 10:43:44 -- 1 ------B 10 10:37:18 34 4 A 16 10:49:00 ------42 0 B 10 10:42:00 ------5 ------A 20 10:50:18 -- 1 ------B 3 10:43:11 -- 6 ------A 21 10:53:08 43 0 B 3 10:47:00 ------35 5 A 2 10:55:00 ------1 ------B 11 10:49:11 -- 6 ------A 3 10:58:34 44 0 B 11 10:52:00 ------36 5 A 17 11:01:00 ------1 ------B 12 10:55:11 -- 6 ------A 4 11:03:34 45 0 B 12 10:57:00 ------37 5 A 18 11:07:00 ------46 0 A 23 11:02:00 ------6 ------A 5 11:09:06 -- 1 ------A 9 11:01:11 38 5 A 19 11:13:00 ------47 0 A 9 11:07:00 ------6 ------A 6 11:14:02 -- 1 ------B 4 11:07:10 39 5 A 20 11:19:00 ------2 ------A 10 11:10:05 -- 6 ------B 1 11:19:55 48 1 B 4 11:12:00 ------40 5 A 21 11:25:00 ------ Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxxiv Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus -- 2 ------A 11 11:12:12 -- 6 ------B 6 11:25:13 49 1 A 10 11:17:00 ------41 5 A 3 11:31:00 ------2 ------B 5 11:18:29 -- 6 ------A 7 11:31:54 50 1 A 11 11:22:00 ------42 5 A 4 11:37:00 ------2 ------A 12 11:24:27 -- 6 ------A 22 11:36:40 51 1 B 5 11:27:00 ------7 ------B 7 11:41:30 -- 2 ------A 13 11:30:36 43 6 A 5 11:43:00 ------52 1 A 12 11:32:00 ------7 ------A 8 11:47:23 53 0 A 13 11:37:00 ------44 6 A 6 11:49:00 ------1 ------A 1 11:36:25 -- 7 ------B 8 11:50:24 54 0 A 1 11:42:00 ------45 6 B 1 11:55:00 ------1 ------A 14 11:42:25 -- 7 ------B 2 11:57:02 55 0 A 14 11:47:00 ------46 6 B 6 12:01:00 ------1 ------A 15 11:48:25 -- 7 ------B 9 12:01:25 56 0 A 15 11:52:00 ------8 ------B 10 12:06:27 -- 1 ------A 16 11:54:25 47 7 A 7 12:11:00 ------57 0 A 16 11:57:00 ------8 ------B 3 12:13:53 -- 1 ------A 2 12:00:25 -- 9 ------B 11 12:17:34 58 0 A 2 12:02:00 ------48 8 A 22 12:21:00 ------59 0 A 24 12:08:00 ------9 ------B 12 12:22:36 60 0 A 25 12:14:00 ------10 ------A 23 12:26:59 -- 1 ------A 17 12:15:08 49 9 B 7 12:31:00 ------61 0 A 17 12:20:00 ------10 ------A 9 12:32:18 -- 1 ------A 18 12:19:38 -- 11 ------B 4 12:36:03 62 0 A 18 12:26:00 ------50 10 A 8 12:41:00 ------1 ------A 19 12:25:33 -- 11 ------A 10 12:41:15 63 0 A 19 12:32:00 ------12 ------A 11 12:43:52 -- 1 ------A 20 12:32:10 51 11 B 8 12:51:00 ------64 0 A 20 12:38:00 ------12 ------B 5 12:50:17 -- 1 ------A 21 12:37:58 -- 13 ------A 12 12:54:10 65 0 A 21 12:44:00 ------14 ------A 13 12:59:22 -- 1 ------A 3 12:43:51 52 13 B 2 13:01:00 ------66 0 A 3 12:50:00 ------14 ------A 1 13:04:47 -- 1 ------A 4 12:49:58 -- 15 ------A 14 13:08:45 67 0 A 4 12:56:00 ------53 14 B 9 13:11:00 ------1 ------A 5 12:55:34 -- 15 ------A 15 13:13:46 68 0 A 5 13:02:00 ------16 ------A 16 13:18:20 -- 1 ------A 6 13:01:36 54 15 B 10 13:21:00 ------2 ------B 1 13:06:56 55 14 B 3 13:31:00 ------69 1 A 6 13:08:00 ------15 ------A 2 13:33:00 -- 2 ------B 6 13:08:11 -- 16 ------A 24 13:38:26 Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxxv Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus -- 3 ------A 7 13:12:57 56 15 B 11 13:41:00 ------70 2 B 1 13:14:00 ------16 ------A 25 13:43:17 71 1 B 6 13:20:00 ------57 15 B 12 13:51:00 ------2 ------A 22 13:22:28 -- 16 ------A 17 13:51:40 72 1 A 7 13:26:00 ------17 ------A 18 13:58:27 73 0 A 22 13:32:00 ------58 16 A 23 14:01:00 ------1 ------B 7 13:31:52 -- 17 ------A 19 14:04:22 74 0 B 7 13:38:00 ------59 16 A 9 14:11:00 ------1 ------A 8 13:41:57 -- 17 ------A 20 14:12:31 75 0 A 8 13:44:00 ------18 ------A 21 14:18:24 76 0 A 26 13:50:00 ------60 17 B 4 14:21:00 ------1 ------B 8 13:51:55 -- 18 ------A 3 14:24:24 77 0 B 8 13:56:00 ------61 17 A 10 14:31:00 ------78 0 A 27 14:02:00 ------18 ------A 4 14:33:31 79 0 A 28 14:08:00 ------19 ------A 5 14:37:19 -- 1 ------B 2 14:08:57 62 18 A 11 14:41:00 ------80 0 B 2 14:14:00 ------19 ------A 6 14:43:49 -- 1 ------B 9 14:16:59 63 18 B 5 14:51:00 ------81 0 B 9 14:20:00 ------19 ------B 1 14:50:08 82 0 A 29 14:26:00 ------20 ------B 6 14:56:06 -- 1 ------B 10 14:26:02 -- 21 ------A 7 14:59:20 83 0 B 10 14:32:00 ------64 20 A 12 15:01:00 ------1 ------B 3 14:35:13 -- 21 ------A 22 15:05:46 84 0 B 3 14:38:00 ------65 20 A 13 15:11:00 ------85 0 A 30 14:44:00 ------21 ------B 7 15:10:04 -- 1 ------B 11 14:45:18 -- 22 ------A 8 15:13:58 86 0 B 11 14:50:00 ------66 21 A 1 15:21:00 ------87 0 A 31 14:56:00 ------22 ------A 26 15:22:00 -- 1 ------B 12 14:55:16 -- 23 ------B 8 15:27:55 88 0 B 12 15:02:00 ------67 22 A 14 15:31:00 ------1 ------A 23 15:03:24 -- 23 ------A 27 15:33:56 89 0 A 23 15:08:00 ------24 ------A 28 15:39:05 90 0 A 32 15:14:00 ------68 23 A 15 15:41:00 ------1 ------A 9 15:17:52 -- 24 ------B 2 15:48:03 91 0 A 9 15:20:00 ------69 23 A 16 15:51:00 ------92 0 A 33 15:26:00 ------24 ------B 9 15:53:15 -- 1 ------B 4 15:29:21 -- 25 ------A 29 15:59:11 93 0 B 4 15:32:00 ------70 24 A 2 16:01:00 ------94 0 A 34 15:38:00 ------71 23 A 24 16:05:00 ------1 ------A 10 15:40:52 -- 24 ------B 10 16:05:11 95 0 A 10 15:44:00 ------72 23 A 25 16:09:00 ------ Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxxvi Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus 96 0 A 35 15:50:00 ------24 ------B 3 16:09:15 -- 1 ------A 11 15:50:50 73 23 A 17 16:13:00 ------97 0 A 11 15:56:00 ------24 ------A 30 16:14:25 -- 1 ------B 5 16:00:50 74 23 A 18 16:17:00 ------98 0 B 5 16:02:00 ------75 22 A 19 16:21:00 ------99 0 A 36 16:10:00 ------23 ------B 11 16:20:25 -- 1 ------A 12 16:15:39 -- 24 ------A 31 16:23:47 100 0 A 12 16:18:00 ------76 23 A 20 16:25:00 ------1 ------A 13 16:23:31 77 22 A 21 16:29:00 ------101 0 A 13 16:26:00 ------23 ------B 12 16:30:48 102 0 A 37 16:34:00 ------78 22 A 3 16:33:00 ------1 ------A 1 16:33:42 79 21 A 4 16:37:00 ------103 0 A 1 16:42:00 ------22 ------A 23 16:36:24 -- 1 ------A 14 16:43:40 80 21 A 5 16:41:00 ------104 0 A 14 16:50:00 ------22 ------A 32 16:42:24 -- 1 ------A 15 16:53:40 81 21 A 6 16:45:00 ------105 0 A 15 16:58:00 ------22 ------A 9 16:47:59 -- 1 ------A 16 17:03:40 82 21 B 1 16:49:00 ------106 0 A 16 17:06:00 ------83 20 B 6 16:53:00 ------107 0 A 38 17:14:00 ------21 ------A 33 16:53:41 -- 1 ------A 2 17:13:58 84 20 A 7 16:57:00 ------2 ------A 24 17:16:18 -- 21 ------B 4 16:59:48 108 1 A 2 17:22:00 ------85 20 A 22 17:01:00 ------109 0 A 24 17:30:00 ------86 19 B 7 17:05:00 ------1 ------A 25 17:29:11 -- 20 ------A 34 17:05:46 -- 2 ------A 17 17:32:31 87 19 A 8 17:09:00 ------110 1 A 25 17:38:00 ------20 ------A 10 17:10:33 -- 2 ------A 18 17:38:57 88 19 A 26 17:13:00 ------3 ------A 19 17:44:27 89 18 B 8 17:17:00 ------111 2 A 17 17:46:00 ------19 ------A 35 17:16:29 -- 3 ------A 20 17:50:29 90 18 A 27 17:21:00 ------112 2 A 18 17:54:00 ------19 ------A 11 17:21:51 -- 3 ------A 21 17:53:46 91 18 A 28 17:25:00 ------4 ------A 3 17:57:48 92 17 B 2 17:29:00 ------113 3 A 19 18:02:00 ------93 16 B 9 17:33:00 ------4 ------A 4 18:01:46 -- 17 ------B 5 17:32:03 -- 5 ------A 5 18:05:41 94 16 A 29 17:37:00 ------114 4 A 20 18:10:00 ------17 ------A 36 17:36:57 -- 5 ------A 6 18:09:31 95 16 B 10 17:41:00 ------6 ------B 1 18:13:14 96 15 B 3 17:45:00 ------115 5 A 21 18:18:00 ------16 ------A 12 17:44:19 Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxxvii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus -- 6 ------B 6 18:17:14 97 15 A 30 17:49:00 ------7 ------A 7 18:21:14 98 14 B 11 17:53:00 ------116 6 A 3 18:26:00 ------15 ------A 13 17:52:11 117 5 A 4 18:34:00 ------99 14 A 31 17:57:00 ------6 ------A 22 18:36:12 100 13 B 12 18:01:00 ------7 ------B 7 18:39:08 -- 14 ------A 37 18:00:03 -- 8 ------A 8 18:40:46 101 13 A 23 18:05:00 ------118 7 A 5 18:42:00 ------102 12 A 32 18:09:00 ------8 ------A 26 18:43:28 -- 13 ------A 1 18:08:03 -- 9 ------B 8 18:44:57 103 12 A 9 18:13:00 ------10 ------A 27 18:46:24 104 11 A 33 18:17:00 ------119 9 A 6 18:50:00 ------12 ------A 14 18:16:03 -- 10 ------A 28 18:51:01 105 11 B 4 18:21:00 ------11 ------B 2 18:54:59 106 10 A 34 18:25:00 ------120 10 B 1 18:58:00 ------11 ------A 15 18:24:03 -- 11 ------B 9 18:58:59 107 10 A 10 18:29:00 ------12 ------A 29 19:02:59 -- 11 ------A 16 18:29:51 121 11 B 6 19:06:00 ------108 10 A 35 18:33:00 ------12 ------B 10 19:06:59 109 9 A 11 18:37:00 ------13 ------B 3 19:10:59 -- 10 ------A 38 18:38:30 122 12 A 7 19:14:00 ------110 9 B 5 18:41:00 ------13 ------A 30 19:14:59 111 8 A 36 18:45:00 ------14 ------B 11 19:18:59 -- 9 ------A 2 18:46:15 123 13 A 22 19:22:00 ------112 8 A 12 18:49:00 ------14 ------A 31 19:22:59 113 7 A 13 18:53:00 ------15 ------B 12 19:26:32 -- 8 ------A 24 18:54:15 124 14 B 7 19:30:00 ------114 7 A 37 18:57:00 ------15 ------A 23 19:29:44 115 6 A 1 19:01:00 ------16 ------A 32 19:30:49 -- 7 ------A 25 19:02:15 -- 17 ------A 9 19:33:26 116 6 A 14 19:05:00 ------125 16 A 8 19:38:00 ------117 5 A 15 19:09:00 ------17 ------A 33 19:37:51 -- 6 ------A 17 19:10:15 -- 18 ------B 4 19:41:49 118 5 A 16 19:13:00 ------126 17 A 26 19:46:00 ------119 4 A 38 19:17:00 ------18 ------A 34 19:45:49 -- 5 ------A 18 19:18:15 -- 19 ------A 10 19:49:49 120 4 A 2 19:21:00 ------127 18 B 8 19:54:00 ------5 ------A 19 19:20:58 -- 19 ------A 35 19:53:49 121 4 A 24 19:25:00 ------20 ------A 11 19:57:49 122 3 A 25 19:29:00 ------128 19 A 27 20:02:00 ------4 ------A 20 19:29:07 -- 20 ------B 5 20:01:49 123 3 A 17 19:33:00 ------ Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxxviii Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus -- 21 ------A 36 20:05:49 124 2 A 18 19:37:00 ------22 ------A 12 20:09:49 -- 3 ------A 21 19:36:56 -- 23 ------A 13 20:13:49 125 2 A 19 19:41:00 ------129 22 A 28 20:18:00 ------126 1 A 20 19:45:00 ------23 ------A 37 20:17:49 -- 2 ------A 3 19:44:56 130 22 B 2 20:34:00 ------127 1 A 21 19:49:00 ------23 ------A 1 20:37:12 128 0 A 3 19:53:00 ------24 ------A 14 20:39:47 -- 1 ------A 4 19:52:56 -- 25 ------A 15 20:43:14 129 0 A 4 19:57:00 ------26 ------A 16 20:46:31 130 0 B 13 20:01:00 ------131 25 B 9 20:50:00 ------1 ------A 5 20:00:56 -- 26 ------A 38 20:50:38 -- 2 ------A 6 20:08:56 -- 27 ------A 2 20:54:36 131 1 A 5 20:12:00 ------28 ------A 24 20:58:21 -- 2 ------B 1 20:16:56 -- 29 ------A 25 21:02:21 -- 3 ------B 6 20:20:24 132 28 A 29 21:06:00 ------132 2 A 6 20:23:00 ------29 ------A 17 21:06:21 -- 3 ------A 7 20:26:17 -- 30 ------A 18 21:10:23 133 2 B 1 20:34:00 ------31 ------A 19 21:14:11 -- 3 ------A 22 20:34:23 -- 32 ------A 20 21:17:49 -- 4 ------B 7 20:42:23 133 31 B 10 21:22:00 ------134 3 B 6 20:45:00 ------32 ------A 21 21:21:49 -- 4 ------A 8 20:50:23 -- 33 ------A 3 21:25:49 135 3 A 7 20:56:00 ------34 ------A 4 21:29:49 -- 4 ------A 26 20:58:23 -- 35 ------B 13 21:33:09 136 3 A 22 21:07:00 ------134 34 B 3 21:38:00 ------4 ------B 8 21:06:23 -- 35 ------A 5 21:49:33 -- 5 ------A 27 21:12:59 135 34 A 30 21:54:00 ------137 4 B 7 21:18:00 ------35 ------A 6 21:59:55 138 3 A 8 21:29:00 ------136 34 B 11 22:10:00 ------4 ------A 28 21:29:14 -- 35 ------B 1 22:11:00 139 3 A 26 21:40:00 ------36 ------B 6 22:21:53 -- 4 ------B 2 21:45:11 137 35 A 31 22:26:00 ------140 3 B 8 21:51:00 ------36 ------A 7 22:32:53 141 2 A 27 22:02:00 ------37 ------A 22 22:39:45 -- 3 ------B 9 22:01:11 138 36 B 12 22:42:00 ------142 2 A 28 22:13:00 ------37 ------B 7 22:52:23 -- 3 ------A 29 22:14:18 139 36 A 23 22:58:00 ------143 2 B 2 22:24:00 ------37 ------A 8 23:03:06 -- 3 ------B 10 22:30:51 140 36 A 32 23:14:00 ------144 2 B 9 22:35:00 ------37 ------A 26 23:14:06 145 1 A 29 22:46:00 ------ Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxxix Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Terminal A Terminal B Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus Departure Pool Departed bus -- 38 ------B 8 23:25:06 -- 2 ------B 3 22:46:48 141 37 A 9 23:30:00 ------146 1 B 10 22:57:00 ------38 ------A 27 23:33:43 -- 2 ------A 30 23:02:48 -- 39 ------A 28 23:45:38 147 1 B 3 23:08:00 ------40 ------B 2 23:56:33 148 0 A 30 23:19:00 ------41 ------B 9 00:07:33 -- 1 ------B 11 23:18:09 -- 42 ------A 29 00:18:33 149 0 B 11 23:30:00 ------43 ------B 10 00:29:33 -- 1 ------A 31 23:34:20 -- 44 ------B 3 00:40:33 150 0 A 31 23:41:00 ------45 ------A 30 00:51:33 -- 1 ------B 12 23:50:20 -- 46 ------B 11 01:02:33 151 0 B 12 23:52:00 ------47 ------A 31 01:13:33 -- 1 ------A 23 00:06:20 -- 48 ------B 12 01:24:33 -- 2 ------A 32 00:22:20 -- 3 ------A 9 00:38:20 -- 4 ------00:54:20 Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxxx Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Appendix G Vehicle schedule for 43- seater bus Table G- 1 Vehicle schedule for 43- seater bus Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit A1 8 240 6481.064 11825 B1 9 270 7227.411 12560 5332.589 5343.936 From : A :06:00:00 To : B : 07:26:35 | From : B :06:00:00 To : A : 07:03:03 | From : B :07:35:00 To : A : 08:45:53 | From : A :07:12:00 To : B : 08:33:42 | From : A :08:47:00 To : B : 10:17:05 | From : B :08:37:00 To : A : 09:51:56 | From : B :10:31:00 To : A : 11:36:25 | From : A :09:57:00 To : B : 11:19:55 | From : A :11:42:00 To : B : 13:04:47 | From : B :11:55:00 To : A : 13:06:56 | From : B :15:21:00 To : A : 16:33:42 | From : A :13:14:00 To : B : 14:50:08 | From : A :16:42:00 To : B : 18:08:03 | From : B :16:49:00 To : A : 18:13:14 | From : B :19:01:00 To : A : 20:37:12 | From : A :18:58:00 To : B : 20:16:56 | From : B :20:34:00 To : A : 22:11:00 | A2 8 240 6481.049 11860 5378.951 From : A :06:12:00 To : B : 07:38:40 | B2 9 270 7227.279 11985 4757.721 From : B :07:54:00 To : A : 09:04:05 | From : B :06:19:00 To : A : 07:36:49 | From : A :09:07:00 To : B : 10:30:59 | From : A :07:48:00 To : B : 09:10:51 | From : B :10:55:00 To : A : 12:00:25 | From : B :09:13:00 To : A : 10:24:31 | From : A :12:02:00 To : B : 13:33:00 | From : A :10:32:00 To : B : 11:57:02 | From : B :16:01:00 To : A : 17:13:58 | From : B :13:01:00 To : A : 14:08:57 | From : A :17:22:00 To : B : 18:46:15 | From : A :14:14:00 To : B : 15:48:03 | From : B :19:21:00 To : A : 20:54:36 | From : B :17:29:00 To : A : 18:54:59 | From : A :20:34:00 To : B : 21:45:11 | A3 8 240 6481.247 11890 From : B :22:24:00 To : A : 23:56:33 | 5408.753 From : A :06:24:00 To : B : 07:49:48 | From : B :08:13:00 To : A : 09:33:10 | B3 9 270 6785.195 12590 5804.805 From : A :09:37:00 To : B : 10:58:34 | From : B :06:38:00 To : A : 07:57:07 | From : B :11:31:00 To : A : 12:43:51 | From : A :08:00:00 To : B : 09:25:12 | From : A :12:50:00 To : B : 14:24:24 | From : B :09:31:00 To : A : 10:43:11 | From : B :16:33:00 To : A : 17:57:48 | From : A :10:47:00 To : B : 12:13:53 | From : A :18:26:00 To : B : 19:44:56 | From : B :13:31:00 To : A : 14:35:13 | From : B :19:53:00 To : A : 21:25:49 | From : A :14:38:00 To : B : 16:09:15 | From : B :17:45:00 To : A : 19:10:59 | A4 8 240 6481.379 11660 From : A :21:38:00 To : B : 22:46:48 | 5178.621 From : A :06:36:00 To : B : 08:02:24 | From : B :23:08:00 To : A : 00:40:33 | From : B :08:19:00 To : A : 09:35:16 | From : A :09:42:00 To : B : 11:03:34 | B4 7 210 5734.784 9845 4110.216 From : B :11:37:00 To : A : 12:49:58 | From : B :06:57:00 To : A : 08:11:46 | Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxxxi Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit From : A :12:56:00 To : B : 14:33:31 | From : A :08:17:00 To : B : 09:49:30 | From : B :16:37:00 To : A : 18:01:46 | From : B :09:55:00 To : A : 11:07:10 | From : A :18:34:00 To : B : 19:52:56 | From : A :11:12:00 To : B : 12:36:03 | From : B :19:57:00 To : A : 21:29:49 | From : B :14:21:00 To : A : 15:29:21 | From : A :15:32:00 To : B : 16:59:48 | A5 8 240 6481.29 11340 From : B :18:21:00 To : A : 19:41:49 | 4858.71 From : A :06:48:00 To : B : 08:13:06 | From : B :08:25:00 To : A : 09:40:52 | B5 7 210 5734.851 9655 3920.149 From : A :09:47:00 To : B : 11:09:06 | From : B :07:16:00 To : A : 08:28:09 | From : B :11:43:00 To : A : 12:55:34 | From : A :08:32:00 To : B : 10:03:44 | From : A :13:02:00 To : B : 14:37:19 | From : B :10:13:00 To : A : 11:18:29 | From : B :16:41:00 To : A : 18:05:41 | From : A :11:27:00 To : B : 12:50:17 | From : A :18:42:00 To : B : 20:00:56 | From : B :14:51:00 To : A : 16:00:50 | From : B :20:12:00 To : A : 21:49:33 | From : A :16:02:00 To : B : 17:32:03 | From : B :18:41:00 To : A : 20:01:49 | A6 8 240 6481.193 11560 5078.807 From : A :07:00:00 To : B : 08:22:55 | B6 7 210 5734.672 8960 3225.328 From : B :08:31:00 To : A : 09:46:42 | From : B :08:43:00 To : A : 09:57:59 | From : A :09:52:00 To : B : 11:14:02 | From : A :10:02:00 To : B : 11:25:13 | From : B :11:49:00 To : A : 13:01:36 | From : B :12:01:00 To : A : 13:08:11 | From : A :13:08:00 To : B : 14:43:49 | From : A :13:20:00 To : B : 14:56:06 | From : B :16:45:00 To : A : 18:09:31 | From : B :16:53:00 To : A : 18:17:14 | From : A :18:50:00 To : B : 20:08:56 | From : A :19:06:00 To : B : 20:20:24 | From : B :20:23:00 To : A : 21:59:55 | From : B :20:45:00 To : A : 22:21:53 | A7 8 240 6481.082 11540 B7 7 210 5734.765 9865 4130.235 5058.918 From : A :07:24:00 To : B : 08:45:02 | From : B :08:55:00 To : A : 10:11:15 | From : B :08:49:00 To : A : 10:04:56 | From : A :10:17:00 To : B : 11:41:30 | From : A :10:07:00 To : B : 11:31:54 | From : B :12:31:00 To : A : 13:31:52 | From : B :12:11:00 To : A : 13:12:57 | From : A :13:38:00 To : B : 15:10:04 | From : A :13:26:00 To : B : 14:59:20 | From : B :17:05:00 To : A : 18:39:08 | From : B :16:57:00 To : A : 18:21:14 | From : A :19:30:00 To : B : 20:42:23 | From : A :19:14:00 To : B : 20:26:17 | From : B :21:18:00 To : A : 22:52:23 | From : B :20:56:00 To : A : 22:32:53 | B8 7 210 5734.581 9755 4020.419 A8 8 240 6480.975 11210 From : B :09:07:00 To : A : 10:19:33 | 4729.025 From : A :07:36:00 To : B : 08:58:06 | From : A :10:27:00 To : B : 11:50:24 | From : B :09:01:00 To : A : 10:12:38 | From : B :12:51:00 To : A : 13:51:55 | From : A :10:22:00 To : B : 11:47:23 | From : A :13:56:00 To : B : 15:27:55 | From : B :12:41:00 To : A : 13:41:57 | From : B :17:17:00 To : A : 18:44:57 | From : A :13:44:00 To : B : 15:13:58 | From : A :19:54:00 To : B : 21:06:23 | From : B :17:09:00 To : A : 18:40:46 | From : B :21:51:00 To : A : 23:25:06 | Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxxxii Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit From : A :19:38:00 To : B : 20:50:23 | From : B :21:29:00 To : A : 23:03:06 | B9 7 210 5734.459 9995 4260.541 From : B :09:19:00 To : A : 10:31:15 | A9 7 210 5734.914 10405 From : A :10:37:00 To : B : 12:01:25 | 4670.086 From : A :08:12:00 To : B : 09:44:18 | From : B :13:11:00 To : A : 14:16:59 | From : B :09:49:00 To : A : 11:01:11 | From : A :14:20:00 To : B : 15:53:15 | From : A :11:07:00 To : B : 12:32:18 | From : B :17:33:00 To : A : 18:58:59 | From : B :14:11:00 To : A : 15:17:52 | From : A :20:50:00 To : B : 22:01:11 | From : A :15:20:00 To : B : 16:47:59 | From : B :22:35:00 To : A : 00:07:33 | From : B :18:13:00 To : A : 19:33:26 | From : A :23:30:00 To : B : 00:38:20 | B10 7 210 5734.497 9880 4145.503 From : B :09:25:00 To : A : 10:37:18 | A10 6 180 4988.466 8420 From : A :10:42:00 To : B : 12:06:27 | 3431.534 From : A :08:22:00 To : B : 09:54:58 | From : B :13:21:00 To : A : 14:26:02 | From : B :10:01:00 To : A : 11:10:05 | From : A :14:32:00 To : B : 16:05:11 | From : A :11:17:00 To : B : 12:41:15 | From : B :17:41:00 To : A : 19:06:59 | From : B :14:31:00 To : A : 15:40:52 | From : A :21:22:00 To : B : 22:30:51 | From : A :15:44:00 To : B : 17:10:33 | From : B :22:57:00 To : A : 00:29:33 | From : B :18:29:00 To : A : 19:49:49 | B11 7 210 5292.713 9585 4292.287 A11 6 180 4988.272 8300 From : B :09:37:00 To : A : 10:49:11 | 3311.728 From : A :08:27:00 To : B : 09:58:52 | From : A :10:52:00 To : B : 12:17:34 | From : B :10:07:00 To : A : 11:12:12 | From : B :13:41:00 To : A : 14:45:18 | From : A :11:22:00 To : B : 12:43:52 | From : A :14:50:00 To : B : 16:20:25 | From : B :14:41:00 To : A : 15:50:50 | From : B :17:53:00 To : A : 19:18:59 | From : A :15:56:00 To : B : 17:21:51 | From : A :22:10:00 To : B : 23:18:09 | From : B :18:37:00 To : A : 19:57:49 | From : B :23:30:00 To : A : 01:02:33 | A12 6 180 4988.305 8640 B12 7 210 5292.725 7485 2192.275 3651.695 From : A :08:37:00 To : B : 10:08:15 | From : B :09:43:00 To : A : 10:55:11 | From : B :10:19:00 To : A : 11:24:27 | From : A :10:57:00 To : B : 12:22:36 | From : A :11:32:00 To : B : 12:54:10 | From : B :13:51:00 To : A : 14:55:16 | From : B :15:01:00 To : A : 16:15:39 | From : A :15:02:00 To : B : 16:30:48 | From : A :16:18:00 To : B : 17:44:19 | From : B :18:01:00 To : A : 19:26:32 | From : B :18:49:00 To : A : 20:09:49 | From : A :22:42:00 To : B : 23:50:20 | From : B :23:52:00 To : A : 01:24:33 | A13 6 180 4988.416 8550 3561.584 From : A :08:42:00 To : B : 10:12:53 | B13 1 30 1256.326 710 -546.326 From : B :10:25:00 To : A : 11:30:36 | From : B :20:01:00 To : A : 21:33:09 | From : A :11:37:00 To : B : 12:59:22 | From : B :15:11:00 To : A : 16:23:31 | From : A :16:26:00 To : B : 17:52:11 | Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxxxiii Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit From : B :18:53:00 To : A : 20:13:49 | A14 6 180 4988.338 8710 3721.662 From : A :08:52:00 To : B : 10:22:07 | From : B :10:37:00 To : A : 11:42:25 | From : A :11:47:00 To : B : 13:08:45 | From : B :15:31:00 To : A : 16:43:40 | From : A :16:50:00 To : B : 18:16:03 | From : B :19:05:00 To : A : 20:39:47 | A15 6 180 4988.236 8645 3656.764 From : A :08:57:00 To : B : 10:25:27 | From : B :10:43:00 To : A : 11:48:25 | From : A :11:52:00 To : B : 13:13:46 | From : B :15:41:00 To : A : 16:53:40 | From : A :16:58:00 To : B : 18:24:03 | From : B :19:09:00 To : A : 20:43:14 | A16 6 180 4988.093 8125 3136.907 From : A :09:02:00 To : B : 10:27:01 | From : B :10:49:00 To : A : 11:54:25 | From : A :11:57:00 To : B : 13:18:20 | From : B :15:51:00 To : A : 17:03:40 | From : A :17:06:00 To : B : 18:29:51 | From : B :19:13:00 To : A : 20:46:31 | A17 6 180 4988.437 8790 3801.563 From : A :09:12:00 To : B : 10:36:11 | From : B :11:01:00 To : A : 12:15:08 | From : A :12:20:00 To : B : 13:51:40 | From : B :16:13:00 To : A : 17:32:31 | From : A :17:46:00 To : B : 19:10:15 | From : B :19:33:00 To : A : 21:06:21 | A18 6 180 4988.257 8545 3556.743 From : A :09:17:00 To : B : 10:41:11 | From : B :11:07:00 To : A : 12:19:38 | From : A :12:26:00 To : B : 13:58:27 | From : B :16:17:00 To : A : 17:38:57 | From : A :17:54:00 To : B : 19:18:15 | From : B :19:37:00 To : A : 21:10:23 | Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxxxiv Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit A19 6 180 4988.151 8050 3061.849 From : A :09:22:00 To : B : 10:43:44 | From : B :11:13:00 To : A : 12:25:33 | From : A :12:32:00 To : B : 14:04:22 | From : B :16:21:00 To : A : 17:44:27 | From : A :18:02:00 To : B : 19:20:58 | From : B :19:41:00 To : A : 21:14:11 | A20 6 180 4988.377 8515 3526.623 From : A :09:27:00 To : B : 10:50:18 | From : B :11:19:00 To : A : 12:32:10 | From : A :12:38:00 To : B : 14:12:31 | From : B :16:25:00 To : A : 17:50:29 | From : A :18:10:00 To : B : 19:29:07 | From : B :19:45:00 To : A : 21:17:49 | A21 6 180 4988.185 8320 3331.815 From : A :09:32:00 To : B : 10:53:08 | From : B :11:25:00 To : A : 12:37:58 | From : A :12:44:00 To : B : 14:18:24 | From : B :16:29:00 To : A : 17:53:46 | From : A :18:18:00 To : B : 19:36:56 | From : B :19:49:00 To : A : 21:21:49 | A22 6 180 4988.385 8760 3771.615 From : A :10:12:00 To : B : 11:36:40 | From : B :12:21:00 To : A : 13:22:28 | From : A :13:32:00 To : B : 15:05:46 | From : B :17:01:00 To : A : 18:36:12 | From : A :19:22:00 To : B : 20:34:23 | From : B :21:07:00 To : A : 22:39:45 | A23 5 150 4241.799 6785 2543.201 From : A :11:02:00 To : B : 12:26:59 | From : B :14:01:00 To : A : 15:03:24 | From : A :15:08:00 To : B : 16:36:24 | From : B :18:05:00 To : A : 19:29:44 | From : A :22:58:00 To : B : 00:06:20 | A24 4 120 3495.503 6005 2509.497 From : A :12:08:00 To : B : 13:38:26 | From : B :16:05:00 To : A : 17:16:18 | Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxxxv Government of India Service Level Optimisation between Public Bus and Para-transit Services along a Transport Corridor Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit From : A :17:30:00 To : B : 18:54:15 | From : B :19:25:00 To : A : 20:58:21 | A25 4 120 3495.657 5960 2464.343 From : A :12:14:00 To : B : 13:43:17 | From : B :16:09:00 To : A : 17:29:11 | From : A :17:38:00 To : B : 19:02:15 | From : B :19:29:00 To : A : 21:02:21 | A26 4 120 3495.452 5310 1814.548 From : A :13:50:00 To : B : 15:22:00 | From : B :17:13:00 To : A : 18:43:28 | From : A :19:46:00 To : B : 20:58:23 | From : B :21:40:00 To : A : 23:14:06 | A27 4 120 3495.421 5080 1584.579 From : A :14:02:00 To : B : 15:33:56 | From : B :17:21:00 To : A : 18:46:24 | From : A :20:02:00 To : B : 21:12:59 | From : B :22:02:00 To : A : 23:33:43 | A28 4 120 3495.397 5670 2174.603 From : A :14:08:00 To : B : 15:39:05 | From : B :17:25:00 To : A : 18:51:01 | From : A :20:18:00 To : B : 21:29:14 | From : B :22:13:00 To : A : 23:45:38 | A29 4 120 3495.331 5530 2034.669 From : A :14:26:00 To : B : 15:59:11 | From : B :17:37:00 To : A : 19:02:59 | From : A :21:06:00 To : B : 22:14:18 | From : B :22:46:00 To : A : 00:18:33 | A30 4 120 3053.557 5660 2606.443 From : A :14:44:00 To : B : 16:14:25 | From : B :17:49:00 To : A : 19:14:59 | From : A :21:54:00 To : B : 23:02:48 | From : B :23:19:00 To : A : 00:51:33 | A31 4 120 3053.561 5645 2591.439 From : A :14:56:00 To : B : 16:23:47 | From : B :17:57:00 To : A : 19:22:59 | Department of Architecture and Regional Planning lxxxvi Government of India Handbook on Feasible Service Delivery Ranges for Bus Transit in Indian Context- Part 2: Operator Perspective Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal A Vehicle Scheduling : Terminal B Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit Veh_ID # Trip Veh-km. OP-Cost Earn Profit From : A :22:26:00 To : B : 23:34:20 | From : B :23:41:00 To : A : 01:13:33 | A32 3 90 2749.068 3765 1015.932 From : A :15:14:00 To : B : 16:42:24 | From : B :18:09:00 To : A : 19:30:49 | From : A :23:14:00 To : B : 00:22:20 | A33 2 60 2002.723 2735 732.2772 From : A :15:26:00 To : B : 16:53:41 | From : B :18:17:00 To : A : 19:37:51 | A34 2 60 2002.731 2740 737.2686 From : A :15:38:00 To : B : 17:05:46 | From : B :18:25:00 To : A : 19:45:49 | A35 2 60 2002.731 2740 737.2686 From : A :15:50:00 To : B : 17:16:29 | From : B :18:33:00 To : A : 19:53:49 | A36 2 60 2002.829 2850 847.1713 From : A :16:10:00 To : B : 17:36:57 | From : B :18:45:00 To : A : 20:05:49 | A37 2 60 2002.815 2855 852.1853 From : A :16:34:00 To : B : 18:00:03 | From : B :18:57:00 To : A : 20:17:49 | A38 2 60 2002.837 2960 957.1627 From : A :17:14:00 To : B : 18:38:30 | From : B :19:17:00 To : A : 20:50:38 | Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs lxxxvii Government of India