DOCSLIB.ORG

Low-Floor Articulated Bus Demonstration

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

PB JOO 497·:-· ~ •· 'T• - - -"'~""' ,., • " " ,,,. -vr-i• . ~ ( ;. ' • -.... .,>"'- • •• • I ~-~ ""- ~"'f. •, ~• • ' ., , .. -' . -'9·•·•·.rj2 V.. jt,.,s,. ' . ., , t ~ • I 1-:..-, ~• ..,..._,t:f ~• ,~~'½ I• • . .,._ •, ,.,._ ,, .· ' ~ :""~ ....... .rl ,~.'t:\.'' -~·. .. tf: /'; •'. .l <· ~•-r;-/t\ J < : ·.-/"'\.·\4 .. ,, '... •.. ! . • ' f ~ • / • ' ,-! • ~ •• • '.c.t I • • • • • 1• < •'' v.:~~j " ... r; ~;, '.•, __ -J I• • ·• . 1 ,P I ,. LOW-FLOOR ARTI-CULATED­ I BUS DEMONSTRATION I BOOZ• ALLEN & HAMILTON Inc. I TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING DlVISION 4330 EAST WEST HIGHWAY 1· BETHESDA, MARYLAND 20014 1.· I I I SEPTEMBER 1979 FINAL REPORT Document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service Springfield, Virginia 22161 Prepared for U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION •· WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 .) . ~ 'I' REPORT NO. BP 79-001 LOW-FLOOR ARTICULATED BUS DEMONSTRATION 8002· ALLEN & HAMIL TON Inc. TRANSPORTATION CONSUL TING DIVISION 4330 EAST WEST HIGHWAY BETHESDA, MARYLAND 20014 SEPTEMBER 1979 FINAL REPORT Document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service Springfield, Virginia 22161 METRO RAIL TR:\NSIT CONSULT ANTS Technical Library Los Angc!es, CA Prepared for U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 T::CHN iCAL ~EPC~7 STAl!O.\RD T,TU: ;:::.GE j i. ~eport No. 2. Go.,ernmeM ..\ccaa"1on No. RJtcipoenr ' s Co10lo<;1 l'io . i l ~- i 4. Tjrle and S1;btitle 5. Rar,ort Oore Low-Floor Articulated Bus Demonstration September 1979 6. P ulorming Orgoni zotion Cod• 7. Aurnor( s) a. p •riorming Orgoni 2otion R.ec,orl Ne. Transportation Consulting Division BP 79-001 9. Performing Organ, zotion Nome ond Addreu 10 . Worlc Unit No. i Booz, Allen & Hamilton Inc. i 4330 East West Highway 11 . Contract or Gront No. Bethesda, Maryland 20014 UMTA-9073-077 t-::-:--7'----:------:--:--:-----------------~ 13. Type of Re:,ort ond Period Covered ! 12. Sponaoring Agency Nome ond Address Urban Mass Transportation Administration De partment of Transportation Final Report Washington, D.C. 20590 14. Sponsoring Agency Cocie 15. Supplementary Note, 16. Ab•troct This report is documentation of a program to demonstrate the stability and anti-jackknifing capabilities of a low-floor articu­ lated bus to the transit industry. To this end a low-floor, high­ capacity, articulated bus prototype, · developed by Hamburg-Consult of the Federal Republic of (West) Germany, was demonstrated and evaluated at five sites in the U.S. The low-floor concept, seen in the prototype, is an improvement over current articulated vehi­ cle designs. The low floor allows faster and easier boarding, thus increasing productivity, and offering an advantage to elderly and handicapped persons. Data on performance, and reactions of drivers, maintenance and management personnel and on public reactions (news media) were collected. The performance and the industry's favor­ able reaction to the technology at all five sites is evidence of the prototype's demonstrated stability and anti-jackknifing capa­ bilities. 17. Key Worda 18. Oiattibution Stot•"'ent articulated bus, bus technology , This document is available to the high-capacity bus, low-floor bus, public through the National Techni- I Transbus cal Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 19. Security Clouil. (of thia report) 20. Security Ciauil. (of thia page) 21. No. of P oqn 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 45 rorm DOT F 1700.7 ca-u1 METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS Approximate Conversions to Metric Measures N "' "' Approximate Conversions from Metric M11suru N N Symbol When You Know Multi,ly by To Fid Sy•~•I Sy•hl Whu You Know Multiply by To Find Symbol ;:; LENGTH 0 N LENGTH n-.n millimeters 0.04 inches ,n ~ cm centimeters 0.4 inches in m meters 3.3 feet ft inches ·2.5 centimeters cm m meters 1.1 yards yd ft feel 30 centimeters cm :!: km kilometers 0.6 miles mi yd yards 0.9 mete,s m m, miles 1.6 kilometers km !:; AREA AREA :!: 2 cm inches in2 2 square centimeters 0.16 square in square inches 6.~ square centimeters "' m2 cm' ~ square meters 1.2 square yards yd2 ft2 square feet 0,09 square meters m' km2 square kilometers 0 .4 square miles mi2 yd2 ml 2 square yards 0.8 square meters ha hectares (10,000 m ) 2.5 acres mi 2 square miles 2.6 square kilometers km2 ! acres 0.4 hectares ha !:! MASS (weight) MASS (wei1h_tl ::! g grams 0.035 ounces o, o, ounces 28 grams g kg kilograms 2.2 pounds lb lb pounds 0.45 kilograms kg tonnes I 1000 kgl 1.1 short tons short tons 0.9 tonnes (2000 lb) ... ~ VOLUME VOLUME tsp teaspoons 5 milliliters ml ml milliliters 0.03 fluid ounces fl oz Tbsp tablespoons 15 milliliter~ ml I liters 2.1 pints pt H oz fluid ounces JO milliliters ml "' liters 1.06 quarts qi C cups 0.24 liters I liters 0.26 gallons gal pt pints 0.47 liters mJ cubic meters 35 cubic feet 113 qt quarts 0.95 lilers mJ cubic meters 1.3 cubic yards ydJ gal gallons 3.8 liters I ftJ cubic feel 0.03 cubic meters mJ ydJ cubic yards 0.76 cubic meters mJ .., TEMPERATURE (exact) TEMPERATURE (exact) "c Celsius 9/ 5 !then Fahrenheit "• 1emperature add 32) temperature " f Fahrenheit 5/ 9 (after Celsius "c temperature subtracting temperature •• 32) ~F 32 98.6 212 4 0 8 1 0 1 0 2 1 , 1 •I , I , , ~ , , ~ , , ~ , 1 1 ~ -•f ~ ~ ~ " I ,n : '1.~4 , .. .,,l l"llyl. f ,,r u ll1er ei..c1i. l ~-"nv,•1:,," >1i :-. .ind 1nu1,· d, ·t,1,l,·d t,1li!P::. :-. <:t: Nl!S r.lic.L. PutJ I. 281l, 5 I I I I I I I 1 , I I I Un,b u l We,yni:,, ,Hlo.l r. ,.:.i:..uro:>:,,, P1,ci- $;?.2S, SD C <tt.i l<l\ J Nu. C13. 1ll ~86. g. -40 - 20 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 c 37 °C ~ ~ T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S Page Number SUMMARY V LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vi I. INTRODUCTION I-1 1. Background I-1 2. Objective of Study I-2 3. Scope of the Program I-2 4. Participants and Their Roles I-3 II. DESCRIPTION OF HAI1BURG-CONSULT ARTICULATED BUS II-1 III. DEMONSTRATION SCHEDULE III-1 1. U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Display III-1 2. Southeastern Michigan Transportation Authority (SEMTA) III-1 3 • Transportation Research Center (TRC ) III-3 4. Port Authority (of Allegheny County ) Transit (PATransit) III-3 5. Mass Transit Administration of Mary land (MTA) III-3 IV. SUBJECTIVE RESPONSES I V-1 1. Interviews I V-1 2. Public Awareness IV-3 3. Rider Observations I V-3 V. TESTS V-1 1. Test Approach V-1 2. Test Results V-2 VI. CONCLUSIONS VI-1 APPENDI X A-Interview Responses I ii "'· I N D E X 0 F F I G U R E S Page Number II-1 The Hamburg-Consult Articulated Demonstra­ tion Bus II-2 II-2 Major External Dimensions-RC Articulated Transbus II-4 II-3 Passengers Boarding II-5 III-1 Hamburg-Consult Articulated Bus Demonstra­ tion Sites-1978 III-4 IV-1 HC Articulated Bus Demonstration Run IV-2 V-1 Turning Radii of Hamburg-Consult Bus and UMTA Transbus Requirements V-4 V-2 Acceleration Curve V-5 V-3 Gradability Curve V-6 V-4 Maneuverability Test Low-Speed Slalom Course V-8 V-5 High Speed Handling Test V-8 iii I N D E X O F T A B L E S Page Number I-1 Participating Agencies and Their Roles in I-4 the HC Articulated Bus Demonstration Program III-1 Hamburg-Consult Bus Schedule III-2 V-1 Test Schedule for Hamburg-Consult Articulated Bus V-1 V-2 Weights of Vehicle for Various Conditions and Configurations V-2 V-3 Exterior Noise Test Measurement Series (Each Series Bi-directional) V-9 V-4 Comparison of HC Articulated Bus Prototype to In-Service American Transit Buses and Proposed EPA Regulations (dBA re 20µPa) V-10 iv SUMMARY This report is documentation of a program to demonstrate the stability and anti-jackknifing capabilities of a low-floor articulated bus. For the demonstration program a prototype coach built by the firm of Hamburg-Consult of the Federal Republic of (West) Germany was used. The Hamburg-Consult (HC) low-floor articulated bus was displayed and demonstrated at U.S. Department of Transportation headquarters, the South­ eastern Michigan Transportation Authority (SEMTA), the Port Authority of Allegheny County (PATransit), and the Mass Transit Administration of Maryland (MTA). Additionally, testing and evaluation was conducted at the Transportation Research Center of Ohio (TRC). Representatives from U.S. and Canadian governments, transit authorities, vehicle and component manufacturers, the news media, and the general public observed and rode in the bus during the demonstration period. Data of performance, and reactions of drivers, maintenance and management personnel, and on public reactions (news media) were collected. The prototype's performance and control and the favorable reaction to the technology at all five sites is evidence of the stability and anti-jackknifing capability of a low-floor articulated bus. V LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS APTA American Public Transit Association DIN Deutsche Ingenieur Nomber [technical rating system used in the Federal Republic of (West) Germany] DOT U.S. Department of Transportation GVW Gross Vehicle Weight HC Hamburg-Consult MTA Mass Transit Administration (of Maryland) PATransit Port Authority (of Allegheny County) Transit SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SEMTA Southeastern Michigan Transportation Authority Seated Load Weight (curb weight plus one hundred-fifty pounds for every designated passenger seating position and for the driver) TRC Transportation Research Center (of Ohio) UMTA Urban Mass Transportation Administration vov Verband Offentlicher Verkehrsbtriebe (Federal Republic of (West) Germany equivalent of APTAl Vl I.
Recommended publications
  • Minibus Or Coach Module 4 Driver CPC Questions and Answers

    Minibus Or Coach Module 4 Driver CPC Questions and Answers

    Minibus or coach Module 4 Driver CPC questions and answers The Initial Driver CPC qualification was introduced into the bus and coach industry on September 10th 2008. Exactly one year before Driver CPC came into force for the commercial goods (HGV) industry (September 10th 2009). Part of acquiring the PCV Initial Driver CPC qualification means having to pass the module 4 examination. Module 4 is the practical associated knowledge test that is carried out at a DSA approved test centre. There is no driving required (suffice for the rolling brake check.) Students will need a DSA approved vehicle to demonstrate their answers. This test is all about scenarios a professional PCV driver may encounter in his or her working life. It includes PCV drivers legal obligations (vehicles checks, not overloading, pre-use checking), as well as checking for illegal immigrants, dealing with emergency situations etc. The Module 4 exam will last approximately 20-30 minutes and the DSA examiner will ask approximately 5-6 questions. To be successful you must attain at least 75% for each question and at least 80% overall. This post looks at the possible questions you may be given for your minibus or coach Driver CPC module 4 examination. If you need HGV Module 4 questions and answers we recommend your visit our Module 4 HGV Driver CPC page. Module 4 requires competence of skills and knowledge in the following areas. Carrying passengers with due regard for safety rules and proper vehicle use. Ensuring passenger, comfort, safety and security. Preventing criminality and trafficking of illegal immigrants Assessing emergency situations Preventing physical risk The following should be used as a guide only.
  • CATA Assessment of Articulated Bus Utilization

    CATA Assessment of Articulated Bus Utilization

    (Page left intentionally blank) Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................................... E-1 Literature Review ................................................................................................................................................................................................................E-1 Operating Environment Review ........................................................................................................................................................................................E-1 Peer Community and Best Practices Review...................................................................................................................................................................E-2 Review of Policies and Procedures and Service Recommendations ...........................................................................................................................E-2 1 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Best Practices in Operations ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Integration into the Existing Fleet ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................
  • Buses – Global Market Trends

    Buses – Global Market Trends

    2017 BUSES – GLOBAL MARKET TRENDS Markets – Competition – Companies – Key Figures Extract from the study BUSES – GLOBAL MARKET TRENDS Markets – Competition – Companies – Key figures In all regions across the globe, buses remain the most widespread public transport mode. Their demand goes hand in hand with several, mostly region-specific factors, including demographics, increasing mobility of people and environmental awareness, as well as public funding. Buses are comparatively to other transportation modes cheap and easy to use, since their use does not necessarily require the implementation of a specific infrastructure. This makes buses ideal vehicles for both short- and long-distance services. Based on the current developments, this Multi Client Study offers a comprehensive insight into the structure, volumes and development trends of the worldwide bus market. In concrete terms, the market study “BUSES – GLOBAL MARKET TRENDS” includes: A look at the worldwide market for buses differentiated by region An analysis of the relevant market data including present and future market volumes Information concerning the installed fleet and future procurement potential until 2022 An assessment of current developments and growth drivers of the worldwide bus markets in the individual regions An overview of bus manufacturers including an analysis of the market shares, financial backups as well as a brief description of the current product portfolio and strategy outlook A list of the major production facilities in each of the regions including product range as well as production capacities Presentation of the development stage of alternative propulsions, their manufacturers and their occurrence worldwide The study is available in English from the August 2017 at the price of EUR 3,400 plus VAT.
  • The Influence of Passenger Load, Driving Cycle, Fuel Price and Different

    The Influence of Passenger Load, Driving Cycle, Fuel Price and Different

    Transportation https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9925-0 The infuence of passenger load, driving cycle, fuel price and diferent types of buses on the cost of transport service in the BRT system in Curitiba, Brazil Dennis Dreier1 · Semida Silveira1 · Dilip Khatiwada1 · Keiko V. O. Fonseca2 · Rafael Nieweglowski3 · Renan Schepanski3 © The Author(s) 2018 Abstract This study analyses the infuence of passenger load, driving cycle, fuel price and four diferent types of buses on the cost of transport service for one bus rapid transit (BRT) route in Curitiba, Brazil. First, the energy use is estimated for diferent passenger loads and driving cycles for a conventional bi-articulated bus (ConvBi), a hybrid-electric two- axle bus (HybTw), a hybrid-electric articulated bus (HybAr) and a plug-in hybrid-electric two-axle bus (PlugTw). Then, the fuel cost and uncertainty are estimated considering the fuel price trends in the past. Based on this and additional cost data, replacement scenarios for the currently operated ConvBi feet are determined using a techno-economic optimisa- tion model. The lowest fuel cost ranges for the passenger load are estimated for PlugTw amounting to (0.198–0.289) USD/km, followed by (0.255–0.315) USD/km for HybTw, (0.298–0.375) USD/km for HybAr and (0.552–0.809) USD/km for ConvBi. In contrast, C the coefcient of variation ( v ) of the combined standard uncertainty is the highest for C PlugTw ( v : 15–17%) due to stronger sensitivity to varying bus driver behaviour, whereas C it is the least for ConvBi ( v : 8%).
  • Bi-Articulated Bi-Articulated

    Bi-Articulated Bi-Articulated

    Bi-articulated Bus AGG 300 Handbuch_121x175_Doppel-Gelenkbus_en.indd 1 22.11.16 12:14 OMSI 2 Bi-articulated bus AGG 300 Developed by: Darius Bode Manual: Darius Bode, Aerosoft OMSI 2 Bi-articulated bus AGG 300 Manual Copyright: © 2016 / Aerosoft GmbH Airport Paderborn/Lippstadt D-33142 Bueren, Germany Tel: +49 (0) 29 55 / 76 03-10 Fax: +49 (0) 29 55 / 76 03-33 E-Mail: [email protected] Internet: www.aerosoft.de Add-on for www.aerosoft.com All trademarks and brand names are trademarks or registered of their respective owners. All rights reserved. OMSI 2 - The Omnibus simulator 2 3 Aerosoft GmbH 2016 OMSI 2 Bi-articulated bus AGG 300 Inhalt Introduction ...............................................................6 Bi-articulated AGG 300 and city bus A 330 ................. 6 Vehicle operation ......................................................8 Dashboard .................................................................. 8 Window console ....................................................... 10 Control lights ............................................................ 11 Main information display ........................................... 12 Ticket printer ............................................................. 13 Door controls ............................................................ 16 Stop display .............................................................. 16 Level control .............................................................. 16 Lights, energy-save and schoolbus function ............... 17 Air conditioning
  • Totaltrack Holds the Line for Action Distribution Warehouse

    Totaltrack Holds the Line for Action Distribution Warehouse

    Top Transport Vehicle Manufacturer Uses Intelligent Video to Prevent Intrusion and Scrap Metal Theft ioimage intelligent-video system installed to upgrade existing indoor and outdoor security at the Merkavim Merkavim Metal Works Ltd. Description: Transport & Bus Manufacturer founded in 1946 Cesarea Plant Employees: Approx. 300 Produces: Entire range of mini-buses, low-floor and articulated The theft and removal of items low-floor city buses, inter-city buses, tourist coaches, armored from outdoor sites that store and prisoner buses and other specialized passenger transport materials and equipment for solutions. Central Distribution Center: Production facility, covering over manufacturing and building 100,000 sqm, is located in Central Israel construction is becoming more widespread. Most often the damage far exceeded The assembly plant is located in the street or scrap value of the items an area that is surrounded by Worldwide equipment and scrap stolen farmland and open field areas. metal theft is costing billions of dollars and there are few ways Merkavim found that thieves were Thieves can easily scale to prevent these crimes or catch taking parts from busses and doing landscape walls and commercial these criminals. considerable damage in the process. wrought iron fences that protect Most often the damage far exceeded the the site. Just beyond the semi- The common reasons for the street or scrap value of the items stolen. decorative fences are access outbreak is an inability to watch On several occasions component steel roads, main streets and rail lines over expansive areas, absence used for manufacturing was stolen by that provide thieves access to the of security, or patchy traditional scrap metal thieves from the outdoor property as well as offer a means security that is too labor storage areas.
  • Mass Limits for Three-Axle Buses Discussion Paper June 2018

    Mass Limits for Three-Axle Buses Discussion Paper June 2018

    Mass limits for three-axle buses Discussion paper June 2018 Mass limits for three-axle buses: Discussion paper June 2018 1 Report outline Title Mass limits for three-axle buses Type of report Discussion paper Purpose For public consultation Abstract This paper investigates whether there is a need to increase the mass limits that apply to three-axle buses to accommodate the current number of passengers that such buses may carry. It also assesses the implications of a potential increase in three-axle bus mass limits. The paper addresses project options, industry impact, risks and benefits. It is based on research and stakeholder engagement with states and territories, industry. Submission Any individual or organisation can make a submission to the NTC. details Submissions will be accepted until 24 July 2018 online at www.ntc.gov.au, via Twitter or LinkedIn or by mail to: Chief Executive Officer National Transport Commission Level 3/600 Bourke Street Melbourne VIC 30000 Where possible, please provide evidence, such as data and documents, to support your position. We publish all submissions online, unless you request us not to. The Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cwlth) applies to the NTC. Key words Three-axle, bus, mass, loading, capacity, coach, tourist bus, tourism, passengers, baggage allowance, double decker, articulated bus Contact National Transport Commission Level 3/600 Bourke Street Melbourne VIC 3000 (03) 9236 5000 [email protected] www.ntc.gov.au Mass limits for three-axle buses: Discussion paper June 2018 2 Contents Report
  • Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (Part B)

    Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (Part B)

    7UDQVLW&DSDFLW\DQG4XDOLW\RI6HUYLFH0DQXDO PART 2 BUS TRANSIT CAPACITY CONTENTS 1. BUS CAPACITY BASICS ....................................................................................... 2-1 Overview..................................................................................................................... 2-1 Definitions............................................................................................................... 2-1 Types of Bus Facilities and Service ............................................................................ 2-3 Factors Influencing Bus Capacity ............................................................................... 2-5 Vehicle Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-5 Person Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-13 Fundamental Capacity Calculations .......................................................................... 2-15 Vehicle Capacity................................................................................................... 2-15 Person Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-22 Planning Applications ............................................................................................... 2-23 2. OPERATING ISSUES............................................................................................ 2-25 Introduction..............................................................................................................
  • Global Competitiveness in the Rail and Transit Industry

    Global Competitiveness in the Rail and Transit Industry

    Global Competitiveness in the Rail and Transit Industry Michael Renner and Gary Gardner Global Competitiveness in the Rail and Transit Industry Michael Renner and Gary Gardner September 2010 2 GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS IN THE RAIL AND TRANSIT INDUSTRY © 2010 Worldwatch Institute, Washington, D.C. Printed on paper that is 50 percent recycled, 30 percent post-consumer waste, process chlorine free. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Worldwatch Institute; of its directors, officers, or staff; or of its funding organizations. Editor: Lisa Mastny Designer: Lyle Rosbotham Table of Contents 3 Table of Contents Summary . 7 U.S. Rail and Transit in Context . 9 The Global Rail Market . 11 Selected National Experiences: Europe and East Asia . 16 Implications for the United States . 27 Endnotes . 30 Figures and Tables Figure 1. National Investment in Rail Infrastructure, Selected Countries, 2008 . 11 Figure 2. Leading Global Rail Equipment Manufacturers, Share of World Market, 2001 . 15 Figure 3. Leading Global Rail Equipment Manufacturers, by Sales, 2009 . 15 Table 1. Global Passenger and Freight Rail Market, by Region and Major Industry Segment, 2005–2007 Average . 12 Table 2. Annual Rolling Stock Markets by Region, Current and Projections to 2016 . 13 Table 3. Profiles of Major Rail Vehicle Manufacturers . 14 Table 4. Employment at Leading Rail Vehicle Manufacturing Companies . 15 Table 5. Estimate of Needed European Urban Rail Investments over a 20-Year Period . 17 Table 6. German Rail Manufacturing Industry Sales, 2006–2009 . 18 Table 7. Germany’s Annual Investments in Urban Mass Transit, 2009 . 19 Table 8.
  • New Requirements to the Emergency Exits of Buses

    New Requirements to the Emergency Exits of Buses

    NEW REQUIREMENTS TO THE EMERGENCY EXITS OF BUSES Dr. MATOLCSY, Mátyás Scientific Society of Mechanical Engineers Hungary Paper Number: 09-0181 ABSTACT general safety requirements of buses. The EE’s requirements are grouped as follows: Based on certain assumptions, the requirements of a) required number of EE-s emergency exits on buses and coaches are specified b) their location and distribution in ECE Regulation No.107. Different accident c) the required minimum dimensions situations, real accidents proved that some of the d) required access to EE-s original assumptions are not valid, so it is necessary e) technical requirements of their operation. to reformulate them. Accident statistics – contain- ing some hundreds bus accidents – and in depth These requirements are in force since 30 years and accident analysis were studied, concentrating on the during this period only a few, small corrections evacuation of buses and the rescue possibilities of were made to improve them for better understand- the bus occupants. Certain results and conclusions ing. But during this period a lot of experiences were of evacuation tests are also considered which show collected about the usability of different EE-s and the capabilities and limitations of different groups some very serious accidents – fire in the bus, many of passengers (men-women, young or elderly peo- injured passengers on board, panic among the pas- ple, etc.) when evacuating the bus through different sengers, etc. when the passengers could not evacu- kind of emergency exits. The new assumptions to ate the bus – called the attention to the problems of specify the required number and location of emer- the existing regulation.
  • Buy America on Transportation Infrastructure and U.S

    Buy America on Transportation Infrastructure and U.S

    Effects of Buy America on Transportation Infrastructure and U.S. Manufacturing Updated July 2, 2019 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R44266 SUMMARY R44266 Effects of Buy America on July 2, 2019 Transportation Infrastructure and Michaela D. Platzer U.S. Manufacturing Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business In 1978, Congress began placing domestic content restrictions on federally funded transportation projects that are carried out by nonfederal government agencies such as state and local William J. Mallett governments. These restrictions, which have changed over the years, are commonly referred to as Specialist in the Buy America Act, or more simply, Buy America. Although there has been ongoing Transportation Policy congressional interest in domestic preference policy over the years, statements and actions by the Trump Administration about reinvigorating domestic manufacturing and investing in infrastructure have stimulated renewed interest in Buy America. Buy America refers to several similar statutes and regulations that apply when federal funds are used to support projects involving highways, public transportation, aviation, and intercity passenger rail, including Amtrak. Unless a nationwide or project-specific waiver is granted, Buy America requires the use of U.S.-made iron and steel and the domestic production and assembly of other manufactured goods, particularly the production of rolling stock (railcars and buses) used in federally funded public transportation and Amtrak’s intercity passenger rail service. A separate law requires that at least half the value of products imported by sea for federally supported transportation projects be transported in U.S.-flag ships. This report examines the effects of Buy America on iron and steel manufacturing, rolling stock manufacturing, and transportation.
  • Vehicle Technologies Memo

    Vehicle Technologies Memo

    Technical Memorandum #2 Review of Vehicle Technology This document briefly summarizes the vehicle technologies that are being used today on commuter rail, express bus, and bus rapid transit (BRT) services in North America. This information will assist in the evaluation of alternatives as part of the Red Rock Corridor Alternatives Analysis Update. October 1, 2013 October 2, 2013 Red Rock Corridor Alternatives Analysis Update Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Express Bus Systems ............................................................................................................................. 4 a. Examples ........................................................................................................................................... 4 b. Features ............................................................................................................................................ 5 c. Capacity ............................................................................................................................................. 5 d. Capital Costs ...................................................................................................................................... 5 e. Operating Costs ................................................................................................................................. 6 f. Future Directions .............................................................................................................................