DOCSLIB.ORG

Metro Rail Design Criteria Section 10 Operations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

METRO RAIL DESIGN CRITERIA SECTION 10 OPERATIONS METRO RAIL DESIGN CRITERIA SECTION 10 / OPERATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS 10.1 INTRODUCTION 1 10.2 DEFINITIONS 1 10.3 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN 5 Metro Baseline 10- i Re-baseline: 06/15/10 METRO RAIL DESIGN CRITERIA SECTION 10 / OPERATIONS OPERATIONS 10.1 INTRODUCTION Transit Operations include such activities as scheduling, crew rostering, running and supervision of revenue trains and vehicles, fare collection, system security and system maintenance. This section describes the basic system wide operating and maintenance philosophies and methodologies set forth for the Metro Rail Projects, which shall be used by designer in preparation of an Operations and Maintenance Plan. An initial Operations and Maintenance Plan (OMP) is developed during the environmental phase and is based on ridership forecasts produced during this early planning phase of a project. From this initial Operations and Maintenance plan, headways are established that are to be evaluated by a rail operations simulation upon which design and operating headways can be established to confirm operational goals for light and heavy rail systems. The Operations and Maintenance Plan shall be developed in order to design effective, efficient and responsive transit system. The operations criteria and requirements established herein represent Metro’s Rail Operating Requirements / Criteria applicable to all rail projects and form the basis for the project-specific operational design decisions. They shall be utilized by designer during preparation of Operations and Maintenance Plan. Any proposed deviation to Design Criteria cited herein shall be approved by Metro, as represented by the Change Control Board, consisting of management responsible for project construction, engineering and management, as well as daily rail operations, planning, systems and vehicle maintenance with appropriate technical expertise and understanding. 10.2 DEFINITIONS Active fleet Portion of the total fleet which is available for revenue service, including peak vehicle requirements, ready reserve and maintenance spares. Alignment Classification Metro uses definitions adopted by the California Public Utilities Commission concerning classification of a rail alignment. Pertinent classifications include “exclusive”, “semi- exclusive” and “non-exclusive.” Auxiliary tracks Tracks other than Main Line tracks. Base Headway This refers to the off-peak standard time interval between trains. Often, the base headway is considered to occur during weekdays at mid-day times. Civil design speed (civil The design speed, which derives from the guideway speed limit) geometry. Consist The makeup or composition of cars of a train. Metro Baseline 10-1 Re-baseline: 06/15/10 METRO RAIL DESIGN CRITERIA SECTION 10 / OPERATIONS Crossing (track) A special trackwork unit, assembled from rails and frogs that allows crossing of two tracks at the same level (at grade). Crossover Track with two turnouts, which provide connection between two other tracks. Incident in which one or more wheels of a transit vehicle Derailment unintentionally leaves the rails. Design Headway The “Design Headway” is the closest interval of time between trains that could be operated. Dwell time The period of time measured from the instant a train stops at a station/terminal until the instant it resumes moving. Gap train/Ready Reserve A reserve train stationed at a designated non-revenue track or Train maintenance facility ready to enter into revenue service to provide consistent delivery of service. Metro uses these trains to fill-in service when a train is delayed, incurs a mechanical problem and to accommodate special events: sporting events, community services, dignitaries’. Gauntlet track A Structure consisting of two tracks built with overlapping Running Rails; a rail of one track falling between the rails of another track. Grade crossing In Metro rail system it is a place, where a street (any roadway with vehicular traffic) or a pedestrian walkway is crossing Metro track (tracks), which are on a street level (at-grade). Guardrail A special trackwork unit – an additional rail, installed inside the gage to guide the flange of the wheel in sharp horizontal curves (restraining rail) or additional protection in case of derailment on structures (emergency guardrail). Headway The time interval between the successive trains, moving in the same direction on the same track. Common terms applied to headway include “Base headway”, “Design Headway”, “Operational Headway”, “Peak Hour Headway” and “Off-Peak Headway.” Hold track An auxiliary track in a Yard or a passenger station to temporarily hold the car or train awaiting disposition order. Main Line tracks Tracks, used for regular scheduled train operations under the Central Control Maintenance of Way access The places along the guideway/alignment, where Metro points Maintenance of Way personnel may enter the Right-of-Way from public street or another roadway. Maximum Consist Length This refers to the maximum number of cars of a consist. For light-rail transit, this will be 3-car trains of approximately 270 feet in length. For heavy-rail transit, this will be 3 married pair- car trains of approximately 450 feet in length. MIS Major Investment Study Metro Baseline 10-2 Re-baseline: 06/15/10 METRO RAIL DESIGN CRITERIA SECTION 10 / OPERATIONS Off-Peak Headway The Off-Peak Headway refers to the scheduled time interval between trains operating at times other than the “Peak Hour.” These typically are established based on ridership levels, and not to exceed a minimum service level determined by Metro policy. Operating Headway “Operating Headway”, for light-rail transit, refers to the reliable train movement based on the schedule as established by the Operations and Maintenance plan Operating Margin Refers to a measure of time between “Design Headway” and “Operating Headway.” The “Operating Margin” is the interval of time available for scheduled service to respond to variations in time for operating a train over a line and reflects the level of flexibility a train line has to maintain a schedule or return to a published schedule. Overhead /Contact System Overhead Contact System is an overhead contact wire and its (OCS) support system providing traction power to rail vehicles through suspended contact wire. Scheduled Operating speed An authorized operating speed based on schedule headways and train control speed codes. Scheduled operating speeds can not exceed the civil design speeds. Operators Transition Point A location within the Main Line, where a train operator can be relieved en route; includes a short platform and may be located or close to a Yard. Operators Dispatching A location within the Operations and Maintenance Facility, Office where operators report for work. The dispatch office is located in close proximity to employee welfare facilities. Peak Hour Headway The headway required to provide a system capacity sufficient to carry projected peak hour peak direction ridership at the peak of the load point of a line or branch for a given design year. The design of the systems shall meet the short term headway needs for the opening day of revenue and also the long term requirements which will take into account potential expansion of the system and growth in ridership. Pocket track An auxiliary track, located between Main Line tracks and connected to both Main Line tracks at both ends (run-through pocket track) or at one end only (stub-end pocket track) with a length, sufficient for a maximum length consist; may be used for trains to pass, meet, as a crossover (run-through only) and also to hold a train. Pre-Revenue service The minimum 12 week period prior to beginning of revenue service on a new line or line extension, in which the project is tested for compatibility, stress, and which trains are operated on a simulated revenue service schedule; however, passengers are not permitted aboard trains. Metro Baseline 10-3 Re-baseline: 06/15/10 METRO RAIL DESIGN CRITERIA SECTION 10 / OPERATIONS Push button operations Method to operate turnouts and signals using the stand-alone electrical switch (button) located at the turnout; train operator may change the position of the turnout switch by pushing the button through the open cab window prior to proceeding through the turnout. Quad gates An arrangement of crossing gates, which prevents road vehicles from moving around the closed gate, by installation of gates on outbound traffic lanes as well, as on inbound lanes, both sides of the tracks; simple grade crossing of the roadway without center divider requires four gates. Remote control and Method to operate turnouts and signals from remote location, operations such as central control facility; in Metro Rail System it is ROC for Main Line or Yard Control in a Yard. ROC Rail Operations Center-location from which mainline operations are authorized, controlled and directed Run-around track A Yard track, which connects all the rail facilities in a Yard to each other and to Yard Leads; no storage, hold or maintenance of rail vehicles are allowed on a run-around track. Run-through track A track, where rail vehicle or a train may enter at one end and exit through another track. Scheduled Operating speed An authorized operating speed based on schedule headways and train control speed codes. Scheduled operating speeds can not exceed the civil design speeds. Siding track An auxiliary run-through track, located alongside the main tracks and connected to the adjacent main line tracks at both ends; may be used for train to pass and meet (cannot be done without siding on a single track line) or to hold a train Single track operations Operations within defined limits governing bi-directional train movement over a single track on the mainline. Speed codes Maximum speed limits for particular segments of the line, established by automatic train control system. Special trackwork Trackwork, which consists of more than two rails and ties. Stand alone push button A device to house an electrical switch (button) for push button unit operations.
Recommended publications
  • 2.2 Pointwork Configurations in the Following Paragraphs Some of the More Maintenance Is Straightforward

    2.2 Pointwork Configurations in the Following Paragraphs Some of the More Maintenance Is Straightforward

    Part 2 Section 2 POINTWORK Issued February 2001 2.2 Pointwork configurations In the following paragraphs some of the more maintenance is straightforward. However, in a common pointwork configurations are shown restricted space it may be necessary to together with the accepted terminology used to superimpose one turnout upon another, which describe them. When planning track layouts the introduces additional crossings and timbering and preference is to use a combination of single may, in bullhead track, involve the use of special turnouts as these require the minimum of special chairs. chairs and timbers to construct them and 2.2.1 Single turnouts These follow the pattern described in 2.1 and are illustrated in Figure 2-9. RH Turnout LH Turnout RH Crossover LH Crossover Split or Equilateral Turnout Figure 2-9 Single turnouts 2.2.2 Tandem or double turnout This uses one set of switches immediately after form part of a continuous curve but this would another and before the crossing, which introduces require movements to be carried out at low speed. a third crossing and crowded timbering. Where (Figure 2-10 and Photo 2.2) space is particularly crowded the crossing may Figure 2-10 Tandem turnout 2-2-9 2.2.3 Three-throw turnout Photo 2.2 A double tandem turnout leading off from a double There is a nomenclature problem here slip at Stowmarket Goods Yard. as the 3-throw yields the same outcome (NRM Windwood Collection GE1005) as the double turnout. It uses a left hand and a right hand set of switches that are superimposed to divide three ways together in symmetrical form.
  • Northeast Corridor Chase, Maryland January 4, 1987

    Northeast Corridor Chase, Maryland January 4, 1987

    PB88-916301 NATIONAL TRANSPORT SAFETY BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 20594 RAILROAD ACCIDENT REPORT REAR-END COLLISION OF AMTRAK PASSENGER TRAIN 94, THE COLONIAL AND CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION FREIGHT TRAIN ENS-121, ON THE NORTHEAST CORRIDOR CHASE, MARYLAND JANUARY 4, 1987 NTSB/RAR-88/01 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1. Report No. 2.Government Accession No. 3.Recipient's Catalog No. NTSB/RAR-88/01 . PB88-916301 Title and Subtitle Railroad Accident Report^ 5-Report Date Rear-end Collision of'*Amtrak Passenger Train 949 the January 25, 1988 Colonial and Consolidated Rail Corporation Freight -Performing Organization Train ENS-121, on the Northeast Corridor, Code Chase, Maryland, January 4, 1987 -Performing Organization 7. "Author(s) ~~ Report No. Performing Organization Name and Address 10.Work Unit No. National Transportation Safety Board Bureau of Accident Investigation .Contract or Grant No. Washington, D.C. 20594 k3-Type of Report and Period Covered 12.Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Iroad Accident Report lanuary 4, 1987 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD Washington, D. C. 20594 1*+.Sponsoring Agency Code 15-Supplementary Notes 16 Abstract About 1:16 p.m., eastern standard time, on January 4, 1987, northbound Conrail train ENS -121 departed Bay View yard at Baltimore, Mary1 and, on track 1. The train consisted of three diesel-electric freight locomotive units, all under power and manned by an engineer and a brakeman. Almost simultaneously, northbound Amtrak train 94 departed Pennsylvania Station in Baltimore. Train 94 consisted of two electric locomotive units, nine coaches, and three food service cars. In addition to an engineer, conductor, and three assistant conductors, there were seven Amtrak service employees and about 660 passengers on the train.
  • Headway and Speed Data Acquisition Using Video

    Headway and Speed Data Acquisition Using Video

    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1225 Headway and Speed Data Acquisition Using Video M. A. P. TayroR, W. YouNc, eNp R. G. THonlpsoN Accurate knowledge of vehicle speeds headways and on trallÌc ment (such as a freeway) before this study, so there was an networks is a fundamental part of transport systems modelling. excellent opportunity to evaluate the system and suggest mod- Video and recently developed automatic data-extraction tecñ- ifications to it. This equipment also made niques have the potential to provide a cheap, quick, easy, and it feasible to inves- accurate method of investigating traflic systems. This paper pre- tigate the relationship between vehicle speeds and location in sents two studies that use video-based equipment to investigate the car parks. character of vehicle speeds and headways. Investigation oÌ head- rvays on freeway traffic allows the potential of this technology in a high-speed environment to be determined. Its application to the THE VIDEO SYSTEM study ofspeeds in parking lots enabled its usefulneis in low-speed environments to be studied. The data obtained from the video was Using film equipment compared to traditional methods of collecting headway and speed to obtain a permanent record of vehicle data. movements is not a new concept. However, considerable recent developments have occurred in collecting data using video. Digital image-processing applications offer the potential to In particular, ARRB has developed a trailer-mounted video automate a large number of traffic surveys. It is, therefore, recording system (3). This relatively new equipment has until not surprising that considerable interest has been directed at recently experienced only a limited range of applications.
  • Headway Adherence. Detection and Reduction of the Bus Bunching Effect

    Headway Adherence. Detection and Reduction of the Bus Bunching Effect

    HEADWAY ADHERENCE. DETECTION AND REDUCTION OF THE BUS BUNCHING EFFECT Josep Mension Camps Director Central Services and Deputy Chief Officer of Bus Network. Transports Metropolitans de Barcelona (TMB). Miquel Estrada Romeu Associate Professor. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya- BarcelonaTECH. 1. INTRODUCTION Transit systems should provide a good performance to compete against the wide usage of cars in metropolitan areas. The level of service of these systems relies on a proper temporal and spatial coverage provision (high frequencies, low stop spacings) as well as significant regularity and comfort. In this way, bus systems in densely populated cities usually operate at short headways (10 minutes or less). However, in these busy routes, any delay suffered by a single bus is propagated to the whole bus fleet. This fact causes vehicle bunching and unstable time-headways. In real bus lines, we usually see that two or more vehicles arrive together or in close succession, followed by a long gap between them. There are many sources of potential external disruptions in the service of one bus: illegal parking in the bus lane, failure in the doors opening system, traffic jams, etc. However, some intrinsic characteristics of transit systems and traffic management may also induce delays at specific vehicles such as traffic signal coordination and irregular passenger arrivals at stops. These facts make the bus motion unstable. Therefore, bus bunching is a common problem in the real operation of buses all over the world that must be addressed. The crucial issue is that bus bunching has a great impact on both users and agency cost. From a passenger perspective, the bus bunching phenomena increases the travel time of passengers (riding and waiting time) and worsens the vehicle occupancy.
  • Electric Railway Engineering

    Electric Railway Engineering

    UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY Volume Class Book i^LL fTir^fa '"-^alljf' Return this book on or before the Latest Date stamped below. A charge is made on all overdue ^°°^^S- U. of I. Library ^tMK xb iS'- ^^^, i€ i^l; .^!^ 1762S-S ELECTRK^ RAILA\ AY ENGINEERING ELECTEIC KAILWAY ENGINEERING BY C. FRANCIS HARDING, E. E. professor, electrical engineering; director, electrical laboratories, purdue universitt; associate American institute electrical engineers; asso- ciate AMERICAN electric RAILWAY ASSOCIATION ; MEMBER SOCIETY FOR promotion OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION McGRAW-HILL BOOK COMPANY 239 WEST 39TH STREET. NEW YORK 6 BOUVERIE STREET, LONDON, E. C. 1911 Copyright, 1911 BY McGraw-Hill Book Company Prhited and Eleclrolyped by The Maple Press York. Fa. PREFACE. To students in technical universities who wish to specialize in the subject of electrical railway engineering and to those who understand the fundamental principles of electrical engineering and are interested in their application to electric railway practice it is hoped that this book may be of value. While it is planned primarily for a senior elective course in a technical university, it does not involve higher mathematics and should therefore be easily understood by the undergraduate reader. The volume does not purport to present any great amount of new material nor principles, but it does gather in convenient form present day theory and practice in all important branches of electric railway engineering. No apology is deemed necessary for the frequent quotations from technical papers and publications in engineering periodicals, for it is only from the authorities and specialists in particular phases of the profession that the most valuable information can be obtained, and it is believed that a thorough and unprejudiced summary of the best that has been written upon the various aspects of the subject will be most welcome when thus combined into a single volume.
  • Making Headway, Capital Investments to Keep Transit Moving

    Making Headway, Capital Investments to Keep Transit Moving

    CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN Making Headway Capital Investments to Keep Transit Moving 2019–2033 headway (/ˈhed wā/) noun 1. forward movement or progress, especially when the way is difficult. 2. the average interval between trains, streetcars, or buses. The shorter the headway, the more passengers carried per hour. Making Headway — Capital Investments to Keep Transit Moving January 2019 From the Chief Executive Officer In January 2018, the TTC published a new Corporate Plan that clearly laid out our priorities for the next five years. At the top of the list was transforming for financial sustainability. “Fiscal sustainability,” we said, “depends on our ability to fund what the TTC is being asked to deliver over the long term.” We committed to providing better budget information for improved long-term decision-making. Over the past 12 months, we have undertaken a massive, multi-department review of all of our assets. The result is this Capital Investment Plan. Toronto’s transit system is hailed as among the most multi- modal systems in the world, with seamless integration between buses, streetcars, Wheel-Trans and the subway. The TTC’s interdependent network of fleet, track, power, maintenance and other infrastructure moves more than half a billion people annually. Funding for critical maintenance and system improvements is necessary. Projects that have been approved are still awaiting funding. Line 2 Capacity Enhancement is unfunded. Buses past 2021 are unfunded. The expansion of Bloor-Yonge Station, which is needed to accommodate ridership growth even before planned transit expansion, is unfunded. The TTC Way, which was introduced in our Corporate Plan, establishes clear guidelines for how we at the TTC work with each other, with customers and with our partners, including our funding partners.
  • Application of Holding and Crew Interventions to Improve Service Regularity on a High Frequency Rail Transit Line

    Application of Holding and Crew Interventions to Improve Service Regularity on a High Frequency Rail Transit Line

    Towards 3-Minutes: Application of Holding and Crew Interventions to Improve Service Regularity on a High Frequency Rail Transit Line by Gabriel Tzvi Wolofsky B.A.Sc. in Civil Engineering, University of Toronto (2017) Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Transportation at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2019 © 2019 Massachusetts Institute of Technology. All rights reserved. Signature of Author …..………..………………………………………………………………………….. Department of Urban Studies and Planning May 21, 2019 Certified by…………………………………………………………………………………………………. John P. Attanucci Research Associate, Center for Transportation and Logistics Thesis Supervisor Certified by…………………………………………………………………………………………………. Saeid Saidi Postdoctoral Associate, Institute for Data, Systems, and Society Thesis Supervisor Certified by…………………………………………………………………………………………………. Jinhua Zhao Associate Professor, Department of Urban Studies and Planning Thesis Supervisor Accepted by……………………………………………………………………………………………….... P. Christopher Zegras Associate Professor, Department of Urban Studies and Planning Committee Chair 2 Towards 3-Minutes: Application of Holding and Crew Interventions to Improve Service Regularity on a High Frequency Rail Transit Line by Gabriel Tzvi Wolofsky Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 21, 2019 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science in Transportation Abstract Transit service regularity is an important factor in achieving reliable high frequency operations. This thesis explores aspects of headway and dwell time regularity and their impact on service provision on the MBTA Red Line, with specific reference to the agency’s objective of operating a future 3-minute trunk headway, and to issues of service irregularity faced today. Current operating practices are examined through analysis of historical train tracking and passenger fare card data.
  • 1995 Headway-Control.Pdf

    1995 Headway-Control.Pdf

    A HEADWAY CONTROL STRATEGY FOR RECOVERING FROM TRANSIT VEHICLE DELAYS Peter G. Furth I ASCE Transportation Congress, San Diego October 24, 1995 Abstract Suppose a subway train is delayed due to, say, a medical emergency. What adjustments to the following trains' itineraries should be made in order for the schedule to recover from this initial delay? An optimization framework for finding the optimal schedule adjustments is devised. It accounts for the impact of those adjustments on ride time and waiting time, and has as its objective the minimization of total passenger time. Optimality conditions and a solution algorithm are developed. Realistic constraints such as a safety headway, vehicle capacity, and maximum delay at the start ofthe line are explicitly incorporated. Examples illustrate the main features of the optimal adjustment pattern. After adjustment, a train will follow its leader by the scheduled headway minus an amount called that train's schedule recovery. Because the optimal solution involves a tradeoff between minimizing the ride time impact, which is accomplished by immediately recovering from the initial delay, and the wait time impact, which is minimized by spreading the recovery over a large number of following trains, the optimal recovery pattern lies between these two extremes. In general, there is an S-shaped pattern to the recovery distribution: large recovery for the first one or two trains following the initially delayed train, then rapidly diminishing recoveries per train, and finally small recoveries for the last few trains. The location of the initial delay influences the recovery pattern. Delays that occur on a boarding section, where many waiting passengers will be affected, tend to benefit most from an optimal recovery as opposed to a policy of immediate recovery.
  • Repurposed Rolling Stock

    Repurposed Rolling Stock

    Create a Gauntlet Track using FastTracks Tools Fred Soward 20190504-FRS What this clinic will cover • A method of creating a Gauntlet Track (not a Gauntlet Turnout) for your layout that will meet one of the requirements for the “scratchbuilt” requirement for the “Model Railroad Engineer – Civil” certificate in the NMRA Achievement Program • A standard gauge HO scale solution using Code 83 Micro Engineering rail in a #6 Fast Tracks turnout fixture • It is not the only solution for meeting the requirement • It is not the only solution for creating a Gauntlet Track • Just the handlaid track construction • Use the provided references for the details and finishing 20190504-FRS What this clinic will NOT cover • A how to guide for detailing & finishing the scale track & structures • The Meaning of Life • It’s 42 – see Arthur Dent for additional details 20190504-FRS A bit of background info • Santa Cruz & Felton Railway switching layout 1978-1981 • Handlaid HO scale standard & HOn3 code 70 • NMRA National Convention 2016 • Modeling with the Masters • Pennsylvania Southern Railroad 2016-present • Santa Cruz & Felton Railway (second edition) 2018-present 20190504-FRS Outline • Intro • Tools & Materials • Gauntlet Track Build Overview • Gauntlet Track Build “By the Numbers” • Gauntlet Track Build Next Steps • A few Fast Tracks Tips & References 20190504-FRS What’s a Gauntlet Track • A different route for rail equipment along the same pathway • May share a piece of rail, but frequently does not • Always share the same track bed (ties & ballast) •
  • The MBTA-Performance System

    The MBTA-Performance System

    Performance Measurements Using Real-Time Open Data Feeds: The MBTA-performance system 2017 Fare Collection/Revenue Management & TransITech Conference Ritesh Warade, Associate Director, IBI Group April 2017 Introduction Boston MBTA’s challenge Agenda Approach The MBTA-performance system Questions? Multi-disciplinary professional services firm 2,500+ staff / 75+ offices including Boston Core expertise in transit / rail service planning and operations analysis Extensive experience in Transit Technology Increasing focus on Transit Data IBI’s Transit Data practice focuses on helping transit agencies: Manage their data end-to-end Provide high-quality information to passengers Analyze and measure the quality of service provided to and experienced by customers Boston MBTA’s Challenge Size: 5th Largest Agency in the US, 1.3 million Passengers Daily Multimodal: Subway, Light Rail, Bus, Boat, Commuter Rail Goal: Provision of Real-time Passenger Information Tied to the source of data Train Tracking Challenges Bus CAD/AVL Replicating for other modes / agencies Not real-time Approach Leverage Open Data Could We GTFS-realtime feeds Location Prediction Tracking Generation Bus CAD/AVL NextBus In-house Train Prediction Subway Tracking Engine MBTA- realtime GPS + In-house Track Prediction LRT Circuits Engine + TWC Customers Commuter GPS Transitime Rail GTFS Bus Google/ GTFS-RT Apps Subway MBTA- realtime LRT MBTA Apps / Customers API Website / Signs Commuter Rail GTFS JSON Website SMS/ API Email RSS Apps MBTA- alerts Google/A GTFS-RT pps MBTA MBTA Dispatchers API Apps Customers API Twitter GTFS GTFS-RT Trip Updates GTFS- realtime Vehicle Positions Service Alerts Provide real-time data to customers Updated frequently 5-15 seconds All modes / services Well documented GTFS- realtime Widely adopted Strong incentive to maintain Ensure up-time As systems change The MBTA-performance System Bus Google/ GTFS-RT Apps Subway MBTA- realtime LRT MBTA Apps / Customers API Website / Signs Commuter Rail GTFS Bus MBTA MBTA- Mgmt.
  • Best Practices for Assisting Transfers Checklist This Is an Agency Self

    Best Practices for Assisting Transfers Checklist This Is an Agency Self

    Best practices for assisting transfers checklist This is an agency self-audit checklist, designed to be used at a station or stop served by more than one fixed route transit service. For agencies interested in evaluating opportunities for assisting passengers who transfer across services, this checklist may help identify areas for improvement. The checklist attempts to help identify concrete actions that a transit provider can take to support more convenient, less stressful bus transfers. Schedule information ☐Printed schedules and maps include information about neighboring agencies ☐Real-time transit information system mobile app ☐Schedule information appears in trip planning applications (Google Maps, Bing Maps, other transit apps) ☐Availability of printed maps on buses ☐Availability of printed maps in transit centers ☐Schedule information is available in multiple accessible formats (audio, multilingual, written, braile, large font) ☐Schedule information is available online ☐Schedule information is available at bus stops serving multiple routes ☐Fare information regarding fare categories (e.g. youth rate, senior rate) is clearly displayed on printed schedules ☐Fare information regarding different fare rates (e.g. rate for intercity service, around town service, all-day fare, regular fare) is clearly displayed on printed schedules Bus stop amenities ☐Bus stops are ADA compliant and designed to promote access ☐Landscaping around bus stops enhances the aesthetic quality of bus stop ☐Landscaping around bus stops provides a buffer zone between
  • Review of the G Line

    Review of the G Line

    Review of the G Line ,. July 10, 2013 NYC Transit G Line Review Executive Summary Executive Summary The attached report provides a comprehensive review of operations on the G line. Based on NYC Transit’s standard measures of On-Time Performance and Wait Assessment, the G performs well relative to the average subway line. At the same time, the G differs from other NYC Transit subway lines because the route is relatively short and never enters Manhattan, and thus serves primarily as a feeder/distributor with most riders transferring at least once before reaching their destinations. This review identifies a number of opportunities to improve operations on the G line, with recommendations chiefly intended to provide more even train headways and passenger loading, as well as to improve customer communication. Key Findings: While G ridership has grown significantly in recent years, it still remains relatively low compared to the rest of the system, and average passenger loads on the G are within service guidelines during both peak and off-peak hours. Scheduling the G train around the busier and more frequent F train causes uneven headways and passenger loads on the G, most significantly during the afternoon peak period, when G service is scheduled at the minimum guideline frequency of 6 trains per hour (an average 10-minute headway). G riders make twice as many transfers as the average subway rider; this high transfer rate is inconvenient for customers who must wait for multiple trains. Trains shorter than the platform length cause uncertainty about where the G train stops, contributing to uneven passenger loads.