DOCSLIB.ORG

Modern Streetcar Vehicle Guideline

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Modern Streetcar Vehicle Guideline APTA STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM APTA RT-ST-GL-001-13 Approved March 26th, 2013 GUIDELINE American Public Transportation Association APTA Streetcar Subcommittee Work Group 1666 K Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20006-1215 Modern Streetcar Vehicle Guideline Abstract: This document provides guidelines to support specification and procurement of modern streetcar vehicles by identifying and describing important technical and operating principles relating to their application. Keywords: modern streetcar, light rail, low-floor vehicle Summary: Modern light rail and streetcar vehicles are fundamentally very similar, the differences having largely to do with how they are applied. The primary difference between the two modes is the degree of integration into the urban environment and the scale of the associated infrastructure. This difference in application makes some common light rail vehicle design features unnecessary for streetcar application but may also require the use of other features that may or may not be incorporated into a typical light rail vehicle. The Guideline includes an introduction and four chapters: Vehicle Configuration, Vehicle/Platform Interface, Vehicle/Track Interface and Power Supply. Recognizing that streetcar systems vary considerably in form and function, the document identifies and explains the underlying principles and interdependencies associated with each topic, and examines the trade-offs involved in various different design approaches. Throughout, emphasis is placed on the need to treat vehicles, infrastructure and operations as an integrated system. Scope and purpose: The purpose of this Guideline is to facilitate the successful introduction of modern streetcar vehicles into North American systems by promoting understanding of the core technical and operational issues. From this understanding, agencies will be able to better navigate the process of specifying a vehicle and designing compatible infrastructure. The document is intended to provide guidance to planners, transit agencies, local governments and others interested in developing new streetcar systems or enhancing existing streetcar systems using low-floor modern streetcar vehicles. High-floor vehicles and heritage streetcars fall outside the scope of this document, although many of the same technical and operating fundamentals also apply. This Guideline represents a common viewpoint of those parties concerned with its provisions, namely, transit operating/planning agencies, manufacturers, consultants, engineers and general interest groups. The application of any standards, practices or guidelines contained herein is voluntary. In some cases, federal and/or state regulations govern portions of a transit system’s operations. In those cases, the government regulations take precedence over this standard. APTA recognizes that for certain applications, the standards or practices, as implemented by individual transit agencies, may be either more or less restrictive than those given in this document. © 2013 American Public Transportation Association. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the American Public Transportation Association. Contents APTA Streetcar Subcommittee Membership ................................................... iii Participants CHAPTER 1: VEHICLE CONFIGURATION ........................................................ 8 1.0 Introduction........................................................................................ 8 The American Public Transportation Association greatly appreciates the 1.1 Duty Cycle ......................................................................................... 8 contributions of John Smatlak (project 1.2 Optimizing the Vehicle for the Streetcar Operating Environment .... 9 manager), John Aurelius, Stephen Bonina, Jack Boorse, Tim Borchers, Jacques 1.3 Capacity ........................................................................................... 14 Drouin, Tom Furmaniak, Jim Graebner, 1.4 Vehicle Width and Interior Layout .................................................. 18 Paul Grether, Lyndon Henry, Tom Hickey, 1.5 Partial vs. 100 Percent Low-Floor ................................................... 25 Tom Irion, Carl Jackson, Russ Jackson, Richard Krisak, Stephen Lam, Larry 1.6 Single vs. Double-Ended ................................................................. 27 Lovejoy, Scott McIntosh, Bill Moorhead, Jason Mumford, Margarita Novales, Jim CHAPTER 2: VEHICLE/PLATFORM INTERFACE ........................................... 30 Schantz, John Schuman, Eric Sitiko, and John Swanson, who provided the primary 2.0 Introduction...................................................................................... 30 effort in the drafting of this guideline. 2.1 The Evolution of the Streetcar Stop ................................................. 30 At the time this standard was completed, the 2.2 New vs. Legacy Systems ................................................................. 31 Streetcar Subcommittee included the following members: 2.3 Platform Configuration .................................................................... 31 James Graebner, Chair 2.4 Vehicle Doors .................................................................................. 35 Tom Hickey, Vice Chair 2.5 Bridgeplates (if used) ....................................................................... 37 Tim Borchers, Secretary 2.6 Streetcar and Bus Sharing a Platform .............................................. 40 See next page for a list of the Streetcar Subcommittee members. CHAPTER 3: VEHICLE/TRACK INTERFACE ................................................... 44 3.0 Introduction...................................................................................... 44 3.1 Unique Aspects of Streetcar Track Design ...................................... 46 3.2 Unique Aspects of Streetcar Vehicles ............................................. 52 CHAPTER 4: POWER SUPPLY ........................................................................ 58 4.0 Introduction...................................................................................... 58 4.1 Operating Voltage and Current Collection ...................................... 59 4.2 Energy Savings ................................................................................ 60 4.3 Off-Wire Capability ......................................................................... 61 4.4 Ground-Level Power Systems ......................................................... 66 5.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................... 69 6.0 ABBREVIATIONS and ACRONYMS ......................................................... 70 7.0 GLOSSARY ................................................................................................ 71 8.0 SUMMARY OF CHANGES ......................................................................... 74 9.0 DOCUMENT HISTORY ............................................................................... 75 Project Team Charles Joseph Appendix 1: Carbuilder survey ................................................................. 75 Senior Project Manager American Public Transportation Association © 2013 American Public Transportation Association ii APTA Streetcar Subcommittee Membership Dan Abernathy Paul Grether Paul O'Brien Susannah Kerr Adler Wulf Grote Thomas O'Brien Paul Aichholzer Jeff Hamm Trevor Ocock Lewis T. Ames Curvie Hawkins Lucas Olson Randel Anderson Chris Heald Aaron Overman John Andreas Katrina Heineking Sasha N. Page John Aurelius Cliff Henke Rocco Paiano Tim Baldwin Lyndon Henry Matthew Palilla Christoper G. Barber Arturo Herrera Pankaj Pandit DJ Baxter Robert C. Highfill Wright C. Parkes John Bender Boris Homenock Philip G. Pasterak Derek Benedict Robert Holmquist Angel Pena Robert Bergen Niklas Hook Herbert Pence Steve Bethel Kammy Horne Frank M. Pierson Mark Bishop Emmanuel S. (Bruce) Horowitz John R. Post Adam Blakeley Christine Hotchkin Meghan Powell Stephen Bonina Gary Howard Paul Przepiorka Jeffrey F. Boothe Perry Howse Thomas Purmort Joseph Boscia Peter Hrovat Jeffrey Rankin Winsome Bowen Kenneth J. Hughes Ken Rees Ken Boyd Mathew E. Hughes Andrew Robbins Christina Briggs Carl Jackson Steve Roescher Trip Brizell Russell Jackson R. Scott Rodda Richard Brown Karl Johnson Jerry Rutledge Ralph Burns Kevin Johnson James (Jim) Schantz Ed Byers Keith Jones Todd Schultz Richard Cain Joseph E. (Joe) Kenas John Schumann John F. Calnan David W. Kilmer Kevin Seto Paul V. Campbell Cheryl King Joseph Shaffer Klaus Peter Canavan Jay Kline Jane Shang Bruce Cardon Kirk Klug Matthew Z. Sibul Raymond Carini Francois Kneppert Ruby A. Siegel Richard A. Carman Andrew Kooiman Kenneth G. Sislack Steven M. Carroll Richard Krisak Eric Sitiko Mattie Carter John Kut John Smatlak Patrick Charpentier Stephen Lam Ryan Snow Dan Cohen Tom LeBeau Marc K. Soronson Michael P. Collins Alan Lehto Harvey Stone David Colussi Thomas Ligenfield Peter Straus Marlene B. Connor Benjamin Limmer John Swanson RoseMary Covington George Long James D. Switzer Greg Crocombe J. Sam Lott David M. Taylor William Cross George Louie Jerry Thompson Frank R. Culver Lawrence Lovejoy Ronald J. Tober Richard D. Curtis William Lutz Frank T. Tobey III Jeffrey Damon Bob Ly Jitendra S. Tomar Jeremy Daniel Eric L. Madison Edward J. Toomey Chris Davis Tom Marking Rob Troup William J. Deville George V. Marks Virginia Verdeja
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Metro Rail Design Criteria Section 10 Operations
    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.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Milwaukee, Wis. Environmental Assessment October 2011
    City of Milwaukee, Wis. Environmental Assessment October 2011 Prepared by the City of Milwaukee in cooperation with the Federal Transit Administration (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) Milwaukee Streetcar Environmental Assessment ii October 2011 RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES Lead Agency: Federal Transit Administration Project Sponsors: City of Milwaukee WHERE TO FIND COPIES OF THIS DOCUMENT A hard copy of the document is available for public inspection at the Federal Transit Administration field office at the following location: Federal Transit Administration Region V 200 West Adams Street, Suite 320 Chicago, Illinois 60606 Hard copies of the document will also be available at the following locations: Milwaukee Public Library – Central Milwaukee Public Library – Center Street 814 W. Wisconsin Avenue 2727 W. Fond du Lac Avenue Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53233 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53210 Milwaukee Public Library – Forest Home Milwaukee Department of City Development 1432 W. Forest Home Avenue 809 Broadway, 1st Floor Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53204 Milwaukee, WI 53202 Legislative Reference Bureau, Milwaukee City Hall City Hall, Room B-11 200 East Wells Street Milwaukee, WI 53202 To view an electronic copy of this document, please visit the project Web site at www.themilwaukeestreetcar.com. CONTACT INFORMATION For additional information concerning this document please contact our public involvement coordinator who can direct your questions and comments to the appropriate person: Lois Kimmelman, Environmental Protection Specialist Federal Transit Administration Region 5 200 West Adams St., Suite 320 Chicago, IL 60606 Kristine Martinsek, Milwaukee Streetcar Public Involvement Coordinator Martinsek and Associates 1325 E. Potter Avenue Milwaukee, WI 53207 Milwaukee Streetcar Environmental Assessment iii October 2011 ABSTRACT The proposed Milwaukee Streetcar project would establish a starter streetcar system in and around downtown Milwaukee connecting workers, visitors and residents to key destinations and attractions.
    [Show full text]
  • Interstate Commerce Commission in Re
    INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION IN RE INVESTIGATION OF AM" ACCIDENT WHICH OCCURRED ON THE DENVER & INTERURBAN RAILROAD, NEAR GLOBEVILLE, COLO , ON SEPTEMBER 6, 1920 November 17, 1920 To the Commission On September G, 1920, there was a hoad-end collision between two passenger tiams on the Denvei & Intemiban Railioad neai Globe ville, Colo , which lesulted m the death of 11 passengeis and 2 em­ ployees, and the injury of 209 passengers and 5 employees This accident was investigated jointly with the Public Utilities Commis­ sion of Coloiado, and as a result of this investigation I lespectfully submit the following lepoit The Dem ei & Interurban Railioacl is a bianch of the Coloiado & Southern Railway, the rules of which govern Denver & Interurban trains Donvei & Intemiban tiains aie opeiated between Denvei and Bouldei, 31 miles noith of Denvei, over the Denvei Tiamway Co's tiacks between Denvei and Globeville and ovei Denvei & In­ temiban tiacks between Globeville and Denver & Inteiuiban Junc­ tion, at which point the line blanches, one line extending to Louis­ ville Junction and the othei to Webb Junction, and between these two junctions and Bouldei the trains of the Denvei & Inteiuiban j.»,ailroad opeiate over the tiacks of the Colorado & Southern Kail- way From Marshall, between Louisville Junction and Bouldei, a bianch line .extends to Eldorado Spimgs, this is also used jointly by the tiams of the two laihoads On this line Denvei & Intel urban employees aie ordinarily re­ lieved by Denver Tiamway employees at Globeville, the tiamway employees
    [Show full text]
  • From the 1832 Horse Pulled Tramway to 21Th Century Light Rail Transit/Light Metro Rail - a Short History of the Evolution in Pictures
    From the 1832 Horse pulled Tramway to 21th Century Light Rail Transit/Light Metro Rail - a short History of the Evolution in Pictures By Dr. F.A. Wingler, September 2019 Animation of Light Rail Transit/ Light Metro Rail INTRODUCTION: Light Rail Transit (LRT) or Light Metro Rail (LMR) Systems operates with Light Rail Vehicles (LRV). Those Light Rail Vehicles run in urban region on Streets on reserved or unreserved rail tracks as City Trams, elevated as Right-of-Way Trams or Underground as Metros, and they can run also suburban and interurban on dedicated or reserved rail tracks or on main railway lines as Commuter Rail. The invest costs for LRT/LMR are less than for Metro Rail, the diversity is higher and the adjustment to local conditions and environment is less complicated. Whereas Metro Rail serves only certain corridors, LRT/LRM can be installed with dense and branched networks to serve wider areas. 1 In India the new buzzword for LRT/LMR is “METROLIGHT” or “METROLITE”. The Indian Central Government proposes to run light urban metro rail ‘Metrolight’ or Metrolite” for smaller towns of various states. These transits will operate in places, where the density of people is not so high and a lower ridership is expected. The Light Rail Vehicles will have three coaches, and the speed will be not much more than 25 kmph. The Metrolight will run along the ground as well as above on elevated structures. Metrolight will also work as a metro feeder system. Its cost is less compared to the metro rail installations.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Trolleybuses: Applicability of UN Regulation No
    Submitted by the expert from OICA Informal document GRSG-110-08-Rev.1 (110th GRSG, 26-29 April 2016, agenda item 2(a)) Trolleybuses: Applicability of UN Regulation No. 100 (Electric Power Train Vehicle) vs. UN Regulation No. 107 Annex 12 (Construction of M2/M3 Vehicles) for Electrical Safety 1. At 110th session of GRSG Belgium proposes to amend UN R107 annex 12 by deleting the requirements for trolleybuses (see GRSG/2016/05) and transfer the requirements into UN R100 (see GRSP/2016/07), which will be on the agenda of upcoming GRSP session in May 2016. 2. Due to the design of a trolleybus and stated in UN Regulation No. 107, trolleybuses are dual- mode vehicles. They can operate either: (a) in trolley mode, when connected to the overhead contact line (OCL), or (b) in bus mode when not connected to the OCL. When not connected to the OCL, they can also be (c) in charging mode, where they are stationary and plugged into the power grid for battery charging. 3. The basic principles of the design of the electric powertrain of the trolleybus and the connection to the OCL is based on international standards developed for trams and trains and is implemented and well accepted in the market worldwide. 4. Due to the fact that the trolleybus is used on public roads the trolleybus has to fulfil the regulations under the umbrella of the UNECE regulatory framework due to the existing national regulations (e.g. European frame work directive). 5. Therefore the annex 12 in UN R107 was amended to align the additional safety prescriptions for trolleybuses with the corresponding electrical standards.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Trolleys Through the Timber - Richard Thompson
    Oregon Electric Railway Historical Society Volume 19 503 Issue 2 Spring 2014 Reminder to members: Please be sure your dues In this issue: are up to date. 2014 dues were due Jan 1, 2014. Trolleys Through the Timber - Richard Thompson....................1 Oregon Electric Railway Historical Society News.......................2 If it has been longer than one year since you renewed, Interpretative Center Update Greg Bonn....................................2 go to our website: oerhs.org and download an Red Trolleys in the Sun Mark Kavanagh..................................5 application by clicking: Become a Member MAX Yellow Line Lou Bowerman ..............................................6 Seattle Transit Update Roy Bonn................................................7 Tucson Sun Link Update Roy Bonn............................................9 See this issue in color on line DC Streetcar Update Roy Bonn..............................................10 at oerhs.org/transfer Pacific Northwest Transit Update Roy Bonn..............................10 Spotlight on Members: Hal Rosene ..........................................11 Trolleys Through the Timber Oregon’s Small Town Streetcar Systems By Richard Thompson The following article is excerpted from Richard's upcoming book, “Trolleys Through the Timber: Oregon's Small Town Streetcar Systems.” As the working title indicates, it will focus upon streetcars outside of Portland. This new endeavor will allow the author to further develop information about small town streetcar systems that previously appeared in his online Oregon Encyclopedia entries, and his four books for Arcadia Publishing. By the turn of the 20th century the Small town streetcar systems often relied on secondhand rolling stock. This interurban- street railway had become a vital part of like Forest Grove Transportation Company car is thought to have started life as a trailer urban transportation.
    [Show full text]
  • Santa Monica Smiley Sand Tram
    Santa Monica Smiley Sand Tram TRANSFORMING BEACH PARKING, TRANSPORTATION AND ACCESS Prepared by Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corporation, February 2006 Concept History In the fall of 2004 a long-term event was staged in the 1550 parking lot occupying over 70% of the lot. The event producer was required to implement shuttle service from the south beach parking lots up to the Pier. A local business man offered the use of an open air propane powered tram and on October 5, 2004 at 8pm, the tram was dropped off in the 2030 Barnard Way parking lot for an initial trial run. The tram was an instant hit. Tram use in Santa Monica is not a new concept. A Santa Monica ordinance adopted in 1971 allows for the operation of trams along Ocean Front Walk and electric trams were operated between Santa Monica and Venice throughout the 1920’s. Electric trams took passengers between the Venice and Santa Monica Piers. - 1920 In 2004, due to pedestrian traffic concerns, Ocean Front Walk was not utilized for the tram. Instead, the official route for the tram was established along the streets running one block east of the beach. This route required extensive traffic management and, while providing effective transportation, provided limited access to the world-class beach. At a late-night brainstorming session on how to improve the route SMPD Sergeant Greg Smiley suggested that the tram run on the sand. With the emerging vision of the “Beach Tram”, the Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corporation began the process of research, prototype design and consideration of the issues this concept would raise.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 1973) Is, by Almost Any Means of Reconing, a Little Late
    MUN SURV __..___._ ........_~~ ... it if ii ':, "i I ' ~ .11; ~ ' Ii; I Ii; it ' ' I .. ,\ .~ ' ' ~ .;, l -6, l ' 'I .,__ I I . I L I ' L L L • . L I .t.lii i~ h • I • . I •I I I ' I I I I i I I I I L_ "- L L I 'I '- I I 'I I I I I I ! I I I l I '-- '- ._ I - - L_ ' q I i ! i - .L - ,-I 1 I I' ' - I I I I I I ' I I I - ' I - I I I I I ' I - - ! I j ! I - -- - , .:..._ I I I -- I I l MUNICIPAL RAILWAY SURVEY -- 1969-1970 I F O R E W O R D: The Municipal Railway Survey -- 1969-1970 is the fourth in a series of in-depth looks at the operations of various public transit systems in the Western United States (the 1967 SCRTD Survey, Pasadena City Lines I and Denver Tramway were the other three). The publication of this article at this time (January, 1973) is, by almost any means of reconing, a little late. The reason for the lack of timeliness is simply that it took the volunteer workers who prepared this article in their s pare time this long to produce it! The reader might well ask hims elf why the material herein wasn't updated and the article titled Munici­ I pal Railway Survey -- 1972-1973, The answer to this question is that the 1969-1970 fis cal year represented a sign i ficant t urning point in the history of the SAN FRANC ISCO MUNICIPAL RAILWAY.
    [Show full text]