• Home
• How NextBus Works
• News
• Contact us
• About Us
• Free Newsletter

Sign Up for NextBus News

Email Address ^*

 

Categories

• AVL Systems
• Best Practices
• Feature Stories
• Financing University Systems
• Government Funding
• Grey Island Systems
• Intelligent Transportation Systems
• Marketing Transit
• Municipal Transit
• NextBus, Inc.
• Paratransit
• Real-time Passenger Information Systems
• Research
• Success Stories
• Sustainability
• Transit Funding
• Transit Management Challenges
• Transit Trends
• Transportation Trends
• Uncategorized
• University Transit
• WebTech Wireless

Admin

• Log in
• Entries RSS
• Comments RSS
• WordPress.org

Many universities with brilliant students benefit from technology that they developed for the benefit of the community. So it is with MIT where a student designed system helped run their University shuttle. The downside of student developed technology is that when the designers graduate, it can become very difficult to maintain and upgrade that technology.

So it is with MIT. For many years they had used the student written ShuttleTrack. Originally installed in 2003, it offered a real-time map of shuttle locations across campus. Unfortunately, the students who had developed it graduated. In addition, the system had limited capabilities which prevented programming of new routes and could monitor only one vehicle per route.

MIT’s newspaper, the tech, quoted Lawrence Brutti, operations manager at the University parking and transportation office, commented on the problem, “ShuttleTrack being down was one of our chief complaints. We knew we needed to get stable tracking up.” In explaining the choice of NextBus, Brutti said, “it is state-of-the-art, top-of-the-line. We feel like we’ll have a nice stable system, which ShuttleTrack was not.”

The new NextBus system is expected to be rolled out in July 2008 and will provide the advanced real-time tracking needed to optimize their transit operations and to ensure student safety.

To read the full article about the choice of NextBus in Tech, click here.

We have added an automated passenger counting tool to our suite of products. Now you will know–in real-time just how many riders you have on every vehicle and on every route.

Here are the New Passenger Counter Capabilities:

The Real Time Passenger Information (RTPI) system also can add an optional Automatic Passenger Counter (APC), which includes the following features:

• Active infrared sensors
• Fully automatic passenger detection
• Logs the number of passengers that board and alight at each stop
• Real-time update of passenger counts
• Real-time passenger count delivered to AVL
• APC report

The APC report shows the number of passengers that board a vehicle at each stop on the route. The report will show the date, time, vehicle ID, route ID, driver ID, number of passengers who boarded, number of passengers who alighted and the total passenger count at the moment the vehicle leaves the stop. This report can be used by managers to determine passenger load for the purpose of adjusting routes and times to prevent overloading of the vehicles.

How Your Agency Can Save Money, Time, and Aggravation

Real-time Passenger Information Systems (RTPIS) provide a wealth of information to both the transit agency’s customers, as well as the managers, planners, supervisors, and even bus operators of that transit agency. The name “Real-time Passenger Information System” seems to imply that the benefits of such systems are reaped only by the passengers of the transit agency. This is simply not true, and a wealth of valuable information is available to assist the agency through both archived and real-time automated vehicle location (AVL) and automatic passenger counting (APC) data. Agency functions as diverse as accident analysis, operations planning, accident/incident response, and the resolution of customer complaints are just some of the many additional areas where data obtained through an RTPIS can have a significant impact.

The archived data from the AVL and APC systems must be linked together in order to provide the greatest benefit to the agency. In this manner, passenger counts are linked to specific portions of routes and even individual bus stops.

So what can your agency do with this AVL and APC data?

1. Save money

The high costs of diesel fuel and transit labor require that transit agencies operate as efficiently as possible. Management must take a hard look at the utilization of transit service and determine areas where reductions are prudent. Archived APC data can provide agency management with the data they need to make significant cost reductions while impacting as few customers as possible. Agencies are able to drill down to the individual passenger stop level and determine which stops, and even route segments, are underutilized. Once these areas are cut, the remaining route segments can be reorganized and served using fewer routes, vehicles, and operators.

2. Enhance transit planning efficacy

Gone are the days when a stopwatch, pencil, and paper were needed to create or update timetables on fixed transit routes. Without AVL technology, transit agencies must resort to this labor intensive and lengthy process when creating new routes or improving existing routes.

Some considerations:

· Timetables are often created using assumptions about traffic patterns which are inaccurate.

· Political pressures may also force transit planners to create timetables which conform to some artificial constraints.

· Over time, even the most thoroughly researched timetables need updating as traffic conditions change.

· Archived AVL data on existing fixed routes can be used to determine the ‘real-world’ version of the timetable.

· Archived AVL data can also be used when designing new routes and timetables. Transit planners can use a transit vehicle as a data probe. This vehicle travels the proposed route throughout the day and collects AVL data. After several days of data collection, timing patterns will emerge and enable the planner to create a solid timetable.

3. Resolve passenger complaints

One of the chief complaints of transit riders is that the bus did not arrive as scheduled. It is difficult for a transit agency to determine which complaints are valid and warrant a discussion with the vehicle operator, and which complaints are the result of errors on the passenger’s part. This ambiguity is resolved by using archived AVL data to determine precisely when a vehicle arrived at each passenger stop. RTPI systems also allow for the creation of schedule adherence reports, and quickly highlight any problem areas. It is a win-win situation for everyone: Vehicle operators are protected from groundless complaints, agency management has objective data and can respond to valid problems, and the transit customers end up with a more reliable form of transportation.

4. Respond quickly to accidents and incidents

AVL data use in real-time can truly be the difference between life and death. Transit supervisors and first responders must quickly and accurately determine the location of vehicle accidents and emergencies. In the absence of AVL, agencies typically rely on the bus operator to communicate accurate location information. During an accident or other emergency incidents such as hijackings, bomb threats, and assaults, the bus operator may be unable to provide that information. AVL coupled with a silent alarm will enable the transit supervisors to instantly pinpoint the location of the vehicle involved and relay that information to first responders. If the vehicle is moving, precise location updates can be reported to ensure a quick resolution to the situation.

5. Manage non-fixed route operations

Many transit agencies provide demand-response and charter services, and these operations must be carefully monitored to ensure that the client is receiving excellent customer service. Real-time AVL data is used to efficiently dispatch demand-response requests to the nearest vehicles. This data is also used during large charter operations such as sporting events or university commencements to coordinate and manage the service provided. For example, the University of Maryland, College Park hosts football games which attract up to 54,000 people. Moving these people and connecting them with the various transportation modes through bus rapid transit is a significant undertaking. The University relies on a RTPIS to provide real-time AVL information for use in coordinating this service. Buses are dispatched to where they are needed the most, and timely information can be relayed to and from supervisors in the field concerning traffic conditions and vehicle movements.

Real-time Passenger Information Systems dramatically improve the customer experience. While RTPIS are traditionally known for providing real-time arrival predictions to passengers, they are not as well known for their ability to provide the transit agency with a wealth of useful information. Transit agency operations are significantly improved when AVL and APC data is used to guide transit planning, respond to accidents and emergencies, resolve passenger complaints, and manage non-fixed route operations. Most importantly today, this technology can save the transit agency a significant amount of money.

In June 2008, regular gasoline costs more than four dollars a gallon. That sounds bad, but it may be just the beginning. It could well spike to five dollars a gallon by July and six dollars within the next 12 months, according to experts such as T. Boone Pickens. Suddenly, diehard car drivers are becoming born-again transit riders.

As the price of gasoline surges throughout the United States, both public and university transit systems face good and bad news. The good news is that their ridership is increasing. The bad news is that it is costing them a lot more money to carry each of those riders.

Read more

College and university transit agencies share many similarities with their larger municipal and regional transit agency cousins. Both typically provide fixed route, paratransit, and other demand-response services including charter services. They use the same equipment and employ bus operators who are required to have the same qualifications. Vehicle breakdowns, accidents, employee turnover, and passenger complaints are normal events for both as well.

We have identified five important differences between these types of agencies which significantly affect how they manage certain aspects of their operations and planning. These differences affect how quickly the agencies can purchase new technology, how they will use that technology, and how their customers will react to that technology.

1. Funding

College and university operated transit systems are primarily self-supporting auxiliary enterprises that generate revenue through transit fees and/or parking fees. A minority of the systems receive financial support from the institution’s general fund. However, very few college and university systems have access to Federal and state transportation funds. These transit systems are typically operated as ‘closed’ systems whereby only institutionally affiliated individuals may make use of the service. Federal and state funding is usually only available to agencies which provide service to the general public.

This presents a challenge to college and university transit agencies. Passenger fares are often ‘pre-paid’ when the student, faculty, or staff member pays the transit and/or parking fee at the beginning of each academic period. Public transit agencies operate using traditional fares and can increase revenue through various fare pricing strategies and marketing campaigns. Academic institutions operate their transit systems on a fixed budget, and can only increase revenue by increasing the transit and/or parking fees. Increasing revenue by raising these fees is a lengthy process. Student fees provide the bulk of the funding and are set two to three years in advance.

The level of transit ridership does not directly affect the revenue collected at a university or college transit agency. Since the fares are ‘pre-paid’ the revenue is collected even if very few students actually use the service. This can be helpful to ensuring the transit agency’s financial success during periods of low demand, but can be a great challenge when demand increases. Improving and adding service as demand increases is very difficult due to this static nature of college and university transit budgets. Many of these agencies operate on a premise each year whereby they either use their funding completely or lose what money remains. As a result, very little money is set aside and not allocated to existing line items. This can make even minor service level improvements a difficult and lengthy undertaking.

2. Capital Improvements

Closely related to the funding considerations is the college and university transit agency capital improvements process. College and university transit agencies typically have a ‘plant fund’ for capital projects that is maintained through regular allocations from their operating budgets. The purchase of new rolling stock, parking structures, maintenance and administration facilities, and large scale Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) infrastructure are all funded through this plant fund.

All participants in the ITS market, vendors and transit agencies, must understand that the procurement cycle for college and university transit agencies can be much longer than that of their larger municipal and regional agency cousins. The combination of static annual budgets, difficulty in increasing revenue from year to year, and the long term allocation of plant funds to improvements in existing infrastructure, can make it very difficult for a college and university transit agency to purchase ITS enhancements. What capital money these systems have is often allocated years in advance to facility rehabilitation or rolling stock replacement.

The dilemma for ITS providers is that the transit agencies want the technology but have a difficult time finding the funding for it. The providers must be willing to invest several years into the relationship with the transit agencies in order to facilitate a sale.

3. Service Planning

Service planning at college and university transit agencies can be a delicate process. Students are highly vocal critics of what they foresee as a poorly operated transit system. This combined with equally vocal parents, money-donating alumni, and the wishes of the surrounding community, creates a situation where transit service is not provided as efficiently or effectively as it could be. Transit service that is underutilized may continue to be provided at the behest of an individual with political clout. Transit service that is sorely needed may be denied as a method to effect change in the student concentration of certain residential areas.

Even in light of their ability to access IT resources, college and university transit agencies can be very ‘data-poor’ when it comes to the population they serve. Few agencies invest the time and effort required to ensure that their finite resources are being used to perform the greatest good. Agencies should periodically obtain information concerning student, faculty, and staff residential addresses from their campus registrar’s office. This ‘geo-data’ can be used in a Geographic Information System (GIS) to determine where the highest concentra tion of campus affiliates is located, and whether or not the existing transit service is adequately serving them. A GIS can make this task very easy by overlaying the concentration of campus affiliates on an area map, and including layers representing the existing transit routes.

4. Customer Base

The students, faculty, and staff at institutions of higher learning are generally very technologically savvy. Colleges and universities are some of the most IT-connected organizations in the country and the use of technology is readily apparent throughout each institution. Students register for classes and pay their bills online. Faculty members conduct classes and assign coursework online. Staff members register for benefits and complete their timesheets online. This comfort level and familiarity with new technology provides ITS vendors the ability to make some advantageous assumptions. For example, communication modes such as the Internet, WAP-enabled cell phones, and SMS text messaging can all be incorporated into an ITS project with the assumption that the users will have both the knowledge and equipment needed to access the information.

Campus affiliates are used to incorporating new technology into their daily lives. The transit agency and ITS vendor will have relatively little difficulty in persuading the passengers to use new technology and to believe in the technology’s merits. An example of this new transit technology is the Real-time Passenger Information System (RTPIS). This system provides transit passengers with information concerning bus arrival times at each passenger stop instantly or in ‘real-time.’ Users can access this information through a variety of methods, including the Internet, WAP-enabled cell phones, SMS text messages, Interactive Voice Response (IVR) telephone systems, and digital signage located at the bus stops.

5. Employee Recruitment and Retention

College and university transit agency employee recruitment and retention presents several challenges. These agencies are typically much smaller than municipal or regional agencies and as a result, employee salaries can be much lower for similar jobs. This makes recruiting and retaining high quality employees difficult. Employees may work in their positions at these agencies just long enough to gain experience for a more lucrative private sector position. The resulting revolving door makes it difficult to maintain consistent policies, procedures, and strategic plans.

Many agencies don’t have a formal method for gathering and permanently storing the combined institutional ‘memory’ of their various employees. As critical employees leave, their knowledge is lost to the agency and their work must be recreated. Many agencies find that they are simply treading water and are not able to make significant advances in service improvements and institutional planning.

College and university transit agencies attempt to counter this problem by providing benefits that private employers cannot. Free tuition for the employee, employee’s spouse, and employee’s children is often provided and can have a significant financial impact on the family’s budget. Public colleges and universities may also allow employees to participate in state-sponsored retirement plans, including defined benefit pensions. Lastly, employee leave is often more generous with up to 40 paid days off (holiday, sick, and vacation) per year.

Student Run Service Handles 3 Million Passengers Yearly for Davis Community

What is Unitrans? A Brief History: Unitrans was founded in 1968 as the University Transport System, when the Associated Students of UC Davis purchased two vintage London doubledecker buses to operate on two routes.

In 1972, Unitrans was opened to the general public, with partial funding from the City of Davis. Since that time the ASUCD/City of Davis partnership has continued, and now Unitrans provides public transportation service to the entire city with 50 buses on 15 routes, carrying over 3 million passengers a year.

Unitrans is well-known for their fleet of historic London doubledecker buses. These doubledecker buses run on four lines (B, E, F, G) in regular service during the academic year, and their times are noted on the printed schedule and a special flyer. One of the doubledecks has been converted from a diesel engine to run on clean natural gas. Unitrans’ CNG doubledeck is unique in North America, and perhaps in the world. Although the doubledeck bus is the symbol of Unitrans, about 90% of our service is provided by modern buses fueled by CNG (with one even-cleaner prototype bus operating on a Hydrogen-Natural Gas blend).

Unitrans emphasizes the benefits of having a student run system by highlighting the fact that by charging the students specific fees for the shuttles as well as employing student drivers and managers, the students in turn have much more of a vested interest, both financially and personally.

Some Challenges Persist

Some of the obstacles that Unitrans faces include finding enough student drivers, which is a continual challenge, as well as funding the needs of a developed system that needs to support such a large passenger base. For example, the bus service is often confronted with the issue of finding technicians that are able to utilize buses and resolve problems effectively. The fact that students are inexperienced with requires ongoing training as new students are cycled through the system every four years. As of mid-2008, twenty buses in their fleet are currently due for replacement. Finding the means to replace these buses as well as support the growth and development of the transit service is resolved through federal and state funding. However, a lack capital funding has be a periodic obstacle to achieving certain annual goals for the Unitrans service, and continues to be a source of concern.

In spite of these challenges, the community-wide Unitrans services has survived in large part because of the active engagement of the student population. This active engagement motivates creative management and problem-solving. The bottom line is that student leadership has played a major role in providing better service in the face of a consistently growing university and community population.

Click here to learn more about the unique Unitrans system.

If you’ve ever wondered how your transit services stack up to those across the country, this article is for you. NextBus surveyed 75 U.S. universities and you may find the results surprising!

The majority of respondents believe that university transit systems improve the quality of university life and contribute to the safety of students, faculty, and staff. They are using a wide range of technology to improve their ability to serve their communities.

Read on to learn more about the respondent profile in the top eight issues that concern transportation professionals within university communities.

8 Biggest University Transit Issues

1. to improve the quality of university life
2. to run an efficient OnTime system
3. to maximize student, faculty, and staff safety
4. to ensure regulatory compliance
5. to promote environmentally friendly transportation alternatives
6. to provide a highly predictable route system
7. to gather highly accurate ridership and other operations performance data
8. to reduce costs without compromising service quality

Top Technologies Used

Automatic vehicle location systems	46%
On-board video and audio recording	38%
Automatic passenger counters (infrared, break-beam, etc.)	35%
Operations planning with geographical information systems (geo-coded data)	31%
Real-time traveler information systems	27%
Automatic visual passenger stop announcing systems	23%
Computer aided dispatch	23%
Automatic audible passenger stop announcing systems	19%
Transit management software	19%
Mobile data terminals	12%
Smart-card transit media	12%
Traffic signal priority	12%

Respondent Profile:

Type of School Responding

Public 80%

Private/Other 20%

Number of Full-Time Students

20,000 + 44%

10,000-19,999 31%

2,500-9,999 22%

<2,500 2%

Percent Offering Mass Transit

72%

Number of Vehicles

50+ 13%

25-49 22%

10-24 39%

<10 26%

Annual Passenger Load

5 million+ 8%

1-4.9 million 40%

100,000-999,999 36%

<100,000 16%

To find out more about transit management practices at top universities, click here for the full report.

NextBus currently operates in 20 U.S. states and is rapidly expanding. For more information on bringing Next Bus to your location, contact NAME LINK.

Thanks to NextBus, students get around campus quickly and reliably

College poses plenty of challenges as students acclimate themselves to a new way of living. The stress of a new environment, financial constraints, and academic obligations can lead to quite a few undesirable attributes, from weight gain to acne.

But, at least in one area, Rutgers is enabling its new and returning students to maneuver easily and inexpensively with its AVL powered bus system. They are finding that they can forego private transportation for the first time in their lives and give buses the old college try—which should help reduce stress from parking fees and traffic, promote physical activity, and reduce ambient pollution that can (gasp!) clog pores.

However, the benefits of trading in private cars for University buses can be overshadowed by frequent problems such as delayed, uncertain or canceled arrivals. And, if you thought coffee-clutching commuters could be uptight about missing a morning meeting, just talk to an ambitious 18-year-old during finals week. All that is history since the implementation of a NextBus AVL transportation system.

“People are not calling us anymore saying, ‘Where is this bus?’ People are not calling us anymore saying, ‘I was waiting a half-hour for the bus’…” Manager of Transit Services John Karakoglou of Rutgers University in New Jersey, a NextBus client since September 2005, no longer dreads the wrath of the student body. And he has NextBus to thank.

Since its launch at Rutgers, NextBus has helped reduce student complaints by 35%. This, of course, is a relief in itself; however, fielding fewer complaint calls also leads to increased efficiency, productivity, and job satisfaction among transit employees at both the administrative and operational levels. And with 65,000 riders each day, increasing student satisfaction with transit services was no easy task without NextBus technology.

Rutgers had been relying on a cadre of bus dispatchers armed with clipboards and pencils to record potential problem areas and convey them to transit administration. Karakoglou apparently does not miss the old days, “I don’t need anybody out on the street anymore to ask questions, see where there is a lot of traffic, if there are a lot of people waiting at the bus shelter. I don’t need five people out on the road when I can see everything from the command center.”

In addition to NextBus LCD displays, Rutgers has also equipped bus stops with security cameras and emergency phones. Karakoglou and team have taken the added step of installing NextBus monitors—which update data every six seconds—in popular student hang-outs. This means students can take that 15 minutes of waiting for the bus and do something constructive and stress-free, like adding more friends to their Facebook profile.

NextBus currently operates in 20 U.S. states and is rapidly expanding. For more information on bringing Next Bus to your location, contact Whitney Sones.