Vehicle Selection for BRT: Issues and Options

Zimmerman, Samuel; Levinson, Herbert S

doi:10.5038/2375-0901.7.1.5

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…State-of-the-art vehicles, including in some cases massive bi-articulated buses, which characterise BRT's image and identity, but also play according to [51] a strong role in achieving measurable performance success.…”

Section: The Elements Differentiating Bus Rapid Transitmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Can Autonomous and Connected Vehicles, Electromobility, BRT, Hyperloop, Shared Use Mobility and Mobility-As-A-Service Shape Transport Futures for the Context of Smart Cities?

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:A smarter transport system that caters for social, economic and environmental sustainability is arguably one of the most critical prerequisites for creating pathways to more livable urban futures. This paper aims to provide a state-of-the-art analysis of a selection of mobility initiatives that may dictate the future of urban transportation and make cities smarter. These are mechanisms either recently introduced with encouraging uptake so far and much greater potential to contribute in a shift to a better transport paradigm or still in an embryonic stage of their development and yet to be embraced as powerful mechanisms that could change travel behaviour norms. Autonomous and connected vehicles are set to revolutionise the urban landscape by allowing machines to take over driving that for over a century has been exclusively a human activity, while electrical vehicles are already helping decarbonising the transport sector. Bus rapid transit has been steadily reinventing and rebranding conventional bus services revitalising the use of the humblest form of public transport, while hyperloop is an entirely new, disruptive, and somewhat provocative, travel mode proposition based on the use of sealed tube systems through which pods could travel free of air resistance with speeds exceeding 1000 km/h. Shared use mobility mechanisms like car-sharing, ride-sharing, ride-sourcing and public bicycles can help establishing a culture for using mobility resources on an as-needed basis, while mobility-as-a-service will take this sharing culture a step further, offering tailored mobility and trip planning packages that could entirely replace the need for privately owned modes of transport.

show abstract

Section: The Elements Differentiating Bus Rapid Transitmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Can Autonomous and Connected Vehicles, Electromobility, BRT, Hyperloop, Shared Use Mobility and Mobility-As-A-Service Shape Transport Futures for the Context of Smart Cities?

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• Doors: Increasing the number of wide doors for boarding and alighting reduces the service/dwelling time of buses. While wider doors can support multiple stream boarding and/or alighting, multiple doors also result in better distributions of passengers within the vehicle (Zimmerman & Levinson, 2004) and reduce the time spent getting to/from a seat from/to a door. Separate doors for boarding and alighting can be provided to facilitate and expedite passenger movements (Diaz & Schneck, 2000).…”

Section: Vehiclesmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…This practice is most common in Latin American BRT systems. • Floor elevation: The floor height of BRT vehicles can be of three types (Zimmerman & Levinson, 2004): (1) 100% low floor; (2) partial low floor (usually about 70%); and (3) high floor. Low-floor buses are often used to provide easy boarding and alighting for passengers with disabilities, young children, the elderly, expectant mothers, passengers with baby carriages and people carrying heavy loads.…”

Section: Vehiclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bus rapid transit – a review

Wirasinghe

Kattan

Rahman

et al. 2013

International Journal of Urban Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Comfort and Convenience Comfort and convenience was expressed through four indicators: passenger space, cargo space, leg room space available to each passenger, and access time. For transit buses it was assumed that the space under the seats was the cargo space available to each passenger (47). The access time was the time spent reaching the vehicle and starting the trip.…”

Section: Vehicle Sustainability Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multicriterion Sustainability Assessment in Transportation

Mitropoulos

Prevedouros

2014

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increase in the number of hybrid electric vehicles and carshare users in the United States in the past decade urges transportation officials to incorporate vehicle characteristics into traditional transportation planning and sustainability assessments. This study updates the state of the art in three main ways: (a) employs a life-cycle approach instead of focusing only on the operation of modes, (b) disaggregates vehicles by type instead of assuming a uniform light-duty vehicle fleet, and (c) assesses conventional and hybrid technologies explicitly for travel mode combinations instead of assuming only fossil fuel–powered vehicles and private cars. The sustainability framework used in this study sets the direction for a multicriterion assessment of urban transportation. Six highway vehicles and modes are analyzed: an internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV), a hybrid electric vehicle (HEV), a carsharing program with ICEVs, a carsharing program with HEVs, a diesel bus, and a hybrid diesel–electric bus. The three travel combinations are developed into three case studies: (a) passenger vehicle only, (b) passenger vehicle and public bus, and (c) carsharing and public bus. The results show that the inclusion of carsharing in the travel mix is the best option. The most sustainable mode, relative to the other five, is found to be carsharing with HEVs. The superior performance of carsharing over transit buses reveals opportunities for new policies in sustainable transportation.

show abstract

Vehicle Selection for BRT: Issues and Options

Abstract: A-23 (Levinson, Zimmerman, et al. 2003). It also reflects experience from newer BRT

Cited by 12 publications

References 2 publications

How Can Autonomous and Connected Vehicles, Electromobility, BRT, Hyperloop, Shared Use Mobility and Mobility-As-A-Service Shape Transport Futures for the Context of Smart Cities?

How Can Autonomous and Connected Vehicles, Electromobility, BRT, Hyperloop, Shared Use Mobility and Mobility-As-A-Service Shape Transport Futures for the Context of Smart Cities?

Bus rapid transit – a review

Multicriterion Sustainability Assessment in Transportation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About