<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>TRANSFER OPTIMIZATION IN AN INTERACTIVE GRAPHIC SYSTEM FOR TRANSIT PLANNING</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/59330</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper describes a coordinated four-stage interactive graphic process for operational transit planning.  Stage 1 deals with route, headway, and vehicle-type optimization; stage 2 attempts to optimize transfer delays; stage 3 designs runs so that the service resulting from the previous stages can be operationalized; and stage 4 provides computer assistance in making manpower assignments.  The network optimization procedure of stage 1 has been previously reported on, and the latter two stages are currently under development.  This paper deals principally with the transfer optimization tool of stage 2.  The operational tool to optimize transfer delays involves the automated-iterative modification of terminal departure times.  An interactive graphic computer approach is used to increase the transparency of the tool to the planner.  The analysis takes into account the calculation of expected waiting times for transfers between transit lines with different headways and the interdependence of terminal departure times.  Within the interactive graphic optimization process, the user can request computer-generated and computer-drawn charts of transfer movements and delays, time-distance diagrams of individual routes, and computer-produced transfer statistics at individual stops as well as the entire system.  The process has been applied to the Basel Transit System in Switzerland, which serves a population of 500,000.  In comparison with the existing hand-generated timetable, the optimized timetable reduces the total transfer delays by approximately 20 percent with no increase in operating costs.  /Author/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 1982 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/59330</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SPECIFICATION OF RAPID TRANSIT ACCESS MODE REQUIREMENTS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/172860</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Descriptive aggregate measures of access transportation to rapid transit stations are investigated to provide guiding principles for rapid transit access planning.  Problems associated with the development of a data base that provides sufficient sensitivity for analyzing the problem are identified.  Data from the BART and Lindenwold systems are selected with certain qualifications, and used to show the influence of location, parking availability, and station accessibility on rapid transit access service.  Concepts for economic cost models are used to define generalized impedance curves for the different access modes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/172860</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TRANSIT STATION CLASSIFICATION FOR ACCESS MODE ANALYSIS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/172859</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A classification scheme for rapid transit stations that shows requirements for similar modes of access is investigated.  Data for 18 parameters that appear to distinguish the 34 BART stations were employed to establish station groups.  Among the 18 variables used were those that characterize the physical nature of the terminal (above or below ground, parking, etc.); the accessibility of the terminal (local bus, expressways, local streets); and the socioeconomic nature of the area surrounding the terminal (race, average income, percent industrial, etc.).  The relative importance of these variables was established during the analysis.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/172859</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>BUSWAY VERSUS RAIL BRANCH: ANALYSIS OF ATLANTA'S TUCKER-NORTH DEKALB CORRIDOR (ABRIDGMENT)</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/59325</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of this study was to evaluate comprehensively the costs, operational effects, and partronage aspects of busway versus rail rapid transit in the Tucker-North Dekalb (T/ND) corridor in Atlanta.  Two transportation alternatives were considered: a rail branch providing direct, no transfer service and operating as a separate radial line; and a busway alternative operating a feeder service route.  A discussion of passenger attraction, capital costs, operating cost, and quality of service factors for both the rail and busway alternatives is included.  It is concluded that for the study corridor, capital costs of busways will be lower than those for rail branches; rail service into a branch corridor will invariably be of a higher quality than will a busway feeding a main rail line; and operating costs will not be as costly to operate as a busway feeder system.  For these reasons, a rail branch will attract a substantially greater number of riders than will be busway alternative.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/59325</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A LOOK AT THE LIGHT SIDE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40289</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Light rail transit is a very popular concept in North America at the moment.  Transit planners like light rail because it is not experimental like some rapid transit systems.  It is also cheaper to install than a subway system.  However, despite the great interest in light rail no new systems are being built in North American at the moment, although several are planned.  The main development in light rail has been the new car design for replacing old equipment on the San Francisco and Boston systems.  The article gives a brief summary of existing and proposed light rail systems in the United States and Canada.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40289</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>