Transit Management > Operations & Fleet Management > Automatic Vehicle Location / Computer-Aided Dispatch
Recent contract awards suggest the capital costs to implement bus AVL systems range from $10,000 to $20,000 per vehicle.(2008)
The METropolitan Special Transit, a paratransit service in Billings, Montana, spent approximately $43,500 to add automatic vehicle location (AVL) technology to its fleet of 15 vehicles. $83,575 was spent for a computer-assisted scheduling and dispatching (CASD) software system.(May 2, 2007)
Capital costs for transit vehicle mobile data terminals typically range between $1,000 and $4,000 per unit, with installation costs frequently between $500 and $1,000.(2007)
Driver assist and automation systems can substantially increase the cost of a new bus.(2007)
In Michigan, the Flint Mass Transportation Authority budgeted $1 million to develop a central system for county-wide AVL.(June 2005)
The annualized life-cycle costs for full ITS deployment and operations in Tucson were estimated at $72.1 million. (May 2005)
A modeling study evaluated the potential deployment of full ITS capabilities in Cincinnati. The annualized life-cycle cost was estimated at $98.2 million.(May 2005)
The annualized life-cycle costs for full ITS deployment and operations in Seattle were estimated at $132.1 million.(May 2005)
TMC central hardware costs can exceed $200,000 if regional communications and system integration are required.(5 August 2004)
The ITS components for the Bus Rapid Transit system in the Greater Vancouver area of British Columbia, Canada costs $5.8 million (Canadian).(August 2003)
Client Referral, Ridership, and Financial Tracking (CRRAFT), a New Mexico Web-based system that provides coordination between funding agencies and their subgrantees cost about $1 million to implement. CRRAFT is one of five transit agency highlighted in a rural transit ITS best practices case study.(March 2003)
Based on information from 18 agencies worldwide, the costs of real-time bus arrival information systems vary depending on AVL technology, fleet size, and provisioning of real-time information. (2003)
The cost of the capital infrastructure of the Cape Cod Advanced Public Transit System—which included radio tower upgrades, local area network upgrades, AVL/MDT units (total of 100), and software upgrades—was $634,582.(January 2003)
A Minnesota integrated communications system project to share application of ITS across transportation, public safety, and transit agencies cost just over $1.5 million.(November 2001)
Detailed communications equipment costs for the Denver Regional Transportation District regional transit AVL/CAD system.(August 2000)
The Denver Regional Transportation District deployed a regional transit AVL/CAD system for $10.4 million; O&M costs were estimated at $1.9 million. (August 2000)
The cost to implement an advanced public transportation systems in Ann Arbor, Michigan was $32,500 per bus.(October 1999)
Transit operators and dispatchers for the South Lake Tahoe Coordinated Transit System (CTS) are generally satisfied with the new system deployed and feel that it can provide good capabilities for future service expansion.(4/14/2006)
In Salt Lake City, Utah, a transit Connection Protection system yielded a small, but not statistically significant, increase in the number of travelers satisfied with their travel experience; 87 percent compared to 85 percent.(5/12/2004)
A survey of visitors to the Acadia National Park in Maine found that more than 80 percent who experienced on-board next-stop announcements and real-time bus departure signs agreed these technologies made it easier to get around.(June 2003)
In Portland, Oregon, the Tri-Met transit agency used archived AVL data to reduce variation in run times, improve schedule efficiency, and make effective use of resources.(June 2003)
A survey of visitors to the Acadia National Park in Maine found that 90 percent of respondents who used the real-time bus departure signs and 84 percent of respondents who experienced the automated on-board next-stop message announcements agreed these technologies made it easier to get around.(February 2003)
Simulation of a transit signal priority system in Helsinki, Finland indicated that fuel consumption decreased by 3.6 percent, Nitrogen oxides were reduced by 4.9 percent, Carbon monoxide decreased by 1.8 percent, hydrocarbons declined by 1.2 percent, and particulate matter decreased by 1.0 percent.(13-17 January 2002.)
In Helsinki, Finland a transit signal priority system improved on-time arrival by 22 to 58 percent and real-time passenger information displays were regarded as useful by 66 to 95 percent of passengers.(13-17 January 2002.)
A transit signal priority system in Helsinki, Finland reduced delay by 44 to 48 percent, decreased travel time by 1 to 11 percent, and reduced travel time by 35,800 to 67,500 passenger-hours per year. (13-17 January 2002.)
In Denver, 80 percent of RTD dispatchers felt that the GPS functions of the transit AVL system were "easy" or "very easy" to use and approximately half of bus drivers and street supervisors felt likewise.
(August 2000)
In Denver, transit AVL decreased early and late arrivals by 12 and 21 percent, respectively.(August 2000)
In 1998, in Portland, Oregon an automatic vehicle location system with computer aided dispatching improved on-time bus performance by 9 percent, reduced headway variability between buses by 5 percent, and decreased run-time by 3 percent.(Summer 2000)
When bus priority was used with an adaptive signal control system in London, England average bus delay was reduced by 7 to 13 percent and average bus delay variability decreased by 10 to 12 percent. (6-12 November 1999)
Intelligent Time Savers, Life Savers(December 1997)
In San Jose, California, a paratransit program equipped with AVL/CAD and an automated scheduling and routing system, realized increased ridership, better on-time performance, and a $500,000 reduction in annual operating costs.
(March/April 1997)
In San Jose, California, a paratransit driver commented that she was satisfied with a new AVL/CAD scheduling and routing system, and said it was useful for settling disputes concerning on-time performance .(March/April 1997)
In Sweetwater, Wyoming a computer assisted dispatching system that allowed same-day ride requests contributed to an 80 percent increased in ridership (5,000 to 9,000 passengers per month), without requiring an increase in dispatch staff. (September 1996)
In Kansas City, Missouri an automatic vehicle location (AVL) system increase productivity by eliminating seven buses out of a 200 bus system that allowed Kansas City to recover their investment in AVL in two years.(14 November 1995)
In Kansas City, transit AVL systems improved on-time bus performance from 80 to 90 percent.(November 1995)
In Kansas City, a transit AVL system reduced the time required to respond to bus drivers' calls for assistance.(November 1995)
Transit AVL can improve O&M and reduce operating expenses.(November 1995)
In Baltimore and Kansas City, AVL improved on-time bus performance by 23 percent and 12 percent, respectively; in Milwaukee, AVL contributed to a 28 percent reduction in buses behind schedule by more than one minute.(July 1995)
In Winston-Salem, North Carolina, a CAD scheduling system use to manage 17 transit vehicles decreased passenger wait time by more than 50 percent.(1995)
In Winston-Salem, North Carolina, a CAD scheduling system increased vehicle miles per passenger-trip by 5 percent, reduced operating expenses, and contributed to an expanding client list which grew from 1,000 to 2,000 in 6 months(1995)
Secure high level management support and broad participation throughout an organization during the implementation and operation of transit automatic vehicle location systems.(2008)
Plan for cellular communications to evolve and transition to new communication technologies every few years.(2008)
Consider the implications of ITS transit technologies on operational efficiencies.(4/14/2006)
Consider the pros and cons of performance bonds as they may not be appropriate for all types of procurements.(January 2006)
Exercise careful planning in preparation for issuing an RFP to help mitigate cost, schedule, and performance risks.(January 2006)
Consider issuing separate awards for specific project components when procuring divergent technologies, equipment, or services.(January 2006)
Use transit intelligent transportation systems (ITS) technologies in rural areas to save agency staff time and create a more user-friendly system.(2/1/2005)
Assure accurate late train arrival forecasts in support of a Connection Protection system.(5/12/2004)
Incorporate real-time bus and train location information in the Connection Protection algorithm.(5/12/2004)
Adjust bus schedules to assure adequate time to accomplish rail-to-bus connections, given the risk of late train arrivals at connecting stations.(5/12/2004)
Develop ways to raise awareness among businesses to promote advanced traveler information sources to their customers.(June 2003)
Consider various technical applications and processes, such as using GIS, evaluating systems compatibility and the facility for upgrades, when deploying ITS.(March 2003)
Design the system to withstand the demands of the physical environment in which it will be deployed.(4/1/2002)
Design and tailor system technology to deliver information of useful quality and quantity, that the user can reasonably absorb.(4/1/2002)
Install Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) technology to greatly enhance transit agency performance.(1/1/1999)
Improve demand response transit using ITS technology, including CAD/AVL, with Mobile Data Terminals (MDT), electronic ID cards, and Geographic Information Systems (GIS).(1/1/1998)
