Tracking code image

Tool Objectives

Passenger Information Systems can:

In combination with other measures such as bus priority, road geometry alterations and new vehicles, real time information systems can:

Passenger Information Systems also better inform people of when services are due, thus reducing their perceived waiting time (and possibly their actual wait time through provision of pre-trip information). Users like Passenger Information Systems and in some instances suggest that their presence make them feel safer. In addition, passenger information systems can offer a higher level of traveller care, due to people being better informed as to the nature of any delays that may affect their arrival time (especially true for in-vehicle information).

It should be noted that often passenger information systems are implemented with a fleet management system and Public Transport Priority. Very often, therefore, passenger information and fleet management systems are implemented in partnership with and with funding from local bus companies. This means bus operator scheme objectives must also be considered. These may include patronage improvements, efficiency improvements etc.

Tool Description

Real Time Passenger Information (RTPI) Systems generally provide both real time and timetable information about bus services via:

Real time information may also be presented via interactive terminals and plasma displays in major traffic generators such as shopping centres, council buildings etc. As a general rule, the information displayed informs the user about the arrival times of services and any problems with the service on the day in question.

Most recent RTPI systems consist of Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) equipment usually a GPS receiver fitted to each bus together with a radio transmitter, a central server and at stop signs. The bus communicates its position either on a regular (every 30 seconds) basis, or by exception, (when it reaches a certain point or does not reach a certain point within a time limited period). The central server then interprets the information from the bus and communicates the information using another radio transmitter, to the bus stop signs. Information is also passed to the website and to mobile devices on request. More information can be found in Traffic Advisory Leaflet ITS 7/03 Public Transport Information.

Recently there has been a trend to use TFT (Thin-Film Transistor) based screens at bus stops, which allow more graphical display of information. These have also been combined with "Content Management Systems", which allow other information feeds (such as news tickers, rail information and event details) to be displayed in addition to bus real time information.

Integrated Systems

RTPI systems generally include an automatic vehicle location component. This means that RTPI systems are often implemented together with Vehicle Fleet Management systems and Public Transport Priority systems.

Many authorities have implemented server to server links with neighbouring authorities to exchange data. This also allows information on cross boundary routes to be presented on signs owned by both authorities.

Content management systems such as Cityspace Vision allow a user to control a range of content for broadcast. Screen layouts can be divided into separate areas so that various sources of information can be displayed simultaneously. For example a user can watch TV and at the same time have an eye on a train timetable. A user can select a layout template from a range of available templates, create a tailored playlist of content components and schedule broadcast of the playlist by time, date and screen location.

Key Cost Drivers

The cost of Real Time Information Systems are greatly affected by the nature and scale of the system employed but key considerations are:

Capital Costs

Revenue costs

Suppliers are working to develop electronic ticket machines with GPS facilities that can deliver basic automatic vehicle location functionality. This potentially will reduce the cost of Passenger Information Systems but may reduce overall functionality.

 

Costs

The following table presents costs of some specific deployed schemes.

Costs symbol Leicester Star Trak 247 AVL equipped buses over 22 routes DfT grant £1.65 million Capital Cost: approximately £3,397,000 over 4 years
Revenue Cost: approximately £90,000 per annum
Costs symbol The West & South Yorkshire RTI Project 450 AVL equipped buses, bus information for 23,000 stops (not all Real Time) via WEB, WAP, SMS, Phone server DfT grant £2.5 million Capital Cost: > £10 million
Revenue Cost: Not Reported.
Costs symbol West Midlands Bus RTI Project 338 AVL equipped buses, 208 at stop signs, bus information available for 2,000 stops, via WEB and SMS. 50 + routes covered DfT grant £2 million Capital Cost: £4.035 million
Revenue Cost: Not yet reported

System component costs vary depended on the technology employed and the manufacturers used. Some indicative costs for equipment components in 2004 are as follows:

At stop displays

Display Type Order of cost in £
20" ruggedised TFT Monitor £6,000 - £8,000
32" TFT in envirionmental housing £8,000 - £12,000
40" TFT in environmental housing £10,000 - £15,000
3 Line in shelter displays £3,500 - £5,000
Electronic bus stop flags £2,000 - £3,000

(Source - AECOM 2008)

At-stop displays can also be fitted with RNIB React Audio Units, which provide information as audio anouncments, when triggered by a keyfob carried by a blind or partially-sighted user.

On board automatic vehicle location equipment

On board GPS receiver, on board processor, radio card and antenna costs in the order of £1,600 - £3,500 at 2008 prices (Source - AECOM 2008) dependant on technology and radio network employed.

In-station costs

Dependant on system procured.

Radio Network Costs

Dependant on technology employed.

Some possible options are:

Other radio solutions that may be employed include third generation digital public networks and MESH technology (MESH is a proprietary system using unlicensed radio spectrum) Both these solutions are not yet widely used for Real Time Information systems but may offer cost effective RTI radio solutions in the future.

Spending on system elements by proportion

Lehtonen and Kulmala (2002) have provided a percentage-based analysis of the proportionate capital spending on the HELMI RTI project in Helsinki:

System Component % of Capital expenditure
Displays at bus stops 22
In-vehicle systems 31
Signal devices and priority systems 13
Management system, with a radio network 34

The RTI Mapping and Funding Survey Summary presents estimates of capital and revenue spending on real time information systems that will have been committed in London and the whole of England by the end of 2003. This indicates that, outside of London the percentage breakdown of spending is as follows:

Percentage Breakdown of Non-London Spending Capital Costs % Revenue Costs %
On-bus Kit 35 21
At stop signage 31 27
Infrastructure 13 25
Miscellaneous 11 12
Communications 10 15

It should be noted that while the above percentage breakdown of costs are interesting, some concerns have been raised about the high proportion of spending on At stop signage given the difficulties of attributing realisable transport related benefits to at stop signs.

Benefits

Scheme Safety

Safety

 Environment

Environment

 Economy / Efficiency

Efficiency

 Accessiblity

Accessibility

 Integration

Integration

 Technical Performance

Performance

 User Acceptance

User Acceptance
United Kingdom Scheme
STOPWATCH - Hampshire sig 		**Not an objective for the project.** **Not measured in the project evaluation.** This information scheme generated a 5% increase in bus patronage. A benefit:cost ratio in excess of 2:1 was achieved. Before the introduction of the system, 16.3% of people felt this would make them use the buses more, however post-implementation this figure had dropped to 3.7%. **Not an objective for the project.** **Not an objective for the project.** - -
United Kingdom Scheme
TIMECHECKER - Liverpool sig 		**Not an objective for the project.** **Not measured in the project evaluation.** The Timechecker system has led to a 5% increase in patronage on routes where Timechecker had been installed. **Not an objective for the project.** **Not an objective for the project.** The system claims 90% accuracy. 68% of passengers used Timechecker consistently. 92% perceived RTI to be either 'very accurate' or 'accurate' and 85% that it made waiting more acceptable. 87% felt it gave a feeling of reassurance and 73% that it made them feel safer waiting for a bus at night. 57% thought that real-time displays resulted in decreased waiting times, with 71.5% believing that in general, bus services improved when the electronic displays were installed. 89% wanted to see an expansion in the provision of real-time information, to cover all stops.
United Kingdom Scheme
COUNTDOWN - London sig 		**Not an objective for the project.** **Not measured in the project evaluation.** Countdown was found to generate a minimum of 1.5% new revenue. **Not an objective for the project.** **Not an objective for the project.** 96% of passengers thought that Countdown information was clear and easy to see, and had no problem with the system. Passengers approved of the 3 essential pieces of information provided (route number, destination and waiting time). About 70% of passengers referred to the display when they arrived at the stop, and about 90% looked at the sign while they waited. 65% perceived a shorter waiting time, whilst 89% felt the wait was more acceptable. 83% of passengers found that time seemed to pass more quickly and the service was also perceived as being more reliable. Passengers perceived waiting at bus stops at night to be safer.
United Kingdom Scheme
Star Trak - Leicester sig 		**Not an objective for the project.** **Not measured in the project evaluation.** The bus routes that were equipped with the Star Trak equipment experienced a 28% patronage increase. **Not an objective for the project.** **Not an objective for the project.** - 90% of users consider the electronic displays either useful or very useful. This is due to the implementation of VMS at bus stops, displays on the buses, SMS information for all stops and bus priority for late buses.
IBIS - Trondheim, Norway sig **Not an objective for the project.** **Not measured in the project evaluation.** **Not measured in the project evaluation.** **Not an objective for the project.** **Not an objective for the project.** During a 21-week trial period for the SMS information system, the system suffered only one breakdown, caused by a hacker breaking into the main server. 86% of users found RTI to be helpful, with only 5% believing it to be unnecessary. Among SMS users, 59% would be willing to pay for RTI at bus stops, on average 1.5 Krone (13p) per journey. 49% would be willing to pay for the real time SMS service, at an average of 1.1 Krone (10p). Among respondents to a workplace survey, 35% would be willing to pay for RTI at bus stops, on average 0.7 Krone (6p) per journey. 40% would be willing to pay for the real time SMS service, at an average of 0.7 Krone (6p).
QUARTET PLUS / APOLLON - Athens, Greece sig **Not an objective for the project.** **Covered in another part of the project.** **Covered in another part of the project.** **Not an objective for the project.** **Not an objective for the project.** - Analysis of the website (which featured multimodal trip planning and real-time travel information) showed that 45% of the respondents were regular users. High rates were obtained for the comprehension (72%), usefulness (78%), accuracy (65%) and access time (65%) of the service.
uk indicates that the scheme is from the United Kingdom.
sig indicates that the results for this scheme are significant at the 95% or greater level.

Assessment Approach

The key benefit directly derived from providing Passenger Information Systems relate to improvements in integration by improving the quality of information provided at bus stops.

Real Time Information Signs also reduce the perceived wait time at stops although justifying signs on these grounds is difficult as there is no agreed monetary benefit from the provision of RTPI signs.

It is therefore suggested that Passenger Information Systems are more easily cost justified on economic grounds by assessment in combination with public transport priority and fleet management systems as part of a total package.

Extra revenue created from increasing patronage caused purely by new Passenger Information Systems is likely to be small and very difficult to isolate from other effects on passenger numbers. Research has shown that 'advanced traveller information services' (of which Passenger Information Systems are a subset) provide an increase in passenger numbers of 1% - 3% (Schweiger 2003).

Economy/Efficiency Objectives

There is evidence to suggest that the provision of real time information at bus stops may decrease the perceived value of waiting time at these stops. The standard value of wait time is calculated as being 2.5 times the value attributed to walking or in vehicle ride time (as stated in TAG guidance). At present, no change in value of wait time can be claimed through the provision of RTI in TAG.

Where justifying Real Time Information systems are part of a wider initiative it may be possible to identify journey time savings and journey time reliability improvements (perhaps through the deployment of fleet management or public transport priority measures). The following paragraphs demonstrate where information is available about justifying schemes using these benefits.

WEBTAG 3.5.2 - The Transport Economic Efficiency Sub-Objectives. This unit covers general information about the economy/efficiency objective including benefits from journey times. WEBTAG 3.5.3 - Transport User Benefit Calculation. This sub-objective contains more detailed information about modelling and calculating the value of journey time benefits and vehicle operating costs. WEBTAG 3.5.6 - Values of Time and Operating Costs. The unit explains the difference between working and non-working time. Section 1.2.19 also includes the assertion that the value of non-working wait time is 2.5 times higher than the value of non-working travel time.

WEBTAG 3.5.7 - The Reliability Sub-Objective. This unit covers how journey time reliability is calculated and improvements can be shown. The unit shows the specific methods for measuring reliability of scheduled public service vehicles such as buses.

Integration Objectives

Adding Passenger Information Systems to bus stops and interchange locations can increase the standard of provision at interchanges. WEBTAG 3.7.1 - The Transport Interchange Sub-Objective. The unit details how certain criteria can be met to improve the integration objective. Provision of Real Time Information displays is included in the top 'High Standard' threshold for 'Level of Information'.

Improving other facilities such as better paper based information and creating an integrated timetable with connection information can also increase the integration objective in other areas.

Additionally WEBTAG 3.7.3 - The Other Government Policies Sub-Objective considers the impact of transport proposals on other Government policies (in this case, on tackling social exclusion and in the provision of e-Government facilities), in order to assess the effect on overall policy integration within Government.

Environment Objectives

Whilst there is no direct link between the provision of passenger information systems and environment benefits, any modal change figures arising from its provision can be used to estimate its environmental benefit in terms of less vehicles on the road and reduced congestion. The most relevant environmental objectives to be assessed are as follows:

WEBTAG 3.3.3 - The Local Air Quality Sub-Objective. This TAG Unit provides guidance on assessing the impact of transport options on local air quality. This particularly concerns levels of oxides of nitrogen (NOx), fine particulate matter such as PM10, carbon monoxide and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as benzene and 1,3-butadiene.

WEBTAG 3.3.5 - The Greenhouse Gases Sub-Objective. This TAG unit looks at how to assess the impacts of transport schemes on greenhouse gases emissions, including carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4).

Monitoring Requirements

Monitoring undertaken should enable the:

Given that the benefits currently available from RTI under TAG guidance relate to enhanced integration, it is prudent to undertake user surveys both prior to and post implementation. Survey questions might include:

Technical assessment may be undertaken to ensure that:

If RTI is implemented with fleet management or public transport priority tools then patronage levels of before and after implementation should be assessed.

Other Important Considerations

More Information

More information can be found at the following sources:

Case Studies

Centro Real Time Information

Leicester Star Trak

NADICS - National Driver Information and Control System

Reading UTMC Demonstrator

Last updated: 12-Jan-2010