Lots of people use public transportation everyday. Buses, train, LRT and other kind of public transportation used by million of peoples everyday around the world. Most of them are happy using this service, or at least satisfied with it. But in this article I will highlight the problem on public transportation worldwide. This problems coming from first hand experiences.
The first problem can be found is comes from its word, "public". There is going to be other people in the same vehicle. Do you want this? I'm sure not. But what can we do. Its a "public" transport. Don't get me wrong. It will be fun with other people around.
Second issue is travelers will stumble upon is the timing. we must adhere on the schedule of the transport. If late one minute, be prepare to wait another one hour next bus.
The last one is hygiene. So, you are finally sited and want to enjoy your surrounding? Think again. Also, the seat are always dirty to sit on.
That's all for this entry. Next time I will post about benifit of using ublic transportation.
note : posted by kitchenaid parts
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Friday, October 22, 2010
Public Transportation In Berlin
Our last post have discuss about public transportation in Germany. And for this entry, we also discuss about public transportation in Germany, but more specific in their capital city, Berlin. Berlin, is the capital city of Germany. Its famous with their historical sites, beautiful architecture structures and museum of arts. Many travelers love to go to Berlin because of enjoying fabulous tourist spot, has amazing public transport system. This enable travelers explore the whole city of Berlin. In Berlin also, every travelers has no problems in communicate with public transportation staff because they can speak in english. This make every travelers convenience to explore around Berlin city using public transportation.
Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe (BVG) is the biggest public transportation system in Berlin. Its also known as the best mode of transportation when exploring Berlin city. It has three zone, that is underground, surface rail and tram. It only require one ticket for travelers to ride on this three zone.
This systems (BVG) will make sure that every tourist are enjoy and have a fun time during exploring the city. During at night also, many of locals and travelers from all over the world use Berlin's public transportation. This is because the convenience and its comfort its bring to every user. BVG will always improves their system, facilities and services to give full satisfaction for their user.
S-Bahn Berlin GmBH is the second largest transport service in Berlin. With their fifteen lines, its can give service to more than million passengers everyday. S-Bahn also always make sure that they give the best service for their passengers. They continuously improve their system, facilities and services. They also promote a clean and healthy environment by using sulfur free diesel.
Berlin is the perfect city that you can enjoy for your vacation. Travelers love to come this city again not because the beautiful of this city only, also they love with their public transportation service.
Notes : azim is the writer of this articles. His own kitchenaid blog, with the latest post is about kitchenaid mixer parts.
Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe (BVG) is the biggest public transportation system in Berlin. Its also known as the best mode of transportation when exploring Berlin city. It has three zone, that is underground, surface rail and tram. It only require one ticket for travelers to ride on this three zone.
This systems (BVG) will make sure that every tourist are enjoy and have a fun time during exploring the city. During at night also, many of locals and travelers from all over the world use Berlin's public transportation. This is because the convenience and its comfort its bring to every user. BVG will always improves their system, facilities and services to give full satisfaction for their user.
S-Bahn Berlin GmBH is the second largest transport service in Berlin. With their fifteen lines, its can give service to more than million passengers everyday. S-Bahn also always make sure that they give the best service for their passengers. They continuously improve their system, facilities and services. They also promote a clean and healthy environment by using sulfur free diesel.
Berlin is the perfect city that you can enjoy for your vacation. Travelers love to come this city again not because the beautiful of this city only, also they love with their public transportation service.
Notes : azim is the writer of this articles. His own kitchenaid blog, with the latest post is about kitchenaid mixer parts.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Public Transportation In Germany
If you an america and you arrive in Germany, you can see the germany's public transportation is more efficient then in america. You can get this public transportation easily in anywhare and anytime. You also can buy a train ticket at your current location to your choosen destination. What is more amazing is this ticaket also valid for train, bus and taxi. This is so great.
azim from kitchenaid parts provide valuable information on Germany Travel derived from their own experiances in this Beautiful Country.
azim from kitchenaid parts provide valuable information on Germany Travel derived from their own experiances in this Beautiful Country.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Public transport safety, availability assured during Lenten break
THE SAFETY and availability of public transportation have been assured for travellers during the Holy Week break that begins Thursday and ends Sunday.
The Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) is providing help desks and passenger assistance centers as well as tightening security at all ports nationwide for the heavy passenger traffic during the Lenten break.
PPA is also giving a 20% discount to senior citizens and students on passenger terminal fees at all of its ports nationwide starting Friday.
Senior citizens are required to present valid identification cards to avail of the discount, while students could only avail of the discount during the school year.
In a statement on Wednesday, PPA General Manager Oscar M. Sevilla said they have been directed "to adopt appropriate measures that would ensure the continued safety and convenience of ships, passengers, and cargoes in the ports."
Measures include the provisions of help desks and passenger assistance centers; and coordination with various government agencies for port safety and security, and contingency plans for possible power interruption.
The passenger assistance centers will be manned by PPA personnel and members of other agencies such as the Philippine Coast Guard, Philippine National Police Maritime Command and Maritime Industry Authority.
For its part, the Department of Transportation and Communication (DoTC) will also set up road safety assistance centers during the break.
Called "Oplan Semana Santa 2009," the scheme will run from April 5-12 and will "ensure the convenience and safety of passengers going to the provinces during the Lenten season."
Through hot line 7890, the DoTC will maintain a 24-hour help desk and assistance network at all land, air and sea passenger terminals nationwide.
To accommodate heavy road traffic, the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) has also issued 240 special permits to bus operators nationwide effective April 5-13. LTFRB granted 153 additional bus units to operate in Northern Luzon, 18 in the Bicol Region, 35 in Southern Luzon and 34 in Visayas.
For those taking the elevated railway system, the Light Rail Transit lines 1 (Caloocan City to Pasay City) and 2 (Santolan in Pasig City to Recto in Manila), and the Metro Rail Transit (Pasay to SM North in Quezon City) will not operate on April 9-12. Services will resume on April 13.
Meanwhile, Victor I. Luciano, president and chief executive officer of the Clark International Airport and member of the air panel conducting talks with other countries on air service agreements, said on Wednesday airports nationwide have been ordered by the DoTC-Transportation and Security Administration (DoTC-TSA) to ramp up security.
"Airports have been put on tighter security due to the high number of passengers during Lent. We are now extra strict for the check-in baggages," he said in an interview.
Aside from the DoTC-TSA, airport securities are also coordinating with the Philippine National Police Aviation Security group. Mr. Luciano said airports nationwide increase their manpower by about 30%-40% during Holy Week.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Journal and Periodical List
these are some journals that might help you all understanding about transport and public transport:
Journal of Public Transportation
Produces its own transportation oriented studies and results.
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Provides information on many different aspects of the transportation field.
Journal of Transportation and Statistics
Is a U.S. DOT sponsored journal concerning the use and effects of transportation in society.
Journal of the Transportation Research Forum
Produced by a group of various transportation workers and address issues facing
transportation works, projects, and organizations today.
Journal of Urban Planning and Development
Discusses aspects associated with transportation planning and development in urban areas.
Journal of Public Transportation
Produces its own transportation oriented studies and results.
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Provides information on many different aspects of the transportation field.
Journal of Transportation and Statistics
Is a U.S. DOT sponsored journal concerning the use and effects of transportation in society.
Journal of the Transportation Research Forum
Produced by a group of various transportation workers and address issues facing
transportation works, projects, and organizations today.
Journal of Urban Planning and Development
Discusses aspects associated with transportation planning and development in urban areas.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Studies Analyzing the Influence of Urban Form on Transit Patronage
TCRP Report 16, published in 1996, presents results from Project H‐1, An Evaluation of the
Relationships between Transit and Urban Form. Report 16 consists of two volumes, each
containing two reports. The first volume includes a comprehensive literature review of studies
analyzing the relationship between transit and urban form for the period to 1995. The second
volume consists of a practitioner’s guidebook on patterns of development that encourage
transit patronage and on mode accessibility and catchment areas for rail transit.
The most important work prior to Report 16 is Pushkarev and Zupan (1977). This
publication presented “land‐use thresholds” at which different types of transit were feasible
investments. The methodology used single‐equation ordinary least square (OLS) regression
analysis. The choice of this method was dictated by the paucity of data available at the time as
well as the desire to present results as nomograms. A nomogram is a graph with which one can
find the value of a dependent variable given the values of two or more independent variables,
with only the use of a straightedge. The nomograms were designed to facilitate a planner’s
choice of a feasible transit alternative, given values of current or expected density levels and
other relevant variables.
The determinants of transit demand used by Pushkarev and Zupan were the size of the
central business district (CBD), measured in non‐residential floor space; the distance of a site
from the CBD; and residential density. The study also accounted for socio‐demographic
characteristics affecting transit patronage, such as vehicle ownership levels, household size and
income.
There are problems with this study as well as with a later one by Pushkarev and Zupan,
(1982). As part of this review, CUTR researchers tried to replicate numerical examples in the
study, but encountered several problems that made replication impossible. These problems
are similar to those of papers reviewed later. An important example of such a problem is the
lack of a formalized behavioral framework, a deficiency that in turn results in poorly specified
empirical equations.
In a subsequent update of their 1977 study, Pushkarev and Zupan (1982), examined the
feasibility of fixed guide‐way transit under the assumption that all work travel was to the CBD.
This assumption would be quite restrictive today, given the multi‐centered character of many
metropolitan regions.
Multicollinearity impairs the reliability of these estimates, as recognized by the authors
themselves. Also, lack of causality is a problem, for the estimated elasticities merely support a
direct relationship between transit patronage and population density. This causality problem,
which affects most findings in this research field, is discussed in a later section of this report.
Finally, the authors do not employ a model that accounts for inherent, unobserved regionspecific
characteristics that might affect the reliability of estimates. A fixed effect model
controlling for transit provider unobserved heterogeneity could provide a superior model.
Using Report 16 as a reference, Kuby et al. (2004) analyze the determinants of light rail
transit ridership with a multiple regression model using weekday boardings for 268 stations in
nine cities. For each city, five categories of independent variables accounting for land‐use and
other factors are used. The authors hypothesize that employment within walking distance of
each station is the most important factor for work trips. The model also controls for the
relevance of nearby airports and for city‐specific unobserved effects that might affect weekly
boarding, such as the presence of an international airport. The study finds that an increase of
100 persons employed within walking distance of a station increases boarding by 2.3
passengers per day while an increase of 100 persons residing within walking distance of a
station increases boardings by 9.2 passengers per day. The study also finds higher residential
population to be associated with higher weekly boardings and that the CBD variable is not
statistically significant, indicating that centrality is no longer relevant in determining light rail
ridership. This result could, however, be due to faulty test statistics produced by the high
correlation between the model’s measures of centrality and the CBD dummy.
Kuby et al. made some important improvements to the methodology of Report 16. First,
they captured the effect of the CBD on boardings by introducing a dummy variable for CBD
location. In contrast, Report 16 only examined ridership at non‐CBD stations. Second, Kuby et
al. included employment near non‐CBD stations. Report 16 included employment within the CBD, but it ignored employment around other stations. Third, they included accessibility to
non‐CBD stations. Report 16 computed distances from the stations to the CBD, but it ignored
stations’ accessibility to other stations. Finally, Kuby et al. used residential population within
CBD as an independent variable, while Report 16 did not.
Relationships between Transit and Urban Form. Report 16 consists of two volumes, each
containing two reports. The first volume includes a comprehensive literature review of studies
analyzing the relationship between transit and urban form for the period to 1995. The second
volume consists of a practitioner’s guidebook on patterns of development that encourage
transit patronage and on mode accessibility and catchment areas for rail transit.
The most important work prior to Report 16 is Pushkarev and Zupan (1977). This
publication presented “land‐use thresholds” at which different types of transit were feasible
investments. The methodology used single‐equation ordinary least square (OLS) regression
analysis. The choice of this method was dictated by the paucity of data available at the time as
well as the desire to present results as nomograms. A nomogram is a graph with which one can
find the value of a dependent variable given the values of two or more independent variables,
with only the use of a straightedge. The nomograms were designed to facilitate a planner’s
choice of a feasible transit alternative, given values of current or expected density levels and
other relevant variables.
The determinants of transit demand used by Pushkarev and Zupan were the size of the
central business district (CBD), measured in non‐residential floor space; the distance of a site
from the CBD; and residential density. The study also accounted for socio‐demographic
characteristics affecting transit patronage, such as vehicle ownership levels, household size and
income.
There are problems with this study as well as with a later one by Pushkarev and Zupan,
(1982). As part of this review, CUTR researchers tried to replicate numerical examples in the
study, but encountered several problems that made replication impossible. These problems
are similar to those of papers reviewed later. An important example of such a problem is the
lack of a formalized behavioral framework, a deficiency that in turn results in poorly specified
empirical equations.
In a subsequent update of their 1977 study, Pushkarev and Zupan (1982), examined the
feasibility of fixed guide‐way transit under the assumption that all work travel was to the CBD.
This assumption would be quite restrictive today, given the multi‐centered character of many
metropolitan regions.
Multicollinearity impairs the reliability of these estimates, as recognized by the authors
themselves. Also, lack of causality is a problem, for the estimated elasticities merely support a
direct relationship between transit patronage and population density. This causality problem,
which affects most findings in this research field, is discussed in a later section of this report.
Finally, the authors do not employ a model that accounts for inherent, unobserved regionspecific
characteristics that might affect the reliability of estimates. A fixed effect model
controlling for transit provider unobserved heterogeneity could provide a superior model.
Using Report 16 as a reference, Kuby et al. (2004) analyze the determinants of light rail
transit ridership with a multiple regression model using weekday boardings for 268 stations in
nine cities. For each city, five categories of independent variables accounting for land‐use and
other factors are used. The authors hypothesize that employment within walking distance of
each station is the most important factor for work trips. The model also controls for the
relevance of nearby airports and for city‐specific unobserved effects that might affect weekly
boarding, such as the presence of an international airport. The study finds that an increase of
100 persons employed within walking distance of a station increases boarding by 2.3
passengers per day while an increase of 100 persons residing within walking distance of a
station increases boardings by 9.2 passengers per day. The study also finds higher residential
population to be associated with higher weekly boardings and that the CBD variable is not
statistically significant, indicating that centrality is no longer relevant in determining light rail
ridership. This result could, however, be due to faulty test statistics produced by the high
correlation between the model’s measures of centrality and the CBD dummy.
Kuby et al. made some important improvements to the methodology of Report 16. First,
they captured the effect of the CBD on boardings by introducing a dummy variable for CBD
location. In contrast, Report 16 only examined ridership at non‐CBD stations. Second, Kuby et
al. included employment near non‐CBD stations. Report 16 included employment within the CBD, but it ignored employment around other stations. Third, they included accessibility to
non‐CBD stations. Report 16 computed distances from the stations to the CBD, but it ignored
stations’ accessibility to other stations. Finally, Kuby et al. used residential population within
CBD as an independent variable, while Report 16 did not.
report : Integrating Transit and Urban Form
page : 7 - 11
page : 7 - 11
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Cities must reduce road traffic to save young lives
21 October 2003: The consequences of transport for health affect most of the population, not just drivers and passengers in motor vehicles. In Europe, air pollution accounts for about 100,000 premature deaths in adults annually; emissions from road traffic make up a significant share of this pollution. Each year, traffic accidents still kill about 120,000 people (a third of them aged under 25 years), and cause some 2.5 million injuries.
In addition, noise affects people physiologically and psychologically: about 120 million people in the European Union (more than 30 per cent of its total population) are exposed to seriously annoying road traffic noise levels above. More than 50 million people are exposed to noise levels considered to be detrimental to health. Physical inactivity is a major risk factor for ill health, and is associated to 5 to 10 per cent of deaths in Europe, where 20 to 30 per cent of adults are estimated to be obese.
Children are particularly vulnerable to traffic-related health effects, including injuries. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), road traffic accidents are the leading cause of death among children aged 5 to 14 years in high-income European countries and rank third, after war injuries and acute lower respiratory diseases, in medium- and low-income countries. Air pollution exacerbates asthma attacks and bronchitis episodes, while exposure to lead in fuel can have neuro-developmental effects. Exposure to high levels of noise at school reduce attention and may interfere with learning skills. In addition, along with diet, the lack of physical activity is the main risk factor in the mounting epidemic of obesity and overweight in European children.
Using healthy and sustainable transport alternatives can reduce the negative effects of transport on human health. This is why the WHO supported European Mobility Week (EMW), which took place on 16 to 22 September 2003 in hundreds of cities across Europe and culminated in the event ‘Car Free Day’.
In addition, noise affects people physiologically and psychologically: about 120 million people in the European Union (more than 30 per cent of its total population) are exposed to seriously annoying road traffic noise levels above. More than 50 million people are exposed to noise levels considered to be detrimental to health. Physical inactivity is a major risk factor for ill health, and is associated to 5 to 10 per cent of deaths in Europe, where 20 to 30 per cent of adults are estimated to be obese.
Children are particularly vulnerable to traffic-related health effects, including injuries. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), road traffic accidents are the leading cause of death among children aged 5 to 14 years in high-income European countries and rank third, after war injuries and acute lower respiratory diseases, in medium- and low-income countries. Air pollution exacerbates asthma attacks and bronchitis episodes, while exposure to lead in fuel can have neuro-developmental effects. Exposure to high levels of noise at school reduce attention and may interfere with learning skills. In addition, along with diet, the lack of physical activity is the main risk factor in the mounting epidemic of obesity and overweight in European children.
Using healthy and sustainable transport alternatives can reduce the negative effects of transport on human health. This is why the WHO supported European Mobility Week (EMW), which took place on 16 to 22 September 2003 in hundreds of cities across Europe and culminated in the event ‘Car Free Day’.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
