[sustran] Re: It seems from what I can gather that 'xTransit' is basically a shared radio taxi. No?

[Lee Schipper]

Int ersting. This is the dominate form of transport in Mexico City (55% of trips, allowing that Metrobus has gobbled back 5% of the trips) and so many other places in Latin America. The six-seaters (that magicall hold up to 15 people) and Maxi Taxis in S asia look this way too.

>>> eric.britton at ecoplan.org 1/3/2006 3:15:37 PM >>>
xTransit: Getting people in and around cities in road vehicles, smaller than
full sized buses, driven by real human beings, dynamically shared with
others, and aided by state of the art communications technologies -- and all
of that as no less than the only way to offer "car like" mobility in most of
our 21st century cities without killing the cities themselves (the old
mobility way). 

What follows here (3 Jan 2005) is the beginning of our collaborate work in
this area, which is much needed to help us all to understand better how all
of this fits in with the New Mobility Agenda that we now need to use to
drive transport and related decisions in our cities. We are calling it for
now a "WorkPad". Keep reading and you will see how it is intended to work.
And then, one hopes, you will pitch in to help us all make this into a more
complete and more useful set of information tools for the much needed
transformation process in our cities around the world. 


Short History


 

This is the latest focus program of the New Mobility Agenda and The Commons,
which just got underway on the last day of 2005 to make an important, to us,
symbolic deadline. (Thus making it the on-schedule fourth in a series of ten
year world surveys and support programs reporting on these technologies and
their prospects, the first of which carried out in 1975, with new reviews in
1985 and 1995. We are nothing if not persistent.) 

If you are looking for some of the historic building blocks that have in
their various ways opened the way for what is now going to take place far
more quickly than probably even you think: "Old" New Mobility Agenda, which
you may know in the past, including such as shared taxis, dial-a-ride, DRT,
Demand Responsive Transport, paratransit, and the long list goes on. Take
any and all of those, and then complete the logistics/communications chain
with internet and mobile phones -- and a no less important wholesale
redefinition of the legal and regulatory context -- and there you have it:
xTransit. 

Here's how Ron Kirby and Kisten Bhat of the Urban Institute diagramed it in
1974 in their path-breaking report: Para-transit: Neglected options for
urban mobility (ISBN: 0877661219). (See website for diagram)

And what's the big difference with these same concepts many of which have
been around for decades? It's the technology, stupid! Stay tuned and get
involved. 


What is xTransit


 

The job of this section of the WorkPad -placed here merely to get the
discussions and serious work going and with no pretensions of being in any
way definitive - is to rough out the main antecedents and eventual raw
materials and components of a well working xTransit system. It is being
posted at this point as part of the process of starting to define and
development useful materials and perspectives on this important and as yet
hugely underexploited mobility asset. 

If you want to see an example of the sort of thing that we are targeting to
provide under this heading, our World Carshare project at
http://worldcarshare.com is the best example that we can cite today. 

Please give us your comments and suggestions, both as to points of details
and more broadly. 

What xTransit is not: 

*         'Normal' cars, 'normally' used (SOV etc.) 

*         Motorized two/three wheelers 

*         Scheduled, fixed route transit service 

*         Cycles 

*         Walking, running, etc. 

Antecedents/ways of getting around:
In any old order for now and just to get us going. What the following have
in common is that they all are, or could be, candidates for, group ride
services, more or less well articulated, more or less well supported by SOA
technology. For now we cluster these in groups of roughly like concepts and
operations: 

Taxis (even in the single client variant, as least as an antecedent) 

*         Limousines 

*         Group Taxis 

*         Jitneys 

*         Line Taxis 

*         Maxicabs 

*         Shared Taxis (also called, among many others: Colectivos, Peseros,
Jeepney, Matatu, Gush Texi, Dolmus, Public light bus, Shirut, Publicos,
Molue, Bemo, Tro-tro, Poda-poda, Danfo . . . and lots more) 

Ride-sharing 

*         Lift-sharing (in UK also called carsharing. Watch out!) 

*         Carpools 

*         Vanpools 

*         Buspools 

*         Ride-matching 

*         Hitchhiking 

Demand Responsive Transport 

*         DRT 

*         Dial a Ride 

*         Dial a Bus 

*         Taxi-Bus (Also Buxi, Busphone, Telebus, RufBas, ReTax,
Sammel-Taxi, Texxi <http://www.texxi.com/pro/texxi.nsf/?Open> , etc.) 

*         Accessible transit services 

Special Group Mobility Services 

*         Paratransit 

*         Shuttle buses 

*         Feeder services 

*         E&H group transit 

*         Medical transport 

*         Färdtjänst 

Carsharing???
Arguably does not belong here since in actual use it serves a single
customer/purpose. That said there are a number of important overlaps and
common issues, including the IT components of both. 

Goods/freight delivery 

*         Small package and message delivery 

*         Grouped goods delivery/Clustering 

*         Freight Village 

*         Teleshopping 

The other half of the xTransit equation:the logistics link: 

*         IT/ICT 

*         Central dispatching services 

*         Back-office systems and services 

*         Call centers and processing 

*         On board information and communications systems 

*         Advanced traveler information systems 

*         Internet/website information (may or may not be interactive) 

*         Internet/website reservation/ordering (interactive) 

*         Ride matching 

*         Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) 

*         GPS 

*         Mobile phones 

*         Mobility centers 

*         . . . 


Why has it lagged?


 

When the first demonstration systems began to appear in the mid/late
sixties, most ran into the dual problems of: (a) the technology was not
there yet; and (b) insufficiently entrepreneurial skills on the part of the
organizers. What was achieved however is that these first systems broke the
ice and various groups and people started to look more closely at these
group ride, 'third way' concepts. 

An even less successful series of attempted innovations -- PRT or Personal
Rapid Transit Systems (these entirely off the road, on their own guideways
and (too) ambitiously computer controlled from start to finish) -- which
despite being the beneficiaries of one, two, even three orders of magnitude
more investment also bit the dust. But they too started various players
around the world to thinking about high levels of service, and the ways in
which new technologies might provide the glue to keep them together. 

But the most important barriers that have delayed the progress and on-street
introduction of these systems have been above all the result of the many
ways in which the old system protects itself form innovation and change.
Here are some of these which have been at times examined by researchers,
public sector agencies, entrepreneurs, activists, and others hoping to
create a more open framework for innovation in this badly constrained sector
that is transport in cities. 

Which brings us to what is doubtless going to be the most important single
target, challenge and eventual contribution: 

*         "Channeled thinking" on the part of the authorities and most
others concerned in shaping the transport context of the city 

 <http://www.ecoplan.org/general/xtransit.htm#top>  


Next steps


 

Some of the key issue areas that now need collective attention if xTransit
is to advance in time to make a difference, both as a global concept and in
its various parts: 

*         Better knowledge of preconditions for success 

*         Institutional, legal, regulatory and other barriers (incl. local
ordinances) 

*         Integration, coordination issues 

*         Financing: Who pays what 

*         Role of fairbox 

*         Integration of fares with other carriers 

*         HOV priorities 

*         Labor union (resistance) 

*         Trade resistance (mainly from taxi operators) 

*         Insurance, liability 

*         Safety 

*         Privacy 

The model for our collaborative efforts: Perhaps, until something better
pops up, our collaborative efforts over the last decade via the World
Carshare <http://www.ecoplan.org/general/go-to-wcs.htm>  Consortium? 

It might also be useful to recall that this is an example of what we call a
Self-Organizing Collaborative Network
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-Organizing_Collaborative_Networks> , for
which you will find further background in the also in-progress Wikipedia
entry on this here
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-Organizing_Collaborative_Networks>  (own
window). You might also wish to have a look at their entry on Knowledge
Building <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_building> , which relates
closely albeit without the ever-important component of collaboration for
change. 


Some reading and references


 

Print references: 

This list has to be considered as partial and indeed misses out on the many
good non-English languages sources that have been cared out on our subject.
But we have to start somewhere. We list these for now in the order in which
they originally appeared to make their contributions to this new field. Note
that after about 1980, most references to "paratransit" increasingly refer
to what is sometimes called "handicapped transport", in particular in the US
and Canada. 

*  Para-transit: Neglected options for urban mobility, Kirby, Bhatt et al.
Urban Institute, Washington DC, 1974 

*  Paratransit: Survey of International Experience and Prospects, Britton et
al. EcoPlan International. U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Urban Mass
Transportation Administration, 1975 

*  Small city para-transit innovations, Connie A Garber Dept. of City and
Regional Planning, University of North Carolina. (1976) 

*  Demand responsive transportation planning guidelines, Cady C Chung Mitre
Corporation, Reston VA. 1976 

*  Paratransit: an assessment of past experience and planning methods for
the future, by Mary Gallery, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Urban Mass
Transportation Administration, 1979 

*  Paratransit: Changing perceptions of public transport : proceedings of a
workshop held in Mount Gambier, 20-23 February 1979. Australian Government
Pub. Service, 1980. 

*  Jitneys: A complement to public transportation, Carlos R Bonilla,
Transportation Center, University of Tennessee. 1981 

*  GSM paratransit vehicle tests, M Smith. Transportation Development
Centre, Cambridge, Mass. 1983 

*  Taxi-based paratransit technology/operations packages in Europe, Francis
E. K Britton, Technology Sharing Program, Office of the Secretary of
Transportation, Washington DC, 1985 

*  Urban Transit: The Private Challenge to Public Transportation, Charles A.
Lave. Pacific Research Inst, Los Angeles. 1985 

*  Technology and Business Opportunities in the Taxi Industry: An
International Survey, Francis E. K. Britton. EcoPlan International, Paris.
1987 

*  Assessment of computer dispatch technology in the paratransit industry,
John R Stone, Technology Sharing Program, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1992


*  Paratransit in southeast Asia: A market response to poor roads?, Robert
Cervero, University of California Transportation Center, Los Angeles. 1992. 

*  TaxiCom '95: International Survey of Leading innovational Taxi
Communications and operations Approaches. Britton, Rozen, Murga, et al.
Federal Transit Administration, Dept of Transportation, Washington, DC,
1995. 

*  A Handbook for Acquiring Demand-Responsive Transit Software, TRB,
Washington DC. 1996 

*  Paratransit in America, Robert Cervero, Praeger Publishers, New York,
1997 

*  Evaluation of automated vehicle location technologies for paratransit in
small and medium-size urban areas, Gary S Spring, Transportation Research
Board, Washington DC, 1997 

*  Contracting for Bus and Demand-Responsive Transit Services: A Survey of
U.S. Practice and Experience, National Research Council , Washington DC.
2001 

*  Flexible Urban Transportation, by Jonathan L Gifford, Pergamon Press,
2003 

*  Intermode
<http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_localtrans/documents/downloadable 
/dft_localtrans_030325.pdf>  : Innovations in Demand Responsive Transport,
Department for Transport, London, UK (PDF 1675 Kb) August 2004. 

Web references: 

*  Innovations
<http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_localtrans/documents/page/dft_loc 
altrans_030324.hcsp>  in Demand Responsive Transport (UK) 

*  VTPI on Taxi Service Improvements <http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm78.htm>
and on Shuttle Services <http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm39.htm>  

*  Google
<http://www.google.com/search?svnum=10&as_scoring=d&num=100&hl=en&newwindow= 
1&rls=GGGL,GGGL:2005-09,GGGL:en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&as_drrb=q&as_qdr=&as_mind=4&as_
minm=1&as_maxd=3&as_maxm=1&q=%22Demand+Responsive%22+taxi+OR+%7C+OR+transit+
OR+%7C+OR+transport+OR+%7C+O>  1: "Demand Responsive
Transport/Transportation/Transit/Taxi (with exclusions to narrow toward
usefulness) 

*  Google
<http://www.google.com/search?as_q=shared+&num=100&hl=en&newwindow=1&rls=GGL 
G%2CGGLG%3A2005-39%2CGGLG%3Aen&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=taxi+bus+tra
nsit+minibus&as_eq=algorithm+cable+processor+controller+switch+multiprocesso
rs&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&as
_rights=&safe=off>  2: "Shared Taxi/bus/transit (with exclusions to narrow
toward usefulness) 

*  Google Ride Finder <http://labs.google.com/ridefinder/help.html>  

(To follow)