1. The Relationship of Scheduling to Costs

2. Introduction Robert Madison – Manager, Scheduling & Analysis Ken Halliday – Senior Scheduler

3. Scheduling Process Transit Scheduling Definition (verb) - the act of designing a relationship between time and space – creating a plan for when a vehicle will pass by a specific geographic location. Because of the geographic aspect, efficient scheduling is not a “stand alone” activity, it has to be related to the route design.

4. Scheduling process (overview) 1.Understand the challenges and opportunities 2.Understand the constraints 3.Collect information 4.Collect basic running time data 5.Refine running times 6.Determine cycle time

5. Scheduling process (overview) 7.Build trip schedule 8.Block trips 9.Runcut blocks 10.Finalization and wrap-up

6. Scheduling process (approaches) Network/route design and scheduling go hand-in-hand Various approaches ‣ Hub and spoke » Often with timed transfers ‣ Loops » High coverage vs. inconvenient routings/timings ‣ Grid » Often offers best headway opportunities

7. Hub and Spoke network Schedules are designed so several buses arrive at one location at specific times to facilitate transfers. Also known as timed-transfer, or pulse network

8. Hub and Spoke network (pros) Maximize transfer opportunities ‣ Often with timed transfers/scheduled meets Most passengers can get to main hub on one-seat ride

9. Hub and Spoke network (cons) Very little flexibility with route length ‣ Bus has to be able to get back to hub to meet with other buses Delays cause significant disruption ‣ One late bus can make every bus late Not convenient for travel between outer ends of adjacent spokes

10. Loop networks (pros) Maximize coverage area with fewer vehicles Really, seriously, not much else.

11. Loop networks (cons) Indirect routings One-way loops offer no easy return trip options Hard for passengers to understand Not always a clear start and end point ‣ Interlining can be difficult if the bus is expected to continue on its loop routing

12. Loop networks

13. Grid Buses are scheduled to run frequently so wait times for transfers are minimized.

14. Grid networks (pros) Allows for best headway / frequent transit Convenient for transferring anywhere in system Straightforward, logical Allows for less service duplication

15. Grid networks (cons) Not easy to do timed transfers ‣ Each route can have different headways ‣ Too many transfer possibilities to try and make individual ones work Local street network must work for grids

16. Short turns & branches Useful where demand on one portion of a route is significantly higher than demand on another portion Multiple outlying areas need service to a single dense corridor

17. Short turns & branches Short turns should actually save money in order to be logical Branches necessarily must have a headway that is a multiple of the trunk headway.

18. Route Design/Structure Efficient, lower cost systems ideally run buses through dense population areas Take passengers to/from popular destinations ‣ Employment centres ‣ Shopping and entertainment centres ‣ Schools

19. Service Standards and Policies Define your transit system’s “reason for being”.

20. Service Standards and Policies Policies and standards used in service development Balance between cost efficiency and provision of adequate service to the public

21. Cycle time The amount of time it takes for a bus operate a round-trip (i.e. both directions, or one loop), including layover/recovery. BA

22. Cycle time Good route design takes into account cycle time For “clock-face” headways (frequencies), design routes that have a cycle time that can be divided by your headway (15/30/60 minutes)

23. Cycle time

24. Cycle time / interlining How do you maintain efficiency if you can’t design routes with even cycle times? ‣ That’s where you employ interlining Example ‣ Route 100: 37 minute cycle ‣ Route 200: 40 minute cycle ‣ Route 300: 38 minute cycle ‣ 30 minute frequency

25. Interlining Example:

26. Interlining Same trips, interlined

27. Interlining Without interlining ‣ 6 buses ‣ Long layovers With interlining ‣ 115-minute total cycle ‣ 4 buses ‣ Less excess recovery time

28. Interlining No interliningWith interlining In-service time42h55 Pull in/out trips9h006h00 Layover29h316h45 Buses used64 Total time81h2655h40

29. Interlining (pros vs. cons) Pros ‣ More efficient use of vehicle/driver time ‣ Reduce excess recovery ‣ Can offer additional direct service Cons ‣ Delays on one route may impact others ‣ Only works if vehicle types compatible on all trips/routes

30. Small schedule tweaks 5 Min

31. Small schedule tweaks

32. Peak vs. Off-peak service Typical weekday “vehicles in service” graph

33. Peak vs. Off-peak service Typically, “base” service (midday service) cheapest to add Peak service typically most expensive ‣ Assuming service span is fixed. Adding new service day or extending service day can have lots of overhead costs. “Shoulder” peak usually more expensive than base ‣ Just before AM peak ‣ Just after PM peak

34. Runcutting Often overlooked in overall system design Can be a key driver of efficiency, particularly for larger systems Impacted by collective agreement work rules ‣ Or even generic work rules if no CA

35. Overtime vs. adding drivers? Consider cost of having extra drivers vs. cost from overtime Often, fixed costs for employees (benefits, vacation, training, etc.) exceed overtime Must balance with driver quality of life, fatigue from longer hours, etc.

36. OT vs. adding drivers example Total of 240 hours per weekday Driver pay = $25 / hour Overtime (1.5x pay) after 8 hours 250 weekdays per year Each run costs $30,000/year in fixed costs ‣ Vacation benefits for driver ‣ Health benefits for driver ‣ Training and other administrative costs ‣ Extra board

37. OT vs. adding drivers example # of daily shifts302928 Average shift length8 hours8.28 hours8.57 hours Straight time pay per run/day$200$206.90$214.29 Overtime premium$0$3.45$7.14 Total daily pay per run$200.00$210.35$221.43 Annual pay total$1,500,000$1,525,000$1,550,000 Fixed run cost (total)$900,000$870,000$840,000 Total annual cost$2,400,000$2,395,000$2,390,000 Paying ½ hour overtime to fewer drivers saves $10,000/year

38. Drawbacks of high overtime Increased driver stress may lead to more sick time Longer hours, particularly at night, can increase fatigue (i.e. higher accident risk) Not all drivers want to work longer hours Some contracts may specify limits on work time

39. Spread premium and limitations Spread: The time from the earliest report to the latest sign-off for a driver’s work day ‣ Piece 1: » Report 6:00 » Pull out 6:15 » Pull in 9:30 » Sign off: 9:40 ‣ Piece 2: » Report 14:00 » Pull out 14:15 » Pull in 17:45 » Sign off: 17:55 ‣ Spread: 6:00 – 17:55, 11h55

40. Spread premium and limitations Most transit collective agreements have spread premium ‣ E.g. 10% bonus pay for spread beyond 10 hours Most also have a maximum spread time ‣ Generally 12 or 13 hours, depending on run type

41. Spread premium and limitations Spread limitations can cause difficulty for runcutting in certain cases ‣ Service operates far from downtown (has to start early/finish late) ‣ Service levels drop off later in PM rush/early evening ‣ Limited opportunities to mix with other services Because of spread premium, can make adding service more expensive at certain times of day

42. Spread premium and limitations Filling in midday is often cheaper than adding to the outer edge of the peaks More $ Cheaper

43. Vehicle blocking and runcutting Vehicle blocking can drive runcutting costs ‣ Short blocks may have to pay guarantee ‣ Blocking can affect efficiency in scheduling straights and splits Most efficient vehicle schedule isn’t necessarily most efficient crew schedule

44. Vehicle blocking and runcutting Scenario: ‣ Route operates 5:00-21:00 ‣ 45-minute cycle ‣ 15-minute headway (3 buses) 7:00-9:15, 15:15-18:00 ‣ 45-minute headway (1 bus) all other times

45. Vehicle blocking and runcutting Blocking option 1: Total 26h15 vehicle time per day

46. Vehicle blocking and runcutting Blocking option 2: Total 27h15 vehicle time per day

47. Vehicle blocking and runcutting Blocking option 1:

48. Vehicle blocking and runcutting Blocking option 2:

49. Vehicle blocking and runcutting Option 1Option 2 Vehicle time26h1527h15 Straight runs12 Split runs12 Trippers30 Paid time34h5330h15

50. Pitfalls to avoid “We can’t afford to schedule accurate running times” ‣ You are paying for it one way or the other ‣ Schedule accurate run times to better control overtime costs/service reliability ‣ Increase headway if cost increase can’t be accommodated in budget

51. Pitfalls to avoid Time-consuming diversions to serve few passengers ‣ Mass transit should serve the masses ‣ Increase in running time will increase costs without a commensurate benefit to ridership ‣ Passengers on board inconvenienced by longer trip

52. Pitfalls to avoid Trying to guarantee everyone an 8 am arrival ‣ If every route has to have a bus at the same time, you need a separate bus for every route » Particularly expensive for smaller systems ‣ Reduces ability to gain efficiency through interlining ‣ If possible, try to work with schools, major employers to stagger start/end times

53. Pitfalls to avoid Building a bus garage in the middle of nowhere because the land is cheap 15 Km

54. Tools to help improve schedules Automated data collection technology to help calibrate service levels, cycle times ‣ AVL, APC systems generate large amounts of data for planners and schedulers to use ‣ BC Transit currently working on a program to improve our APC technology ‣ Smart Bus program to consider AVL options

55. Tools to help improve schedules HASTUS-ATP ‣ Run-time analysis tool offered by GIRO » On wish list for near-term purchase ‣ Uses data from AVL/APC software ‣ Calibrates run times and cycle times based on user-specified criteria for on-time performance

56. Tools to help improve schedules MinBus ‣ Vehicle blocking optimizer ‣ Finds efficiency in vehicle blocking, reducing peak vehicle requirements based on parameters set by scheduler ‣ Best for larger systems (multiple garages, multiple vehicle types)

57. Tools to help improve schedules CrewOpt ‣ Crew schedule optimizer ‣ Finds efficiency in crew scheduling, reducing overall schedule cost based on parameters set by scheduler ‣ Uses rules based on collective agreement, plus other preferences

58. The End Thanks for listening!