National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Appendix A - Survey Questionnaire
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - List of Survey Respondents." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Current Practices in the Use of Onboard Technologies to Avoid Transit Bus Incidents and Accidents. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25716.
×
Page 67
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - List of Survey Respondents." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Current Practices in the Use of Onboard Technologies to Avoid Transit Bus Incidents and Accidents. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25716.
×
Page 68

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

67 California • Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) • Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro) • San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) • Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Colorado • Greeley-Evans Transit (GET) Connecticut • Greater Bridgeport Transit (GBT) • Norwalk Transit District District of Columbia • Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) Florida • Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (LYNX) • Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART) • Jacksonville Transportation Authority (JTA) • Lee County Transit (LeeTran) • Miami-Dade Department of Transportation and Public Works (Miami-Dade Transit) Georgia • Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) Indiana • Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation (IndyGo) Iowa • Ames Transit Agency (CY Ride) Maryland • Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) Massachusetts • Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Minnesota • Metro Transit Missouri • City Utilities of Springfield Transit (CU Transit) A P P E N D I X B List of Survey Respondents

68 Current Practices in the Use of Onboard Technologies to Avoid Transit Bus Incidents and Accidents Montana • Fort Peck Transit (dial-a-ride) • Skyline Bus North Carolina • GoTriangle • Greensboro Transit Authority (GTA)—Operated by Keolis New Jersey • New Jersey Transit (NJT) New York • New York City Transit (NYCT) Ohio • Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (RTA) • Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority (SORTA) • Toledo Area Regional Transit Authority (TARTA) Oregon • Lane Transit District (LTD) • Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet) Pennsylvania • Port Authority of Allegheny County • Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) South Carolina • Central Midlands Regional Transit Authority (CMRTA) South Dakota • River Cities Public Transit Texas • Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) • Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (METRO) • Trinity Metro Utah • Utah Transit Authority (UTA) Washington • Community Transit (CommTrans) • King County Metro Transit (KC Metro) • Pierce County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation (Pierce Transit) West Virginia • Mid-Ohio Valley Transit Authority (MOVTA) Wisconsin • City of Madison Metro Transit (Madison Metro)

Next: Appendix C - Passive Collision Avoidance Technologies and Safety Practices »
Current Practices in the Use of Onboard Technologies to Avoid Transit Bus Incidents and Accidents Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Transit agencies around the country are facing the challenges of reducing transit bus collisions and the injuries, fatalities, and liability expenses associated with these collisions.

The TRB Transit Cooperative Research Program's TCRP Synthesis 145: Current Practices in the Use of Onboard Technologies to Avoid Transit Bus Incidents and Accidents documents the current practices in the use of the various onboard technologies on transit buses to prevent incidents and accidents, with a primary objective of determining whether these technologies are effective in actual practice.

The examination shows that many transit agencies are proactively instituting a number of approaches to address these collisions, including the piloting and use of collision avoidance technologies, such as forward collision warning (FCW), emergency braking, lane departure warning (LDW), and electronic stability control (ESC).

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!