Hubbry Logo
Skip-stopSkip-stopMain
Open search
Skip-stop
Community hub
Skip-stop
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Skip-stop
Skip-stop
Skip-stop
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Skip-stop is a public transit service pattern which reduces travel times and increases capacity by having vehicles skip certain stops along a route. Originating in rapid transit systems, skip-stop may be also used in light rail and bus systems.[1]

"Skip-stop" is also used to describe elevators that stop at alternating floors and hence also used to describe building designs that exploit this design and avoid corridors on alternating floors.[2]

Rationale

[edit]

Skip-stop service is one solution to increasing train speed at minimal cost. In rapid transit systems in the United States, stations tend to be close together (approximately 800 metres (2,600 ft) in 1976),[1] and so trains struggle to reach high speeds. The New York City Subway for example, the slowest in the United States, travels at an average speed of 17.4 miles per hour (28.0 km/h).[3][4] Trains on the same track cannot pass each other like buses can, and so to increase speed, changes can only be made in terms of headway, or in which stations are served.

Skipping stations increases the average speed of trains, thus making journeys quicker and more appealing to commuters. There are certain drawbacks: for certain commuters skip-stop may actually increase journey times, and using the system may be more confusing.[1] A long-term alternative is to build dedicated express tracks, however this comes at considerable cost and is rarely justified.[1]

Analysis suggests that skip-stop operation is most appropriate for systems with long rail lines with many stations, stations that are close together and with short headways, since the benefits disappear when any one of these is not met.[5]

History

[edit]

The Cleveland Railway, Cleveland's streetcar operator implemented a skip-stop scheme under its new commissioner, Peter Witt in 1910. The scheme was more successful than an earlier attempt to implement skip-stop service in the city.[6]

The Chicago Transit Authority initiated skip-stop service in 1948 as a means of speeding up old trains it inherited when it took over from private operators. The first skip-stop service was run on April 5 of that year on the Lake Street line with the North-South (Howard-Englewood/Jackson Park) and Ravenswood lines beginning skip-stop service on August 1 of the following year.[7]

Rail operation

[edit]
Two types of trains stopping at different stations

When skip stops are used in rail transit, the transit operator designates stations as either major or minor, typically by ridership. Usually, all vehicles stop at the major stations, but only some vehicles stop at the minor ones.

Since one rail vehicle can only pass another by using an additional track, skip-stop may require additional investment in infrastructure if express services, where trains skip many stops along a route, are employed simultaneously with vehicles making stops on every station.

In systems that have no extra track for a faster train to pass a slower train, skip-stop may be employed either during busier travel hours to reduce travel time of a particular train, or during off-peak hours to raise efficiency by not stopping at "unpopular" stations.

A timetable from 1959 showing skip-stop service on the New York City Subway's 14 and 15 services.

In some systems, such as the New York City Subway, these are considered as two separate services (J/Z, and formerly the 1/9, which was discontinued in May 2005), as if the two services were separate lines instead of two different stopping patterns on the same line. On other systems, the alternating services are distinguished by lights on the train. For example, the Santiago Metro – which runs skip-stop services on line 2, line 4, and line 5 during the morning and evening rush hours – use trains with red marker lights stop only at the minor stations that are located on the red route (la ruta roja) and trains with green marker lights that stop only at the minor stations that are located on the green route (la ruta verde). There are some stations where all trains stop, which are known as common stations (estaciones comunes); common stations allow passengers to change between trains to get to their final destination.[8]

The Chicago "L" used skip-stop service (noted as "A" and "B" services) from the 1940s until the mid 1990s, at which point it was discontinued in favor of all-stop service. This was done to reduce waiting times for passengers riding to or from "A" and "B" stations who could only take half of the trains. It also eliminated the need for a train transfer for passengers riding from an "A" station to a "B" station, which required a transfer at an "AB" (all trains stop) station to complete their trip. Further, the system was simpler to use for new riders and visitors.

Philadelphia's SEPTA Market-Frankford Line also used skip-stop service (also noted as "A" and "B" services) from 1956 until February 2020, at which point it was discontinued in favor of all-stop service.[9]

In Australia, Adelaide's suburban rail Gawler Line only has 2 tracks. To speed up service, starting in 2008, it uses skip-stop operation on weekdays, where trains only stop at alternating sets of minor stations, while all trains stop at major stops known as "High Frequency Stations".[10]

Bus operation

[edit]

In bus operations, skip-stop refers to a stopping pattern where buses do not stop at every block or at every designated bus stop, typically in a central business district. Skip-stop operation reduces travel time and increases the number of buses that the streets and bus stops are able to accommodate. With skip-stop operations, bus routes are typically grouped together by geographic area in order to provide a common stop for areas that are served by multiple routes. The skip-stop groups are sometimes identified by color or letter so that passengers and bus operators can easily identify their desired stop. A disadvantage with skip-stops is that passengers may have to walk farther or change buses to catch their intended bus, which increases travel time. Passengers may also be unsure about which bus stop to walk towards to catch their intended bus.

Skip-stops work best when buses are able to easily pass each other at bus stops, such as on a low-traffic street, street with bus stop pockets or dedicated busway with at least two lanes in each direction. If there is a large amount of other traffic on the street or only a single bus lane is provided, then buses have difficulty passing each other and much of the benefit of using skip-stops is not realized.

In Seattle, WA, which has an extensive local and regional bus system operated by three different transit agencies, skip-stops are used on 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Avenues in the downtown area. Bus routes on 3rd Avenue are grouped into Blue and Yellow stops, while bus routes on 2nd and 4th Avenue are grouped into Red and White stops.

In Portland, Oregon, buses of TriMet and C-Tran use skip stops on the Portland Transit Mall in Downtown Portland. The practice has been in use on the mall since its opening in 1977, and was continued (for buses) after MAX Light Rail was added to the mall in 2009. Buses stop at every third or fourth bus stop. Until 2007, the bus stops for the different groups of routes were identified by colors and symbols, such as "Yellow Rose" and "Orange Deer", but with the rebuilding for the addition of light rail, those designations were replaced by simple letters—A, B, C, D for southbound on 5th Avenue and W, X, Y, Z for northbound on 6th Avenue.

This term may also refer to limited-stop bus services.

[edit]

In The Honeymooners, Episode 32, "Opportunity Knocks But", Ed Norton (Art Carney) impresses Ralph Kramden (Jackie Gleason)'s boss with his suggestions for improving the bus company, including the offering of "odd" and "even" lines.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Skip-stop

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Skip-stop is a public transportation service pattern in which certain vehicles, such as trains or buses, bypass select intermediate stations or stops to expedite travel times for longer-distance passengers, while complementary vehicles serve all stops to ensure coverage for local riders. This approach, often implemented during peak hours on busy urban corridors, alternates stopping patterns to balance speed and without requiring additional tracks or routes. The skip-stop strategy originated in the United States with the , which introduced it in 1948 on the Lake Street Line shortly after the agency's formation in 1947, as a method to accelerate aging rail services inherited from private operators and reduce overall journey durations. By designating stations as "A" (served only by A trains), "B" (served only by B trains), or "AB" (served by all trains), the CTA applied this pattern across most of its rapid transit lines during rush hours, converting all service to express-like operations while maintaining all-stop service off-peak. The primary rationale was to enhance efficiency on congested networks by minimizing dwell times at low-demand stations, thereby improving capacity and passenger throughput without major investments. Skip-stop operations have since been adopted worldwide in rail and bus systems to address similar challenges in high-density urban environments, with empirical studies showing potential reductions in average travel times compared to all-stop services, though at the cost of increased waiting times at skipped locations. Notable implementations include the Subway's 9 train, which provided rush-hour skip-stop service on the from 1989 until its discontinuation in 2005 due to evolving ridership patterns and service adjustments. In , the CTA phased out A/B skip-stop on remaining lines by 1995 as modernized equipment and station consolidations reduced the need for it, though the concept persists in optimization models for contemporary transit planning. Today, skip-stop remains a flexible tool in transit design, particularly for and metro lines in cities facing growing demand, with ongoing research focusing on data-driven schemes to minimize equity concerns for underserved stops.

Fundamentals

Definition

Skip-stop service is a public transit operational strategy in which vehicles along a shared route bypass selected intermediate stops to shorten overall travel times, while ensuring comprehensive coverage of all stops through coordinated alternating patterns among the fleet. In this approach, stops are typically designated into categories such as A, , or shared AB types, where vehicles designated as "A" service halt only at A and AB stops, and "B" vehicles halt at B and AB stops, thereby collectively serving every station without requiring each vehicle to stop at all locations. This contrasts sharply with all-stop service, in which every vehicle adheres to the full route, and is designed to enhance efficiency on routes with sufficient demand to justify multiple vehicle dispatches. The core characteristics of skip-stop service include its application primarily on high-capacity corridors, such as urban rail lines or busy bus arterials, where frequent headways—often under six minutes—minimize wait times for the appropriate type. All stops remain accessible, but may need to plan for specific vehicle designations, relying on basic transit elements like route , stop labeling, and vehicle scheduling to navigate effectively. This method inherently balances speed gains for long-distance travelers against potential minor inconveniences for those at skipped stops, without eliminating service to any point. Variations in skip-stop service range from simple alternating configurations, such as the basic pattern that divides stops evenly between two vehicle types, to more complex multi-tier arrangements involving three or more patterns (e.g., designations) that allow for nuanced allocation of stops based on demand distribution. These advanced variations enable operators to tailor stopping behaviors more precisely, potentially incorporating additional shared stops to optimize flow on heterogeneous routes. Regardless of , the presupposes integrated scheduling to maintain equity in service coverage.

Rationale

Skip-stop service is primarily implemented to enhance in transit s by reducing average travel times through the elimination of intermediate stops for select vehicles. This strategy typically achieves travel time savings of 10-20% for s on express routes, as fewer stops minimize dwell times and /deceleration cycles, allowing vehicles to maintain higher average speeds. By enabling more frequent short-turn services on shared , skip-stop patterns increase overall capacity without the need for additional tracks, platforms, or signaling upgrades, thereby accommodating growing demand more effectively. A key capacity benefit arises from staggering stop patterns across vehicle groups, which prevents bunching and optimizes throughput on congested routes. For instance, in paired A-B skip-stop schemes, A trains serve major (A) and shared (AB) stations, while B trains serve secondary (B) and shared (AB) stations, distributing passenger loads more evenly and reducing headway variability to support higher frequencies. This approach can maintain or even expand line capacity—such as by increasing capacity by up to 10% through shorter possible headways at high-demand stations—while preserving coverage across the network. Economically, skip-stop operations serve as a cost-effective alternative to expensive expansions or fleet acquisitions, requiring minimal capital beyond timetable adjustments and updates. These patterns can reduce operating costs by optimizing utilization, such as decreasing the required fleet size to deliver equivalent service levels, potentially saving hundreds of thousands of dollars annually in labor and expenses. Additionally, they extend the utility of aging fleets by accelerating turnaround times, allowing systems to maximize existing assets amid budget constraints. In terms of passenger flow, skip-stop services are designed to prioritize peak-hour commuters traveling between high-volume origins and destinations, ensuring frequent service at major hubs while providing baseline coverage at minor stops. This targeted approach balances speed for long-distance riders with accessibility for local users, enhancing overall satisfaction by aligning vehicle patterns with spatiotemporal demand variations.

Historical Development

Origins

The (CTA) introduced skip-stop service in 1948 as a response to the challenges of operating an aging urban rail system amid post-World War II demands. Following the war, Chicago's transit network experienced significant strain from increased ridership driven by population growth and economic recovery, while inheriting infrastructure from private operators that included outdated wooden trailer cars and single-track segments on many lines, limiting capacity without substantial capital upgrades. The CTA, formed in 1947 to consolidate and modernize these failing systems, sought operational efficiencies to handle overcrowding on key routes like the North-South line, where peak-hour loads exceeded the capabilities of the existing fleet and layout. On April 5, 1948, the CTA implemented the first skip-stop operation on the Lake Street Line, designating trains as "A," "B," or all-stops variants to accelerate service on its two-track configuration burdened by slow, inherited wooden trailers. In this A/B pattern, "A" trains bypassed stations marked for "B" stops and vice versa, ensuring every station received service collectively while reducing dwell times and overall trip durations by up to a third on the route. This approach addressed capacity constraints cost-effectively, avoiding the need for immediate infrastructure overhauls in a financially strained postwar environment. The success of this innovation prompted its expansion across the CTA network in the 1950s, particularly for peak-hour operations. By August 1, 1949, A/B skip-stop service was extended to the Ravenswood Route and the North-South Route (encompassing , Englewood, and Jackson Park branches), closing low-ridership stations and further streamlining service to manage high volumes without new investments. In 1951, the pattern was adopted on the Congress-Douglas Route starting , where it similarly improved speeds by skipping select stops while maintaining coverage, demonstrating the model's viability for enhancing efficiency on Chicago's congested elevated lines.

Expansion and Decline

Following the initial success of skip-stop service on Chicago's CTA lines in the 1940s and 1950s, the pattern expanded across the in subsequent decades. In , the introduced the 9 train in 1989 as a rush-hour skip-stop companion to the 1 train along the Broadway Line from to South Ferry, where the two services alternated stops to accelerate travel times for outer-borough commuters. This implementation aimed to enhance capacity without additional infrastructure, serving and riders until its discontinuation on May 27, 2005, when the MTA consolidated operations onto the 1 train with all stops and higher frequencies to address uneven ridership and prolonged waits at bypassed stations. In , the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority operated skip-stop patterns on the Market-Frankford Line starting January 30, 1956, which continued through the 1960s and 1970s and until its discontinuation on February 21, 2020, as a means to boost peak-hour efficiency on the elevated and subway route spanning to 69th Street Transportation Center. International adoption of skip-stop remained limited but included notable research and optimizations. In , post-2000 studies in examined skip-stop schemes for to minimize passenger wait times and operational costs while accommodating dense demand; for instance, a 2014 analysis developed estimation methods for implementing such strategies on high-volume lines, emphasizing balanced stop patterns across oversaturated networks. These efforts built on the need for equitable access in high-density systems. By the late , skip-stop services faced decline due to equity issues, ridership fluctuations, and evolving . Passengers at skipped stations often endured longer waits and perceived inequities in service levels, exacerbating travel time disparities for underserved communities and prompting criticism from riders and advocates. In , the CTA fully phased out A/B skip-stop operations by 1995 across remaining lines like the and , driven by overall ridership drops that necessitated service cuts, resulting in headways exceeding six minutes and diminishing the pattern's benefits; concurrent station closures further reduced the number of potential skips, eliminating much of the rationale for the scheme. Infrastructure enhancements, such as signaling upgrades and fleet modernizations in systems like New York's, enabled all-stop services to achieve comparable or better frequencies without skipping, further eroding the need for the pattern. From 2020 to 2025, skip-stop has seen only temporary and experimental applications amid disruptions. In , Manhattan-bound 7 trains skipped 52nd Street and 69th Street stations starting June 23, 2025, to facilitate track and platform upgrades on the Flushing Line, with the bypass extending through early 2026. Post-COVID-19 proposed skip-stop adaptations to enforce physical distancing and curb transmission risks by reducing onboard crowding, such as patterns that limit loads while minimizing delays. Despite these innovations, no permanent revivals have occurred, as operators prioritize consistent all-stop reliability in recovering networks.

Rail Applications

Operational Patterns

In rail systems, skip-stop operations leverage the controlled environment of dedicated tracks and signaling to implement fixed stopping patterns that enhance efficiency without the variability of road traffic. Typically, stations are classified as "A" (served only by A trains), "B" (served only by B trains), or "AB" (served by all trains), with A and B trains alternating to ensure every stop receives service at regular intervals, often during peak hours. This pattern minimizes dwell times at low-demand stations, allowing trains to maintain higher average speeds and increase line capacity on single- or double-track corridors without additional . For example, on urban rail lines with closely spaced stations, A trains might skip every other intermediate stop while serving all major interchanges, complemented by B trains covering the skipped locations, effectively doubling frequency at AB stations while halving it at A or B stops. Unlike buses, rail skip-stop relies on precise scheduling enforced by (ATC) or signaling systems, preventing bunching and ensuring even headways, typically 3-5 minutes during rush hours. Dynamic adjustments are rare due to safety constraints, but some systems use conditional skipping based on real-time demand via centralized control centers. Time savings arise primarily from reduced acceleration/deceleration cycles and shorter dwells, estimated at 20-30 seconds per skipped stop, leading to overall travel time reductions of 10-20% on congested lines. management is crucial to avoid extended waits at skipped stations, with operators often transitioning to all-stop service off-peak to maintain equity. Common implementations include paired operations where A and B services run in tandem, synchronized at terminals to reverse patterns if needed for bidirectional flow. In high-density metros, advanced patterns like three-stop schemes (A, B, C) have been modeled to further optimize distribution, though most real-world applications stick to binary A/B for . Simulations indicate capacity gains of up to 25% by freeing up slots for more trains, though benefits are limited on lines with v/c ratios exceeding 0.8 due to platform constraints.

Notable Implementations

The pioneered skip-stop on its 'L' lines starting in 1948 with the Lake Street Line, designating , and AB stations to accelerate service on aging infrastructure. Expanded to most lines by the 1950s, the A/B pattern operated during daytime hours until its phase-out by 1995, as modern signaling and declining ridership made all-stop service more viable, with some former skipped stations seeing 34-50% ridership increases post-discontinuation. In , the 9 train provided rush-hour skip-stop service on the from July 1989 to May 27, 2005, complementing the 1 train by alternating stops north of 96th Street to reduce crowding and travel times. The pattern served major stations while skipping select locals, but was discontinued due to uneven ridership and operational complexities, with the 1 train absorbing all stops thereafter. Santiago Metro in has employed skip-stop express services since 2007 on lines like Line 2, 4, and 5 during peak hours (6:00-9:00 a.m. and 6:00-9:00 p.m.), using A/B patterns to bypass alternate intermediate stations and achieve faster end-to-end times on high-demand corridors. This approach, marked by "Tren Expreso" signage, has sustained operations as of 2025, balancing speed for long-distance riders with coverage for locals amid growing urban demand. Other examples include limited skip-stop on London's , where fast services bypass intermediate stations during peaks to reach outer suburbs quicker, and historical trials in San Francisco's streetcar system in to address spacing issues. These implementations have generally reduced peak-hour travel times by 10-15%, though equity concerns at skipped stops persist, prompting ongoing optimizations.

Bus Applications

Operational Patterns

In bus systems, skip-stop operations adapt the fixed-schedule principles of rail transit to the variable conditions of road networks, where buses alternate stopping patterns to balance speed and coverage. Typically, buses are designated as Type A or Type B, departing in alternating sequence from the terminal; Type A vehicles serve all major transfer stops (denoted as AB stations) plus a subset of intermediate stops (A stations), while Type B vehicles serve AB stations plus the complementary B stations. This pattern ensures every stop receives service at regular intervals without requiring all buses to halt at minor locations, effectively creating a limited-stop variant that skips low-demand points while maintaining at key hubs. For instance, in a corridor with evenly spaced stops, Bus A might serve majors plus even-numbered intermediates, and Bus B majors plus odds, reducing overall dwell accumulation across the fleet. Scheduling skip-stop services on buses presents unique challenges due to traffic variability, which can disrupt fixed patterns unlike the controlled of rail lines. Operators often employ dynamic skip decisions to monitor real-time positions and adjust skips based on or congestion, ensuring buses integrate with traffic signal priorities at major stops. For example, if upstream cause bunching, algorithms may trigger conditional skips at low-demand stops to restore headways, preventing service gaps for passengers. This flexibility contrasts with rail's rigid signaling, as bus schedules must account for road conditions like variable , often requiring rolling-horizon optimization to replan patterns every few minutes. Common patterns include paired bus operations, where Type A and Type B vehicles launch in tandem to cover complementary stops without , maintaining even spacing in mixed . Conditional skipping activates when a bus exceeds a delay threshold—such as more than 5 minutes late—to minor stops, allowing it to recover time and align with the paired follower. This approach minimizes passenger wait times at skipped locations by ensuring the next bus (of the opposite type) arrives promptly, while avoiding overload at high-demand AB stops. In bidirectional corridors, patterns may reverse at terminals to balance peak-hour imbalances, with simulations showing reduced bunching compared to all-stop services. Time savings in bus skip-stop derive from eliminating dwells and approach/departure maneuvers at skipped stops, quantified as ΔT = (number of skipped stops × (dwell time + approach time)), where dwell typically ranges from 15 to 25 seconds per stop under moderate loads, and approach time adds 5-10 seconds for deceleration and . management is critical to prevent gaps, with minimum intervals (e.g., 3-5 minutes) enforced to synchronize A/B pairs, ensuring overall route capacity increases in uncongested conditions without compromising equity. These metrics highlight skip-stop's role in enhancing reliability, though benefits diminish in high v/c ratios above 0.7 due to interference.

Notable Implementations

In the 1930s, the San Francisco Market Street Railway implemented skip-stop patterns on its streetcar services to address stop spacing issues and build rider acceptance for faster operations during peak periods. Although primarily rail-based, this approach influenced early bus operations in the region as transit systems transitioned. Modern implementations include the Los Angeles Metro's Rapid lines, which employ limited-stop strategies with predefined skips, allowing buses to pass intermediate stops and achieve faster end-to-end times on arterials like Wilshire Boulevard. European examples, such as Transport for London's trials of optimized bus routing to mitigate congestion, have incorporated elements of stop skipping on select routes to enhance flow without dedicated infrastructure. These implementations have yielded reductions in running times, though challenges arise in low-ridership areas where skipped stops lead to longer wait times for passengers. For instance, stop-skipping strategies in simulated bus operations reduced total system costs by approximately 9.6% while shortening in-vehicle times by about 8%. In the U.S., Seattle's uses skip-stop spacing on downtown routes, alternating stops on avenues like 3rd Avenue for efficiency.

Benefits and Challenges

Advantages

Skip-stop services improve overall transit efficiency by reducing dwell times at less busy stations, which minimizes from passenger boarding and alighting, as well as and deceleration cycles. This results in average end-to-end travel time savings of 10-25% for passengers on express patterns, enhancing service reliability in high-density urban corridors. In terms of capacity, skip-stop operations allow agencies to achieve higher effective frequencies with fewer vehicles, as two complementary patterns can cover all stops while maintaining faster run times equivalent to a mix of local and express services. This approach reduces fleet requirements and operating costs by up to 8-10%, enabling resource allocation to peak-demand periods or route expansions without proportional increases in infrastructure. For instance, historical implementation on Chicago's Lake Street 'L' line in 1948 cut running times by one-third, demonstrating how such patterns optimize vehicle utilization. Environmentally, shorter trip durations and fewer stops lead to lower consumption and emissions per passenger, particularly beneficial in dense urban areas where transit supports modal shifts from private vehicles. Studies on bus operations indicate that skip-stop strategies can reduce emissions by up to 33% and volatile organic compounds by 18%, contributing to goals by decreasing overall energy use in transit fleets. Empirical evidence from implementations underscores rider satisfaction at major stops, where frequent service aligns with demand patterns. Post-adoption analyses show average travel time reductions of around 13%, though benefits are most pronounced for longer-distance travelers.

Disadvantages

Skip-stop services often exacerbate equity concerns by disproportionately affecting passengers at skipped stops, where wait times can extend up to twice the standard compared to all-stop operations, as passengers must await a specific pattern to serve their station. This longer waiting time particularly disadvantages riders in low-income or outer urban areas, where stations are more likely to be designated as minor stops with lower service frequencies, limiting access to employment and essential services. The Subway's 9 train skip-stop service was discontinued in 2005 due to low ridership, long wait times, and the need to simplify operations by having the 1 serve all stops. Operational risks associated with skip-stop implementations include passenger confusion arising from complex stop patterns, necessitating clear signage such as A/B designations to guide riders toward the correct , though this can still lead to errors in boarding. Additionally, the strategy may result in uneven passenger loads across vehicles, with some trains experiencing while others operate under capacity, particularly during off-peak periods when demand variability makes balanced distribution more challenging. Other drawbacks encompass reduced flexibility for spontaneous travel, as passengers at skipped stops face lower convenience and may need to walk farther or backtrack to reach an alternative station, discouraging short-distance trips. Maintaining consistent patterns during service disruptions proves difficult, potentially amplifying delays, while studies indicate ridership reductions at minor stops due to the cumulative effect of longer waits and perceived unreliability. To mitigate these issues, hybrid models combining skip-stop with all-stop services during certain periods or dynamic adjustments based on real-time demand have been proposed, alongside mobile applications providing live updates on patterns to reduce confusion and improve perceived equity.

References

  1. https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-its.2018.5213
  2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1077291X23000255
  3. https://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/6/13JD_048_2014_Calendar_low_rev.pdf
  4. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23249935.2025.2509109
  5. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/12/nyregion/metro-briefing-new-york-mta-proposes-dropping-no-9-train.html
  6. https://www.chicago-l.org/operations/lines/route_ops/A-B.html
  7. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_webdoc_6-b.pdf
  8. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=jpt
  9. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2192437624000244
  10. https://railtec.illinois.edu/wp/wp-content/uploads/pdf-archive/Sogin-et-al-2012b.pdf
  11. https://repository.upenn.edu/bitstreams/d8e8edc0-57fa-4f13-ae36-524285de6df7/download
  12. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/FTA_Report_No._0037.pdf
  13. https://www.chicago-l.org/history/CTA2.html
  14. http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/274.html
  15. https://www.chicago-l.org/history/chron_CTA.html
  16. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X22002013
  17. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0968090X13001575
  18. https://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/Santiago,_Chile
  19. https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/examples-of-skip-stop-express-services-on-the-tube-or-dlr-lo-too.218336/
  20. https://www.streetcar.org/skipping_stops_then_and_now/
  21. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_26-a.pdf
  22. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23249935.2020.1798554
  23. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0968090X13001265
  24. https://www.metro.net/projects/rapid/
  25. https://content.tfl.gov.uk/bus-stop-bypass-safety-review-2024.pdf
  26. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2020/4317402
  27. https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/metro/travel-options/bus
  28. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/jpt/vol17/iss2/7/
  29. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276905412_Optimizing_Skip-Stop_Rail_Transit_Stopping_Strategy_using_a_Genetic_Algorithm
  30. https://www.morgan.edu/Documents/ACADEMIA/CENTERS/NTC/Mathematical_Lee_1112.pdf
  31. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1077291X2201757X
  32. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9301585/
  33. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/23988/dot_23988_DS1.pdf
  34. https://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/04/nyregion/skip-stop-subway-plan-annoys-no-1-riders.html
  35. https://www.nydailynews.com/2005/05/31/no-9-trains-gone-off-line/
  36. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/19/14511
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.