Urban travel demand modeling in the United States has a rich history in both practice and academic research. The same cannot be said, however, or freight demand modeling despite the intermodal planning requirements if ISTEA and TEA21. In most instances, agencies responsible for state transportation planning (e.g. Kentucky Transportation Cabinet) have applied, in a limited way, the methodology development for urban travel demand modeling (i.e., Urban Transportation Modeling System or UTMS1) to the freight arena. Obviously, this methodology similarity implies that the fundamental data requirements for both types of demand modeling are also similar. For example, both models require estimates of the amount of traffic (i.e., number of trips for urban modeling and amount of freight for freight modeling) produced within each zone comprising the study area. Yet, despite such similarities, the two modeling systems differ significantly in terms of the availability of data for modeling purposes.


    Zugriff

    Zugriff über TIB

    Verfügbarkeit in meiner Bibliothek prüfen


    Exportieren, teilen und zitieren



    Titel :

    Assessment of the 1997 Commodity Flow Survey for State-Level Freight Transportation Planning


    Beteiligte:
    D. M. Scott (Autor:in)

    Erscheinungsdatum :

    2002


    Format / Umfang :

    74 pages


    Medientyp :

    Report


    Format :

    Keine Angabe


    Sprache :

    Englisch




    Intermodal Freight Transportation Planning Using Commodity Flow Data

    Y. Zhang / R. O. Bowden / A. J. Allen | NTIS | 2003




    BTS Freight Transportation Data Activities: Results and Products from the Commodity Flow Survey: Abstract Only

    Ammah-Tagoe, F. / Transportation Research Forum | British Library Conference Proceedings | 1998


    Freight Transportation Planning

    Schank, Joshua / Hirschman, Ira / Elliott, Preston | Transportation Research Record | 2008