Network planning software for public transport is the set of tools agencies and operators use to decide where lines run, how often they run, and with which vehicles and drivers. It falls into four main categories: strategic modelling tools (such as PTV Visum), web-based service design tools (such as Remix by Via or PTV Lines), scheduling and optimisation suites for vehicles and crews (such as GIRO HASTUS, IVU.suite, Optibus or Trapeze), and GIS platforms for spatial analysis (such as ArcGIS).
Most buyers do not need "a network planning solution" but a specific task done well, fed with data they actually have. An authority redesigning its network and an operator cutting deadhead on a winter timetable need different tools.
This guide maps what each category really does, which data it needs, how to compare options, and why measured (as-run) AVM data turns planning into a continuous loop. Examples come from Spain, Portugal, France, Belgium and the Netherlands.
What does network planning cover in public transport?
In practice, "network planning" covers four layers, each with its own horizon, decision makers and software.
| Layer | Core question | Time horizon | Typical owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strategic network design | Which corridors, which line structure, which hierarchy (trunk, feeder, local)? | 2 to 10 years | Transport authority, consultants |
| Service planning and timetabling | How often does each line run, at which times, with which running times? | Season to year | Authority and operator |
| Vehicle and crew scheduling | How many buses, which blocks, which duties and rosters? | Weeks to months | Operator |
| Analysis and evaluation | Is the network performing as designed: punctuality, coverage, loads, cost? | Continuous | Both |
Strategic network design decides the shape of the network. A good illustration is Barcelona's Nova Xarxa, rolled out by TMB in phases and completed in autumn 2018: 28 high-performance lines organised as a grid (17 vertical, 8 horizontal, 3 diagonal), running every 5 to 8 minutes. The design deliberately relies on transfers: a UC Berkeley study (Badia, Argote-Cabanero and Daganzo, 2016) found that about 26% of trips on the new network involved a transfer at the end of 2015, against roughly 1.3% to 16% in the bus systems it used for comparison. That is a strategic choice, made with modelling, not with a scheduling tool.
Service planning and timetabling translates the network into frequencies and departure times. A timetable built on optimistic running times produces late buses, whatever the quality of the design.
Vehicle and crew scheduling turns timetables into vehicle blocks, driver duties and rosters under labour rules and depot constraints. Optimisation algorithms have their longest track record here, and driver costs are one of the largest operating cost items for a bus operator.
Analysis and evaluation compares what was planned with what happened, line by line and time band by time band.
Which categories of network planning software exist?
The tools most often cited fall into five categories. Descriptions below are based on each vendor's public material.
1. Strategic transport modelling
PTV Visum (PTV Group) is multimodal modelling software for strategic planning. PTV lists use cases such as mode shift, pricing, cost-benefit analysis and fleet planning. Its strength is demand modelling: estimating how many people will use a new line or how a fare change shifts trips between modes. It requires trained modellers and a calibrated model, so it is mostly used by authorities, large operators and consultancies.
2. Web-based service design
Remix, now part of Via after an acquisition announced in March 2021, is a collaborative mapping platform for transit planning. At the time of the deal, Via reported that Remix worked with more than 350 local governments in 22 countries. Planners draw or edit routes on a map, change frequencies and see immediate estimates of cost, coverage and demographic reach.
PTV Lines follows a similar logic. PTV positions it as a web-based tool for service planners who do not need complex modelling software: editing stops, routes and timetables, testing seasonal changes or detours, and estimating operating costs. Scenarios can be exported to Visum for demand modelling.
These tools answer "what if?" questions fast. They do not replace a demand model for a major redesign, and they do not produce optimised driver duties.
3. Scheduling and optimisation suites
- GIRO HASTUS (Montreal) covers vehicle and crew scheduling and, through additional modules, daily operations. In Belgium, De Lijn chose in 2016 to upgrade HASTUS with daily crew and vehicle management, crew assignment optimisation, self-service and an analytics module fed by its new vehicle location system (Intelligent Transport).
- IVU.suite (IVU Traffic Technologies, Berlin) is an integrated suite from planning to dispatch. In the Netherlands, Qbuzz uses IVU.vehicle to dispatch more than 400 buses in the Groningen and Drenthe concession, including charging planning for around 160 electric buses, according to IVU.
- Optibus is a cloud platform that presents itself with modules for planning (network design and scenarios), scheduling (vehicle and crew duties), rostering and operations.
- Trapeze: in February 2026, Trapeze Group rebranded its European businesses into four brands; fixed-route planning and scheduling now sits under Nexfeld, according to Sustainable Bus.
The common core of this category is optimisation: building vehicle blocks and driver duties that respect labour rules while minimising paid hours, deadhead and fleet size.
4. GIS and spatial analysis
ArcGIS (Esri) is not a transit planning product as such. Since ArcGIS Pro 2.4, Network Analyst runs schedule-based transit analysis from GTFS: travel times including waiting, and areas reachable within a given time at a given hour. It suits coverage, accessibility and equity studies.
5. Operational data platforms
Rarely labelled "planning", yet every other category depends on it: AVM systems that record what actually happened on the road (times at each stop, running times, completed and lost trips, kilometres).
What data do network planning tools need?
GTFS (static) is the de facto format for describing a network: stops, routes, trips, calendars and stop times. Almost every tool above imports it.
NeTEx is the European CEN standard for exchanging public transport network and timetable data. It is richer than GTFS and is the reference format in the EU multimodal travel information framework. Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1926 required each Member State to set up a National Access Point for travel data by 1 December 2019; Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/490 extended it, including to dynamic data.
Automatic passenger counts (APC) give boardings and alightings by stop and trip. Ticketing data show demand patterns, but often record entries only.
As-run AVM data records what was actually operated. It is the only source that tells a planner how long a trip really takes on a Tuesday at 8 a.m. in November.
| Data source | Main use in planning | Common pitfall |
|---|---|---|
| GTFS | Network description, tool interoperability | Describes the plan, not reality |
| NeTEx | Standardised exchange, regulatory publication | Profiles vary between countries |
| APC | Loads, frequency sizing | Sensor coverage often partial |
| Ticketing | Demand patterns, origin estimates | Entry-only validation, evasion |
| As-run AVM | Running times, punctuality, completed service | Needs clean trip matching |
How do you choose a network planning solution?
Which layer is the actual problem?
Write down the decision you need to make in the next 12 months. A network redesign calls for modelling and service design tools: Lisbon's metropolitan reorganisation is a large-scale example, with the authority TML now setting offer and timetables for more than 700 Carris Metropolitana lines across 18 municipalities, and weekday trips up 20% (Lisboa Para Pessoas). Recurring overtime and late pull-outs call for a scheduling suite and better running times. Buying a full suite for a single-layer problem is a costly mistake.
Who will use it, and how often?
Strategic modelling tools need specialists and are used a few times a year. Service design and scheduling tools are used weekly by planners. Ask about training time and who holds licences: authority, operator, or both.
Does it read and write open formats?
Check GTFS and NeTEx import and export in practice, with a sample from a real network of similar size. Proprietary-only exchange locks the network description inside one vendor, which matters at each contract renewal.
How does it integrate with operations?
Ask how timetables and duties reach the AVM system and passenger information, and how as-run data comes back. With one-way integration, the next timetable repeats the assumptions of the last one.
What are the criteria for comparing vendors?
Rather than asking which tool is "best", compare on:
- Scope: which of the four layers is covered natively, and which through partners
- Data: supported formats, API availability, data ownership clauses
- Deployment: cloud or on-premise, update cycle, hosting location
- Optimisation: what is optimised (paid hours, vehicles, deadhead) and under which constraints (local labour agreements, depot rules)
- References: networks of comparable size and type (urban, interurban, school) in your country, with contactable users
Why does as-run AVM data close the planning loop?
In many networks, scheduled running times are inherited from previous timetables and adjusted by experience. Buses then run early off-peak and late at peak, recovery time is wasted or insufficient, and drivers absorb the difference. An optimiser fed with these times produces duties that are efficient on paper and unworkable on the road.
As-run AVM data replaces assumptions with measurements. With several weeks of recorded trips, a planner can:
- Set running times by segment and time band from observed distributions (for example the 85th percentile rather than the average)
- Identify the segments where delay builds up, which is the input for bus priority discussions with the city
- Size recovery time at terminals based on actual variability
- Check completed versus scheduled kilometres, which matters for contract reporting between operator and authority
- Measure the effect of a network change after it goes live, instead of relying on the model's forecast
The same logic applies to AI-based planning: models that predict running times or optimise frequencies are trained on historical as-run data. More on this in our article on how AI is changing bus network planning.
Paris shows why post-change measurement matters. When RATP launched the new Paris bus network on 20 April 2019, the first overhaul in about 70 years according to The Local, 50 lines were affected, five created and three withdrawn. Only operational data can show whether new timetables hold at that scale.
What this means for an operator or authority
A practical sequence for most networks:
- Secure the data foundation first. A current GTFS (and NeTEx where required) and a few months of as-run AVM data.
- Fix running times before redesigning. Recalibrating from measured data is often the fastest gain.
- Pick tools by layer. Modelling only when a redesign needs demand forecasts.
- Require open formats and two-way integration in every contract.
- Evaluate after each change with the same as-run indicators.
On the operations side, Pysae provides a cloud-native AVM, running on smartphones and tablets, with a scheduling module for driver duties. It records the as-run data (actual stop times, punctuality, completed trips, kilometres) planners need to calibrate timetables, with open exports including GTFS and GTFS-RT.
FAQ
What is the difference between network planning and scheduling software?
Network planning software decides the structure of the service: corridors, lines, stops and frequencies, often with demand modelling. Scheduling software takes a given timetable and builds vehicle blocks, driver duties and rosters that respect labour rules at the lowest cost.
Can a small or medium network do without a dedicated planning tool?
Often, yes, for strategic design: redesigns are frequently commissioned from consultants with their own tools. What they cannot do without is reliable data: a current GTFS and measured running times from their AVM system.
Is GTFS enough, or is NeTEx required?
GTFS is enough for most planning tools and passenger apps. EU rules on multimodal travel information rely on standardised data published through National Access Points, with NeTEx as the European reference. Many authorities now require both.
How long does it take to get useful as-run data for planning?
A full seasonal picture takes a year. A few weeks of reliable records already show the main gaps between scheduled and actual running times, enough to fix the worst timetables before the next service change.
Sources: TMB, "The new bus network: evolution" (tmb.cat); Badia, Argote-Cabanero, Daganzo, "Network Effects in Bus Transit: Evidence from Barcelona's Nova Xarxa", UC Berkeley ITS, 2016; Lisboa Para Pessoas, "Carris Metropolitana started up on the North Bank", January 2023; The Local, "Paris launches new bus network for first time in 70 years", 17 April 2019; Via, "Via acquires Remix", 10 March 2021; PTV Group blog, "PTV Lines or PTV Visum to plan public transport"; Intelligent Transport, "De Lijn prepares for growth with HASTUS upgrade and expansion", 2016; IVU, "Qbuzz dispatches e-buses with the IVU.suite"; Optibus, company website; Sustainable Bus, "Trapeze rebranding: ebblo, Naviquate, Grampian Solutions, Nexfeld", 2026; Esri ArcGIS Blog, "Public transit in Network Analyst"; European Commission, "Multimodal travel information" (Delegated Regulations (EU) 2017/1926 and 2024/490).