Modeling a Distance-Based Preferential Fare Scheme for Park-and-Ride Services in a Multimodal Transport Network

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is very interesting and deals with important issues.
The research methodology was very well described. This gives the opportunity for other researchers to conduct similar research in other countries / cities. The graphic material is very good and easy to read. However, there is something wrong with the numbering of the figures. On page 8, one of the pictures has no number and caption. Thus, he "got lost" in the numbering.
The summary should clearly define the purpose of the work.
It is a pity that the author did not take into account the fact that in many countries, in addition to buses and trains, there are also trams, and they can also be part of the P&R system.
You have to be careful with the tables. For example Appendix page 12 - one row of the table is on the next page causes that the table is not fully readable.
The article contains a literature review, but unfortunately it is quite modest.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article proposes a modeling distance-based preferential scheme fare scheme for Park-and-Ride services in multimodal transport. The foundation of the article relies on the public transportation of passengers in the proximity of a big city as Sydney (CBS). The addressed scenarios and schemes involve discounted fares in relation to Park-and-ride services in order to reduce the overall total travel distance of all participants, combining transportation modes as private vehicles, rail services with Park-and-ride services with a possible benefit of reduced traffic congestion.

Overall paper is well written. However, there are some minor changes to be resolved as expressed below.

•  The first issue is addressed regarding the contribution of each author to the paper. There is no statement regarding this issue.
• the expressed structure  "Numerical experiments"  present in the abstract of the paper and in the content can be improved. Numerical simulation or numerical exemplification is present rather than an applied experiment. 
• When describing a general travel cost not all parameters in the equations are explained to the reader. There are some similar notations but I am not sure that they are transferable to another travel cost description. A thorough read might improve and a better description solves the issue regarding clarity. 
• Figures description may be improved with further briefing even if they are described in the text. 
• Table 1 appears twice in the article
• The visual appearance of tables and figures can be significantly improved. 
• Does the appendix describe real data (distances, length, capacity,) in relation to the train and P&R services?
• Some spaces appear in the text.

Consider the above-mentioned changes in the further submission of the paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf