Editorial Policies

Aims and Scope

The electronic scientific Journal ”Modern Transportation Systems and Technologies” has been issued quarterly since 2015 under management of Doctor of Economic Science, Professor Anatoly Zaitsev and under the aegis of Emperor Alexander I St. Petersburg State Transport University, and Scientific and Educational Engineering Cluster “Russian Maglev”.

The Journal is intended for engineering and technical personnel and scientific officers and researchers, who specialize in the sphere of passenger and freight transportation. It is especially useful for undergraduates and postgraduates of transport universities for the benefit of improvement of their competences and expansion of their field of vision.

The journal’s mission encompasses:

  • Integration of the results of the fundamental and applied research of Russian speaking scientists, and experience of specialists of the transport engineering industry, into the international scientific community;
  • Becoming an international scientific forum for representatives of higher education (scientists, postgraduates and students), and industry workers for the discussion and exchange of experiences in the sphere of transportation in the engineering industry;
  • The provision of specialists with topical and trustworthy information about new technical solutions in the sphere of transportation, and all other associated spheres of industry;
  • Building a new technological pattern in Russia and around the globe.




The journal comprises scientific reviews, including research ones, on various areas of the transport branch and all other branches related to it. These are:

  • Technologies and projects;
  • Scientific and practical developments;
  • Safety;
  • Transport economics.

The major objective of writing a scientific review should be discussion of the accumulated material and presenting the author’s new vision of the previously proved facts, reconsideration of them and search for new approaches to their understanding. Yet it should not be a mere listing and stating the today’s situation of the issue. Thus, discussion makes a significant part of the review (it may be separated as an independent text or it may run gradually through the whole text).

The review manuscript should contain all sources of information (full text or abstract databases). Also a searching procedure should be described in detail: names of the databases, filters and keywords, and all additional parameters of selecting primary sources.

The review should be structured into sections and contain necessary graphic materials to facilitate the perception of the text.

All review papers sent to the Editorial Board are:

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Original studies

The Journal publishes results of fundamental and applied researches in transport sphere and other spheres associated with it:

  • Technologies and projects;
  • Scientific and practical developments;
  • Safety;
  • Transport economics.

All original papers sent to the Editorial Board.



Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Principles of choosing material for publication

It is highly advisable that the authors should submit only those works for publication which meet the scope of the Journal, represent scientific novelty or interest for other scientists.

The submitted papers containing results of researches should correspond to at least one of the following fields:

  • Physics;
  • Technical sciences, including engineering and computer graphics, mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, transport engineering, civil and industrial engineering, safety, including environmental and human safety, etc;
  • Economy.

Consideration of manuscript

When receiving the manuscript, the Corresponding Secretary checks the manuscript overall formatting.

For the publication of an article of a graduate student, a mandatory review of a supervisor is required.

The authors whose works do not meet the Journal requirements will receive a notification stating the drawbacks or mistakes of the manuscript in general.

In case the manuscript is received for the second time and it does not meet the requirements again, it will be declined without consideration.

After the Editorial Board decides that the manuscript meets the formatting requirements, the decision is made whether or not the manuscript corresponds to the Journal scope.

The manuscript received for consideration will be then forwarded to the Reviewers.

The publication of the paper is possible only after positive reviews have been received.

Upon deciding that their manuscript meets the Journal scope and that they agree with the Editorial Board policy, the authors are expected to prepare their manuscript in accordance with “Requirements for Manuscripts” document and submit the manuscript to the Editorial Board via the website of the Journal.

Mechanism of reviewing

All articles submitted to the Editorial Board of the Journal ”Modern Transportation Systems and Technologies” are subject to mandatory double-blind peer review (the reviewer receives no information about the authors of the manuscript, and the authors receive no information about the reviewers).

  1. The articles are reviewed by the Editorial Board members as well as by guest reviewers – leading experts in corresponding branches of sciences. The decision whether to choose an expert for reviewing is made by Editor-in-Chief, his Deputy, or Corresponding Secretary. The reviewing process takes 4 weeks, yet it may be extended on request by a reviewer.
  2. Each reviewer is entitled to reject reviewing should an obvious conflict of interest arise, which would affect the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. Upon evaluating the article, the reviewer gives his/her recommendations on the next actions related to article with every decision and recommendation substantiated:
    • the article is recommended for publication in the current form;
    • the article is recommended for publication after all mistakes or inaccuracies have been rectified;
    • the article may not be published in the Journal;
    • the article is recommended to be submitted to a journal having different scope.
  3. The Editorial Board sends the review to the author of the article. In case there are recommendations on further improvement of the text of the manuscript, the Editorial Board suggest on considering them while preparing another version of the manuscript. In case the authors do not agree with the reviewers’ recommendations (remarks), they are requested to forward a letter stating expressly why they do not see it necessary to make include the reviewers’ recommendations in the text of the manuscript. Further improvement of the text should not take more than two months from the moment of sending the message to the authors concerning the need to improve the article.
  4. The authors should form their answers to the reviewers as separate files and upload them to the website in “Description of the Manuscript” section. In case no such file has been provided, any further work with the paper will be suspended, and the authors will be provided with the relative notification thereof. The manuscript improved by the authors will be sent for reviewing again.
  5. In case the authors reject improving their article, they should inform the Editorial Board in writing or orally about their decision not to have the article published. If the authors do not resubmit the revised materials after a period of three months since the review has been sent, even if there is no information concerning the authors’ rejecting to improve the article, the Editorial Board will remove it from the register. In this case, the relative letter of notification will be forwarded to the authors, saying that the article has been removed from the register due to expiration of time allotted for revision.
  6. The Editorial Board conducts no more than three stages of reviewing of each manuscript. If after three stages of revision of the manuscript, the reviewers or Editorial Board still have significant remarks, the manuscript will be rejected and removed from the register. In this case, a corresponding letter stating that the article has been removed from the register, will be forwarded to the authors.
  7. If there arise unsolvable contradictions about the manuscript between the authors and reviewers, the Editorial Board is entitled to submit the article for additional reviewing.
  8. The decision to reject the publication of the article is made during the meeting of the Editorial Board and in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. The notification of rejection is electronically forwarded to the authors. The notification contains the reasons for rejection and is complemented by reviewers. The manuscript which has not been recommended by the Editorial Board for publication will not be additionally considered for publication.
  9. Receiving the positive review is not a sufficient ground for publication of the article. The final decision is made by the Editorial Board. In conflict situations the decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief.
  10. After the positive decision on publication has been made the Editorial Board, it informs the authors thereof and specifies the due dates of publication.
  11. The originals of the reviews are stored in the journal’s editorial archive for a period of no less than five years.
  12. The reviews on manuscripts are not subject for open access and are used only for the journal’s Editorial Board document processing and for communication with the authors. The copies of the reviews may be submitted to the Higher Attestation Committee of the Russian Federation on their due requests.
  13. After the positive decision on publication has been made the Editorial Board, it informs the authors thereof and specifies the due dates of publication.
  14. The originals of the reviews are stored in the journal’s editorial archive for a period of no less than five years.
  15. The reviews on manuscripts are not subject for open access and are used only for the journal’s Editorial Board document processing and for communication with the authors. The copies of the reviews may be submitted to the Higher Attestation Committee of the Russian Federation on their due requests.


Publication Frequency

The magazine is published 4 times a year, at the end of each quarter.


Open Access Policy

Articles of this journal are available to everyone from the moment of publication under the International license CC BY, which provides free open access to research results and contributes to the progress of science and the development of innovative transport technologies.

Since the end of 2017, the electronic research journal “Transport Systems and technologies” has been published in English and Russian and distributed in electronic form free of charge (Platinum Open Access). 



The journal uses the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) to digitally preserve all the published articles. The PKP PN is a part of LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) program offers decentralized and distributed preservation, seamless perpetual access, and preservation of the authentic original version of the content.

Also, the journal makes full-text archives on the Russian Science Electronic Library (http://elibrary.ru/) platform.


Indexing and Ranking

The ”Modern Transportation Systems and Technologies” journal is indexed in the following international databases and directory editions:

The journal has been registered with The Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology and Mass Media (Roskomnadzor). The Certificate of Registration is No. ФС77-81789 (FS77-81789) of August 31, 2021.


The Journal’s Code of Ethics

General requirements for manuscripts

When considering received manuscripts, the Editorial Board is guided by the International Committees on Ethics.

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE):

The White Paper on Publication Ethics

The manuscript will be withdrawn from publication if, at any stage of consideration or prepress, the editorial Board reveals a violation of the requirements of publication ethics. This will also result in the team of authors being barred from publishing their works in the journal in the future.

Breach of publication ethics includes:

  • Plagiarism;
  • Submission for publication in several journals at one time;
  • Concealment of conflict of interests;
  • Assessment by the reviewers of professional qualities;
  • Unacceptable authorship.


Plagiarism may occur in many forms: from presenting someone else’s work as one’s own, to the copying and paraphrasing of significant quantities of someone else’s work (without referring to the original authors), or the unjust claiming of rights for someone else’s redearch results. Unauthorised, in all of its forms, is regarded as an unethical action and is, therefore, unacceptable.

The authors of the manuscripts are expected to present fully original works. Mentioning someone else’s work should properly refer to original sources, which, in their turn, are subject to inclusion in References of the manuscript. Citing the previously mentioned text, it should be dealt with as a direct quote, and be enclosed in quotation marks, with the mandatory reference to the original source. Including large segments of borrowed text is unacceptable.

It is always necessary to recognize all participants’ contributions to the research. The authors should refer to publications which have had serious influence on research covered in the manuscript. Data which have been unofficially obtained (e.g., in a conversation, correspondence, or in a discussion with third parties), should not be used or presented without the prior written consent of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources (e.g., when it comes to scientific grants) should not be mentioned in the manuscript without the clearly expressed written consent of the author concerned with the confidential source.

Plagiarism is detected by means of:

  • A peer-review;
  • Antiplagiat software (Antiplagiarism);
  • After the manuscripts has been published – as a result of readers’ claims.

If plagiarism was detected, the manuscript will be denied, even if it has already been published. The website will contain an official notification thereof.

The submission of one manuscript for publication in several journals at one time, or the consequence of the piece having been published earlier under a different title

In the instance that the Editorial Board becomes knowledgeable that the manuscript has been submitted for publication in several journals at one time, it will be regarded as a breach of publication ethics. After such breach is detected, the manuscript will be declined.

Certain types of the paper’s publication (e.g., translated articles) is acceptable in some cases, provided that a number of criteria is met. When submitting the manuscript a second time, the authors are required to notify the Editorial Board, and substantiate the necessity thereof. In the instance of a second-time publication, all copyright related issues are settled individually, and in certain cases, specifically. The general requirements for second-time publication are as follows:

  • The full references of the original (first-time) publication;
  • Saving the first references of the original (first-time) paper.

More detailed information about acceptable second-time (repeated) publications is available at www.icmje.org.

Concealment of conflicts of interest

It is obligatory that all authors should disclose (declare in a specific section of the manuscript) financial, or other express, or potential conflicts of interest, which may be regarded as those having influenced results or conclusions given in the manuscript.

Examples of potential conflicts of interests subject to disclosure are:

  • Having acquired a financial reward for participating in research or writing a manuscript;
  • Any connection (e.g., contract, consulting, shareholding, remuneration, provision of an expert opinion) with organizations having direct interest in the subject of the research or review;
  • A patent application, or the registration of a patent for research findings (copyrights, etc.);
  • Having acquired financial support for any stage of research undertaken, or manuscript written (including but not limited to grants and other financial coverage).

Information about any conflicts of interest that is obtained from the authors will remain available only for the Editorial Board when deciding upon the publication of the manuscript. In the case of the manuscript receiving a positive decision on publication, the information about the conflicts of interest will become available through its publication within the full paper.

Assessment of a reviewers’ competences

The assessment of the professional competences of a reviewer is the exclusive prerogative of the Editorial Board.

Any attempts made by the authors to assess the team of reviewers’ competences will result in publication being declined.

Unacceptable authorship of publications

The authors of the manuscript may be only those who have significantly contributed to forming the concept of the work, its development, and the interpretation of the results of the research presented, as well as to the manuscript writing process itself (including scientific and stylistic revision, and the adaptation of the paper to the journal’s requirements).

The authors are expected to see to it that:

  • All authors who have significantly contributed to the research, are mentioned as co-authors;
  • No one who has not actually participated in the research is mentioned as a co-author;
  • All the authors have looked through and approved the final version of the work, and agreed on its publication. The co-authors consent should be given in writing, in the cover letter.

Access to original data and its storage

The Editorial Board reserves the right to request that the authors provide the original (“raw”) research data, as well as for the purpose of providing it to the team of reviewers and editors. The authors are expected to be ready to provide this date to the editors, as well as storing the data.

Duties of the Authors

Reporting standards

The authors of reports of original research should present an accurate accounting of the work performed, as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. The results of research should be recorded and maintained in a manner that allows for analysis and review. Fraudulent or knowingly unaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior, and are unacceptable.


Authors should ensure that their work is an entirely original work, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, it has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical scholarly behavior, and is unacceptable. Information obtained by private communication, correspondence, or discussions with third parties should not be used without the express written consent of the corresponding source.

Multiple or concurrent publications

In general, authors should not publish articles describing essentially the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes an unethical publishing behavior, and is unacceptable.  The publication of some kinds of articles (e.g., translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgment of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others used in a research project must always be given.

Disclosure of financial support 

All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published work

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor and/or publisher, and cooperate in retracting or correcting the contribution.

Duties of the Editors

Publication decisions

The editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. Validation of the work in question, and its importance to researchers and readers, must always drive such decisions. The editor is guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board, and is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force, regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

Fair play

The editor should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit, without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


The editor and the editorial staff should not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the publisher.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

The editor must not use unpublished materials in the editor's own research, without the express written consent of the author. The editor should recuse him/herself from considering manuscripts in which he/she has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

The editor should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been raised concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper, and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made.

Duties of the reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

All articles published in the journal are submitted to a blind peer review. Peer reviewers should be experts in the scientific topic addressed in the articles they review, and should be selected for their objectivity and scientific knowledge. A peer review assists an editor in making editorial decisions, and through anonymous communications with the authors, may also assist an author in improving a contribution.


The review process may take approximately 1–2 months to be completed.  Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript, or who knows that its prompt review will be impossible, should notify the editor, and excuse themselves from the review process.


Any manuscripts that are received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to, or discussed with others.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly, with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should point out relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity between the manuscript under consideration, and any other published paper of which he/she has personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review, must not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Significant mistakes in the published works

In case significant mistakes or inaccuracies are found in the publication, the authors are expected to inform the Editorial Board or the Publisher thereof, and cooperate with the editorial team to ensure the prompt suspension of the work, and the rectification of mistakes. In an instance where the Editorial Board or the publisher is provided with substantiated information that the publication contains significant mistakes, the author is obliged either to have the work withdrawn and rectify the mistakes within the shortest time, or to withdraw the notification of mistakes, providing the Editorial Board with all necessary proof.

Publication Fee

The papers are published in the journal, ”Modern Transportation Systems and Technologies”, free of charge.

The Editorial Board does not charge the authors for the open publication of their papers, as well as for the reviewing, the preparation of the journal for publication, the maintenance of the website and the electronic storage of the manuscripts.


Publication Fee

Articles are published in the journal ”Modern Transportation Systems and Technologies” free of charge.

The editorial Board does not charge the authors for the open publication of their articles, as well as for the reviewing, the preparation of the journal for publication, the maintaining of the site and the electronic storage of the manuscripts.

Since the end of 2017, the electronic research journal, ”Modern Transportation Systems and Technologies” has been published in the English and Russian languages, and is distributed in electronic form, free of charge (Platinum Open Access). All articles are available under the International license: CC BY

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies