Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) for Singapore?
-
I am not sure whether this topic was discussed before. Pardon me if it happened before.
I have happened to read today edition of TODAY Newspaper(pg 17) topic on "Look elsewhere for bus solutions"
One of the portion he has mentioned this:
"Along with leveraging expertise and gathering data better, considerin the use of best practices could bring leading-edge ideas to Singapore. One example is Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) models, which use corridors for rapid travel bus."
In my opinion, BRT model can be utilised on existing viaducts (e.g. Upper Serangoon Road viaduct or West Coast Highway?). One of the lane can be reserved for BRT and bus stations to be constructed adjacent to the viaduct at strategic points (something similar to Xiamen, where the BRT would travel on viaduct and also on normal roads using normal bus lanes [for our case, due to space constraints])Does everyone feel it will be beneficial to implement BRT in Singapore?
-
Originally posted by gorby107:
I am not sure whether this topic was discussed before. Pardon me if it happened before.
I have happened to read today edition of TODAY Newspaper(pg 17) topic on "Look elsewhere for bus solutions"
One of the portion he has mentioned this:
"Along with leveraging expertise and gathering data better, considerin the use of best practices could bring leading-edge ideas to Singapore. One example is Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) models, which use corridors for rapid travel bus."
In my opinion, BRT model can be utilised on existing viaducts (e.g. Upper Serangoon Road viaduct or West Coast Highway?). One of the lane can be reserved for BRT and bus stations to be constructed adjacent to the viaduct at strategic points (something similar to Xiamen, where the BRT would travel on viaduct and also on normal roads using normal bus lanes [for our case, due to space constraints])Does everyone feel it will be beneficial to implement BRT in Singapore?
can benefit, but i dont think it is very realistic to do so.
-
not realistic for Singapore......
-
wait long long
most roads can't apply BOT.... unless ERP rates go up higher
-
For BRT, you need 2x bus lanes per direction.
1 for express svs or standby in case 1x bus rosak.
It's barricaded up.
-
I think it possible,which is cheaper and faster to implement. Just bulid a flyover bus lane over busy traffic junction and convert all bus lanes full day, so that no other vechice can get in. And also have full day bus lane in expressway, why not? This idea is no new. the late Dr Goh had this idea long time ago, only for the government to select for MRT system.
-
you can't be having flyovers everywhere.
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
For BRT, you need 2x bus lanes per direction.
1 for express svs or standby in case 1x bus rosak.
It's barricaded up.
the concern would be the competition for road/land space. -
or modify the traffic light to turn green for bus before turn green for other traffic. it there already in some area.
here is a system in canada
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/policy/transed2007-pages-1134-1831.htm
-
Originally posted by wsy1234:
or modify the traffic light to turn green for bus before turn green for other traffic. it there already in some area.
here is a system in canada
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/policy/transed2007-pages-1134-1831.htm
Wun work as the buses here are pretty individualised in where they turn.More likely to be better to improve the traffic light cycle timings
-
MRT system take too long to bulid, having a simple BRT of our own is possible using the exting bus lanes and expressways and traffic light system.
-
Also by having electric buses runing on the BRT will cut air and noise pollution
-
This is like bus lane + the system of 'e' buses at peak hour. But then I must take a bus to change at a BRT bus stop to take BRT. It is no better than a train. And it runs slower. And if special lanes, stops and flyovers are built, it is no more flexible than a train. Singapore had something close to this in the past. It was called a tram. The time taken to build MRT lines can be shortened, if they build above ground. More pleasant journey too.
-
there is an efficient BRT in Singapore.
service 27 & 179A.
-
Originally posted by alize:
This is like bus lane + the system of ‘e’ buses at peak hour.
But then I must take a bus to change at a BRT bus stop to take BRT. It is no better than a train. And it runs slower. And if special lanes, stops and flyovers are built, it is no more flexible than a train.
Singapore had something close to this in the past. It was called a tram.
The time taken to build MRT lines can be shortened, if they build above ground. More pleasant journey too.
There's express svs, that's why there's 2 bus lanes per direction.Not tram, trolley buses.
Elevated MRT station is pretty noisy for dwellers living close to the train tracks.
Some places with lots of land dun wish to spend money on MRT, rather on cheaper BRT. BRT can sometimes be better than MRT as you dun throw all the commuters on 1 line, but rather many diff bus routes.
-
no really need to take a bus to change to BRT. a bus can become BRT when it go in to the lanes for them and go out of the lanes. What our bus lane now is already coming to this idea. only thing is how to skip traffic junction and traffic lights completely in the city area and HDB town area that the question here or else our bus service could be faster and stop only at bus stop not at traffic lights and junction.
-
We already have Express services.
But somehow they just can't make it as from Point A to B.
It has to be from Point A to Point B to Point C to Point D, stopping at bus stops at each point.
Have they the gumption to have non-stop services from Point A to Point B?
And, oh yes, no standing passengers.
-
As many fellow forumers mentioned, we are pretty land scarse here and that puts us at a disadvantage on a grade seperated BRT system here. (Grade seperated, e.g. only buses running on the BRT tracks)
Most successful BRT systems also run from the city center or a major transport hub towards suburb areas as a form of high-speed transport that's cheaper than building rail networks. A excellent example would be the O-Bahn Busway in Adelaide, where the buses run up to 100km/h.
However the problem is we already have train lines linking most towns up (or soon will have). Buses also cannot provided as much capacity as trains can, especially our NSEW lines. So building a BRT just to link up places where the trains can do their job would just be a waste of space and money.
My suggestion is, even if we cannot build such a BRT system, theres many positive points to learn from such as:
- New "Rapid" services that have long disance between stops (stopping on average every 1km on a 20km route on major bus stops, vs currently stopping on average every 400meters on a 20km route can save alot of time). This sounds similar to mancha's idea where theres multiple stops along the way instead of just point to point.
- Some special stops that only this "Rapid" services can stop at. Most part of the route can still use normal stops.
- Make use of flyovers and flyunders as much as possible (less traffic lights)
- Aim to match MRT's travelling time, yet as a slightly lower cost alternative.
- Optimised seating for fast passenger turnaround on lower deck, yet provide seating on upper deck on DD.
- Full width doors
- If possible, Tap In only, no Tap out. Saves delay when a forgetful person cant find the card from his/her wallet/bag/purse/etc. This also prevents people from causing unecessary loading by using such "Rapid" services as feeder or for just 1 or 2 stops.
Note: I use the word "Rapid" because there's already "Express" services. Its just a term.
Comments?
-
got one idea for BRT's pilot location in Singapore.. that place is the road from Bt Timah 7th Mile till AYE. Put it in the middle of the road. used only in the peak direction. Means like a traffic island when the buses call at the bus stops. this means adding infrastructure like overhead bridges/underpasses and lifts for PIWs. Cost may outweigh the benefits.
with this in mind, expand it to 4 lanes with 1 lane as bus lane is more cost efficient.