And you wonder why bus drivers and staff who work for bus companies consider bus enthusiasts to be nutters...
Originally posted by SMB128B:Wah this government rly overboard oredi... Sucking us commuters money by increasing fares and stuff JUST to get the buses they claim is "better"... When in fact we ppl dun even like it at all. Dangerous somemore!!!
Anyway, I can list down all the damn problems of LF buses here:
LF buses: - poses as a danger to commuters with leg injuries/diseases, as The steps at the back to the seats are quite high, and will be a great difficulty for them to come down. - causes great inconvenience during peak hours when commuters have to stand during the ride. Less ppl can fit in the bus, and the aisles are so narrow the commuters have to stand on the platforms instead. Remember, complaints have started to come in since the third citaro is registered, and the complaints didn't stop since after. - is hard to maintain, and hard to repair when system goes wrong. As the design for LF buses are extremely complex, it is hard to trace down problems for newcomers. - can get DAMN hot at the back during long-haul rides or during the times when the engine is working at full power, thus making passengers seated at the back unbearably uncomfortable, especially the one seated next to/in front of the engine box (mostly apply to SD)
See the problems? For LE buses, only one or two say the problem is at the steps. For that, the only problem caused by the steps is when some careless idiots dun watch where they are going, trip over the steps and pokai, making a fool of themselves. This can be prevented however.
Conclusion: LTA, Don't implicate us by increasing our fares and buying more expensive LF buses. We dunnid them to make our lives btr but our lives WILL be btr without them.
P.S. I noe that SMB228X will rebutt on seeing this, so I will just make it clear: if you love Citaros so much, and wan to write in to SBST, u can, but AT LEAST tell them to get the low entry ones ok???
If SBS want to get low entry they will get more creepy Scanias!!! They are dangerous trip over fall down can die!!!! U want to pay more for their medical n funeral????
Originally posted by Powered_By_CNG:None of your complaints are justified in my opinion.
1. Those who are less mobile will more than likely sit closer to the front of the bus for ease of alighting and so that it is easier for them to alert the driver if they require further assistance, so the seats at the rear of the bus are not an issue.
2. With respect to peak period buses, standing room is more important than seating room, because you can fit more people onto a bus when there are more standees. More people per bus = higher efficiency of service.
3. A low floor bus is no harder to maintain than a low entry bus. There are similar constaints in relation to where equipment must be fitted, and the engines used are identical to engines found on low entry buses.
4. Regarding the rear engine creating a warmer interior environment on a bus, again, how is a low floor bus different from a low entry bus? Both have their engines mounted above the rear overhang.
Low floor buses are SAFER for the travelling public, as there is no danger of passengers tripping or falling on steps while the bus is in motion. The single step that is adjacent to the rearmost seats are unlikely to cause any problems since there are ample handholds and staunchions located at that part of the bus so that passengers can stabilise themselves if necessary. In contrast, today's low entry buses will have two or more steps leading to a very high rear platform.
Additionally, low floor buses promote a smooth passenger flow throughout the bus and are therefore unrivalled when it comes to loading and unloading times.
See low floor bus are safer and can carry more than low entry bus!!! I am correct all the way!!! So SBS and SMRT must get 800 more Euro VI Citaros!!!!
Originally posted by SMB228X:If SBS want to get low entry they will get more creepy Scanias!!! They are dangerous trip over fall down can die!!!! U want to pay more for their medical n funeral????
I rather say that there are a few people who trip over somewhere in the Citaro and died sometime ago.
Low Entry bus the step is 2x at aisle..
Low floor at ALL row of seats...
Originally posted by SMB128B:stfu lah u r juz biased against a LF bus kid especially reason 2 is the point i used to emphasis LE BUSES CAN FIT MORE THAN LF BUSES U BITCH. STFU AND GO LEARN UR ABC, INSTEAD OF BEING A MUDABITCH AND SPAMMING UR NONSENSE HERE. Retarded f***, there r steep steps to the side seats too, duh!
And wat if there is only ONE seat at the axle area and the person wif leg disabilities cannot sit there cause of steep steps? One very steep steps can make difficultie rather than two easy steps leh, ah boy.
And pls, the comments u commented earlier here on are all shit too, u nvr experience the feeling of taking LF buses b4. I, as a very frequent commuter of 109, can tell citaros of this kind are DEFINITELY not supposed to be on Singapore roads AT ALL, kid.
Great! *** I like this! ***
Originally posted by Powered_By_CNG:And you wonder why bus drivers and staff who work for bus companies consider bus enthusiasts to be nutters...
Because they worked for someone who does the wrong things in the first place.
Originally posted by sbst275:Low Entry bus the step is 2x at aisle..
Low floor at ALL row of seats...
Sorry but I don't get what you mean. Mind explaining in another way?
I don't know what is the big fuss about LF and LE buses.
When LE buses was firstly introduced, many people complained about it because people are not used to the 2 steps behind and lesser seats than a normal bus. A pharse of change people were unhappy.
Because of all these complains, which is still ongoing, LF buses are introduced. Now people complain again. Narrow aisles, less spacious, etc. Another pharse of change people not happy again.
Seriously, I don't know what bus companies can do or buy what bus to satisfy these people. Buy this, complain, buy that, also complain. And the most absurd thing that many bus fans know why the narrow aisle is because of the rear wheels and engine placements. I don't think this problem will exist forever because bus manufacturers will most likely consider this flaw and improve the designs for their future models. WHy need to complain so much?
I do agree that LE is more dangerous because of the 2 steps towards the back. If steps are unavoidable, then might as well have those normal buses with steps in front and at the back doors. At least it is safer for people to climb up and down of them when the bus is stationary, rather than climbing up and down the steps inside the LE bus when the bus is moving.
Some people here don't like the Citaros. Then blame SMRT for introducing it in the first place. SMRT shouldn't even buy the Citaro at all.
Originally posted by vicamour:I don't know what is the big fuss about LF and LE buses.
When LE buses was firstly introduced, many people complained about it because people are not used to the 2 steps behind and lesser seats than a normal bus. A pharse of change people were unhappy.
Because of all these complains, which is still ongoing, LF buses are introduced. Now people complain again. Narrow aisles, less spacious, etc. Another pharse of change people not happy again.
Seriously, I don't know what bus companies can do or buy what bus to satisfy these people. Buy this, complain, buy that, also complain. And the most absurd thing that many bus fans know why the narrow aisle is because of the rear wheels and engine placements. I don't think this problem will exist forever because bus manufacturers will most likely consider this flaw and improve the designs for their future models. WHy need to complain so much?
I do agree that LE is more dangerous because of the 2 steps towards the back. If steps are unavoidable, then might as well have those normal buses with steps in front and at the back doors. At least it is safer for people to climb up and down of them when the bus is stationary, rather than climbing up and down the steps inside the LE bus when the bus is moving.
Some people here don't like the Citaros. Then blame SMRT for introducing it in the first place. SMRT shouldn't even buy the Citaro at all.
But SMRT is F1RST to get Citaro demo if not there will not have Citaros in Singapore!!!
Originally posted by SMB228X:But SMRT is F1RST to get Citaro demo if not there will not have Citaros in Singapore!!!
First but the worst!
So what is the first? Worst service and buses.
Originally posted by SMB128B:stfu lah u r juz biased against a LF bus kid especially reason 2 is the point i used to emphasis LE BUSES CAN FIT MORE THAN LF BUSES U BITCH. STFU AND GO LEARN UR ABC, INSTEAD OF BEING A MUDABITCH AND SPAMMING UR NONSENSE HERE. Retarded f***, there r steep steps to the side seats too, duh!
And wat if there is only ONE seat at the axle area and the person wif leg disabilities cannot sit there cause of steep steps? One very steep steps can make difficultie rather than two easy steps leh, ah boy.
And pls, the comments u commented earlier here on are all shit too, u nvr experience the feeling of taking LF buses b4. I, as a very frequent commuter of 109, can tell citaros of this kind are DEFINITELY not supposed to be on Singapore roads AT ALL, kid.
Just when I was thinking that your posts were getting more sensible and you had to resort to using such language towards someone who spent time reasoning the advantages and disadvantages of LF buses. That was very much uncalled for and the least you could do was to argue in a sensible manner.
Originally posted by Gus.chong:Excuse me, but your points are totally different from our points.
Please, the reply had one-to-one correspondence to what SMB128B had raised. It's either you go for some English classes or stop posting things for the sake of posting them. I wouldn't have said all these if you had included how different the points are -- show, don't just say.
IMO, for LF buses, I think the B9TL Wrights are the best, followed by Citaros. MAN ones are the worst with the crooked aisle behind.
Originally posted by Simply.90:Please, the reply had one-to-one correspondence to what SMB128B had raised. It's either you go for some English classes or stop posting things for the sake of posting them. I wouldn't have said all these if you had included how different the points are -- show, don't just say.
Ok. I shall just say out the points what SMB128B and the others had said.
1. In Carbikebus's post (the starting post), he said that low floor buses had less standing areas than low entry buses, but in CNG's post, he claimed that standing rooms is more important than seating rooms, which means he should support low entry buses, but instead he supported low floor buses (though he was countering SMB128B's post), which is already a wrong justification.
2. In SMB128B's post (posted 21st May 2012, 1.43pm) he said that people with leg injuries/diseases are unable to come down from the back row of seats, while in CNG's post, he said that those people will likely sit close to the front of the bus and alert the driver to assist them alight, so he think the back row of seats should be no problem. But the problem is, there's a great difference in distance from the driver's seat to the back row of the bus. How is the passenger with the symptoms stated above going to alert the driver at the back row if he/she cannot come down?
3. According to SBS3688Y's post, many people had been getting used to the LE buses and thus it might reduce the risk of falling down. If it is really the case, why is the grabpoles there? It served as a side need for people who can't go up the stairs properly. Even if CNG's post mentioned there will be a high platform, but I doubt many people can adjust to the low floor buses which was just massively introduced last year.
I just really hope this post will justify my points and others to make the ones who support the low floor buses to understand the main problems.
Originally posted by SMB228X:But SMRT is F1RST to get Citaro demo if not there will not have Citaros in Singapore!!!
Have you even read his last sentence in the first place?
"Then blame SMRT for introducing it in the first place. SMRT shouldn't even buy the Citaros at all."
This is really ridiculous. I don't even know what to say but some others know since they don't like Citaros.
Originally posted by Gus.chong:Ok. I shall just say out the points what SMB128B and the others had said.
1. In Carbikebus's post (the starting post), he said that low floor buses had less standing areas than low entry buses, but in CNG's post, he claimed that standing rooms is more important than seating rooms, which means he should support low entry buses, but instead he supported low floor buses (though he was countering SMB128B's post), which is already a wrong justification.
2. In SMB128B's post (posted 21st May 2012, 1.43pm) he said that people with leg injuries/diseases are unable to come down from the back row of seats, while in CNG's post, he said that those people will likely sit close to the front of the bus and alert the driver to assist them alight, so he think the back row of seats should be no problem. But the problem is, there's a great difference in distance from the driver's seat to the back row of the bus. How is the passenger with the symptoms stated above going to alert the driver at the back row if he/she cannot come down?
3. According to SBS3688Y's post, many people had been getting used to the LE buses and thus it might reduce the risk of falling down. If it is really the case, why is the grabpoles there? It served as a side need for people who can't go up the stairs properly. Even if CNG's post mentioned there will be a high platform, but I doubt many people can adjust to the low floor buses which was just massively introduced last year.
I just really hope this post will justify my points and others to make the ones who support the low floor buses to understand the main problems.
Other than the point on standing room which LE buses are more advantageous at (and which Powered_By_CNG did not seem to have phrased his reasoning very well), you don't seem to understand point 2 and I'm totally clueless what your point 3 was entirely about.
For point 2, Powered_By_CNG was merely saying that for passengers with disabilities or are less mobile, they would choose to sit at the yellow priority seats located at the front part of the Citaros (or any other LF bus) and the rear seats should not pose a problem to them, something like the LE buses. There is no disadvantage accrued to LF buses in this aspect.
Originally posted by Simply.90:Other than the point on standing room which LE buses are more advantageous at (and which Powered_By_CNG did not seem to have phrased his reasoning very well), you don't seem to understand point 2 and I'm totally clueless what your point 3 was entirely about.
For point 2, Powered_By_CNG was merely saying that for passengers with disabilities or are less mobile, they would choose to sit at the yellow priority seats located at the front part of the Citaros (or any other LF bus) and the rear seats should not pose a problem to them, something like the LE buses. There is no disadvantage accrued to LF buses in this aspect.
Sorry but it seems like you did not get my point for the 2nd part. The main problem itself is the alerting of drivers and the rear seats (which is the back row of seats, unless you are referring to another row of seats) with the stairs, it even renders the less mobile impossible to alert the drivers from such a distance.
If you want to understand somemore, ask from SMB128B and the others then.
Originally posted by Gus.chong:Sorry but it seems like you did not get my point for the 2nd part. The main problem itself is the alerting of drivers and the rear seats (which is the back row of seats, unless you are referring to another row of seats) with the stairs, it even renders the less mobile impossible to alert the drivers from such a distance.
If you want to understand somemore, ask from SMB128B and the others then.
The whole point is less mobile passengers would not have even travelled that far back for a seat. Why can't people understand such plain logic? If they are not going to be seated that far back, what problem will there be in alerting the driver? Sorry, but I really have to /facepalm/.
Originally posted by Simply.90:The whole point is less mobile passengers would not have even travelled that far back for a seat. Why can't people understand such plain logic? If they are not going to be seated that far back, what problem will there be in alerting the driver? Sorry, but I really have to /facepalm/.
This is what I based on SMB128B's post, I was just repeating it to analyze it.
Originally posted by Gus.chong:This is what I based on SMB128B's post, I was just repeating it to analyze it.
Sorry, you are just repeating without deciding for yourself if that made sense or not. I don't see any attempt of analysis being done. Kthxbye.
Seriously some of you really need some soul searching.Some of you really got the guts to offend senior like Power by Cng aka Dave which provide reliable info on engine/Technical issues.Whats wrong with u guys I've got no idea but seems things really gone out of hand.
Originally posted by carbikebus:Seriously some of you really need some soul searching.Some of you really got the guts to offend senior like Power by Cng aka Dave which provide reliable info on engine/Technical issues.Whats wrong with u guys I've got no idea but seems things really gone out of hand.
oh he's a senior? sry but... u no say earlier?