Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Now you are speaking my language :)
I know that the load between Sengkang and AMK is very heavy. That's why I am rooting for DD on this patch. I have witnessed 159 buses at Hougang Ave 9 have no place for people to enter anymore, and it is the only bus serving Serangoon Ave 6, but passengers cannot enter. In the evening, same thing happens at Seagate, when passengers cannot board the SD.
Hence, I feel there should be a 159M using DDs as a full day service and 159 can go to TPY with reduced frequency. Or have 159 return from TPY via CTE instead of Lor Chuan. Everytime I see 159 people just cramp into the bus. It really needs DDs.
By the way 163 is a good alternative from Sengkang to TPY as well, or just take 50/159 to AMK or Bishan and change into connecting bus. Isn't it quicker than taking 159 that does Ave 1, Lor Chuan, Bradell to reach TPY.
163 is NOT a good alt; horrid freq and long routes. Longer than 159. And as I said before, the uncles and aunties may not favour transferring to direct link.
What I think is that 159 should loop at TPY and not enter TPY Int. That way freq improve, trip faster and more space for TPY Int. I also support the idea of skipping Lor Chuan, as that part is real redundant (duplicating 105 and MRT), thus allowing DDs to ply the route.
159M IMHO is just waste of resources, road space and manpower (to manage that service) given the above is granted.
Originally posted by SMB128B:163 is NOT a good alt; horrid freq and long routes. Longer than 159. And as I said before, the uncles and aunties may not favour transferring to direct link.
What I think is that 159 should loop at TPY and not enter TPY Int. That way freq improve, trip faster and more space for TPY Int. I also support the idea of skipping Lor Chuan, as that part is real redundant (duplicating 105 and MRT), thus allowing DDs to ply the route.
159M IMHO is just waste of resources, road space and manpower (to manage that service) given the above is granted.
it currently 'loops' at TPY, same as 163.
Originally posted by service_238:it currently 'loops' at TPY, same as 163.
But it enters the int, waste of time and adding up to int traffic. Should be re-routed to avoid int. Coz turning in and out of int takes time.
Originally posted by SMB128B:163 is NOT a good alt; horrid freq and long routes. Longer than 159. And as I said before, the uncles and aunties may not favour transferring to direct link.
What I think is that 159 should loop at TPY and not enter TPY Int. That way freq improve, trip faster and more space for TPY Int. I also support the idea of skipping Lor Chuan, as that part is real redundant (duplicating 105 and MRT), thus allowing DDs to ply the route.
159M IMHO is just waste of resources, road space and manpower (to manage that service) given the above is granted.
Actually 163's route is only maybe 5 minutes longer than 159. I always take 163 direct from Sengkang to TPY too. hah
And 163's frequency has improved alot already, what it needs to do is the frequency of non peak hours. The wait can be up to 25 mins which i think is ridiculous. During peak hours, you can easily board 163 within 10 minutes.
For 159, i guess it's more like a connecting bus rather than a direct. yup as what busanalyser has mentioned, 50 to AMK then take train to TPY is already a much faster alternative from sengkang as compared to 159 and 163.
Originally posted by SBST163:Actually 163's route is only maybe 5 minutes longer than 159. I always take 163 direct from Sengkang to TPY too. hah
And 163's frequency has improved alot already, what it needs to do is the frequency of non peak hours. The wait can be up to 25 mins which i think is ridiculous. During peak hours, you can easily board 163 within 10 minutes.
For 159, i guess it's more like a connecting bus rather than a direct. yup as what busanalyser has mentioned, 50 to AMK then take train to TPY is already a much faster alternative from sengkang as compared to 159 and 163.
I asked my neighbours who go to TPY too. They will mostly prefer 159 to 163. Freq is still 159 win. Actually 163 can be fast too, but only during evening off-peak, when traffic at YCK Road reduces.
As I have repeated so frequently, uncles and aunties, such as my neighbour's grandmother, don't care about the length of 159 (as long as it's faster than 163) and they would rather a seat and a direct link bus. Thus taking 159 direct is what they would always do of course.
I think it's the other way round bah. People on 163 tend to be the short-haul ones. Not much will take from Sengkang Int to TPY. On the other hand, 159 had one-third or even sometimes half the bus going to TPY <---> Sengkang Int.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
I have keenly observed the loading, and many others have also... Read all the posts on 159 before commenting... If you have a better insight, post it... you don't need to act oversmart... and show how stupid you are ;)
pls lah.. you been observing the loading? seem like every service u go observe one trip and say must put DDs or what? like that call observation? based on you so called observation, you DID NOT even know that there are downroutes for Sv72 in the afternoon? have been looking at all your comments since you registered your account, you simply just whack whatever you like... only know how to propose to add DDs to this and that service.. but do not know the actual operation details at all...
Originally posted by SMB128B:But it enters the int, waste of time and adding up to int traffic. Should be re-routed to avoid int. Coz turning in and out of int takes time.
reroute to where? dun turn into interchange, then turn left into PIE and then exit PIE and into Lor 6 again?
Originally posted by lemon1974:reroute to where? dun turn into interchange, then turn left into PIE and then exit PIE and into Lor 6 again?
Lor 6 ---> Lor 2 ---> TPY Ctrl ---> Lor 6.
Use Service 82 solution.
Originally posted by lemon1974:reroute to where? dun turn into interchange, then turn left into PIE and then exit PIE and into Lor 6 again?
--Duplicate--
Originally posted by SMB128B:Lor 6 ---> Lor 2 ---> TPY Ctrl ---> Lor 6.
Use Service 82 solution.
wont make much different in the timing.. considering the traffic lights....
Originally posted by SMB128B:Lor 6 ---> Lor 2 ---> TPY Ctrl ---> Lor 6.
Use Service 82 solution.
By doing so you are missing out on pax from TPY Interchange. I am sure someone would complain about that as well, as they would want a direct service from TPY Interchange to Sengkang Central and even if there is an alternate service like 163, they would want a shorter route.
Originally posted by lemon1974:pls lah.. you been observing the loading? seem like every service u go observe one trip and say must put DDs or what? like that call observation? based on you so called observation, you DID NOT even know that there are downroutes for Sv72 in the afternoon? have been looking at all your comments since you registered your account, you simply just whack whatever you like... only know how to propose to add DDs to this and that service.. but do not know the actual operation details at all...
FYI - I don't post all loading experiences here. I travel everyday by bus, so don't whack... ;) and just chill.. chill... I don't post anything on WDL / Yishun / CCK services coz I don't have much experience and haven't observed much there. The ones that I know, I know!!
Originally posted by SMB128B:I asked my neighbours who go to TPY too. They will mostly prefer 159 to 163. Freq is still 159 win. Actually 163 can be fast too, but only during evening off-peak, when traffic at YCK Road reduces.
As I have repeated so frequently, uncles and aunties, such as my neighbour's grandmother, don't care about the length of 159 (as long as it's faster than 163) and they would rather a seat and a direct link bus. Thus taking 159 direct is what they would always do of course.
I think it's the other way round bah. People on 163 tend to be the short-haul ones. Not much will take from Sengkang Int to TPY. On the other hand, 159 had one-third or even sometimes half the bus going to TPY <---> Sengkang Int.
With your this post, I have serious doubts on how many times you have travelled from Sengkang to TPY. My cousin lives at Buangkok and I have taken 159 several times. What you have mentioned is so untrue.
In the morning peak, the bus is already standing when I board at Buangkok Green, by Hougang Ave 9, people don't have place to enter. I have seen many times, people near Hougang 1 taking 72 behind and changing into 159 on AMK Ave 5 to AMK MRT. By the time, the bus reaches Nanyang, there are only 25 - 30 of the 70 - 75 pax at Seagate remaining.
At AMK MRT, at least 15-20 pax get down, and another 5 enter. The bus normally leaves AMK MRT with not more than 20 pax. I have even observed this in the afternoon timing. When at AMK MRT, when people get down there are not more than 10-15 pax (not counting pax who enter), how does it be one-third or half pax going direct from Sengkang to TPY. If at all, it would be just 1 or 2 pax - you and your grandmother's friend.
If you'll agree to spend 5 minutes more on 163 that has not-so-bad frequency as you claim, you will see that 159 route from AMK to TPY is quite useless and redundant and even time consuming.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:With your this post, I have serious doubts on how many times you have travelled from Sengkang to TPY. My cousin lives at Buangkok and I have taken 159 several times. What you have mentioned is so untrue.
In the morning peak, the bus is already standing when I board at Buangkok Green, by Hougang Ave 9, people don't have place to enter. I have seen many times, people near Hougang 1 taking 72 behind and changing into 159 on AMK Ave 5 to AMK MRT. By the time, the bus reaches Nanyang, there are only 25 - 30 of the 70 - 75 pax at Seagate remaining.
At AMK MRT, at least 15-20 pax get down, and another 5 enter. The bus normally leaves AMK MRT with not more than 20 pax. I have even observed this in the afternoon timing. When at AMK MRT, when people get down there are not more than 10-15 pax (not counting pax who enter), how does it be one-third or half pax going direct from Sengkang to TPY. If at all, it would be just 1 or 2 pax - you and your grandmother's friend.
If you'll agree to spend 5 minutes more on 163 that has not-so-bad frequency as you claim, you will see that 159 route from AMK to TPY is quite useless and redundant and even time consuming.
Ok... My Maths fail then... But u geddit.
And did u realise you were contradicting to your post above?
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:FYI - I don't post all loading experiences here. I travel everyday by bus, so don't whack... ;) and just chill.. chill... I don't post anything on WDL / Yishun / CCK services coz I don't have much experience and haven't observed much there. The ones that I know, I know!!
Then stop acting boss and think you know everything. I used to study in Woodlands, and I do know which services need bendies and which do not. I remember one of your posts about which SMRT svcs should get DDs and bendies, and you were kinda wrong about The Woodlands part. So u sure u nv post what u didn't actually see?
SBS Transit should put some double deckers into service 268.It is really a pity seeing those workers working at Industrial Estate standing up almost everyday.They should really put double deckers bus into this service.
Originally posted by SMB128B:Then stop acting boss and think you know everything. I used to study in Woodlands, and I do know which services need bendies and which do not. I remember one of your posts about which SMRT svcs should get DDs and bendies, and you were kinda wrong about The Woodlands part. So u sure u nv post what u didn't actually see?
Let's not start the DD v/s bendy flame war in every forum. SMRT will do what it has to.
Originally posted by SBS 6238T:SBS Transit should put some double deckers into service 268.It is really a pity seeing those workers working at Industrial Estate standing up almost everyday.They should really put double deckers bus into this service.
Agree. I thought this service would have got at least 2-3 DDs by now but maybe because half its route is similar to svc 76 from YCK to stop before Daikin (AMK Ave 3), SBST is not using DDs. That is the only rationale I can think.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Let's not start the DD v/s bendy flame war in every forum. SMRT will do what it has to.
Here, I'm not targeting the SMRT DD vs. bendy. I'm flamed at your level of credit and integrity.
You pat your chest and say with your heart: You REALLY didn't post random stuff? Good job lor. I find a lot of your "SMRT deserve DDs" post full of crap IMHO, and I can only agree that svcs like 190 should take in DDs. My boy, where do u stay? Woodlands is not Tampines leh. Tampines is got one and ONLY MRT station leh; Woodlands apart itself, still got Marsiling, Admiralty leh hor. Yishun also have Khatib hor.
Please lah, reflect your own posts before retaliating others with something you really isn't even sure if u have done it anot. Otherwise you will just be the next CY: the whole forum won't favour your presence.
Originally posted by SMB128B:Here, I'm not targeting the SMRT DD vs. bendy. I'm flamed at your level of credit and integrity.
You pat your chest and say with your heart: You REALLY didn't post random stuff? Good job lor. I find a lot of your "SMRT deserve DDs" post full of crap IMHO, and I can only agree that svcs like 190 should take in DDs. My boy, where do u stay? Woodlands is not Tampines leh. Tampines is got one and ONLY MRT station leh; Woodlands apart itself, still got Marsiling, Admiralty leh hor. Yishun also have Khatib hor.
Please lah, reflect your own posts before retaliating others with something you really isn't even sure if u have done it anot. Otherwise you will just be the next CY: the whole forum won't favour your presence.
Please... many of you over here think that you'll own the forum and are so touchy about small things... IF someone uses a wrong reg number, you'll will start shouting at them... I don't care who favors me a not... I just do this as a hobby... have many other things to do... so can't take your reactions too seriously...
Regarding credibility, you'll decide that as per your convenience... I have seen so many of your posts where you just write rubbish.. especially in the DDs for SMRT forum... just because you want to favor bendies... Anyway, IMO apart from 3-4 people here who are senior, no one has credibility and everyone gets flamed when their point of view is different.
Again your point over 159 having one third or half people from Sengkang to TPY is rubbish because by the time the bus comes to AMKAve 1, there are only 15-20 pax remaining in the bus that gets more than 70 pax, and many of these are ones who have taken the bus at AMK MRT. And don't take this all too seriously, just because I want or a couple of people want 159 to be re-routed via CTE or have 159M, it is not going to happen. So enjoy your long ride from Sengkang to TPY.
3240, 3241, 3242, 3330 all go to AMDEP as per posted in this forum. Which services will take these 4 buses from AMDEP?
I would put 3240, 3241 on svc 268 on trial basis.
3242 on svc 59
3330 on svc 70
Since, 3331 is not deployed yet, it should be deployed to BNDEP and assigned to svc 69 or BRBP and assigned to svc 88