SMRT giving up bus operation soon?
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
I thought some army boys Bo bian have to take 927??No?
AM peak, PM peak, PM off peak [nights out], Sunday night... Sure.. PM off peak freq maybe got chance for it to be improved... cos of Night Safari -
Originally posted by SMB66X:
If SBS Transit so many buses, how come they don't improve these svc then? Before the introduction of 269A, waiting for 269 is seriously more than the stated time. These are town-link buses, not trunk or less demand service. At least I don't see much of that in some SMRT feeder/trunks.
Further more, how come they don't bring back DDs to 269? Passengers won't move up?
There's still a proper timeline to settle bus svs issue one by one... Especially all these that need to take time to reschedule duties and figure out which method is better... For feeder buses, as long and as far as possible, freq and fleet can be stepped up until a magical level whereby it would be better for ADD to serve. The reason is very simple... feeder ought to be made frequent... as for 269... Not sure abt the headways issue, but it has a big single directional leg to serve... -
Originally posted by SMB66X:
The easiest svc I do see is only 960/963/966 buses. Not sure about the rest, but I can assure that these few(especially 966), do not have consistant frequencies for the whole peak hours. And even after peak(9pm), there's still lack of buses.
That's why I've said, the unreliable part of SMRT and the contributing ones are mostly from the trunks.. vice versa for SBS Transit.
Bro.. SMRT has become unreliable for both trunks as well as feeders. Can give you a list of services that have bad frequency, skipping bus stops, late.
For sv 161, a lot of people will vouch here, how this service looked a couple of years back and today. It is not just full fleet DDs but also DDs have been added. The morning peak frequency is 08-10 mins and each bus carries 60-80 pax - comfortable journey for everyone taking the bus. I see you keep harping on how sv 161 is bad - but if you see the improvement this service has got, no SMRT service has.
So I suggest you stop all your biased posts on SMRT love, because they just don't make logical sense. You will only get flamed because none of your points make sense to the larger audience here.
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
I don't really share the same view about the DDs part. Yes I agree that the DD gets to clear off the load more, BUT if you see 161, after getting full fleet DD, it's still didn't perform to expectation like 168 does. You'll get delayed departure from the driver, further more, the interval isn't like 168. I don't mind waiting longer for bunch ups, but seriously svc161(and some others) are like some of the SMRT services.
How can it really prove to me fully that DDs are better? The interchange is known to filled the bus to at least 90% or more, why isn't it improve then? By right, all buses won't be packed to the door during peak, after leaving Wdl Int, even a Citaro(168) does it.
"Increased in fleet size =/= better frequencies" doesn't apply to all service, some of the services is just adding more buses to join the jam[Usually didn't see bunches, and first 1-2 ones are full].
For 963/184 part, it only happen on and off. By saying on and off, it really means that it's not so consistant already. And indeed, their frequency during peak hours is more like normal frequencies during off peak. I'm not sure if it's lack of buses or what, but I'm sure at least some buses come in bunches.
88 - I'm just abit irritated by the SDs appearance. No bunches somemore and the bus is somewhat full when I last board it.
88's have additional out of schedule buses to cope with the increasing load. As I mentioned before last year June sv 88 had 21 DDs, 3 SDs - today the perm fleet is 28 DDs. Don't you see the massive improvements or are you blind? On top of the 28 buses, SBST is running additional buses (pullover) from other services to further help with the loading.
Today sv 88 loading is under control with sv 88/88A/88B and also introduction of sv 50 that parallels quite a bit of the route. Why are you cribbing over occassional sv 88 SDs that are mostly additional buses?
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
got ppl see before how 302’s ops is erratic like crazy?
all the 3 buses appear within 10 mins interval.. later again no more bus…
CCK Int cramped by bendy buses? waiting here and there along driveway cos of its length?
What about WDL Interchange... Whenever I go there twice in a month, the interchange is always crazy because of irregular bendy parking at bus stops. Feeder services already leave WDL interchange delayed out of schedule, so then the only way to cope up is speeding and skipping stops. -
Originally posted by SMB66X:
If SBS Transit so many buses, how come they don't improve these svc then? Before the introduction of 269A, waiting for 269 is seriously more than the stated time. These are town-link buses, not trunk or less demand service. At least I don't see much of that in some SMRT feeder/trunks.
Further more, how come they don't bring back DDs to 269? Passengers won't move up?
Your posts make me laugh. sv 269 has got fleet improvement, downroutes in the morning, 269A in the afternoon/evening. The loading is not managed well, now??? You tell me... I live in AMK so don't whack (as 6078M says) -
SMB66X, I clearly remember you along with TIB501D used to talk about how SBST sv 161 and 168 are bad because they are slow on TPE and sv 969 and sv 965 overtake them on expressway.
You'll used to be super happy with the speeding as well as bus stop skipping of sv 854 when it used to overtake sv 25. Finally now there is a speed limit for SMRT buses after the bus over turned.
When you consider speeding a priority over safety, I can also understand why you still talk bad about SBST and want to justify SMRT.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Your posts make me laugh. sv 269 has got fleet improvement, downroutes in the morning, 269A in the afternoon/evening. The loading is not managed well, now??? You tell me... I live in AMK so don't whack (as 6078M says)Wake up...you tell me got fleet improvement? Let alone 269A, the load for every bus is filled to the door, how is it improved? I didn't even see any crossover to help to ease the load. Until so long they then start to introduce 269A, 1 bus only. I don't even think it's improve..
When the issue has been there since the Mercz era, every bus departing is full. Even 265's loading is better than it. And frankly speaking, I rather board 86 and walk a distance than waiting for 1 269.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
88's have additional out of schedule buses to cope with the increasing load. As I mentioned before last year June sv 88 had 21 DDs, 3 SDs - today the perm fleet is 28 DDs. Don't you see the massive improvements or are you blind? On top of the 28 buses, SBST is running additional buses (pullover) from other services to further help with the loading.
Today sv 88 loading is under control with sv 88/88A/88B and also introduction of sv 50 that parallels quite a bit of the route. Why are you cribbing over occassional sv 88 SDs that are mostly additional buses?
Mind you, I know there's massive improvements. And woah, 22DDs 3SDs can become 21DDs 3SDs, so which value is accurate?
During the presence of 3SDs, there's 19AP, 6S, 2E making 26 buses. Now, there's 18AP, 7S, 2E, 2T making 28 buses. Like that can become massive? I don't even think that's really massive improvements when you still get SDs running oftenly.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
SMB66X, I clearly remember you along with TIB501D used to talk about how SBST sv 161 and 168 are bad because they are slow on TPE and sv 969 and sv 965 overtake them on expressway.
You'll used to be super happy with the speeding as well as bus stop skipping of sv 854 when it used to overtake sv 25. Finally now there is a speed limit for SMRT buses after the bus over turned.
When you consider speeding a priority over safety, I can also understand why you still talk bad about SBST and want to justify SMRT.
Yes I did say about 168 vs 969, and it's more of using the correct lane. That time, 969 was using the middle to overtake, I don't see much speeding.
Super happy of speeding? And hello, 854 does skip stops to overtake 25 because the journey from HG Ave2 onwards is the same. Who will choose which company to take?
Speeding doesn't only occurs in SMRT, same for SBS Transit. I've seen drivers using road shoulder to kill waiting time, simply cut in and out like nobody business, and that's from SBS Transit.
And what justify SMRT? It's because somebody here is simply saying the problem of SMRT like SBS Transit doesn't have, hello, if you want to comment on somebody's standard, look at both and mark the "unique" ones out. There's no point siding one party when both are simply rubbish.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Bro.. SMRT has become unreliable for both trunks as well as feeders. Can give you a list of services that have bad frequency, skipping bus stops, late.
For sv 161, a lot of people will vouch here, how this service looked a couple of years back and today. It is not just full fleet DDs but also DDs have been added. The morning peak frequency is 08-10 mins and each bus carries 60-80 pax - comfortable journey for everyone taking the bus. I see you keep harping on how sv 161 is bad - but if you see the improvement this service has got, no SMRT service has.
So I suggest you stop all your biased posts on SMRT love, because they just don't make logical sense. You will only get flamed because none of your points make sense to the larger audience here.
"That's why I've said, the unreliable part of SMRT and the contributing ones are mostly from the trunks.. vice versa for SBS Transit."
MOSTLY from the trunks =/= feeders don't contribute.
Woah~ Oh please, I'm just mentioning the same problem on SBS Transit with SMRT, how is that bias? You should know how bad some SBS Transit service are, and some even worst than SMRT. How come nobody mention it? Another bias?
You want improvement, I can give u some. SMRT ones are rather minor improvements, plus with the company fianance and ability, they can't fork out a bigger improvements yet.
But being in a bigger company, 161 can get improvements but they simply limit themselves. Why can't they add a few more buses? That's just an example from me. Another would be svc86. At AMK, it seems that the frequency is okay, but out to the road, waiting for 1 86 can be longer than some other service(and it's interchange's frequency), and it's off peak hours.
SBS Transit have the buses, but they deploy some to useless services. How is that effective? [Talking about higher capacity buses]
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
There's still a proper timeline to settle bus svs issue one by one... Especially all these that need to take time to reschedule duties and figure out which method is better... For feeder buses, as long and as far as possible, freq and fleet can be stepped up until a magical level whereby it would be better for ADD to serve. The reason is very simple... feeder ought to be made frequent... as for 269... Not sure abt the headways issue, but it has a big single directional leg to serve...269's frequency is rather off. There's average about 12-16mins per bus than the stated 9-10mins.
Anyway, my stand is rather base on something that's outstanding among the 2 operators that makes SMRT sucks. It's rather commentable instead. Things like depot handover causing the standard to drop, I agreed. Which is something I don't see in SBS Transit.
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
There's no point siding one party when both are simply rubbish.
No point continuing this conversation. -
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
No point continuing this conversation.
then~ Because it would be damn cock up if either operators drop it's bus operations now. -
Originally posted by SMB66X:
Wake up...you tell me got fleet improvement? Let alone 269A, the load for every bus is filled to the door, how is it improved? I didn't even see any crossover to help to ease the load. Until so long they then start to introduce 269A, 1 bus only. I don't even think it's improve..
When the issue has been there since the Mercz era, every bus departing is full. Even 265's loading is better than it. And frankly speaking, I rather board 86 and walk a distance than waiting for 1 269.
how many places 269 has to ply? -
We wait and see what others like 2601D comment first.But to be frank SMRT really need to improvise more.SBST on the other hand need to maintain and improved certain svc.3000 plus vs 900 buses
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
Mind you, I know there's massive improvements. And woah, 22DDs 3SDs can become 21DDs 3SDs, so which value is accurate?
During the presence of 3SDs, there's 19AP, 6S, 2E making 26 buses. Now, there's 18AP, 7S, 2E, 2T making 28 buses. Like that can become massive? I don't even think that's really massive improvements when you still get SDs running oftenly.
2 more buses... that's like 6% - 8% increase in capacity if they're ADD addition... that's not a lot? -
Originally posted by SMB66X:
269's frequency is rather off. There's average about 12-16mins per bus than the stated 9-10mins.
Anyway, my stand is rather base on something that's outstanding among the 2 operators that makes SMRT sucks. It's rather commentable instead. Things like depot handover causing the standard to drop, I agreed. Which is something I don't see in SBS Transit.
eh... do you take note of the bus dispatches at sawtooth bay? Why I'm saying so is because someone ever said he didn't see any problem w/ Woodlands Int... Boarding bay become alighting bay etc.. I ever see 856 headways in reality is 5 mins during PM peak... Some ppl say it's very frequent.. but in reality, there's no 5 mins scheduled freq... same old thing... you've to take note in between what goes on.. -
I'm not biased nor siding with sbst275 but in reality most SMRT svc runtime go haywire Liao.Group supervisor all Bo chup siao,Driver lack of disciplines.Im not saying SBST BCs are angel but at least their Route Master are more strict in counsel their BCs.I pity those SMRT BCs have to endure tight schedule and run time but that doesn't mean it warrant speeding cause end of the day they're making their life more miserable cause no action or improvement will be taken.
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
Anyway, is Singapore the only country with both the bus operators handling big bus operations + railway? Could that be the reason for poor maintenance/low cost of maintaining etc.??
Congrats. You have found the problem.
Many for-profit operators run public transporation systems worldwide, Veolia for example may run both the trains and intercity and local buses, but none of them directly collects the fare revenue, but rather paid a fixed amount based on a tender from the local public transport agency.
In Singapore however, both the for-profit operators runs both trains and bus services and collects revenue. Worse, there are limited routes that replicates the rail due to previous govt policies.
For example, why would SMRT run 857 with better frequency or high capacity buses? They could just marginally pass the QoS requirements and leave it as it is, since the other option if you are going to yishun from city would be the train, and they would actually SAVE MONEY doing that (hey the train still has to operate no matter how full it is, but putting more buses would cost). In the end, they still get your money.
See how "clever" this is?
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
2 more buses... that's like 6% - 8% increase in capacity if they're ADD addition... that's not a lot?Hmm then 911 could be counted as a massive improvements then? 5AP to 6AP, 3S1running on 911 during peak to 911E, and 1S2 convert to 911/911E. In all, 2 more buses are added(1AP, 1S150-Runs for crossover, didn't see in the past for evening).
Infact, I also don't count them massive. If you want to say massive, it's more like 334 with almost all SDs convert to DDs. That's rather a big increase in the capacity of the fleet. Go compare with it, 88 is rather inbetween massive/minor.
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
eh... do you take note of the bus dispatches at sawtooth bay? Why I'm saying so is because someone ever said he didn't see any problem w/ Woodlands Int... Boarding bay become alighting bay etc.. I ever see 856 headways in reality is 5 mins during PM peak... Some ppl say it's very frequent.. but in reality, there's no 5 mins scheduled freq... same old thing... you've to take note in between what goes on..Nope, but as far as seen from my rides, they arrive 2-3mins after the scheduled time. That's rather common. AMK side always add 1-3mins from the arrival time for the bus to arrive at the berth.
Woodlands Interchange also like that in reality. AFAIK, 856 buses often layover at empty berths[Usually berth1 area], hardly enter bus park. There's also time where it park at Berth6.
Currently, Woodlands Int doesn't deploy drivers to assist the queue unless it's really terrible, it's getting lesser. Infact, "jams" inside Wdl Int only occurs when driver simply drop passengers beside another bus, blocking the other bus from moving.
Infact, I wouldn't call it a "jam". Because the most only take less than a minute to clear, not hogging up for more than a minute[when it happens]. Plus, it's not really an everyday scene.
-
Wait until 2016,let's see what's going to happen to SMRT. Are they quiting or staying in the bus business.The answer is all in 2016. 2 years left
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
Hmm then 911 could be counted as a massive improvements then? 5AP to 6AP, 3S1running on 911 during peak to 911E, and 1S2 convert to 911/911E. In all, 2 more buses are added(1AP, 1S150-Runs for crossover, didn't see in the past for evening).
Infact, I also don't count them massive. If you want to say massive, it's more like 334 with almost all SDs convert to DDs. That's rather a big increase in the capacity of the fleet. Go compare with it, 88 is rather inbetween massive/minor.
SMRT's scheduling is so messy one... Can't tell just how many trips added by the S or A/P scheduling.. still got simi special run etc... chapalang one... -
Originally posted by SMB66X:
Nope, but as far as seen from my rides, they arrive 2-3mins after the scheduled time. That's rather common. AMK side always add 1-3mins from the arrival time for the bus to arrive at the berth.
Woodlands Interchange also like that in reality. AFAIK, 856 buses often layover at empty berths[Usually berth1 area], hardly enter bus park. There's also time where it park at Berth6.
Currently, Woodlands Int doesn't deploy drivers to assist the queue unless it's really terrible, it's getting lesser. Infact, "jams" inside Wdl Int only occurs when driver simply drop passengers beside another bus, blocking the other bus from moving.
Infact, I wouldn't call it a "jam". Because the most only take less than a minute to clear, not hogging up for more than a minute[when it happens]. Plus, it's not really an everyday scene.
iris NextInterchange timing? Like I said.. There can be times there's two bus dispatch from the same sawtooth berth or just simply very close... The Woodlands Int if it's improving is after ppl took issue with it... and dropping off pax beside another bus dun think it's actually allowed..