Inspite of BSEP, do SMRT services still need improvement?
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Another case of failure on SMRT side. Today PM peak, two 857 buses at an interval of 21 minutes came at Boon Keng MRT, and while some people could, some could not board the bus. Clearly, some had to wait for around 30 minutes to board the bus.
On the other hand every SBST bus that came - whether it was sv 64, 65, 66, 23, 133, 31 - there was not a single pax that was left behind.
They should really deploy bendies for split shift seriously, 2 BSEP add doesnt help at all
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
They should really deploy bendies for split shift seriously, 2 BSEP add doesnt help at all
But from where? I can understand their issue. The moment they deploy a bendy on 857, they will have to pull it out from another service and the problem will start with that service. Just adding BSEP buses is really not helping because as someone here only said "people decide when they want to take a bus and not the other way round." So in many cases you don't need a BSEP rigid add, you just need a higher capacity bus.Why otherwise do we have BSEP DD for SBST services if a BSEP Citaro could do the job??
-
For svc.972, i would rather they replace it with new 960A by SMRT, not BSEP... Atleast can have a share from 960's fleet... For what i suggested since 960:
http://sgforums.com/forums/1279/topics/419264?page=74#posts-10912190
-
Originally posted by TIB1234T:
For svc.972, i would rather they replace it with new 960A by SMRT, not BSEP... Atleast can have a share from 960's fleet... For what i suggested since 960:
http://sgforums.com/forums/1279/topics/419264?page=74#posts-10912190
How about giving this suggestion to LTA? We all feel sv 972 will not solve the issue - will cause more traffic/bunching. People will still have to leave a bus for the next one and will still get irritated. -
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
But from where? I can understand their issue. The moment they deploy a bendy on 857, they will have to pull it out from another service and the problem will start with that service. Just adding BSEP buses is really not helping because as someone here only said "people decide when they want to take a bus and not the other way round." So in many cases you don't need a BSEP rigid add, you just need a higher capacity bus.Why otherwise do we have BSEP DD for SBST services if a BSEP Citaro could do the job??
if they were to pull a SP bendy, then another service may face shortfall should one of its perm bendy were to break down.
SMRT had limited resources. even if BSEP were all rigids, it would not help. if it were effective, explain the Wrights. yet, the new bendies only come next year.
right now, it seems that SBST side is effective, SMRT is a big question mark.
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
if they were to pull a SP bendy, then another service may face shortfall should one of its perm bendy were to break down.
SMRT had limited resources. even if BSEP were all rigids, it would not help. if it were effective, explain the Wrights. yet, the new bendies only come next year.
right now, it seems that SBST side is effective, SMRT is a big question mark.
So is SMRT getting bendies next year? Did not see any new regarding this? -
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
So is SMRT getting bendies next year? Did not see any new regarding this?On their fb page haven't yet post maybe just an assumption
-
Originally posted by All the Best!:
On their fb page haven't yet post maybe just an assumption
But have they said "bendies" or just "high capacity buses"? -
Originally posted by ^tamago^:
I based it on the concluding line, "LTA has been ineffective where SMRT services are concerned and main reason is lack of high capacity buses." Hope it clarifies.
For all parties, I'm trying to phrase it such that the topic is a question rather than a conclusion. If the topic can be rephrased in another way that still sounds impartial, do let me know and I'll rename it. (BusAnalyzer has greater weightage in naming this)
Tamago,Can we rename this thread as "Inspite of BSEP, do SMRT bus services need improvement?"
As you suggested, this puts a question mark to the topic, at the same time, it does not state that BSEP has been completely ineffective for SMRT. Because if BSEP was not there, imagine services 190, 857, 966 without the BSEP adds.
Just a suggestion.
-
Changed.
If you ask me, I'd say yes, they still need the BSEP buses. Any improvement is welcome before the introduction of new high-capacity buses into the fleet, as announced in the LTA FB Update.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
So is SMRT getting bendies next year? Did not see any new regarding this?maybe bendies since TIBS brought in a number of bendies in 1998 onwards.
but hopefully SMRT would bring in some DDs as well
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
maybe bendies since TIBS brought in a number of bendies in 1998 onwards.
but hopefully SMRT would bring in some DDs as well
I would say it is stupid to bring in both bendies and DDs - that many more types of buses you need to maintain.They should just start with DDs now, and slowly replace the bendy fleet once they de-register. Until then, you have bendies for the intra-towns and later anyway, there will be a robust MRT line coming up.
So DDs can be used for long distance, more premium services.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
I would say it is stupid to bring in both bendies and DDs - that many more types of buses you need to maintain.They should just start with DDs now, and slowly replace the bendy fleet once they de-register. Until then, you have bendies for the intra-towns and later anyway, there will be a robust MRT line coming up.
So DDs can be used for long distance, more premium services.
i don't think there is any problem.
right now the fleets of SMRT and SBST is so plain
majority KUBs, Wrights and taros (SBST)
majority A22s (SMRT)
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
I would say it is stupid to bring in both bendies and DDs - that many more types of buses you need to maintain.They should just start with DDs now, and slowly replace the bendy fleet once they de-register. Until then, you have bendies for the intra-towns and later anyway, there will be a robust MRT line coming up.
So DDs can be used for long distance, more premium services.
I hope LTA can tender the CBD/MRT-duplicate routes to a willing operator, who can then bring in DDs to the respective necessary services eg. 190, 857 and 700/A. Then SMRT can bring in only bendies to help its Intratowns, feeders and other necessary trunks eg. 67.
But at the end of the day it is still depending on whether LTA wanna clear the boundaries or not.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
I would say it is stupid to bring in both bendies and DDs - that many more types of buses you need to maintain.They should just start with DDs now, and slowly replace the bendy fleet once they de-register. Until then, you have bendies for the intra-towns and later anyway, there will be a robust MRT line coming up.
So DDs can be used for long distance, more premium services.
That's not true. If both the bendies and DD are from the same manufacturer and shares largely similar components (drivetrain, axle systems, etc) then it does not increase maintenance overheads, yet increasing the flexibility of using the more appropriate buses on each service.
For example, if SBST went with Scania for KUDs then they share very similar components with its KUB. Similarly with SMRT, they could go all MAN and lower costs on keeping spares and training mechanics.
-
Originally posted by ^tamago^:
Changed.
If you ask me, I'd say yes, they still need the BSEP buses. Any improvement is welcome before the introduction of new high-capacity buses into the fleet, as announced in the LTA FB Update.
Agree, like just now around 5 plus, i waited 960 for 15 mins even when 960 had 2 BSEP buses although i know sometimes it's due to traffic condition...
-
Originally posted by Bus Stopping:
That's not true. If both the bendies and DD are from the same manufacturer and shares largely similar components (drivetrain, axle systems, etc) then it does not increase maintenance overheads, yet increasing the flexibility of using the more appropriate buses on each service.
For example, if SBST went with Scania for KUDs then they share very similar components with its KUB. Similarly with SMRT, they could go all MAN and lower costs on keeping spares and training mechanics.
If the give all Bendy to WLDEP, all DDs to the rest[means WLDEP no DD blah blah], still aren't troublesome??
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
If the give all Bendy to WLDEP, all DDs to the rest[means WLDEP no DD blah blah], still aren't troublesome??
Can mix-mix what...
I mean, why not??
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
Can mix-mix what...
I mean, why not??
Agreed.... Then some DDs on some need to improve svcs
-
There's no point using mix high cap buses,MAN DD and bendy can share same engine but technical still different,it's either built a new Wldep and AMDEP if they really interested in DDs
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
There's no point using mix high cap buses,MAN DD and bendy can share same engine but technical still different,it's either built a new Wldep and AMDEP if they really interested in DDs
If you ask me, TBH I also won't complain if SMRT ended up getting all bendies for its share of high-capacity buses... Anyway in the future, bus stops are going to be extended and there will be less cars due to COE...
As long as the rigid issue is solved I won't complain here and there... Not to support bendies too, but all in all it's better than having screwed up schedule of a fleet of many rigids...
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
If you ask me, TBH I also won't complain if SMRT ended up getting all bendies for its share of high-capacity buses... Anyway in the future, bus stops are going to be extended and there will be less cars due to COE...
As long as the rigid issue is solved I won't complain here and there... Not to support bendies too, but all in all it's better than having screwed up schedule of a fleet of many rigids...
The problem Singapore is facing - lack of chances to develop. No develop = no $$ making. Just dk how Singapore will survive when they rapid develop now...
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
The problem Singapore is facing - lack of chances to develop. No develop = no $$ making. Just dk how Singapore will survive when they rapid develop now...
No choice... SG is only one small red dot, this place relies on brains to survive...
And so promoting PT is one of the ideas us brains came up with to relieve congestion on the limited roads we have in this small country...
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
The problem Singapore is facing - lack of chances to develop. No develop = no $$ making. Just dk how Singapore will survive when they rapid develop now...
I think our government has been smart enough to plan well. It has not developed Singapore in one go. If you see so much area was always guarded off and no development was allowed. This was better than mass developing the whole country like it has been done in many cities across the world.
We still have chance for another few decades to grow if we develop smart.
-
Time for ‪#‎SMRT‬ ‪#‎Buses‬ to try this for service 190.
Info from BIS~ number one page on Singapore buses~
