[BSEP] New Sengkang Feeder Service 371
-
Originally posted by SBS8676Z:
163M should merge with 371 to form a Townlink in Sengkang.
Frankly speaking for 163M, I feel that this service is very redunctant ever since 50 was introduced, always see an empty bus especially when it bunches up with 163. If I am not wrong that fleet add for the additional full day 163M was implemented way back just before the GE2011 election.
Good move that SBST had reduced the number of 163M trips for weekdays afternoon peak and increase more trips for 163 instead.
I agree to your point. 163M is completely redundant now, but it will stay as LTA will not allow SBST to completely remove it. So now only one bus. There was a time when you needed DDs for 163M. Now, 50 does the job. 163 is mainly used for those who want to transfer to other services on Punggol Road. To MRT, sv 50 is faster.
-
163 should take 2 DDs out for SDs.
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
163 should take 2 DDs out for SDs.
No should not. AM peak load towards Thomson is still 70+. The loading has only dropped on the Sengkang - Fernvale sector. The DDs are for the AM/PM peak load that connects residential sectors in Sengkang with commercial sectors along YCK and Thomson. -
I would rather 163M to be withdrawn, and put 8132B to run on 163 full day instead. 163M spotted empty most of the time. And the non-WAB SD slot should use DD instead, as 163 ridership is increasing.
Cheers.
-
In the past I discussed about 163M to be withdrawn with people here but I can't remember whether they have disagreed about it...
-
BSEP. Services can't be withdrawm.
-
Originally posted by Gus.chong:
In the past I discussed about 163M to be withdrawn with people here but I can't remember whether they have disagreed about it...
Ideally it should be withdrawn but this whole BSEP/LTA/MLA thing will also not let loss making services 115, 163M to get withdrawn. -
I dun know that 115 is under bsep...
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
No should not. AM peak load towards Thomson is still 70+. The loading has only dropped on the Sengkang - Fernvale sector. The DDs are for the AM/PM peak load that connects residential sectors in Sengkang with commercial sectors along YCK and Thomson.4 peak hours DDs not enough ah?The most you see 3 buses only full during that period.
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
4 peak hours DDs not enough ah?The most you see 3 buses only full during that period.
There are just 5 DDs anyway. Your proposal was to change 2 slots to SD. -
Originally posted by carbikebus:
I dun know that 115 is under bsep...
Oh, maybe you should ask our friend SMB128B who can give you a big lecture on how other services cannot get service downgrades because of BSEP, even if they are not under BSEP.And honestly, I now tend to agree with him, because SBST has not done downgrades to any service in the last 6-8 months as per my knowledge. More than taking out DDs from 163, need to take out buses from 163M that are completely redundant.
-
Originally posted by SBS3004X:
BSEP. Services can't be withdrawm.
These services are introduced before BSEP existed and if they are not bound to provide good services why shouldn't they be withdrawn?
-
Originally posted by Gus.chong:
These services are introduced before BSEP existed and if they are not bound to provide good services why shouldn't they be withdrawn?
Because LTA does not approve of withdrawing them.
See, that's what you get under a dictatorship PT system.
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
Because LTA does not approve of withdrawing them.
See, that's what you get under a dictatorship PT system.
And waste tax payer money humm...... stupid scholar managment
-
115 case more of residents requested MP for it?No?
-
Yes 115 by right should be withdrawn together with 68 in 2008, but it was spared out due to residental feedback I guess
-
Originally posted by bus555:
Yes 115 by right should be withdrawn together with 68 in 2008, but it was spared out due to residental feedback I guess
It was more political. If residents find this service so useful, why is it always empty? Why has the frequency not improved? Why are more buses not added? I have seen 115 bus with 7-8 pax on board for full journey. -
I think LTA prefers to keep the status quo as much as possible, allowing duplicating/redundant bus routes like 115 and 163M to remain to avoid complaints about loss of bus connections. Long bus routes are also left alone despite some talk about cutting them up, back when LTA just took over centralised bus planning.
On the other hand, for areas with weak bus links eg Yew Tee, Sembawang, LTA has not made any amendments or new routes (so far) and is satisfied with most areas having a bus connection to the nearest MRT/bus int/shopping centre.
-
Withdrawing 163M does not really affect Fernvale residents that much as there is still a 163 to depend on. As 163M is just another route running parallel together with 163 from Sengkang to Fernvale only.
But I think instead of withdrawing 163M, it will be better if 163M schedule can be adjusted to run only at late nights or during peak hours on weekdays. Whereas during the daytime make use of the buses to run on full 163 route instead.
-
-
Originally posted by SBS8676Z:
Maybe this new feeder 371 should merge with 163M (similar to old 371 route) to form a new Townlink service 371 in Sengkang
The first Townlink in the north-east.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
It was more political. If residents find this service so useful, why is it always empty? Why has the frequency not improved? Why are more buses not added? I have seen 115 bus with 7-8 pax on board for full journey.Extend it. Keep the existing portion as the looping point.
-
Originally posted by SBS3004X:
The first Townlink in the north-east.
http://goo.gl/maps/3EFHr bUT VERY COMPLEX.... -
Originally posted by TIB1096A:
http://goo.gl/maps/3EFHr bUT VERY COMPLEX....No need for such a service... Complete waste of resources... 163 already caters to Punggol road, so does 372. There is also 85 that almost serves both east and west of Sengkang. There will be very few pax taking this service.
-
Originally posted by SBS3004X:
Extend it. Keep the existing portion as the looping point.
Yes should be extended to Defu Ave and should start from HG int via Kovan MRT or start from HGDEP and loop at Kovan via Defu.