Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:There you go... 985 finally gets DD... much awaited..
Suspect there to be 4 DDs... but 2 are confirmed...
3592Z, 3593X --> KJ 985
Originally posted by array88:
I thought Lor 1 Geylang Ter cannot use DDs?
Now can. Even 961 has DDs... from past one month.
961 upgrade 2nd DD yesterday after xfer out 3104A to AMDEP...
SMB3541X on 3581E slot, 3581E on 3104A slot yesterday...
172 starts DD today, SMB5056S...
SMB5070A might perm 187, either fleet add or replacing SMB1531M which is doing 969...
187 now got 2 perm DDs i believe..Let us see:Bt Batok DD service is 61 & 106,Choa Chu Kang is 67,172,188,190,983 & 985,Bt Panjang so far 176,700 & 972,Woodlands is top for 169,187,951E,960,961,963,964,965,966 & 969 while for Yishun is only 850E,856 & 857.Time to deploy DDs to svc 167 & 980 for Sembawang.
Service that i believe will get DDs later is 180,184(Dont argue why 184 must use DD since 172 & 964 also tio DDs),189,851,854,855 & 962.Guess LTA should add another 50 units or SMRT buy production batch A95
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Now can. Even 961 has DDs... from past one month.
Ok I missed it out... If that's the case, I strongly suggest svc 62 to terminate at Lor 1 Geylang Terminal instead of looping there. 175 should also start deploying DDs, unless there are height restrictions along Depot Rd.
Originally posted by array88:
Ok I missed it out... If that's the case, I strongly suggest svc 62 to terminate at Lor 1 Geylang Terminal instead of looping there. 175 should also start deploying DDs, unless there are height restrictions along Depot Rd.
Lor 1 already face insufficient parking lots for basic bus service ever since SBST introduce 140 & 141 there.175 got fleet restriction along Depot Rd else SBST would have deploy 4-5 DDs already
Anyway I don't know why SMRT is so active in asking the authorities to trim the trees along its routes, while SBST just deploy SDs on its DD-unfriendly routes as if it's nobody's business.
Originally posted by array88:Anyway I don't know why SMRT is so active in asking the authorities to trim the trees along its routes, while SBST just deploy SDs on its DD-unfriendly routes as if it's nobody's business.
SMRT one is Tree problem which can be solved by pruning while SBST case is the route itself or like low lying bridges..
Originally posted by Sbs6750E:175 can extend to Sims Pl so can make way for 62.
Agree that 175 and/or 141 should be extended to Sims Place or Eunos. 141 can provide relief for 67 also
repeated post
Yishun services like 851, 854, 855 and maybe 860 can have DDs after AMDEP have been reroofed to accomodate DDs later.
So now 854 has capacity reduced coz of WLDEP bendies replaced by AMDEP SD's?
Originally posted by array88:Anyway I don't know why SMRT is so active in asking the authorities to trim the trees along its routes, while SBST just deploy SDs on its DD-unfriendly routes as if it's nobody's business.
Kinda agree with you as with the case of 66 & 145, who only get DDs upgrades after SMRT introudce DDs.
Originally posted by array88:
Ok I missed it out... If that's the case, I strongly suggest svc 62 to terminate at Lor 1 Geylang Terminal instead of looping there. 175 should also start deploying DDs, unless there are height restrictions along Depot Rd.
175 no need la... Loading does not justify. 62 a bit complicated as there are now people taking bus from Geylang road (they board here instead walking to Sims Ave to take bus). Always got 15-20 pax on board while turning from Lor 1.
Originally posted by AntiDennisLance:So now 854 has capacity reduced coz of WLDEP bendies replaced by AMDEP SD's?
That's insane if it is true :(
Originally posted by SinkTel:Kinda agree with you as with the case of 66 & 145, who only get DDs upgrades after SMRT introudce DDs.
Lets be fair... SBST many services have DD luxury even if they don't need... SMRT on other hand has kept reducing bendy/high capacity fleet on overly crowded services.. .Only recently, some services are improved... Yet many services still neglected... The list is long... and to be honest.. these need it more than SBST services..
The only SBST services that really need DDs are the airport services that are hindered because of the infrastructure there. Now even at Yishun, you have more SBST DDs in the interchange than SMRT DDs.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:That's insane if it is true :(
Given SMRT's perennial hate and neglect of Yishun and Sembawang, that is unfortunately totally possible ...
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Lets be fair... SBST many services have DD luxury even if they don't need... SMRT on other hand has kept reducing bendy/high capacity fleet on overly crowded services.. .Only recently, some services are improved... Yet many services still neglected... The list is long... and to be honest.. these need it more than SBST services..
The only SBST services that really need DDs are the airport services that are hindered because of the infrastructure there. Now even at Yishun, you have more SBST DDs in the interchange than SMRT DDs.
Agree bro. Some SMRT services should be given to SBST to operate especially the Yishun and Sembawang trunks.
Not surprising. Not one bit. SMRT very actively yet silently reduces capacity on routes like 851, 854 and 969 while boasting about an addition of a mere 1 double-deck bus on 856. Yes, ever since 969 went full WLDEP, the number of DDs have not increased while the number of bendies have decreased. I can clearly see that some of the AMDEP bendies have been replaced by A22s. Also, what happened to AMDEP crossovers to 969?
Yes SMRT has been playing this trick for last one year. Look at sv 856. Was full bendy fleet. 1 slot got downgraded to SD, then 2... today fleet has 6 SDs from SMRT side... while the DDs have been added from BSEP pool.
Same goes for 187. Reduced 1 bendy slot... BSEP DD added. 172 frequently there are only 2 bendies perm.. sometimes have 3 or 4... now putting DDs
180 fleet has 11 buses for so long... when definitely needs more
184 should have been full fleet bendy... has so many rigids spamming
189 housefull buses yet only 4 bendies
851 has reduced so many bendy slots over years... same goes for 854
857/966/985 did not have any high capacity buses for so so long... and now you see both 857 and 966 have potential to get +100 pax... in spite of having DDs
307 neglected with so many rigids... when need bendies...
911/811 classic examples of intra-towns managed so badly.
811 no need 17 buses if the fleet have at least 8 high capacity buses,Just dump another 7 A22s will be enough.911 need 7 high capacity buses and 5 SDs.Since they dont have enough high capacity buses they dump more single deckers in return have to deploy more drivers and OTs..
Originally posted by AntiDennisLance:So now 854 has capacity reduced coz of WLDEP bendies replaced by AMDEP SD's?
They made a grave mistakes by letting Amdep fully control 854,Should have left 7-8 Wldep duties which can deploy all DDs..969 also but Amdep can control a few SD duties which can be useful.I dont really know how SMRT bus plannings,All cock up big time..Save 1 problem then create another problems..In the end report will say lose money because of fuel usage..
I would rather let Wldep part control Yishun svc like 851,854,855 rather than fully Amdep control..The Feeders and Intratowns i got no problem full Amdep control though.
969 another big mistakes...Service that need minority Amdep control to reduce dead mileage should be 75,960,966 & 970