the best for LTA is to build a mult-stories transport interchange. level one for feeder service level two for trunk services level 3 for car parking and have MRT system at b2 and b1 for bicycles. for those who park and ride at transport interchange will have 30 percent discount for the next new car.
Originally posted by wsy1234:the best for LTA is to build a mult-stories transport interchange. level one for feeder service level two for trunk services ...b2 and b1 for bicycles. for those who park and ride at transport interchange will have 30 percent discount for the next new car.
The transport int is a feasible idea, but the bus section wise, I dont think it's a very good idea to split the bus int into 2 levels..
Originally posted by Guides anyone?:The transport int is a feasible idea, but the bus section wise, I dont think it's a very good idea to split the bus int into 2 levels..
I agree you cannot separate bus interchange on two levels - one for feeder, other for trunks. A lot of trunk services behave like feeder within town before heading out.
If we take Tampines as example: 293 on one level and 28 on another would not be a good idea. Bcoz many take 28 as a feeder within Tampines East town.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:I agree you cannot separate bus interchange on two levels - one for feeder, other for trunks. A lot of trunk services behave like feeder within town before heading out.
If we take Tampines as example: 293 on one level and 28 on another would not be a good idea. Bcoz many take 28 as a feeder within Tampines East town.
Another problem will be the buses entering the different levels as well, as different entrances and exits have to be built for them, and it might take a longer time to clear the traffic.
Boon Lay also has examples of Trunk Services serving as "part-time" feeders, liike 30,154 etc
Originally posted by wsy1234:the best for LTA is to build a mult-stories transport interchange. level one for feeder service level two for trunk services level 3 for car parking and have MRT system at b2 and b1 for bicycles. for those who park and ride at transport interchange will have 30 percent discount for the next new car.
saves space.
it is best that LTA has to split feeders and trunks duties well if not why are there feeders when trunks do part time feeder services. 143M could be better as 336G/W where one serves Pandan Gardens first while the other serves Teban Gardens first.
Originally posted by SMB145B:saves space.
it is best that LTA has to split feeders and trunks duties well if not why are there feeders when trunks do part time feeder services. 143M could be better as 336G/W where one serves Pandan Gardens first while the other serves Teban Gardens first.
Not possible. In every town, people use trunk services as feeder to get home, even if there is a dedicated feeder.
For instance, if someone wants to travel to Bedok Reservoir Rd (west of North Ave 3) from Bedok MRT, they have an option of taking sv 66 (trunk) or sv 228 (feeder). They will take whichever comes first. if you isolate one from the other, you will have to add more buses to sv 228 to manage the load. This is not practical.
Same goes for many other services like 28, 29, 293 etc.
Problem is not about that..its because too many svc originate from Interchanges..ITH already too cramp yet introduce new svc from Int..Feeders should be from Int..Several trunk svc can start from Depot/Industrial park that can have 2-3 lots of parking/Housing estate end areas..Tampines Ind park(Opp Ikea) can have 2-3 trunk svc starts/end from there
i think of another way is to remove feeder service and make trunk service go around the HDB town. since now the feeder service fare is no different compare to short trunk service. if you look at the bus service in the 70s and early 80s before mrt system and interchange builded the trunk service actually going around the hdb town. with proper bus route planing i think should be no problem. one way is to cut down number of buses government buy and another way also might help to prevent the mrt from overcrowded. with trunk bus service direct from door step to what ever place you want to go why border to change to MRT at the interchange? trunk services can come direct from bus depot instead.
Originally posted by wsy1234:i think of another way is to remove feeder service and make trunk service go around the HDB town. since now the feeder service fare is no different compare to short trunk service. if you look at the bus service in the 70s and early 80s before mrt system and interchange builded the trunk service actually going around the hdb town. with proper bus route planing i think should be no problem. one way is to cut down number of buses government buy and another way also might help to prevent the mrt from overcrowded. with trunk bus service direct from door step to what ever place you want to go why border to change to MRT at the interchange? trunk services can come direct from bus depot instead.
I encourage trunk services to ply inner roads and not just bigger avenues. I love sv 28 route. It provides direct connectivity to ave 9, st 45, 32, 31 residents to Bedok and beyond, who otherwise would have to take feeder and then change.
But not having feeders is not a solution given that trunk services can get delayed on their way and people wanting to get to MRT might get stranded with longer waiting time. Given this, SWT will have to be started and that would be similar to feeder.
Originally posted by carbikebus:Problem is not about that..its because too many svc originate from Interchanges..ITH already too cramp yet introduce new svc from Int..Feeders should be from Int..Several trunk svc can start from Depot/Industrial park that can have 2-3 lots of parking/Housing estate end areas..Tampines Ind park(Opp Ikea) can have 2-3 trunk svc starts/end from there
I still don't understand why they don't use depots. HGDEP is in a good location to have trunks start from there. Just like SLBP, BNDEP, AMDEP have a few, I don't see a reason why BBDEP and HGDEP should not have services starting from there.
For HGDEP, service like 115 can already initiate from HGDEP and loop @ Kovan MRT. Some services like 116 can be extended via Defu Ave to terminate at HGDEP. This will also free up space at interchanges. Ever see BCs waiting at HG interchange for a bus to leave so that it can park bus and go for rest. Waste good 3-4 mins in this.
LTA more buses but smaller ITHs build,then drivers everytime near miss or accidents..For now the only bigger Int left is Bukit Merah,Tampines,Woodlands..the most pathetic for now is Punggol during peak hours,Drivers wasted their break time just to find parking lots,Same case for Hougang..Worse if its raining..Hope Yishun ITH wont share the same fate as any newer ITHs..Now awaiting for Bukit Panjang
Originally posted by carbikebus:LTA more buses but smaller ITHs build,then drivers everytime near miss or accidents..For now the only bigger Int left is Bukit Merah,Tampines,Woodlands..the most pathetic for now is Punggol during peak hours,Drivers wasted their break time just to find parking lots,Same case for Hougang..Worse if its raining..Hope Yishun ITH wont share the same fate as any newer ITHs..Now awaiting for Bukit Panjang
Punggol and Hougang... both got so much space to build a big interchange... even lot of space for temp interchange.
Removed
Punggol current int should be 'temporary' in that it's not aircon like many new bus ints nowadays. (fyi first aircon int at TPY opened 2002, punggol opened 03) Got alot of empty land around the MRT station, new aircon int may be built some time in future together with some big development on top. Problem is that Punggol int is almost at max capacity now and new svcs will keep being added, while the new int may not come so soon.
Originally posted by 201911:Punggol current int should be 'temporary' in that it's not aircon like many new bus ints nowadays. (fyi first aircon int at TPY opened 2002, punggol opened 03) Got alot of empty land around the MRT station, new aircon int may be built some time in future together with some big development on top. Problem is that Punggol int is almost at max capacity now and new svcs will keep being added, while the new int may not come so soon.
But they can expand. I am surprised Sengkang got an extension but Punggol did not. Punggol will also soon need an extension interchange for additional trunk service, feeder service for Matilda, Sumang west in future.
Punggol will get new Int later..Most probably 83,84 might start from Sengkang if the extension completed.
Originally posted by carbikebus:Punggol will get new Int later..Most probably 83,84 might start from Sengkang if the extension completed.
Hi mr carbikebus, 84 got chance start from sengkang. 83 not possible. 83 is a very important service for Punggol central and Punggol east and Punggol field residents. By reversing the starting interchange for sbs 83 will greatly inconvenience Punggol residents. Sbs 83 functions as an important feeder for these groups of residents. Besides sbs 83, there is only sbs 3 which serves the same purpose. Cheers.
Originally posted by dupdup77:Hi mr carbikebus, 84 got chance start from sengkang. 83 not possible. 83 is a very important service for Punggol central and Punggol east and Punggol field residents. By reversing the starting interchange for sbs 83 will greatly inconvenience Punggol residents. Sbs 83 functions as an important feeder for these groups of residents. Besides sbs 83, there is only sbs 3 which serves the same purpose. Cheers.
You forgot sbs 85.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:You forgot sbs 85.
Hi mr busanalyser, I did not forget sbs 85. Firstly, its frequency is much longer than sbs 3 and 83. Secondly, sbs 85 does not go Punggol field. So it does not function as a service for residents going from Punggol central and east to Punggol field. Cheers.
Originally posted by dupdup77:Hi mr busanalyser, I did not forget sbs 85. Firstly, its frequency is much longer than sbs 3 and 83. Secondly, sbs 85 does not go Punggol field. So it does not function as a service for residents going from Punggol central and east to Punggol field. Cheers.
Okay. My point of view.
Main feeder use is for Punggol Central connection to MRT as LRT is not there. For Punggol Field, LRT and sv 62 connect to MRT faster than 3/83.
If it is purely connecting sv 3/83 between Punggol Field/Central... firstly not too many pax... secondly 2 services are good enough..
If we see like that no connection between Punggol West and Punggol Central/Field towns or Punggol Dr and Punggol Central.
I agree to your point that Punggol Central residents need timely buses to come to connect to MRT. Hence, even sv 85 is important to clear loads. 3,83,85 + a new trunk in future would be good enough to take care of the loads here.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Not possible. In every town, people use trunk services as feeder to get home, even if there is a dedicated feeder.
For instance, if someone wants to travel to Bedok Reservoir Rd (west of North Ave 3) from Bedok MRT, they have an option of taking sv 66 (trunk) or sv 228 (feeder). They will take whichever comes first. if you isolate one from the other, you will have to add more buses to sv 228 to manage the load. This is not practical.
Same goes for many other services like 28, 29, 293 etc.
who here takes 161/168 over 901/912 (Woodlands Ave 2), 965 over 804/812 (Yishun Ave 2)? trunks usually have bad frequency as the feeders, 300 vs 67
Originally posted by carbikebus:LTA more buses but smaller ITHs build,then drivers everytime near miss or accidents..For now the only bigger Int left is Bukit Merah,Tampines,Woodlands..the most pathetic for now is Punggol during peak hours,Drivers wasted their break time just to find parking lots,Same case for Hougang..Worse if its raining..Hope Yishun ITH wont share the same fate as any newer ITHs..Now awaiting for Bukit Panjang
the AMK one is reduced to half its area. the adjacent plot is taken by the centro residences. bad idea, and there is cases of wrights hitting the corner. even Mk IIIs also hit it.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Okay. My point of view.
Main feeder use is for Punggol Central connection to MRT as LRT is not there. For Punggol Field, LRT and sv 62 connect to MRT faster than 3/83.
If it is purely connecting sv 3/83 between Punggol Field/Central... firstly not too many pax... secondly 2 services are good enough..
If we see like that no connection between Punggol West and Punggol Central/Field towns or Punggol Dr and Punggol Central.
I agree to your point that Punggol Central residents need timely buses to come to connect to MRT. Hence, even sv 85 is important to clear loads. 3,83,85 + a new trunk in future would be good enough to take care of the loads here.
Hi mr busanalyser,
For Punggol field, LRT is faster to mrt. Sbs 3 and 83 (even one round from field to mrt) is as fast as sbs 62 (due to its poor frequency because of loop service). Many people rather walk to opposite stop take sbs 3 and sbs 83 to mrt.
Sbs 3 and sbs 83 are the only two services connecting Punggol field and central so mr carbikebus suggestion to make sbs 83 start from sengkang is out. If start from sengkang, sbs 83 may be jammed at Punggol road (before going to Punggol) causing bad frequencies. Furthermore sbs 3 is already subjected to winding roads at pasir ris and highly susceptible to jams at TPE before turning into Punggol. That will be disastrous for Punggol residents if sbs 3 and sbs 83 are being touched currently.
For punggol west, current way is LRT. For Punggol drive to central, walk or do transfer by sbs 50.
For those staying at Punggol central, sbs 3 and sbs 83 are crucial. Sbs 85 helps sometimes only purely due to its poor frequency. Yes a new trunk is needed at this moment.
Most residents are already hoping Punggol gets 2 bus services in Q1 2015. One will be trunk and one will be feeder. Out of 4 new services planned, 1 go to queens town and 1 to CCK and 2 to Punggol. In terms of new HDB flats, this should be fair. It is anybody's guess currently until the new routes are announced: Cheers.
Originally posted by dupdup77:Hi mr busanalyser,
For Punggol field, LRT is faster to mrt. Sbs 3 and 83 (even one round from field to mrt) is as fast as sbs 62 (due to its poor frequency because of loop service). Many people rather walk to opposite stop take sbs 3 and sbs 83 to mrt.
Sbs 3 and sbs 83 are the only two services connecting Punggol field and central so mr carbikebus suggestion to make sbs 83 start from sengkang is out. If start from sengkang, sbs 83 may be jammed at Punggol road (before going to Punggol) causing bad frequencies. Furthermore sbs 3 is already subjected to winding roads at pasir ris and highly susceptible to jams at TPE before turning into Punggol. That will be disastrous for Punggol residents if sbs 3 and sbs 83 are being touched currently.
For punggol west, current way is LRT. For Punggol drive to central, walk or do transfer by sbs 50.
For those staying at Punggol central, sbs 3 and sbs 83 are crucial. Sbs 85 helps sometimes only purely due to its poor frequency. Yes a new trunk is needed at this moment.
Most residents are already hoping Punggol gets 2 bus services in Q1 2015. One will be trunk and one will be feeder. Out of 4 new services planned, 1 go to queens town and 1 to CCK and 2 to Punggol. In terms of new HDB flats, this should be fair. It is anybody's guess currently until the new routes are announced: Cheers.
Feeder for Punggol - what's your guess? I don't see scope for feeder service right now unless it is to Nibong, but you have LRT for few flats opened there.
I suspect Punggol will get a trunk this time.
Maybe CCK is the one that will get 2 new services. 1 feeder 301 to complement sv 300 and another as short trunk to Bukit Batok via Gambok.