yishun temp interchange i think those feeder bus service should arrange near the exit of shopping center is because people can transfer to feeder service faster. also if can LTA should make it a perm interchange as it is much bigger than the up coming new air-con interchange. as it all those new air-con they look smaller than those non-air con one.
Originally posted by wsy1234:yishun temp interchange i think those feeder bus service should arrange near the exit of shopping center is because people can transfer to feeder service faster. also if can LTA should make it a perm interchange as it is much bigger than the up coming new air-con interchange. as it all those new air-con they look smaller than those non-air con one.
Currently, the feeders are the furthest from North Point in the temp int, but if we place the feeders near the exit of shopping centre, it might be a little messy.. because the feeders have fairly high demand, plus the berths near North Point arent Bendy friendly. Correct me if Im wrong
12.8m custom 3 doors DDs will replace all bendy buses
859 has been missing from all the electronic display boards for a while now (even though it's listed on the town map, and there's service guides).
Suspect that they'll eventually kick it out from the interchange. Perhaps an extension around Yishun East? Replace 812 for the first stretch at Yishun Ave 4?
If yes its for the better,859 route is too short by the way..extend to loop at Seletar Aerospace park more better
Originally posted by carbikebus:If yes its for the better,859 route is too short by the way..extend to loop at Seletar Aerospace park more better
OK I know this is crazy, but can 859 be extended to SAP and merge with rumoured 102 to Hougang?
Originally posted by array88:
OK I know this is crazy, but can 859 be extended to SAP and merge with rumoured 102 to Hougang?
It would be a great move but I doubt. I wouldn't support 859 just to loop @ SAP.. it rather at least extend to Punggol Interchange via Punggol East, Punggol Field or Punggol Dr / Punggol Central.
If that happens, just re-route 85 to Hougang Interchange instead.. no need for 102 anymore.
Originally posted by AJQZC:859 has been missing from all the electronic display boards for a while now (even though it's listed on the town map, and there's service guides).
Suspect that they'll eventually kick it out from the interchange. Perhaps an extension around Yishun East? Replace 812 for the first stretch at Yishun Ave 4?
I think 859 should just do ring road like 860... this way provides relief to overly crowded 859 + gives trunk service to north for ring road residents.
Originally posted by array88:
OK I know this is crazy, but can 859 be extended to SAP and merge with rumoured 102 to Hougang?
Hi mr array88, from what we heard, 102 is a standalone new service. So unlikely it will be merged with 859. Cheers. Thanks.
Originally posted by carbikebus:If yes its for the better,859 route is too short by the way..extend to loop at Seletar Aerospace park more better
I think services like 852 and 859 should extend to Yishun East. They can greatly reduce the loads for 804 and 806, which in turn operate solely on single deckers in future to increase the frequencies for these two services.
Originally posted by dupdup77:Hi mr array88, from what we heard, 102 is a standalone new service. So unlikely it will be merged with 859. Cheers. Thanks.
Is this service starting from Serangoon or Sengkang?
Originally posted by vicamour:Is this service starting from Serangoon or Sengkang?
Hi mr vicamour, heard from people in this forum that the service is starting from Hougang. Cheers.
Originally posted by vicamour:I think services like 852 and 859 should extend to Yishun East. They can greatly reduce the loads for 804 and 806, which in turn operate solely on single deckers in future to increase the frequencies for these two services.
852 nay,859 and 860 yes..But i would prefer 860 to loop at Seletar Airport
Originally posted by dupdup77:Hi mr vicamour, heard from people in this forum that the service is starting from Hougang. Cheers.
Crazy ah,Why they cant wait till Hougang extend its interchange?Serangoon also no more space for a service eh?
Originally posted by carbikebus:Crazy ah,Why they cant wait till Hougang extend its interchange?Serangoon also no more space for a service eh?
Hi mr carbikebus, nothing to be crazy but everything looks possible. We will just have to wait and see. Cheers.
Originally posted by carbikebus:852 nay,859 and 860 yes..But i would prefer 860 to loop at Seletar Airport
bro.. how do you propose 860 to loop at Seletar Airport... It loops @ Khatib MRT and that's where the main loading comes. The option can be to be extended from Yishun side to Canberra/Sembawang or beyond Khatib to Springleaf/AMK
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:bro.. how do you propose 860 to loop at Seletar Airport... It loops @ Khatib MRT and that's where the main loading comes. The option can be to be extended from Yishun side to Canberra/Sembawang or beyond Khatib to Springleaf/AMK
Ok like that Springleaf better
Now that the walking distance from the Yishun MRT to the Interchange is further away, plus the layout... Seems like more people are taking buses from bus stops nearer to the MRT stations. E.g. people taking 804 boarding at the first bus stop instead of the interchange.
Changing commuter habits
Its just a temporary Interchange till 2019 where the Integrated Transport Hub will be ready at the former side..
If anyone wants to talk about more commuter habits, there's more bus commuters transferring to the MRT at Yishun MRT now (with the temp bus stop outside Yishun MRT for the Sv 39, 85 all those), compared to mostly transferring at Khatib MRT previously. haha.
Heard SBST might deploy a timekeeper at Yishun..In fact Woodlands also need SBST timekeeper to monitor svc 161 and 168 movement rather than BCs call Hougang and Bedok respectively..
Originally posted by carbikebus:Heard SBST might deploy a timekeeper at Yishun..In fact Woodlands also need SBST timekeeper to monitor svc 161 and 168 movement rather than BCs call Hougang and Bedok respectively..
What's the difference between having a timekeeper there at Yishun compared to previously though? Any pros and cons? Just curious.
Originally posted by SBS 9631X:What's the difference between having a timekeeper there at Yishun compared to previously though? Any pros and cons? Just curious.
With timekeeper additional cost thats it,But more productive instead have to call the T1 interchange and add burden to the timekeepers..Woodlands is more sensible because Amdep 168 change shift @ WRI,Unless 39 is part Amdep..
Hi
Originally posted by carbikebus:With timekeeper additional cost thats it,But more productive instead have to call the T1 interchange and add burden to the timekeepers..Woodlands is more sensible because Amdep 168 change shift @ WRI,Unless 39 is part Amdep..
Ohh. So correct me if I misinterpreted, so deploying a timekeeper at Yishun is better for SBST to track the timely departures of their 3 svcs now at Yishun Int?
If i didn't interprete your reply wrongly, I guess it's a good thing then. Both Sv 39 & 85's frequency gets massively screwed up whenever there's an accident on TPE / SLE during Peak Hours.
And commuters on these 2 svcs typically have no other alternatives to wherever they want to go after Yishun (maybe for Sv 85 there is some I think, but for Sv 39 practically none to Pasir Ris (the bulk of the load) unless you take 858/969 & transfer at the TPE bus stop @ Sengkang)