Fares and "Huge deficit" under GCM "clearly not sustainable"
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Expect buses to be as close to kerb then complain leg pain to climb up as if the public buses is using high floor coaches?Join bus and train industry then you know what nonsense is.
Problem is these people don't want. Only want to kau bey this and that, this include one bus fan I know of. -
Originally posted by carbikebus:
BCM also help to keep those complain kings and queens mouth shut because everytime say longer waiting time,Bus overcrowding,Why so many single decks and more out of the world request.Its true what,You want everything go as you want there is always a price for that.
You want this you want that then expect pay peanut only?You expect drivers wait for you,You expect on time,You expect everything where got so cheap?Else just accept the fact its PUBLIC Transport..
These complain kings and queens can never shut up whether BCM or no BCM. They want good, cheap, if possible everything free. They think the world owed them a living, even lord shiva, tua pek kongs, angels, etc.. also owe them. I once ask how and who is going pay if everything is peanuts or free. His reply : tax the car owners and rich people. So simple ah? Retarded moron. -
Here's why it's penitious to use the failure of NEL rationalisation as the reason to not launch any more rationalisation plans.
The problem with NEL rationalisation lies not with the rationalisation itself, but how it is carried out. By this I EXPLICITLY mean the routes that were being cut.
501 was chopped. 502 was chopped. All the peak period services, vital to relieve the currently overflowing crowds on the NEL, also got chopped. Even 81 and 111 are not spared. Basically the Northeast has nothing out to the city save for 80 and 107, both which are not meant for use to the city anyway. The Northeast is also effectively disconnected from the west in express bus connections.
This is why in times of breakdown, becoming more often as the system ages, the Northeast is thrown into a COMPLETE disaster. The shuttle effectively becomes the only viable alternative. Personally i feel the NEL performs the worst of all lines in terms of crowd management because of this.
Inadequate planning should not be used as a reason to denounce a concept as a whole. Bus rationalisation, if optimised, can be an essential tool to ensure the relevance of bus services in Singapore and maximise benefits for both the operators and the commuters.
It is plain misfortune that the NEL rationalisation has failed to achieve any of these outcomes.
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
Here's why it's penitious to use the failure of NEL rationalisation as the reason to not launch any more rationalisation plans.
The problem with NEL rationalisation lies not with the rationalisation itself, but how it is carried out. By this I EXPLICITLY mean the routes that were being cut.
501 was chopped. 502 was chopped. All the peak period services, vital to relieve the currently overflowing crowds on the NEL, also got chopped. Even 81 and 111 are not spared. Basically the Northeast has nothing out to the city save for 80 and 107, both which are not meant for use to the city anyway. The Northeast is also effectively disconnected from the west in express bus connections.
This is why in times of breakdown, becoming more often as the system ages, the Northeast is thrown into a COMPLETE disaster. The shuttle effectively becomes the only viable alternative. Personally i feel the NEL performs the worst of all lines in terms of crowd management because of this.
Inadequate planning should not be used as a reason to denounce a concept as a whole. Bus rationalisation, if optimised, can be an essential tool to ensure the relevance of bus services in Singapore and maximise benefits for both the operators and the commuters.
It is plain misfortune that the NEL rationalisation has failed to achieve any of these outcomes.
My thoughts exactly. Can't wait for 500, if it's really going to be introduced.
Though I wonder if cutting CCL/DTL/TEL trains to 3/3/4 carriages respectively (resulting in reduction of capacity) could have led to the hesitation for further bus route rationalisations in the first place. Big mistakes IMO.
-
Originally posted by AJQZC:
My thoughts exactly. Can't wait for 500, if it's really going to be introduced.
Though I wonder if cutting CCL/DTL/TEL trains to 3/3/4 carriages respectively (resulting in reduction of capacity) could have led to the hesitation for further bus route rationalisations in the first place. Big mistakes IMO.
I personally feel that it is absurd to introduce short trains like these. CCL understandable since it was planned long long ago. But wtf were they thinking with the DTL and TEL?!
Clearly these are services that will have high catchment, and will even serve as TRUNK lines for some sectors. Simultaneously they kept harping on the white paper and whatever "car-free nation". No matter how many trains you inject the system will max out eventually. So spamming the line with trains is clearly not a solution. I think that it is irony at its best. LTA clearly has no bloody idea what it wants to achieve.
-
but, honestly, ever since they add new trains to the NEL, I feel that the trains are less cramp, in fact just nice only can enter the train during peak hours.
the NEL rationalisation is obviously to benefit SBS Transit, since they were able to edit bus routes then.
maybe it's because of the overwhelming demand in the North-East region that the LTA has been introducing many city direct bus services at Hougang, Sengkang and Punggol.
but as the North-East region develops, it's better to have another MRT line eventually. That is why we have the Cross Island Line. But for now, it's better to have more trunk routes or express routes to connect the North East region to the city centre.
-
All, in actual reality there is nothing much we can do. In the meantime, just enjoy new bus services 374 and 381 introduced this Sunday. Cheers. Thanks.
-
Originally posted by dupdup77:
All, in actual reality there is nothing much we can do. In the meantime, just enjoy new bus services 374 and 381 introduced this Sunday. Cheers. Thanks.
Ya enjoy all Citolo fleets..I am more excited about TTS 12.8m DD instead
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Ya enjoy all Citolo fleets..I am more excited about TTS 12.8m DD instead
Hi mr carbikebus, I think you typo. Should be citaro. Not citolo. Cheers. Thanks.
-
Originally posted by dupdup77:
Hi mr carbikebus, I think you typo. Should be citaro. Not citolo. Cheers. Thanks.
Old BC call it Chi To Lo,For Volvo its Bobo,Mercedes is Mah See Dee,Dennis is Dennit,MAN is Mengg..
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
I personally feel that it is absurd to introduce short trains like these. CCL understandable since it was planned long long ago. But wtf were they thinking with the DTL and TEL?!
Clearly these are services that will have high catchment, and will even serve as TRUNK lines for some sectors. Simultaneously they kept harping on the white paper and whatever "car-free nation". No matter how many trains you inject the system will max out eventually. So spamming the line with trains is clearly not a solution. I think that it is irony at its best. LTA clearly has no bloody idea what it wants to achieve.
I was one of those who keep complaining about 3-car trains on DTL long time ago, but I have to admit that DTL is still much less crowded than other lines (even CCL). But when DTL3 opens, it could be a different story.
-
Problem is full automation of NSEWL.
Driverless Train Operation (DTO) is rejected for the NSEWL after the illegal strike involving SMRT bus workers in 2012.
So we proceed on to closure of ticket offices.
-
Actually rather than introduce so many feeder/short trunk svc that will jammed up Interchange,LTA should introduce one express bus svc to city/one end from all region.
Example:505 Punggol-Temasek Ave via Orchard(City uni direction like current 502/518)
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Old BC call it Chi To Lo,For Volvo its Bobo,Mercedes is Mah See Dee,Dennis is Dennit,MAN is Mengg..
Spoken like a Chinese helicopter.
-
Originally posted by iveco:
Spoken like a Chinese helicopter.
Wakakaka...and they call the BYD ee lik trick bus..�
-
To be honest, the concession pass for adult is just for show. The concession pass is $120, when one month we only spend up to $102.48 on public transport (if we travel every day). Without the pass is cheaper.
Unless they set the price at $70 or below. But unlikely they will, cuz otherwise, the fares would be even more unsustainable.
-
Even the one for NS men ($85) I don't think it's worth buying, cuz, it's not as if NS men take public transport everyday.
The only concession pass worth buying are the ones for primary school, secondary school and JC/Poly/ITE. Because understandably, the parents are the ones paying for the students to take public transport. It's better to help the parents subside the cost of raising a child.
-
Originally posted by array88:
Not necessarily so - they give people more connections besides just that one MRT / bus interchange. As long as the trunks come at good frequency.
Trunks at good frequency?
And also trunks do not match the last train timing at the respective bus interchange.
-
Garmen flip-floping. Want a hub and spoke system, then build the interchange so dam small. Then later chop route like no tomorrow. Hassle free public transport, yet have to change buses and trains. Because of someone, no more direct bus.
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
Garmen flip-floping. Want a hub and spoke system, then build the interchange so dam small. Then later chop route like no tomorrow. Hassle free public transport, yet have to change buses and trains. Because of someone, no more direct bus.
That's why after i scrap my Honda car 4 years ago,I switch back to motorcycle for working purpose.My wife MPV car still got another 3 years to go and we plan to extend for another 5 years depending on the COE market.Unless i see more direct basic trunk and more longer route in future which i see wouldn't be happen
-
Originally posted by array88:
I was one of those who keep complaining about 3-car trains on DTL long time ago, but I have to admit that DTL is still much less crowded than other lines (even CCL). But when DTL3 opens, it could be a different story.
DTL3 is precisely what I'm talking about. See, its ridiculous to plan such long lines and expect short trains to tank the load. The outcomes in many instances have been proven to be disastrous.
If DTL2 and DTL3 are really going to have such vast loading differences they shouldn't have been joined up tgt in the first place. Anyway a long line is going to be eventually the worst hit in times of an electrical or signal failure.
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Actually rather than introduce so many feeder/short trunk svc that will jammed up Interchange,LTA should introduce one express bus svc to city/one end from all region.
Example:505 Punggol-Temasek Ave via Orchard(City uni direction like current 502/518)
Good plan. Now that there is (supposedly) no pressure to recoup costs, we can launch these services at an attractive express fare of around $2. But we can't keep adding buses to our fleet and clog up the roads. Will planners be able to wthdraw routes at the same time? Reduce the headway of feeder services according to market demand should people switch to express buses in a big way? There needs an overhaul of the bus service network, and people need to understand that there are always alternatives to every bus service withdrawal and amendment. If not, the bus network will look more and more like a patchwork of new services atop existing ones.
-
Originally posted by ^tamago^:
Good plan. Now that there is (supposedly) no pressure to recoup costs, we can launch these services at an attractive express fare of around $2. But we can't keep adding buses to our fleet and cog up the roads. Will planners be able to wthdraw routes at the same time? Reduce the headway of feeder services according to market demand should people switch to express buses in a big way? There needs an overhaul of the bus service network, and people need to understand that there are always alternatives to every bus service withdrawal and amendment. If not, the bus network will look more and more like a patchwork of new services atop existing ones.
Hi mr tamago, the intention is good.
In idealistic world, I am all for it. In realistic world, it will not work. Cheers. Thanks.
-
Originally posted by ^tamago^:
Good plan. Now that there is (supposedly) no pressure to recoup costs, we can launch these services at an attractive express fare of around $2. But we can't keep adding buses to our fleet and cog up the roads. Will planners be able to wthdraw routes at the same time? Reduce the headway of feeder services according to market demand should people switch to express buses in a big way? There needs an overhaul of the bus service network, and people need to understand that there are always alternatives to every bus service withdrawal and amendment. If not, the bus network will look more and more like a patchwork of new services atop existing ones.
Example on how to overhaul the bus route network?
-
Originally posted by gekpohboy:
Example on how to overhaul the bus route network?
Try Canberra and Adelaide.