27 Apr, 09:01AM in sunny Singapore!

Loading level on buses (Part 2)

Subscribe to Loading level on buses (Part 2) 1,578 posts

Please Login or Signup to reply.
  • carbikebus's Avatar
    21,313 posts since Nov '03
    • Originally posted by dupdup77:

      Hi mr carbikebus, bus fares more expensive than mrt? Cheers. Thanks.

      Hi,I just create awareness on how impressed public transport is mah like what our Ministar say during the increment of water supply.

      How about $1.20 under 3.2k

      3.3-7km:$1.60

      7.1-13km:$2.00

      13.1-17km:$2.40

      17.1km-22km:$2.80

      22.1km above:$3.20?

      Too expensive also?MRT also raise fare ah

  • gekpohboy's Avatar
    2,180 posts since Mar '16
    • I would like to recommend a new fare structure for Express and Night-Rider bus services.

      Still distance-based, but in blocks of 1 kilometre.

       

      Total distance travelled:

      0.0km to 5.0km - $0.80 per km or part thereof.

      More than 5.1km - $0.40 per km or part thereof.

       

      A trip within a residential area (0-10km) would cost up to $4.00

      A trip from residential area to the city (20-24km) would cost up to $9.60

       

      This fare structure is 3 times that of the current one, and maybe at market rate (require less government subsidy).

      Nonetheless, the fares remain competitively lower than Grab Hitch and Standard Taxi.

      There shouldn't be an impact on the loading of express bus services as people would still take it for the low prices.

      Hence, in a way, it's a win-win for both the Government and the people.

      Meanwhile, Feeder bus services and Trunk bus services would continue to use the current fare structure, that is subsidised by the government, as they are fundamental bus services which should be accessible to everyone.

      Edited by gekpohboy 04 Mar `17, 6:31PM
  • CZT's Avatar
    555 posts since Jun '16
    • Originally posted by gekpohboy:

      I would like to recommend a new fare structure for Express and Night-Rider bus services.

      Still distance-based, but in blocks of 1 kilometre.

       

      Total distance travelled:

      0.0km to 5.0km - $0.80 per km or part thereof.

      More than 5.1km - $0.40 per km or part thereof.

       

      A trip within a residential area (0-10km) would cost up to $4.00

      A trip from residential area to the city (20-24km) would cost up to $9.60

       

      This fare structure is 3 times that of the current one, and maybe at market rate (require less government subsidy).

      Nonetheless, the fares remain competitively lower than Grab Hitch and Standard Taxi.

      There shouldn't be an impact on the loading of express bus services as people would still take it for the low prices.

      Hence, in a way, it's a win-win for both the Government and the people.

      Meanwhile, Feeder bus services and Trunk bus services would continue to use the current fare structure, that is subsidised by the government, as they are fundamental bus services which should be accessible to everyone.

      $9.60?! For Express and Nightrider/night buses??

      This is ridiculous lah, while idk how ppl taking express services may be affected, but this will somehow affect the attractiveness of night buses. Loading for night buses are already low, and u shld increase their attractiveness by first reorganising their fare, just like the CT services, higher but affordable

  • gekpohboy's Avatar
    2,180 posts since Mar '16
    • Originally posted by CZT:

      $9.60?! For Express and Nightrider/night buses??

      This is ridiculous lah, while idk how ppl taking express services may be affected, but this will somehow affect the attractiveness of night buses. Loading for night buses are already low, and u shld increase their attractiveness by first reorganising their fare, just like the CT services, higher but affordable

      but still lower than taxi, right? some more taxi got midnight surcharge. those on budget confirm will continue to take the night rider, even at $10 fares. because taxi easily around $20 already...

  • carbikebus's Avatar
    21,313 posts since Nov '03
    • Originally posted by gekpohboy:

      but still lower than taxi, right? some more taxi got midnight surcharge. those on budget confirm will continue to take the night rider, even at $10 fares. because taxi easily around $20 already...

      Night bus 3 fare band:$2,$3 & $4.50.

  • dupdup77's Avatar
    3,087 posts since Nov '13
    • Originally posted by gekpohboy:

      I would like to recommend a new fare structure for Express and Night-Rider bus services.

      Still distance-based, but in blocks of 1 kilometre.

       

      Total distance travelled:

      0.0km to 5.0km - $0.80 per km or part thereof.

      More than 5.1km - $0.40 per km or part thereof.

       

      A trip within a residential area (0-10km) would cost up to $4.00

      A trip from residential area to the city (20-24km) would cost up to $9.60

       

      This fare structure is 3 times that of the current one, and maybe at market rate (require less government subsidy).

      Nonetheless, the fares remain competitively lower than Grab Hitch and Standard Taxi.

      There shouldn't be an impact on the loading of express bus services as people would still take it for the low prices.

      Hence, in a way, it's a win-win for both the Government and the people.

      Meanwhile, Feeder bus services and Trunk bus services would continue to use the current fare structure, that is subsidised by the government, as they are fundamental bus services which should be accessible to everyone.

      Hi mr gekpohboy, no point. This will make all those taking bus go to take taxi. If charging up to $9.60, may as well take taxi. Faster and much more comfortable. The night rider market is already small. You want to drive all away? 

      In Singapore, those who take taxi will not mind the extra few dollars if they can reach home after midnight. Moreover they can take their own timing and not be restricted to the certain timings for night rider bus. Those who always take taxi will continue to take taxi at night. Those who patiently wait for bus will be forced to consider their options if price fare is not much different. Cheers. Thanks.

  • CZT's Avatar
    555 posts since Jun '16
    • Originally posted by dupdup77:

      Hi mr gekpohboy, no point. This will make all those taking bus go to take taxi. If charging up to $9.60, may as well take taxi. Faster and much more comfortable. The night rider market is already small. You want to drive all away? 

      In Singapore, those who take taxi will not mind the extra few dollars if they can reach home after midnight. Moreover they can take their own timing and not be restricted to the certain timings for night rider bus. Those who always take taxi will continue to take taxi at night. Those who patiently wait for bus will be forced to consider their options if price fare is not much different. Cheers. Thanks.

      yes agreed. Thanks for elaborating clearly abt that

      Edited by CZT 04 Mar `17, 8:36PM
  • carbikebus's Avatar
    21,313 posts since Nov '03
    • As for this morning,Svc 3 got 3 DDs deployed with one of them will ended at Depot..PM I think 2 duties will use DDs.

  • TPS Timothy Mok's Avatar
    1,237 posts since Aug '07
    • I would want the fare structure to be:

      12am - 2am: 10% surcharge

      ($1.67 + $0.167 = $1.84)

      2am - 5am: 25% surcharge

      ($1.67 + $0.4175 = $2.09)

      This is so that they can have better maintenance if there is night MRT/night bus.

  • BusAnalayzer's Avatar
    10,628 posts since May '12
    • Loading on svc 67 @ 17.20 from CCK Interchange MANA95 lush green

      CCK Interchange -- 65 (0/65)

      CCK Way -- 70 (-1/6), 68 (-8/6), 49 (-24/5), 38 (-16/5) 

      CCK Road -- 31 (-10/3), 27 (-6/3)

      Bukit Panjang MRT -- 18 (-13/4)

      Upper Bukit Timah Road -- 16 (-2/0), 16 (0/0), 16 (0/0) Cashew, 14 (-2/0), 14 (0/0), 17 (-2/5) Hillview, 16 (-3/2), 14 (-2/0), 14 (0/0), 12 (-4/0), 14 (-1/3)

      Jalan Anak Bukit -- 14 (-3/3), 14 (-2/2)

      Bukit Timah Road -- 13 (-3/2), 12 (-4/3) KAP, 12 (0/0), 12 (0/0), 11 (-1/0), 11 (-2/2) Sixth Ave, 10 (-1/0), 13 (0/3), 12 (-3/2) TKK, 10 (-2/0), 7 (-6/3) Botanic Gardens, 7 (0/0), 6 (-1/0), 6 (-2/2) Stevens, 6 (-2/2), 11 (0/5), 10 (-1/0), 13 (0/3), 14 (-1/3) Newton Circus, 13 (-3/2), 17 (-1/5)

      * time check: bus in front = 09 min, bus behind = 04 min, 12 min (+08m).

      Little India MRT -- 22 (-6/11)

      Serangoon Road -- 55 (-4/37), 72 (-4/21), 87 (-8/23) 

      * 3 stops along Serangoon Road fetches = 81 pax.

      Lavendar St -- 86 (-3/2), 89 (-3/6), 91 (-1/3), 89 (-5/3)

      Kallang Road -- 87 (-2/0), 72 (-24/9) I alighted here.

      * 67 still serves as an important feeder in spite of LRT between CCK way and CCK Interchange (also unlike LRT, bus stops are further away from CCK LRT).

      * Loading is HORRIBLE between Bukit Panjang and Little India (range: 06 pax to 17 pax with average of about 12 pax on a DD). Serious waste of resources.

      * Next bus is at 04 min -- wonder how many pax would it take, but is needed as loading is super high at Serangoon Road towards Geylang in spite of bus coming under 10 mins of previous bus (think: bendy as it showed NWAB). 

      Do you think it is okay to have 67 go all the way from CCK to Tampines with such uneven loading patterns? Comments??? 

       

  • TIB 585L's Avatar
    9,255 posts since Apr '11
  • AJQZC's Avatar
    1,040 posts since Sep '08
    • Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:

      Loading on svc 67 @ 17.20 from CCK Interchange MANA95 lush green

      CCK Interchange -- 65 (0/65)

      CCK Way -- 70 (-1/6), 68 (-8/6), 49 (-24/5), 38 (-16/5) 

      CCK Road -- 31 (-10/3), 27 (-6/3)

      Bukit Panjang MRT -- 18 (-13/4)

      Upper Bukit Timah Road -- 16 (-2/0), 16 (0/0), 16 (0/0) Cashew, 14 (-2/0), 14 (0/0), 17 (-2/5) Hillview, 16 (-3/2), 14 (-2/0), 14 (0/0), 12 (-4/0), 14 (-1/3)

      Jalan Anak Bukit -- 14 (-3/3), 14 (-2/2)

      Bukit Timah Road -- 13 (-3/2), 12 (-4/3) KAP, 12 (0/0), 12 (0/0), 11 (-1/0), 11 (-2/2) Sixth Ave, 10 (-1/0), 13 (0/3), 12 (-3/2) TKK, 10 (-2/0), 7 (-6/3) Botanic Gardens, 7 (0/0), 6 (-1/0), 6 (-2/2) Stevens, 6 (-2/2), 11 (0/5), 10 (-1/0), 13 (0/3), 14 (-1/3) Newton Circus, 13 (-3/2), 17 (-1/5)

      * time check: bus in front = 09 min, bus behind = 04 min, 12 min (+08m).

      Little India MRT -- 22 (-6/11)

      Serangoon Road -- 55 (-4/37), 72 (-4/21), 87 (-8/23) 

      * 3 stops along Serangoon Road fetches = 81 pax.

      Lavendar St -- 86 (-3/2), 89 (-3/6), 91 (-1/3), 89 (-5/3)

      Kallang Road -- 87 (-2/0), 72 (-24/9) I alighted here.

      * 67 still serves as an important feeder in spite of LRT between CCK way and CCK Interchange (also unlike LRT, bus stops are further away from CCK LRT).

      * Loading is HORRIBLE between Bukit Panjang and Little India (range: 06 pax to 17 pax with average of about 12 pax on a DD). Serious waste of resources.

      * Next bus is at 04 min -- wonder how many pax would it take, but is needed as loading is super high at Serangoon Road towards Geylang in spite of bus coming under 10 mins of previous bus (think: bendy as it showed NWAB). 

      Do you think it is okay to have 67 go all the way from CCK to Tampines with such uneven loading patterns? Comments??? 

       

      Split. Eastern half extend and terminate at Bt Merah / Harbourfront, western half terminate at Lor 1 Geylang, 

      Edited by AJQZC 06 Mar `17, 9:16PM
  • TIB 585L's Avatar
    9,255 posts since Apr '11
  • TPS Timothy Mok's Avatar
    1,237 posts since Aug '07
    • Originally posted by TIB 585L:

      Talking abt loading

      Svc 256 to be scrap in May

      Not supposed to scrap, 256 can be amended to ply Tuas -> Lakeside MRT Station (Loop). 182 can be amended to ply Tuas -> Tuas South Boulevard (Loop).

  • BusAnalayzer's Avatar
    10,628 posts since May '12
    • Originally posted by AJQZC:

      Split. Eastern half extend and terminate at Bt Merah / Harbourfront, western half terminate at Lor 1 Geylang, 

      Split yes but my thoughts are different.

      67 - Tampines <> Cavenagh Road (loop) like svc 23

      986 - CCK <> Jalan Anak Bukit (loop)... Marina Center (terminate if merge with 171/700). 

      Extending to Harbourfront/Bukit Merah would lead to unecessary duplication with other services. I know you want it so that they get a terminating end on both sides of the route, but sometimes looping works better like svc 23. 

    • Originally posted by TIB 585L:

      Talking abt loading

      Svc 256 to be scrap in May

      It's a good move BUT some on the forum may object it as there are still 5-10 pax per bus. 

  • hgdep103's Avatar
    310 posts since Sep '16
    • Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:

      It's a good move BUT some on the forum may object it as there are still 5-10 pax per bus. 

      got 192 trf 258 as a replacement in future

  • array88's Avatar
    1,489 posts since May '14
    • Originally posted by hgdep103:

      got 192 trf 258 as a replacement in future

      Nice route. It's totally insane that LTA planned so many duplicative services when Joo Koon Int first opened.

      Edited by array88 07 Mar `17, 7:38AM
    • Just thinking, why withdraw 256 only in May? Is it to create space for 500?

  • AJQZC's Avatar
    1,040 posts since Sep '08
    • Originally posted by array88:

      Just thinking, why withdraw 256 only in May? Is it to create space for 500?

      Don't think so, too much of a hassle for 500 to serve all the way there. May is probably to coincide with Tuas extension opening.

      IMO 256 shouldn't be withdrawn without replacement, especially seeing that it is the only service for three pairs of bus stops along PIE. Unless that would be taken over by 258? Alternatively if 182 gets cut to Tuas, 256 can easily be extended to Tuas checkpoint to cover for it.

  • array88's Avatar
    1,489 posts since May '14
    • Originally posted by AJQZC:

      Don't think so, too much of a hassle for 500 to serve all the way there. May is probably to coincide with Tuas extension opening.

      IMO 256 shouldn't be withdrawn without replacement, especially seeing that it is the only service for three pairs of bus stops along PIE. Unless that would be taken over by 258? Alternatively if 182 gets cut to Tuas, 256 can easily be extended to Tuas checkpoint to cover for it.

      Didn't hgdep103 say there would be replacement?

  • hgdep103's Avatar
    310 posts since Sep '16
    • Originally posted by AJQZC:

      Don't think so, too much of a hassle for 500 to serve all the way there. May is probably to coincide with Tuas extension opening.

      IMO 256 shouldn't be withdrawn without replacement, especially seeing that it is the only service for three pairs of bus stops along PIE. Unless that would be taken over by 258? Alternatively if 182 gets cut to Tuas, 256 can easily be extended to Tuas checkpoint to cover for it.

      replaced by 258

  • Sbs6750E's Avatar
    1,970 posts since May '15
    • Originally posted by AJQZC:

      Don't think so, too much of a hassle for 500 to serve all the way there. May is probably to coincide with Tuas extension opening.

      IMO 256 shouldn't be withdrawn without replacement, especially seeing that it is the only service for three pairs of bus stops along PIE. Unless that would be taken over by 258? Alternatively if 182 gets cut to Tuas, 256 can easily be extended to Tuas checkpoint to cover for it.


      You mean AYE?

  • carbikebus's Avatar
    21,313 posts since Nov '03
    • Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:

      Loading on svc 67 @ 17.20 from CCK Interchange MANA95 lush green

      CCK Interchange -- 65 (0/65)

      CCK Way -- 70 (-1/6), 68 (-8/6), 49 (-24/5), 38 (-16/5) 

      CCK Road -- 31 (-10/3), 27 (-6/3)

      Bukit Panjang MRT -- 18 (-13/4)

      Upper Bukit Timah Road -- 16 (-2/0), 16 (0/0), 16 (0/0) Cashew, 14 (-2/0), 14 (0/0), 17 (-2/5) Hillview, 16 (-3/2), 14 (-2/0), 14 (0/0), 12 (-4/0), 14 (-1/3)

      Jalan Anak Bukit -- 14 (-3/3), 14 (-2/2)

      Bukit Timah Road -- 13 (-3/2), 12 (-4/3) KAP, 12 (0/0), 12 (0/0), 11 (-1/0), 11 (-2/2) Sixth Ave, 10 (-1/0), 13 (0/3), 12 (-3/2) TKK, 10 (-2/0), 7 (-6/3) Botanic Gardens, 7 (0/0), 6 (-1/0), 6 (-2/2) Stevens, 6 (-2/2), 11 (0/5), 10 (-1/0), 13 (0/3), 14 (-1/3) Newton Circus, 13 (-3/2), 17 (-1/5)

      * time check: bus in front = 09 min, bus behind = 04 min, 12 min (+08m).

      Little India MRT -- 22 (-6/11)

      Serangoon Road -- 55 (-4/37), 72 (-4/21), 87 (-8/23) 

      * 3 stops along Serangoon Road fetches = 81 pax.

      Lavendar St -- 86 (-3/2), 89 (-3/6), 91 (-1/3), 89 (-5/3)

      Kallang Road -- 87 (-2/0), 72 (-24/9) I alighted here.

      * 67 still serves as an important feeder in spite of LRT between CCK way and CCK Interchange (also unlike LRT, bus stops are further away from CCK LRT).

      * Loading is HORRIBLE between Bukit Panjang and Little India (range: 06 pax to 17 pax with average of about 12 pax on a DD). Serious waste of resources.

      * Next bus is at 04 min -- wonder how many pax would it take, but is needed as loading is super high at Serangoon Road towards Geylang in spite of bus coming under 10 mins of previous bus (think: bendy as it showed NWAB). 

      Do you think it is okay to have 67 go all the way from CCK to Tampines with such uneven loading patterns? Comments??? 

       

      Do you know the rego of the Lush Green A95?

  • TIB 585L's Avatar
    9,255 posts since Apr '11
Please Login or Signup to reply.