25 Feb, 12:01AM in sunny Singapore!

Recent Posts by iveco

Subscribe to Recent Posts by iveco

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by SG1131L:

      If a company has t-1 contracts, it will definitely be barred from getting the remaining 1 contract. This was what happened in 2000, when SMRT was barred from getting the North East Line as the government wanted competition in the rail industry.

      And we all saw how Tibs Holdings got screwed badly by that. Railways are more suited as a natural monopoly on the whole.

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by dupdup77:

      All, service 68 will be launched in a few months time. News have broken out on DPM teo’s Facebook. From pasir ris to tampines interchange. Covering pasir ris st 71, drive 12 and across TPE to giant/ikea area. Soon service 3 will not be the only bus service along pasir ris st 71. Cheers. Thanks.

      I will laugh my socks off if SMRT end up being the operator of Route 68. Seriously, I will.

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • BCM system works best in major cities with a high population density, most notably capital cities. Technically, it could be implemented without too much difficulty in the Klang Valley.

      London and Perth have a long history of BCM being practised. The authorities there were smarter as they realised that allowing individual operators legal ownership of the means of production wasn't sustainable in the long run. As we have seen, IntraKota and Cityliner in Kuala Lumpur were having severe financial woes and had to seek government intervention, which prompted the restructuring of the whole public transit network in the Klang Valley.

      That being said, having a monopoly operator breeds complacency in the long run, and here is where competitive tendering comes in. Ideally, no single contractor should control more than 50% of the market, because they don't deserve to. Transperth's "50% of total service mileage" rule exists for a good reason. 

      On that note, SBST having bagged Seletar and Bukit Merah should therefore be ruled ineligible to defend Hougang.

      Edited by iveco 24 Feb `18, 12:08AM
  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by carbikebus:

      Wait long2 lah Sengkang-Hougang will goes to other operators..Its all wayang only.

      Maybe when the time comes for Hougang to get farmed out Pritam Singh become PM liao. Who knows, maybe LTA adopt the "no more than 50% of total service miles" rule of Transperth and SBST is automatically frozen out of Hougang and barred from defending it.

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by Gus.chong:

      To me, one of the influential factors in the present results seems to be the need for 160 and 170 to remain status quo...otherwise the administrative side in JB may be complicated.

      If 160 and 170 need to remain status quo, so does 950. But still better to have all JB routes under one operator for economy of scale.

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by AntiDennisLance:

      As long as not SMRT win can liao. I happy liao.

      My gut feeling says Sembawang will remain with the incumbents.

      Since SBST snagged Seletar and held on to Bukit Merah, I hope Hougang goes to one of the other operators (logically GAS since they already have the adjacent Loyang contract).

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by carbikebus:

      I think 110 & 944 contract is valid till 2021 until the Bulim & Sengkang-Hougang package is up for bidding.

      For 974,its up to 2023 when the CCK-BPJ tender is up for bidding.

      It makes a lot of sense for 110 and 117 to do  a straight swap immediately. Both are orphan routes.

      117 fits easily inside Sembawang package, which is next to get farmed out. Can't deny that.

      Edited by iveco 22 Feb `18, 10:55PM
  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by iamgoondu:

      Nah... Not a new service. Bus 61 definitely have to travel from Holland Ave to Commonwealth MRT due to closure of Tanglin Halt Close in March.... The return trip from Commonwealth Drive to Holland Avenue should still remain the same.

      Well, it kinda becomes pointless. Might as well straighten out 61 and make 122 loop at Tanglin Halt.

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by Sbeesg:

      Anyone have the photo of the affected Road Closure (Tanglin Halt Rd) signboard?

      What is the reason for closure? Is it due to the construction work going on?

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Now this case became a political issue after the doctored headline of "PAP lawyer saving Kong Hee's ass" made its rounds on Facebook, with K Shanmugam threatening legal action against the creator. Shanmugam is Law Minister and also head of a committee to tackle fake news. Many regard this committee as a threat to free speech.

      Edited by iveco 21 Feb `18, 9:34PM
  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:

      970 doesn't exactly have such high loading to take pressure off. 122 can just loop around Queenstown MRT and come back via Dawson. 

      There were complaints about 970 having terrible frequency. Most were from Holland Villagers catching the train from Commonwealth station.

      Edited by iveco 20 Feb `18, 9:58PM
  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by carbikebus:

      Can just eradicate 128,not that great either..Can reuse the number for other new svc

      Apparently 128 was spared because a certain MP exerted his influence to keep it going. Wonder who it was.

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by carbikebus:

      There will be more 20-30mins freq bus svc in future be it express or SWT.

      I predict East will get 2e & 65e.Central will get 5e,West will get 66e,North will get 960e and Northeast will get 51e

      65e competition with DTL3?

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by sgbuses:

      To all bus lobbyists who still haven't realized the consequences of their acts over the years: Have fun paying your GST increase to fund your new "premium" buses.

      I don't mind the GST hike if it means everyone gets entitled to $8 heart bypass surgeries. Sadly, that isn't the case.

      Edited by iveco 20 Feb `18, 9:47PM
  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by carbikebus:

      Is not a matter of good or not...engine reliability,spare part costs all play a part.If you run a bus company depend on power output and looks only then your depot is like rojak,MAN here,Volvo there,MB here,ADL there,Iveco here,VDL there,Hino here and Yutong there..

      Heck, just use pure Scania fleets. Nothing could be better than that.

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by JKYY:

      This would mean 135 will be cut short and would increase demand on 43 and 134.

      135 can merge with 40, while 47 be made to ply East Coast Road in both directions and extended to MacPherson.

      In short, 40 gets removed and gets supplanted by an augmented 135 (AMK-BDK), which will provide Siglap with a direct link with Parkway Parade. Meanwhile, 47 will skip Parkway Parade altogether and use East Coast Road in addition to being extended to loop at MacPherson Estate.

      Another solution would be a three-way merger of 47, 125 and 135 resulting in 135 looping at Sims Drive while 125 gets extended to CBP taking over portions of 135 and 47; and 40 gets amended to ply Marine Parade due to the removal of 47. I believe this had been proposed before at Routes.one.

      Edited by iveco 19 Feb `18, 7:07PM
  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by carbikebus:

      Hopefully there will be a small terminal at Marine Parade once the station is completed in 2023..Svc 15 and 966 can rest there.

      You mean Parkway Parade?

      Also, 135 needs a layover point. It is the last of the Marine Parade routes that still loops at Siglap.

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • I prefer 122 to skip Commonwealth Dr altogether and loop at Holland Village instead. It can take some pressure off 970.

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by carbikebus:

      7A Bedok Int-Orchard then OS start midway from Orchard-Bedok Int. (BNDEP)

      7B Clementi-Orchard then OS start midway from Orchard-Clementi. (BBDEP)

      Clementi already so tight..Clever very clever.

      When Route 7 gets farmed out what will happen to 7A and 7B? What if Bedok and Clementi contracts get tendered to different operators?

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by carbikebus:

      SBST because their BOL haven't expired and they got lots of depot islandwide.

      Imgaine SBST's competitors gaining control over HGDEP, SLBP and BBDEP in future.

      Ideally, TT should operate from BUDEP and BBDEP, GA from LYDEP and HGDEP, SMRT from SLBP, MDDEP, GBDEP and WLDEP and SBST from the remaining depots (SEDEP, UPDEP, AMDEP, KCDEP, BNDEP and ECID).

  • iveco's Avatar
    17,169 posts since Mar '04
    • Originally posted by carbikebus:

      Actually for certain service i would recommend interlining.

      Examples:S51 1st trip,HG-JE then JE-HG mealbreaks,then do 2 full trips of 102 before end duty.Feeders should be crossing each others.

      Ditto for 74. 1st trip BV-HG then HG-BV mealbreak, followed by 2 full trips of 200 before finishing up. But must be SD, of course.