Reasons why SMRTB not doing much to improve services thread
-
Huh? Drink coffee?Originally posted by service_238:both companies are partly under the government la.. u go look at the structure of the company and its management u know already. -_-
i wish that you do not probe anything further or else risk being going to drink free coffee. -
anyone knows why was bukit panjang services taken over by tibs from sbs?
-
Because of the WDL ExtnOriginally posted by 105090:anyone knows why was bukit panjang services taken over by tibs from sbs? -
Can anyone rationalise due WDL extension, the government give these routes to TIBS (then)?Originally posted by sbst275:Because of the WDL Extn
Also NEL issue, SBST won the tender, fair enough, they exchange the punggol and sengkang services with CCK and Bukit batok routes.
Question is: why the government give such an extra routes to TIBS?
Sengkang routes were much less than the CCK interchange's route. Why give the Bukit batok route to TIBS as well?
Because of Ho C. I guess! -
Back in 1995, BPJ was still a developing estate while SKG was not even developed. Furthermore, Tibs pulled out quite a few services following the WDL extension (but were forced to partially reinstate 950). The takeover of the northern region (from BPJ toSKG) in a way was to "compensate" for losing some WDL routes when the future MRT extension was open.Originally posted by phillipC:Can anyone rationalise due WDL extension, the government give these routes to TIBS (then)?
Also NEL issue, SBST won the tender, fair enough, they exchange the punggol and sengkang services with CCK and Bukit batok routes.
Question is: why the government give such an extra routes to TIBS?
Sengkang routes were much less than the CCK interchange's route. Why give the Bukit batok route to TIBS as well?
Because of Ho C. I guess!
Also note that PGL was hived off from SKG and given its own route group in 12/2003 with SBST in charge. Even though SBW developed earlier than these 2 estates, it still doesn't have its own bus interchange (but could have it by Christmas). In a way, SBST seems to be doing a better job with north-east routes. It is likely Tibs preferred a slow approach to SKG and PGL (like what they did in SBW) so as not to overtax themselves, but the government's decision not to have a subway monopoly spoilt all their plans. -
stupid exchange i say.. the saddest is sbs giving up 67 and 190, and the worst is tibs exchanging cck services for 103, 163, 378, 379, all loss-making routes..Originally posted by phillipC:Can anyone rationalise due WDL extension, the government give these routes to TIBS (then)?
Also NEL issue, SBST won the tender, fair enough, they exchange the punggol and sengkang services with CCK and Bukit batok routes.
Question is: why the government give such an extra routes to TIBS?
Sengkang routes were much less than the CCK interchange's route. Why give the Bukit batok route to TIBS as well?
Because of Ho C. I guess!
btw, how did tibs also took over bukit batok services? at 25th dec 2001, 106 and one more route last to be taken over? why it happened and sbs didint get back anything back? -
CCK was exchanged for Sengkang while BB was exchanged for PunggolOriginally posted by 105090:stupid exchange i say.. the saddest is sbs giving up 67 and 190, and the worst is tibs exchanging cck services for 103, 163, 378, 379, all loss-making routes..
btw, how did tibs also took over bukit batok services? at 25th dec 2001, 106 and one more route last to be taken over? why it happened and sbs didint get back anything back? -
From the 1996 Transitlink Guide. Amended Woodlands bus services at a glance.
Svc Changes
160 Divert via Middle Rd and Beach Rd in both directions
169 Divert via Yishun Ave 3/Ave 2, and integrate with 857
178 Extend to new Woodlands Int
181 Divert to new Woodlands Int
182 Withdraw
187 Extend to new Woodlands Int from Bt Panjang via BKE
372 Divert to operate from new Woodlands Int and renamed 903
852 Withdraw (this decision was later reversed)
856 Divert via Sembawang MRT Station along Canberra Rd
857 Withdraw/integrate with 169
858 New service between Yishun and new Woodlands Int via Gambas Ave
900 Divert to operate from new Woodlands Int
902 Divert to operate from new Woodlands Int
925 Extend to Choa Chu Kang Int via Woodlands Rd, KJE and CCK Dr.
Convert to stage fare service.
950 Withdraw
951 Withdraw between Bt Panjang and Woodlands and renamed 180
952 Withdraw
SS7 Withdraw
All changes were effective on 10 March 1996 -
852 was shortened to BBT from BNL in the end. Good competition for 74 & 157, so cannot pull out.Originally posted by The_Bus_Guide:From the 1996 Transitlink Guide. Amended Woodlands bus services at a glance.
Svc Changes
160 Divert via Middle Rd and Beach Rd in both directions
169 Divert via Yishun Ave 3/Ave 2, and integrate with 857
178 Extend to new Woodlands Int
181 Divert to new Woodlands Int
182 Withdraw
187 Extend to new Woodlands Int from Bt Panjang via BKE
372 Divert to operate from new Woodlands Int and renamed 903
852 Withdraw (this decision was later reversed)
856 Divert via Sembawang MRT Station along Canberra Rd
857 Withdraw/integrate with 169
858 New service between Yishun and new Woodlands Int via Gambas Ave
900 Divert to operate from new Woodlands Int
902 Divert to operate from new Woodlands Int
925 Extend to Choa Chu Kang Int via Woodlands Rd, KJE and CCK Dr.
Convert to stage fare service.
950 Withdraw
951 Withdraw between Bt Panjang and Woodlands and renamed 180
952 Withdraw
SS7 Withdraw
All changes were effective on 10 March 1996
Also commuters were unhappy with the loss of Svcs 182, 950 & 952. Tibs then introduced Svc 960. -
Bendies can move around the present Sengkang Int....This is a fact man that the turning radius on bendies are less than the 12m buses.I don't think it would be possible for more than a bendy to park at the present Sengkang Int.It would be too cramped.SBST/LTA made a big mistake by building the interchange in my opinion.Should have built it on the flat land opp/temp SKG int.Condo residents living on top have to suffer now.I pity them.Once again,it's just my 10 cents.Originally posted by sbst275:Can you promise that if they take all MRT lines, they can put at 6 mins off peak frequency and not going to screw up the NEL frequency?
Hmm.. Habits can move around at SKG Int? Is it??? -
Government policy.Originally posted by 105090:anyone knows why was bukit panjang services taken over by tibs from sbs? -
Nothing to do with this.Originally posted by sbst275:Because of the WDL Extn -
The handing over of Bt Panjang to Tibs has nothing to do with Woodlands MRT extension.Originally posted by phillipC:Can anyone rationalise due WDL extension, the government give these routes to TIBS (then)?
Also NEL issue, SBST won the tender, fair enough, they exchange the punggol and sengkang services with CCK and Bukit batok routes.
Question is: why the government give such an extra routes to TIBS?
Sengkang routes were much less than the CCK interchange's route. Why give the Bukit batok route to TIBS as well?
Because of Ho C. I guess!
Exchange was in term of numbers of territory (Sengkang, Punggol/Jln Kayu exchange with Choa Chu Kang and Bt Batok), not numbers of routes. -
Services 106 and 173 were handed to Tibs in Dec 2000.Originally posted by 105090:stupid exchange i say.. the saddest is sbs giving up 67 and 190, and the worst is tibs exchanging cck services for 103, 163, 378, 379, all loss-making routes..
btw, how did tibs also took over bukit batok services? at 25th dec 2001, 106 and one more route last to be taken over? why it happened and sbs didint get back anything back?
SBS had already get Sengkang, Punggol/Jln Kayu in 1999 before the handling of Bt Batok services in 2000. -
I Really Don't like this...why must they exchange PGL/SKG TIBS to CCK/BBT..SBS?Originally posted by tranquilice:Services 106 and 173 were handed to Tibs in Dec 2000.
SBS had already get Sengkang, Punggol/Jln Kayu in 1999 before the handling of Bt Batok services in 2000.
and i think SBS did well in CCK and BBT -
Because SBST won the NEL tender and also the operation of bus services in NE. This means Tibs cannot operate in NE anymore, so a territory exchange took place.Originally posted by Volvo Olympian:I Really Don't like this...why must they exchange PGL/SKG TIBS to CCK/BBT..SBS?
and i think SBS did well in CCK and BBT -
I really don't understand what the government meant when they say "Seamless travel" when they give reason to change territory. If you ask me, with Transitlink & EZlink...everything is seamlessOriginally posted by tranquilice:Because SBST won the NEL tender and also the operation of bus services in NE. This means Tibs cannot operate in NE anymore, so a territory exchange took place. -
If SBST lose tender...i think its the same..no matter wat.Originally posted by tranquilice:Because SBST won the NEL tender and also the operation of bus services in NE. This means Tibs cannot operate in NE anymore, so a territory exchange took place. -
tibs only have the miserable 82 in punggol fior exchange.. tibs got a really good deal from cck and bt panjang man. if not, tibs will be left with woodlands and yishun onlyOriginally posted by cck_190:CCK was exchanged for Sengkang while BB was exchanged for Punggol -
NE means why have NR6, 965, 853?Originally posted by tranquilice:Because SBST won the NEL tender and also the operation of bus services in NE. This means Tibs cannot operate in NE anymore, so a territory exchange took place. -
I was actually referring to Sengkang, Punggol and Jln Kayu.Originally posted by 105090:NE means why have NR6, 965, 853? -
NR6 go Sengkang wat....But this only happen on 2 nightsOriginally posted by tranquilice:I was actually referring to Sengkang, Punggol and Jln Kayu. -
Night services are not normal trunk services. They are allowed to ply into rival's territories.Originally posted by Volvo Olympian:NR6 go Sengkang wat....But this only happen on 2 nights -
That is true. Beisdes NR6 in SKG, there is NR7 in PSR. In the case of SBST, 181M goes to CCK and 162M ends in YIS.Originally posted by tranquilice:Night services are not normal trunk services. They are allowed to ply into rival's territories. -
39 > YishunOriginally posted by tranquilice:I was actually referring to Sengkang, Punggol and Jln Kayu.
161, 168 > woodlands
858 > jalan kayu
965 > Sengkang
signs that the red tape on crossing territory has eased. the territory thing is very confusing if you includes 853 serangoon, 854 hougang etc. etc. etc. no clear line