useless bus routes...post them here!
-
i think that svc 274 is useless. its problem lies between it and svc 57. since svc 57 also go to Depot Rd why not change svc 274 into svc 57A plying between Bukit Merah and Depot Rd (loop)? it is like svc 163 & 371 (last time) now that 371 "change" to 163A.
-
274 and 275 will be withdrawn in due time.
-
57 in tiself is useless. it duplicates 100 from alexandra rd to shenton way to beach rd - no one takes it.
a better bisahn to bt merah connection will be the go trhu farrer rd and lornie rd area.
ZYX -
Your route also not direct enough. Useless too....duplicates SBST 165 from Upper Thomson to Farrer Road, and worse SMRT 855 from Upper Thomson to Bukit Merah.
We need to follow recent trends....Express 57:
Bishan--> Braddell--> --> --> Alexandra--> Depot Road --> Bukit Merah Interchange.
<> denotes express sector -
57? Useless....what about 58? barely surviving....passenger volume not even a double digit on off peak hours..Originally posted by ZYX2005:57 in tiself is useless. it duplicates 100 from alexandra rd to shenton way to beach rd - no one takes it.
ZYX -
The PTC Annual Report 2005 shows that 275 will be withdrawn, I don't think 274 will be withdrawn.Originally posted by ^tamago^:274 and 275 will be withdrawn in due time. -
Btw how to get The PTC Annual Report 2005.?Originally posted by Apex-LW'21:The PTC Annual Report 2005 shows that 275 will be withdrawn, I don't think 274 will be withdrawn.
-
You sure? If this is so, will there be any SWT on 131 between BMR Int and Bt Purmei estate?Originally posted by Apex-LW'21:The PTC Annual Report 2005 shows that 275 will be withdrawn, I don't think 274 will be withdrawn. -
Jurong Regional Library, Reference Section (Level 3)Originally posted by 5454:Btw how to get The PTC Annual Report 2005.?
I'm very sure that 275 will be withdrawn. But, I'm not sure about any SWT on 131.Originally posted by iveco:You sure? If this is so, will there be any SWT on 131 between BMR Int and Bt Purmei estate?
-
posted by Apex-LW'21
Thanks.
Jurong Regional Library, Reference Section (Level 3) -
Sv 57... Of all bet Sv 52, 57, 58 and 59, 57 has the slowest passenger ridership growth. Even Sv 59 is having standing passengers bet TAP and BDK RES during peak hrs
-
57 is kinda bad ah. so bad they had to show the route as ads on the back/sides of the perm buses. 58/59 do have standing passengers during peak hrs. quite good. still, 58 during off-peak is bad.
-
do you take every service 58 bus everyday during off peak hours?Originally posted by muziq bus:57? Useless....what about 58? barely surviving....passenger volume not even a double digit on off peak hours.. -
Sv 48 also haveOriginally posted by sinicker:57 is kinda bad ah. so bad they had to show the route as ads on the back/sides of the perm buses. 58/59 do have standing passengers during peak hrs. quite good. still, 58 during off-peak is bad. -
u mean..Originally posted by sbst275:Sv 48 also have
48 has ads on its perm buses showing its route? or
48 has standing passengers during peak hrs? -
The formerOriginally posted by sinicker:u mean..
48 has ads on its perm buses showing its route? or
48 has standing passengers during peak hrs? -
With regards to Sv 275's immiment withdraw, I dun think a 131A is needed as 131 serves Bt Pumei in both direction
-
i think SBST's CityBuzz should stop ... waste those DD B10TL
-
wah, that bad ah??? haizx.Originally posted by sbst275:The former -
yah! svc 48 had those adsOriginally posted by sinicker:wah, that bad ah??? haizx.
since i live at Selegie i had observe and had these results -
ridership during...Peak Hours between 20-35 people
Off-Peak Hours between 0-20 people -
58 is good enough. it certainly a kudos to sbst for the route
altho it suspicuously looks like my 58 route i post in the forums.
as for the proposed 57 i got (now service ZYX52) true it does duplciate 93 or 165 but the use of AYE and CTE will lengthen the travelling time and espeically
gasp
bus fare
ZYX -
bus no. 307
it keep turning around and round wasting my time....
walking from CCK to my hus -->45min
take bus -->15min
waiting time -->1min-25min -
Hahaha..... how about taking the 'Express' away from my proposed 57. Then the situation becomes:
Current 57:
With 30 fare stages (maximum fare), 56 bus stops, more than 1 hour from Bishan to Bukit Merah.*
My proposed 57:
Fare Stages unknown (but maximum fare), 6 bus stops, under 1 hour from Bishan to Bukit Merah.*
So to the comment on longer travelling times, and higher fares:
Both routes will pay the SAME maximum fares, but travel time is shorter for proposed 57.
*excluding potential traffic jams at peak hours. -
for YOUR information, 307 is not deemed useless. If you even know it, it is the only bus service in Choa Chu Kang North 5,6,7, St 62 near the stadium area and also the only bus service serving the insides of Teck Whye. SMRT once withdrew just the Teck Whye part, and residents were complaining to the MPs and only after a few months, they were forced to restore it.Originally posted by masteryap:bus no. 307
it keep turning around and round wasting my time....
walking from CCK to my hus -->45min
take bus -->15min
waiting time -->1min-25min
even though you find it useless, one third of CCK residents who rides 307 daily and sees it as a necessity -
Agreed , As a Choa Chu Kang North Resident , 307 is quite useful to me and cck190. Since this service cannot use bendys at all , i myself get used with the 0405 CAC.Originally posted by cck_190:for YOUR information, 307 is not deemed useless. If you even know it, it is the only bus service in Choa Chu Kang North 5,6,7, St 62 near the stadium area and also the only bus service serving the insides of Teck Whye. SMRT once withdrew just the Teck Whye part, and residents were complaining to the MPs and only after a few months, they were forced to restore it.
even though you find it useless, one third of CCK residents who rides 307 daily and sees it as a necessity
And as for 302 , it only serve St 52 , and CCK Cres , which is i think very short. They can actually use bendys for just peak hours only.