Amendment of Service 57
-
Will be re-routed to ply Bt Timah Rd, Kg Java Rd, Thomson Rd, Jln Toa Payoh in the direction towards Bishan
Jln Toa Payoh, Thomson Rd, Keng Lee Rd, Kg Java Rd, Bt Timah Rd in the direction towards Bt Merah
now from Jln Toa Payoh to Bt Timah Rd (Tekka Mall), we have Sv 56 and 57 duplicating each other
Sv 57 will no longer go to Newton FC, ACS(Barker), SCGS, SJI along Whitley and Bt Timah Rd, and Catholic JC along PIE -
why duplicate~!!
-
Rerouted form when?
-
Thought was what when someone told me of notice posted at Bt Timah
I bet complains will come in for the students
WHY???? When 57 students loading is quite good alrdy -
* Not well taken.Wait for the press release in the website for better view. -
No point duplicating 56 leh, from Thomson Road to Shenton Way/Bt Merah there is 131 already and to Bishan/Toa Payoh got 56.
-
Yah I agree... The amendment is bad, esp for the students...Originally posted by sbst275:Thought was what when someone told me of notice posted at Bt Timah
I bet complains will come in for the students
WHY???? When 57 students loading is quite good alrdy
Maybe SBST checked the ez-link records and monitored the usage level of 57, and discovered that not many people alight along the old route... So they just amend the route. But the problem is, students often tap when they board, but don't tap when they alight. Hence the usage level along Whitney Rd & Bk Timah Rd is not captured by ez-link and SBST assumes that very few people use those roads.
This was the problem when SBST withdrew service 85 during the NEL rationalisation. A lot of students in Sengkang and Hougang depended on 85 to go to school, but the usage level was not captured because students only tap in but never tap out. So SBST assumed nobody needed 85 and withdrew the service. In the end, students and parents complained, and SBST finally introduced 119 to cover part of the old 85 route...... -
seems that amended 57 now shares the load of 56
does this spell DDs on 56 fleet being taken off? -
Originally posted by autumncs:
Thats why there are so many 'tap and win' promotion..One after another
Yah I agree... The amendment is bad, esp for the students...
[b]Maybe SBST checked the ez-link records and monitored the usage level of 57, and discovered that not many people alight along the old route... So they just amend the route. But the problem is, students often tap when they board, but don't tap when they alight. Hence the usage level along Whitney Rd & Bk Timah Rd is not captured by ez-link and SBST assumes that very few people use those roads.
This was the problem when SBST withdrew service 85 during the NEL rationalisation. A lot of students in Sengkang and Hougang depended on 85 to go to school, but the usage level was not captured because students only tap in but never tap out. So SBST assumed nobody needed 85 and withdrew the service. In the end, students and parents complained, and SBST finally introduced 119 to cover part of the old 85 route......[/b]
-
The students will have to do a bus transfer to their school..Back to normal When there is no sv57..
I personally think that this amended route is better than the old one. The amended route passes by Thomson Rd, Novena Square, United Square which has more demand than the old route which does not pass by any shopping centre,only schools, therefore lesser demand. -
From SBST's point of view, the amended route is definitely better than the old one. Not only the new route passes by higher-demand areas, it is also shorter than the old route, meaning less fuel is burnt per trip.Originally posted by choww:The students will have to do a bus transfer to their school..Back to normal When there is no sv57..
I personally think that this amended route is better than the old one. The amended route passes by Thomson Rd, Novena Square, United Square which has more demand than the old route which does not pass by any shopping centre,only schools, therefore lesser demand. -
Originally posted by autumncs:
That's the prob of relying on the ez-link system too much...
Yah I agree... The amendment is bad, esp for the students...
[b]Maybe SBST checked the ez-link records and monitored the usage level of 57, and discovered that not many people alight along the old route... So they just amend the route. But the problem is, students often tap when they board, but don't tap when they alight. Hence the usage level along Whitney Rd & Bk Timah Rd is not captured by ez-link and SBST assumes that very few people use those roads.
This was the problem when SBST withdrew service 85 during the NEL rationalisation. A lot of students in Sengkang and Hougang depended on 85 to go to school, but the usage level was not captured because students only tap in but never tap out. So SBST assumed nobody needed 85 and withdrew the service. In the end, students and parents complained, and SBST finally introduced 119 to cover part of the old 85 route......[/b]
But as for 119, see now, 15 - 18 mins freq so that ADDs can be deployed -
And maybe 1 - 2 buses of sv57's fleet can become AM SPOriginally posted by autumncs:From SBST's point of view, the amended route is definitely better than the old one. Not only the new route passes by higher-demand areas, it is also shorter than the old route, meaning less fuel is burnt per trip. -
Still, duplicate with 56 for what?Originally posted by choww:The students will have to do a bus transfer to their school..Back to normal When there is no sv57..
I personally think that this amended route is better than the old one. The amended route passes by Thomson Rd, Novena Square, United Square which has more demand than the old route which does not pass by any shopping centre,only schools, therefore lesser demand.
Provided that 56 cannot cope but for now, 56 can increase the fleet size -
Students will definitely be the losers here.
But residents in Toa Payoh can look forward to a faster ride to Shenton Way. -
If they want a faster way to Shenton Way, can look at returning Sv 140 as a peak hr sv
-
This is to teach the 'smart' students a lesson for not tapping their ez-links upon exit.
Well SBS can just intro a short route just to accomadate these students, or promote them to buy Bus Passes
. -
take MRT...Originally posted by sbst275:If they want a faster way to Shenton Way, can look at returning Sv 140 as a peak hr sv -
To relieve the MRT load during the peak hrs lorOriginally posted by ^tamago^:take MRT... -
sv 140 did not go to Shenton way. it go to orchard rd in the past. SV 141 is the one which go to Shenton way, or should i say cecil street.Originally posted by sbst275:If they want a faster way to Shenton Way, can look at returning Sv 140 as a peak hr sv
maybe sooner or later, either SV 56 or SV 57 might get withdraw? -
maybe when CCL opens they might merge.Originally posted by lemon1974:maybe sooner or later, either SV 56 or SV 57 might get withdraw?
Can say that sv 57 is now duplicating sv 56 about 80% and sv 131 about 65% -
no point duplicate.Originally posted by ^tamago^:why duplicate~!!
thomson rd already have adequate bus services. -
Penang Rd (Loop) was much later...Originally posted by lemon1974:sv 140 did not go to Shenton way. it go to orchard rd in the past. SV 141 is the one which go to Shenton way, or should i say cecil street.
maybe sooner or later, either SV 56 or SV 57 might get withdraw?
Dun believe, take a look at SBS webpage... The Volvo B57 -
Oh yeah .... 57 also served CJC before ...
Wonder if PTC or LTA were up to against the CJCians =). First Extending 966, now this. -
Originally posted by Yaimster:Oh yeah .... 57 also served CJC before ...
Wonder if PTC or LTA were up to against the CJCians =). First Extending 966, now this.