Land Transport Review
-
Agree. I feel that having too many bus companies for "competition" is not suitable for Singapore. Look how small Singapore is. They like to compare with HK, which is don't know how many times larger than us. I also feel that they should go under 1 company. Bus for bus, train for train. Under the same company, depots can come together. You get the cue from here.Originally posted by Zilchster:Well, I don't trust LTA planning all the bus routes. Do they actually know what the passengers want or not?
Firstly, what would they do with existing bus routes? Will they be radically be rationalised? Will direct links between places be further axed? Do we have to make more transfers from bus to bus, bus to train etc? Especially with the recent MRT fiasco and the many times train trips have been interrupted? How exactly reliable can the hub and spoke system be? We ain't doing a Singapore Airlines at Changi Airport.
I am happy that the same fares will be charged by distance though. If this doesn't translate into higher fares.
And I think the tender is crap. Bus operators will definitely wanna cherry pick more profitable and viable routes and shun unprofitable ones away. Unless the routes come in a package. The bus operator has to operate a mixture of routes that have high and low passenger loads.
And a third, fourth bus company? I hope that will materialise? But I doubt it will happen. New companies need a substantial fleet of buses to enter the market. Existing companies might need to re-fit their current buses to meet the current standards? Which company will wanna invest in a business that does not bring high business yields? There's no First or Business class in bus services. And you need a fleet of a few hundred of buses and it has to be Euro 4 and WAB. All these needs $$$.
Competition between buses? Unless buses ply the exact same route, otherwise there is no direct competition. Crap.
Actually the best solution is this.
1) Merge all the transport companies under one roof or the second one is preferred...
2) Management shakeup at the SMRT and keep the existing status of both companies status quo but integrate the frequencies a bit here and there...but given the irregular frequency of SMRT ... i don't know it this would work.
I also agree with you that with future plans already expanding for both transport operators, what happens to extra buses? It really sucks to say this, but I don't want a duopoly or triopoly etc etc etc... monopoly is the best IMO.
In general, bus routes are axed to avoid duplication of the MRT lines. Coming up we'd see more withdrawal or axing of services. However I feel that that should not do that simply because it acts as a backup in case of any emergency. But then, fuel costs come into place. So I'd say both are not any good solutions either.
I'm also one of the many who disagree with Ms Saw's arrogant attitude for SMRT. Look at the state of SMRT today because of her. Tibs, originally a good-profiled company, became lousy under her. However I'm not totally anti-SMRT, like what some here are "practicing". I believe the fault lies in Ms Saw and not the rest of the company. I've seen cases whereby people pull in anything related to SMRT and starts crapping bullsheet around. That isn't nice, I must say.
Zilchster, if you were Mr. Raymond Lim, what would you do? I'd like to hear.
-
Given a choice i would like to see SBST running all routes with Bus Plus operates a few premium & express sv to suppliment SBST
-
Ms Saw is not experienced in the transport sector.Originally posted by Oceane:Agree. I feel that having too many bus companies for "competition" is not suitable for Singapore. Look how small Singapore is. They like to compare with HK, which is don't know how many times larger than us. I also feel that they should go under 1 company. Bus for bus, train for train. Under the same company, depots can come together. You get the cue from here.
I also agree with you that with future plans already expanding for both transport operators, what happens to extra buses? It really sucks to say this, but I don't want a duopoly or triopoly etc etc etc... monopoly is the best IMO.
In general, bus routes are axed to avoid duplication of the MRT lines. Coming up we'd see more withdrawal or axing of services. However I feel that that should not do that simply because it acts as a backup in case of any emergency. But then, fuel costs come into place. So I'd say both are not any good solutions either.
I'm also one of the many who disagree with Ms Saw's arrogant attitude for SMRT. Look at the state of SMRT today because of her. Tibs, originally a good-profiled company, became lousy under her. However I'm not totally anti-SMRT, like what some here are "practicing". I believe the fault lies in Ms Saw and not the rest of the company. I've seen cases whereby people pull in anything related to SMRT and starts crapping bullsheet around. That isn't nice, I must say.
Zilchster, if you were Mr. Raymond Lim, what would you do? I'd like to hear.
She came from DFS International
No wonder her hair got style one
-
you just watch the news yesterdayOriginally posted by gorby107:Ms Saw is not experienced in the transport sector.
She came from DFS International
No wonder her hair got style one
Kua Hong Pak simply had his company name and logo, his name and a quote under his name for the response of the review.
Saw granted a press interview so that she can show how nice her hair looks on tv -
Ever since Ms Saw left DFS for SMRT, SMRT has been worse off in terms of service standards, she does manage to however, maintain a good investor's relationship, by having profits, except for the 3rd quarter profits drop by 5.3% (BT, 26-27/1/0Originally posted by Oceane:Agree. I feel that having too many bus companies for "competition" is not suitable for Singapore. Look how small Singapore is. They like to compare with HK, which is don't know how many times larger than us. I also feel that they should go under 1 company. Bus for bus, train for train. Under the same company, depots can come together. You get the cue from here.
I also agree with you that with future plans already expanding for both transport operators, what happens to extra buses? It really sucks to say this, but I don't want a duopoly or triopoly etc etc etc... monopoly is the best IMO.
In general, bus routes are axed to avoid duplication of the MRT lines. Coming up we'd see more withdrawal or axing of services. However I feel that that should not do that simply because it acts as a backup in case of any emergency. But then, fuel costs come into place. So I'd say both are not any good solutions either.
Zilchster, if you were Mr. Raymond Lim, what would you do? I'd like to hear. 
.
The 90 sec freq during peak of the MRT lines are gone...and on the other extreme, off peak dipped from 5 mins to 8, 9 or even 10 mins).
The friendly, clean, efficient and reliable TIBS is also gone...replaced by the can't be bothered SMRT Buses.
Maybe Ms Saw should be a consultant for Capitaland/Sun Hung Kai Properties in their ion Orchard project.
I do however believe that more MRT lines in the future will not cause bus services to be axed, and a bus-rail competition will exist like what is happening in HK.
HK is big, however, due to the geography there, and the natural parks there, there leaves about less than 700 sq km of space left for development. Towns are generally spreaded out and a duapoly (largely) exist in the bus industry (Transport International vs NWS Development) and competition is mainly bus-bus and bus-rail. Over at the habour, it becomes bus-rail-ferry.
Extra buses can be sold to either overseas operators (like Stagecoach HK selling buses to Stagecoach Wellington) or existing local operators (like, CTB to KMB, NWFB to KMB, NWFB to CTB, worse comes to worst if whole company can't operate bus routes any more, CMB to NWFB). -
In 2003, yes. In 2010, no.Originally posted by Oceane:In general, bus routes are axed to avoid duplication of the MRT lines. Coming up we'd see more withdrawal or axing of services. However I feel that that should not do that simply because it acts as a backup in case of any emergency. But then, fuel costs come into place. So I'd say both are not any good solutions either.
Since we are projecting a surge in the population, there has to be a need for bus-rail duplication if you want more and more people to make public transport your other car. I'm sure no one wants to squeeze into a kawasaki like in tokyo because there's no direct bus from Ubi Ave 2 to Shenton Way? (and currently there's none )
You need to see the broader picture here. We are now under Raymond Lim, not some Mah Bow Tan or Yeo Cheow Tong. Ong Teng Cheong and Yeo Ning Hong were better, especially the former. -
Practically I didn't see Mr. Yeo do anything good for us except visiting the site of the collapse of the Nicoll Highway.Originally posted by service_238:In 2003, yes. In 2010, no.
Since we are projecting a surge in the population, there has to be a need for bus-rail duplication if you want more and more people to make public transport your other car. I'm sure no one wants to squeeze into a kawasaki like in tokyo because there's no direct bus from Ubi Ave 2 to Shenton Way? (and currently there's none )
You need to see the broader picture here. We are now under Raymond Lim, not some Mah Bow Tan or Yeo Cheow Tong. Ong Teng Cheong and Yeo Ning Hong were better, especially the former.
As much as you like, I also don't wish for axing of routes. -
Can walk to Paya Lebar Rd to take Sv70 if its near Aztech Bldg thereOriginally posted by service_238:I'm sure no one wants to squeeze into a kawasaki like in tokyo because there's no direct bus from Ubi Ave 2 to Shenton Way? (and currently there's none ) -
We need buses to run around the MRT route as well
Which for one reason, the recent MRT rosak case
Another thing, buses are still needed for direct routing -
You know why?She cut all cost by axing/transfer all the Terminal timekeepers,axed the depot assistant who's in charge of bus cleaniness,Cut off SL bonuses,Chop many OTs on many services,Cut many buses,Cut cost by appointing Gajah Tunggal over Michelin.Even the Technical staff uniform were not spared either,she really a big dumbass.Then all the savings from buses side invest to train side and staffs.Some bus officers says we're just their stepson afterall.Originally posted by Scania:Ever since Ms Saw left DFS for SMRT, SMRT has been worse off in terms of service standards, she does manage to however, maintain a good investor's relationship, by having profits, except for the 3rd quarter profits drop by 5.3% (BT, 26-27/1/0.
The 90 sec freq during peak of the MRT lines are gone...and on the other extreme, off peak dipped from 5 mins to 8, 9 or even 10 mins).
The friendly, clean, efficient and reliable TIBS is also gone...replaced by the can't be bothered SMRT Buses.
Maybe Ms Saw should be a consultant for Capitaland/Sun Hung Kai Properties in their ion Orchard project.
I do however believe that more MRT lines in the future will not cause bus services to be axed, and a bus-rail competition will exist like what is happening in HK.
HK is big, however, due to the geography there, and the natural parks there, there leaves about less than 700 sq km of space left for development. Towns are generally spreaded out and a duapoly (largely) exist in the bus industry (Transport International vs NWS Development) and competition is mainly bus-bus and bus-rail. Over at the habour, it becomes bus-rail-ferry.
Extra buses can be sold to either overseas operators (like Stagecoach HK selling buses to Stagecoach Wellington) or existing local operators (like, CTB to KMB, NWFB to KMB, NWFB to CTB, worse comes to worst if whole company can't operate bus routes any more, CMB to NWFB).
For service management its quite haywire too.
eg:S61 AMDEP went to Eunos Timekeeper office to apply leave or submit MC,Now they have to do it @ Bukit Batok,WTF. -
Tell Saw go and eat shit lah....
-
Petition?Originally posted by phillipC:Tell Saw go and eat shit lah....
Raise up the issue with Raymond Lim?
Hold protest?
-
They got connection larOriginally posted by gorby107:Petition?
Raise up the issue with Raymond Lim?
Hold protest? -
Originally posted by iveco:
Maybe TransitLink could be reorganised such that they take over all the public transport resources then farm them out.
In future:
All trains operate under TL livery, but come under SMRT Corp.
All buses operate under TL livery, but are split between SBS and Tibs depending on sector.this is a good idea, especially for trains. saves the need to do repainting all the time when operators switch , which will only become more common with shorter operating contracts.
this is how the London Underground and NYC Subway works as well. you dont really know who is the operator unless you inspect the minute details.
-
Originally posted by deskoh91:
this is a good idea, especially for trains. saves the need to do repainting all the time when operators switch , which will only become more common with shorter operating contracts.
this is how the London Underground and NYC Subway works as well. you dont really know who is the operator unless you inspect the minute details.
NYC Subways is fully operated by their government's Metropolitian Transit Authority, no separate operators. Proof is that trains from all over the system would visit the main maintenance yard a few times in their lifespan. -
I don't know what I'll do if i am the transport minister...still thinking about it.
There are some plus points in his proposal.
-
my gf and friends also say i shud be transport minister.
but seriously, if given the task, like zilchster, i too wudnt know what to do.
-
Increasing Frequencies of Basic Bus Services, including Feeder Services
16. To shorten bus journey and waiting times, and reduce crowding, we will enhance the frequency of basic bus services. In particular, we will put priority on corridors affected by impending ERP expansion, where the bus operators will increase the peak period frequency of all basic bus services from 15 minutes to 12 minutes by June 2008 and 10 minutes by August 2009.
17. Many commuters use feeder bus services to connect to MRT stations and bus interchanges. To reduce their waiting time, we will increase the frequency of feeder services. Over and above the minimum frequencies which the Public Transport Council (PTC) specifies for all bus services, the PTC will also be spelling out a separate and higher Quality of Service (QoS) standard for peak hour feeder bus services. The PTC will announce changes after consultation with the public transport operators.
18. The bus operators will have to procure additional buses to run the trunk and feeder bus services at higher frequencies. As this will take time, LTA will in the interim, extend the statutory life span of existing buses to expedite implementation.
Allowing Basic Bus Services to Duplicate Parts of the Rail Network
19. Today, trunk buses are not allowed to run routes that are parallel to rail lines. This avoids wasteful duplication of resources, which would increase the overall cost of our public transport system. However, LTA has reviewed and will relax this rule for the mature rail lines, namely the North-South and East-West lines, where ridership is high and the scope for expanding rail capacity quickly is limited. From June 2008, we will allow new bus services to ply along the North-South and East West lines where there is persistent heavy passenger loading during peak hours. For example, it will now be possible to have a more direct bus that runs parallel to the North-South Line, from Ang Mo Kio to Orchard Road, compared to existing services which have more indirect routes. This would give commuters an attractive alternative to trains.
Expanding Premium Bus Services to Provide More Choices
20. We will also expand premium bus services which provide more comfortable and direct journeys. We currently have 42 services. We will work with the bus operators to increase the number to at least 72 by June 2008, putting priority on routes affected by ERP expansion. For example, premium bus services will provide direct connections from residential areas such as Katong, Holland, Bukit Timah, Choa Chu Kang, Sengkang, Tampines, and Yio Chu Kang to the Shenton Way, Robinson Road, Suntec City and Orchard Road areas. The operators will also provide return trips in the evening on high demand services. -
I don't know if you guys noticed, but the changes in the morning peak hour MRT frequencies on the North South Line seem to have been implemented. I was pleasantly greeted by not-sardine-packed trains running at 2-3 minutes frequency in the morning today.
Can anyone confirm?
-
Not sure but on the way back it's quite bad. >.<
-
Now buses can duplicate w/ NS and EW line
Something like old SBS 168
-
yeah. finally. but nowdays jams are so bad, unless these routes use CTE, if not, there's no point in duplicating if you can't get a seat.
-
evening peak hr: northbound train(observed at Khatib today) 1min freq. southbound: 1-2min freq.
northbound: when the train haven't even left the station, another train is already approaching.
-
Car review out,
Road Tax reduced
16 new ERPs (including the 5 which has been built but not in use) will be fully operational by year's end.
New North South expressway from Woodlands to (seemingly) Benjy Sheares Bridge.
-
Originally posted by ^tamago^:
yeah. finally. but nowdays jams are so bad, unless these routes use CTE, if not, there’s no point in duplicating if you can’t get a seat.
Bus lanesThey came w/ this decision onto looking at it's almost coming to the max NS and EW can take