Positive Suggestions needed on improving the Public Bus Tpt
-
Hi all,
I'm appealing to all to assist me in contributing ideas for my PW (Project Work) in which im doing on Singapore's Public Bus Transport System.
Could forumnites assist me in my project...by identifying any problem or flaw that u may find of the public buses and offer positive suggestions to address the problem or raise awareness of that particular issue?
To give an example, one of the proposals my project is offering is to have a Mobile bus Museum in which there'll be various forms of games and posters to exhibit to many advantages of taking buses over private transport and the immense cost savings and environmental benefits that can be accrued from using buses, of which this "Mobile Bus Museum" will be travelling around to various schools to enable students to be more aware of the above mentioned reasons. This is done for the sake of awareness to encourage more to be more open to use public transport.
So could anyone provide some insightful suggestions to the many problems that our public bus transport system is afflicted with?
Your suggestions, however big or small, will prove itself to be useful to my project that i am embarking on and it will be very much appreciated.
(No flaming of particular company/bus model/depot etc. is bad pls! Offer positive criticisms WITH suggestions)Many thanks in advance.
Desmond.
-
Hi Desmond,
I think you are really asking the wrong people man! What you are going to get here I'm afraid is a lot of unbalanced and biased views which might not be constructive and might impede your project. What I may suggest to you is to actually talk to those adults who take public transport, and those people who actually prefer to drive rather than to take public transport. Find out their motivations to why they prefer to drive and their reasons for avoiding public transport. These reasons would provide you with rich information for your project because they would be far more realistic and more down to earth than some of the views that migh be suggested here. Bus fans might have a desire to build an unrealistic utopian world based on their wants.
Back to the mobile bus exhibition, while I agree that it is good to start the m young, I think you are quite missing the point. Children and school kids don't have much of a choice but to take the public transport as they don't have an income to speak of. School kids should only be one piece of the puzzle in the long term. In short, you should be looking towards adults - those who have disposable income and can afford a private transport. These are the people that your campaign should be targeting at really. So to reach out to them, you could either do a PR/Media campaign that extols the benefits of public transport.
Personally I find it difficult to separate bus transport from other forms of public transport in Singapore. It's part of an integral package. But with regards to the improving bus transport, perhaps more double deckers, , perhaps restrict bendy buses from plying congested roads to avoid traffic built up, more point to point bus services during peak hours on certain popular routes, abolishing cash fare practices on certain popular routes to allow for efficiency and more speedier service. More downroutes on popular services, perhaps bus timetables for all services at busstops.
-
I believe the best way is to conduct a public survey. Information from the regular passengers of public transport is what you will need most as they give the most valuable information. Regardless of whether they may sound ridiculous, but they are coming from people who have been experiencing public transport woes everyday.
I agree with Zilchster that there are many reasons why people still prefer to drive rather than taking transport. Perhaps interviewing them can be a possible source of information and opinions about our public transport system.
-
What I can suggest:
(01) Most bus services today call on too many bus stops. They make too many inner rounds and thus, travelling is not as smooth as it seems because it takes a long time to travel from Point A to Point B. Bus services should be more direct and amended accordingly.
(02) The new Wheel-Chair Accessible (WAB) Bus was meant to cater to the needs for the disabled, as well as benefit the elderly from stepless boarding. However, they have neglected the seats. There are practically no seats on the bus and most of the time, the elderly end up standing, inconveniencing them. 4 seats for elderly in fact, to be precise, as the rest of the seats are accessible by walking up the stairs. And lesser and lesser seats for everyone.
(03) There are too many restrictions on bus services. PTC has to approve every single route and one of which is that a SBST service which needs to cut through a SMRT territory must cut through the shortest route, or best should not even enter its territory at all, likewise the converse. For example, SBST cannot introduce a bus service from Ang Mo Kio To Yishun, even if they wanted to, as there is a restriction on it. This has prevented many cross-territorial routes from operations.
(04) Long wait for buses. Most bus services come between the frequencies of 12 - 15 minutes. This has prevented people from taking public transport. Bus services should be rationalised, merged to have more buses operating on fewer routes.
(05) Too many transfers. With the long wait plus bus services that does not bring you to destination. This has actually prompted people to taking cabs and driving. Imagine waiting 40 minutes for 2 buses to get from Point A to Point B plus a 40 minutes bus trip. 80 minutes!
(06) Smaller buses should be deployed to bus services with lesser demand. Look at HongKong's light bus. It can take around 20 people. Frequencies of bus services can be improved. 20 minutes for a 40 seater bus, why not a 10 minute wait for a 20 seater bus.
-
honey comb maps singapore island
do not count actual route or distance travel
as long as within certain honey comb numbers the fare should be minimum.
like latest they encourage tranfer rebate, this should be practice long ago.
more transfer more rebate.
information like Maximum fare hike, these information should be more publicity,
within 120 minute, as long as different SBS transits buses, maximum fare S$1.90.
but detail not so clear to public.
Free travel for senior citizen, and school children.
do away with different timing window allow period.
different operators different timing to enjoy concession.
-
the fare cap system has been abolished
-
Originally posted by Junyang700:
(02) The new Wheel-Chair Accessible (WAB) Bus was meant to cater to the needs for the disabled, as well as benefit the elderly from stepless boarding. However, they have neglected the seats. There are practically no seats on the bus and most of the time, the elderly end up standing, inconveniencing them. 4 seats for elderly in fact, to be precise, as the rest of the seats are accessible by walking up the stairs. And lesser and lesser seats for everyone.
the elderly being able to have a seat is still dependent on the passengers' part. whether the passengers are willing to give up their seats to the elderly is still up to them so if they are not willing to do so, not much can be done because passengers are already encouraged to give up their seats to the elderly. not much can be done either about lesser seats for WAB buses because they need to have enough space for the wheelchair to come into the bus and because it is up to SBST or the bodywork company to decide the number of seats in the bus.
-
Originally posted by Junyang700:
What I can suggest:
(01) Most bus services today call on too many bus stops. They make too many inner rounds and thus, travelling is not as smooth as it seems because it takes a long time to travel from Point A to Point B. Bus services should be more direct and amended accordingly.
(02) The new Wheel-Chair Accessible (WAB) Bus was meant to cater to the needs for the disabled, as well as benefit the elderly from stepless boarding. However, they have neglected the seats. There are practically no seats on the bus and most of the time, the elderly end up standing, inconveniencing them. 4 seats for elderly in fact, to be precise, as the rest of the seats are accessible by walking up the stairs. And lesser and lesser seats for everyone.
(03) There are too many restrictions on bus services. PTC has to approve every single route and one of which is that a SBST service which needs to cut through a SMRT territory must cut through the shortest route, or best should not even enter its territory at all, likewise the converse. For example, SBST cannot introduce a bus service from Ang Mo Kio To Yishun, even if they wanted to, as there is a restriction on it. This has prevented many cross-territorial routes from operations.
(04) Long wait for buses. Most bus services come between the frequencies of 12 - 15 minutes. This has prevented people from taking public transport. Bus services should be rationalised, merged to have more buses operating on fewer routes.
(05) Too many transfers. With the long wait plus bus services that does not bring you to destination. This has actually prompted people to taking cabs and driving. Imagine waiting 40 minutes for 2 buses to get from Point A to Point B plus a 40 minutes bus trip. 80 minutes!
(06) Smaller buses should be deployed to bus services with lesser demand. Look at HongKong's light bus. It can take around 20 people. Frequencies of bus services can be improved. 20 minutes for a 40 seater bus, why not a 10 minute wait for a 20 seater bus.
Let me share my views on your points. Note that in what I share, there is no right or wrong answer. It is just a personal opinion.(01) Most bus services today call on too many bus stops. They make too many inner rounds and thus, travelling is not as smooth as it seems because it takes a long time to travel from Point A to Point B. Bus services should be more direct and amended accordingly.
Skipping stops is already currently practised in Mainly Victoria St/Hill St, New Bridge Road/Eu Tong Sen St and Orchard Road. All the Services that pass by these places are divided into two groups. At alternate stops, you can board Group A Services and Group B Services respectively. For example, Services 007, 014, 014E, 016, 036, 077, 106, 111, 124, 162, 162M, 167, 171, 174, 174E, 175, 190, 502, 502A, 502B, 518, 518A, 518B, 700, 700A, NR6, NR7, 1N, 2N, 3N, 4N, 5N, 6N, 7N and 8N calls at Dhoby Ghaut Stn while Services 064, 065 139, 576, 578, 579, 581, NR6 and NR7 calls at Aft Macdonald Hse. Skipping stops cannot be practised outside town when bus stops are located further apart.
(02) The new Wheel-Chair Accessible (WAB) Bus was meant to cater to the needs for the disabled, as well as benefit the elderly from stepless boarding. However, they have neglected the seats. There are practically no seats on the bus and most of the time, the elderly end up standing, inconveniencing them. 4 seats for elderly in fact, to be precise, as the rest of the seats are accessible by walking up the stairs. And lesser and lesser seats for everyone.
This is also what I exactly feel about and what I have been stressing about but for this, we really need to work out a "win-win solution". As I can see and suggested from other sources, one solution to consider could be to have only one WAB space as we do not need so have so many PIWs taking our buses. But somehow many of my fellow bus enthusiasts seems to be very against this idea. Another solution I can think of might be to purchase more Double Decks in the long run to improve passenger comfort greatly. However, I would also like to add on a potential problem that SBS Transit or SMRT Buses might face eventually years down the road when all single decks are replaced by such WAB models. Have the operators ever asked themselves how are they going to ensure enough seats to run their Premium Services (Those that use Single decks currently) and Cityshopper Services where standing is prohibited? Unless they want to use double decks for all of such services, but then it is a waste of resources.
(03) There are too many restrictions on bus services. PTC has to approve every single route and one of which is that a SBST service which needs to cut through a SMRT territory must cut through the shortest route, or best should not even enter its territory at all, likewise the converse. For example, SBST cannot introduce a bus service from Ang Mo Kio To Yishun, even if they wanted to, as there is a restriction on it. This has prevented many cross-territorial routes from operations.
This is a factor that fails to let our bus operators realise their full service potential. The PTC will come out with reasons such a MRT duplications, etc. If a certain route duplicates a MRT line and sees reasonable demand, the route serves as another good choice of transport as an alternative to the MRT where you hardly get a seat toward the City. This can really encourage people to switch to public transport. In general there would also be more chances for direct Services without these restrictions. With more direct Services, there again more people would be encouraged to switch to public transport. For example, the Cityshopper Services do not allow boarding at the respective interchanges because this will "duplicate the MRT". If it allows boarding at the respective interchanges, there again there would be more passengers willing to pay the $3.30 fare for a guaranteed seat.
(04) Long wait for buses. Most bus services come between the frequencies of 12 - 15 minutes. This has prevented people from taking public transport. Bus services should be rationalised, merged to have more buses operating on fewer routes.
I do not fully agree to this. The frequency of Bus Services should be worked out differently on respective Services based on demand.
(05) Too many transfers. With the long wait plus bus services that does not bring you to destination. This has actually prompted people to taking cabs and driving. Imagine waiting 40 minutes for 2 buses to get from Point A to Point B plus a 40 minutes bus trip. 80 minutes!
This explains the need for more Services to connect the far ends, such as Pasir Ris/Tampines to Jurong East/Boon Lay via the expressways. A few examples of such Services would be Services 161, 168, 969. This problem also varies across different residential towns. Places like Bedok has many direct Services to many places which many SMRT Territories do not have much direct Services.
06) Smaller buses should be deployed to bus services with lesser demand. Look at HongKong's light bus. It can take around 20 people. Frequencies of bus services can be improved. 20 minutes for a 40 seater bus, why not a 10 minute wait for a 20 seater bus.
Again, this varies across different Services's respective demands at different times of the day. So I feel that this can't really be worked out easily.
Evaluation
Generally, I feel that to improve our Service standards we should look at Hong Kong's transport system. They have much more Double Decks than we do, head rests on seats and bodywork of much higher standard such as Alexender Dennis. This shows that they really reach out to their passengers which is what all operators should follow.
-
To SBS2695H.
if i'm your english teacher and i look at your answer to junyang700's first comment, i'll just take a red pen and cross out your answer. simply for not debating it to the point being put across.
and of course i'll be sad. coz you're my student. and your effort in writing so long goes nowhere.
-
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
Let me share my views on your points. Note that in what I share, there is no right or wrong answer. It is just a personal opinion.(01) Most bus services today call on too many bus stops. They make too many inner rounds and thus, travelling is not as smooth as it seems because it takes a long time to travel from Point A to Point B. Bus services should be more direct and amended accordingly.
Skipping stops is already currently practised in Mainly Victoria St/Hill St, New Bridge Road/Eu Tong Sen St and Orchard Road. All the Services that pass by these places are divided into two groups. At alternate stops, you can board Group A Services and Group B Services respectively. For example, Services 007, 014, 014E, 016, 036, 077, 106, 111, 124, 162, 162M, 167, 171, 174, 174E, 175, 190, 502, 502A, 502B, 518, 518A, 518B, 700, 700A, NR6, NR7, 1N, 2N, 3N, 4N, 5N, 6N, 7N and 8N calls at Dhoby Ghaut Stn while Services 064, 065 139, 576, 578, 579, 581, NR6 and NR7 calls at Aft Macdonald Hse. Skipping stops cannot be practised outside town when bus stops are located further apart.
(02) The new Wheel-Chair Accessible (WAB) Bus was meant to cater to the needs for the disabled, as well as benefit the elderly from stepless boarding. However, they have neglected the seats. There are practically no seats on the bus and most of the time, the elderly end up standing, inconveniencing them. 4 seats for elderly in fact, to be precise, as the rest of the seats are accessible by walking up the stairs. And lesser and lesser seats for everyone.
This is also what I exactly feel about and what I have been stressing about but for this, we really need to work out a "win-win solution". As I can see and suggested from other sources, one solution to consider could be to have only one WAB space as we do not need so have so many PIWs taking our buses. But somehow many of my fellow bus enthusiasts seems to be very against this idea. Another solution I can think of might be to purchase more Double Decks in the long run to improve passenger comfort greatly. However, I would also like to add on a potential problem that SBS Transit or SMRT Buses might face eventually years down the road when all single decks are replaced by such WAB models. Have the operators ever asked themselves how are they going to ensure enough seats to run their Premium Services (Those that use Single decks currently) and Cityshopper Services where standing is prohibited? Unless they want to use double decks for all of such services, but then it is a waste of resources.
(03) There are too many restrictions on bus services. PTC has to approve every single route and one of which is that a SBST service which needs to cut through a SMRT territory must cut through the shortest route, or best should not even enter its territory at all, likewise the converse. For example, SBST cannot introduce a bus service from Ang Mo Kio To Yishun, even if they wanted to, as there is a restriction on it. This has prevented many cross-territorial routes from operations.
This is a factor that fails to let our bus operators realise their full service potential. The PTC will come out with reasons such a MRT duplications, etc. If a certain route duplicates a MRT line and sees reasonable demand, the route serves as another good choice of transport as an alternative to the MRT where you hardly get a seat toward the City. This can really encourage people to switch to public transport. In general there would also be more chances for direct Services without these restrictions. With more direct Services, there again more people would be encouraged to switch to public transport. For example, the Cityshopper Services do not allow boarding at the respective interchanges because this will "duplicate the MRT". If it allows boarding at the respective interchanges, there again there would be more passengers willing to pay the $3.30 fare for a guaranteed seat.
(04) Long wait for buses. Most bus services come between the frequencies of 12 - 15 minutes. This has prevented people from taking public transport. Bus services should be rationalised, merged to have more buses operating on fewer routes.
I do not fully agree to this. The frequency of Bus Services should be worked out differently on respective Services based on demand.
(05) Too many transfers. With the long wait plus bus services that does not bring you to destination. This has actually prompted people to taking cabs and driving. Imagine waiting 40 minutes for 2 buses to get from Point A to Point B plus a 40 minutes bus trip. 80 minutes!
This explains the need for more Services to connect the far ends, such as Pasir Ris/Tampines to Jurong East/Boon Lay via the expressways. A few examples of such Services would be Service 161, 168, 969. This problem also varies across different residential towns. Places like Bedok has many direct Services to many places which many SMRT Territories do not have much direct Services.
06) Smaller buses should be deployed to bus services with lesser demand. Look at HongKong's light bus. It can take around 20 people. Frequencies of bus services can be improved. 20 minutes for a 40 seater bus, why not a 10 minute wait for a 20 seater bus.
Again, this varies across different Services's respective demands at different times of the day. So I feel that this can't really be worked out easily.
Evaluation
Generally, I feel that to improve our Service standards we should look at Hong Kong's transport system. They have much more Double Decks than we do, head rests on seats and bodywork of much higher standard such as Alexender Dennis. This shows that they really reach out to their passengers which is what all operators should follow.
I can't be bothered to read your other points, but let me pinpoint on just one point you're talking about.(02) Quoted from your post: "However, I would also like to add on a potential problem that SBS Transit or SMRT Buses might face eventually years down the road when all single decks are replaced by such WAB models. Have the operators ever asked themselves how are they going to ensure enough seats to run their Premium Services (Those that use Single decks currently) and Cityshopper Services where standing is prohibited? Unless they want to use double decks for all of such services, but then it is a waste of resources."
Have you ever asked yourself, 20 years down the road when there are so many more elderly than before today, that the operators have ensured that there are adequate wheelchair spaces to cater to the special needs of these disabled?
I believe you have not been taught the model of the population in Singapore. We are facing an ageing population due to the decrease of birth rates in Singapore. Eventually, the ratio of the elderly-dependent to the young-dependent plus the working population would be getting smaller. Overtime, as people turn old, medical and healthcare services need to be able to cater to these elderly. Similarly, our public transport system needs to be elderly-friendly too. Are you going to still expect the disabled to take the MRT everytime they need to instead of buses which are so much accessible. (And if it so happens that they live super far away from an MRT station, they have to wheel themselves there???)
Please change your mindset. I'm not scolding you or what, you have to realise that in today's context, yes the Premium services cater to the working population, but we also need to cater to the disabled so that they can work and live just like normal human beings, like us. Would you mind standing then, because you're an able-bodied citizen?
-
Originally posted by BusSpeeder:
the elderly being able to have a seat is still dependent on the passengers' part. whether the passengers are willing to give up their seats to the elderly is still up to them so if they are not willing to do so, not much can be done because passengers are already encouraged to give up their seats to the elderly. not much can be done either about lesser seats for WAB buses because they need to have enough space for the wheelchair to come into the bus and because it is up to SBST or the bodywork company to decide the number of seats in the bus.
Agreeable. But the problem is... Without walking up the step, the new bus has only 4 seats! 5 elderly would mean one has to either stand or walk up the stair. The rest of them are accessible through a small step, which is quite dangerous for the elderly especially when the bus has already started moving by the time they reach there. Don't the older DM3500 and Striders serve better the elderly? My Thought...
-
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
Let me share my views on your points. Note that in what I share, there is no right or wrong answer. It is just a personal opinion.(01) Most bus services today call on too many bus stops. They make too many inner rounds and thus, travelling is not as smooth as it seems because it takes a long time to travel from Point A to Point B. Bus services should be more direct and amended accordingly.
Skipping stops is already currently practised in Mainly Victoria St/Hill St, New Bridge Road/Eu Tong Sen St and Orchard Road. All the Services that pass by these places are divided into two groups. At alternate stops, you can board Group A Services and Group B Services respectively. For example, Services 007, 014, 014E, 016, 036, 077, 106, 111, 124, 162, 162M, 167, 171, 174, 174E, 175, 190, 502, 502A, 502B, 518, 518A, 518B, 700, 700A, NR6, NR7, 1N, 2N, 3N, 4N, 5N, 6N, 7N and 8N calls at Dhoby Ghaut Stn while Services 064, 065 139, 576, 578, 579, 581, NR6 and NR7 calls at Aft Macdonald Hse. Skipping stops cannot be practised outside town when bus stops are located further apart.
Wrong to say about these services skipping stops. They do not skip. The bus stops are built closer than the neighbourhood bus stops. The reason they make these bus services stop alternatively is that there are simply too many bus services stopping at one bus stop. Hence, the staggering of bus services to 2 bus stops... Just like the bus interchange, you do not say it skips all the berth.
-
hmmm... maintain their bus better,remove buses tt are uncomfortable,and fit in more WAB buses with many seats too..i suggest SBS and SMRT to buy WAB DD,space for WAB and also for passengers,SMRT>to clean up their bus regularly ,SBS>increase of speed,please!suggest tvm to be on all buses.
-
Originally posted by Roderick a.k.a Guai Kia:
hmmm…
maintain their bus better,remove buses tt are uncomfortable,and fit in more WAB buses with many seats too..i suggest SBS and SMRT to buy WAB DD,space for WAB and also for passengers,SMRT>to clean up their bus regularly ,SBS>increase of speed,please!suggest tvm to be on all buses.I feel that you should elaborate more on your points and be more specific in your views about how the public transport system should be improved. For example, you said "maintain their bus better". You need to elaborate on which points of maintenance should be improved, be it the engine condition or cleanliness of the buses. Next, you said "remove buses tt are uncomfortable". I would like to know which model you think is/are uncomfortable. Followed by you saying "fit in more WAB buses with many seats too..", the word "fit in" is not the proper word to use. Probably you are trying to suggest for SBST and SMRT to purchase more WAB Buses with more seats fitted. You should also not use the word "many seats" as it just does not sound right. With "SMRT>to clean up their bus regularly ,SBS>increase of speed", you are probably trying to suggest for SMRT to improve the cleanliness of their buses and SBS Transit to remove the speed regulators on their buses for improved speed. So please phrase your thoughts correctly. Lastly, you said "suggest tvm to be on all buses". Please explain why you feel that there should be TVM on all buses.
-
-_-" (shakes head)
-
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
I feel that you should elaborate more on your points and be more specific in your views about how the public transport system should be improved. For example, you said "maintain their bus better". You need to elaborate on which points of maintenance should be improved, be it the engine condition or cleanliness of the buses. Next, you said "remove buses tt are uncomfortable". I would like to know which model you think is/are uncomfortable. Followed by you saying "fit in more WAB buses with many seats too..", the word "fit in" is not the proper word to use. Probably you are trying to suggest for SBST and SMRT to purchase more WAB Buses with more seats fitted. You should also not use the word "many seats" as it just does not sound right. With "SMRT>to clean up their bus regularly ,SBS>increase of speed", you are probably trying to suggest for SMRT to improve the cleanliness of their buses and SBS Transit to remove the speed regulators on their buses for improved speed. So please phrase your thoughts correctly. Lastly, you said "suggest tvm to be on all buses". Please explain why you feel that there should be TVM on all buses.
Next time I recommend you to become an auditor, EL teacher etc... -
Originally posted by gorby107:
Next time I recommend you to become an auditor, EL teacher etc...
No need. He will teach his students wrong things.There's isn't any logic seen through his post. He can't even understand SBST well enough and provide information to SBS3758D which MAY lead to him providing wrong information for his project. I would think if he were to doubt his information or even his "daydream", don't post anything.
-
Well now our dear SBS2695H has a new field of expertise. I'm thrilled!
-
Let me chime in on one thing that bus companies seem to be lacking in that no one else seems to be bothering
Human communication.
Somehow, I feel that bus companies in Singapore seem to be rather alienated with the commuters on this aspect, and this reflects thoroughly in their web sites and media releases, among other things. I do praise SBS Transit for updating and reworking their web site some years back to make it more modern and user-friendly, but - as I always say for everything of SBS Transit - there's still room for improvement. As for SMRT, their web site reflects how they have managed to drag the bloodwork and sweat of Ong Teng Cheong into the pits (f.y.i., SMRT encompasses what was then Trans Island Bus Services, a bus company more or less set up by him - the story about him and the MRT needs no retelling) - the whole thing may look professional at first glance, until you peel away this veener to reveal something that was built in a laissez faire manner. Media releases from both bus companies often tend to be about temporary service diversions, or some major route amendment, withdrawal, or introduction, and these often come long after they have been approved by the Public Transport Council and posted onto their web site. Media releases from the bus companies are often worded in an overly formal, serious, monotonous, and (to put it simply) "dead", though SBS Transit has been experimenting with more informal language in recent years. Both bus companies don't seem to hold enough dialogue with their commuters (though I still remember the SBS Transit dialogue over tea sessions (or something like that) sometime back - I participated in one), and feedback often needs to be routed through overly-formal and rigid "proper feedback channels" (a symptom of the pervasiveness of the military in our lives?). Not many people also know the hotline numbers to call when they have a problem with the bus companies (for the record, SBS Transit's is 1800 287 2727, and SMRT's is 1800 336 8900), resulting in what I call "Straits Times Forum or Stomp it Syndrome"; such indirect communication creates headaches for the bus companies - something that could have been rather private between the commuter and the company becomes public, and tarnishes the image of the bus company (which is made worse in this day and age of the internet, where one bad opinion spreaded, no matter how true or false, is enough to completely ruin anything - just read about Windows Vista and the Large Hadron Collider) - and is symptomatic of a communication problem between bus companies and commuters.
Things doesn't have to be this way.
If both SBS Transit and SMRT is to start looking at how they can improve themselves, they must start first on this. And one thing they can do is to become much more transparent than what they are right now - one can't help but feel that the bus companies is being secretive with us commuters - and that even applies to SBS Transit to some extent (although I will grade SMRT as being higher up on the ladder of secretiveness). .
For starters, bus companies should be bolder - much bolder - at how they release new information. Planning to buy new bus models? Announce it even before the first order is made; tell us what commuter enhancements we can expect from the new bus models, and gather feedback from us the commuters so improvements can be made even before the first screw is put on the first chassis of the new buses. Bringing in demonstrators? Tell us about it; let us know what enhancements are there in the bus, tell us where it is deployed, and have someone stationed on the demonstrator bus to take suggestions on how the bus could be improved in an informal manner, rather than having commuters fill out forms, when it is on passenger service. New bus routes? Involve us commuters in the planning stage when new bus routes are being drawn up; consider our feedback, show us possible alignments for us to comment on, and tell us when the route is approved by the P.T.C. and when we can expect this new route. If it's rejected, tell us why, and let us know our options if any. I know, the Land Transport Authority is going to take over planning of bus routes soon, but in the meantime, bus companies should establish this tradition for L.T.A. to follow.
The recent wheelchair-accessible fiasco could have been avoided if SBS Transit had adopted this kind of transparency in the first place - if the commuters were briefed about the way wheelchair-accessible buses are deployed and run, people won't be so confused. The commuters could have even come up with a suggestion in the first place to prevent this kind of mistake from happening.
SBS3758D made a suggestion about having a mobile bus museum to spread awareness about the advantages of public transport, and it's an idea I'm really liking. SBS Transit is currently phasing out their older bus models; either they or the authorities can consider saving some of them and turn them into such museums on wheels. To extend the idea further, they can consider having a several specific mobile bus museums targeted to a wider auidence, with each targeted for a specific group - for example, one for children (which can make visits to schools regularly), one for the working crowd, one for the middle and upper class populace (who often shun public transportation), and so on. This idea also helps contribute to removing the wall of non-communication between bus companies and commuters; bus companies can make use of such museum events to hear feedback, suggestions, and grouses from the public - and this may also include non-users of public transport, which could provide valuable insights on how their service standards can be improved for that auidence.
I hope my ideas and suggestions have been of help, and I do hope the authorities and companies take my ideas seriously.
-
I have no comments about the secrecy and transparency thing. I don't think that they have to be transparent in all its dealings, though it would be much appreciated that lines of communicaton especially with regards to the WAB incident could be strengthened.
And I disagree with the suggestion that the media release should be more lively and interesting. If you are pretty ignorant on how press releases work, I think you better not chime in your two cents worth. Press releases are meant to be news-like and formal in nature. You can look at any company's media release. It's written in the news like structure. The press release also helps media outlets to adapt the information for their news reporting without having to go through much edit. Some lazy media outlets would just reproduce the whole media release from the press company verbatim as a news story.
Secondly, you can't expect SBST to release news about every single demonstrator it receives or every single bus model it buys to the media not if the order isn't significant. Even if they issued a press release to the media, the media might not run the story if there are other competing and far more news-worthy stories.
-
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
I feel that you should elaborate more on your points and be more specific in your views about how the public transport system should be improved. For example, you said "maintain their bus better". You need to elaborate on which points of maintenance should be improved, be it the engine condition or cleanliness of the buses. Next, you said "remove buses tt are uncomfortable". I would like to know which model you think is/are uncomfortable. Followed by you saying "fit in more WAB buses with many seats too..", the word "fit in" is not the proper word to use. Probably you are trying to suggest for SBST and SMRT to purchase more WAB Buses with more seats fitted. You should also not use the word "many seats" as it just does not sound right. With "SMRT>to clean up their bus regularly ,SBS>increase of speed", you are probably trying to suggest for SMRT to improve the cleanliness of their buses and SBS Transit to remove the speed regulators on their buses for improved speed. So please phrase your thoughts correctly. Lastly, you said "suggest tvm to be on all buses". Please explain why you feel that there should be TVM on all buses.
i think its way better than your morbid elaboration
-
To Desmond:
posts here are just a rough guide.
everyone has their own opinion and should be given the opportunity to contribute on their notion of the topic without qualms of getting blasted collectively by forumnites but there should also be a decree of reliable and sensible judgment particularly towards absurd and preposterous posts being observed when scrutinising the views posted up here. for ludicrous posts, just ignore to elude conflict.
-
Mr 2695 please think before you speak
Observe what the person is trying to say
Also check the mood and tone
Note that your answers are shallow like a four year old
Look at the company's point of view
Ensure that what you say, answers the situation or gives link to the topic of the matter
Best: Dont post!
-
Originally posted by SBS2695H:
(02) The new Wheel-Chair Accessible (WAB) Bus was meant to cater to the needs for the disabled, as well as benefit the elderly from stepless boarding. However, they have neglected the seats. There are practically no seats on the bus and most of the time, the elderly end up standing, inconveniencing them. 4 seats for elderly in fact, to be precise, as the rest of the seats are accessible by walking up the stairs. And lesser and lesser seats for everyone.
This is also what I exactly feel about and what I have been stressing about but for this, we really need to work out a "win-win solution". As I can see and suggested from other sources, one solution to consider could be to have only one WAB space as we do not need so have so many PIWs taking our buses. But somehow many of my fellow bus enthusiasts seems to be very against this idea. Another solution I can think of might be to purchase more Double Decks in the long run to improve passenger comfort greatly. However, I would also like to add on a potential problem that SBS Transit or SMRT Buses might face eventually years down the road when all single decks are replaced by such WAB models. Have the operators ever asked themselves how are they going to ensure enough seats to run their Premium Services (Those that use Single decks currently) and Cityshopper Services where standing is prohibited? Unless they want to use double decks for all of such services, but then it is a waste of resources.
This shows that you are only thinking of the present not in the future. Are you going to guarantee that there will be no working people that are disabled??? Seriously think about it, years down the road there will be many elderly people in singapore. Obviously, there will also be wheelchair-bound people. If they don't deploy WAB, do you expect to let them wheel themselves to take MRT. What happens if the MRT is located far away?
-
Originally posted by Zilchster:
I have no comments about the secrecy and transparency thing. I don't think that they have to be transparent in all its dealings, though it would be much appreciated that lines of communicaton especially with regards to the WAB incident could be strengthened.
And I disagree with the suggestion that the media release should be more lively and interesting. If you are pretty ignorant on how press releases work, I think you better not chime in your two cents worth. Press releases are meant to be news-like and formal in nature. You can look at any company's media release. It's written in the news like structure. The press release also helps media outlets to adapt the information for their news reporting without having to go through much edit. Some lazy media outlets would just reproduce the whole media release from the press company verbatim as a news story.
Secondly, you can't expect SBST to release news about every single demonstrator it receives or every single bus model it buys to the media not if the order isn't significant. Even if they issued a press release to the media, the media might not run the story if there are other competing and far more news-worthy stories.
On your first point, I guess I concede, more or less .Looking closely at SBS Transit's press releases, I feel they have done well on this point, but SMRT's press releases still need to be less formal and "government-like". Still, I could appreciate if some of the press releases use more casual language rather than sticking to neologisms that baffles us commuters.
I think I missed the chance to elaborate on this point: when I asked for press and media releases to be less formal, I wasn't calling for a blanket de-formalisation of all press releases; bad news (eg. service disruptions, withdrawals, etc.) should be carried in a formal and serious tone - that can't be argued against. However, for good news (eg. route introductions, new bus fleets, etc.), a somewhat less formal and more casual language could be appropriate. SBS Transit has done well on this point, but SMRT's press releases on such things, I feel, are still rather formal and monotonous in tone.
On your second point, let me elaborate further. The bus companies may need to not talk much about their demonstrators if they are of the more technical type (eg. mechanical improvements, etc.), which most commuters don't care about. However, if the demonstrator improves on something that is highly visible to the commuter (eg. low floor design, ramps, passenger information systems, etc.), I feel bus commuters should have knowledge of such demonstrators so they may have the opportunity to give feedback on such features; bus companies can use such feedback to gauge commuter response to such new features so they can know what features to implement or improve on in future production bus models. On hindsight, if SBS Transit released their Scania K230UB demonstrator (SBS 8033D) earlier in it's original two-ramp and seating configuration layout in the way I suggested, they could had been able to test some of their later-dropped ideas in a real-world situationon and probably also caught some of the problems that plague the Scania K230UB buses before they had to scramble around trying to fix them in later batches of the production models.
I agree with you that the idea about releasing press releases about every new bus fleet is not a realistic idea, but maybe it was because you were thinking a bit further out than me. Yes, more important news items will crowd out comparably trivia news about new bus fleets, but not all bus fleet introductions need to go that far. For the more major bus fleet introductions that feature some kind of major improvement over prior bus fleets, they can make a major press release about it, but for the more minor fleet additions, probably a minor mention on their web sites could suffice; bus companies can do this to let the commuters be aware that they are not neglecting their bus fleets.