Your wishes here for buses in 2010
-
Originally posted by sangjoon52:
163 take over by SMRT, then extend route to Punggol.
SBS 9888 Y perm on sv410.
SBST buy 500 more B9TLs.
Sv23 and 166 with full B9TL fleet.
SMRT buy 500 OC500LE.
SMRT exchange all bendies with new ones, 851 with full new bendy fleet.
1) No way it could happen
2) NIL
3) It would be boring to see alot of B9TLs
4) NIL
5) SMRT bought 134 OCs, and somemore, already got people felt bored of spotting OCs.
6) NIL -
Originally posted by SMB66X:
5) SMRT bought 134 OCs, and somemore, already got people felt bored of spotting OCs.
Especially, the WL OCs had permed 187 and 961. Unless any special OC cameos on other WLDEP services. -
Originally posted by TIB657M:
Especially, the WL OCs had permed 187 and 961. Unless any special OC cameos on other WLDEP services.Like SMB128B on 964
-
deleted
-
Originally posted by TIB657M:
So far, SMB119C, SMB120Y, SMB121U, SMB128B, SMB129Z, SMB130T and SMB134H did more than 2 WLDEP services.Apart from 187 and WL 961,
SMB119C appeared on WL 171 and 901
SMB120Y appeared on WL 969
SMB121U appeared on 963
SMB128B appeared on 178, 964
SMB129Z appeared on 178, 187/911E*, 857, 960
SMB130T appeared on WL 965
SMB134H appeared on 911 (non x-over)134H appear on 911E also.
-
My wish is perhaps more variety of buses on the roads as that is the primary motivation of people spotting buses.
-
Nobody spotted the OC that appear on 173 last saturday? I could nt see the rego sadly.... :(
-
Originally posted by tanjun:
My wish is perhaps more variety of buses on the roads as that is the primary motivation of people spotting buses.
yea...looks like aft the vo3x go it will be mainly b9s and kubs:( -
Originally posted by Edan2009:
Nobody spotted the OC that appear on 173 last saturday? I could nt see the rego sadly.... :(
wrong thread?
-
Originally posted by sangjoon52:
163 take over by SMRT, then extend route to Punggol.
Service 163 was ever taken over by Tibs before in Dec 1995, but bounced back to SBST in Dec 1999
-
Originally posted by One Harmonius Blend:
you are right, but if that's the case, what are the 27 SPs lying there @ AM?
and the SPs there are on par with WL though
SMRT do not have sufficient drivers to improve their freq.that is e reasons for e SP buses there.
-
27 SP is not a full time SP BTW with 4 buses standby @ Yishun Interchange at night.More old buses new buses are put on standby.
-
Originally posted by One Harmonius Blend:
WL-Yishun isn't that far off
What about 960? why no-one complained about that service why it should go half AM?
173 should stay
Then how bout 171 WL side have to end trips @ MCT?173 under WL is complete joke.167 should be full WL.856 IS NOT about distance solely,Its about supplement trips from Yis-WDL.Other side from WDL-Yis during AM peak ardy packed thats explain why 851 4 bendys needed for the crossover.965 also distance not far why must need 2 depot?
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Then how bout 171 WL side have to end trips @ MCT?173 under WL is complete joke.167 should be full WL.856 IS NOT about distance solely,Its about supplement trips from Yis-WDL.Other side from WDL-Yis during AM peak ardy packed thats explain why 851 4 bendys needed for the crossover.965 also distance not far why must need 2 depot?
No, like i mentioned earlier, Batok isn't far off from WL, provided you know the short cut, it's roughly the same time from WL coming down to boon lay, so it should stay.
Side track a bit, If that's the case, then why 168 SLs doesnt have to complain about the distance, all the way from AMK somemore to start at WL, BN needless to say, because it's pretty near
-
Originally posted by One Harmonius Blend:
No, like i mentioned earlier, Batok isn't far off from WL, provided you know the short cut, it's roughly the same time from WL coming down to boon lay, so it should stay.
Side track a bit, If that's the case, then why 168 SLs doesnt have to complain about the distance, all the way from AMK somemore to start at WL, BN needless to say, because it's pretty near
Does common sense tell you that for 168 (and 161 previously), AM was the closest place to WRI? Even if they find it long they cannot complain - it's part of their job anyhow and off-servicing counts under their payhour too.171 is totally stupid to make it partially WL, that's because both AM and WL drivers change shifts at Yishun and AM is closer to MCT than WL.
965 should be totally under WL - AM drivers change shift at WRI which makes it really stupid. That even though AM helps to do a few morning trips from Sengkang.
And in fact if you look at it, making 857 WL is stupid too. I don't care what historical reason there is about 857 but the fact is that AM is closer to Suntec for downroute than WL.
I prefer BB under KJ though - it's faster than from WL. KJ is closer to Boon Lay too. WL should take back Bukit Panjang even though KJ is nearer.
So it's really not about the distance but the feasibility and the part about common sense in planning that counts. Fuel is precious and thus should not be wasted on such extra daily routine routings. Even a mere 5 minutes more of journey per bus adds up to alot of fuel wasted if you go by the masses.
Even SBST makes such wastings in their shift plannings though. A very classic example is 9889U's slot on 166 - both morning and afternoon S shifts start AND end at Ang Mo Kio. So it is really a wastage of fuel to put it at BB instead of AM.
-
Originally posted by TIB1232Z:
Does common sense tell you that for 168 (and 161 previously), AM was the closest place to WRI? Even if they find it long they cannot complain - it's part of their job anyhow and off-servicing counts under their payhour too.171 is totally stupid to make it partially WL, that's because both AM and WL drivers change shifts at Yishun and AM is closer to MCT than WL.
And in fact if you look at it, making 857 WL is stupid too. I don't care what historical reason there is about 857 but the fact is that AM is closer to Suntec for downroute than WL.
I prefer BB under KJ though - it's faster than from WL. KJ is closer to Boon Lay too. WL should take back Bukit Panjang even though KJ is nearer.
857 going under WL's control, i am fine with that decision, as it is a loop service, and it is not terminating at there
171's decision to go partial WL should stand don't see anything wrong with it though, AMK-wise to start off at MCT, no problems there, it's solved. period
857 going under WL's control, i am fine with that decision, as it is a loop service, and it is not terminating at there. as for whether Suntec is near AMK or not, i'll check out someday.
judging by your logic, if 857 should go under AMK's control, shouldnt 858 too?
-
Originally posted by One Harmonius Blend:
Hallo by making 171 AM start shift from MCT will create more parking issues.Layover/change shift itself take an average 8-18mins there.Reason why SMRT depot supervisor emphasize why 75,960 & 77 cant be partial AMDEP.WLDEP to BNL nearer if you know short cut,Who r u kidding?You think all short cut route bendy can ply one?Obviously you're senseless.980 should be majority WLDEP.AMDEP one can start at Lor 1 together with 961 & 985.The terminal itself have proper parking space except bendy.Somemore 853 rest time is short there.Ditto for 985 KJ ones.
-
A UD to cameo on 176 and i sit on it b4 the last 1 dereg on 26 Feb 2010
-
Don't want talk to him liao, can vomit blood one. He would only insist his own way and counter everyone else views. =.="
-
Originally posted by Veyron16.4:
A UD to cameo on 176 and i sit on it b4 the last 1 dereg on 26 Feb 2010
No more UD on KJDEP services le.
Anyway, I also do hope that UD can spam on other WLDEP/AMDEP services other than 'restricted services' like: 178, 852, 853 and 855. -
Originally posted by TIB657M:
No more UD on KJDEP services le.
Anyway, I also do hope that UD can spam on other WLDEP/AMDEP services other than 'restricted services' like: 178, 852, 853 and 855.187! :P
-
Originally posted by TIB657M:
No more UD on KJDEP services le.
Anyway, I also do hope that UD can spam on other WLDEP/AMDEP services other than 'restricted services' like: 178, 852, 853 and 855.
Still waiting for the UDs to cameo on 67 and 985 before they go off..... -
Originally posted by TIB657M:
No more UD on KJDEP services le.
Anyway, I also do hope that UD can spam on other WLDEP/AMDEP services other than 'restricted services' like: 178, 852, 853 and 855.what about WL? are they gone yet?
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Hallo by making 171 AM start shift from MCT will create more parking issues.Layover/change shift itself take an average 8-18mins there.Reason why SMRT depot supervisor emphasize why 75,960 & 77 cant be partial AMDEP.WLDEP to BNL nearer if you know short cut,Who r u kidding?You think all short cut route bendy can ply one?Obviously you're senseless.980 should be majority WLDEP.AMDEP one can start at Lor 1 together with 961 & 985.The terminal itself have proper parking space except bendy.Somemore 853 rest time is short there.Ditto for 985 KJ ones.
WL-BNL takes atleast 20 to 1/2 an hour, i kid you not
Downroute to start off at their respective interchange, as for bendies, i'm not sure, but i am sure they often use BKE to downroute to BNL. as simple as that. If you think i am, so be it, i cant force you. and no, 980 should stay 50:50, not majority WL
and do you expect all fleets to start at the same time? no, there's a fair amount of fleeting to start with at their respective interchange.
-