LTA's Bus Service Enhancement Programme (BSEP)
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
"Channelling to trains that MUCH" doesn't mean that trains DO NOT get funds? MUCH =/= NOTHING
Hello, certain BSEP improvements wasn't even necessary, and it's minor few. Further more, I didn't even state which operators, and you don't even ask
, anyhow assumed
again? WOW~ You should see
services 178/925. With or without the BSEP, they still have the
almost the same frequency, not even necessary. Your last sentences seriously made me know that you don't even think
Do
you think the govt. plan this idea out and ended up not benefitting
in the end? -.-" Not criticising them but seriously, who will give
free stuff w/o benefitting? And come on..you should seriously compare Woodlands Interchange jam with other country first before talk cock here, or even those highway jams. Do you even see it often now? If you have observed, the flow is much smoother already, compared to the past.
frankly speaking Sv925 need these buses esp during peak hours.. cos the 177 crossover does not appear in the am/pm peak hours.. there are many workers inside Kranji/Sungei Kadet area that are without company transports.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
I feel LTA/SBST should have done a better job with designing the bus routes though.
According to me 4 is the best, followed with 50. The routing of 116 and 120 is to some extent poor. These services do not have good loading even in peak hours.
why you must keep on insisting that the new services have good loading? if the new servies are expected to have good loading, they should been long introduce by SBST long time back... The issue is that the loading wont be good, and that why need BSEP to help to introduce these new bus services instead.. BSEP is to help make travel more easy and to help to relieve the load of other bus services...
Total no of buses need for Sv4/50/116/120 is around 35... the cost of these buses alone cost almost S$8 million?
-
LTA should put a few BSEP buses on Sv72B... SBST is currently putting 13 SDs on this Sv72B to cater for the students crowds, but the revenue they are getting i think is very little, considering that most of the students are transferring from MRT.....
If LTA can put a few BSEP buses and SBST can better make use of these buses for other services instead..
and SBST have to put 2 or 3 inspectors at the boarding points daily as well plus one more at the alighting point... all these are additional costs to them also... even SMRT also deploy 2-3 CSO holding Sv72B rear detso near the boarding points to ensure that queue are properly form up...
-
So they should withdraw some buses out of this svc and create a SWT 265A from AMK Int to ITE and throw SP buses there? But come to think of it, the parking space is already very limited in AMK Int and some buses have to park at the side of the kerb where they park the bus or whatever you call it.
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
frankly speaking Sv925 need these buses esp during peak hours.. cos the 177 crossover does not appear in the am/pm peak hours.. there are many workers inside Kranji/Sungei Kadet area that are without company transports.
Hmm, I didn't see that. But during off peak hours, the bus is just transporting 1-2 people the least(or even non)~ :/ Find it wasted.
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
Hmm, I didn't see that. But during off peak hours, the bus is just transporting 1-2 people the least(or even non)~ :/ Find it wasted.
Though never seen 925 pax full till the entrance, But i see that during peak hours, There is alot of pax riding 925
-
925 alrdy saved by merging 204 & 208 together... still want to hiam.. as though Jurong Ind Est svs off peak load very good like that
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
Though never seen 925 pax full till the entrance, But i see that during peak hours, There is alot of pax riding 925
Then they can just boost the fleet with split shift buses, and instead of BSEP, can use normal buses already mah? If I am not wrong, the BSEP bus operates on full day(until 7/8). Isn't it much fuel saving then to have more extra buses running on peak hours instead of full day?
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
860 had a 7th bus
3029J
at around 9-10am
860 is full (towards KTB)
when it return to YIS, it's empty
Took 860 3-4 times recently. On way to Khatib, it is the only bus, so full. On return, 800 is there from Khatib MRT. Why will people take 860 that will go to Ave 3, then turn to Ave 2 and then back to Ring road. Distance fare more.
People rather wait for 800 and take 800 to Ring road instead. So 860 on return journey is not that full. The route should have complemented 800 and should have just returned to Yishun Interchange from Ring Road. This way 860 downward frequency to Khatib would be very good.
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
why you must keep on insisting that the new services have good loading? if the new servies are expected to have good loading, they should been long introduce by SBST long time back... The issue is that the loading wont be good, and that why need BSEP to help to introduce these new bus services instead.. BSEP is to help make travel more easy and to help to relieve the load of other bus services...
Total no of buses need for Sv4/50/116/120 is around 35... the cost of these buses alone cost almost S$8 million?
But look at svc 4 and svc 50 - loading is good. I am just saying, the routing should have been thought about better. 120 hardly 20 pax in the bus during peak hours. 124 takes most load to Harbourfront. If 33 has gone ahead, 120 completely empty to Redhill.
-
Originally posted by SBS 6078 M:
So they should withdraw some buses out of this svc and create a SWT 265A from AMK Int to ITE and throw SP buses there? But come to think of it, the parking space is already very limited in AMK Int and some buses have to park at the side of the kerb where they park the bus or whatever you call it.
There is already 159A/B and 50. Not enough from AMK? Why do you need 265 to be SWT when it does not even go to ITE? -
Originally posted by SBS 6238T:
Speaking about service 116,took SBS 6326Y towards Hougang Central during the morning peak hours just now and i counted about approximately 40 people inside the bus.
Yes peak loading hardly goes more than 40 for this service. If 72 goes before, which it most of the time does, the loading from HG Ave 9 to MRT will be even poor. I have taken 116 during peak hours with just 10-15 pax on board from SGN North Ave 4 to HG MRT.
-
The joke is 116 was introduced to provide faster service for people to SGN North Ave 4 than 315, but people still take 315 to SGN North Ave 4 than 116 because of stop location at NEX
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
Though never seen 925 pax full till the entrance, But i see that during peak hours, There is alot of pax riding 925
Go stand at kranji road bus stop at 5-6 pm n see yourself. Likewise. Go kranji mrt n see from 7-9am.
-
What do you think of the Bus Service Enhancement Programme (BSEP) - effective? Too early to tell? More improvements needed? Do share your views!
-
If a BSEP bus cameos on a non bsep bus svc, is the non bsep svc that the BSEP bus cameoed on is going to Become a BSEP svc?
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
"Channelling to trains that MUCH" doesn't mean that trains DO NOT get funds? MUCH =/= NOTHING
Hello, certain BSEP improvements wasn't even necessary, and it's minor few. Further more, I didn't even state which operators, and you don't even ask
, anyhow assumed
again? WOW~ You should see
services 178/925. With or without the BSEP, they still have the
almost the same frequency, not even necessary. Your last sentences seriously made me know that you don't even think
Do you think the govt. plan this idea out and
ended up not benefitting in the end? -.-" Not criticising them but
seriously, who will give free stuff w/o benefitting?
And come on..you should seriously compare Woodlands Interchange jam with other country first before talk cock here, or even those highway jams. Do you even see it often now? If you have observed, the flow is much smoother already, compared to the past.
Trains get more than bus do. Admit it. They got way more from past till now. Don't just look at BSEP cost $1+b. Look at the big picture.
Even the rolling stock is purchased by LTA
Add in the rail cost + all the signalling + tunnelling...you mean trains "don't get as much"?
As lemon pointed out, 925 did need the BSEP. BANG. Kena shot in the foot again.
Being cynical =/= being smarter than everyone else. If you think that everything the govt does has kickbacks, indirect or not, then I suggest that you go work in LTA and see for yourself what they do. What you say smacks of utter under-appreciation of what its rank and file has done for you. They deserve more. And better.
I too, would like to think I am in a better position when you say "talk about other countries" before you say that.
Because I have been to Dhaka, which is also the most densely populated city in the world, by measure of net urban density, and I stayed there for 4 weeks, during which I had a privilege to travel around as well on their "highways".
Oops.
Guess I was right about the part with regards to lack of wisdom.
If you don't open your eyes as you walk, don't blame others for elbowing you when they approach. Ok?
-
Originally posted by SBS2601D:
Trains get more than bus do. Admit it. They got way more from past till now. Don't just look at BSEP cost $1+b. Look at the big picture.
Even the rolling stock is purchased by LTA
Add in the rail cost + all the signalling + tunnelling...you mean trains "don't get as much"?
As lemon pointed out, 925 did need the BSEP. BANG. Kena shot in the foot again.
Being cynical =/= being smarter than everyone else. If you think that everything the govt does has kickbacks, indirect or not, then I suggest that you go work in LTA and see for yourself what they do. What you say smacks of utter under-appreciation of what its rank and file has done for you. They deserve more. And better.
I too, would like to think I am in a better position when you say "talk about other countries" before you say that.
Because I have been to Dhaka, which is also the most densely populated city in the world, by measure of net urban density, and I stayed there for 4 weeks, during which I had a privilege to travel around as well on their "highways".
Oops.
Guess I was right about the part with regards to lack of wisdom.
If you don't open your eyes as you walk, don't blame others for elbowing you when they approach. Ok?
If the funds are channelled to trains that much, why the outcome isn't really that significant to see? The train still have some poor frequency, tracks aren't replace faster etc., stations facilities aren't upgraded~~
Current train lines already like falling apart, holes around the corner, and yet they are openning more lines. It ridiculous then~ Think again lah~ 925 BSEP is only useful for peak hours, off peak hours can be seriously useless since workers are working~ How is that considered useful?
Yes I agree and know that not every government action's have a kickbacks. But for this scheme, it's definitely a benefit for both parties(govt. and people).
It's not about appreciating or what, the irony is why other countries can do it such a success but not Singapore? The SG government inject money in, and not to mention that the money is also part of Singaporean one, but the impact they get still "lag" behind operators like MTR etc.
Anyway, this is a forum still~ My say doesn't need your comments, and I've never ask for your comments but an answer. I may be lack of wisdom in the full programme, but I have the rights to say what I feel~ If you can't reply in a proper tone, then I suggest you don't~
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
If the funds are channelled to trains that much, why the outcome isn't really that significant to see? The train still have some poor frequency, tracks aren't replace faster etc., stations facilities aren't upgraded~~
Current train lines already like falling apart, holes around the corner, and yet they are openning more lines. It ridiculous then~ Think again lah~ 925 BSEP is only useful for peak hours, off peak hours can be seriously useless since workers are working~ How is that considered useful?
Yes I agree and know that not every government action's have a kickbacks. But for this scheme, it's definitely a benefit for both parties(govt. and people).
It's not about appreciating or what, the irony is why other countries can do it such a success but not Singapore? The SG government inject money in, and not to mention that the money is also part of Singaporean one, but the impact they get still "lag" behind operators like MTR etc.
Anyway, this is a forum still~ My say doesn't need your comments, and I've never ask for your comments but an answer. I may be lack of wisdom in the full programme, but I have the rights to say what I feel~ If you can't reply in a proper tone, then I suggest you don't~
sometime i dun really understand the logic of your thinking.... you want them to upgrade the tracks/trains faster? but how fast can they do? they only have 3 hours daily to do maintainaince.... and to upgrade a train need how many days? not as if it is like upgrading your SMRT O405 buses instead... it would take at least one month to upgrade one train.. and they cant be pulling out many trains as well
and what train station facilities you want? aircon platform at woodland station? the mrt is already 25 years? so they should start building new parallel tracks and stations to replace the NS and EW lines right?
and your logic of Sv925 should not be getting BSEP buses is totally wrong. BSEP buses are mainly to help during peak hours... and like what i have said before, you will still see some BSEP buses during off peak hour. esp for Sv925 considering its operationg hours.. or else what is the driver to do? do one am trip of sv925 and one evening peak trip? Maybe you should try to go and squeeze onto sv925 at kranji mrt in the am peak and try boarding sv925 at kranji road (towards kranji mrt)...
i use to work at kranji area and my colleagues are always complaining of difficulty of boarding sv925....
-
People forgot that SMRT has been fined multiple times because of 925?
And how is BSEP a "benefit" for the govt? You did not substantiate. You just basically smeared your opinions with facts and hope that your words will carry authority when they do not.
How do you expect people who are in the know (you guys should too, these are ALL public domain information with some common sense!) to just let it pass?
Your say doesnt need comments?
Then you say here for...?
-
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
sometime i dun really understand the logic of your thinking.... you want them to upgrade the tracks/trains faster? but how fast can they do? they only have 3 hours daily to do maintainaince.... and to upgrade a train need how many days? not as if it is like upgrading your SMRT O405 buses instead... it would take at least one month to upgrade one train.. and they cant be pulling out many trains as well
and what train station facilities you want? aircon platform at woodland station? the mrt is already 25 years? so they should start building new parallel tracks and stations to replace the NS and EW lines right?
and your logic of Sv925 should not be getting BSEP buses is totally wrong. BSEP buses are mainly to help during peak hours... and like what i have said before, you will still see some BSEP buses during off peak hour. esp for Sv925 considering its operationg hours.. or else what is the driver to do? do one am trip of sv925 and one evening peak trip? Maybe you should try to go and squeeze onto sv925 at kranji mrt in the am peak and try boarding sv925 at kranji road (towards kranji mrt)...
i use to work at kranji area and my colleagues are always complaining of difficulty of boarding sv925....
That's the problem~ They should extend the changing of sleeper's time. For example, since weekdays there's hardly people travelling around 11-12, they can close certain station that's hardly use(like Kranji/Marsiling - Marsiling have some direct buses). Otherwise, they can deploy shuttle buses at night to meet the deadline. Of cus they have to pay abit extra to the drivers~
With shorter time to replace the rail track, the time taken to change all of them would take lesser time. By then, if they need to, they should do a full test on the lines-for example team A do Station A to C, team B will do Station C to E etc.- after completing the whole track replacement to ensure that the newest and new track sleeper would have no flaws or problem.
By doing so every week after the entire replacement, they can prevent less breakdowns etc(Of cus to check the other parts too). They can also hire some experts to team up with the crew to ensure strict maintenace. That will benefit more to the people and the funds are used correctly(Funds for drivers' extra work, recruit the experts etc.)
Station facilities, they can add more seats to the platform(if possible) or otherwise, add 1-2 more TVs on each platform.
I would ask you then, does the frequency of 925 become shorter? I still see the same-1 bus in and another out, 10mins later another bus enter and another bus leaves. They added 2 BSEP and the fleet turn out to be not efficient(in frequency). I'm not sure about the effect of the 3 BSEP but I can say 925's 1st wave of BSEP was useless. They only foresee the load in the interchange itself and forgotten about Marsiling/Kranji station. Never observe how the 3 BSEP bus affects the service, but I believe that the frequency is shorter(obvious, provided they didn't remove any buses) and making it useful. With just 2 and the frequency is about the same, I don't find it useful~
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Took 860 3-4 times recently. On way to Khatib, it is the only bus, so full. On return, 800 is there from Khatib MRT. Why will people take 860 that will go to Ave 3, then turn to Ave 2 and then back to Ring road. Distance fare more.
People rather wait for 800 and take 800 to Ring road instead. So 860 on return journey is not that full. The route should have complemented 800 and should have just returned to Yishun Interchange from Ring Road. This way 860 downward frequency to Khatib would be very good.
800 route
Yishun Int
Yishun Central
Yishun Ave 9
Yishun Ring Road
Yishun Ave 2
Yishun Ave 7
Sembawang Road
Yishun St 72
Yishun Ring Road
Yishun Ave 9
Yishun Central
Yishun Ave 2
Yishun Int
860
Yishun Int
Yishun Central
Yishun Ave 9
Yishun Ring Road
Yishun Ave 3
Yishun Ave 2
Yishun Ring Road
Yishun Ave 9
Yishun Central
Yishun Ave 2
Yishun Int
800 never went to KTB
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Took 860 3-4 times recently. On way to Khatib, it is the only bus, so full. On return, 800 is there from Khatib MRT. Why will people take 860 that will go to Ave 3, then turn to Ave 2 and then back to Ring road. Distance fare more.
People rather wait for 800 and take 800 to Ring road instead. So 860 on return journey is not that full. The route should have complemented 800 and should have just returned to Yishun Interchange from Ring Road. This way 860 downward frequency to Khatib would be very good.
Are you drunk on that day? -
people always forget... you close the MRT Stn at 2300... can... but what abt connecting feeder bus timing? Run till the last replacement bridging bus?