LTA's Bus Service Enhancement Programme (BSEP)
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
Eh mister.
I would have bought your argument on svc 113 had it not been your ridiculous comments.
293: As a quite frequent traveller of svc 293 I can tell you that svc deserve in fact FULL FLEET DDs for peak hours. In Tampines int, 3 buses have to wait for their turn to unload during AM peak. Why? Coz 293 pax are streaming out of the DDs non-stop for the next 2-3 mins. Fully packed to the door. Don't underestimate 293, young boy. It is the only service that serves as the backbone of the busy areas like St 45, 71 and perhaps 73. And you should see 293 towards Ave 3 during PM peak. No, take a look at either direction. 5 rounds of queues consisting of over 80 pax dominate the centre alleu of the interchange. I don't see how 293 does not deserve DDs at all. With what do you struggle to argue, little boy? The queue still remains long and strong after a 13 min wait for a KUB. I've ever waited 18 mins durin PM peak for the West loop and a STRIDER came. I saw the queue of the remaining people going halfway through the berth. Checked iris and next bus was 14 mins. Oh jolly. And the east loop at that time? DD came, packed to door, just nice. Another time, came to see a 293 wright leaving fully loaded and 6 mins later, another Wright came in and left with not much space to spare.
I agree. This sbst191 has gone mad. sv 293 deserves more DDs. I think a fleet of 6 DDs, 7 SDs would be good. -
Wow wow wow 410W redundant eh
100+ pax waiting during peak and no need dd
-
Originally posted by sbst191:
DDs on 101 ppl nvr move up deserve dds?
50 pax justify dd for svc 56?Have you seen empty dds on 186 at queensway - farrer road stretch?
101 DD this morning >50% upper deck full on HG Ave 8.. Why you say people don't move up?? All faking...186... Queensway - Farrer is not where the load is... It is at Alexandra Road to Shenton Way. 100+ pax on every DD.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
101 DD this morning >50% upper deck full on HG Ave 8.. Why you say people don't move up?? All faking...186... Queensway - Farrer is not where the load is... It is at Alexandra Road to Shenton Way. 100+ pax on every DD.
He would just say those svc that gets DD having passengers not moving up, hence waste of resources. But for his 113, he would insist that the bus is damn packed, no space to move...
-
Lols
-
Originally posted by sbst191:
DDs on 101 ppl nvr move up deserve dds?
50 pax justify dd for svc 56?Have you seen empty dds on 186 at queensway - farrer road stretch?
pls re-evaluate 186 dds during am peak towards shenton way thnx
-
Originally posted by SMB66X:
He would just say those svc that gets DD having passengers not moving up, hence waste of resources. But for his 113, he would insist that the bus is damn packed, no space to move...
Sometimes the bus still can ferry arnd 5 more pax, and sometimes is those commuters don't want to move to rear. Just ignore this troll.
-
3355H should be deployed on sv 81.
BNDEP SP --> CGBP 81
Like 3347, 3348, 3349 - this bus has been spare for too long. After evaluating all BNDEP / CGBP services, I feel 81 is the best for a fleet add.
-
3347G AM SP --> AM 410 (replacing BSEP slot of 6301T)
-
That taro can handle lah. And those 2 posts of yours should be in Your Own Deployment thread.
-
3348J AM SP --> AM 162 (replacing BSEP slot of 6361U)
Double decker intro on this route (just suggesting)
-
still move to YOD thread. 3348J can just fleet add to 162. the frequency sucks. even with that AP 6361 still gg.
-
Originally posted by SBS 6078 M:
still move to YOD thread. 3348J can just fleet add to 162. the frequency sucks. even with that AP 6361 still gg.
Nvm la...still BSEP buses
-
i should only say SBST now still dun need dat much of BSEP buses @ the moment as u can see now many BSEP buses from all depots still not deploy to perm svc leh .
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
3355H should be deployed on sv 81.
BNDEP SP --> CGBP 81
Like 3347, 3348, 3349 - this bus has been spare for too long. After evaluating all BNDEP / CGBP services, I feel 81 is the best for a fleet add.
3354K also spare, 17 was never under BSEP.
-
Originally posted by Lsk138:
i should only say SBST now still dun need dat much of BSEP buses @ the moment as u can see now many BSEP buses from all depots still not deploy to perm svc leh .
Yeah agree
-
Originally posted by SBS7557R:
3354K also spare, 17 was never under BSEP.
Really? This was updated as fleet add for sv 17 in mid-Jul and sgwiki shows it as perm for the last 2 months. -
Originally posted by Lsk138:
i should only say SBST now still dun need dat much of BSEP buses @ the moment as u can see now many BSEP buses from all depots still not deploy to perm svc leh .
Agreed. But the ones already with AMDEP and BNDEP should be deployed perm. Don't register more BSEP buses for the time being.
Like I mentioned, sv 81 can get 3355H as fleet add. The frequency is not that good and the loading can be significant in peak hours. Also, it has not got a SD --> DD upgrade or fleet add since Apr 2012 (that's the date from when I am tracking)
-
If AMDEP does not need those 3 BSEP WEGs, it can very well transfer them to other depot. I am sure HGDEP can take 1 in and deploy WEG on sv 153, SLBP can take one as well. AMDEP should use one of the 3 for sv 410 (converting the 6301T slot to DD slot) now that it is using DDs on sv 410.
-
113 will get dds either tmr or tuesday. I have seen 113 perm bc driving a trainin DD along lorong ah soo today
-
I don't really find the damned logic in the BSEP deployment scheme.
You see, the system that works now is that those svcs with >80% buses will get BSEP. And the bus is one split shift bus. But what sucks is the rapid registration of the BSEP buses and now all the BSEP buses are running around JUST BECAUSE of the fixed rule that BSEP buses MUST stay on their perm svc and the BSEP buses MUST perm the svc they are allocated to. This takes time, and in the end the BSEP buses run around at svcs that have low demand and leaving some higher demand svcs neglected.
I mean, why can't BSEP be more flexible? Why waste time looking at svcs and allowing the BSEP buses run on all sorts of crazy low-demand svcs when it could have alr been into good use on svcs that have crowding problems for a long time, such as 27. And why one bus at a time? The buses are coming faster than the lists of svcs coming out. And it could also have been used for making svcs Wheelchair-accessible, such as the HGDEP svcs. And why must BSEP always be Citaros? For example svc 120. Why can't svc 120 use KUBs? And why can't svc 4 use a few B10Ms? It has the destos anyways.
These are yet to be solved. Not saying the status quo of BSEP is very bad, but just hope a little reorganisation can get the commuters a less crowded bus quicker.
-
Originally posted by SBS5010P:
113 will get dds either tmr or tuesday. I have seen 113 perm bc driving a trainin DD along lorong ah soo today
If it is REALLY true then most probably Tmr since all new buses and trials tend to start on a Monday.
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
I don't really find the damned logic in the BSEP deployment scheme.
You see, the system that works now is that those svcs with >80% buses will get BSEP. And the bus is one split shift bus. But what sucks is the rapid registration of the BSEP buses and now all the BSEP buses are running around JUST BECAUSE of the fixed rule that BSEP buses MUST stay on their perm svc and the BSEP buses MUST perm the svc they are allocated to. This takes time, and in the end the BSEP buses run around at svcs that have low demand and leaving some higher demand svcs neglected.
I mean, why can't BSEP be more flexible? Why waste time looking at svcs and allowing the BSEP buses run on all sorts of crazy low-demand svcs when it could have alr been into good use on svcs that have crowding problems for a long time, such as 27. And why one bus at a time? The buses are coming faster than the lists of svcs coming out. And it could also have been used for making svcs Wheelchair-accessible, such as the HGDEP svcs. And why must BSEP always be Citaros? For example svc 120. Why can't svc 120 use KUBs? And why can't svc 4 use a few B10Ms? It has the destos anyways.
These are yet to be solved. Not saying the status quo of BSEP is very bad, but just hope a little reorganisation can get the commuters a less crowded bus quicker.
These are very minor topics according to me. Your comment that BSEP buses run on low-demand svcs is not true according to me. If you see 3347, 3348, 3349 they are always running on either 55/70/72/76. 3355H runs mostly on 168.
And why does sv 120 even need KUBs. The Citaros go empty. Why does sv 4 need B10Ms when newer WAB buses are available for it.
Of course there is scope for improvement but the major issue is SBST has done such a good job with fleet upgrade and additions that with BSEP now they are not sure which service to deploy on.
What is your take? Which AMDEP/BRBP services should get 3347/48/49? Which BNDEP / CGBP service should get 3355H? Apparently, even 3354K is spare right now and not on sv 17 as some claim.
-
Originally posted by SBS5010P:
113 will get dds either tmr or tuesday. I have seen 113 perm bc driving a trainin DD along lorong ah soo today
If that happens, I will be very happy - at least we will stop the boring discussion of sv 113 here
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
These are very minor topics according to me. Your comment that BSEP buses run on low-demand svcs is not true according to me. If you see 3347, 3348, 3349 they are always running on either 55/70/72/76. 3355H runs mostly on 168.
And why does sv 120 even need KUBs. The Citaros go empty. Why does sv 4 need B10Ms when newer WAB buses are available for it.
Of course there is scope for improvement but the major issue is SBST has done such a good job with fleet upgrade and additions that with BSEP now they are not sure which service to deploy on.
What is your take? Which AMDEP/BRBP services should get 3347/48/49? Which BNDEP / CGBP service should get 3355H? Apparently, even 3354K is spare right now and not on sv 17 as some claim.
Ok, I buy your case on 120 but If that's the case then I really don't understand why 120 should deserve that fleet then. Why not just 1 or 2 buses just like svc 11? Since its seasonal load.
As for svc 4, prove that it needs the WABs more than the other svcs. And BNDEP/CGBP itself is pretty much okay with its WAB management. Why not send the buses over to HGDEP, to svcs like 153 and 159? These svcs both connect old folk's favourites.
As you have agreed on, this is why BSEP needs a review. So that it makes great svcs even better, besides catering to svcs in need.
And yes, I have seen cases when BSEP does svcs like 85. It could be one of the minority, but it is still a sign.