LTA's Bus Service Enhancement Programme (BSEP) (Part 2)
-
Originally posted by iveco:
Maybe CDGE one is WAB, others hard to say. Also, can we pay using EZ-Link card or is it cash only? OT: WTS should be allowed a proper PTO license, given that they have such a modern-looking fleet among the private charter operators.I queried LTA abt WAB for their City Direct, PPS asked how come not WAB?!
whole lot of info given to me but never answer my qns, basically if BSEP it should be WAB rite, can anyone confirm this since SG moving towards more gracious society and SG PT is suppose to be WAB friendly by 2020 -
Originally posted by Gus.chong:
It's the first time I have heard of such services with the route number affixed with 'P' code...It is common in HK, with P representing special departures during peak hours
S would be special departures during peak or for school children in HK
However, some special departures do not have P/S but is run daily, most notably 112 > Mongkok, 171 > Mongkok, this is to facilitate faster turn around for services
so commuters need to look up before they board
In London, the final destination will appear next to the route number
Eg, Metroline's NB4L is between Archway and Nothing Hill Gate
Some buses will depart Nothing Hill Gate and terminate at Euston instead -
OT, this is how TFl answers queries from the public:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/number_of_vehicles_operating_on -
Originally posted by TIB1234T:
Peak-Period Short Service (PPSS):
Living in Woodlands, Boon Lay, Bedok or Ang Mo Kio? Look out for four new Peak Period Short Services (PPSS) in your neighbourhood!
From:
14 April - Service 912P in Woodlands
22 April - Service 240P in Boon Lay
29 April - Service 222P in Bedok
6 May - Service 268P in Ang Mo KioThese services run by Private Bus Operators (PBOs)will overlay on existing stretches of feeder bus services 222, 240, 268, and 912. All four PPSS will operate at least five trips per hour during weekday morning and evening peak periods (except on public holidays) connecting commuters to nearby MRT stations and bus interchanges. PPSS will help reduce crowding, reduce commuter waiting times and will improve reliability during peak hours. The bus services will charge distance fares similar to current feeder services.
Soon, there will be more buses than cars in Singapore.
-
And soon there will be more jams than before...New Citizens and PRs can afford a car despite the skyhigh COE..
-
Can see King Longs,Higers,Fotons and other Cheena make buses.
-
Originally posted by iveco:
Maybe CDGE one is WAB, others hard to say. Also, can we pay using EZ-Link card or is it cash only? OT: WTS should be allowed a proper PTO license, given that they have such a modern-looking fleet among the private charter operators.no wab as these are additional short trips... the PIW can take the normal trips (if the parent service is WAB service)... ezylink is accepted....
and dun think those private operators will be interested in proper PTO license, if they are not making money from PT.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Soon, there will be more buses than cars in Singapore.
you must be kidding.
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
no wab as these are additional short trips... the PIW can take the normal trips (if the parent service is WAB service)... ezylink is accepted....
and dun think those private operators will be interested in proper PTO license, if they are not making money from PT.
shld additional short trips be WAB since all PTOs are to be full WAB by 2020?!
-
Originally posted by Acx1688:
shld additional short trips be WAB since all PTOs are to be full WAB by 2020?!
now it is 2014.... still got 6 years.... just be glad that there are additional short trips.. cant expect too much now, until SBST/SMRT have more space/buses/drivers to do these short trips themselves (maybe 2-3 years later when all the new buses arrive). those private operators wont be going to buy new WAB just to go bid for these services for a 2 year contract right?
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
now it is 2014.... still got 6 years.... just be glad that there are additional short trips.. cant expect too much now, until SBST/SMRT have more space/buses/drivers to do these short trips themselves (maybe 2-3 years later when all the new buses arrive). those private operators wont be going to buy new WAB just to go bid for these services for a 2 year contract right?
OT a bit, agree but smetimes i c uncle/aunite struggle to board the new buses(scania engine, sc bodywork) for parkway shuttle to bedok, i wonder what the Private operators tinking...
Dun they tink long term and to increase biz share or juz stay static n b happy?
Tink CDG/WT are the few operators w more WAB type in their fleet -
Originally posted by lemon1974:
you must be kidding.
2day ST report more COEs release
-
Originally posted by Acx1688:
OT a bit, agree but smetimes i c uncle/aunite struggle to board the new buses(scania engine, sc bodywork) for parkway shuttle to bedok, i wonder what the Private operators tinking...
Dun they tink long term and to increase biz share or juz stay static n b happy?
Tink CDG/WT are the few operators w more WAB type in their fleetthey just want to buy cheap MIC 44 seaters buses now... not those 30 seat WAB buses since they are mainly doing private charters... more seats = high rental/higher charter rates.
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
they just want to buy cheap MIC 44 seaters buses now... not those 30 seat WAB buses since they are mainly doing private charters... more seats = high rental/higher charter rates.
Apparently in CN big cities, seldom public bus operators use them...
I was in Shanghai and the buses were engined by Volvo, Daewoo... (albeit JV)
Bus body is european style... bus stop announcements also -
Actually they should look for operators having some city buses, not coach buses. One example would be like the Advanced Coach. I think city buses would be easier for passengers to get up and down compared to coach buses.
Whereas for express service, coach bus would still be okay.
-
Originally posted by Pervertedboy:
Personally, I feel that SBS Transit is now more of a bus operator, instead of the company it seemed to be previously. SBS Transit now only focus on bus service, on how to operate them and how to improve them. All the campaigns and so on are now done by LTA and the government. If anyone notices, SBS Transit now hardly (or never really) introduce its own company campaign (eg. http://www.sbstransit.com.sg/press/2007-03-31-02-S.aspx) like in the past. Ever since the Government intervened, SBS Transit's quality of bus services has improved. For instance, the waiting time for buses and crowding level of buses are now, to some extent, reduced.
Personally, I feel that SMRT is gradually returning back to its former self - during the Singapore MRT Ltd days & during the Trans-Island Buses days. In other words, the quality in all aspects of SMRT has improved and is improving further. In terms of technology, SMRT will soon catch up with SBS Transit, as it is currently implementing all the technology that SBS Transit implemented before the government intervened.
When SMRT's first batch of Double Decker
buses enters service by 2016, along with the technology that would
all implemented by then, I am sure SMRT will be on par with SBS
Transit. 
As the government introduces more bus services in SMRT areas via the BSEP, I guess this would increase SMRT's share in the public bus services industry and reduce SBS Transit's share, such that both shares will eventually equalise at 50%-50%. This will cease SBS Transit's monoploy status. Along with SMRT catching up in technology and having Double Decker buses in its fleet, there is finally going to be real competition between the two Public Transport Operators!
Thereafter, when everything is equal (except number of services and buses) in both Public Bus Operators, I guess the Government will say that whatever SBS Transit and SMRT have in common (by that time) is the standard that a Public Transport Operator must have.
When the standard (eg. must have a prescribed list of technology, must have at least how much proportion of Double Decker buses, etc.) is set, I guess the Government will then open up the Public Bus Industry and invite other bus operators to become Public Bus Operator in Singapore.
So... to some extent, the government is helping SMRT improve and be on par with SBS Transit, while it pause SBS Transit's improvement (in non-services areas). Personally, in my opinion, I feel that it is only because the government intervenes that's why SMRT implements the tracking system in its buses, introduces Double Decker buses, etc. Somehow, I feel that SMRT is right now being SBSTransit-nalised (becoming similar to SBS Transit). Eventually, SMRT will be so identical to SBS Transit that the only difference is just in the logo, livery, colours schemes (in buses) and the uniform that the staff wears.
By then, when things become so identical, LTA will most likely say that this is the standard that Public Bus Operators must have, in order for them to get their license to operate public bus services, or have their license renewed thereafter.
By then, there will be many depots (right now, I think there is only the one at Bulim) and interchanges (I think the one at Joo Koon is developed and owned by LTA) built by LTA and leased to Public Bus Operators. Whereas for the ones owned by the respective Public Bus Operators, LTA will probably take over them and be the new owner of them, then lease them to Public Bus Operators.
By then, I doubt any Public Bus Operator would have the luxury of leasing an entire bus depot/interchange. Most likely one bus depot/interchange will be used by several Public Bus Operators, and every Public Bus Operator can only lease parking lots, based on how many bus routes it operates from the facility.
Meanwhile, there will surely be excess buses that would not have space in the depot/interchanges, if LTA takes over them and lease them to several operators. I guess the government will either make it compulsory for every Public Bus Operator to come up with their own money to buy land to build their own parking space to park their buses, or (since land is scarce) LTA will itself build one multi-storey storage building at every of the four districts (north, south, east, west) of Singapore for storing of buses, and make it compulsory for every Public Bus Operator to rent the bus storage spaces at the buildings - the proportion of storage space allocated in every storage building would be based on the proportion of the PTO share in bus services in the district the building is in. Somehow, I think many people will complain and criticize if government chooses to do the second option, because many people will say that the government waste money build the multi-storey bus storage buildings - unless the government can justify that the rent it forced out of PTOs actually can make profits after a certain number of years.
Just in case suddenly no buses are deployed, the government would probably make it a must that the bus storage buildings/spaces in total must have the provision of accommodating a certain number of Public Bus Operators.
By then, when the two Public Bus Operators become so identical, all the infrastructure required for public bus services is owned by the government, and all the provision of bus storage infrastructure required are there, I guess the government will then open up the Public Bus Services Industry and invite the Private bus operators to become Public Bus Operators, and Public Bus Operators from other countries to come to Singapore and be Public Bus Operators here.
By then, there will be a great competition among the Public Bus Operators in the Public Bus Services industry. The government will set the standards and regulate/control the industry, while the Public Bus Operators compete among themselves to remain in competition and avoid being replaced by other Public Bus Operators. In other words, by then, the Public Bus Services industry will be based on Contracts model.
You type so much.
But let me show you a single picture.
We’ve just awarded a contract to ST Electronics (Info-Comm Systems) Pte Ltd (STE) / Trapeze Switzerland GMBH Consortium to develop an Intelligent Bus Management System to integrate operations control, fleet management, passenger information and business management.
How does this system benefit our commuters? This new technology will enable SBS Transit and SMRT to better optimise their bus fleets and resources, which translates to better bus services. Commuters will not onlyenjoy more reliable bus services, but also more accurate information like bus arrival timings. You can better plan your journeys!
The Intelligent Bus Management System is a step-up from the separate bus fleet management systems which SBS Transit and SMRT currently uses to manage their daily bus operations and to provide bus arrival information to commuters. The system will be implemented progressively from the end of 2015.
Get it?
-
Originally posted by Acx1688:
2day ST report more COEs release
ST also like those CNN,BBC all like to twist and turn..Release more Coe then decrease by few hundreds dollars then next round increase another thousands?Friend,now bike Coe reach $4xxx Liao leh...Govt don't care already,you wanna private vehicle then pay more than double..money no enough take PTs even though you have to squeeze,take longer routes,longer waiting times..More buses more trains so what?Their planning for 6.9m later if no additional buses and trains then what?later part you will experience the same old thing again,buses ninja here n there,train not on time,breakdowns..
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
ST also like those CNN,BBC all like to twist and turn..Release more Coe then decrease by few hundreds dollars then next round increase another thousands?Friend,now bike Coe reach $4xxx Liao leh...Govt don't care already,you wanna private vehicle then pay more than double..money no enough take PTs even though you have to squeeze,take longer routes,longer waiting times..More buses more trains so what?Their planning for 6.9m later if no additional buses and trains then what?later part you will experience the same old thing again,buses ninja here n there,train not on time,breakdowns..
Yup ST always twist story in favour of MIW
-
Originally posted by Acx1688:
Yup ST always twist story in favour of MIW
True enough,if really Coe supply increase and sink around 45k then I will definitely go for Volkswagen Touran mini mpv 1.4 twin charge with 122hp/220nm one.My current stream 1.8 Coe ends in 3 years time and already I've downgraded my 750cc bike to 400cc street bike..
-
Originally posted by SBS2601D:
You type so much.
But let me show you a single picture.
We’ve just awarded a contract to ST Electronics (Info-Comm Systems) Pte Ltd (STE) / Trapeze Switzerland GMBH Consortium to develop an Intelligent Bus Management System to integrate operations control, fleet management, passenger information and business management.
How does this system benefit our commuters? This new technology will enable SBS Transit and SMRT to better optimise their bus fleets and resources, which translates to better bus services. Commuters will not onlyenjoy more reliable bus services, but also more accurate information like bus arrival timings. You can better plan your journeys!
The Intelligent Bus Management System is a step-up from the separate bus fleet management systems which SBS Transit and SMRT currently uses to manage their daily bus operations and to provide bus arrival information to commuters. The system will be implemented progressively from the end of 2015.
Get it?
From this text, it seems that the Government will start introducing bus contracts model into our public bus system from end-2015.
It seems that the buses that SBS Transit and SMRT have will eventually be re-painted into a common LTA livery because it is quite likely that LTA will takeover the buses from SBS Transit and SMRT - it should not cost LTA any money to takeover the ownership of the buses, since after all SMRT is 60% owned by Temasek Holdings and SBS Transit is somewhat related to the National Labor Union; both SMRT and SBS Transit are somehow owned mainly by the government, so it may be just a matter of changing from one hand to another.
Previously, in my long "essay", I mentioned a possible problem of having a surplus of buses, that there may have to be parking space built to park extra buses. I am glad that this was only a bad dream, and actually, there may not at all be a surplus of buses.
In a nutshell,
- There is a high possibility that LTA may takeover the ownership of the buses SBS Transit and SMRT have.
- It is quite likely that the public buses may all be re-painted with a common LTA livery.
- It is quite likely that LTA may own everything, while the Public Transport Operators would bid to operate services and use the LTA resources to operate them.
But then, there is something that I do not understand:Since the government has been working on implementing the Bus Contracts Model for many years now, why did it not take ownership of the new buses procured by the operators and give the new buses a common LTA livery?
Unless, the buses will not be in a common livery, and there will actually indeed be a surplus of buses as a result of contracts model - like the bad dream I had. Sigh.
If possible, I really wish that the buses could be in a common livery, so that at least there would not be a surplus of buses, which could actually mean a wastage of resources - since they are not employed. Although re-painting the buses to a common livery might be quite costly, the costs would still be lower - possibly much lower - than having so many many units of buses and having surplus of buses. So even if it may be a waste of money, I do not mind the buses being re-painted to a common livery because it is still cheaper than buying so many buses and having so many of them under-utilized.Besides, Singapore is a land-scarce country. It is really not feasible for us to have so many bus parks like how it is done in other countries that also uses the bus contracts model. #justsaying -
Originally posted by carbikebus:
True enough,if really Coe supply increase and sink around 45k then I will definitely go for Volkswagen Touran mini mpv 1.4 twin charge with 122hp/220nm one.My current stream 1.8 Coe ends in 3 years time and already I've downgraded my 750cc bike to 400cc street bike..
gahmen policy all contradicting each other nwadays
-
Originally posted by Pervertedboy:
From this text, it seems that the Government will start introducing bus contracts model into our public bus system from end-2015.
It seems that the buses that SBS Transit and SMRT have will eventually be re-painted into a common LTA livery because it is quite likely that LTA will takeover the buses from SBS Transit and SMRT - it should not cost LTA any money to takeover the ownership of the buses, since after all SMRT is 60% owned by Temasek Holdings and SBS Transit is somewhat related to the National Labor Union; both SMRT and SBS Transit are somehow owned mainly by the government, so it may be just a matter of changing from one hand to another.
Previously, in my long "essay", I mentioned a possible problem of having a surplus of buses, that there may have to be parking space built to park extra buses. I am glad that this was only a bad dream, and actually, there may not at all be a surplus of buses.
In a nutshell,
- There is a high possibility that LTA may takeover the ownership of the buses SBS Transit and SMRT have.
- It is quite likely that the public buses may all be re-painted with a common LTA livery.
- It is quite likely that LTA may own everything, while the Public Transport Operators would bid to operate services and use the LTA resources to operate them.
But then, there is something that I do not understand:Since the government has been working on implementing the Bus Contracts Model for many years now, why did it not take ownership of the new buses procured by the operators and give the new buses a common LTA livery? Unless, the buses will not be in a common livery, and there will actually indeed be a surplus of buses as a result of contracts model - like the bad dream I had. Sigh.If possible, I really wish that the buses could be in a common livery, so that at least there would not be a surplus of buses, which could actually mean a wastage of resources - since they are not employed. Although re-painting the buses to a common livery might be quite costly, the costs would still be lower - possibly much lower - than having so many many units of buses and having surplus of buses. So even if it may be a waste of money, I do not mind the buses being re-painted to a common livery because it is still cheaper than buying so many buses and having so many of them under-utilized.Besides, Singapore is a land-scarce country. It is really not efficient for us to have so many bus parks like how it is done in other countries that also uses the bus contracts model. #justsayingHow about the registration numbers (SBS/SMB/TIB)? All change to LTA xxxx X?
-
Originally posted by Pervertedboy:
From this text, it seems that the Government will start introducing bus contracts model into our public bus system from end-2015.
It seems that the buses that SBS Transit and SMRT have will eventually be re-painted into a common LTA livery because it is quite likely that LTA will takeover the buses from SBS Transit and SMRT - it should not cost LTA any money to takeover the ownership of the buses, since after all SMRT is 60% owned by Temasek Holdings and SBS Transit is somewhat related to the National Labor Union; both SMRT and SBS Transit are somehow owned mainly by the government, so it may be just a matter of changing from one hand to another.
Previously, in my long "essay", I mentioned a possible problem of having a surplus of buses, that there may have to be parking space built to park extra buses. I am glad that this was only a bad dream, and actually, there may not at all be a surplus of buses.
In a nutshell,
- There is a high possibility that LTA may takeover the ownership of the buses SBS Transit and SMRT have.
- It is quite likely that the public buses may all be re-painted with a common LTA livery.
- It is quite likely that LTA may own everything, while the Public Transport Operators would bid to operate services and use the LTA resources to operate them.
But then, there is something that I do not understand:Since the government has been working on implementing the Bus Contracts Model for many years now, why did it not take ownership of the new buses procured by the operators and give the new buses a common LTA livery? Unless, the buses will not be in a common livery, and there will actually indeed be a surplus of buses as a result of contracts model - like the bad dream I had. Sigh.If possible, I really wish that the buses could be in a common livery, so that at least there would not be a surplus of buses, which could actually mean a wastage of resources - since they are not employed. Although re-painting the buses to a common livery might be quite costly, the costs would still be lower - possibly much lower - than having so many many units of buses and having surplus of buses. So even if it may be a waste of money, I do not mind the buses being re-painted to a common livery because it is still cheaper than buying so many buses and having so many of them under-utilized.Besides, Singapore is a land-scarce country. It is really not efficient for us to have so many bus parks like how it is done in other countries that also uses the bus contracts model. #justsayingThe government is still hesitant on a common government livery because they still want to project the perception that bus operations are still in the hands of private operators (i.e. any blame can be deflected to the private sector).
However, the recent BSEP stickers provides some clue to the government toying with and accepting such an idea if it gives them credit and benefits them politically.
Quite a few cities have moved towards adopting a common government livery for its buses (see below, Melbourne). And personally I do want a model where the government owns and lease public buses as well.
-
Originally posted by Pervertedboy:
From this text, it seems that the Government will start introducing bus contracts model into our public bus system from end-2015.
It seems that the buses that SBS Transit and SMRT have will eventually be re-painted into a common LTA livery because it is quite likely that LTA will takeover the buses from SBS Transit and SMRT - it should not cost LTA any money to takeover the ownership of the buses, since after all SMRT is 60% owned by Temasek Holdings and SBS Transit is somewhat related to the National Labor Union; both SMRT and SBS Transit are somehow owned mainly by the government, so it may be just a matter of changing from one hand to another.
Previously, in my long "essay", I mentioned a possible problem of having a surplus of buses, that there may have to be parking space built to park extra buses. I am glad that this was only a bad dream, and actually, there may not at all be a surplus of buses.
In a nutshell,
- There is a high possibility that LTA may takeover the ownership of the buses SBS Transit and SMRT have.
- It is quite likely that the public buses may all be re-painted with a common LTA livery.
- It is quite likely that LTA may own everything, while the Public Transport Operators would bid to operate services and use the LTA resources to operate them.
But then, there is something that I do not understand:Since the government has been working on implementing the Bus Contracts Model for many years now, why did it not take ownership of the new buses procured by the operators and give the new buses a common LTA livery? Unless, the buses will not be in a common livery, and there will actually indeed be a surplus of buses as a result of contracts model - like the bad dream I had. Sigh.If possible, I really wish that the buses could be in a common livery, so that at least there would not be a surplus of buses, which could actually mean a wastage of resources - since they are not employed. Although re-painting the buses to a common livery might be quite costly, the costs would still be lower - possibly much lower - than having so many many units of buses and having surplus of buses. So even if it may be a waste of money, I do not mind the buses being re-painted to a common livery because it is still cheaper than buying so many buses and having so many of them under-utilized.Besides, Singapore is a land-scarce country. It is really not feasible for us to have so many bus parks like how it is done in other countries that also uses the bus contracts model. #justsayingu alway think too much.... the new buses procured by SBST/SMRT for the past few years taken over by LTA just because govt own some shares? how to do the accounting?? pls lah, just dun think so much now.... maybe u and mr bus analayzer can go and sit down and drink coffee and talk about all these...
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
The government is still hesitant on a common government livery because they still want to project the perception that bus operations are still in the hands of private operators (i.e. any blame can be deflected to the private sector).
However, the recent BSEP stickers provides some clue to the government toying with and accepting such an idea if it gives them credit and benefits them politically.
Quite a few cities have moved towards adopting a common government livery for its buses (see below, Melbourne). And personally I do want a model where the government owns and lease public buses as well.
very true... they dun wan ppl to point fingers at govt/lta.... not as simple as someone else think...