LTA's Bus Service Enhancement Programme (BSEP) (Part 2)
-
Common in HK... Xharbor routes
If in SG, candidate 1 :190
-
Am I the only one here who thinks 93 needs a frequency upgrade?
-
Originally posted by 23ispolo:
Am I the only one here who thinks 93 needs a frequency upgrade?
No but load does not justify increasing freq...
I take off peak before hardly more than half full even freq is at close to 20mins -
Originally posted by iveco:
I wonder if Singapore is open to the idea of two operators having joint control of one route, like the Circle Route in Perth (Transdev Fremantle/Swan Transit Canning/Path Transit Morley) or 950 (Path Transit Morley/Swan Transit Claremont).
Route 61 could be the perfect candidate for such an experiment, with KJDEP (SMB) and BNDEP (SBS) supplying buses. It would be good to see both VO3Xes and Merc O405Gs working together on the same route.
Sorry, this form of operation can cause huge problems...
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
Sorry, this form of operation can cause huge problems...
Perth is better coordinated than Hong Kong.
At least staff from different operators do talk to each other on 98, 99 and 950.
-
Originally posted by 23ispolo:
Am I the only one here who thinks 93 needs a frequency upgrade?
It is managed well with existing loading... Sv 93 does not have an exclusive route.. Have services in parallel on most sectors... And hence if u don't get 93, just hop onto another bus. There was a time when Sv 93 needed DDs though.
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
Sorry, this form of operation can cause huge problems...
y may i ask? HK has managed it very well
-
Originally posted by Acx1688:
y may i ask? HK has managed it very well
My foot
Especially wicked KMB
All the times when the buses run off schedule, drag slow slow, snatch pax...
And all the disputes...
When I still in HK lagi worse, NWFB love to use 車海戰術 on 101, spam buses to snatch pax and override KMB schedule, until the tunnel clogged with 5 NWFB 101s, all in one straight line...
Terrible lah, the snatch pax and schedule problem. No wonder I'm not surprised new dual op only exist in peak period svc...
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
My foot
Especially wicked KMB
All the times when the buses run off schedule, drag slow slow, snatch pax...
And all the disputes...
When I still in HK lagi worse, NWFB love to use 車海戰術 on 101, spam buses to snatch pax and override KMB schedule, until the tunnel clogged with 5 NWFB 101s, all in one straight line...
Terrible lah, the snatch pax and schedule problem. No wonder I'm not surprised new dual op only exist in peak period svc...
Bro, v interesting please elaborate more... I go there veri freq din notice...
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
My foot
Especially wicked KMB
All the times when the buses run off schedule, drag slow slow, snatch pax...
And all the disputes...
When I still in HK lagi worse, NWFB love to use 車海戰術 on 101, spam buses to snatch pax and override KMB schedule, until the tunnel clogged with 5 NWFB 101s, all in one straight line...
Terrible lah, the snatch pax and schedule problem. No wonder I'm not surprised new dual op only exist in peak period svc...
'Not in Service' buses (could be any operator IMO) would come in to the stop before the Tunnel toll booth, and the timekeeper would shout the route number to the driver, probably whichever queue is the longest. He would then switch his EDS and immediately begin service.
Perth is the exact opposite. Buses would fly stop and let the other operator pick up the load.
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
'Not in Service' buses (could be any operator IMO) would come in to the stop before the Tunnel toll booth, and the timekeeper would shout the route number to the driver, probably whichever queue is the longest. He would then switch his EDS and immediately begin service.
Perth is the exact opposite. Buses would fly stop and let the other operator pick up the load.
If this is wat SMB128B is saying, YES i have seen it, other than tt, no
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
It is managed well with existing loading... Sv 93 does not have an exclusive route.. Have services in parallel on most sectors... And hence if u don't get 93, just hop onto another bus. There was a time when Sv 93 needed DDs though.
Well, how about Braddell Road (whole road) to Queensway? Remember those VO2Xs on 93!
-
as we know that generally SBST routes are more winding and circuitous while SMRT offer more direct routes. should LTA re-design some existing routes to provide more direct links while letting feeders or short haul routes to supplement?
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
'Not in Service' buses (could be any operator IMO) would come in to the stop before the Tunnel toll booth, and the timekeeper would shout the route number to the driver, probably whichever queue is the longest. He would then switch his EDS and immediately begin service.
Perth is the exact opposite. Buses would fly stop and let the other operator pick up the load.
The 5 buses thing I saw was right before XHT HK exit, where there's no toll Stn stop... It was not OS btw
Another time, 3 NWFB spammed Sai Wan on 101, followed by one more a minute later...
-
SBST winding routes but their svc is more profitable than so called direct route from SMRT..Any reasons why?
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
SBST winding routes but their svc is more profitable than so called direct route from SMRT..Any reasons why?
Coz they used their trunks as feeders.
Which yes may profit a little more, BUT is at the disadvantage of many commuters.
It does not really help people living in let's say Simei to get to town via bus. So they take MRT which yes is under SMRT!
I hope they can have feeders/short trunks like 38 plying the heartlands and the trunks connecting them directly to another place.
-
Some insider information which is 'believed to be from LTA'...apparently someone claimed that service 11 will be extended to loop at Tanjong Rhu with effect from 8th June under BSEP; it will loop at Stadium MRT twice. Although official release has yet to be out and I also don't know who may be able to backup this information, let's just wait and see.
-
Originally posted by Gus.chong:
Some insider information which is 'believed to be from LTA'...apparently someone claimed that service 11 will be extended to loop at Tanjong Rhu with effect from 8th June under BSEP; it will loop at Stadium MRT twice. Although official release has yet to be out and I also don't know who may be able to backup this information, let's just wait and see.
if really true, then 11 wic is supposed to be withdrawn(due to duplication) will not be then... Interesting route to have, 158A cancel?
-
Originally posted by Acx1688:
if really true, then 11 wic is supposed to be withdrawn(due to duplication) will not be then... Interesting route to have, 158A cancel?
This is under BSEP...think it won't affect 158A. It is not like 143M replacing 143A.
-
Originally posted by Gus.chong:
Some insider information which is 'believed to be from LTA'...apparently someone claimed that service 11 will be extended to loop at Tanjong Rhu with effect from 8th June under BSEP; it will loop at Stadium MRT twice. Although official release has yet to be out and I also don't know who may be able to backup this information, let's just wait and see.
Route 11 better off merged with 62. Routes 14, 51, 61 & 67 should be operated by more than one company. Already, I think 61 needs input from both SBS & SMB. -
Originally posted by sgbuses:
Perth is better coordinated than Hong Kong.
At least staff from different operators do talk to each other on 98, 99 and 950.
Not to mention that Route 336 BCs from Midvale (Swan Transit) often agreed to wait for the incoming Route 60 driven by a Malaga BC (Path Transit) to arrive at Morley before setting off for Ellenbrook. -
Originally posted by Gus.chong:
Some insider information which is 'believed to be from LTA'...apparently someone claimed that service 11 will be extended to loop at Tanjong Rhu with effect from 8th June under BSEP; it will loop at Stadium MRT twice. Although official release has yet to be out and I also don't know who may be able to backup this information, let's just wait and see.
Hi mr Gus.chong, it is true. LTA will announce shortly. See other thread opened by boy20. Sbs 11 frequency will also be improved. Cheers.
-
nitiplah bongan we teu bsa posting
https://cloudhance.zendesk.com/entries/69686088
http://mossmouth.com/forums/index.php?topic=17448
http://gameofthrones48.wordpress.com/
http://gameofthroness4e8.webnode.com/ -
Originally posted by iveco:
Route 11 better off merged with 62. Routes 14, 51, 61 & 67 should be operated by more than one company. Already, I think 61 needs input from both SBS & SMB.Unless there isa roadside ter fot 62 at Tanjong Rhu...
14? Present scheduled fleet n timetable ok except for traffic snarls at Paterson Rd
-
Originally posted by dupdup77:
Hi mr Gus.chong, it is true. LTA will announce shortly. See other thread opened by boy20. Sbs 11 frequency will also be improved. Cheers.
I expect at least 3 more buses on 11, giving a total fleet of 4 buses...