Route Suggestions (Part 5)
-
Originally posted by Pervertedboy:
@Acx1688 I think I know why LTA rejected your suggestion.
Simply because the demand for bus services at that area is too high, and combining them into 1 single bus service would reduce the supply of bus services.
Some routes are similar because they complement each other, so that the load can be spread out. If combine those routes into one single route, the entire load will be on that one route and there will be a lot of unnecessary complications regarding crowd management.
More bus services = better ride.
Alternatively, instead of combining bus services, you could suggest to LTA to introduce a new bus route, which duplicates sections of these bus services.
That is probably why the new BSEP bus routes are mostly duplicating existing bus services. For instance, BSEP service 49 duplicates mainly existing service 98.
#justsaying
Can try again though, sad that LTA keep on harping on hub and spoke and when anyone suggest a bus service to hub and spoke, tio reject flatly... in that case, how to get people to switch to public transport!? departments within LTA are not collaborating hard enough... more talk than do...
For Haig Rd link to PYL suggestion to divert sv76, sv43,76 have heavy duplication even though their end terminals are different...
Heavy usage for 43,76,135 is from PYL station to M Parade Rd, loading will not be that bad assuming FULL bus lanes implementation which is NEVER GOING to happen...
Really pity students walking to their schools from bus stops at Amber Rd, East Coast Rd rain or shine... damn sad... -
Originally posted by Pervertedboy:
@Acx1688 I think I know why LTA rejected your suggestion.
Simply because the demand for bus services at that area is too high, and combining them into 1 single bus service would reduce the supply of bus services.
Some routes are similar because they complement each other, so that the load can be spread out. If combine those routes into one single route, the entire load will be on that one route and there will be a lot of unnecessary complications regarding crowd management.
More bus services = better ride.
Alternatively, instead of combining bus services, you could suggest to LTA to introduce a new bus route, which duplicates sections of these bus services.
That is probably why the new BSEP bus routes are mostly duplicating existing bus services. For instance, BSEP service 49 duplicates mainly existing service 98.
#justsaying
Back to 82/107, before NEL introduce, 82 run from Punggol End to Shenton Way... SDs...
Can upgrade extended 82 to FULL DD service and special 82e plying Punggol/part of SKG before going KPE/Shenton Way area as suggested by a few bros here.
Correspondence with LTA seem to give me the impression that there is Premium 569 running in the morning, find it puzzling, Punggol residents must pay premium ride and worse only one trip every weekday just to get to town?! It does not hold as most of the housing estates(except Yew Tee, but that is another story) have at least one service to town/CBD area. (please do not ask me to list hor, you all should knoe)
After that, kena chopped to end at SGN station, if NEL breakdown at Punggol, Punggol residents ho say liao, but wait for MRT shuttle will at least be better than SMRT's dilly dally denial attitude... -
Originally posted by Acx1688:
Can try again though, sad that LTA keep on harping on hub and spoke and when anyone suggest a bus service to hub and spoke, tio reject flatly... in that case, how to get people to switch to public transport!? departments within LTA are not collaborating hard enough... more talk than do...
But sv43,76 has heavy duplication even though their end terminals are different...
Heavy usage for 43,76,135 is from PYL station to M Parade Rd, loading will not be that bad assuming FULL bus lanes implementation which is NEVER GOING to happen...
Really pity students walking to their schools from bus stops at Amber Rd, East Coast Rd rain or shine... damn sad...Alternatively, you could suggest this to the Residents' Corner (RC) or to your Member of Parliament. Convince the RC people and/or your MP that your suggestion will improve public bus services and they will submit a proposal to LTA to consider your suggestion.
After all, we did not vote for them and pay their salaries for nothing. Since we vote for them, we should make use of them.
If go through MP and/or RC, I think LTA will be more likely to accept and implement your suggestion.
Of course, I am not sure if this applies to the MPs of Aljunied GRC, Hougang SMC and Punggol East SMC. But even if you stay in Opposition's teritory, you can still try la... after all, PAP wants to win back everything they lose. They are probably more likely to serve the opposition wards, such as introducing new BSEP routes there, to make the people there happy, so that next election they would vote for them.
#justsaying
-
Originally posted by Pervertedboy:
Alternatively, you could suggest this to the Residents' Corner (RC) or to your Member of Parliament. Convince the RC people and/or your MP that your suggestion will improve public bus services and they will submit a proposal to LTA to consider your suggestion.
After all, we did not vote for them and pay their salaries for nothing. Since we vote for them, we should make use of them.
If go through MP and/or RC, I think LTA will be more likely to accept and implement your suggestion.
Of course, I am not sure if this applies to the MPs of Aljunied GRC, Hougang SMC and Punggol East SMC. But even if you stay in Opposition's teritory, you can still try la... after all, PAP wants to win back everything they lose. They are probably more likely to serve the opposition wards, such as introducing new BSEP routes there, to make the people there happy, so that next election they would vote for them.
#justsaying
My RC members most of them DO NOT take public transport, they join so that they can get their children to schools(if i am not wrong) or have their own vested interests. Furthermore most of them are new Singaporeans...
My MP is a very busy person, ESM... my Estate is nice on the outside(from afar) not so clean inside(i tink its the same for most lightning bolt controlled estates?)
Your sentence "If go through MP and/or RC, I think LTA will be more likely to accept and implement your suggestion" is very much correct and appropriate coz whenver have new bus routes, newspaper reports the MP/grassroots for that area have worked very hard with LTA to get it implemented...
SG > cant work if you do not have connections with the ruling elite in one way or another... -
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Agreed…side note 982 should reserved for CCK-Shenton Way Ter svc if they decide to introduce a basic svc..
Actually 98+ should be SBW side... 97+ can be still use in CCK or BPJ
-
982 (Alternative)
SBW-PSRSembawang Vista
Sembawang Dr
Sembawang Way
Admiralty Dr
Canberra Rd
Canberra Link
Yishun Ave 2
Yishun Ring Rd (East side)
Yishun Ave 11\
Yishun Central
Yishun Ave 4
Yishun Ave 1
Lentor Ave
SLE
TPE
Punggol Way
Sumang Lk
Sentul Crescent
Punggol Dr
Punggol Rd
TPE
Pasir Ris Dr 8
Pasir Ris Dr 1
Pasir Ris Dr 6
Pasir Ris Dr 3 -
Originally posted by Acx1688:
Wrote to LTA to combine 82/107(duplication), kenna rejected, press them for reason, they told me we will take into account your suggestion when we review the bus routes
LTA rejects all suggestions... They feel they are the best... Makes absolutely sense to merge 82/107... This is so obvious... I don't know why they don't do it... It won't disturb even one person due to route parallelism.
-
Originally posted by mwhale7886:
SMRT Feeder 308
Choa Chu Kang <--> C.C.K St 64/54 (Loop)
https://mapsengine.google.com/map/edit?mid=z5U3OUiwcVD8.kUdL_eEfHpIM
I had suggested a similar route before.
CCK -- Sungei Kadut loop
CCK interchange
CCK dr
CCK north 5
CCK st 54
cck st 64
cck north 6 (with new stop for yew tee MRT)
cck way
sungei Kadut loop
sungei Kadut dr.... And back...
this kind of route is much needed to improve connectivity within CCK and new industrial areas in Sungei Kadut not covered by 925
-
Originally posted by Acx1688:
Your Haig Rd portion if submit prob reject, wrote to have 76 diverted there for new link and to provide transport for students in the two schools and residents link to PP, PYL station, FLATLY rejected by LTA
Has LTA ever accepted any suggestion?
-
Originally posted by Acx1688:
IMO, should really implement ffw858e, from Woodlands, one stop at Admiralty, one stop at Sembawang, 1 at Yishun Ave 5, 1 at Yishun Int, 1 at Khatib MRT, then express to CGA, POWER!
Sure packed bus...Yes... And I also propose same for 36... Need to have 36E... Routed via ECP direct to airport.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Yes... And I also propose same for 36... Need to have 36E... Routed via ECP direct to airport.
I would also like to see 27E that will not stop at smaller bus stops, and will stop directly after TPE stop at regional Library, Tampines MRT, century square, ave 5 and then direct cga.
-
Originally posted by Pervertedboy:
@Acx1688 I think I know why LTA rejected your suggestion.
Simply because the demand for bus services at that area is too high, and combining them into 1 single bus service would reduce the supply of bus services.
Some routes are similar because they complement each other, so that the load can be spread out. If combine those routes into one single route, the entire load will be on that one route and there will be a lot of unnecessary complications regarding crowd management.
More bus services = better ride.
Alternatively, instead of combining bus services, you could suggest to LTA to introduce a new bus route, which duplicates sections of these bus services.
That is probably why the new BSEP bus routes are mostly duplicating existing bus services. For instance, BSEP service 49 duplicates mainly existing service 98.
#justsaying
I don't think Sv 49 duplicates Sv 98... The purpose of this service is to relieve load on 334 and give people living on st 41 an option of Lakeside MRT rather than go all the way to Jurong., it also relieves and provides another option to 335.. I don't see it affecting Sv 98 loading one bit.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Has LTA ever accepted any suggestion?
Nope most of them rejected...
SBS6421E was added for sv36 after constant badgering and admission that there is capacity issue for morning peak hours -
Originally posted by Acx1688:
Can try again though, sad that LTA keep on harping on hub and spoke and when anyone suggest a bus service to hub and spoke, tio reject flatly... in that case, how to get people to switch to public transport!? departments within LTA are not collaborating hard enough... more talk than do...
For Haig Rd link to PYL suggestion to divert sv76, sv43,76 have heavy duplication even though their end terminals are different...
Heavy usage for 43,76,135 is from PYL station to M Parade Rd, loading will not be that bad assuming FULL bus lanes implementation which is NEVER GOING to happen...
Really pity students walking to their schools from bus stops at Amber Rd, East Coast Rd rain or shine... damn sad...
I strongly support your idea to ply along Haig road... I think out of 43, 76 and 135... 135 should be routed via Haig road and then go straight down Amber road... 43/76/135 have route duplication all from Marine Parade to Mountbatten... If 135 is diverted via Haig road, will provide direct connectivity to residents along Haig road to both Parkway Parade and Paya Lebar... You have from Paya Lebar 43/76 with DDs and good frequency to Tanjong Katong, so should not cause inconvenience. You also have sv 40 in case some people will cry that they lose direct connectivity to Pipit/Circuit/Mattar/Aljunied areas... If people from Tanjong Katong want to go to Serangoon, still have 43 to connect... for AMK still have 76... so will not cause inconvenience to people but rather benefit lot of people living along Haig road... if LTA is reading, it should consider this modification for sure. -
Originally posted by Acx1688:
Back to 82/107, before NEL introduce, 82 run from Punggol End to Shenton Way... SDs...
Can upgrade extended 82 to FULL DD service and special 82e plying Punggol/part of SKG before going KPE/Shenton Way area as suggested by a few bros here.
Correspondence with LTA seem to give me the impression that there is Premium 569 running in the morning, find it puzzling, Punggol residents must pay premium ride and worse only one trip every weekday just to get to town?! It does not hold as most of the housing estates(except Yew Tee, but that is another story) have at least one service to town/CBD area. (please do not ask me to list hor, you all should knoe)
After that, kena chopped to end at SGN station, if NEL breakdown at Punggol, Punggol residents ho say liao, but wait for MRT shuttle will at least be better than SMRT's dilly dally denial attitude...
Strongly support 82/107 merger and will need 24 buses according to me... This can be divided as 12 DDs, 12 SDs... will benefit all Punggol / Sengkang residents in AM peak hours to town areas... just like 147... I think this will make both 82 and 107 routes more usable, as there are many people who live along Punggol road that would like to take this service directly to Potong Pasir / Lavendar rather than take 80/82/87 --> HG MRT... and change.LTA must consider... no pax gets affected... just benefit for everyone including SBST who will save on 2 buses...
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Strongly support 82/107 merger... will benefit all Punggol / Sengkang residents
while i agree sengkang/punggol need a full day bus svc to town, a new semi-express svc would be better than merging 82/107. with mrt providing a faster journey in most cases, new long bus routes should use the expressway for a faster and more direct connection, as a good alternative to bus/mrt transfer.
the new city direct svcs are cheaper than existing premium bus rts while providing similar fast connectivity, but would be better if some of them have full day variants serving additional areas like orchard, suntec or even harbourfront
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
I strongly support your idea to ply along Haig road... I think out of 43, 76 and 135... 135 should be routed via Haig road and then go straight down Amber road... 43/76/135 have route duplication all from Marine Parade to Mountbatten... If 135 is diverted via Haig road, will provide direct connectivity to residents along Haig road to both Parkway Parade and Paya Lebar... You have from Paya Lebar 43/76 with DDs and good frequency to Tanjong Katong, so should not cause inconvenience. You also have sv 40 in case some people will cry that they lose direct connectivity to Pipit/Circuit/Mattar/Aljunied areas... If people from Tanjong Katong want to go to Serangoon, still have 43 to connect... for AMK still have 76... so will not cause inconvenience to people but rather benefit lot of people living along Haig road... if LTA is reading, it should consider this modification for sure.Will try again, never hurts to write in and request, the most kena reject, again it would be the residents at Haig Rd to have a full connect to EW/Circle Line...
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Strongly support 82/107 merger and will need 24 buses according to me... This can be divided as 12 DDs, 12 SDs... will benefit all Punggol / Sengkang residents in AM peak hours to town areas... just like 147... I think this will make both 82 and 107 routes more usable, as there are many people who live along Punggol road that would like to take this service directly to Potong Pasir / Lavendar rather than take 80/82/87 --> HG MRT... and change.LTA must consider... no pax gets affected... just benefit for everyone including SBST who will save on 2 buses...
Precisely, it will also act as a buffer in any event NEL breaks down... Punggol residents are not left in the lurch...
NS have 960 from WDL
East have 2/12/23(slightly out of the way but still to city fringes)
West have 30, 51, 97 -
Originally posted by 201911:
while i agree sengkang/punggol need a full day bus svc to town, a new semi-express svc would be better than merging 82/107. with mrt providing a faster journey in most cases, new long bus routes should use the expressway for a faster and more direct connection, as a good alternative to bus/mrt transfer.
the new city direct svcs are cheaper than existing premium bus rts while providing similar fast connectivity, but would be better if some of them have full day variants serving additional areas like orchard, suntec or even harbourfront
Bro suggested to LTA before running Punggol, partial SKG east, Hougang Ave 3, Jln Eunos, Still Rd South, ECP, Sheares Ave, Shenton Way.
Tio reject with the standard reply...
Anyway part of the route is used by 107 daily to return to HG depot after shift end...
City Direct not WAB compliant -
Extension of service 82 is made by terms and conditions:
-Either to Bidadari
-Or to Shenton Way once again and make it as a backup in case of MRT breakdown.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Yes... And I also propose same for 36... Need to have 36E... Routed via ECP direct to airport.
Good to have express for sv36E, means it will be running as an alternative to taxis/MRT, fare should be at ffw/Express rates...
With a schedule of 20mins headway from CGA, 1st stop in city should be Temasek Boulevard(Conrad Hotel)
Meaning 36B should be running for full day to cater to the M Parade to ORC crowd, DD deployed...
Correct me if i am wrong, A FEW folks gave me the impression SG DDs has no power to go up Rochor ramp to BJB... so can our DDs go up Rochor ramp?!
HK DDs can go up steep ramps esp the ones that go up the ramp to get to Ap Lei Chau/South Horizons...
Our DDs no power?! -
Originally posted by TPS Timothy Mok:
Extension of service 82 is made by terms and conditions:
-
Either to Bidadari
-
Or to Shenton Way once again and make it as a backup in case of MRT breakdown.
T & C?! Bidadari?!
to shenton way is really to back up in case of NEL breakdown, that was why i suggested to LTA and emphasising this point -
https://www.google.com.sg/maps/ms?msid=211683730974815289058.0004f3ec49449c60aa389&msa=0&ll=1.292179,103.858116&spn=0.014609,0.016544
36E
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
LTA rejects all suggestions... They feel they are the best... Makes absolutely sense to merge 82/107... This is so obvious... I don't know why they don't do it... It won't disturb even one person due to route parallelism.
Hi mr BusAnalyser, persist on until LTA relents. Sooner or later, they will combine sbs 82 and sbs 107. Cheers
-
Originally posted by Acx1688:
Can try again though, sad that LTA keep on harping on hub and spoke and when anyone suggest a bus service to hub and spoke, tio reject flatly... in that case, how to get people to switch to public transport!? departments within LTA are not collaborating hard enough... more talk than do...
For Haig Rd link to PYL suggestion to divert sv76, sv43,76 have heavy duplication even though their end terminals are different...
Heavy usage for 43,76,135 is from PYL station to M Parade Rd, loading will not be that bad assuming FULL bus lanes implementation which is NEVER GOING to happen...
Really pity students walking to their schools from bus stops at Amber Rd, East Coast Rd rain or shine... damn sad...Hi mr Acx1688, persist on. Pressurize LTA until they relent. I will hope to see the combination of sbs 82 and sbs 107 into 1 route. Cheers.