Originally posted by randomguy10:I think if Sg Selatar package is to include majority Yishun services, it might be awarded to SMRT because they are the only Bendy operator in Singapore. Besides, if SMRT loses yishun, its share in the bus industry will become alot smaller so I dont think LTA will do it.
Thats why I believe that Sg Seletar Package may contain AMK, YCK and Sengkang instead of Yishun. Some of the Yishun Services that are SD or SD/DD only may be included but the feeders will be probably left out due to the Bendy buses. Unless Bendys are included in that package.
There were also a lot of bendies in Bukit Batok...
sekali YIS controlled from Mandai instead.
Give SMRT CCK, BPJ, WDL, SBW & YIS can liao..
Hopefully, LTA will deploy any company buses for MRT shuttles then...save the time for SMRT/SBST to deploy MRT shuttle if it's far..
Maybe if we divide S'pore into 5 sections...
Centre(AMK/Bishan), Top Right(Pasir Ris) & Bottom Left(Boon Lay[Jurong] - Foreign Operators
Top Left(CCK/Wdl/Yis) - SMRT
Bottom Right(HBF/Eunos/Bedok/Tampines?) - SBST
As the new year arrives, there is still a lot of optimistic selling about the GCM. Those who buy the marketing that GCM necessarily brings a guaranteed improvement in services and fail to moderate their expectations may be in for a rude shock once reality sets in.
1. Go-Ahead intends to bring the concept of timed stops from London to Singapore. Tower Transit may also follow, as Swan Transit (Tower Transit Perth) already practices this in Australia for several years.
http://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/london-bus-quality-systems-en-route-here
How is this different from the current operators?
Bus drivers will no longer attempt to regulate their speed while the bus is in motion. Instead, the bus will park at a designated bus stop and wait out any excess time in the timetable. For example, if a route 66 bus is early for 8 minutes along Bukit Timah, it will stop and park at Little India bus stop for 8 minutes before continuing its journey.
2. Another practice in London (and many parts of the world) is ad hoc early termination of service. This is legal in London. This is not the same as a shortworking service, where advance warning has already been given.
If the bus is excessively late, the OCC may call the driver and ask him to end the bus service early (likely a shortworking point), get all passengers already on the bus to alight and take the next bus.
This can happen especially if three or more buses are bunching together. It is immaterial if that particular bus has previously advertised on its EDS to be operating the full journey.
https://www.reddit.com/r/london/comments/24coz9/why_do_london_bus_drivers_randomly_throw_everyone/
It is not known if either operators intend to implement this second practice in Singapore.
If you are used to these Western practices, all is good. However if you are one of those confused commuters who asked why LTA is frequently modifying bus stops/services to the point where they do not know where to board or forced to walk the distance...
These concepts, implemented over the long term, will pan out better than the current system. It is a question of whether commuters/motorists will respond maturely if these changes come.
These ideally should go and hand in hand with chopping up those long legacy bus routes which not only gives the OCC extra work in controlling the headways, but also runs contrary to the concept of depot-centric packages.
I am afraid these are painful steps that people may not be willing to take. That being the case, we can just go on the same path with little real improvements.
As for the ad-hoc termination of service, that has been done before, but the practice stopped because commuters didn't like it (obviously). This probably epitomises yet again the painful steps we need to take if we really want to improve reliability.
On the topic of holding buses at bus-stops, the infrastructural issue will bite: can the bus-stop bay hold buses without disrupting traffic? If this proves otherwise, LTA may not allow it, or I would guess that the incumbents may lobby against it as it affects their operations.
Originally posted by SBS2601D:These concepts, implemented over the long term, will pan out better than the current system. It is a question of whether commuters/motorists will respond maturely if these changes come.
These ideally should go and hand in hand with chopping up those long legacy bus routes which not only gives the OCC extra work in controlling the headways, but also runs contrary to the concept of depot-centric packages.
I am afraid these are painful steps that people may not be willing to take. That being the case, we can just go on the same path with little real improvements.
As for the ad-hoc termination of service, that has been done before, but the practice stopped because commuters didn't like it (obviously). This probably epitomises yet again the painful steps we need to take if we really want to improve reliability.
On the topic of holding buses at bus-stops, the infrastructural issue will bite: can the bus-stop bay hold buses without disrupting traffic? If this proves otherwise, LTA may not allow it, or I would guess that the incumbents may lobby against it as it affects their operations.
"Improvements" can be quite a subjective matter to everyone. Let me explain why.
How is the man on the street going to respond is where I am concerned. There are some pioneer generation people I spoke to who greatly resent changes because these changes inconvenience them - even moving a bus stop 100 away from the previous one (e.g. 920/922/979 at Bukit Panjang MRT Station). Some have weak legs, others less willing to make personal sacrifices. One elderly lady I spoke to asked "why bring in all these fancy foreign practices with little consideration of local needs/culture for an old lady".
There are then those who will ignore large banners and signs telling them this bus stop is for alighting only and still question the driver why they wouldn't allow them to board. The only but major flaw with these signs is that they were all in English. Some follow the crowd with a herd menality and groan when the driver refuses boarding at the bus stop. Others criticise why the boarding and alighting points are arranged in such a confusing manner.
I think the negative response will come largely from the commuters than the incumbent operators. Not everyone in Singapore understands English, and even if they do, appreciate all these concepts. New GCM practices, if not explained properly, can result in irate commuters who do not appreciate them. Passengers who frequently get kicked off a late bus without explanation may interpret it as buses "frequently break down much more often than before the GCM". Timed stops makes regulating services much more visible than current practices, and may cause some passengers to think that "GCM is causing me to be late and buses to be slower than before".
These are some of the challenges LTA and the new operators will have to anticipate in advance. For timed stops, traffic can be another possible issue and LTA may have to consider building dedicated bays/parking lots to accomodate these buses waiting out their timetable.
Hope that LTA will consider Euro IV buses like MB Citaro C2,VDL Citea etc
Originally posted by carbikebus:Hope that LTA will consider Euro IV buses like MB Citaro C2,VDL Citea etc
Euro IV? Or VI?
Originally posted by carbikebus:Hope that LTA will consider Euro IV buses like MB Citaro C2,VDL Citea etc
All buses registered from 1 January 2018 onwards must be Euro VI-compliant...
Four Habit bendies from 106 will be moved to others soon, de-registering 4 of the Citaro bendies.
Originally posted by TPS Timothy Mok:Four Habit bendies from 106 will be moved to others soon, de-registering 4 of the Citaro bendies.
Since when do we have Citaro bendies?
Or do you mean the Merc bendies?
Originally posted by SMB128B:Since when do we have Citaro bendies?
Or do you mean the Merc bendies?
I think what he meant was the Hispano Citaro (TIB 973 A) that series...
Originally posted by SBS 9256 X:I think what he meant was the Hispano Citaro (TIB 973 A) that series...
Oh I see... Apologies for my mistake
From 2016-2021,We only see either SBST or SMRT winning the tenders.Sungei Seletar will winners will be either SBST or SMRT,Same goes for Ulu Pandan and Mandai..Cant say much about Kim Chuan though..So much for open tender..
Originally posted by carbikebus:From 2016-2021,We only see either SBST or SMRT winning the tenders.Sungei Seletar will winners will be either SBST or SMRT,Same goes for Ulu Pandan and Mandai..Cant say much about Kim Chuan though..So much for open tender..
Not true. There won't be any open bids for them and no winners or losers. They will simply continue to operate the services they are already operating under new contracts with LTA (re-negotiated).
Meaning Sungei Seletar & Mandai for SMRT,Ulu Pandan & Kim Chuan for SBST till 2021?
Originally posted by carbikebus:From 2016-2021,We only see either SBST or SMRT winning the tenders.Sungei Seletar will winners will be either SBST or SMRT,Same goes for Ulu Pandan and Mandai..Cant say much about Kim Chuan though..So much for open tender..
weren't there 3 GCM areas to be farmed out? Which is the third one?
Originally posted by iveco:weren't there 3 GCM areas to be farmed out? Which is the third one?
Is it?I thought 2,Anyway i hope Tower Transit will win the third one and can co share depot with Go Ahead
sorry but just out of curiosity
since Tower Transit uses MAN A22, E500, wrights & citaros
Is there a possibility that ex-smrt buses will ply on ex-sbst routes & vice versa?
like for example MAN A22 on 78 & wrights on 189 ?
Originally posted by azharjj:sorry but just out of curiosity
since Tower Transit uses MAN A22, E500, wrights & citaros
Is there a possibility that ex-smrt buses will ply on ex-sbst routes & vice versa?
like for example MAN A22 on 78 & wrights on 189 ?
Yes. In fact I think they may even put them as perm, that is if they practise a deployment that has perms.
Originally posted by SBS351M:Yes. In fact I think they may even put them as perm, that is if they practise a deployment that has perms.
Sure, that can happen. The real question is whether Go-Ahead is going to receive A22s and Enviro500s for it to deploy in Loyang.
Originally posted by azharjj:sorry but just out of curiosity
since Tower Transit uses MAN A22, E500, wrights & citaros
Is there a possibility that ex-smrt buses will ply on ex-sbst routes & vice versa?
like for example MAN A22 on 78 & wrights on 189 ?
See if TT is free to combine all the data on every single buses.
Vote for your favourite GCM livery here!
Sadly there's only 2 choices and the colours looks a little dull... Rather they hold a design competition.
Originally posted by SBS9C:Vote for your favourite GCM livery here!
Sadly there's only 2 choices and the colours looks a little dull... Rather they hold a design competition.
bright red colour like london buses
Originally posted by azharjj:bright red colour like london buses
I got a feeling its red