Originally posted by JurongWestresident:I believe SMRT will procure more Double Decker buses this year and in the next few years.
Last year it only procured 201 units most likely because this was its first year procuring Double Decker buses. Now that it has experience, it may procure more units of Double Decker buses.
I feel that eventually, the Articulated buses (including that SMB-registered one) will all be phased out and replaced with Double Decker buses.
Speaking of which, an articulated bus caused a traffic jam inside Boon Lay Bus Interchange bus bay recently. That bus occupied around half of the driveway where buses from sawtooth berths drive through to loop and exit the bus interchange. Only one bus can drive through to loop, and some departures were delayed.
In my opinion, there should not be Articulated buses here where traffic volumes are high and traffic congestions are common.
According to the article on Wikipedia, last updated on 29 December 2014, SMRT has 315 units of Articulated buses.
When SMRT procures Double Decker buses again, it shoud procure at least 315 units to replace all its Articulated buses. Considering that more high capacity buses will be needed in future, the figure should be doubled to around 630. SMRT should procure around 630 units of Double Decker buses when it procures Double Decker buses again.
As mentioned before, it's also the interchange structure that is always causing jams problem, not just bendy bus factor alone. So don't juz blame the bendy bus alone.
If you wish to have no jams in the interchange, govt. should bloody expand the landspace, stop being stingy..
Imo, imagine some random bus just breakdown at the entrance of the interchange, and because the govt. wants to save space, they only make two lanes for entry..which in reality only can take 1 single lane..
Yeah agreed,ITHs with many svc should follow like WRI style,semi underground..In the end they have to waste land building Changi Bussiness park terminal and extension of Tampines which is already very tight
LTA should focus more on SMRTB routes..SBST for now their plan is working perfectly.
LTA should work together with NEA for the trimming/chopping of branches or even trees if they must..
LTA should order more BSEP Enviro 500s and A95s while SMRTB should order another 60-70 units of A24s at a discount rates.If not by 2016 when the population increase again the old problem will erect again..
All feeders/Intratowns and short trunk like 859,860,962,964 should use just A24s and rigid buses
Mid and long haul trunk should use DDs and rigid buses..
svc like 106,188,190,960,969 can deploy all DDs
Maybe ADL can offer SMRTB their new E200MMC with 4.5litre engine for svc like 825 etc
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Worst is how they are managing sv 300 now... spamming so many rigids on a once-upon-a-time full fleet bendy route.
Feeder 300 SMRT Buses simply cannot cope with the load
Originally posted by phillipC:Feeder 300 SMRT Buses simply cannot cope with the load
yes.. and still they spam so many SDs...
that's also the reason I feel sv 300 will be revised... and sv 301 will be introduced to complement loads...
it is one of the "worst" managed feeder services in Singapore.
Problem with 300 is it is the only bus svc towards CCK and it has to serve many blocks hope SBST can introduce another feeder svc/trunk to share the loads with 300..
982E dosent operate full day and 67's frequency is ridiculous. therefore ppl crowd on 300 instead plus SMRT's mental block on only trunks can get DDs and feeders bendies wont help 300 any further
Registered on 09/01/2015
SMB5033H
Originally posted by SBS5010P:Problem with 300 is it is the only bus svc towards CCK and it has to serve many blocks hope SBST can introduce another feeder svc/trunk to share the loads with 300..
982E dosent operate full day and 67's frequency is ridiculous. therefore ppl crowd on 300 instead plus SMRT's mental block on only trunks can get DDs and feeders bendies wont help 300 any further
yes.. sv 300 will do good with a few DDs... I prefer sv 300 to get some rather than other sv like 61... sv 300 route is also quite long... so ppl who board along ave 2/3/5 can easily go to upper deck. Better than having rigids on this service.
Ofcourse better would be to have bendies.. but if you see it was a full fleet bendy service... and now has 4 SDs.
This may sounds like a pretty unpopular opinion, but I personally prefer services serving major teritary institusions that have either a MRT station nearby, or have its Int nearby to use bendys instead, due to very high loading/unloading within a few stops. Of course, not all services need bendies IMO.
Here are some which I can think of currently.
23 (Tamp Int - TP)
95 (Kent Ridge MRT - NUS)
There are some services that I also considered, but decided against it due to several reasons.
31 (More of a point A - B type of pax, noticable on 31A)
69 (A bit of distance from Bedok - TP)
96 (A bit of distance from Clementi - Kent Ridge Cres)
179 (Way too much buses, and Pioneer bus bay will pobably not be able to support so many bendy)
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:yes.. sv 300 will do good with a few DDs... I prefer sv 300 to get some rather than other sv like 61... sv 300 route is also quite long... so ppl who board along ave 2/3/5 can easily go to upper deck. Better than having rigids on this service.
Ofcourse better would be to have bendies.. but if you see it was a full fleet bendy service... and now has 4 SDs.
Previously it was 10 buses with all bendy fleets,After extension add up another 3-4 rigid buses..
Info from friend:SMRT testing DDs on 851,854 & 857 routes.I wonder if 851 kena Wldep/Amdep control.
Originally posted by carbikebus:Previously it was 10 buses with all bendy fleets,After extension add up another 3-4 rigid buses..
Okay, to your point
sv 300 in 2013: 10 bendy buses
sv 300 in 2014: 8 bendy buses + 5 SDs
Capacity increased by 3 buses, in turn 2 bendy slots degraded to SD.
So how much really was the capacity increased?
When the SD comes, already no space for anyone to board along ave 4. Observed 2-3 times. Same PM peak, SDs can hardly clear off the load.
Do we have to wait for another person to post video until SMRT takes constructive steps? 302/307 still okay (not great).
Now compare this with 240, 241, 243, 291, 334... such a huge world of difference in the way feeders are managed in SBST and SMRT.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:yes.. and still they spam so many SDs...
that's also the reason I feel sv 300 will be revised... and sv 301 will be introduced to complement loads...
it is one of the "worst" managed feeder services in Singapore.
think 300 will be re-routed once 301 is introduced...it will be anytime soon i guess. 300 loading is super crazy...the queue can go easily up to at least 2 bendy buses worth of pax during peak hour even at 2-3 mins per bus... putting SMB1510Z and SMB1516H (AP slot) in is definitely a wrong move.. TIB549S is still ok since it is only for peak hour, so i take TIB549S only as a supplement...
Originally posted by SMB42P:
think 300 will be re-routed once 301 is introduced...it will be anytime soon i guess. 300 loading is super crazy...the queue can go easily up to at least 2 bendy buses worth of pax during peak hour even at 2-3 mins per bus... putting SMB1510Z and SMB1516H (AP slot) in is definitely a wrong move.. TIB549S is still ok since it is only for peak hour, so i take TIB549S only as a supplement...
Yes.. I am also sure 301 will be introduced... and 300 route will be modified... 300A/B will also be beneficial.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Okay, to your point
sv 300 in 2013: 10 bendy buses
sv 300 in 2014: 8 bendy buses + 5 SDs
Capacity increased by 3 buses, in turn 2 bendy slots degraded to SD.
So how much really was the capacity increased?
When the SD comes, already no space for anyone to board along ave 4. Observed 2-3 times. Same PM peak, SDs can hardly clear off the load.
Do we have to wait for another person to post video until SMRT takes constructive steps? 302/307 still okay (not great).
Now compare this with 240, 241, 243, 291, 334... such a huge world of difference in the way feeders are managed in SBST and SMRT.
you should totally see the queue at CCK INT yesterday at around 810pm. 300 had at least 150 pax queueing, 302 and 307 had at least 100 pax queueing, and both the queue for 302 and 307 actually intersected each other. I saw someone took photo, but not sure if it will be sent in for complaint...
Not sure but eventually for 302, TIB1217T and TIB1117Z cleared the load, while SMB215H and SMB1566M cleared the load for 307...
301 or the new trunk should run parallel at certain areas just like what 972 to 190
The bendies from 188 & 190 should goes to 300 in return for DDs
Originally posted by SMB42P:you should totally see the queue at CCK INT yesterday at around 810pm. 300 had at least 150 pax queueing, 302 and 307 had at least 100 pax queueing, and both the queue for 302 and 307 actually intersected each other. I saw someone took photo, but not sure if it will be sent in for complaint...
Not sure but eventually for 302, TIB1217T and TIB1117Z cleared the load, while SMB215H and SMB1566M cleared the load for 307...
is the person who took photo shawn?
Lta needs to do more to move the load at CCK interchange
SMRT areas need more bus service..
Bt Batok still got room for a feeder and a mid haul trunk...Bt Batok to Marsiling might be great.CCK need a trunk svc which ply Keat Hong and loops around Jurong West and a feeder which can compliment svc 300.Bt Panjang can have a trunk svc to Sembawang via Sembawang Rd/Yishun Ave 1 and Yishun MRT.Yishun can have a trunk looping at Admiralty Rd West compliment svc 169,Woodlands just need a short haul trunk that connect most of the feeder/Intratown routes..Sembawang need another feeder.
Sbw need meh? 859 n the A n B just covered almost all of sbw alone. Plus 962,980,882,858 and 167 to cover the rest of sbw. Sbw need trunk to Tampines or pasir ris or bedok and sbw to JE or boon lay bypassing bpj,cck and bukit batok
Originally posted by TIB999B:is the person who took photo shawn?
i have no idea..but till now no news of complaints so i guess not..
Originally posted by carbikebus:SMRT areas need more bus service..
Bt Batok still got room for a feeder and a mid haul trunk...Bt Batok to Marsiling might be great.CCK need a trunk svc which ply Keat Hong and loops around Jurong West and a feeder which can compliment svc 300.Bt Panjang can have a trunk svc to Sembawang via Sembawang Rd/Yishun Ave 1 and Yishun MRT.Yishun can have a trunk looping at Admiralty Rd West compliment svc 169,Woodlands just need a short haul trunk that connect most of the feeder/Intratown routes..Sembawang need another feeder.
but then CCK is getting overcrowded...during peak hour sometimes buses can take up to 5-10 mins just to leave the interchange, and often can also observe buses queueing up to park the buses, especially evident for the rigid buses and during meal /peak times... sometimes rigid buses have to park at the bendy lots..
Wonder if the Enviros will also get Voith gearbox like the newer MANs...
Originally posted by 23ispolo:Wonder if the Enviros will also get Voith gearbox like the newer MANs...
If that's the case, the Enviro500s will lambat even worser.. (for some services only)