LTA's Bus Service Enhancement Program - BSEP (Part 3)

• sgbuses

  27 Oct 15, 16:03

  How little trust do we have in this community.

• dupdup77

  27 Oct 15, 16:04

  Originally posted by array88:

  Anyway they didn't even say they counted 49 extension as another 'new' service... Just that BSEP poster was used. 386 should be a special case which I hope will not happen again

  Hi mr array88, extension of a route can be BSEP as long as the portion extended is new in respect to that bus number. No need to be new service then count as BSEP. Cheers. Thanks. 

• dupdup77

  27 Oct 15, 16:11

  Originally posted by jurongresident:

  I am not sure if the picture (https://scontent-sin1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/12189979_1010324748988137_6000628547379086861_n.jpg?oh=f3f0f16717612bc7ea2500c29bb6d0db&oe=56B74C93) is authentic.

  First, the resolution of the picture is not good; it is blurred.

  Second, I cannot find the picture on https://www.facebook.com/TheYuhuaFamily, which the original poster claimed it as the source.

  Third, this poster looks photoshop-ed. The tables look weird.

  Fourth, route 49 does not serve Yuhua SMC.

  Fifth, why would the extension be a BSEP new route, when the original route is already a BSEP new route?

    

  I have a feeling that this picture is fake.

  I am sorry for helping to spread the rumors.

  If this picture is fake, I hope the original poster can admit it and apologize for creating this false information.

   

  Only hear from the official sources. In this case, it is the LTA and the SBS Transit.

  Hi mr jurongresident, this is the point that people in this forum love to hate. When people try to provide information close to what was intended, others rebuked or criticized the information given. 

  First and 3rd pt is more due to external factors. 2nd pt is post removed due to sensitivity. Fourth pt is it will benefit those staying there. Fifth pt is why not? They have already made it clear officially that amendment and extension of a route can be BSEP. No need for a completely new service with new number to be considered BSEP. Why is this still an issue???

  Let''s look on bright side of things. Everything released earlier before official release, please do not put it down. Forums are meant to discuss. If you don't want, then please do not talk anything before releases by official sources. Cheers. Thanks.

• lemon1974

  27 Oct 15, 16:20

  Originally posted by dupdup77:

  Hi mr array88, extension of a route can be BSEP as long as the portion extended is new in respect to that bus number. No need to be new service then count as BSEP. Cheers. Thanks. 

  only that guy" Mr jurongresident" put it as new route？ the poste put extension of route only.. nothing wrong with that....  

• jurongresident

  27 Oct 15, 16:54

  Originally posted by jurongresident:

  Originally posted by SBS7557R:

  Service 49 to be extended to Jurong East from 15 Nov 2015.

  https://scontent-sin1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/12189979_1010324748988137_6000628547379086861_n.jpg?oh=f3f0f16717612bc7ea2500c29bb6d0db&oe=56B74C93

  Source: The Yuhua Family, Facebook

  

  I am not sure if the picture (https://scontent-sin1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/12189979_1010324748988137_6000628547379086861_n.jpg?oh=f3f0f16717612bc7ea2500c29bb6d0db&oe=56B74C93) is authentic.

  First, the resolution of the picture is not good; it is blurred.

  Second, I cannot find the picture on https://www.facebook.com/TheYuhuaFamily, which the original poster claimed it as the source.

  Third, this poster looks photoshop-ed. The tables look weird.

  Fourth, route 49 does not serve Yuhua SMC.

  Fifth, why would the extension be a BSEP new route, when the original route is already a BSEP new route?

    

  I have a feeling that this picture is fake.

  I am sorry for helping to spread the rumors.

  If this picture is fake, I hope the original poster can admit it and apologize for creating this false information.

   

  Only hear from the official sources. In this case, it is the LTA and the SBS Transit.

  I only asked if this picture is real.

  
  

  Originally posted by SBS7557R:

  Last night it was on the page. Guess it was removed later today. Hmm...

  Originally posted by SBS2652G:

  isnt fake

  Originally posted by lemon1974:

  funny... you are the one who posted the photo leh... SBS7557R only posted the link.. but you posted the photo.. so where did you get the photo from?  so you fake the photo and now ask other to apologize? 

  please tell me jurong east interchange is located in which SMC/GRC?

  Well, the original poster and some other members have said that this picture is real. I have nothing else to say.

  
  

  Originally posted by SBS2652G:

  JE in Yuhua SMC what

  Originally posted by SBS2652G:

  1. Facebook kills quality

  2. Deleted this morning

  3. Tables are not properly saved when file was converted to PDF

  4. JE under Yuhua SMC

  5. 49 is a BSEP service, extension counted as another new svc (like 386)

  I am sorry for saying that bus service 49 does not serve Yuhua SMC when it is extended to the Jurong East Bus Interchange, according to the route shown in the picture. When I first saw the route, I thought that while it terminates in the constituency, it only plies Yuhua SMC at the boundary, and it does not actually serve Yuhua SMC. When I looked at the route again, I realise that it calls at that one pair of bus stop in Yuhua SMC, along Jurong East Central; bus service 49 does serve Yuhua SMC.

  
  

  Originally posted by sgbuses:

  How little trust do we have in this community.

  It is not about trust. It is about being credible.

  I hope this is indeed the route to the Jurong East Bus Interchange when bus route 49 is extended to there.

  
  

  Originally posted by array88:

  Anyway they didn't even say they counted 49 extension as another 'new' service... Just that BSEP poster was used. 386 should be a special case which I hope will not happen again

  Originally posted by dupdup77:

  Hi mr jurongresident, this is the point that people in this forum love to hate. When people try to provide information close to what was intended, others rebuked or criticized the information given.

  First and 3rd pt is more due to external factors. 2nd pt is post removed due to sensitivity. Fourth pt is it will benefit those staying there. Fifth pt is why not? They have already made it clear officially that amendment and extension of a route can be BSEP. No need for a completely new service with new number to be considered BSEP. Why is this still an issue???

  Let''s look on bright side of things. Everything released earlier before official release, please do not put it down. Forums are meant to discuss. If you don't want, then please do not talk anything before releases by official sources. Cheers. Thanks.

  Originally posted by lemon1974:

  only that guy" Mr jurongresident" put it as new route？ the poste put extension of route only.. nothing wrong with that....  

  With regards to whether the route extension is a BSEP new route, I think it depends on the length of the extension. When the feeder route 386 at Punggol was extended, the extended length is either about the same or slightly longer than the original length. That could be the reason why the extension to route 386 is considered a BSEP new route. There is a likelihood that the extended length of route 49 is longer than the original length of the route. If so, this explains why it is considered a BSEP new route. Hence the BSEP logo on the picture.

• jurongresident

  27 Oct 15, 17:09

  Hi. I am sorry for making the accusation that the picture is not authentic.

  I have no right to criticize anybody. I am sorry for going over the line.

  Let us move on and discuss about the other topics in the forum. :)

• SBS2652G

  27 Oct 15, 17:19

  -

• Path Light

  27 Oct 15, 17:54

  The LTA must extend Service 502

• carbikebus

  27 Oct 15, 18:29

  Make sense for Svc 49 extension.Taman Jurong need a proper Terminal to deviate further Boon Lay svc..

• Path Light

  27 Oct 15, 18:52

  Originally posted by carbikebus:

  Make sense for Svc 49 extension.Taman Jurong need a proper Terminal to deviate further Boon Lay svc..

  I think I want Service 81, 82, 97, 103 and 111 to serve Serangoon Road areas and reduce waiting times to 2 minutes

• Gus.chong

  2 Nov 15, 20:42

  Registered on 02nd November 2015:

  SMB3138C
  SMB3139A
  SMB3140U
  SMB3141S
  SMB3142P
  SMB3143L
  SMB3144J
  SMB3613Y
  SBS3467T
  SBS3468R
  SBS3469M
  SBS3470H
  SBS3471E
  SBS3472C
  SBS3473A
  SBS3476S
  SBS3477P
  SBS3478L
  SBS3479J
  SBS3480D
  SBS3481B
  SBS3482Z
  SBS6597G
  SBS6598D
  SBS6599B

• jurongresident

  2 Nov 15, 21:58

  The route of BSEP Bus Service 258 is around 13.9 km.

  Based on travelling time on existing bus services 193, 257, 243W, 243G, 257, 193, estimation from OneMap.sg, and my own guess, the estimated travel time of BSEP Bus Service 258 is around 65 mins.

  If BSEP Bus Service 258 follows the frequency of the Jurong Industrial bus services, the frequency should be as follows:

  With reference to existing bus service 257,

  
  

  Morning peak – 6.5 mins

  Day non-peak – 11 mins

  Evening peak – 8.5 mins

  Night non-peak – 18.5 mins

  Based on the above, the maximum number of buses required for BSEP Bus Service 258 should be (65/6.5) ten.

  Originally posted by Gus.chong:

  Registered on 02nd November 2015:

  SMB3138C
  SMB3139A
  SMB3140U
  SMB3141S
  SMB3142P
  SMB3143L
  SMB3144J
  SMB3613Y
  SBS3467T
  SBS3468R
  SBS3469M
  SBS3470H
  SBS3471E
  SBS3472C
  SBS3473A
  SBS3476S
  SBS3477P
  SBS3478L
  SBS3479J
  SBS3480D
  SBS3481B
  SBS3482Z
  SBS6597G
  SBS6598D
  SBS6599B

  Of the twenty five buses in the list, seventeen have the “SBS” prefix. I guess ten would be deployed on BSEP Bus Service 258.

  Considering the loading at Jurong West Street 64 and 75 on bus services 243W in the morning and 243G in the evening, the use of double decker buses is necessary. This is especially if there would be reduction of bus fleet on bus services 243G and 243W when BSEP Bus Service 258 is launched.

  Originally posted by Gus.chong:

  Registered on 02nd November 2015 (BSEP):

  SBS3467T
  SBS3468R
  SBS3469M
  SBS3470H
  SBS3471E
  SBS3472C
  SBS3473A
  SBS3476S
  SBS3477P
  SBS3478L
  SBS3479J
  SBS3480D
  SBS3481B
  SBS3482Z

  Of the seventeen buses with the “SBS” prefix, fourteen are the Volvo B9TL Wright buses (Double-Decker).

  I guess around half of the Double-Decker buses would be deployed on BSEP Bus Service 258.

  Therefore, I guess the fleet on BSEP Bus Service 258 would comprise of the following:

  - Seven Volvo B9TL Wright buses (Double-Decker)

  - Three Mercedes-Benz O530 Citaro buses (Single-Decker)

• CB2883J

  2 Nov 15, 22:45

  BSEP Citaros registered up to 6599 and used up the 63xx-65xx series. What will they continue with?

• Path Light

  3 Nov 15, 06:19

  They should use buses from SBS3483D onwards

• jurongresident

  3 Nov 15, 08:08

  Apparently, it seems that a new prefix will be introduced from this month onwards, as part of the transition to the Government Contracting Model.
• SBS 9256 X

  3 Nov 15, 08:45

  Originally posted by jurongresident:

  Apparently, it seems that a new prefix will be introduced from this month onwards, as part of the transition to the Government Contracting Model.

  Hmmm...

  I guess for the Wrights no issue... They have SBS 9 C onwards for Batch 4...

  Subsequently, maybe they use SBS 7000 E onwards for the new batch of BSEP buses; maybe the Wrights, maybe the Citaros..

• Lsk138

  3 Nov 15, 18:19

  -

• BusAnalayzer

  4 Nov 15, 08:41

  Originally posted by Gus.chong:

  Registered on 02nd November 2015:

  SMB3138C
  SMB3139A
  SMB3140U
  SMB3141S
  SMB3142P
  SMB3143L
  SMB3144J
  SMB3613Y
  SBS3467T
  SBS3468R
  SBS3469M
  SBS3470H
  SBS3471E
  SBS3472C
  SBS3473A
  SBS3476S
  SBS3477P
  SBS3478L
  SBS3479J
  SBS3480D
  SBS3481B
  SBS3482Z
  SBS6597G
  SBS6598D
  SBS6599B

  sv 49 might get 2 more DDs... and 1 more SD. So total fleet of 10 buses.

• BusAnalayzer

  4 Nov 15, 08:55

  Originally posted by Lsk138:

  btw DDs on 102 Having good loading ?

  Wrong thread... I still have to do loading analysis on 102... will come back to you.

• Path Light

  4 Nov 15, 16:41

  Originally posted by Gus.chong:

  Registered on 02nd November 2015:

  SMB3138C
  SMB3139A
  SMB3140U
  SMB3141S
  SMB3142P
  SMB3143L
  SMB3144J
  SMB3613Y
  SBS3467T
  SBS3468R
  SBS3469M
  SBS3470H
  SBS3471E
  SBS3472C
  SBS3473A
  SBS3476S
  SBS3477P
  SBS3478L
  SBS3479J
  SBS3480D
  SBS3481B
  SBS3482Z
  SBS6597G
  SBS6598D
  SBS6599B

  Some of the new Volvo Wrights can be used on Service 253, 256 and 258

• CB2883J

  4 Nov 15, 17:35

  Originally posted by jurongresident:

  Apparently, it seems that a new prefix will be introduced from this month onwards, as part of the transition to the Government Contracting Model.

  Is this news info or speculation?

• AJQZC

  4 Nov 15, 23:13

  Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:

  sv 49 might get 2 more DDs... and 1 more SD. So total fleet of 10 buses.

  Alas, official press release for 49 extension is still not out yet. I'm starting to doubt whether it will indeed occur on 15 Nov, as stated on the publictransportsg site.

  Are the posters up already?

• BusAnalayzer

  4 Nov 15, 23:19

  Originally posted by AJQZC:

  Alas, official press release for 49 extension is still not out yet. I'm starting to doubt whether it will indeed occur on 15 Nov, as stated on the publictransportsg site.

  Are the posters up already?

  sv 102... a brand new service was announced less than a week before... so here still 10 days to go... maybe in next 2 days will be announced.

• lemon1974

  4 Nov 15, 23:37

  Originally posted by AJQZC:

  Alas, official press release for 49 extension is still not out yet. I'm starting to doubt whether it will indeed occur on 15 Nov, as stated on the publictransportsg site.

  Are the posters up already?

  e-timetable revision from 15 nov onwards.....

• array88

  4 Nov 15, 23:38

  deleted