Double-deckers not right fit for S'pore roads?
-
http://transport.asiaone.com/news/general/story/double-deckers-not-right-fit-spore-roads
They have been a common sight on Singapore roads for decades but are double-deckers making bus transportation doubly effective?
Lee Der Horng, a transport expert at the National University of Singapore, is urging SBS Transit and SMRT to rethink their use of such buses.
What i say to this person is that if he ever take a public transport bus, he should know there are service route which always full of people even with DD buses deploy on them during peak hours. if both company deploy SD as what he said on the web page he must be someone never taken a public bus before.
And this so call expert don't ever try to compare between cities and what others had studied transport on other cities around the world.
he should take 59 during peak hours or other serivce that alway full during peak hours. before making any comment on paper.
-
Doesnt mean he is from NUS he is smart and genius..Another bunch of Dimwit talk without using common sense
-
...
-
Then bendy leh? Lagi worse. Dr Lee's brains grow out of his bum. So much for NUS standards. Bleah.
-
The problem with all these so called transport experts is they like to talk from the comfort of their office desks. Please go and walk the talk. Go down to the roads and check out and see for yourself what is really happening in real practise. Cheers.
-
Originally posted by wsy1234:
http://transport.asiaone.com/news/general/story/double-deckers-not-right-fit-spore-roads
They have been a common sight on Singapore roads for decades but are double-deckers making bus transportation doubly effective?
Lee Der Horng, a transport expert at the National University of Singapore, is urging SBS Transit and SMRT to rethink their use of such buses.
What i say to this person is that if he ever take a public transport bus, he should know there are service route which always full of people even with DD buses deploy on them during peak hours. if both company deploy SD as what he said on the web page he must be someone never taken a public bus before.
And this so call expert don't ever try to compare between cities and what others had studied transport on other cities around the world.
he should take 59 during peak hours or other serivce that alway full during peak hours. before making any comment on paper.
Not completely wrong but i would say that the title is completely off.
Using SD alone is just not sustainable since we are struggling to get enough bc to begin with.
But using DD as a one-fits-all solution is just not it. DBTF causes travelling pattern to change. Who wouldn't want to take a short ride home from the MRT station if it's just 10cents or less? If they put DD on such services, its just a waste of time to board+move up+move down+alight.
If he targetted his article to just services of high loading but with most passenger not staying in the bus for more than 15minutes, then I would agree with what he says.
Otherwise 0.2 seconds per pax is neligible if pax are travelling for >30mins esp on 161 and 168. At least pax get a seat and will be less frustrated.
-
"Singapore's traffic conditions, especially during peak hours, are not suitable for double-deckers, as they have a longer dwelling time at bus stops. This will more likely lead to bus bunching and extend the travelling time for passengers."
He is so stupid. OMG.
Does he even know
-- During peak hours when there is traffice, DDs are more efficient than SDs even at bus stops on high loading routes. Lets not take 190 but take 963 or 88 (when had SDs) for example. The SDs crawl on these services. Once it reaches 70 pax, and at every stop 3-4 pax alight, no one can board because the whole gangway is clogged. People have to push to make their exit. BC has to shout at pax to move behind if he wants to take any new pax. In all this bus waits for 2-3 minutes, always causing bunching. Hence, bunching is so much more frequent with SDs than DDs.
I am not even commenting about the loading that requires DDs for many routes during peak hours.
What a dumbass!!
-
What is 0.2 seconds? Compared to the comfort the buses offer with 82 people able o sit, carrying more pax, lesser buses on road.
Just take for example: sv 27, 34, 36, 53, 15
Buses are constantly added on these services as DDs cannot be used. Does the idiot not see that if these services had DDs, lesser buses would have been used than current fleet. Is he blind not to observe the bunching issues on SDs??
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
He is so stupid. OMG.
What a dumbass!!
You may have better views from the ground than just ezlink data... but going down this low to call another fellow human being names?
Just disagree but why the hate?
-
Anyway, green lights have been given for buses atleast 12m + 3 doors SD/DD to be here for trial in the next few years, that is if both companies are willing to test them... We might just see MB Citaro L or something like MAN A39 13.7m...
-
the frightening part this is the kind of person might join the government agencies and make our life worse than before. example impose fee on JB lorries comning over here.
-
I could not find the full academic article in question yet, so I do not think it is appropriate to comment until I see the conclusions for all other bus types.
-
Originally posted by Bus Stopping:
Not completely wrong but i would say that the title is completely off.
Using SD alone is just not sustainable since we are struggling to get enough bc to begin with.
But using DD as a one-fits-all solution is just not it. DBTF causes travelling pattern to change. Who wouldn't want to take a short ride home from the MRT station if it's just 10cents or less? If they put DD on such services, its just a waste of time to board+move up+move down+alight.
If he targetted his article to just services of high loading but with most passenger not staying in the bus for more than 15minutes, then I would agree with what he says.
Otherwise 0.2 seconds per pax is neligible if pax are travelling for >30mins esp on 161 and 168. At least pax get a seat and will be less frustrated.
the title is taken from asiaone.com SPH news web site. Also most people taking DD bus service the journey is not less than 15min. example from toa payoh to kakit bukit service 59 is more than 15min about 25min as it travel on expressway. this is the kind of bus service sbst should have when the MRT lines are fully completed. because the service travel on expressway with proper plaining it still faster and cheaper than MRT.
-
if you notice normal service that made use of expressway there is always high demand during peak hours. 5,59,985,190,52,30,966,969,168,161 and 972 anymore service? how many DD buses or bendy bus deploy on them?
-
Originally posted by wsy1234:
if you notice normal service that made use of expressway there is always high demand during peak hours. 5,59,985,190,52,30,966,969,168,161 and 972 anymore service? how many DD buses or bendy bus deploy on them?
Many more... 27 33 197 97 196 198 965 857 154 151 52... etc etc.
0.2 seconds per pax is not alot on these services you mentioned, since the pax board and alight not very often. I don't agree with him on this.
However, if you look at svcs like 241, 243 where easily 60 pax can board from int and alight within 10mins, then 0.2 sec per pax is alot. Also same for some long dist trunk services that ply between MRT stations and ppl use it like feeder. This needs better buses like 3 door DD or multi door bendy (4-5 doors would be nice) for exceptionally fast boarding and alighting.
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Doesnt mean he is from NUS he is smart and genius..Another bunch of Dimwit talk without using common sense
another academic with serious P.H.D. -
Was expecting to see MH17 on the headlines of My Paper and saw this instead. Was disappointed.
On topic: DDs save space on our already crowded roads (as much as I wanted to drive a car). If no DDs, by the time 6.9mil people, no need drive liao, everywhere also jam because too many SDs.
-
Double decker not right?
please, a DD on 190 is okay but not on 900.
-
whoever says one size fit all ... wright on 147, 174, 74, 88 but even on 293?
pick the right bus type for every route. spamming KUB and Taros on 27 and 27A when 27A could get some Wrights.
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
whoever says one size fit all ... wright on 147, 174, 74, 88 but even on 293?
pick the right bus type for every route. spamming KUB and Taros on 27 and 27A when 27A could get some Wrights.
One more person asking for DDs on 27A... LTA wake up!!!
-
The fellow's main point was that our current DD layout is inefficient and archaic. Which many of you also said before what.......
If anything, all that article serves to remind me was that my low opinion of sgforums was probably too high still. And asiaone was trying to get you guys to read by using such a lousy title, and you guys actually bought everything WITHOUT asking to read the ORIGINAL paper by Prof. Lee. Except one.
-
I agree feeders & short routes suchs as 181 doesnt require DDs cause most of the times the upp deck is only half full..I think the main point is that he notice SBST particularly ineffectively deploy DDs at the wrong route i suppose?
-
wad if 179 dun have any DDs -
179 no DDs?Disastrous..how many SDs and BCs needed?38 buses at least then we can go headhunt that so called Prof..Wonder if he is local or not?Sg so many imports and new citizens their mindset is diff from us though i respect him as a prof but again he is a car guy
-
This expert must be taking car one. Out of touch with the ground.