Double-deckers not right fit for S'pore roads?
-
NTU should have planned a feeder LRT system inside to Pioneer Station~ Then 179 can go with SDs~
-
Originally posted by SBS2601D:
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.
but SMRT and SBST only go for 12m DD
if you have double staircases and 3rd doors, then capacity wise Bendies > DD.
but then you look at the trunks which needs DDs are having small turnovers (SBST). svcs like 67 and 960 have a pattern like a feeder, i.e. loading going from full to nearly empty and vice-versa. 851 and 857 have single directional high loadings as compared to 147 and 174 which has bi-directional high loadings. services like 27, 36 and 858 have high loading but are restricted to SD/rigid and bendies, 27A and 858A plies the most used areas of the respective services but are given SDs at very high frequencies. why should 27A not given DDs and 858A not given bendies, simply because 27 and 858 are all SD/Rigids?
-
Originally posted by Bus&Soccer l0v3r (VO3x 1):
wad if 179 dun have any DDsplease get rid of 179A. pax will alight at PNR instead BNL
-
858A dont need bendies lah, there is 0 standees for all 4 buses. I took 1228L on 858A as e-pull, only 3 pax only incl myself. 27A can put DDs due to high freq
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
858A dont need bendies lah, there is 0 standees for all 4 buses.
I took 1228L on 858A as e-pull, only 3 pax only incl myself.
27A can put DDs due to high freq
... lol
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
but SMRT and SBST only go for 12m DD
if you have double staircases and 3rd doors, then capacity wise Bendies > DD.
but then you look at the trunks which needs DDs are having small turnovers (SBST). svcs like 67 and 960 have a pattern like a feeder, i.e. loading going from full to nearly empty and vice-versa. 851 and 857 have single directional high loadings as compared to 147 and 174 which has bi-directional high loadings. services like 27, 36 and 858 have high loading but are restricted to SD/rigid and bendies, 27A and 858A plies the most used areas of the respective services but are given SDs at very high frequencies. why should 27A not given DDs and 858A not given bendies, simply because 27 and 858 are all SD/Rigids?
For the bolded part: that is stupid deployment logic that I just don't get. It is not a difficult issue to tackle. It is like treating the A variant as a separate route within the route, and having fixed deployment of dd buses.
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
858A dont need bendies lah, there is 0 standees for all 4 buses.
I took 1228L on 858A as e-pull, only 3 pax only incl myself.
27A can put DDs due to high freq
I am not too sure your observation on 858 is correct. Peak period loading is always packed to door.
-
858A only operates after 2330 btw. 858 peak hour dont need to say lah. I am very well aware of 858 load even before the OC days. I seen 5 858 come together before
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
858A only operates after 2330 btw. 858 peak hour dont need to say lah. I am very well aware of 858 load even before the OC days. I seen 5 858 come together before
I am talking abt peak hour loading on 858... Of course high capacity buses not needed after peak hours.
-
Originally posted by sbst191:
NTU should have planned a feeder LRT system inside to Pioneer Station~ Then 179 can go with SDs~
i think a electric tram system similar to Melbourne may be better. i believe may cost less to build and maintain and pax need not climb up and down the station. -
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
For the bolded part: that is stupid deployment logic that I just don't get. It is not a difficult issue to tackle. It is like treating the A variant as a separate route within the route, and having fixed deployment of dd buses.
Something like 143M replacing SWT 143A will be ideal.
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
858A only operates after 2330 btw. 858 peak hour dont need to say lah. I am very well aware of 858 load even before the OC days. I seen 5 858 come together before
eh we have a problem.
why 858 stopped going to the Airport after 2314? on the other hand 27, 36 will continue until the last bus. inconsistency among airport bound buses.
aside from that, 858A should also be operating during peak hours, making it a true SWT. it would be getting some bendies
-
2325 not 2314, 2314 is bfore 3071K is added.
Imagine 858 last bus to CGA is 0030, i bet nobody wanna drive tht slot.
SBST side those last bus from airport could be the last bus from their starting point. Same goes for 858. Last bus from CGA is always 12.
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
2325 not 2314, 2314 is bfore 3071K is added.
Imagine 858 last bus to CGA is 0030, i bet nobody wanna drive tht slot.
SBST side those last bus from airport could be the last bus from their starting point. Same goes for 858. Last bus from CGA is always 12.
normally the last bus are 2330 for all Trunk svcs. 859 is at 0000, 882 is at 2345.
the current 858A, 859A and 700A are like the M variant of SBST routes.
-
if 858 has high loading, where is the SWT? and as usual the Bendies should be on this service.
-
SWT 858A should start from Yishun Stadium to WRI for PM peak and AM peak from WRI to Yishun Stadium. That is the best solution i can give to help with 858 loading coz 858 did downroute from yishun stadium to WRI in the morning
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
SWT 858A should start from Yishun Stadium to WRI for PM peak and AM peak from WRI to Yishun Stadium. That is the best solution i can give to help with 858 loading coz 858 did downroute from yishun stadium to WRI in the morning
this is likely to give 858A some bendies ...
-
Best is to start from Yishun loop at WRI for both AM/PM peak from 0600-0830,1800,2030.Give a few duties to Amdep..In return Amdep give 7 duties of 851 to Wldep.
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Best is to start from Yishun loop at WRI for both AM/PM peak from 0600-0830,1800,2030.Give a few duties to Amdep..In return Amdep give 7 duties of 851 to Wldep.
ah yeah since AMDEP is completely DD-phobic ...
but 7 DDs for 851 is ... not enough, maybe some SD to bendies on AM side?
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
ah yeah since AMDEP is completely DD-phobic ...
but 7 DDs for 851 is ... not enough, maybe some SD to bendies on AM side?
Temporary before Amdep find a better place to move 851 should be Am/Wl..maybe 12 duties for Am and 15 duties to Wl.852 should be half Am half Kj,854 revert back to full Am cause I don't see any improvement for this partial thing.857 can go full Am.Svc like 171 Am can give another 4 duties to Wl and introduce a short working trip from 2315-2345 from Yishun to Bt Panjang done by Wl side.969 & 980 can go minority Am.
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
ah yeah since AMDEP is completely DD-phobic ...
but 7 DDs for 851 is ... not enough, maybe some SD to bendies on AM side?
851 is very badly treated. People often cannot board. SMRT relies people to take 852 or 54 as backup options around Marymount, where the loading gets unmanageable. After that on Thomson, there are many other services in parallel that share the load.
851 needs 10-12 DDs/bendies in the peak direction between 07.00 and 08.30. In the opposite direction, only SDs can be deployed during the same duration from BMR side.
-
851 in fact need only DDs for peak hours not bendies..Imagine New Year eves jam..Heard there's planning to expand Amdep but what and how?My thinking is the empty land pop the depot..If they dismantle and fit new roofs it will at least takes a week or so..
-
Seriuosly we cant survive w/o DD here..I dun mind about short routes but those like 161/168 etc..
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
851 in fact need only DDs for peak hours not bendies..Imagine New Year eves jam..Heard there's planning to expand Amdep but what and how?My thinking is the empty land pop the depot..If they dismantle and fit new roofs it will at least takes a week or so..
They need to start work on AMDEP asap. That is the quickest solution for now.
-
The fact: It takes 0.2 seconds per pax longer to disembark from a DD compared to SD.
Did anyone even ask why in the world Prof Lee would use such a metric?
Apparently not.
The guess is simple: The method of using the length of time to disembark all pax divided by the number of pax is to normalise the length of time, against the bias that is the larger amount of people for the DD to disembark.
In laymen terms, it means that DDs hold at bus-stops longer for reasons beyond that there are more pax.
Using logic, it has to be the lay-out of the DD, coupled to the fact that pax has to walk more within the bus, to exit. Thus adding to the extra dwell-time.
Prof Lee then understandably questions the wisdom of continuing the current layout, which is also a logical conclusion, and a legitimate question.
But it inspires howls and wails and then irrelevantly gleeful discussions about what service should get what.
If numbers are not your forte (nor fault of yours), and respect is not in your dictionary, then is it really the education system that is solely to blame for both at the same time?
Please think about it.
Edit: I re-read the article in case I sound stupid when I accuse others of thus. That's when I found the line in the article: The study was done based on an equal passenger to passenger ratio, to eliminate the expectation that a double-decker would have a longer dwelling time since it can hold more passengers.
Guess the education did some good for me after all.