Originally posted by orange28:I find it very hard to agree with the statement in red, to say that less bendies = better bus operations is not valid. Just look at the feeder services in Woodlands, replacing bendies with regular 12 m buses means more drivers have to be deployed, and in many cases result in more bus bunching, not less. In fact, my observation with svc 913 is that its reliability has gone down the drain ever since they added A22s into the fleet. So at least, bendy buses should be used for the feeder routes ...
Seriously I think mindsets have to change and be realistic if you really want to ask for better bus services.
While the rest of Singapore feeder bus services are coping well without any bendies, Woodlands should not be the exception of continuing having poor standards of bus services with tons of bendies clogging the bus interchange and parking areas during operations.
The statement you quoted in red is a fact with my observations in areas like Yishun, Chua Chu Kang and Bukit Batok. Just how many new bus services are added and how much better the frequencies for current services have improved, with more than half of the bendy fleets removed. Because operators have more buses to have more flexibilities in deployments, and that's the main reason that why SMRT bus can improve in these few years.
Woodlands on the other hand can be improved like other areas as well. Firstly break up the inflexibilities of bendies with more single and double deckers. Then based on that to determine the loadings and introduce more new bus services to spread out the load of the current feeder demands. Lastly LTA should allocate some of the feeders to another new terminal near Admiralty MRT station, just like what it did for Tampines.
I don't see a need to maintain a small fleet of different buses just because of the inflexibilities to change for the better, which also adds more costs and troubles for LTA to maintain in the long run.
Here is what I predict
SMRT:30 units
SBST:77 units
TT:15 units
GA:15 E500
And there will be 2nd round of A95 purchasing..
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:You think LTA really cares for the 3 bendies out of all services that have been deployed towards CGA.
Yep, it is exactly this that validates all I've just said about LTA..
Originally posted by vicamour:Seriously I think mindsets have to change and be realistic if you really want to ask for better bus services.
While the rest of Singapore feeder bus services are coping well without any bendies, Woodlands should not be the exception of continuing having poor standards of bus services with tons of bendies clogging the bus interchange and parking areas during operations.
The statement you quoted in red is a fact with my observations in areas like Yishun, Chua Chu Kang and Bukit Batok. Just how many new bus services are added and how much better the frequencies for current services have improved, with more than half of the bendy fleets removed. Because operators have more buses to have more flexibilities in deployments, and that's the main reason that why SMRT bus can improve in these few years.
Woodlands on the other hand can be improved like other areas as well. Firstly break up the inflexibilities of bendies with more single and double deckers. Then based on that to determine the loadings and introduce more new bus services to spread out the load of the current feeder demands. Lastly LTA should allocate some of the feeders to another new terminal near Admiralty MRT station, just like what it did for Tampines.
I don't see a need to maintain a small fleet of different buses just because of the inflexibilities to change for the better, which also adds more costs and troubles for LTA to maintain in the long run.
I'm not sure if neglecting the mindset of Singaporeans is being realistic or not..
Firstly it is absolutely untrue that "the rest of Singapore are coping well with DDs". I can tell u that with the exception of a few svcs like 241, 291, 225, all other svcs have faced CHAOTIC situations with DDs (empty upper decks, clogging inside the bus, immensely long layover times due to clogging, and then severe delays due to that, to name a few..) And for the svcs I've named they all either do not ply intermediate MRT stops, or have far distances between stops.
Next. You talk about flexibility. I ask you: is restricting and fixating into only ONE type, of ONE design, of ONE make of buses for ALL TYPES of bus services in Singapore what you call " flexibility"?! I shudder at your definition. I think that true flexibility only exists when operators train themselves to be able to handle multiple types of buses at once and have more options to deploy each type of buses to what suits each svc best. It is not having a uniform make across the board. That limits service optimisation, especially when in Singapore it is neither all-trunk not all-feeder.
I feel that it is unfair that you chose to find fault with removing bendies being the solution to messed up scheduling, at the exact same period of time where LTA has also began rolling many other measures to deal with scheduling, most notably the BSRF, which happened on the same year SMRT first procured DDs. Logically speaking, when placed side by side the problems bendies may pose for scheduling are negligible to that of DDs since crowding in the interchange happens during turnaround time, which does not affect travelling time for the commuters. Even in the worst case where there may be congestion near the entrance, it is measly compared to the severe human gridlock that happens so much often along the journey for the DDs, DURING REVENUE SERVICE TIME.
I guess the real solution to this is, as you have aptly pointed out, to also be flexible in managing these short haul routes themselves. Granted, I concede that some services may be able to cope on the borderline with DDs pumped in. These are the services where boarding and alighting will most likely not concurrently happen on a large scale, services like 800. Generally, the feeder services. For intratowns, however, this will definitely not work until the concept DD comes in. Look at how many times they stop ag the MRT. 812 TWICE. 913 THRICE, of which twice is at an intermediate stop. Human gridlock are bound to happen, and THIS is what REALLY cause scheduling problems. TL,DR: Some svcs can DD, others just absolutely no. I'd very much rather the habits stay on longer for the intratowns, than for the DDs to come in and open a big can of worms.
The debate going forward is going to be DD v/s rigid. Bendies are out, so let's now not include them in the feeder/intra-town discussion.
Between rigids and DDs, what would be the right fleet for high loading feeder/intratown services is the questions!!!
Originally posted by SMB128B:I'm not sure if neglecting the mindset of Singaporeans is being realistic or not..
Firstly it is absolutely untrue that "the rest of Singapore are coping well with DDs". I can tell u that with the exception of a few svcs like 241, 291, 225, all other svcs have faced CHAOTIC situations with DDs (empty upper decks, clogging inside the bus, immensely long layover times due to clogging, and then severe delays due to that, to name a few..) And for the svcs I've named they all either do not ply intermediate MRT stops, or have far distances between stops.
Next. You talk about flexibility. I ask you: is restricting and fixating into only ONE type, of ONE design, of ONE make of buses for ALL TYPES of bus services in Singapore what you call " flexibility"?! I shudder at your definition. I think that true flexibility only exists when operators train themselves to be able to handle multiple types of buses at once and have more options to deploy each type of buses to what suits each svc best. It is not having a uniform make across the board. That limits service optimisation, especially when in Singapore it is neither all-trunk not all-feeder.
I feel that it is unfair that you chose to find fault with removing bendies being the solution to messed up scheduling, at the exact same period of time where LTA has also began rolling many other measures to deal with scheduling, most notably the BSRF, which happened on the same year SMRT first procured DDs. Logically speaking, when placed side by side the problems bendies may pose for scheduling are negligible to that of DDs since crowding in the interchange happens during turnaround time, which does not affect travelling time for the commuters. Even in the worst case where there may be congestion near the entrance, it is measly compared to the severe human gridlock that happens so much often along the journey for the DDs, DURING REVENUE SERVICE TIME.
I guess the real solution to this is, as you have aptly pointed out, to also be flexible in managing these short haul routes themselves. Granted, I concede that some services may be able to cope on the borderline with DDs pumped in. These are the services where boarding and alighting will most likely not concurrently happen on a large scale, services like 800. Generally, the feeder services. For intratowns, however, this will definitely not work until the concept DD comes in. Look at how many times they stop ag the MRT. 812 TWICE. 913 THRICE, of which twice is at an intermediate stop. Human gridlock are bound to happen, and THIS is what REALLY cause scheduling problems. TL,DR: Some svcs can DD, others just absolutely no. I'd very much rather the habits stay on longer for the intratowns, than for the DDs to come in and open a big can of worms.
Neglecting the mindset of Singaporeans or neglecting the mindset of a small group of bus enthusists? If Singaporeans are really neglected, then why more bus services are already improved so much since BSEP and GCM started?
Instead of keep complaining about how chaotic for some feeders are using double deckers, why not you as a bus enthusist, do something to encourage people to go upstairs instead? As an ambassdor to encourage people to go upstairs, or give more suggestions to the operators or the authories to encourage people to go upstairs, since it has been proven that it is possible that people can go upstairs after some time with the examples of services you gave. No doubt that other areas' feeders may have some problems, it is not as bad as those with bendies in the interchanges. Shorter buses have the flexibity to create a break in between buses, which will allow buses blocked in the queue to pass through into another lane. This is not in the case where long queues of bendies which buses are stuck in berths, parking lots, etc. And this is proven through my observations before and after BSEP/GCM.
The funny thing is that you don't even want to understand the point of the flexibility that I am conveying. Flexibility in the Singapore bus operations context means less congestions, more space, lesser long bus queues and shorter buses to allow more maneuverability within the limited areas in the bus interchanges, depots and bus stops, because Singapore, land scarce. Freeing up more space means more buses can park in depots and interchanges, providing more new bus services, improving frequencies of the current ones. And all these are done by LTA and proven to improve overall bus services greatly in Singapore in these recent years.
Not the kind of flexibility of choosing more lengths of buses to use as a more important context, because again it has been tested and proven that shorter 12-13m buses are better in deployments, because operators have more buses to play in flexibility, in terms of shifting some buses from service A to service B if service B has higher demands or demanded better frequencies during peak hours and then shift these buses back to service A once the peak timings are over, OR having more buses to introduce another new bus service to ease the loads of services A and B. This would be a less stressful task with an interchange that can, say, park 30 12m buses for bus operators. What's the value add to learn more kinds of buses to drive if the interchange itself is so congested that buses can hardly move within the interchange and there are so few services for BCs to rotate around? If you tell me the flexibiltiy for drivers to know more than one bus service to drive, then I agree with you.
In the past years, many people find faults of SMRT with screwed up frequencies, not enough bus services, etc and overall screwed up bus operations under SMRT till the extend that SMRT even wants to give up bus operations. Since BSEP/GCM with the removal of many bendies while giving more buses to SBST and SMRT, SMRT bus services have really improved. Also tested and proven that under SBST areas, bus service standards are better with only single and double deckers because SBST has more buses to improve frequencies, introduce more bus services to improve connectivity.
Sorry but you are wrong on the sccheduling. It is in fact better now because there are more buses (and BCs) to spread the loadings and more resting times for BCs and they are more relaxed because run times are now longer, rather than SMRT rushed schedules in the past.
Again your assumption that bendies only caused gridlocks at the entrance is wrong. When Yishun temp interchange was just opened, the alighting berth is always jammed with long bus queues all the way till Yishun Central during peak and waiting time to alight the bus can wait as long as 7-8 mins. I haven't even included the long bus queues after the alighting berths where most buses are stuck to find parking lots with bendies making the queues worse with their length that blocks the lanes and other boarding berths. But with more than half of the bendies scrapped by end 2016, the long queues of buses waiting at the alighting berths are almost non existent nowadays and the interchange can park more buses, plus more new service in Yishun after so many years. Woodlands is not better, especially at the alighting berths, with the trailers blocking lane by lane other than the berths.
While you can argue that double deckers can cause gridlocks by people alighting but the effects are certainly negligible compared to empty bendy buses forming long queues and blocking the way of other buses with their inflexible lengths and create a traffic congestion within the interchange itself. Fact is that situations in interchanges with only single and double deckers are still better than with bendies, tested and proven by SBST for decades and SMRT after BSEP/GCM. And I would like SMRT to continue this way rather than the old SMRT.
So it would be more wise that LTA to remove the bendies and let operators like SMRT to improve its bus services instead which is more important, like what it is doing now. If really some feeder is not effective with double deckers deployed, then the bus operators can instead have more single deckers to have the flexibilty to deal with the crowds with better frequencies, OR even better, introduce a new bus service to balance out the loads of the feeder while providing more links to the commuters. That is the kind of flexibility that will benefit all. I do agree that LTA needs to roll out the 12.8m concept double deckers on the feeders or even the 3 door single deckers as soon as possible.
This is what they are heading. Want to write to LTA if you do not like the changes, but please do so in a more thoughtful manner if you want a better answer from them. We are already lucky that Singapore has brought in proper buses, and the likes of Citaro and B9TLs are already considered good buses if you compare to buses with the neighbouring countries. Want LTA to buy all MIC buses in future? Don't know why people can keep complaining over such trival matters. Normal commuters won't even notice or care less if it is a swing out or slide out plug doors, as long as they can open or close, or even care of the transmission is ZF or Voith as long as BCs don't have to struggle with manual gears. If you are so keen on fine tuning of vehicles, go get yourself a car. You can tune or do whatever that satisfy your needs with your own car.
Look, this is what LTA and other agencies, the country, the government is heading,compacting space and squeezing more people, in this small country.
Many people are unhappy with the overcrowding in Singapore since there is less space for each and everyone of us. Many have different perspectives of unhappiness over GCM, even myself though feel that bus services do improved, but I am unhappy with the eyesore green livery on all the buses, instead of their respective liveries.
Unless you can lobby all Singaporeans to vote against the incumbant, make the population reduced to 4.5 million, else suck it up and accept the fact that they are breaking up into smaller compact flexible spaces to move more efficiently and providing smaller cramped living spaces, in order to squeeze more people in this country.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:The debate going forward is going to be DD v/s rigid. Bendies are out, so let's now not include them in the feeder/intra-town discussion.
Between rigids and DDs, what would be the right fleet for high loading feeder/intratown services is the questions!!!
It entirely depends on the loading and the length of the route.
For intra-towns, double deckers, preferbably the concept double decker is desirable.
For very short feeders, e.g. less than 5 bus stops, single deckers. If the loading is very high, better frequencies of single deckers or 3 door single deckers will be good.
Originally posted by vicamour:It entirely depends on the loading and the length of the route.
For intra-towns, double deckers, preferbably the concept double decker is desirable.
For very short feeders, e.g. less than 5 bus stops, single deckers. If the loading is very high, better frequencies of single deckers or 3 door single deckers will be good.
Let's get specific.
YIS
800 - DDs okay (but does the loading justify?)
803 - SDs only
804 - DDs okay (for st 41/ave 11)
805 - SDs for now, in future will need DDs
806 - DDs okay (ave 6)
811 - DDs okay
812 - DDs okay
WDL
900 - DDs okay (ave 4)
901 - DDs okay
903 - DDs okay
904 - SDs (loading doesn't justify DDs)
911 - DDs okay
912 - DDs okay though stops very close from MRT especially on Admiralty side, but if you only deploy SDs, you will need a bus every 02 mins and that will be chaotic. Hopefully A24s are reserved for this service (08 A24s, 2 DDs, 06 rigids)
913 - DDs won't do very well especially on Admiralty side as bus stops v near from MRT. Unless those from WDL already go upper deck. Again, in future no choice but will have to deploy DD otherwise will have rigids at 02 min frequency. Not practical. A24s should be reserved for this service as well (08 A24s, 2 DDs, 03 rigids)
CCK
300 - Most people take bus for ave 4 which is 2-3 stops. DDs won't do v well and A24s is best choice. Already operating at 03 min frequency with majority bendy fleet. If all rigid, will need bus every 02 min. CCK cannot handle already. (06 A24s, 07 rigids) + DDs on 983
301 - DDs are okay especially for Keat Hong Close
302 - I would prefer to continue with A24s simply because st 51 - Yew Tee - CCK Crescent stops are all close and v high loading activity. SDs just cannot manage the load. 302 already operating at 03 min frequency with 90% bendies. SDs will create chaos. 979 has shared some load between YT and CCK Crescent. (12 A24s, 04 rigids)
307 - SDs are doing okay
308 - SDs are doing okay. Won't need DDs.
BPJ
920/922 - both BPJ feeders will do v well with DDs.
Hence, A24 deployment is:
912 (08), 913 (08), 300 (06), 302 (12), 858 (04 + 02 SP)
Originally posted by vicamour:Neglecting the mindset of Singaporeans or neglecting the mindset of a small group of bus enthusists? If Singaporeans are really neglected, then why more bus services are already improved so much since BSEP and GCM started?
Instead of keep complaining about how chaotic for some feeders are using double deckers, why not you as a bus enthusist, do something to encourage people to go upstairs instead? As an ambassdor to encourage people to go upstairs, or give more suggestions to the operators or the authories to encourage people to go upstairs, since it has been proven that it is possible that people can go upstairs after some time with the examples of services you gave. No doubt that other areas' feeders may have some problems, it is not as bad as those with bendies in the interchanges. Shorter buses have the flexibity to create a break in between buses, which will allow buses blocked in the queue to pass through into another lane. This is not in the case where long queues of bendies which buses are stuck in berths, parking lots, etc. And this is proven through my observations before and after BSEP/GCM.
The funny thing is that you don't even want to understand the point of the flexibility that I am conveying. Flexibility in the Singapore bus operations context means less congestions, more space, lesser long bus queues and shorter buses to allow more maneuverability within the limited areas in the bus interchanges, depots and bus stops, because Singapore, land scarce. Freeing up more space means more buses can park in depots and interchanges, providing more new bus services, improving frequencies of the current ones. And all these are done by LTA and proven to improve overall bus services greatly in Singapore in these recent years.Not the kind of flexibility of choosing more lengths of buses to use as a more important context, because again it has been tested and proven that shorter 12-13m buses are better in deployments, because operators have more buses to play in flexibility, in terms of shifting some buses from service A to service B if service B has higher demands or demanded better frequencies during peak hours and then shift these buses back to service A once the peak timings are over, OR having more buses to introduce another new bus service to ease the loads of services A and B. This would be a less stressful task with an interchange that can, say, park 30 12m buses for bus operators. What's the value add to learn more kinds of buses to drive if the interchange itself is so congested that buses can hardly move within the interchange and there are so few services for BCs to rotate around? If you tell me the flexibiltiy for drivers to know more than one bus service to drive, then I agree with you.
In the past years, many people find faults of SMRT with screwed up frequencies, not enough bus services, etc and overall screwed up bus operations under SMRT till the extend that SMRT even wants to give up bus operations. Since BSEP/GCM with the removal of many bendies while giving more buses to SBST and SMRT, SMRT bus services have really improved. Also tested and proven that under SBST areas, bus service standards are better with only single and double deckers because SBST has more buses to improve frequencies, introduce more bus services to improve connectivity.
Sorry but you are wrong on the sccheduling. It is in fact better now because there are more buses (and BCs) to spread the loadings and more resting times for BCs and they are more relaxed because run times are now longer, rather than SMRT rushed schedules in the past.Again your assumption that bendies only caused gridlocks at the entrance is wrong. When Yishun temp interchange was just opened, the alighting berth is always jammed with long bus queues all the way till Yishun Central during peak and waiting time to alight the bus can wait as long as 7-8 mins. I haven't even included the long bus queues after the alighting berths where most buses are stuck to find parking lots with bendies making the queues worse with their length that blocks the lanes and other boarding berths. But with more than half of the bendies scrapped by end 2016, the long queues of buses waiting at the alighting berths are almost non existent nowadays and the interchange can park more buses, plus more new service in Yishun after so many years. Woodlands is not better, especially at the alighting berths, with the trailers blocking lane by lane other than the berths.
While you can argue that double deckers can cause gridlocks by people alighting but the effects are certainly negligible compared to empty bendy buses forming long queues and blocking the way of other buses with their inflexible lengths and create a traffic congestion within the interchange itself. Fact is that situations in interchanges with only single and double deckers are still better than with bendies, tested and proven by SBST for decades and SMRT after BSEP/GCM. And I would like SMRT to continue this way rather than the old SMRT.
So it would be more wise that LTA to remove the bendies and let operators like SMRT to improve its bus services instead which is more important, like what it is doing now. If really some feeder is not effective with double deckers deployed, then the bus operators can instead have more single deckers to have the flexibilty to deal with the crowds with better frequencies, OR even better, introduce a new bus service to balance out the loads of the feeder while providing more links to the commuters. That is the kind of flexibility that will benefit all. I do agree that LTA needs to roll out the 12.8m concept double deckers on the feeders or even the 3 door single deckers as soon as possible.This is what they are heading. Want to write to LTA if you do not like the changes, but please do so in a more thoughtful manner if you want a better answer from them. We are already lucky that Singapore has brought in proper buses, and the likes of Citaro and B9TLs are already considered good buses if you compare to buses with the neighbouring countries. Want LTA to buy all MIC buses in future? Don't know why people can keep complaining over such trival matters. Normal commuters won't even notice or care less if it is a swing out or slide out plug doors, as long as they can open or close, or even care of the transmission is ZF or Voith as long as BCs don't have to struggle with manual gears. If you are so keen on fine tuning of vehicles, go get yourself a car. You can tune or do whatever that satisfy your needs with your own car.
Look, this is what LTA and other agencies, the country, the government is heading,compacting space and squeezing more people, in this small country.
Many people are unhappy with the overcrowding in Singapore since there is less space for each and everyone of us. Many have different perspectives of unhappiness over GCM, even myself though feel that bus services do improved, but I am unhappy with the eyesore green livery on all the buses, instead of their respective liveries.
Unless you can lobby all Singaporeans to vote against the incumbant, make the population reduced to 4.5 million, else suck it up and accept the fact that they are breaking up into smaller compact flexible spaces to move more efficiently and providing smaller cramped living spaces, in order to squeeze more people in this country.
If your idea of a bus enthusiast is to just look at things from a normal commuter perspective then I question the existence of this hobby. Since the only thing you will not deem "trivial" are the things that could have been discussed without SGF anyway!
BA you forget 902.
Rigid are useless. Deploying DDs would reduce efficiency instead
859
DDs okay.
882
DDs may have hard time returning to SBW.
883.
Loading atm do not permit. But it is certainly DD ready.
860
DDs are pretty much needed.
Originally posted by TIB 585L:902 shld stick with bendies, faster loading n unloading at RP and can come back to WTBI fast
I guess we do not have a choice on this. Happy spamming rigids after rigids or send pax on 169.
Originally posted by TIB 585L:169 bendies oso tanking them daily so ya and those 169 DDs lower deck damn full for those RP students or ask all of them to walk or take grab or taxi lol
Hey, they are loaded. Remove 902 lor. GrabTaxi!
Hmm 15 DDs on 858, and goodbye to bendies.
Originally posted by carbikebus:Here is what I predict
SMRT:30 units
SBST:77 units
TT:15 units
GA:15 E500
SBST using MAN buses . Hahaha haha . LTA forced them I know . However which service will they deploy on ? Feeder ? Trunk ? Or express ?
Originally posted by SMB145B:BA you forget 902.
Rigid are useless. Deploying DDs would reduce efficiency instead
859
DDs okay.
882
DDs may have hard time returning to SBW.
883.
Loading atm do not permit. But it is certainly DD ready.
860
DDs are pretty much needed.
Will have to do with rigids bro. Though 72B does well with DDs, so you can argue that 902 also may work out okay with DDs since mostly college students.
Originally posted by SMB145B:BA you forget 902.
Rigid are useless. Deploying DDs would reduce efficiency instead
859
DDs okay.
882
DDs may have hard time returning to SBW.
883.
Loading atm do not permit. But it is certainly DD ready.
860
DDs are pretty much needed.
859/882 don't need. 883 will need in future just like 860. 860 already now majority dD fleet. Doing v well with DDs contrary to what some people felt.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Will have to do with rigids bro. Though 72B does well with DDs, so you can argue that 902 also may work out okay with DDs since mostly college students.
There's sure going to be some load offseted by the TEL when the first stage opens in 2019...
Originally posted by vicamour:So it would be more wise that LTA to remove the bendies and let operators like SMRT to improve its bus services instead which is more important, like what it is doing now. If really some feeder is not effective with double deckers deployed, then the bus operators can instead have more single deckers to have the flexibilty to deal with the crowds with better frequencies, OR even better, introduce a new bus service to balance out the loads of the feeder while providing more links to the commuters. That is the kind of flexibility that will benefit all. I do agree that LTA needs to roll out the 12.8m concept double deckers on the feeders or even the 3 door single deckers as soon as possible.
Bendy buses are feasible to operate, but not in its current format.
If operators have to operate 2 door DDs on feeder routes, try something radical: remove every seat except those on the wheelarch from the lower deck for a sub-fleet of DD buses and deploy them during peak hours only. Make off-peak travel for senior citizens free of charge.
Originally posted by Gus.chong:There's sure going to be some load offseted by the TEL when the first stage opens in 2019...
Yep!! In fact, TEL should also see 1-2 bus service introduced/diverted to ply Woodlands North to ease the congestion at Woodlands Central.
Originally posted by sgbuses:Bendy buses are feasible to operate, but not in its current format.
If operators have to operate 2 door DDs on feeder routes, try something radical: remove every seat except those on the wheelarch from the lower deck for a sub-fleet of DD buses and deploy them during peak hours only. Make off-peak travel for senior citizens free of charge.
We make a bigger issue of the feeders than it actually is. After heavy pumping of buses to feeders, except for a few, most have enough capacity even for a SD, let alone a DD.
Even if you observe heavy feeder services such as 806, 811 at Yishun, people don't have problem with boarding. If one is late, there is another bus right behind. Too much said!!
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:We make a bigger issue of the feeders than it actually is. After heavy pumping of buses to feeders, except for a few, most have enough capacity even for a SD, let alone a DD.
Even if you observe heavy feeder services such as 806, 811 at Yishun, people don't have problem with boarding. If one is late, there is another bus right behind. Too much said!!
By going with your logic why are you so vexed with the spamming of rigids then? Since if one cannot board, "another bus is right behind" what..
Aiya,Just use OCs as supplement for feeders that can't use DD mah..AMK feeders can do well with Citaro and K230UB,265 & 268 can use DD mah