Originally posted by SMB128B: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..
Simple. Because I don't even agree with that logic. Haven't you heard me cribbing about it all the time? It clogs interchanges, wastes resources, causes massive bunching etc.
This is their way of dealing with the situation for lack of putting HC buses esp. bendies. They put 2 rigids together, so that load is distributed between 2 buses rather than have one HC bus that can manage the load.
The feeder deployment is most resource wasting I have seen. This applies to both SBST (AMDEP, HGDEP) and SMRT.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer: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.
859 have 859A/B. If both are not present, 859 will need DDs.
882 does have standing pax.
Originally posted by Gus.chong:There's sure going to be some load offseted by the TEL when the first stage opens in 2019...
Don't think so. Woodlands Waterfront station is still far from RP for them.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Simple. Because I don't even agree with that logic. Haven't you heard me cribbing about it all the time? It clogs interchanges, wastes resources, causes massive bunching etc.
This is their way of dealing with the situation for lack of putting HC buses esp. bendies. They put 2 rigids together, so that load is distributed between 2 buses rather than have one HC bus that can manage the load.
The feeder deployment is most resource wasting I have seen. This applies to both SBST (AMDEP, HGDEP) and SMRT.
It will clog up even if there are no spamming of buses. Number of bus services and the size of interchange. LTA just love small interchanges.
Originally posted by SMB145B:Don't think so. Woodlands Waterfront station is still far from RP for them.
I did take into account the location but it is a matter of direct service; when TEL1 opens in 2019, there will be three options. Either the students want to get down from Woodlands and head to take 169 and 902 (still have to cover walking distance but spend a few more minutes given the possible queue), or they have to transfer to TEL from Woodlands. There are even students who opted to walk a long distance from WTI to RP.
Perhaps not many people would directly transfer to TEL initially since TEL1 only covers Woodlands, but when the rest of the TEL opens it would connect Woodlands to other places and they wouldn't have to rely on 169/902 too much.
Originally posted by SMB145B:859 have 859A/B. If both are not present, 859 will need DDs.
882 does have standing pax.
Ha ha... standing pax doesn't mean need DD bro... 859 loading usually in range of 30-45 pax... no need DD also + 856 is there to supplement (full fleet HC) @ 05-06 min frequency.
Originally posted by Gus.chong:I did take into account the location but it is a matter of direct service; when TEL1 opens in 2019, there will be three options. Either the students want to get down from Woodlands and head to take 169 and 902 (still have to cover walking distance but spend a few more minutes given the possible queue), or they have to transfer to TEL from Woodlands. There are even students who opted to walk a long distance from WTI to RP.
Perhaps not many people would directly transfer to TEL initially since TEL1 only covers Woodlands, but when the rest of the TEL opens it would connect Woodlands to other places and they wouldn't have to rely on 169/902 too much.
In addition, there will be a bus service that will start from Woodlands North and pass by RP. Don't remember if they have plans for Woodlands North Interchange like they do for Tampines.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Ha ha... standing pax doesn't mean need DD bro... 859 loading usually in range of 30-45 pax... no need DD also + 856 is there to supplement (full fleet HC) @ 05-06 min frequency.
Soon not now
To be honest, if LTA and PTOs are not going to support the use of Bendy buses on feeder routes, atleast please don't deploy 2-door double decker buses. Don't need 100% bendy for feeders but atleast 1 in 2 or 1 in 3 will be good because these buses use the space more effectively and they can manage the loading patterns of a feeder like SDs can, plus reduce driver to passenger ratio. If not, just use SD and increase frequency which in turn is less cost effective in some ways because more space, more drivers but more cost effective cos lesser models to manage. There is always a tradeoff. 3 door 12.8m DD could be a solution but we have to see if these 12.8m can negotiate the sharp turns too as feeders Ply narrower roads.
I will say Bendy bus operations are feasible in Singapore, as long as they are not deployed in the current fashion. We are no country with a lot of road space to have so many bendy on the roads. If even woodlands interchange reserves those Bendys for 858 and feeders/intra town, the congestion issues will be more under control. Anyway with close to 150 O405Gs being deregistered this yr, I believe SMRT will pull the remaining Bendys to serve feeders. SD and DD shld form the bulk of Singapore fleet with 200-300 bendy at most to plug in gaps with their advantages. And talking about congestion, have you seen Boon Lay... The congestion is partially due to heavy alighting at the interchange from 2 door DD buses. I'm not saying use bendy there but my point is, no bendy doesn't mean no congestion.
I think those who want to comment, please analyse the situation first and don't anyhow blindly say just put 2-door double deck. Ideally it solves the problem cos LTA see both same capacity and lesser space on the road. The truth is these DDs are doing a "not bad job" at the expense of people inconvenience and time. Bendys may congest the interchange for now but once they are out into those you roads where U have only 1 or 2 service, they are superior and at MRT stations they layover shorter times. And bear in mind, with more stations emerging in heartlands, people are going to travel lesser distances on feeders.. There will be more cases like 912 913 and 302, unless of course the feeder concept is extinct in Singapore.
Its best if LTA can buy another 30 A24 to support SMRT feeder and service 858.
Originally posted by randomguy10:To be honest, if LTA and PTOs are not going to support the use of Bendy buses on feeder routes, atleast please don't deploy 2-door double decker buses. Don't need 100% bendy for feeders but atleast 1 in 2 or 1 in 3 will be good because these buses use the space more effectively and they can manage the loading patterns of a feeder like SDs can, plus reduce driver to passenger ratio. If not, just use SD and increase frequency which in turn is less cost effective in some ways because more space, more drivers but more cost effective cos lesser models to manage. There is always a tradeoff. 3 door 12.8m DD could be a solution but we have to see if these 12.8m can negotiate the sharp turns too as feeders Ply narrower roads.
I will say Bendy bus operations are feasible in Singapore, as long as they are not deployed in the current fashion. We are no country with a lot of road space to have so many bendy on the roads. If even woodlands interchange reserves those Bendys for 858 and feeders/intra town, the congestion issues will be more under control. Anyway with close to 150 O405Gs being deregistered this yr, I believe SMRT will pull the remaining Bendys to serve feeders. SD and DD shld form the bulk of Singapore fleet with 200-300 bendy at most to plug in gaps with their advantages. And talking about congestion, have you seen Boon Lay... The congestion is partially due to heavy alighting at the interchange from 2 door DD buses. I'm not saying use bendy there but my point is, no bendy doesn't mean no congestion.
I think those who want to comment, please analyse the situation first and don't anyhow blindly say just put 2-door double deck. Ideally it solves the problem cos LTA see both same capacity and lesser space on the road. The truth is these DDs are doing a "not bad job" at the expense of people inconvenience and time. Bendys may congest the interchange for now but once they are out into those you roads where U have only 1 or 2 service, they are superior and at MRT stations they layover shorter times. And bear in mind, with more stations emerging in heartlands, people are going to travel lesser distances on feeders.. There will be more cases like 912 913 and 302, unless of course the feeder concept is extinct in Singapore.
^ totally agreed. Die-hard DD lobbyists here are talking air without proof. Claim this claim that but have zero evidence to support it.
Originally posted by carbikebus:Its best if LTA can buy another 30 A24 to support SMRT feeder and service 858.
Popular routes with height restrictions could do with a few units of bendies too. unfortunately, most SBST depots and interchanges weren't designed for them.
Originally posted by iveco:Popular routes with height restrictions could do with a few units of bendies too. unfortunately, most SBST depots and interchanges weren't designed for them.
Which route is height restrictions?120?121?They have other service that parallel with them by the way and the numbers isn't that much nowadays though i agree LTA can trial bendies on 195.
Originally posted by carbikebus:Which route is height restrictions?120?121?They have other service that parallel with them by the way and the numbers isn't that much nowadays though i agree LTA can trial bendies on 195.
Originally posted by Sbs6750E:
24, 27, 34, 36, 53 and 858 lah dey.
These svc your limpeh also know cannot use DD la kotek..I want other routes.
Originally posted by carbikebus:These svc your limpeh also know cannot use DD la kotek..I want other routes.
Originally posted by carbikebus:These svc your limpeh also know cannot use DD la kotek..I want other routes.
Originally posted by carbikebus:Which route is height restrictions?120?121?They have other service that parallel with them by the way and the numbers isn't that much nowadays though i agree LTA can trial bendies on 195.
Height I think is only Braddell Flyover... 73, 105, 159
Most other places are narrow roads and sharp turns etc.
e.g. Telok Blangah... 121, 124, 273
Joo Chiat... 16, 33
Yeah height restriction routes can also do with bendy but this one I rather say not neccessary. These routes can still cope with increased SD frequency. At 1 point I also used to say 105 can use bendy. But how many units will u need to just sustain that 1 service plus 105 crosses some heavy congested areas.
But for feeders that go through congestion free small roads and heavy loading, you dont need that many units to sustain that service - definitely feasible.
Today I took SBS7496H on 88 from AMK station to Buangkok Green during peak hours. If I run that distance, it takes 25-30mins. The bus took 40mins. Why? Cos every busstop had heavy passenger activity in terms of both boarding and alighting. And for a DD, the upper deck people must come down then people can board and go up. So every busstop layover atleast 5 mins. Very slow. My point is not to say 88 needs bendy but I will strongly believe 88 can do better with some DD slots being split to 2SDs instead of 100% DD fleet.
That being said, this is the scenario that feeders face. You put DD, this is what will happen. Atleast 88 sees this for a certain sector of its route and DD might benefit the bigger picture of TPY to Pasir Ris, so fine. But feeder see this start to end, treating it this way will definitely be a step back in our public transportation.
Originally posted by randomguy10:Yeah height restriction routes can also do with bendy but this one I rather say not neccessary. These routes can still cope with increased SD frequency. At 1 point I also used to say 105 can use bendy. But how many units will u need to just sustain that 1 service plus 105 crosses some heavy congested areas.
But for feeders that go through congestion free small roads and heavy loading, you dont need that many units to sustain that service - definitely feasible.
Today I took SBS7496H on 88 from AMK station to Buangkok Green during peak hours. If I run that distance, it takes 25-30mins. The bus took 40mins. Why? Cos every busstop had heavy passenger activity in terms of both boarding and alighting. And for a DD, the upper deck people must come down then people can board and go up. So every busstop layover atleast 5 mins. Very slow. My point is not to say 88 needs bendy but I will strongly believe 88 can do better with some DD slots being split to 2SDs instead of 100% DD fleet.
That being said, this is the scenario that feeders face. You put DD, this is what will happen. Atleast 88 sees this for a certain sector of its route and DD might benefit the bigger picture of TPY to Pasir Ris, so fine. But feeder see this start to end, treating it this way will definitely be a step back in our public transportation.
I hope you touch your heart and feel your soul when u say such things.
Do you even know what you are saying? Spamming SDs on height restriction routes? Have you not seen what happened to 858 then? Smh
Originally posted by randomguy10:Yeah height restriction routes can also do with bendy but this one I rather say not neccessary. These routes can still cope with increased SD frequency. At 1 point I also used to say 105 can use bendy. But how many units will u need to just sustain that 1 service plus 105 crosses some heavy congested areas.
But for feeders that go through congestion free small roads and heavy loading, you dont need that many units to sustain that service - definitely feasible.
Today I took SBS7496H on 88 from AMK station to Buangkok Green during peak hours. If I run that distance, it takes 25-30mins. The bus took 40mins. Why? Cos every busstop had heavy passenger activity in terms of both boarding and alighting. And for a DD, the upper deck people must come down then people can board and go up. So every busstop layover atleast 5 mins. Very slow. My point is not to say 88 needs bendy but I will strongly believe 88 can do better with some DD slots being split to 2SDs instead of 100% DD fleet.
That being said, this is the scenario that feeders face. You put DD, this is what will happen. Atleast 88 sees this for a certain sector of its route and DD might benefit the bigger picture of TPY to Pasir Ris, so fine. But feeder see this start to end, treating it this way will definitely be a step back in our public transportation.
Some of your earlier points on bendies were legit. but some of your points such as that on svc 88 is rubbish. It puts the entire credibility of your bendy discussion to stake as you come across anti-DD and bendy-biased (which I believe you are).
Anyway, my friend, get over it, bendies are gone. Not your or my decision, but the higher authorities there! And I feel sad too, as there should have been bendies for certain feeder/intra-town/height restriction routes.
SG5800M and SG5801K made their service debut today during evening peak hours on 190 and 972 respectively according to Land Transport Guru.
http://landtransportguru.net/new-man-lions-city-facelift-dd-buses/
Originally posted by AtlasSava:SG5800M and SG5801K made their service debut today during evening peak hours on 190 and 972 respectively according to Land Transport Guru.
http://landtransportguru.net/new-man-lions-city-facelift-dd-buses/
Originally posted by Sbs6750E:
As usual, KJDEP always get the new buses.
And deploy on their 2 favourite svcs again..
Originally posted by Sbs6750E:
As usual, KJDEP always get the new buses.
To be fair KJ has gotten none of the B2 A95 soooo..