Originally posted by Formususeonly:What I mean is why do smrt want to swap 856 / 857 enviro 500 for a95 then ? Enviro 500 on those routes seems to be doing fine but why smrt want to deploy more A95 rather then envrio500 ? Those a95 in the 1st place belongs to 854 / 969 .
This is SMRT (AMDEP) haha. They rotate most of the buses all every few weeks.. No such thing as a bus belong to a sv...
but this also means the enviros wont stay on 854 forever and a95s may return after rotations..
Originally posted by SBS8676Z:960 fleet had improved quite alot ever since more B4 WEGs enter WLDEP to replace the old bendies. The worse off currently are those Woodlands feeders.
For 854 fleet I am fine with the deployment of any DDs, be it E500 or A95. As long as the old bendies dun anyhow spam 854 and the WAB quota is met.
960 fleet has indeed improved.. but 128B is anti-SBST and dislikes anything sbst based (as from his posts, isnt it?)
so his opinion of 960 fleet sucks is just due to many B9TLs (though many agree that B9 is better than enviro) and not capacity issue...
Originally posted by SMB1333T:960 fleet has indeed improved.. but 128B is anti-SBST and dislikes anything sbst based (as from his posts, isnt it?)
so his opinion of 960 fleet sucks is just due to many B9TLs (though many agree that B9 is better than enviro) and not capacity issue...
Again stop taking my words out of context. Never had I said 960 fleet sucks in capacity. I only said that the presence of E500s should be a good thing by itself since it has a PIS unlike the B9. I'm saying that for each E500 someone here dreads to get, there are other svcs whose DDs doesn't even have PIS. I do not deny that 960 is healthy with its fleet of DDs. And just coz the B9s suck doesnt make 960 an incapable service in terms of capacity. Its just that its ridiculous to have A95 v E500 when HELLO there are worse buses like the B9??
And yes I'm proudly anti-SBST and all its accompanying attributes. Would be appreciated if you'd stop digging up the past and intimidate me with it. What good does it do for you anyway?
Originally posted by SBS8676Z:960 fleet had improved quite alot ever since more B4 WEGs enter WLDEP to replace the old bendies. The worse off currently are those Woodlands feeders.
For 854 fleet I am fine with the deployment of any DDs, be it E500 or A95. As long as the old bendies dun anyhow spam 854 and the WAB quota is met.
Dont take my words out of context. I'm not denying that 960 has been better in terms of capacity. I'm just saying that an ADL v E500 debate is ridiculous given how there are svcs spammed w B9, so inadequate it even lacks PIS
Originally posted by carbikebus:You should be thankful that 854 gets A22/OC/E500/A95/O405G and occasionally Citaro..I can't imagine if you live in either Pasir Ris or Punggol area where you can only see Citaro and B9TL 😂😂😂😂😂
Exactly right!!
Originally posted by SMB1333T:This is SMRT (AMDEP) haha. They rotate most of the buses all every few weeks.. No such thing as a bus belong to a sv...
but this also means the enviros wont stay on 854 forever and a95s may return after rotations..
There's almost an equal amount of Enviro500 & A95 (76 & 75 respectively) under AMDEP.. Either way they're still double-decker buses but with different specs..
Originally posted by SMB128B:Again stop taking my words out of context. Never had I said 960 fleet sucks in capacity. I only said that the presence of E500s should be a good thing by itself since it has a PIS unlike the B9. I'm saying that for each E500 someone here dreads to get, there are other svcs whose DDs doesn't even have PIS. I do not deny that 960 is healthy with its fleet of DDs. And just coz the B9s suck doesnt make 960 an incapable service in terms of capacity. Its just that its ridiculous to have A95 v E500 when HELLO there are worse buses like the B9??
And yes I'm proudly anti-SBST and all its accompanying attributes. Would be appreciated if you'd stop digging up the past and intimidate me with it. What good does it do for you anyway?
Haha chill la the forum is meant for discussions right?
And anyway, I never mentioned you said that 960 sucks in terms of capacity. I mentioned capacity issues in the post to say that 8676Z had misunderstood your post as that was what he took it to be (based on my interpretation)
I dont know how I have intimidated you with the post and digging up the past? I was mainly just refering to your post the previous page in this same 854 issue discussion
The post wasnt aimed against you or anything like that so dont overthink man
Originally posted by SMB1333T:Haha chill la the forum is meant for discussions right?
And anyway, I never mentioned you said that 960 sucks in terms of capacity. I mentioned capacity issues in the post to say that 8676Z had misunderstood your post as that was what he took it to be (based on my interpretation)
I dont know how I have intimidated you with the post and digging up the past? I was mainly just refering to your post the previous page in this same 854 issue discussion
The post wasnt aimed against you or anything like that so dont overthink man
Okay yea now I see what your post meant. I was the one taking you out of context. My apologies, and cheers haha
Originally posted by SMB128B:Yah so I'm crossing my fingers that someone will go lower than SBST.
Sekali it is WTS haha.
Originally posted by iveco:Sekali it is WTS haha.
WTH?
Maybe SBST is preferred?
Originally posted by iveco:Sekali it is WTS haha.
Is WT that bad though? They've never bidded low anyway so
frankly saying they are average. Sometimes they are on time and but can also be very unsatisfactory
Originally posted by SMB128B:Yah so I'm crossing my fingers that someone will go lower than SBST.
if sbst lowest price > SBST wins
if sbst not lowest > LTA will say SBST bid quality best > SBST wins
u cant do anything if the transport planner just wants sbst...
Originally posted by hgdep103:if sbst lowest price > SBST wins
if sbst not lowest > LTA will say SBST bid quality best > SBST wins
u cant do anything if the transport planner just wants sbst...
Err that's not true. If thats the case SBST would have won Loyang as well.
And why would LTA want to blatantly protect SBST? Shares in Temasek Holdings?
Originally posted by SMB128B:Err that's not true. If thats the case SBST would have won Loyang as well.
And why would LTA want to blatantly protect SBST? Shares in Temasek Holdings?
was just giving an example... what i was saying is if the transport planner wants something, it will go his way... like how 76 was blatantly amended
Originally posted by SMB128B:Err that's not true. If thats the case SBST would have won Loyang as well.
And why would LTA want to blatantly protect SBST? Shares in Temasek Holdings?
The first two packages is just for show only..I'm sorry to say many in the industry prefer SBST..Its some sort of personal preference..TTS will come second and i no need to explain much.SMRT is like walking in a thin rope although its under Temasek..GAS i dont see any future either.So in future prepared to see only 3 'personal' choice operators with SBST again the majority.
Originally posted by hgdep103:was just giving an example... what i was saying is if the transport planner wants something, it will go his way... like how 76 was blatantly amended
Are you hinting at the Senior Planner?🤔
Originally posted by carbikebus:The first two packages is just for show only..I'm sorry to say many in the industry prefer SBST..Its some sort of personal preference..TTS will come second and i no need to explain much.SMRT is like walking in a thin rope although its under Temasek..GAS i dont see any future either.So in future prepared to see only 3 'personal' choice operators with SBST again the majority.
In this respect I kinda agree with the "industry" wrt SMRT ... in fact they should just focus on running the rails properly and ditch the bus business. I dont mean to cause hurt to SMRT bus drivers, but SMRT management had only managed to show that it is capable of only properly managing a bus business of a scale that harks back to the TIBS days prior to the Bt Panjang and CCK takeover.
Their recent improvements had been directly due to LTA, BSEP and the provision of GreenBus Co buses.
Originally posted by AntiDennisLance:In this respect I kinda agree with the "industry" wrt SMRT ... in fact they should just focus on running the rails properly and ditch the bus business. I dont mean to cause hurt to SMRT bus drivers, but SMRT management had only managed to show that it is capable of only properly managing a bus business of a scale that harks back to the TIBS days prior to the Bt Panjang and CCK takeover.
Their recent improvements had been directly due to LTA, BSEP and the provision of GreenBus Co buses.
Agreed. I am just hoping that SMRT lose the Sembawang-Yishun package (all AMDEP controlled) by 2020.
Anyway back to topic, are they anymore B3 A95s being registered lately? It has been some time ever since the last unit was registered. Or is LTA waiting for the next batch of old bendies to go off next month?
Originally posted by SBS8676Z:Agreed. I am just hoping that SMRT lose the Sembawang-Yishun package (all AMDEP controlled) by 2020.
Anyway back to topic, are they anymore B3 A95s being registered lately? It has been some time ever since the last unit was registered. Or is LTA waiting for the next batch of old bendies to go off next month?
I suppose they would be waiting for the bendies to go off...after all there are quite a higher number of A95s and B9TLs already assigned to SMRT as compared to the MK2 bendies de-registered.
Tibs didn't do too badly during the brief period when they controlled SKG, did they?
Originally posted by iveco:Tibs didn't do too badly during the brief period when they controlled SKG, did they?
TIBS handled SKG and Jalan Kayu quite okay. They had box bendies on 82 and 864 (present 80). Even 103 and the old 860 had Hispano O405's. The tradeoff was Scania 113's and later Lances appearing on 167, 851, 852, 853, 855 and 980 but it really got to the worst (en masse spam of Lances on AMDEP services) when they took over BPJ and CCK and gave SKG and Kayu back to SBST.
Originally posted by AntiDennisLance:TIBS handled SKG and Jalan Kayu quite okay. They had box bendies on 82 and 864 (present 80). Even 103 and the old 860 had Hispano O405's. The tradeoff was Scania 113's and later Lances appearing on 167, 851, 852, 853, 855 and 980 but it really got to the worst (en masse spam of Lances on AMDEP services) when they took over BPJ and CCK and gave SKG and Kayu back to SBST.
If I am not wrong, Lances rolled in at around the time when Tibs opened its 3rd depot at Woodlands in 1998. The Scanias were then under AMDEP and eventually moved to WLDEP, and the newly rolled in Lances took its place in AMDEP.
855 initially had mainly 0405s in its fleet until when Jalan Kayu went back under SBST, lances from 163 went to 855. Some of the 855's 0405s went to 67.
167 and 851 never had lances until sometime later in 2001, due to the fact that these 2 services were not under AMDEP then until another depot reshuffle took place. 169 was the one that had lances instead.
103 also got a handful of perm lances too when it was under Tibs, together with 163 and 59/866 (now 86).
I remembered once Tibs started to take over 190, all the bendies were withdrawn from 82. And also noticed Tibs also anyhow deployed buses on 82 and 103 just before they were returned to SBS in 1999.
Originally posted by Gus.chong:I suppose they would be waiting for the bendies to go off...after all there are quite a higher number of A95s and B9TLs already assigned to SMRT as compared to the MK2 bendies de-registered.
TIB1025E to TIB1050G batch going off come next month.
Originally posted by SBS8676Z:Agreed. I am just hoping that SMRT lose the Sembawang-Yishun package (all AMDEP controlled) by 2020.
Anyway back to topic, are they anymore B3 A95s being registered lately? It has been some time ever since the last unit was registered. Or is LTA waiting for the next batch of old bendies to go off next month?
If they lose it SBST better not take it.. Unless they are willing to run bendies again for 858