New Bus Services Announced by LTA/PTOs
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
LTA already say before in their press release mah... i cut and paste for you..
Better connectivity with new bus services
- With the additional buses, the number of new bus services will double from 40 to 80 under BSEP. Many of the new routes will be feeder routes or short trunks to serve new areas of developments in HDB towns, connecting residents to the key transport nodes like MRT stations and bus interchanges, as well as key community and commercial facilities in the neighbourhood.
- The implementation of these new routes will be coordinated with the completion of new developments. Areas with new Built-to-Order (BTO) flats such as Sengkang, Punggol, Yishun and Choa Chu Kang, will typically see more new routes, while the remaining routes will be distributed across the island to improve local connectivity. Details of these routes will be provided when ready.
Hi mr lemon1974, sorry I did not read the press release. I just write based on the routes introduced. Anyway there are still many others who have the thinking that LTA will continue to introduce those mid-haul long routes. Cheers.
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
36 services introduce include 10 CDS and does not include those "M" or "A/B" service.
Hi mr lemon1974, I know of this. Cheers.
-
Originally posted by TIB868X:
i feel they should introduce more trunk services in the mould of 50, its extremely popular and if the routes are well-planned they would be a massive hit just like 50. also no more express services to be introduced?
and if it is true that LTA suka suka plan route just to fulfil quotas then it is not only a serious misuse of taxpayers dollars but also limited resources. i can think of a few poorly planned routes off my head IMO such as 116 and even 990 that are usually running empty. even the effectiveness of 859A and 859B is questionable as most of the time i see them running empty, although off peak but even so 859 is still crowded. maybe BSEP should also include further small scale rationalization, not simply introducing more SWTs and routes that turn out to be duds.
Hi mr TIB868X, Sbs 116 got sufficient load for single deck for Hougang int to ave 4 and ave 9. Not redundant. Cheers.
-
Originally posted by dupdup77:
Hi mr TIB868X, Sbs 116 got sufficient load for single deck for Hougang int to ave 4 and ave 9. Not redundant. Cheers.
Yes. But The remaining 4km is redundant. Liddat 116 should might as well be shortened to be like 324 and renamed to 323
-
Originally posted by dupdup77:
Hi mr TIB868X, Sbs 116 got sufficient load for single deck for Hougang int to ave 4 and ave 9. Not redundant. Cheers.
Dont forget Sv 120 and Sv 119
-
Originally posted by sbst191:
Dont forget Sv 120 and Sv 119
Hi mr sbst191, sbs 119 is an important service in Punggol and sengkang. At various roads, it is one of only few services plying there. At some roads, it is the only bus service. Why people think is not important or redundant is because the DDs make the bus look empty at times. However, there is sufficient loading for single deck. Furthermore, the frequency is 15 mins at times. Please note sbs 119 is not a completely new BSEP service. The BSEP for sbs 119 is only from sengkang int extended to Punggol int. Cheers.
-
Originally posted by sbst191:
Yes. But The remaining 4km is redundant. Liddat 116 should might as well be shortened to be like 324 and renamed to 323
Hi mr sbst191, redundant? The main purpose is to connect serangoon north ave 4 residents direct link to serangoon interchange. Cannot shorten or else the intention of introducing this service is no longer needed. Cheers.
-
Originally posted by dupdup77:
Oh LTA just introduces 2 new services (sbs 41, sbs 140) plus 1 extended route (sbs 35, 35M). Looking at the trend, all are short trunk routes. This should convince everybody that the so called mid-long haul trunk services are no longer introduced. They are only aiming to plug those roads and those current/ new estates without a link to the mrt station or a nearby town centre. They are providing more convenience to areas which have poor links to mode of transports. Looking at it on a broader sense, it seems a plausible choice. Cheers.
I think it is okay until it makes sense... routes 35, 41, 140 make more sense than 116/120/141 even today.
116 loading after 2 years of introduction at NEX during PM peak remains poor with between 10-20 pax max per bus.
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
LTA already say before in their press release mah... i cut and paste for you..
Better connectivity with new bus services
- With the additional buses, the number of new bus services will double from 40 to 80 under BSEP. Many of the new routes will be feeder routes or short trunks to serve new areas of developments in HDB towns, connecting residents to the key transport nodes like MRT stations and bus interchanges, as well as key community and commercial facilities in the neighbourhood.
- The implementation of these new routes will be coordinated with the completion of new developments. Areas with new Built-to-Order (BTO) flats such as Sengkang, Punggol, Yishun and Choa Chu Kang, will typically see more new routes, while the remaining routes will be distributed across the island to improve local connectivity. Details of these routes will be provided when ready.
Strategy is WRONG... need more services like sv 50/972... look how popular both are!!
-
Originally posted by TIB868X:
i feel they should introduce more trunk services in the mould of 50, its extremely popular and if the routes are well-planned they would be a massive hit just like 50. also no more express services to be introduced?
and if it is true that LTA suka suka plan route just to fulfil quotas then it is not only a serious misuse of taxpayers dollars but also limited resources. i can think of a few poorly planned routes off my head IMO such as 116 and even 990 that are usually running empty. even the effectiveness of 859A and 859B is questionable as most of the time i see them running empty, although off peak but even so 859 is still crowded. maybe BSEP should also include further small scale rationalization, not simply introducing more SWTs and routes that turn out to be duds.
You are spot on... 116 is so useless... and 90% times empty... even during peak hours... during off-peak almost 99% times pax <20 ... isn't that waste of resouces????
990 lets give it a little more time to judge,
-
Originally posted by azharjj:
i think 41 will relieve 183 & 154(since it's somehow near NP)
the question is... is toh tuck rd DD friendly?
Yes... should be... what's wrong with Toh Tuck road... are you assessing it coz 77/173 do not have DDs? then please note that both are SMRT services.... and both need no DDs... but sv 41 surely will need.
-
Originally posted by ButIAmAToilet:
35's route length got doubled.... even though only 5 extra stops.
If planned properly, it could be an express varient of 9 (no one takes 9 from TM to CACC though)
Yes... once ppl get familiarized with new 35 route... i think its popularity will increase... hence DDs will be needed... sv 20 also needs more DDs,.. wondering why BNDEP is not giving it to CGBP?
-
Originally posted by dupdup77:
Hi mr TIB868X, Sbs 116 got sufficient load for single deck for Hougang int to ave 4 and ave 9. Not redundant. Cheers.
I feel your opinion is EXTREMELY biased here. Remember that sv 116 from HG to ave 4/9 only eats pax from sv 72... whose frequency has been added by 5+ buses since sv 116 introduction.. even today ppl prefer to wait outside HG interchange for sv 72 than 116... there are some instances when sv 116 gets 20-25 pax at HG Interchange... but on an avergage... PM peak bus will get between 15-20 pax and AM peak between 05-15 pax... I would highly recommend you spend a few hours before you speak favorably about one of the worst routes introduced by LTA.
-
Originally posted by sbst191:
Dont forget Sv 120 and Sv 119
119 is still okay.. has decent load.. yes dont need DDs.. but load > 116/120
-
Originally posted by dupdup77:
Hi mr sbst191, sbs 119 is an important service in Punggol and sengkang. At various roads, it is one of only few services plying there. At some roads, it is the only bus service. Why people think is not important or redundant is because the DDs make the bus look empty at times. However, there is sufficient loading for single deck. Furthermore, the frequency is 15 mins at times. Please note sbs 119 is not a completely new BSEP service. The BSEP for sbs 119 is only from sengkang int extended to Punggol int. Cheers.
Agreed
-
All, from this BSEP exercise, we can tell that there are many areas or roads with no/few links to major transport nodes. Naturally there will be some areas with more bus services than others. Now minor roads are getting into the spotlight and more are done to ensure a good linkage to an mrt station or bus interchange. And for new towns, with new roads being constructed, they will definitely get more services. Let's all look forward to better coverage around the whole island of Singapore! Cheers.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
I feel your opinion is EXTREMELY biased here. Remember that sv 116 from HG to ave 4/9 only eats pax from sv 72... whose frequency has been added by 5+ buses since sv 116 introduction.. even today ppl prefer to wait outside HG interchange for sv 72 than 116... there are some instances when sv 116 gets 20-25 pax at HG Interchange... but on an avergage... PM peak bus will get between 15-20 pax and AM peak between 05-15 pax... I would highly recommend you spend a few hours before you speak favorably about one of the worst routes introduced by LTA.
Hi mr busanalyser, I take sbs 116 quite often to visit Hougang 1 mall. At those times I board this service, it starts with few people (less than 10). When the bus comes, people all come out to board. There are even people from sbs 165 (the boarding berth just next to sbs 116) switching to take sbs 116. Loading gets high enough that all seats are taken up with few standing. So it is not too bad a service. By putting sbs 116 at the current exit location of Hougang mrt, it serves to pick up people too. There are quite a substantial number of people exiting from this mrt side to take sbs 116. Cheers.
-
Originally posted by dupdup77:
Hi mr busanalyser, I take sbs 116 quite often to visit Hougang 1 mall. At those times I board this service, it starts with few people (less than 10). When the bus comes, people all come out to board. There are even people from sbs 165 (the boarding berth just next to sbs 116) switching to take sbs 116. Loading gets high enough that all seats are taken up with few standing. So it is not too bad a service. By putting sbs 116 at the current exit location of Hougang mrt, it serves to pick up people too. There are quite a substantial number of people exiting from this mrt side to take sbs 116. Cheers.
Let me tell you this very clearly: if sv 116 was terminated between HG Interchange and Serangoon North Ave 4, NO one would complain.
If need be sv 116 can be renumbered as sv 316 from Serangoon Interchange looping @ Serangoon North Ave 4. But let me also tell u my observation... many many times.,.. stop opp NEX during AM peak 08-10 pax board 116... during PM peak max 20 pax board... I have not seen more than 30-32 pax on board sv 116
To make it more effective, should also be diverted via Serangoon North Ave 1...
This shows that sv 116 patronage remains VERY poor even after 2+ years of introduction... and needs revision, whether u like it or not... and if u see this is similar observation by other FORUMERs as well.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Let me tell you this very clearly: if sv 116 was terminated between HG Interchange and Serangoon North Ave 4, NO one would complain.
If need be sv 116 can be renumbered as sv 316 from Serangoon Interchange looping @ Serangoon North Ave 4. But let me also tell u my observation... many many times.,.. stop opp NEX during AM peak 08-10 pax board 116... during PM peak max 20 pax board... I have not seen more than 30-32 pax on board sv 116
To make it more effective, should also be diverted via Serangoon North Ave 1...
This shows that sv 116 patronage remains VERY poor even after 2+ years of introduction... and needs revision, whether u like it or not... and if u see this is similar observation by other FORUMERs as well.
support
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Let me tell you this very clearly: if sv 116 was terminated between HG Interchange and Serangoon North Ave 4, NO one would complain.
If need be sv 116 can be renumbered as sv 316 from Serangoon Interchange looping @ Serangoon North Ave 4. But let me also tell u my observation... many many times.,.. stop opp NEX during AM peak 08-10 pax board 116... during PM peak max 20 pax board... I have not seen more than 30-32 pax on board sv 116
To make it more effective, should also be diverted via Serangoon North Ave 1...
This shows that sv 116 patronage remains VERY poor even after 2+ years of introduction... and needs revision, whether u like it or not... and if u see this is similar observation by other FORUMERs as well.
Hi mr busanalyser, the way I see it, the current route is still fine. No need to start from serangoon int as the int is packed. Cannot add another service or else sbs 81 and sbs 82 will not have to be amended in yr 2010. Sbs 81 will not need to loop at serangoon central and sbs 82 will not have to change starting int from serangoon to Punggol.
At times where sbs 116 loading is poor, it's frequency is neither great too. Not all bus services need to assume full loading at all sectors of the route. There are always higher crowds at certain sectors to compensate for the lower loading for other sectors. If it is that bad until it is unsustainable, LTA will have amended its route after receiving so much feedback over the 2 years. The fact that the route still remains shows that it may not be too bad as mentioned. Cheers.
-
Let the service as it be,There will be always full load svc,medium load and low loading svc...As long revenue still within acceptable range its not a problem.116 peak hours(2 trips) an average of 30-40 pax while off peak between 15-25 pax..Ok ok lar
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Let the service as it be,There will be always full load svc,medium load and low loading svc...As long revenue still within acceptable range its not a problem.116 peak hours(2 trips) an average of 30-40 pax while off peak between 15-25 pax..Ok ok lar
Hi mr carbikebus, yes I support it. Anyway this service has only single deck and the frequency is quite long too. Cheers!
-
Sv 41 should be run by Soon Lee or BB
-
41 is the last service that will be included in the first tender package and its based at Bulim...
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Let the service as it be,There will be always full load svc,medium load and low loading svc...As long revenue still within acceptable range its not a problem.116 peak hours(2 trips) an average of 30-40 pax while off peak between 15-25 pax..Ok ok lar
cbb bro... u will be the same person later who will "again" complain about how government is wasting tax payers money by introducing not good services. If you say this, 116 is one of them. Like this, you can introduce any service tomorrow and it will fetch 30-40 pax at least on one or two trips during the day. Even if out of these 30 pax, 20 pax are those who could have taken sv 72. I just don't get the logic. Anyway, we have ppl like this in LTA also... that's why we have such services. Please do not complain again bro. And you are the last person I want to argue with coz I respect you. So peace!