Originally posted by array88:
Actually, I don't think an 'M' variant can only call at the stops of its parent route and nothing else. 70M, 107M and 162M are some examples. 63M also has one stop different from 63 at MacPherson (where 63 is turning into Merpati Rd). 143M and 43M also have some bus stops which their parent services do not ply. Maybe you will say these services still use the same interchange/terminal as their parent route. But there is 17A which starts from BNDEP, and that's not a terminal for svc 17. Although 17A is technically not an 'M' varient, I would say it's operating in the same way as the 'M' varients. Another such example is 170X which starts from Kranji Station. If 17A can do this, I don't see a reason why 43M cannot start from Serangoon Int.
Hi mr array88, I am not sure if 17A allows boarding at BNDEP. If it allows, then you can use this logic for sbs 43M to start from serangoon interchange. If sbs 17A does not allow boarding ar BNDEP, then your logic is flawed for sbs 43M.
You use sbs 170X which starts from Kranji. This is not a bus terminal or interchange. Sbs 170 also stops at this bus stop which is same as sbs 170X. So why you say sbs 170X as an example? This is treated as a bus stop which is same as parent service (sbs 170). Nothing unusual for a service to use part of route for parent service. How does it relate to sbs 43M starting from serangoon interchange which is not part of parent service??? Very ironical. Cheers. Thanks.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:I think it will rest at HG st 21 Terminal... and off-peak may have only 1 bus running on 53M... and others going back to depot... not sure will have to wait and see.
HG St 21 correct. However theres 2AP buses and no S/E/T
Originally posted by dupdup77:Hi mr array88, I am not sure if 17A allows boarding at BNDEP. If it allows, then you can use this logic for sbs 43M to start from serangoon interchange. If sbs 17A does not allow boarding ar BNDEP, then your logic is flawed for sbs 43M.
You use sbs 170X which starts from Kranji. This is not a bus terminal or interchange. Sbs 170 also stops at this bus stop which is same as sbs 170X. So why you say sbs 170X as an example? This is treated as a bus stop which is same as parent service (sbs 170). Nothing unusual for a service to use part of route for parent service. How does it relate to sbs 43M starting from serangoon interchange which is not part of parent service??? Very ironical. Cheers. Thanks.
17A's first bus stop is outside of BNDEP (it enters BNDEP for termination purposes like 185 and 502/502A).
I hope they don't count 53M as a new service... or even new supplementary service as it already existed as 53A/B.
I had a feeling it would do Bishan Int loop @ HG Ave 1. But now it is just renumbered.
17A also can be renumbered to 17M to be more consistent.
Since 53M operates on full day,I suspect there is 3 duties meaning 2A/P and 1 S or T or all 3A/P which 1 bus will cover during meal breaks..There should be 7-10 mins frequencies and no need for high freq either
Originally posted by dupdup77:Hi mr array88, I am not sure if 17A allows boarding at BNDEP. If it allows, then you can use this logic for sbs 43M to start from serangoon interchange. If sbs 17A does not allow boarding ar BNDEP, then your logic is flawed for sbs 43M.
You use sbs 170X which starts from Kranji. This is not a bus terminal or interchange. Sbs 170 also stops at this bus stop which is same as sbs 170X. So why you say sbs 170X as an example? This is treated as a bus stop which is same as parent service (sbs 170). Nothing unusual for a service to use part of route for parent service. How does it relate to sbs 43M starting from serangoon interchange which is not part of parent service??? Very ironical. Cheers. Thanks.
If you think 43M cannot start from Serangoon Int JUST because it is not a part of its parent service, bear in mind that 70M, 107M, 162M also ply Suntec which is NOT a part of their parent service. Current 43M also calls at a stop along Upper Serangoon Road which is NOT a part of svc 43. 143M also calls at one bus stop along West Coast Rd which is NOT a part of svc 143. 53M even starts from Hougang St 21 Terminal which is NOT a part of svc 53. (Although you may argue that boarding/alighting is not allowed at Hougang St 21, there's no harm in making 43M enter Serangoon Int and do now allow boarding/alighting there as well. It's first stop can be along Serangoon Ctrl.)
I can understand you want 43M to start from Punggol because that's the only service at Soo Teck. But 43 is also one of the only 2 services at Buangkok MRT (the other service 27 does not help), and the ONLY service for the bus stop at Buangkok Drive. At least Soo Teck has LRT as an alternative, but Buangkok Dr has nothing.
I once took 43 during peak hours to see how it's loading is like. (I did not post my loading analysis as I believe Mr BusAnalyzer has taken 43/43M for many more times than me.) 20+ pax boarded at Punggol Int and around 12 alighted at Soo Teck. Then 60+ pax boarded at Buangkok MRT. 27 alighted at Buangkok Dr (which is one stop away), and most of the rest alighted at Buangkok Green. Can you still say Punggol needs 43M more? If that's the case, why didn't I see higher loading along the Punggol-Buangkok stretch?
Yes I know that NEX has many other services, but the fact that 43/43M still survives with high loading shows that 43M is (maybe the only) service preferred by Buangkok Green residents who transfer to bus at NEX. It's hard to say they need 43/43M less than Punggol residents.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:I hope they don't count 53M as a new service... or even new supplementary service as it already existed as 53A/B.
I had a feeling it would do Bishan Int loop @ HG Ave 1. But now it is just renumbered.
17A also can be renumbered to 17M to be more consistent.
TBH I feel 53M should allow boarding/alighting at Hougang St 21 so that those waiting for svc 113 there have another alternative. Maybe in the direction towards Hougang St 21, it can use Upp Serangoon Rd to Kovan MRT so that those who want to go to Kovan MRT can also take 53M during AM peak instead of only having svc 113.
Originally posted by array88:If you think 43M cannot start from Serangoon Int JUST because it is not a part of its parent service, bear in mind that 70M, 107M, 162M also ply Suntec which is NOT a part of their parent service. Current 43M also calls at a stop along Upper Serangoon Road which is NOT a part of svc 43. 143M also calls at one bus stop along West Coast Rd which is NOT a part of svc 143. 53M even starts from Hougang St 21 Terminal which is NOT a part of svc 53. (Although you may argue that boarding/alighting is not allowed at Hougang St 21, there's no harm in making 43M enter Serangoon Int and do now allow boarding/alighting there as well. It's first stop can be along Serangoon Ctrl.)
I can understand you want 43M to start from Punggol because that's the only service at Soo Teck. But 43 is also one of the only 2 services at Buangkok MRT (the other service 27 does not help), and the ONLY service for the bus stop at Buangkok Drive. At least Soo Teck has LRT as an alternative, but Buangkok Dr has nothing.
I once took 43 during peak hours to see how it's loading is like. (I did not post my loading analysis as I believe Mr BusAnalyzer has taken 43/43M for many more times than me.) 20+ pax boarded at Punggol Int and around 12 alighted at Soo Teck. Then 60+ pax boarded at Buangkok MRT. 27 alighted at Buangkok Dr (which is one stop away), and most of the rest alighted at Buangkok Green. Can you still say Punggol needs 43M more? If that's the case, why didn't I see higher loading along the Punggol-Buangkok stretch?
Yes I know that NEX has many other services, but the fact that 43/43M still survives with high loading shows that 43M is (maybe the only) service preferred by Buangkok Green residents who transfer to bus at NEX. It's hard to say they need 43/43M less than Punggol residents.
Hi mr array88, Good point for the M series. Good analysis. Take note you have already counted sbs 53M out since it does not allow boarding/alighting at the terminal/interchange.
For the loading analysis, what we observe may exemplify a daily occurrence and can be used to represent a general view.
However, please take note that sometimes other factors are more crucial than others (including loading) when introducing a new M service. Factors like lack of linkage are very important. It does not mean that loading is more at certain sectors than others then they re-route to benefit more people. So your loading analysis does not really mean much in certain cases.
By the way, your last paragraph is inconsequential right? Currently Buangkok green residents still have Sbs 43M. So both buangkok green and Punggol residents still have SBS 43M. If you route from serangoon to buangkok green, then Punggol residents don't have Sbs 43M. So now currently this route benefit both. So why need change from serangoon to buangkok green only? Cheers. Thanks.
Originally posted by Sbs6750E:Controlled by HGDEP or AMDEP?
HGDEP
Originally posted by Sbs6750E:Then can deploy 6328S 6332D 6339K good enough.
dont understand what is 2AP is it ._.
Originally posted by Gus.chong:17A's first bus stop is outside of BNDEP (it enters BNDEP for termination purposes like 185 and 502/502A).
Hi mr Gus.chong, thanks for the info. Cheers
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:I hope they don't count 53M as a new service... or even new supplementary service as it already existed as 53A/B.
I had a feeling it would do Bishan Int loop @ HG Ave 1. But now it is just renumbered.
17A also can be renumbered to 17M to be more consistent.
Bro, its considered a NEW service, sad to say...
Need to hit "quota" for/to report...
Apparently, Public Transport Sg removed 102 from the upcoming bus services. It seems that there will be only be 1 more new mystery service for Punggol after 53M for this year not counting the city direct ones. Sucks.
Too many redundant service la bro,Even LTA feel the pinch of operation costs.
Actually no point introducing new service just for sake of it. We don't need too many buses on road also.
For now 1 service for Punggol, 1 for Sengkang West and 1 for Yishun Ring road is good enough. Yishun ring road can be extension service.
Joo Koon/Boon Lay can get new service after rehauling the route network there.
Pasir Ris might get short feeder for Pasir Ris Grove.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Actually no point introducing new service just for sake of it. We don't need too many buses on road also.
For now 1 service for Punggol, 1 for Sengkang West and 1 for Yishun Ring road is good enough. Yishun ring road can be extension service.
Joo Koon/Boon Lay can get new service after rehauling the route network there.
Pasir Ris might get short feeder for Pasir Ris Grove.
Unless like Pasir Ris Grove which indeed can introduce a feeder svc.Most interchanges are jam packed by these so called feeder and short trunks due to their distance to and fro.
In future, more new services will be required for:
Punggol
1. Punggol Waterway (depending on road network 386 can be modified to ply all of Waterway, or will need to introduce new feeder)
2. Punggol Matilda (feeder for sure)
3. Punggol Northshore (since LRT is very near, prefer if it would be extension of one of the trunks from Punggol Interchange to do Northshore, Nibong, Matilda before heading out to Sengkang)
4. Intra town for Punggol would be good
Hougang
1. Service to Buangkok Link (need alternative to 101 given the new flats)
Yishun
1. Yishun Ave 1, 8, st 44/51 (could be 1 or 2 feeders that would be required depending on the way they route)
2. Diversion of trunk service 852/853 to do Yishun Ring Road
3. Loop of 856/859 (latter is preferable) along Yishun Ring road
Woodlands
1. Feeder service needed for Woodlands Ave 9 (this will also cater to Woodlands Industrial Hub and flats along ave 9 that have to rely on 169/858) - can be achieved by extending 902 and making full day service. 902A can be launched for Republic students for AM time slots
Bidadari
This new town will need new services - 1 will connect Potong Pasir and Bartley MRT. There will also be service to nearby Serangoon town given that's the closest hub with huge mall and amenities (though Bidadari might get its own)
Pasir Ris
Will need 354 to be diverted one way to cater to new condominiums in the area
New short feeder for Pasir Ris Grove
Tampines North
Here we will see extension of few services from Tampines Interchange + new intratown/feeder service for Tampines North
Changi Business Park
Still poorly connected despite sv 20. Need trunk service to NEL that will complement sv 27 as well as new service to Bedok via Tanah Merah
Bedok
Short trunk service between Bedok and Bayshore. This condo is HUGE and has been neglected for years with its own private buses operating. And they are not cheap.
Eunos
Industrial service would be good to connect to neglected parts of Kaki Bukit and UBI industrial area
Marina South
With new CBD coming up in Marina South, we might see a new terminal and some of Shenton Way services terminating here.
Whompoa
sv 139M can become service that loops around Jalan Tanameram.. given the new HDB blocks coming here
Bukit Panjang
Ring road will need one more trunk service in addition to 972. Capacity on 920/922 will have to be increased with DTL2
New service for Chestnut/Hillview connecting Bukit Panjang and Bukit Batok towns
CCK
Keat Hong will need new feeder service for ave 7 and grove.
983 extension to BPJ
700 should get extended to CCK via Keat Hong
Jurong West
New service will be needed near Jurong rail station to KL. This could be mixture of 1 short trunks/diversion of existing service to start here
Jurong Lake District: Corporation Road (only has 178 for the moment)
Jurong West Ave 2 (needs another service with flats coming up, only has 157 at the moment, can be supplemented by diverting one of existing services)
Originally posted by Sbs6750E:Cck: Feeder to Yew Tee,
Bpj:
Short trunk to Yew Tee,
Bbt:
Feeder to Gombak (Can extend 990).
A trunk to Bt Panjang will benefit Yew Tee residents better considering the crowd at CCK, thus my earlier suggestion of extending 177 to Yew Tee via Woodlands Rd & KJE (as the BTP ITH won't be ready by DTL2 opening).
Bt Gombak isn't in dire need of feeders yet, there's 187 / 188 / 947 / 985 to help with the load at West Ave 4, and 945 / MRT at West Ave 5. If a direct connection is in demand, consider amending 947 to serve Bt Gombak MRT then. The upcoming West Ave 8 area, though, can have one good feeder / trunk service.