wishful thinking 904 will get bendy buses. demand patterns do not warrant any bendies and the route is clearly unsuitable for bendies due to tight turns.
and why would bendies be purchased in huge amounts by LTA when most interchanges especially the new ITHs cannot handle bendy buses? if they are not to terminate at interchanges then terminate at roadside? unreal when singapore's transportation system is heavily centralized in terms of bus interchanges.
at the end of the day, lta's stance on bendy buses is quite clear with the design of ITHs, which is irreversible. even more so with the new contract model where LTA would dictate fleet deployments. for all u know LTA will tell SMRT's mere 40 A24s to go fly kite.
so far no news for A24, i guess it has been shelved
AMK : 2 bendy lots
BNL : most of SMRT lots are bendy-capable, but i think it is just those few lots
SKG: not bendy friendly
BDK : ???
...
Well, 868X, your days are numbered.
Originally posted by TIB868X:wishful thinking 904 will get bendy buses. demand patterns do not warrant any bendies and the route is clearly unsuitable for bendies due to tight turns.
and why would bendies be purchased in huge amounts by LTA when most interchanges especially the new ITHs cannot handle bendy buses? if they are not to terminate at interchanges then terminate at roadside? unreal when singapore's transportation system is heavily centralized in terms of bus interchanges.
at the end of the day, lta's stance on bendy buses is quite clear with the design of ITHs, which is irreversible. even more so with the new contract model where LTA would dictate fleet deployments. for all u know LTA will tell SMRT's mere 40 A24s to go fly kite.
Thats why SMRT CEO says Bendy exclusive for feeder svc within their interchange..
Originally posted by sgbuses:What if LTA chooses to purchase articulated buses in the future?
The next question you will be thinking is LTA must be crazy to do that because there is no space to set down and layover at the interchange.
Then, my next question is must articulated buses always start and end their journey at the bus interchange, layover at the interchange, or even enter the interchange?
Many bus planners around the world face the same set of problems in urban cities but they go beyond conventional thinking to find their solutions.
The same still could be applied to an all DD solution, as our bus interchanges are getting more congested with additional buses.
dun think LTA is getting any more bendies in future.. i believe that they have a deal with SMRT to allow them to buy bendies just solely for feeder/short route, while long haul route have to use DDs...
and buses need not start at interchange, but problem is that bendies also take up lot of road space as well.
Originally posted by TIB868X:wishful thinking 904 will get bendy buses. demand patterns do not warrant any bendies and the route is clearly unsuitable for bendies due to tight turns.
and why would bendies be purchased in huge amounts by LTA when most interchanges especially the new ITHs cannot handle bendy buses? if they are not to terminate at interchanges then terminate at roadside? unreal when singapore's transportation system is heavily centralized in terms of bus interchanges.
at the end of the day, lta's stance on bendy buses is quite clear with the design of ITHs, which is irreversible. even more so with the new contract model where LTA would dictate fleet deployments. for all u know LTA will tell SMRT's mere 40 A24s to go fly kite.
If the planners still revolve everything around bus interchanges, they will have no workable long-term solution to their current bus interchange woes, bendy or no bendy.
Originally posted by lemon1974:dun think LTA is getting any more bendies in future.. i believe that they have a deal with SMRT to allow them to buy bendies just solely for feeder/short route, while long haul route have to use DDs...
and buses need not start at interchange, but problem is that bendies also take up lot of road space as well.
I wrote a little about this here.
As for buses not terminating at interchanges - Why not? In many urban Australian cities, buses do terminate by the roadside. Bus stops are staggered to prevent buses from queuing to set down passengers.
Yes passengers will need to walk to transfer, but if done correctly the walking distance should be no more than walking from the alighting berth to the next boarding berth within the interchange or MRT station.
We will of course know LTA's answer by 2016. The prospective operators might already know the answer as we speak from the tender documents.
Gemilang is assembling first few A24s...
It's hard to imagine life without bendy buses...
People can tend to be lazy nowadays, take a look at 169's ADL. Most of the pax rather stand on the lower deck than going up and down.
Bendy buses indeed take up road space, parking space etc. But you can reduce the no. of it or deploy it on less congestion routes.
You can't avoid interchange jams when you have only less than 5 alighting berths, single lane entrance, peak hours long queue demands etc. Under this situation, the feeder/intra-town svcs will definitely suffers more isn't it? What's more if it's a Single Deck bus.
So I wouldn't totally agrees that bendy buses is the main cause of the issue, but also the poor planning of the interchange + mindset of "save landspace".
Like come on, if the govt. feels that Singapore has the shortage of land, please reduce or remove some of the landspace size of the stadiums, condomiums, shopping malls.
And PTH is considered to the stable "income" to the country's economy, am I right?
#justsaying
Design of the ITH itself is a poor planning ones..
Tampines town hub will compromise a new 22000 seater stadium that can act as a sub National Stadium for future Intl games..If they wanna bigger ITH then should follow Woodlands underground style
Originally posted by TIB868X:wishful thinking 904 will get bendy buses. demand patterns do not warrant any bendies and the route is clearly unsuitable for bendies due to tight turns.
and why would bendies be purchased in huge amounts by LTA when most interchanges especially the new ITHs cannot handle bendy buses? if they are not to terminate at interchanges then terminate at roadside? unreal when singapore's transportation system is heavily centralized in terms of bus interchanges.
at the end of the day, lta's stance on bendy buses is quite clear with the design of ITHs, which is irreversible. even more so with the new contract model where LTA would dictate fleet deployments. for all u know LTA will tell SMRT's mere 40 A24s to go fly kite.
yes... 904 don't need bendies at all... it is perfect for MAN fleet... and totally agree on your point on bendies... current infrastructure just suggests it will get phased out in due course... but that will be sad... they should maintain some bendies at least for short feeder services.
Originally posted by TIB429E:It's hard to imagine life without bendy buses...
People can tend to be lazy nowadays, take a look at 169's ADL. Most of the pax rather stand on the lower deck than going up and down.
Bendy buses indeed take up road space, parking space etc. But you can reduce the no. of it or deploy it on less congestion routes.
You can't avoid interchange jams when you have only less than 5 alighting berths, single lane entrance, peak hours long queue demands etc. Under this situation, the feeder/intra-town svcs will definitely suffers more isn't it? What's more if it's a Single Deck bus.
So I wouldn't totally agrees that bendy buses is the main cause of the issue, but also the poor planning of the interchange + mindset of "save landspace".
Like come on, if the govt. feels that Singapore has the shortage of land, please reduce or remove some of the landspace size of the stadiums, condomiums, shopping malls.
And PTH is considered to the stable "income" to the country's economy, am I right?
#justsaying
169 upper deck during peak hours is fully seated.
Originally posted by TIB429E:It's hard to imagine life without bendy buses...
People can tend to be lazy nowadays, take a look at 169's ADL. Most of the pax rather stand on the lower deck than going up and down.
Bendy buses indeed take up road space, parking space etc. But you can reduce the no. of it or deploy it on less congestion routes.
You can't avoid interchange jams when you have only less than 5 alighting berths, single lane entrance, peak hours long queue demands etc. Under this situation, the feeder/intra-town svcs will definitely suffers more isn't it? What's more if it's a Single Deck bus.
So I wouldn't totally agrees that bendy buses is the main cause of the issue, but also the poor planning of the interchange + mindset of "save landspace".
Like come on, if the govt. feels that Singapore has the shortage of land, please reduce or remove some of the landspace size of the stadiums, condomiums, shopping malls.
And PTH is considered to the stable "income" to the country's economy, am I right?
#justsaying
those DDs on 169 ...
i still go for the seats on the upper deck.
bendies do take up a lot of valuable road space. but then any type of buses will jam up the interchange or depot if it is small or it has poor traffic control.
Originally posted by TIB429E:It's hard to imagine life without bendy buses...
People can tend to be lazy nowadays, take a look at 169's ADL. Most of the pax rather stand on the lower deck than going up and down.
Bendy buses indeed take up road space, parking space etc. But you can reduce the no. of it or deploy it on less congestion routes.
You can't avoid interchange jams when you have only less than 5 alighting berths, single lane entrance, peak hours long queue demands etc. Under this situation, the feeder/intra-town svcs will definitely suffers more isn't it? What's more if it's a Single Deck bus.
So I wouldn't totally agrees that bendy buses is the main cause of the issue, but also the poor planning of the interchange + mindset of "save landspace".
Like come on, if the govt. feels that Singapore has the shortage of land, please reduce or remove some of the landspace size of the stadiums, condomiums, shopping malls.
And PTH is considered to the stable "income" to the country's economy, am I right?
#justsaying
why condos and stadiums? golf courses not taking up too much space? there is way too many malls. they should actually think of maximising space available
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:yes... 904 don't need bendies at all... it is perfect for MAN fleet... and totally agree on your point on bendies... current infrastructure just suggests it will get phased out in due course... but that will be sad... they should maintain some bendies at least for short feeder services.
at the moment, no
however, there is some developments and some HDB BTO coming up.
For 169, there's pax. whom goes up during peak hours. But for non-peak, most of them rather stand at the lower deck.
I rather there's bendy causing a jam than getting a SD that is caught in the jam[For feeder/intra-town]
Hmm Golf Course could be part of it. Condos, too much already. Same for shopping malls, like Tampines or Jurong. You could provide accessable transport(i.e. bus/MRT) to bring convenients to shoppers going towards certain area for certain type of shops instead of the other way.
Don't forget current ITH is focused on SBS Transit side..where they(SBST) dun hav bendy fleets..
Originally posted by carbikebus:Thats why SMRT CEO says Bendy exclusive for feeder svc within their interchange..
then smrt failed to look long term. no guarantee they will win the contracts containing feeders they are running now.
Originally posted by sgbuses:If the planners still revolve everything around bus interchanges, they will have no workable long-term solution to their current bus interchange woes, bendy or no bendy.
yes i agree they must decentralize bus interchanges. taman jurong terminal and the future changi business park terminal are good signs but they are half in half out efforts since for at least taman jurong terminal only one service terminates there and it is a new service, not one that is amended from a current interchange.
i think smrt should not have purchased those A24s at all. its only 40 of them, nowhere near enough to replace a reasonable amount of bendy buses and there's no telling if more will be purchased by SMRT or LTA.
Hmm, they can order more later on what?
Like the Citaros, only after the intake then they announce for further purchase.
lol then what's holding back SMRT? external pressure? lack of confidence that LTA will accept bendies? SMB388S has been evaluated enough
Haha perhaps the lack of space or not needed in bulks at the moment. As the ADL replaces the bendy on trunks, they have sufficient "not-so-soon" retired buses at the moment to run the feeders.
Originally posted by TIB429E:Haha perhaps the lack of space or not needed in bulks at the moment. As the ADL replaces the bendy on trunks, they have sufficient "not-so-soon" retired buses at the moment to run the feeders.
Agreed, but they need more DDs then.
SMRT depots lack of space to park those 40 A24s is one of the reason,Else they may have to scrapped all box bendies and MK IIs first
Originally posted by carbikebus:SMRT depots lack of space to park those 40 A24s is one of the reason,Else they may have to scrapped all box bendies and MK IIs first
if they are running out of spaces, then why order so many A22s and Enviro 50s when the out going O405s, O405Gs are so much less? did they factor the A24s in the first place?
Mk2 O405Gs, volgren O405Gs and the habit O405Gs are not due for dereg yet, unless they plan for early dereg like they did to the Scanias and Lances