LTA calls tender for mock-ups for Concept Bus
-
PT236 Concept Bus Mock-up
Calling for: One single deck or double deck Concept Bus mock-up or both
Closing date: 3 June 2015
Delivery date: 17 September 2015
Source: http://www.lta.gov.sg/apps/tender/
Opinon
1. Should be related to procurement of buses for current and future GCMs. Tender explicitly stated that the supplier must be an experienced bus manufacturer.
2. No articulated bus indicated as part of tender - no articulated buses to be procured in future?
3. "Concept bus" may suggest a brand new bus design for Singapore's operating environment, possibly along the lines of how NBfL and NTfL are developed in London.
-
How about a 12.5m tri axles with dual staircases and three doors?If the manufacturers can design and built can say goodbye to bendy buses already
-
Manufacturing our own bus can better enable us to have customised features. One challenge is that the Capacity should be larger, if not remain the same. #justsaying
Concept bus.... what if it's just a regular bus, but one hundred per cent made in Singapore? a regular bus, with additional features... either physically or on the design, or simply some customization of parts (eg. signboard). maybe that is what they mean by concept bus...
-
Those who registered with GeBiz, will keep to themselves...
And yes - articulated buses will die out. It didn't really matter how many years it took for proponents to see it, but this is not confirmation enough?
-
Design,built by Singapore but mechanism must be under European..Drooling something like the A39 but much shorter version say 12.5m?I dont mind bendy phased out if this became reality..Good for anything from trunks to Intratowns!
-
single decks could possibly be either rigids or bendies.
-
like this one http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jun/19/new-bus-london-boris-johnson bulid with a 12.5m tri axles bus chassis
-
Originally posted by wsy1234:
like this one http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jun/19/new-bus-london-boris-johnson bulid with a 12.5m tri axles bus chassis
three door two stairs double decker??
-
Well, I am fine with a 12.5m DD with 2 staircases and 3 doors, but DON'T expect it to have the same capacity as a standard 12m DD or 18m bendy.
Although I would favour a 10m bi-axle DD instead. There are high loading services that cannot ply 12m DDs due to the roads the service ply through.
-
They should focus on improving the bus network, especially with connectivity, instead of doing this kind of prestige projects.
-
Originally posted by SBS351M:
They should focus on improving the bus network, especially with connectivity, instead of doing this kind of prestige projects.
I agree. Unless this increases the capacity OR (AND) reduces operating costs (eg. more energy efficient), the time is not yet right for us to manufacture our own buses.Nonetheless, haven't we already manufactured our own buses before, by Comfort Delgro, ST, etcetera.?
Anyway, besides capacity and operating costs, I think what we need/want is either more bus services, or some campaigns/programmes/schemes/initiatives/measures to change some travel patterns to spread out the loading across more time periods. #justsaying
-
Well,There is already a feedback that normal 12m DDs and bendy doesnt favour Sg feeders and trunks respectively..LTA wanna standardise to normal SD and DD only so the best option is to design something like the A39 with shorter length(12.5/12.8m)..
-
Originally posted by JurongWestresident:
I agree. Unless this increases the capacity OR (AND) reduces operating costs (eg. more energy efficient), the is not yet right for us to manufacture our own buses.Nonetheless, haven't we already manufactured our own buses before, by Comfort Delgro, ST, etcetera.?
Anyway, besides capacity and operating costs, I think what we need/want is either more bus services, or some campaigns/programmes/schemes/initiatives/measures to change some travel patterns to spread out the loading across more time periods. #justsaying
dude, wake up!!
(splashes water on face) the local industry can never support bus-building on an industralised scale, like what you get in malaysia, australia, china, europe or even the US. whatever reasons and benefits conceived are never likely to give SC Auto or Soon Chow reasons to exapand and become a local GML.
did CDGE manufactue its own buses before? there's quite some difference between the following:
1) bodywork assembly
2) chassis assembly
3) complete bus productionlikewise, ST also manufactures buses ar?
the problems run deeper than campaigns, promotions are gonna fix. Singapore is past trying to change travel habits, and the prime challenge, imo, is to meet loading challenges across time by adjusting supply rather than manipulating demand.
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Well,There is already a feedback that normal 12m DDs and bendy doesnt favour Sg feeders and trunks respectively..LTA wanna standardise to normal SD and DD only so the best option is to design something like the A39 with shorter length(12.5/12.8m)..
dont confuse a route design problem with the vehicles deployed onto the route
wow, an 'additional' 0.5m is indeed standardization, especially when the bulk of drivers are already trained and certified on 12m vehicles
well done!! -
Originally posted by SexyMichael:
dont confuse a route design problem with the vehicles deployed onto the route
wow, an 'additional' 0.5m is indeed standardization, especially when the bulk of drivers are already trained and certified on 12m vehicles
well
done!! Just saying dude,no need for the sarcasm,Thanks!
-
Originally posted by SexyMichael:
dude, wake up!!
(splashes
water on face) the local industry can never support bus-building on an industralised scale, like what you get in malaysia, australia, china, europe or even the US. whatever reasons and benefits conceived are never likely to give SC Auto or Soon Chow reasons to exapand and become a local GML.
did CDGE manufactue its own buses before? there's quite some difference between the following:
1) bodywork assembly
2) chassis assembly
3) complete bus productionlikewise, ST also manufactures buses ar?
the problems run deeper than campaigns, promotions are gonna fix. Singapore is past trying to change travel habits, and the prime challenge, imo, is to meet loading challenges across time by adjusting supply rather than manipulating demand.
Perhaps he is referring to SC Auto or Soon Chow? CDGE did built the bodywork of 200 Euro III B9TLs on their own, but that's probably not enough.
Tender eligibility requires the manufacturer to have exported of at least 1,000 city buses outside of the local market. I don't think any local manufactuers will be able to meet this requirement.
-
Maybe invite GML here hahaha
-
Originally posted by SBS351M:
They should focus on improving the bus network, especially with connectivity, instead of doing this kind of prestige projects.
What is a "prestige project"?
And how is this "prestigious"?
The simple mind of mine only conceives it as a way for the Authority to evaluate and assess options for purchasing buses.
Perhaps you could fire up my imagination and then I can somehow "contribute" to this forum.
Or not.
-
Originally posted by JurongWestresident:
I agree. Unless this increases the capacity OR (AND) reduces operating costs (eg. more energy efficient), the time is not yet right for us to manufacture our own buses.Nonetheless, haven't we already manufactured our own buses before, by Comfort Delgro, ST, etcetera.?
Anyway, besides capacity and operating costs, I think what we need/want is either more bus services, or some campaigns/programmes/schemes/initiatives/measures to change some travel patterns to spread out the loading across more time periods. #justsaying
Nothing in that excerpt that sgbuses has kindly provided in the lead post suggests manufacturing buses remotely.
You think what we need/want is either more bus services, or some campaigns/programmes/schemes/initiatives/measures to change some travel patterns to spread out the loading across more time periods.
I think what we need will be more discerning minds.
-
Originally posted by SBS2601D:
Nothing in that excerpt that sgbuses has kindly provided in the lead post suggests manufacturing buses remotely.
You think what we need/want is either more bus services, or some campaigns/programmes/schemes/initiatives/measures to change some travel patterns to spread out the loading across more time periods.
I think what we need will be more discerning minds.
huh? what talking you? ok ok... whatever la...
-
What about a DD with lifts? It is either a 12.4m or 14.5m with two sets of lifts. These DD could accommodate 2 to 4 PIWs (1 or 2 PIWs on each deck).
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
Perhaps he is referring to SC Auto or Soon Chow? CDGE did built the bodywork of 200 Euro III B9TLs on their own, but that's probably not enough.
Tender eligibility requires the manufacturer to have exported of at least 1,000 city buses outside of the local market. I don't think any local manufactuers will be able to meet this requirement.
that's what i was trying to bite on - that CDGE has only manufactured bodies instead of complete buses for export ;)
but it does raise an interesting scenario - suppose a combination bid by say CDGE (chassis) + SC Auto (bodywork) does come in, would it be accepted by virtue of chassis manufacturer's export volumes or rejected on the basis of the bodybuilder's 'lack of qualifications'?
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
What about a DD with lifts? It is either a 12.4m or 14.5m with two sets of lifts. These DD could accommodate 2 to 4 PIWs (1 or 2 PIWs on each deck).
let's do some math, with some assumptions to begin with (what's discussions without assumptions
)1. a 12.4m DD will have the same number of seats as a 12m DD (let's say 83 seats)
2. a PIW lift has tto be able to access both floors (hence its a lift)
3. the floor area of the PIW lift (including the lift mechanisms) occupies the area equivalent to 4 seats on every floor
4. if we have 2 lifts, that makes (4 x 2 x 2) = 16 seats lost
5. we are hence left with (83 - 16) = 67 seats remaining
of which there are only 47 seats left on the upper deck!6. okay this is getting ridiculous. is it even safe for PIWs to even park below the PIW lift?
7. most PIW lifts are designed for 1 PIW only, so if there are 2 PIW lifts how many seats are we giving up for PIWs? (if there are even that many PIWs taking the buses to start with)
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
What about a DD with lifts? It is either a 12.4m or 14.5m with two sets of lifts. These DD could accommodate 2 to 4 PIWs (1 or 2 PIWs on each deck).
What are the chances of having more then 1 PIW in a WAB in any one time? 1 PIW is enough IMO
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
What about a DD with lifts? It is either a 12.4m or 14.5m with two sets of lifts. These DD could accommodate 2 to 4 PIWs (1 or 2 PIWs on each deck).
Having a lift complicates matters, including cost of installation and maintenance, and would take up quite an amount of space in the bus.