Originally posted by SMB145B:...omg what is wrong with you? i find you so funny lor. You know our govt is good at something. the 12.4m DD with lift is the main thing not the 23.5m bendy. lol
Why are you, as many other enthuasists are, still in denial of reality?
Ya - if you hadn't scoured (I presume you had) GeBiz, then few if anybody at all, would have seen this.
I can only say that LTA is getting increasingly aggressive in wresting control of the public transport industry back.
But is competitive govt model the way to go forward? For all the talk about big govt being inefficient, people tend to forget that the cost price of the tender doesn't reflect the true cost of the model.
The true cost actually includes: writing the tender, answering feedback, audits etc etc. These costs are borne by taxpayers eventually.
These costs aren't reported obviously, which under-states the true cost of GCM, and over-hypes the supposed benefits of lean governance.
My opinion is for LTA to stop the "we should not be operating buses but we know better than PTO" mantra.
It is contradictory and counter-productive, especially at this transition point. The PTOs are not going to be particularly cooperative, and the public will suffer.
Anybody noticed that with the upgrade to the bus arrival times to mytransport, the estimations have gotten even worse?
My guess is that the data supply is now controlled by LTA. Not from PTOs, and the algorithms are not as correct as previously before.
Will the PTOs help sort this out? I doubt it.
I would like to see the industry nationalised - the true cost may become more transparent, and there would be less oddities such as having "packages" on this rather small island.
And yes, GCM or nationalisation, the bus-fan hobby stuff will be dead very soon either way.
And bendies will be gone. As simple as that. The signs have been there for so long.
Originally posted by SMB145B:...omg what is wrong with you? i find you so funny lor. You know our govt is good at something. the 12.4m DD with lift is the main thing not the 23.5m bendy. lol
Non-compliant bids are not funny.
Imagine you are the project manager and you managed to smoke your bosses and really put a bendy up as proposal, which is eventually ruled as non-compliant by the Authority.
Are you prepared to face the music from your boss?
If not, then you have zilch credibility and I have no qualms in being that slightly more rude.
Originally posted by SBS2601D:Ya - if you hadn't scoured (I presume you had) GeBiz, then few if anybody at all, would have seen this.
I can only say that LTA is getting increasingly aggressive in wresting control of the public transport industry back.
But is competitive govt model the way to go forward? For all the talk about big govt being inefficient, people tend to forget that the cost price of the tender doesn't reflect the true cost of the model.
The true cost actually includes: writing the tender, answering feedback, audits etc etc. These costs are borne by taxpayers eventually.
These costs aren't reported obviously, which under-states the true cost of GCM, and over-hypes the supposed benefits of lean governance.
It is true that the competitive tendering model has no guarantee of being better. You are right that compliance involves costs, and there are risks involved in GCM (including bankrupcy and labour disruption). There is no shortage of literature out there arguging for and against this model.
I am more inclined to think that all these changes are highly driven by national politics. Public transportation is one of the hottest political hot potato in the last election (and the most visible impact of Singapore's immigration policies), and the government probably felt the need to just something about it to placate the voters.
In a way it's a political gamble, and so it will be very interesting to see how this eventually plays out.
P.S. I don't like mytransport either. It gives me a lot less information than I could get out the previous publictransport.sg portal.
Originally posted by sgbuses:I was hoping to set the record straight with solid information to clear the high seas of rumours and disinformation prevalent in this community. I was expecting older folks with some institutional knowledge to offer some useful comment.
Clearly, I was wrong. There are lobbyists who even belittle the significance of this news.
Perhaps the only explanation is that we now live in a new generation of young lobbyists who possess zero institutional knowledge (because it no longer exists) and assume that they know everything. Hence the responses which IMO is worse than asking any passerby who possess no prior knowledge of buses.
I truly fear for Singapore's future of public bus transportation.
@sgbuses
Not sure if this is useful,
a few weeks ago, I went onto Ask.fm and asked my friends (around 18/19 yrs old) this question.
Q: In terms of transportion, do you want speed or comfort.
Many of them say they want both speed and comfort.
Some say speed.
Some say it depends on the distance. If short distance, speed. If long distance, comfort.
In short, we know what we want. Tbh, regarding transport, we just want to get from point A to point B in the best possible way.
Well, you know, "best" can mean many things, depending on each point of view. #justsaying
but really, I do not think we really care what kind of bus is used. so long as we can board and can go to where we want, can already.
but still, it really feels good to say that "I am so poor. I can only take Mercedes to school."　:)
#justsaying #conceptbus #tender #prototype
Ya - there is no harm in rocking the boat now.
And it isn't really like the PTOs will die. If anything, these incumbents have the advantage of having experience running the ops, as evidenced by them having the lowest bids for Bulim.
They will also be happy (I may stand to be corrected), in being able to shake off the revenue risk and the need to hold (and think about) fixed assets.
With the consolidation of the bus industry and the fact that the buses will be owned by LTA, LTA will have a significant clout over the bus manufacturers.
From that perspective, it will certainly make sense now to rock the boat a bit by calling for new bus concepts. They can then learn better about what is good/possible, and call for appropriate tenders.
Originally posted by sgbuses:It is true that the competitive tendering model has no guarantee of being better. You are right that compliance involves costs, and there are risks involved in GCM (including bankrupcy and labour disruption). There is no shortage of literature out there arguging for and against this model.
I am more inclined to think that all these changes are highly driven by national politics. Public transportation is one of the hottest political hot potato in the last election (and the most visible impact of Singapore's immigration policies), and the government probably felt the need to just something about it to placate the voters.
In a way it's a political gamble, and so it will be very interesting to see how this eventually plays out.
P.S. I don't like mytransport either. It gives me a lot less information than I could get out the previous publictransport.sg portal.
Unfortunately mytransport will be THE land transport portal.
As evidenced by the sheer amount of things stuffed into it.
The saving grace however would be the new data mall, which allows developers to get hold of some critical data (such as bus routes) to develop minor spin-offs.
Those who had learnt IT-related engineering stand to benefit from these recent events. The new systems such as the IBMS and beeline.sg are clear trends towards the use of big data in many of the public transport problems.
Originally posted by SBS2601D:Ya - there is no harm in rocking the boat now.
And it isn't really like the PTOs will die. If anything, these incumbents have the advantage of having experience running the ops, as evidenced by them having the lowest bids for Bulim.
They will also be happy (I may stand to be corrected), in being able to shake off the revenue risk and the need to hold (and think about) fixed assets.
With the consolidation of the bus industry and the fact that the buses will be owned by LTA, LTA will have a significant clout over the bus manufacturers.
From that perspective, it will certainly make sense now to rock the boat a bit by calling for new bus concepts. They can then learn better about what is good/possible, and call for appropriate tenders.
Thank you. That is what I was trying to hint at about the new concept bus mock up.
In the words of Masterchef, "whoever wins this challenge will gain a significant advantage in the next round".
You may have noticed that right from the start, I have brought up Perth as the example to be looked at. It is not only because I have experienced the system, but because LTA's GCM model is almost identical to PTA WA's (Transperth).
I have seen the flaws arising out of Transperth's system, and do not want to see these flaws replicated in Singapore's system (where the impact is going to be more visible).
Originally posted by sgbuses:Thank you. That is what I was trying to hint at about the new concept bus mock up.
In the words of Masterchef, "whoever wins this challenge will gain a significant advantage in the next round".
You may have noticed that right from the start, I have brought up Perth as the example to be looked at. It is not only because I have experienced the system, but because LTA's GCM model is almost identical to PTA WA's (Transperth).
I have seen the flaws arising out of Transperth's system, and do not want to see these flaws replicated in Singapore's system (where the impact is going to be more visible).
Thankfully, Social Studies is a compulsory subject in secondary school.
Anyway, I am sure we will do a thorough read up on the case studies. whatever good, use it. whatever bad, prevent it. Rest assured, we have been doing that since the beginning of time. I'm sure by now we are very good and very experienced at it. :)
Originally posted by JurongWestresident:@sgbuses
Not sure if this is useful,
a few weeks ago, I went onto Ask.fm and asked my friends (around 18/19 yrs old) this question.
Q: In terms of transportion, do you want speed or comfort.
Many of them say they want both speed and comfort.
Some say speed.
Some say it depends on the distance. If short distance, speed. If long distance, comfort.
In short, we know what we want. Tbh, regarding transport, we just want to get from point A to point B in the best possible way.
Well, you know, "best" can mean many things, depending on each point of view. #justsaying
but really, I do not think we really care what kind of bus is used. so long as we can board and can go to where we want, can already.
but still, it really feels good to say that "I am so poor. I can only take Mercedes to school."　:)
#justsaying #conceptbus #tender #prototype
The only main difference between Singapore and other cities is that Singapore has much larger population of captive audiences taking public transport, by virtue of COE.
In academia, most experts will advise transport planners that the needs of captive audiences is to be ignored and the focus should be on incentivizing car owners to switch to public transport. Clearly, that is not happening in Singapore for reasons already mentioned.
That is why, and this is especially true for bus lobbyists, if passengers are stuck with a choice (taking the bus) then they will do whatever they can to make the conditions of that choice better for themselves.
Originally posted by sgbuses: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.
I am sorry, but can I just say that maybe the people who have access to the information share the information here, if allowed?
Most of us here do not know, that's why tend to write off topic. #justsaying
Originally posted by JurongWestresident:I am sorry, but can I just say that maybe the people who have access to the information share the information here, if allowed?
Most of us here do not know, that's why tend to write off topic. #justsaying
I do not have access to the information. I was just making an educated guess from what is publicly available.
I discourage anyone else with this information to make it public.
I expect a bit of speculation and that is perfectly fine, but not the extent of being so far off course (such as lobbying for bendy buses when its clearly ruled out).
I have heard about the bad name that these people give, especially when they give endless "feedback" about these that. A lot of them contain a huge dose of self-righteousness and a number are rude.
Spare a thought for the poor fellows who have to entertain you at LTA.
It's not as though they have too little work especially now.
Originally posted by SBS2601D:Non-compliant bids are not funny.
Imagine you are the project manager and you managed to smoke your bosses and really put a bendy up as proposal, which is eventually ruled as non-compliant by the Authority.
Are you prepared to face the music from your boss?
If not, then you have zilch credibility and I have no qualms in being that slightly more rude.
listen, i only follow what given to me by my boss. if he says no and i insist, then it is fair that i get the punishment.
At that point it is minute you take in more about a Male Enhancement appraisal on the off chance that you'd like to abstain from squandering your money while finding an answer for penis broadening that really lives up to expectations. What's an assessment? Well its an unprejudiced observe an item. Evaluates have a tendency to be done even or by outsiders by those people who have gone for something. You get the upside of comprehension from somebody who has essentially attempted the stock and you likewise don't have to have cleared up inside the business buildup that you will get from most firms.
Click Here :- https://sites.google.com/site/vimaxtrialit/
Originally posted by SBS2601D: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/
See highlighted. Simi London simi NBFL so cheem.
I see mock-up = not real bus.
You mean everyday mock-up buses come and pick us up?
I see no reason why the Authority wants to try new things without commiting themselves to something more serious like a demonstrator (who in the Authority will drive the bus?).
I would be very curious to see what creative designs the bidders will give, without thinking about simi lift in bus la, horse-powered bus la.
Here is the BIGGEST issue of it all, what this means is that LTA has the upper hand in playing manufacturers out. Imagine if LTA awarded this contract to manufacturer A, feels happy about the mockup, then puts the good aspects in the specs of a subsequent tender for buses, and awards it to manufacturer B who has bidded lower than A in the contract. I highly doubt there is any contractual commitment to purchase buses out of this contract. As a manufacturer, congratulations, you've been played out by a government agency who may be a bastard but you can't do anything about it but to try harder next time round, even though it was your ideas and your blood and sweat.
Point to note that the NBFL design competition's entrys were designed by design firms, ie there was no bus manufacturer involved (LTA's one stated they have to be experienced bus manufacturers), bus manufacturers were only called in after the winning concept was decided to provide the engineering design and manufacture of the buses.
I personally like the quality of the buses manufactured by a certain Northern Irish bus manufacturer, and its buses have a unique design, and they are known to be very creative in their designs. What if they submitted a bid in this concept, and another tender for purchase of buses comes out with the ideas from the Irish in the spec but the Scottish or even the Chinese get the contract? Is it fair for the Irish?
Hi. I would like to know, actually what is the purpose of creating this thread? Is it to lecture the commoners/General Public?
After all, this is only a public discussions page. We are only here to chit-chat, right? If so, we do not need to know private and confidential information.
We just need some press releases, news articles, publications and any other infomation in the public domain, to talk talk talk all we want.
#justsaying
i think still a BRT system combine with MRT will be the best for the public. and for those road that never big enough for BRT or MRT to be build on, a fleet of normal public buses could provide the link. in short if LTA want people to give up driving cars it is impossible, but at least some kind of interconnection between journey and on time transport service is possible. not point asking contractor to come whatever bus concept for the public. LRT system is a not a every good system compare to BRT.
Originally posted by SBS351M:Here is the BIGGEST issue of it all, what this means is that LTA has the upper hand in playing manufacturers out. Imagine if LTA awarded this contract to manufacturer A, feels happy about the mockup, then puts the good aspects in the specs of a subsequent tender for buses, and awards it to manufacturer B who has bidded lower than A in the contract. I highly doubt there is any contractual commitment to purchase buses out of this contract. As a manufacturer, congratulations, you've been played out by a government agency who may be a bastard but you can't do anything about it but to try harder next time round, even though it was your ideas and your blood and sweat.
Point to note that the NBFL design competition's entrys were designed by design firms, ie there was no bus manufacturer involved (LTA's one stated they have to be experienced bus manufacturers), bus manufacturers were only called in after the winning concept was decided to provide the engineering design and manufacture of the buses.
winning designs do not translate into winning production contracts - there is a significant difference between design capability and production capability, and you seem to be assuming:
1) LTA should award the production contract to the company that designed it (goes against tender rules!)
2) the bidders for the design contract can BOTH design well and produce cheaply (how true??)
there is NO play-out involved because, by virtue of the contract, LTA has to renumerate the bidder with the best possible design, and expect LTA to purchase the winning design (IP rights, TDPs and the related) at the conclusion of the contract. once that is done, the design does not belong to the company that designed it, but instead belongs to LTA.
when LTA decides, further down the road, to issue a manufacturing contract, there is no sell-out because LTA is merely having people tender to build their design, yes LTA's design. it can be argued that LTA's design is a defacto design from a bus company, but the design, legally, still belongs to LTA.
Originally posted by JurongWestresident:Hi. I would like to know, actually what is the purpose of creating this thread? Is it to lecture the commoners/General Public?
After all, this is only a public discussions page. We are only here to chit-chat, right? If so, we do not need to know private and confidential information.
We just need some press releases, news articles, publications and any other infomation in the public domain, to talk talk talk all we want.
#justsaying
There is no confidential information involved. A simple search over GeBiz (with the word "bus") will yield information on the tender eligibility which anyone can view.
Pasting the direct URL didn't work on this forum. It resulted in a broken link. Sometimes even pasting URLs of LTA press releases does not work. It is frustrating, but you will have look it up manually. But the tender eligibility information is available and online to anyone.
A lot of these "feedback" (I call it lobbying) has spilled over to the mainstream media over the past five years.
All you needed to do is to Google for it. It is all over the public domain in the last five years.
Originally posted by JurongWestresident:Hi. I would like to know, actually what is the purpose of creating this thread? Is it to lecture the commoners/General Public?
After all, this is only a public discussions page. We are only here to chit-chat, right? If so, we do not need to know private and confidential information.
We just need some press releases, news articles, publications and any other infomation in the public domain, to talk talk talk all we want.
#justsaying
its tragic the pen, or rather the internet, does not discriminate between the informed and the un-informed. often enough, its the un-informed who resort to persuasion above their weight to effect changes that are often detrimental to the system.
kid, you underestimate the power of the media. If you havent been reading your Social Studies textbooks properly, re-read them and also singapore's history. how did LKY influence the masses against British Colonial rule, and eventually against the Barisan Socialis?
Edit - to better put this whole issue of 'forum public discussions are harmless' into context, remember rumours of the B10M Mk5 many years back? How did Volvo respond to such suggestions of a Mk5 B10M then?
Originally posted by SBS351M:Here is the BIGGEST issue of it all, what this means is that LTA has the upper hand in playing manufacturers out. Imagine if LTA awarded this contract to manufacturer A, feels happy about the mockup, then puts the good aspects in the specs of a subsequent tender for buses, and awards it to manufacturer B who has bidded lower than A in the contract. I highly doubt there is any contractual commitment to purchase buses out of this contract. As a manufacturer, congratulations, you've been played out by a government agency who may be a bastard but you can't do anything about it but to try harder next time round, even though it was your ideas and your blood and sweat.
Point to note that the NBFL design competition's entrys were designed by design firms, ie there was no bus manufacturer involved (LTA's one stated they have to be experienced bus manufacturers), bus manufacturers were only called in after the winning concept was decided to provide the engineering design and manufacture of the buses.
Alternatively, it is possible to argue the other way round.
If I were a manufacturer and I wanted to keep other manufacturers out for the next round, I would propose a mock-up with technologies that other manufactures find it difficult or are unable to replicate (e.g. steel structure or cutting edge aluminum structure design). That will put many of my competitors out of the game for the next round.
That is why this looks like Masterchef if you have watched episodes of it, "whoever wins this challenge will gain a significant advantage in the next round". The winner of the first challenge will usually pick ingredients/choices for their competitors for the elimination round that put them in an very vulnerable position.
Originally posted by wsy1234:i think still a BRT system combine with MRT will be the best for the public. and for those road that never big enough for BRT or MRT to be build on, a fleet of normal public buses could provide the link. in short if LTA want people to give up driving cars it is impossible, but at least some kind of interconnection between journey and on time transport service is possible. not point asking contractor to come whatever bus concept for the public. LRT system is a not a every good system compare to BRT.
Generally, a rail system is preferred to a BRT if it exists.
I have seen at least one major urban city tear down BRT facilities to substitute it for a metro system. Taichung is tearing down theirs in a few months.
The main benefits of a BRT system is its flexibility and shorter period of construction.