Route Amendment: Service 171
Yishun - Bt Panjang (Loop)
Route Amendment: Service 960
Woodlands - Marina Centre
930E (renumbered from 980E)
Sembawang Int to Lor 1 Geylang Terminal
via
Canberra Road
Sembawang Road
Upper Thomson Road
SLE/CTE
Bukit Timah Road
Sungei Road
Bencoolen Street
Middle Road
Beach Road
Crawford Street
Kallang Road
Sims Avenue
Originally posted by Rytz:Route Amendment: Service 171
Yishun - Bt Panjang (Loop)
- Yishun Temp Int
- Yishun Ave 5
- Sembawang Rd
- Mandai Ave
- Mandai Rd
- Woodlands Rd
- Upp Bt Timah Rd
- Petir Rd
- Jelebu Rd
- Bt Panjang Rd
- Woodlands Rd
- Mandai Rd
- Mandai Ave
- Sembawang Rd
- Yishun Ave 5
- Yishun Temp Int
Support. The loop section can be extended to Chestnut Dr / Dairy Farm Cres / Rd for future demand. The difference in demand along Yishun - BPJ and BPJ - Marina Centre suggests that splitting / a cut-short would be optimal.
Originally posted by Rytz:Route Amendment: Service 960
Woodlands - Marina Centre
- Woodlands Temp Int
- Woodlands Ave 2
- Woodlands Ave 5
- Woodlands Ave 12
- SLE
- CTE
- Bt Timah Rd
- Sungei Rd
- Ophir Rd
- Victoria St
- Bras Basah Rd
- Raffles Blvd
- Marina Centre Ter
While it's good to bring a quick express service to Woodlands Ave 2/5, skipping Woodlands Rd and Bt Panjang is simply not going to work, due to heavy demand at Mandai Estate (along Woodlands Rd) and possible lost link between Woodlands and Whitley Rd, as well as all those between Bt Panjang and CBD.
Originally posted by SMB145B:930E (renumbered from 980E)
Sembawang Int to Lor 1 Geylang Terminal
via
Canberra Road
Sembawang Road
Upper Thomson Road
SLE/CTE
Bukit Timah Road
Sungei Road
Bencoolen Street
Middle Road
Beach Road
Crawford Street
Kallang Road
Sims Avenue
Could try, but would certainly require a significant fleet boost for 980 / 930E. Not sure if LTA would want to do it though, given the relatively more convenient MRT option and the lack of demand from the upcoming Canberra estate residents.
I'm thinking more along the lines of changing 167 though:
The benefits are, of course, a much faster route, almost express, for Sembawang, Canberra and Yishun West residents. In addition, Canberra estate / Yishun Ave 2, 7 residents and industrial workers get a direct link to Canberra MRT station.
Shortfalls would be the loss of direct link between Sembawang Shopping Ctr / Upper Chong Pang and MRT station (still provided by 858, 859, 980), and the skipping of Upp Thomson Rd bus stops. Much of 167's long route along Upp Thomson and Thomson Rds still have alternative services 166 and 980, while lost links to Orchard are still provided by 162. And of course, should all these happen, 167 and all of these alternative services would need a HUGE fleet boost.
A less radical option would be to allow 167 to continue along Upp Thomson Rd instead of taking the express route (in orange), but I feel that would have defeated the purpose of amending the route over to Canberra in the first place. The opening of NSE / Thomson-East Coast Line may also make such a route change obsolete.
Originally posted by AJQZC:Could try, but would certainly require a significant fleet boost for 980 / 930E. Not sure if LTA would want to do it though, given the relatively more convenient MRT option and the lack of demand from the upcoming Canberra estate residents.
I'm thinking more along the lines of changing 167 though:
- Sembawang Vista
- Canberra Rd
- Canberra Link
- Sembawang Rd (towards Sembawang CC)
- Canberra St
- Canberra Way
- Canberra Link
- Yishun Ave 2
- Yishun Ring Rd
- Yishun Ave 5
- Sembawang Rd
- Upp Thomson Rd
- SLE (express)
- CTE (express)
- Moulmein Rd
- Newton Rd
- (usual route to Bt Merah)
The benefits are, of course, a much faster route, almost express, for Sembawang, Canberra and Yishun West residents. In addition, Canberra estate / Yishun Ave 2, 7 residents and industrial workers get a direct link to Canberra MRT station.
Shortfalls would be the loss of direct link between Sembawang Shopping Ctr / Upper Chong Pang and MRT station (still provided by 858, 859, 980), and the skipping of Upp Thomson Rd bus stops. Much of 167's long route along Upp Thomson and Thomson Rds still have alternative services 166 and 980, while lost links to Orchard are still provided by 162. And of course, should all these happen, 167 and all of these alternative services would need a HUGE fleet boost.
A less radical option would be to allow 167 to continue along Upp Thomson Rd instead of taking the express route (in orange), but I feel that would have defeated the purpose of amending the route over to Canberra in the first place. The opening of NSE / Thomson-East Coast Line may also make such a route change obsolete.
980 would also be renumbered. as for 167, 167E will terminate at Shenton Way instead of Bukit Merah. 167 can be amended into Canberra while keeping much of its route unchanged. 167E will ply SLE/CTE instead, exiting CTE like 850E.
932
Sembawang to Changi Airport
via
Canberra Road
Canberra Link
Canberra Way
Admiralty Road East
Yishun Avenue 8
Yishun Avenue 1
Seletar West Link
TPE/PIE/ECP
Airport Boulevard
Changi Airport PTB3
Changi Airport PTB1
Changi Airport PTB2
(loop)
Route will only call at the TPE bus stop before/after Punggol Road.
Note: includes future roads.
Can use 888 mah..
Originally posted by carbikebus:Can use 888 mah..
88x are Sembawang "feeders"
93x are Sembawang trunks (i hate the fact that 98x is shared between Sembawang and CCK Trunks)
They can use 164 for a trunk svc at sembawang
Originally posted by SMB145B:88x are Sembawang "feeders"
93x are Sembawang trunks (i hate the fact that 98x is shared between Sembawang and CCK Trunks)
882 is trunk although it act like a feeder so still can use mah..Why need 930?Might as well use 986 cause both 980 and 981 at Sembawang mah..Unlike 111 which is an odd ball at West side.
Originally posted by SMB145B:88x are Sembawang "feeders"
93x are Sembawang trunks (i hate the fact that 98x is shared between Sembawang and CCK Trunks)
Might as well move everything to 83x and 84x - beside the Yishun trunks, for both numerical and geographic proximity. Leave 98x for CCK (with neighbouring 97x at Bt Panjang and 99x at Bt Batok) and 870-899 for future developments (such as Simpang and Seletar).
Then 980, 981, 882 can be renumbered 840, 841, 842 respectively. New trunks can start from 843, and new feeders from 830 (mainly for those not entering Yishun town, to minimize "3" and "5" mixup). If needed, premium 825 can be renumbered to 525 or 529X.
Originally posted by carbikebus:882 is trunk although it act like a feeder so still can use mah..Why need 930?Might as well use 986 cause both 980 and 981 at Sembawang mah..Unlike 111 which is an odd ball at West side.
980 and 981 are in Sembawang, but 982E, 983 and 985 are all in CCK.
111 should have renumbered long ago
51 also should renumbered as well, does not even serve Bishan at all.
svc 2-6, 8 and 9 serves Tampines but 7, though all serves pax in the east.
Sembawang needs feeder service. heck even 882 does not serve till midnight.
859A/B (currently the only service serving till after midnight)
882A (for 2330/2345 to 0040) (minimal route changes)
117M (SBST) (new SWT)
883 (new service)
Originally posted by SMB145B:980 and 981 are in Sembawang, but 982E, 983 and 985 are all in CCK.
111 should have renumbered long ago
51 also should renumbered as well, does not even serve Bishan at all.
svc 2-6, 8 and 9 serves Tampines but 7, though all serves pax in the east.
51 and 52 are in Jurong East also.41 & 49 serve West area while 4x series all in the East and Northeast(43).If all renumbered for the sake of renumbering it doesnt make sense at all though i agree new service from the West can also have 110 to compliment 111.111 used to serve Hougang South before NEL amendment.53M also doesnt serve Bishan so technically it got partner svc 51 in Hougang area.55,58 and 59 does serve Eastern areas..Hahaha..7 starting point is Bedok though Bbdep hold the most duties.You must know the history of the svc before conclude anything my friends and i stand my point that 111 is the oddball.11x series doesnt serve West nor City area..
And dont forget 985 serve central east that is Boon Keng and Lor 1 Geylang,It still meet svc 980 hahaha
167 look odd in Sembawang but again it did meet 162,166 also..Ditto for svc 171,It did meet 170,176,177.
175 meet 176 at West Coast.
Originally posted by carbikebus:51 and 52 are in Jurong East also.41 & 49 serve West area while 4x series all in the East and Northeast(43).If all renumbered for the sake of renumbering it doesnt make sense at all though i agree new service from the West can also have 110 to compliment 111.111 used to serve Hougang South before NEL amendment.53M also doesnt serve Bishan so technically it got partner svc 51 in Hougang area.55,58 and 59 does serve Eastern areas..Hahaha..7 starting point is Bedok though Bbdep hold the most duties.You must know the history of the svc before conclude anything my friends and i stand my point that 111 is the oddball.11x series doesnt serve West nor City area..
Hi mr carbikebus, 111 used to serve Hougang area which is northeast. Thus it was not the odd one out at that time as it was serving northeast like 112, 113. However when it was shortened, the number remained. Cheers. Thanks.
980 is former 160 (old). but any new service should follow a numbering system.
Originally posted by AJQZC:Could try, but would certainly require a significant fleet boost for 980 / 930E. Not sure if LTA would want to do it though, given the relatively more convenient MRT option and the lack of demand from the upcoming Canberra estate residents.
I'm thinking more along the lines of changing 167 though:
- Sembawang Vista
- Canberra Rd
- Canberra Link
- Sembawang Rd (towards Sembawang CC)
- Canberra St
- Canberra Way
- Canberra Link
- Yishun Ave 2
- Yishun Ring Rd
- Yishun Ave 5
- Sembawang Rd
- Upp Thomson Rd
- SLE (express)
- CTE (express)
- Moulmein Rd
- Newton Rd
- (usual route to Bt Merah)
The benefits are, of course, a much faster route, almost express, for Sembawang, Canberra and Yishun West residents. In addition, Canberra estate / Yishun Ave 2, 5 residents and industrial workers get a direct link to Canberra MRT station.
Shortfalls would be the loss of direct link between Sembawang Shopping Ctr / Upper Chong Pang and MRT station (still provided by 858, 859, 980), and the skipping of Upp Thomson / Thomson Rd bus stops. Much of 167's long route along Upp Thomson and Thomson Rds still have alternative services 166 and 980, while lost links to Orchard are still provided by 162. And of course, should all these happen, 167 and all of these alternative services would need a HUGE fleet boost.
A less radical option would be to allow 167 to continue along Upp Thomson Rd instead of taking the express route (in orange), but I feel that would have defeated the purpose of amending the route over to Canberra in the first place. The opening of NSE / Thomson-East Coast Line may also make such a route change obsolete.
Any comments on the route itself? Feasibility, potential demand, possible impact by future TEL / NSE?
Also:
Feeder service 837: Sembawang Int -- Canberra View (loop)
This route, along with modified 167, would be enough to serve all the roads in Canberra estate. Unless another link to Yishun is desired.
Originally posted by carbikebus:51 and 52 are in Jurong East also.41 & 49 serve West area while 4x series all in the East and Northeast(43).If all renumbered for the sake of renumbering it doesnt make sense at all though i agree new service from the West can also have 110 to compliment 111.111 used to serve Hougang South before NEL amendment.53M also doesnt serve Bishan so technically it got partner svc 51 in Hougang area.55,58 and 59 does serve Eastern areas..Hahaha..7 starting point is Bedok though Bbdep hold the most duties.You must know the history of the svc before conclude anything my friends and i stand my point that 111 is the oddball.11x series doesnt serve West nor City area..
106 is technically an oddball as well then after the NEL rationalisation. All 10x services serve the Serangoon/Hougang areas except 106 at this point.
Originally posted by SBS7557R:106 is technically an oddball as well then after the NEL rationalisation. All 10x services serve the Serangoon/Hougang areas except 106 at this point.
106 meet 105 at Boon Lay Way and Cwealth/Orchard
Dont forget 107 meets 106 at Suntec City
Btw, here is a route which is useful to complement 167
887 (Sembawang to Suntec City)
Sembawang Way
SLE/CTE
Bukit Timah Rd
Scotts Rd
Orchard Rd
Bras Basah Rd
(if necessary, ply Esplanade Dr as well)
Originally posted by Rytz:Route Amendment: Service 171
Yishun - Bt Panjang (Loop)
- Yishun Temp Int
- Yishun Ave 5
- Sembawang Rd
- Mandai Ave
- Mandai Rd
- Woodlands Rd
- Upp Bt Timah Rd
- Petir Rd
- Jelebu Rd
- Bt Panjang Rd
- Woodlands Rd
- Mandai Rd
- Mandai Ave
- Sembawang Rd
- Yishun Ave 5
- Yishun Temp Int
Route Amendment: Service 960
Woodlands - Marina Centre
- Woodlands Temp Int
- Woodlands Ave 2
- Woodlands Ave 5
- Woodlands Ave 12
- SLE
- CTE
- Bt Timah Rd
- Sungei Rd
- Ophir Rd
- Victoria St
- Bras Basah Rd
- Raffles Blvd
- Marina Centre Ter
171 can shortened to Bt Batok also.
Originally posted by SBS7557R:106 is technically an oddball as well then after the NEL rationalisation. All 10x services serve the Serangoon/Hougang areas except 106 at this point.
Hi mr sbs7557R, basically you cannot eliminate those oddballs. Not practical to change numbers and not practical to extend routes to pre-rationalization times. Cheers. Thanks.