GCM New/Transferred Buses
-
Originally posted by SBS3975T:
They on 382 today
soon belong to GO Ahead
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
B9TL is definately underpowered compared to E500 needless to say A95.I got a strong feeling LTA is deciding between E500 and A95 for SMRT.
It's all in the mind.
-
Originally posted by TIB868X:
everything is underpowered here, if you put it that way. B9TL over E500 just because the build quality is miles better.
Untrue. B9TL has slower acceleration, torque, horsepower. It is apparent; just try a B9 vs an E500 and you can feel it. Whether is it going up inclines or picking up speed, B9 is almost no match for E500.
Another flaw in the B9 is SBST's stubbornness in mordernising the model. These are fine and little, yet noticeable points that do make that difference in travelling experience. Outdated seating layout, slanted bars even though there aren't steps at the entrance, swinging plug doors etc. Not to mention, the absence of a PIS system. This makes the B9 way more outdated and inferior interior-wise.
Nonetheless, yes I agree the B9 has better build compared to the jerky A95, and the E500 which felt like the upper deck could separate from the chassis anytime soon. Hopefully LTA would not stop bringing in these stellar builds due to its manufacturers i.e. hope they find better manufacturers for them.
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
Untrue. B9TL has slower acceleration, torque, horsepower. It is apparent; just try a B9 vs an E500 and you can feel it. Whether is it going up inclines or picking up speed, B9 is almost no match for E500.
Another flaw in the B9 is SBST's stubbornness in mordernising the model. These are fine and little, yet noticeable points that do make that difference in travelling experience. Outdated seating layout, slanted bars even though there aren't steps at the entrance, swinging plug doors etc. Not to mention, the absence of a PIS system. This makes the B9 way more outdated and inferior interior-wise.
Nonetheless, yes I agree the B9 has better build compared to the jerky A95, and the E500 which felt like the upper deck could separate from the chassis anytime soon. Hopefully LTA would not stop bringing in these stellar builds due to its manufacturers i.e. hope they find better manufacturers for them.
Are you willing to pay double the current bus fare (similar to Hong Kong) for these "upgrades"?
The slanted bar is meant to be a feature, not a flaw. They prevent PIWs from forcing their wheelchairs through the entrance door:
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
Are you willing to pay double the current bus fare for these "upgrades"?
The slanted bar is meant to be a feature, not a flaw. They prevent PIWs from forcing their wheelchairs through the entrance door:
I meant, the slanted bar ON the door, not the bar in the doorway...
And if the changes do help why not? PIS do benefit commuters so they know where to alight. Especially when stops in SG are spread like sesame seeds, it isn't easy to locate a precise stop... And sliding plug doors close faster so buses can leave earlier, also uses less space as you dont have that big ass spiral... the swinging radius also smaller, meaning less chance of hitting people or objects outside the bus (though quite unlikely)
And do we really pay more, just to adjust a bar or switch a few seats around? Doubt so...
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
I meant, the slanted bar ON the door, not the bar in the doorway...
And if the changes do help why not? PIS do benefit commuters so they know where to alight. Especially when stops in SG are spread like sesame seeds, it isn't easy to locate a precise stop...
That is part of the swing door mechanism - otherwise the door is going to dislodge!
Installation of PIS is a simple retrofit process. In fact, SBS Transit is making LTA's job easier by not installing a prior system that has to be either integrated into (which incur additional costs) or removed later on (wastage).
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
That is part of the swing door mechanism - otherwise the door is going to dislodge!
Installation of PIS is a simple retrofit process. In fact, SBS Transit is making LTA's job easier by not installing a prior system that has to be either integrated into (which incur additional costs) or removed later on (wastage).
To clarify:
NO, not asking for its removal. E500 has a straight one, A95 has a curved one – both of which are more friendly for step-free entrance.
But you see, there aren't even at least a space reserved for potential PIS; meaning there are not even the intention to install one?
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
To clarify:
NO, not asking for its removal. E500 has a straight one, A95 has a curved one – both of which are more friendly for step-free entrance.
That's the plug sliding door design. SBS Transit's B9TLs and Citaros use outward swing door design. The former is a newer design and costs much more to install.
-
It's not that hard, is it?
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
That's the plug sliding door design. SBS Transit's B9TLs and Citaros use outward swing door design. The former is a newer design and costs much more to install.
I don't think you get it.
Notice how the trident has straight door bars at the front. And yes, it is step free.
Regarding the swing door, I've already shown the benefits of the newer design. I feel these benefits are justifiable for the costs.
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
It's not that hard, is it?
Hopefully the B9 gets those. A blessing LTA takes over bus ops or SBST and its rigid bunch would continue its ways.
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
I don't think you get it.
Notice how the trident has straight door bars at the front. And yes, it is step free.
Regarding the swing door, I've already shown the benefits of the newer design. I feel these benefits are justifiable for the costs.
That's worse. You could unscrew the curved doors bars and screw in a new set of straight ones. It doesn't cost more than a few hundred dollars. SMRT Buses has done that before. Why would you condemn an entire chassis over cosmetic designs?
Even if they are straight, people are not supposed to go near it anyway (Australia designates them as no-standing zones, refer to photo above).
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
Hopefully the B9 gets those. A blessing LTA takes over bus ops or SBST and its rigid bunch would continue its ways.
Keep a lookout for the upcoming LTA concept buses.
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
That's worse. You could unscrew the curved doors bars and screw in a new set of straight ones. It doesn't cost more than a few hundred dollars. Why would you condemn an entire chassis over cosmetic designs?
Even if they are straight, people are not supposed to go near it anyway (Australia designates them as no-standing zones, refer to photo above).
...
I don't think you are getting the entire post alr
My point being, the problem with the B9s lie with the fact SBST poorly designed the interior, which yes may be changed but are we seeing them? I don't think LTA would bother to change at all. If that's the case save it la, the B9s themselves aren't very much better off compared to SMRT's DD models anyway, even if they are. And doesn't the E500s and A95s cost cheaper than B9s? If your problem is with the cost then what is your issue with the SMRT models?
I never ever said the people are supposed to go near... You see, the straight bars are easier for passengers, especially the elderly to grip on instead of the horribly steep slant bars on the B9 and KUB.
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
Keep a lookout for the upcoming LTA concept buses.
Those concept buses are for GCM?
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
...
I don't think you are getting the entire post alr
My point being, the problem with the B9s lie with the fact SBST poorly designed the interior, which yes may be changed but are we seeing them? I don't think LTA would bother to change at all. If that's the case save it la, the B9s themselves aren't very much better off compared to SMRT's DD models anyway, even if they are. And doesn't the E500s and A95s cost cheaper than B9s? If your problem is with the cost then what is your issue with the SMRT models?
Then why would LTA call for the concept bus tender? LTA is interested in determining what is most suitable for future procurements, down to the smallest detail.
If LTA is forced to choose between bus products on an all-or-nothing basis, then I really worry how much our bus fares is going to increase in the future. Because in such a scenario, the implication is that LTA has no bargaining power to negotiate a better price or/and design from the bus manufacturers.
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
This will be valuable when deciding on future bus purchases, LTA said.
Those concept buses are for GCM?
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/designing-a-better-ride-on-public-buses
""LTA is studying what enhancements in design and features could be incorporated for future bus purchases and are best suited to operations in Singapore," a spokesman said.
The concept models must have passenger seats, driver's cabin, handrails and other interior and exterior fittings, according to the tender documents.
A workable door system, interior lighting and air-conditioning will also have to be installed.
The tender, which closes next month, requires companies to consider factors such as comfort, safety and carrying capacity during peak hours."
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
Then why would LTA call for the concept bus tender? LTA is interested in determining what is most suitable for future procurements, down to the smallest detail.
If LTA is forced to choose between bus products on an all-or-nothing basis, then I really worry how much our bus fares is going to increase in the future. Because in such a scenario, the implication is that LTA has no bargaining power to negotiate a better price or/and design from the bus manufacturers.
I'm just worried that LTA will be very stingy...
Hopefully LTA will not walk in SBST's footsteps in the concept bus. Coz SBST's design and amenities really lose out to SMRT by miles. And hopefully there won't only be Volvo buses for LTA's concept make.
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
I'm just worried that LTA will be very stingy...
Hopefully LTA will not walk in SBST's footsteps in the concept bus. Coz SBST's design and amenities really lose out to SMRT by miles. And hopefully there won't only be Volvo buses for LTA's concept make.
SBS Transit has a different design philosophy from SMRT Buses. There was an ST Jobs article that discussed about this from their engineer's perspective, but I can't locate it anymore.
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
B9TL is definately underpowered compared to E500 needless to say A95.I got a strong feeling LTA is deciding between E500 and A95 for SMRT.
Further to sgbuses' posts, it has to be noted that we should stop seeing things with separate views of SBS and SMRT. The situation has changed, it is just LTA buying buses, while operators run those buses. LTA is free to choose whatever that suits their requirements, though I think they will be taking in feedback about buses from the current operators as LTA themselves are new to buying buses.
-
Speaking about concept,Swiss autopos custom order ADL E500 with dual staircase three doors for trial..
-
This article is worth a read. Extremely relevant to the thread topic, and answers many questions.
-
Originally posted by SMB128B:
I'm just worried that LTA will be very stingy...
Hopefully LTA will not walk in SBST's footsteps in the concept bus. Coz SBST's design and amenities really lose out to SMRT by miles. And hopefully there won't only be Volvo buses for LTA's concept make.
if LTA stingy, then u will see MIC buses.... haha
-
any one can do the maths?
SBST order 415 B9 and 250 Citaro in July 2014... 296 of these are for BSEP 2.
so left 369 units for SBST own use... 23 B9 registered.. left 346 units (which LTA is taking over).. but the figure does not tally up, cos there are some citaros registered under SBST already.... (unless that 28 units from 6866-6893) are from an earlier order..
346 + 23 + 28 = 397 units...
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
any one can do the maths?
SBST order 415 B9 and 250 Citaro in July 2014... 296 of these are for BSEP 2.
so left 369 units for SBST own use... 23 B9 registered.. left 346 units (which LTA is taking over).. but the figure does not tally up, cos there are some citaros registered under SBST already.... (unless that 28 units from 6866-6893) are from an earlier order..
346 + 23 + 28 = 397 units...
Instead of trying to do the maths for buses allocated to respective schemes, why not try to do the maths for the respective models already registered? I highly doubt that the figure allocated to BSEP still remains as 296 given that no one had expected new buses to be registered as SG regos...
If I consider the new SG rego buses to be funded (and therefore owned) by LTA before they announced the buyover, 92 Wrights and 77 Citaros (including 6546-6549, after all there are only 100 left to be delivered, it does not make sense to me that 6846-6865 are Batch 2, because they made up a total of 125 buses if under Batch 3) had been registered under LTA ownership. There will be 127 left for the original BSEP 2, and given that 240 out of the 665 have been registered, the remaining order uncompleted would have been 298. But do not forget some buses had already been delivered but not yet registered, because so many regoless Citaros are inside C&C recently.
Furthermore, the 346 buses undelivered were due for completion in 2017 which may have included BSEP in my opinion because they are all from a single order.