Originally posted by array88:
My take on 49:Theoretically, a direct service from Jurong East to Taman Jurong is necessary and ought to happen, given the developments at Jurong East (shopping malls, hospitals etc) and more diverse transport options (NSL, future CRL/JRL) rather than a single Lakeside MRT.
But strangely, loading on 49 failed to pick up even during weekends (when I expected more people to be shopping at Jurong East before taking 49 back home). Possible reasons:
(1) Winding route at Boon Lay Way, and as a result it can take 10 minutes from interchange to Jurong Town Hall Rd
(2) Residents are still used to taking MRT to Lakeside, or shopping at Boon Lay instead before taking 30/154 back
(3) Residents not familiar with the route
49 loading was expected to be better but guess people prefer Boon Lay to Jurong East as main hub. 30 is still seen full from Corporation to Boon Lay both AM/PM peak while 49 has a dismissal 20-30 pax loading only.
Traffic on the AYE during peak hours can be quite bad along the stretch that 49 plies.
Anyways, I predict we will see new routes in the upcoming quarters in the following areas:
- Pasir RIs <> CBP
- Ubi/Kaki Bukit <> UEC/Eunos
- Bedok North <> UEC/CBP
- Clementi/One-North
- Whampoa/Balestier/Toa Payoh East
- Sengkang??
Originally posted by SBS6465E:Traffic on the AYE during peak hours can be quite bad along the stretch that 49 plies.
Anyways, I predict we will see new routes in the upcoming quarters in the following areas:
- Pasir RIs <> CBP
- Ubi/Kaki Bukit <> UEC/Eunos
- Bedok North <> UEC/CBP
- Clementi/One-North
- Whampoa/Balestier
- Sengkang??
Hi mr SBS6465E, once sengkang interchange expansion is completed in Q4 2016. It will have new services. Maybe they will have new bus services on day of opening of sengkang extension just like what they do to CBP and sbs 47/117.
As for upper east coast terminal, don't think it can take in another 2 services. Eunos no more as the Eunos services (Sbs 76 and 150) are just implemented in Q1 2016. Cheers. Thanks.
Originally posted by dupdup77:Hi mr SBS6465E, once sengkang interchange expansion is completed in Q4 2016. It will have new services. Maybe they will have new bus services on day of opening of sengkang extension just like what they do to CBP and sbs 47/117.
As for upper east coast terminal, don't think it can take in another 2 services. Eunos no more as the Eunos services (Sbs 76 and 150) are just implemented in Q1 2016. Cheers. Thanks.
Hi dupdup77, if I am not mistaken UEC is currently being expanded or will be expanded in the future at the very least. As for Eunos, there should be space given that 150 will probably only operate with a measly 4 buses. It can definitely fit another short or medium-haul service. Even so there are alternatives to in the areas I have suggested such as Sims Pl (rumoured to have a new 137 service) and CBP (alternative to UEC). My list is not so much which interchanges/terminals will have new services, but the general areas that will see new services.
Originally posted by SBS6465E:Traffic on the AYE during peak hours can be quite bad along the stretch that 49 plies.
Anyways, I predict we will see new routes in the upcoming quarters in the following areas:
- Pasir RIs <> CBP
- Ubi/Kaki Bukit <> UEC/Eunos
- Bedok North <> UEC/CBP
- Clementi/One-North
- Whampoa/Balestier/Toa Payoh East
- Sengkang??
My predictions for Q2/Q3:
- new service or route modification for Edgefield Plains end in Punggol
- new service or route modification for Compassalve Crescent in Sengkang
- UBI / Kaki Bukit North service
- 62 finding home at Lor 1 or Sims place and not do such long loop (similar to 76 being terminated to Eunos)
- one more CBP service connecting preferably to Bedok North / Chai Chee estate
Once the huge estate near the future Canberra station is near-completion, there should be a feeder or two serving that area, including of course at least one that will stop at the MRT station. The question is, from Sembawang or Yishun? I prefer Sembawang. 117 should continue serving the main road. 169 should also get either more buses or more SD > DD conversion in anticipation of an increase in demand.
Also, I don't think CBP can handle more than one more service being added.
Originally posted by SMB128B:76 deserves to be amended. The service is way too long. It is living hell for Marine Terr residents, having to wait for that sole svc that takes forever to arrive. Its already poor freq, coupled with frequent bunching and delays makes 76 a torture to wait for. Ending at Eunos also gives it a terminating point in the East, reducing bunching for inbound commuters. A nice bold move by LTA this time.
So would you say the same for 55/135/155 (i.e. that they deserve to be split)?
Like dat i also wanna say that 70M,107M,162M shouldnt exist coz too long, they should just stay at Shenton Way
Originally posted by TIB 585L:Like dat i also wanna say that 70M,107M,162M shouldnt exist coz too long, they should just stay at Shenton Way
If only there could be a new bus interchange / terminal in Marina South to house some of these services. It would ease the pressure from Shenton Way / Marina Centre / New Bridge Rd / Harbourfront, can be the start/end point for many express routes on the east / northeast via KPE or ECP (such as 513), and can also potentially be a splitting point for some of the terribly long routes (such as 61, 196).
Originally posted by SMB128B:I agree too that 134/150 should merge. If it merges it would be a brilliant service.
76 deserves to be amended. The service is way too long. It is living hell for Marine Terr residents, having to wait for that sole svc that takes forever to arrive. Its already poor freq, coupled with frequent bunching and delays makes 76 a torture to wait for. Ending at Eunos also gives it a terminating point in the East, reducing bunching for inbound commuters. A nice bold move by LTA this time.
What about 15? With 150 already covering Telok Kurau, is there any incentive for it to reroute partially to Still Rd, merge with 134, then employ red/white plate along Marine Cres/Terr?
(i.e. Still Rd --> East Coast Rd --> Telok Kurau Rd --> (right turn into) Marine Parade Rd --> Marine Cres --> Marine Terr --> 134 route towards Sims Place, and Marine Parade Rd --> Marine Cres --> Marine Terr --> Marine Parade Rd --> Telok Kurau Rd --> East Coast Rd --> Still Rd towards Pasir Ris)
(Note to self: 600th post. Yay!)
Marine Parade Ter shouldn't have been closed in the first place. It should be resurrected given that Upp East Coast Ter isn't really a perfect replacement of it.
Originally posted by SBS7557R:Marine Parade Ter shouldn't have been closed in the first place. It should be resurrected given that Upp East Coast Ter isn't really a perfect replacement of it.
I agree. Not only that, they need to further decentralize bus services. We need more Marine Parade/Terrace, Taman Jurong and Sims Place Terminals, not more increasingly overcrowded (with sizes that are getting smaller) interchanges.
Originally posted by TIB868X:I agree. Not only that, they need to further decentralize bus services. We need more Marine Parade/Terrace, Taman Jurong and Sims Place Terminals, not more increasingly overcrowded (with sizes that are getting smaller) interchanges.
Sadly, Marine Parade's unlikely to happen in the short term, with no plans of any terminals, along with the upcoming (?) TEL plans, alignment works and construction. Best thing that can be achieved is to extend some existing UEC services to CBP, then move some of the looping Marine Parade services to UEC where applicable.
Originally posted by SMB128B:I agree too that 134/150 should merge. If it merges it would be a brilliant service.
76 deserves to be amended. The service is way too long. It is living hell for Marine Terr residents, having to wait for that sole svc that takes forever to arrive. Its already poor freq, coupled with frequent bunching and delays makes 76 a torture to wait for. Ending at Eunos also gives it a terminating point in the East, reducing bunching for inbound commuters. A nice bold move by LTA this time.
I would rather wait for a single 76 instead of waiting for a 134 (with typical BSEP frequency) and yet wait for 76 again at Paya Lebar MRT.
And I can always cross the road and take 13/16/196, or walk up to Marine Parade Rd and take 43 together with so many other services.
Originally posted by array88:
I would rather wait for a single 76 instead of waiting for a 134 (with typical BSEP frequency) and yet wait for 76 again at Paya Lebar MRT.And I can always cross the road and take 13/16/196, or walk up to Marine Parade Rd and take 43 together with so many other services.
How many from MT will actually take the svc beyond PP and PL, realistically speaking? And 134 does the exact same job too. Only a small minority will have to transfer and wait, even if so in a common well-sheltered bus stop. For the rest it's just far more reliable waiting times.
And sorry hor, not everyone could walk okay. Maybe those staying near the big road will prob go ahead without 76/134, but majority of MT ppl stay deeper in, and definitely a bus at the doorstep could help. Furthermore, quite a large part of the residents comprise of elderly. Have you thought about them?
Originally posted by SBS7557R:So would you say the same for 55/135/155 (i.e. that they deserve to be split)?
Split ≠ amend.
The amendment I am talking about here is the simplifying and re-routing of routes to enhance reliability.
The logic is simple. The more winding your route (i.e. more stops, more traffic lights), the more your route is prone to delays and bunches. Eventually those nearer to the other end suffers. Thats what happened to svcs like 24.
And I support moves to solve that problem. Nuff said.
Originally posted by array88:If LTA shortened 76 just because of its reliability as a long looping service, there are thousands of better amendments they should look into.
55, 135, 155: Simply build a roadside terminal at Siglap.
62: Simply terminate at Lor 1 Geylang. If not enough space, extend 141 to Eunos - in this way 141 will help 21 A LOT.
64: Extend to Buona Vista. Introduce new service for Mei Ling St sector.
70M, 107M, 111, 162M: Maybe extend to Shenton Way via MBS? Can do Suntec in both directions81, 82: Best candidates for Bidadari.51, 61, 67: Not loop services but long enough to take some actions.Sorry for spamming, but I just realised that changes have been made to a lot of former long looping routes (124, 123, 103, 99, 76 etc), and hence I'm kind of expecting more.
People are never content are they.
People didnt even bloody dream of LTA touching its precious little svcs in the past few years.
At least LTA is doing something now. Better than inaction isnt it? Maybe a first step for more to come?
Unless LTA is gonna stop here, what "better" amendments do you want? They are gonna happen sooner or later anyway.
Oh and on a side note, some 55/135/155 BCs do treat Siglap as a terminal. So you could say the amendment kinda came true?
Originally posted by AJQZC:What about 15? With 150 already covering Telok Kurau, is there any incentive for it to reroute partially to Still Rd, merge with 134, then employ red/white plate along Marine Cres/Terr?
(i.e. Still Rd --> East Coast Rd --> Telok Kurau Rd --> (right turn into) Marine Parade Rd --> Marine Cres --> Marine Terr --> 134 route towards Sims Place, and Marine Parade Rd --> Marine Cres --> Marine Terr --> Marine Parade Rd --> Telok Kurau Rd --> East Coast Rd --> Still Rd towards Pasir Ris)
(Note to self: 600th post. Yay!)
I'm sorry, but what's the issue with 15 again?
Originally posted by SMB128B:How many from MT will actually take the svc beyond PP and PL, realistically speaking? And 134 does the exact same job too. Only a small minority will have to transfer and wait, even if so in a common well-sheltered bus stop. For the rest it's just far more reliable waiting times.
And sorry hor, not everyone could walk okay. Maybe those staying near the big road will prob go ahead without 76/134, but majority of MT ppl stay deeper in, and definitely a bus at the doorstep could help. Furthermore, quite a large part of the residents comprise of elderly. Have you thought about them?
Whoah now people in MT cannot walk... Same for people in Kembangan HDB/condo estate. Also very deep inside but only have 42 which will bring you to Kembangan MRT only. Wanna go anywhere else very mah-fan. Haiyo LTA. Same for people in Chai Chee, only have bus to New Upp Changi and Bedok South. Wanna go Marine Parade or Geylang Serai, mah fan.
Originally posted by TIB868X:Also, I don't think CBP can handle more than one more service being added.
CBP can easily handle 2 more services. It has 12 parking lots. At any time only 5-6 buses max are there in CBP terminal.
Originally posted by TIB 585L:Like dat i also wanna say that 70M,107M,162M shouldnt exist coz too long, they should just stay at Shenton Way
those are okay. They are off peak.
Originally posted by AJQZC:Sadly, Marine Parade's unlikely to happen in the short term, with no plans of any terminals, along with the upcoming (?) TEL plans, alignment works and construction. Best thing that can be achieved is to extend some existing UEC services to CBP, then move some of the looping Marine Parade services to UEC where applicable.
There is no space for terminal at Marine Parade, but can easily make one at Siglap to house 36M, 55, 135, 155, creating space at Bishan/AMK/TPY.
Originally posted by array88:If LTA shortened 76 just because of its reliability as a long looping service, there are thousands of better amendments they should look into.
55, 135, 155: Simply build a roadside terminal at Siglap.
62: Simply terminate at Lor 1 Geylang. If not enough space, extend 141 to Eunos - in this way 141 will help 21 A LOT.
64: Extend to Buona Vista. Introduce new service for Mei Ling St sector.
70M, 107M, 111, 162M: Maybe extend to Shenton Way via MBS? Can do Suntec in both directions81, 82: Best candidates for Bidadari.51, 61, 67: Not loop services but long enough to take some actions.Sorry for spamming, but I just realised that changes have been made to a lot of former long looping routes (124, 123, 103, 99, 76 etc), and hence I'm kind of expecting more.
Not a popular opinion here, but honestly I feel it is good to have an end terminal for super long looping services. It definitely improves reliability. While I hate that 76 is cut short as I use this service frequently for years to go to Parkway Parade, I think it is a good move.
76 at Eunos will improve reliability (though my personal preference was Lor 1 rather than Eunos).
As you pointed out, reliability on 99, 103, 123, 124 has definitely improved with having terminating points at both end.
I do hope that in due course 62 also gets a terminating point and 51, 61, 67, 961 are split as today no one takes end to end or even more than half the route of these services. They are unreliable in terms of frequency due to long nature of route.