Originally posted by array88:300G/W was planned to ply Ave 2, not Ave 3. 301 was the feeder for Ave 3.
You know what I mean... The whole CCK West earlier proposal was going to take care of Ave 3.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Because my suggestion is to make 858 more direct via ave 7 to Woodlands rather than winding around Tampines North. 117 will cover for 858's missing link.
If 858 has to stay as it is, then 117 will have (2) changes
1. Go via Woodlands Ave 10 instead of Gambas
2. Do Republic Poly and ave 2 to Woodlands, future Tampines North MRT rather than ave 4.
Originally posted by Sbs6750E:
Woodlands North lah bro.
Ha ha ha.. I am seriously getting old.
Originally posted by Ajen:I think Svc 308 can be improved.
So my suggestion is to convert this service to 308W / G
Will benefit residents who lives along Ave 3 (Btwn Ave 1 and Way) which only serve by Svc 975 towards CCK Int
308G -
- CCK Int
- CCK Dr
- CCK Ave 1
- Keat Hong Link
- CCK Grove
- CCK Ave 7
- CCK Ave 1
- CCK Ave 3
- CCK Way
- CCK Int
308W -
- CCK Int
- CCK Way
- CCK Ave 3
- CCK Ave 1
- CCK Ave 7
- CCK Grove
- Keat Hong Link
- CCK Ave 1
- CCK Drive
- CCK int
Actually if there is more demand on Ave 3 side then might as well simply reroute 308 to go to CCK Grove via CCK Way > Ave 3 > Ave 1 instead of CCK Dr > Ave 1? Then no need G/W signage, and the current route up till Ave 1 is already covered by 172 anyway ...
Originally posted by SBS 9256 X:Why not just go straight using Ave 9 then Ave 2.. Provide alternative also for RP Students...
I sometimes wonder if 169 and 858 should swop their routes between Woodlands Int and Woodlands Ave 9? Have seen plenty of RP students take 169 from RP only to transfer to 858 just two stops away ...
Not sure if this is discussed before, but considering the nature of way 170A operaters, i wonder if its more logical for it to be renamed as 170M, so that it can make a complete loop and no break betweem the train checkpoint bus stop and the subsequent dtop? I know there r many ppl who uses the train checkpoint bus stop to conect to the mrt, so if it makes a complete loop then theres one more option for the pax
Originally posted by orange28:Actually if there is more demand on Ave 3 side then might as well simply reroute 308 to go to CCK Grove via CCK Way > Ave 3 > Ave 1 instead of CCK Dr > Ave 1? Then no need G/W signage, and the current route up till Ave 1 is already covered by 172 anyway ...
That would put a lot of pressure on 172 as there are 3 new HDBs that svc 308 covers along ave 1
(1) Keat Hong Axis
(2) Keat Hong Quad
(3) Keat Hong Mirage (LRT alternative)
Considering all these have just TOP, the occupancy is still low, but soon 308 should get heavy loading.
172 already operating at 05-07 min frequency. If 308 not there, 172 need to be 20 buses full fleet high capacity and that would make it imbalance for the CCK - Boon Lay side as the loading may not be heavy. Then will need to introduce 172A (just like 975A)
IMO, AM is not a problem on ave 3 as people take 300 to MRT + have 975/975A. PM is more of an issue where people still prefer taking 300 but will either do a roundabout or have to walk some more.
With Keat Hong region growing, I expect a trunk to BPJ via ave 3/ave 1 just like 983 and this should then cover ave 3 - CCK MRT as well.
Originally posted by CZT:Not sure if this is discussed before, but considering the nature of way 170A operaters, i wonder if its more logical for it to be renamed as 170M, so that it can make a complete loop and no break betweem the train checkpoint bus stop and the subsequent dtop? I know there r many ppl who uses the train checkpoint bus stop to conect to the mrt, so if it makes a complete loop then theres one more option for the pax
Yes, can be done!
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Yes, can be done!
Already feedback to LTA to renumbered 170A as 170M while the Blue Plate should be renumbered as 170A instead
Originally posted by carbikebus:Already feedback to LTA to renumbered 170A as 170M while the Blue Plate should be renumbered as 170A instead
Why blue plate 170A? I think the 170X is quite a good suffix. Having an A is like a short working trip, but the current 170X is does not follow the parent service in the JB sector, may cause confusion. Note that the X on the EDS is like a superscript, not rly like the same font, so it suggest smth different abt the suffix as compared to others
Originally posted by CZT:Why blue plate 170A? I think the 170X is quite a good suffix. Having an A is like a short working trip, but the current 170X is does not follow the parent service in the JB sector, may cause confusion. Note that the X on the EDS is like a superscript, not rly like the same font, so it suggest smth different abt the suffix as compared to others
Then they have to programmed it as 170X lor
I rmb someone suggest to renumber 170X to 160M, but in that case most ppl would need to hav transfer, coz most ppl travel frm kranji to larkin, and uses 170X generally.
Btw i toyed with the idea to reroute 170 to wond ard city area first b4 going to the highway coz DTL duplication makes the current route less effective
Came up with this (definitely ridiculous) idea in a whim.
Service 148: Bedok -- Kaki Bukit Ind Estate (loop)
Service 18 modification:
Service 228 minor modification:
In short, 18 mostly replaces 225G, and 148 mostly replaces 225W. Then 225G/W can be withdrawn and its DDs split between 18 and 148. 228 would replace 18's lost section along Ave 2.
Only problem is the unknown expected loading in Bedok North. Currently it is almost unidirectional towards Bedok Central (which explains 225's high loading). Even with DTL3 opening, loading transfer may not even be at 30%. Frequency would also be an issue.
Regarding DTL3 amendment for Tampines East & West stations, is it feasible to:
Originally posted by AJQZC:Regarding DTL3 amendment for Tampines East & West stations, is it feasible to:
- - Divert 81 to serve Tampines Ave 2, St 32 and St 34 (alternatives 4, 19, 37 to Tampines Ave 7, and 39 to Pasir Ris);
- - Amend 293 east to ply Tampines Ave 7 and then loop inside Sts 42, 43, 45 (skipped stops along St 41 and Ave 9 mostly still connected by 28, 29);
- - Divert 292 to ply Tampines Ave 4 and 1 instead of Ave 5 (bridging still provided by 20 and 39, overall transfers to other services aside 27 still available at new stops)?
That would require the least amount of unnecessary route extensions and introductions.
Will not touch 81 or 293. 81 have erratic frequency, while 293 is needed to support the load at Ave 9/St 41.
28M Tamp - Tamp Ave 7 (replace 28's Ave 9 downroutes) (Full SDs)
28's route to St 32
(Ave 2), Ave 7 (Tamp East MRT), (St 24, 21), St 23, 28's route to Int
29M Tamp - Tamp Ave 7 (replace 28's Ave 9 downroutes and 29A) (Full SDs)
29's route to Ave 9 (stop before Ave 9 TPJC stop)
St 42, Ave 7 (Tamp East MRT)
29's route to Int
Provides more reliable frequency along Ave 9 (Especially stops served only by 28/29). One is a loop service, the other is a trunk service. 28 DD downroutes do not serve the 2 stops covered by 29 only.
However, there will potentially be a repeat of 43/43M situation
Originally posted by AJQZC:Regarding DTL3 amendment for Tampines East & West stations, is it feasible to:
- - Divert 81 to serve Tampines Ave 2, St 32 and St 34 (alternatives 4, 19, 37 to Tampines Ave 7, and 39 to Pasir Ris);
- - Amend 293 east to ply Tampines Ave 7 and then loop inside Sts 42, 43, 45 (skipped stops along St 41 and Ave 9 mostly still connected by 28, 29);
- - Divert 292 to ply Tampines Ave 4 and 1 instead of Ave 5 (bridging still provided by 20 and 39, overall transfers to other services aside 27 still available at new stops)?
That would require the least amount of unnecessary route extensions and introductions.
81: A big no. Go unneccessary route for what? A route has been upgraded since 1993 to air-con double deckers, more capacity. In 2003, it was shortened to Serangoon as the demand is not that great between Serangoon and Outram Park after the opening of NEL. The unneccessary route is compensated by NEL and 147. Perhaps there are people still taking 81 from Serangoon, Kovan to Tampines, Pasir Ris during peak hour. A lot of winding take place at Pasir Ris.
292: A big no. There is a heavy loading on 292 during peak hour. There is only two primary schools to support 292 - Tampines and Angsana. People are more aware of 292 and will never ever bother to change it. But the only problem is 61, because of the demolition of Tanglin Halt flats in 2017/18 (after SERS, most of them moved elsewhere; remaining waited for Dawson Estate).
The only alternative is to divert 46, via Tampines Ave 7, Ave 9, St 45, St 34, St 32 to reduce congestion on service 291/293, and allow the reduction of extra buses to bring the frequencies to lower levels. No one will eventually take 46 from the interchange as there is a lot of people using 69, 72 or 291W's berth. This is the "most redundant route ever". They feel that the route is even, not existent.
39 amended to new interchange is not a problem. Its like having my 2nd Facebook is not an eyesore.
18 amended to new interchange is a problem, they added a new bus stop too. But they can also start at the new interchange.
Possibilities:
Originally posted by AJQZC:Came up with this (definitely ridiculous) idea in a whim.
Service 148: Bedok -- Kaki Bukit Ind Estate (loop)
- Bedok Int
- Bedok North St 1 / Ave 2 / St 3 / Ave 1
- Bedok North Rd
- Kaki Bukit Ave 1
- KB Rd 3 / Rd 2 / Ave 2
- Eunos Link
- Kaki Bukit Ave 1 (loop back to Bedok; if need be, can extend to Eunos to be another 60 look-alike.)
Service 18 modification:
- Bedok Int
- Bedok North Ave 1 / St 3 / Ave 2
- Bedok North Rd
- (usual route to TAM Concourse; may include further DTL3 amendments in Tampines)
Service 228 minor modification:
- Bedok Int
- Bedok North St 1 / Ave 2 / Rd
- Bedok North Ave 3
- (usual route to loop at Bedok R. Rd)
In short, 18 mostly replaces 225G, and 148 mostly replaces 225W. Then 225G/W can be withdrawn and its DDs split between 18 and 148. 228 would replace 18's lost section along Ave 2.
Only problem is the unknown expected loading in Bedok North. Currently it is almost unidirectional towards Bedok Central (which explains 225's high loading). Even with DTL3 opening, loading transfer may not even be at 30%. Frequency would also be an issue.
I'm worried about loading imbalance for 18. The 225 part will surely have super high loading but the rest of this route does not deserve a majority DDS fleet nor a robust frequency.
Originally posted by TPS Timothy Mok:81: A big no. Go unneccessary route for what? A route has been upgraded since 1993 to air-con double deckers, more capacity. In 2003, it was shortened to Serangoon as the demand is not that great between Serangoon and Outram Park after the opening of NEL. The unneccessary route is compensated by NEL and 147. Perhaps there are people still taking 81 from Serangoon, Kovan to Tampines, Pasir Ris during peak hour. A lot of winding take place at Pasir Ris.
292: A big no. There is a heavy loading on 292 during peak hour. There is only two primary schools to support 292 - Tampines and Angsana. People are more aware of 292 and will never ever bother to change it. But the only problem is 61, because of the demolition of Tanglin Halt flats in 2017/18 (after SERS, most of them moved elsewhere; remaining waited for Dawson Estate).
The only alternative is to divert 46, via Tampines Ave 7, Ave 9, St 45, St 34, St 32 to reduce congestion on service 291/293, and allow the reduction of extra buses to bring the frequencies to lower levels. No one will eventually take 46 from the interchange as there is a lot of people using 69, 72 or 291W's berth. This is the "most redundant route ever". They feel that the route is even, not existent.
39 amended to new interchange is not a problem. Its like having my 2nd Facebook is not an eyesore.
18 amended to new interchange is a problem, they added a new bus stop too. But they can also start at the new interchange.
Possibilities:
- Split 51 into two because of the longest route.
51: Hougang Central - Labrador Park?
351: Jurong East - New Bridge Road?- Split 66 into two because of the enlargement problems.
66: Bedok - Newton Circus (Loop)
466: Jurong East - Queen Street
351 should change to 144:Jurong East-New bridge Rd
466 change to 44:Jurong East-Queen St
Originally posted by TPS Timothy Mok:81: A big no. Go unneccessary route for what? A route has been upgraded since 1993 to air-con double deckers, more capacity. In 2003, it was shortened to Serangoon as the demand is not that great between Serangoon and Outram Park after the opening of NEL. The unneccessary route is compensated by NEL and 147. Perhaps there are people still taking 81 from Serangoon, Kovan to Tampines, Pasir Ris during peak hour. A lot of winding take place at Pasir Ris.
292: A big no. There is a heavy loading on 292 during peak hour. There is only two primary schools to support 292 - Tampines and Angsana. People are more aware of 292 and will never ever bother to change it. But the only problem is 61, because of the demolition of Tanglin Halt flats in 2017/18 (after SERS, most of them moved elsewhere; remaining waited for Dawson Estate).
The only alternative is to divert 46, via Tampines Ave 7, Ave 9, St 45, St 34, St 32 to reduce congestion on service 291/293, and allow the reduction of extra buses to bring the frequencies to lower levels. No one will eventually take 46 from the interchange as there is a lot of people using 69, 72 or 291W's berth. This is the "most redundant route ever". They feel that the route is even, not existent.
39 amended to new interchange is not a problem. Its like having my 2nd Facebook is not an eyesore.
18 amended to new interchange is a problem, they added a new bus stop too. But they can also start at the new interchange.
Possibilities:
- Split 51 into two because of the longest route.
51: Hougang Central - Labrador Park?
351: Jurong East - New Bridge Road?- Split 66 into two because of the enlargement problems.
66: Bedok - Newton Circus (Loop)
466: Jurong East - Queen Street
Why would I even want to care about 51, 61, 66 and NEL rationalisation when I'm talking about route changes in Tampines here?? Thanks for your irrelevant input.
Originally posted by ButIAmAToilet:Will not touch 81 or 293. 81 have erratic frequency, while 293 is needed to support the load at Ave 9/St 41.
28M Tamp - Tamp Ave 7 (replace 28's Ave 9 downroutes) (Full SDs)
28's route to St 32
(Ave 2), Ave 7 (Tamp East MRT), (St 24, 21), St 23, 28's route to Int
29M Tamp - Tamp Ave 7 (replace 28's Ave 9 downroutes and 29A) (Full SDs)
29's route to Ave 9 (stop before Ave 9 TPJC stop)
St 42, Ave 7 (Tamp East MRT)
29's route to Int
Provides more reliable frequency along Ave 9 (Especially stops served only by 28/29). One is a loop service, the other is a trunk service. 28 DD downroutes do not serve the 2 stops covered by 29 only.
However, there will potentially be a repeat of 43/43M situation
28M will not work out because there would only be a one-way connection to/from MRT for either side, especially St 32. Unless you make the loop do the other direction as well (or loop at St 33 instead), and in that case it would be as good as introducing a new feeder service.
29M seems alright.
Is it really not possible to amend any other nearby services? Suppose 4 gets a few more DDs, can it manage the diversion into St 32/34?
Originally posted by AJQZC:28M will not work out because there would only be a one-way connection to/from MRT for either side, especially St 32. Unless you make the loop do the other direction as well (or loop at St 33 instead), and in that case it would be as good as introducing a new feeder service.
29M seems alright.
Is it really not possible to amend any other nearby services? Suppose 4 gets a few more DDs, can it manage the diversion into St 32/34?
46 extension can cover ave 7, st 32/34/45 and back to ave 7 via ave 9. This will take care of both the proposals you are making.
14
UEC Terminal <> Ghim Moh Terminal
UEC Terminal >> UEC Road >> ... >> Orchard Boulevard >> Grange Road >> Tanglin Road >> Alexandra Road >> Commonwealth Ave >> Ghim Moh.
* Shortened route to provide better reliability
* Missing route covered by svc 46, 149 and 222.
111
Route deleted, number reserved for future NEL service
* Route covered by svc 14/149
149
Clementi Interchange <> Marina Center Terminal
Clementi Interchange >> svc 14 route ... >> Bras Basah Road >> Suntec City >> Marina Center Terminal
* Shorter route provides higher reliability
46
Bedok Interchange <> Tampines St 45 (loop)
Bedok Interchange >> Bedok South Road >> Bedok South Ave 1 >> UEC Road >> Bedok Road >> Tanah Merah MRT >> Bedok North Road >> ... >> Tampines Ave 5 >> Tampines Ave 4 >> Tampines Ave 7 >> Tampines Ave 2 (exp) >> Tampines St 32 >> St 34 >> St 45 >> Ave 9 >> Ave 7 & back to Bedok
* Blocks along Bedok South Ave 3 can walk to UEC Road to take svc 46 to Bedok Reservoir DTL3
* Covers for missing link of svc 14
* Provides DTL3 connection @ Tampines East to st 32/34/45 and ave 9
* Connects UEC Road/Bayshore to Bedok MRT (no service today)
* Better reliability between Tanah Merah MRT & UEC/Bedok North compared to svc 14 that comes all the way from Clementi and prone to delays because of long route and traffic along Orchard
New route 44
Changi Business Park Terminal >> Changi Business Park Central >> Changi South Ave 3 >> Changi South Ave 2 >> Changi South Ave 1 >> Xilin Ave >> Simei Ave >> Bedok North Ave 4 >> Bedok North Road >> Bedok North Ave 3 (DTL3) >> Bedok Reservoir Road >> Bedok North Road (DTL3) >> Chai Chee St >> Bedok North St 1 (new stop) >> Bedok North Ave 2 >> Bedok North St 3 >> Bedok North Ave 1 >> Chai Chee St & back....
* Connects CBP, ITE to Bedok North Estate & DTL 3 @ Bedok Reservoir
* Connects Bedok North Ave 4 HDBs and industrial estate to DTL 3 @ Bedok Reservoir
* Connects Bedok Reservoir Road to DTL3 @ Bedok North (no connection today)
* Connects Chai Chee St, Bedok North St 1/3, North Ave 1/2 to DTL3 @ Bedok North (no connection today)
* Provides good intra-town connectivity for entire Bedok North Estate.
Thoughts??
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:14
UEC Terminal <> Ghim Moh Terminal
UEC Terminal >> UEC Road >> ... >> Orchard Boulevard >> Grange Road >> Tanglin Road >> Alexandra Road >> Commonwealth Ave >> Ghim Moh.
* Shortened route to provide better reliability
* Missing route covered by svc 46, 149 and 222.
111
Route deleted, number reserved for future NEL service
* Route covered by svc 14/149
149
Clementi Interchange <> Marina Center Terminal
Clementi Interchange >> svc 14 route ... >> Bras Basah Road >> Suntec City >> Marina Center Terminal
* Shorter route provides higher reliability
46
Bedok Interchange <> Tampines St 45 (loop)
Bedok Interchange >> Bedok South Road >> Bedok South Ave 1 >> UEC Road >> Bedok Road >> Tanah Merah MRT >> Bedok North Road >> ... >> Tampines Ave 5 >> Tampines Ave 4 >> Tampines Ave 7 >> Tampines Ave 2 (exp) >> Tampines St 32 >> St 34 >> St 45 >> Ave 9 >> Ave 7 & back to Bedok
* Blocks along Bedok South Ave 3 can walk to UEC Road to take svc 46 to Bedok Reservoir DTL3
* Covers for missing link of svc 14
* Provides DTL3 connection @ Tampines East to st 32/34/45 and ave 9
* Connects UEC Road/Bayshore to Bedok MRT (no service today)
* Better reliability between Tanah Merah MRT & UEC/Bedok North compared to svc 14 that comes all the way from Clementi and prone to delays because of long route and traffic along Orchard
Superb
...