A suggestion came true?
-
For the return route of service 232, should it ply Toa Payoh Central too?Originally posted by service_238:When the original TPY was around, there was a ban from turning right from the interchange exit at Lor 6. Svc 231W had to make a big round then to exit at Lor 2, before turning into Lor 1.
When the temp TPY exist, Svc 232 was able to turn left to Lor 6 then right to Lor 2 at TPY MRT. It seems like SBST has no intention of amending it as 232 provides connections from the 4 corners of TP Central to Lor 2, Lor 1, Lor 6 and Lor 7.
-
a. You can ask SBST to amend service 33 to serve Dover MRT station.Originally posted by iamgoondu:b. To have a direct link between Dover MRT to Kent Ridge via Commonwealth Ave West, Clementi Road, University Highway and Kent Ridge. I had proposed for extending SBST 145, 32, 111 or 100 to be extended to Kent Ridge.
c. Science Park 2 (not 1) and BV MRT can be better linked. SBST 200 is only 4 bus stops away. However many are not aware and thus SBST 200 was not popular. See the crowd at Clementi Interchange boarding for Science Park 2 Shuttle Bus service, SBST 200 does not warrant such fate.
Science Park 2 can be better linked if there is a slip road linking itself to South Buona Vista Road.
e. Many years back when SBST 200 loop at Sixth Ave, I had proposed for its extension to Dunearn Road to NTU/NIE. That shall allow many students along Dunearn Road to have more direct link to BV MRT stations. This amendment allows BV residents to have a more direct link to Bukit Timah Road and Dunearn Road. Imagine spending $1.13 to travel to Chinese High from Holland Drive with SBST 74. Unfortunately it was not considered.
b. The unpopularity of service 200 is due to the frequency. The service does serve Science Park 2 along South Buona Vista Rd. (see those staircases leading down the slope from the stops there)
e. Service 200 looped along Jln Anak Bukit back then, not Sixth Ave. -
I dont think that's practical. Serving the bus stop outside TPY MRT is good enough.Originally posted by tranquilice:For the return route of service 232, should it ply Toa Payoh Central too? -
Was it 148?
-
i sent in the following suggestion to the bus companies and they got implemented.
in order of effective implementation:
SERVICE 920:
i designed the entire route , including the bus stops and the route detials. TIBS took it 100 percent. the 920 u ride now is mine idea.
the basic idea was to integrate 344 and 345 back then.
BUT be reminded that many ppl thought of this idea ( and following ideas) too.
SERVICE 970
i complained about withdrawl of service 5. 3 months later TIBS tells me that getting this 970 to be introduced. and the email was sent to me 2 months before 970 was due to op. they even gave me the start date and route detials...weeeee
SERVICE 163
my original idea called for 163 to extend to punggol via fernvale but SBSt cut short it to sengkang...ish
SERVICE 3
suggested SBS to extend either svc 3 or 17 to punggol. service 3 was chosen. i was quite happy =)
SERVICE 965, SERVICE 161.
suggested to TIBS and SBS at same time to provide link between Yishun and sengkang. TIBS965 resembles my idea totally. i wanted a nice bus link from sengkang to Khatib MRT and there u go.
SBS161 was also implemented but guess it was just to compete with 965
SERVICE 963
well i complained about express 521 and wanted 189 to extned to HBF thru NUS so i cd take bus from NUS to HBF rat hole back then. thne suddenyl next month the 521 goes and 963 comes...lolz
SERVICE 180 extension to sembawng pending.....
ZYX -
Em, 161 started a day earlier and I think of the logic of 39 and 966.Originally posted by xin1jun2:SERVICE 965, SERVICE 161.
suggested to TIBS and SBS at same time to provide link between Yishun and sengkang. TIBS965 resembles my idea totally. i wanted a nice bus link from sengkang to Khatib MRT and there u go.
SBS161 was also implemented but guess it was just to compete with 965
ZYX -
That's 168 and not 161.Originally posted by th1988:Em, 161 started a day earlier and I think of the logic of 39 and 966.
Service 168 started on 14 April 2001 and service 969 on 15 April 2001.
Service 161 started on 2 June 2002 and service 965 started on 7 July 2002. -
I don't think so, maybe service 145 was amended to Buona Vista without any integration.Originally posted by th1988:Was it 148? -
I only remembered 2 versions of this service. The earlier one is Toa Payoh - Buona Vista and the latter one is Clementi - Lor 1 Geylang.Originally posted by th1988:Was it 148? -
It is the 1st version of TPY to BNV.
-
145 existed as toa payoh - kent ridge (NUS arts) back then
148 was a TPY - bouna vista.
after the MRt came online in 1989 or 1990. svc 90 and 145 were integrated to form pretty much of todays 145. 148 was just simply gone.
later in 1992 this AIR-CON 148 was intoduced to suplement svc 147. 148 wetn from clementi - geylang lor 1. short lived service as demand was just not there.
ZYX -
Hahaha, SBST loved to terminate buses at Lor 1 Geylang huh? Same for old Sv. 31 it seems?Originally posted by xin1jun2:145 existed as toa payoh - kent ridge (NUS arts) back then
148 was a TPY - bouna vista.
after the MRt came online in 1989 or 1990. svc 90 and 145 were integrated to form pretty much of todays 145. 148 was just simply gone.
later in 1992 this AIR-CON 148 was intoduced to suplement svc 147. 148 wetn from clementi - geylang lor 1. short lived service as demand was just not there.
ZYX -
The former 90 was it serving Clementi to PLAB or BNV to PLAB? Did it withdrawn earlier than 92?
-
Service 90 served Buona Vista and Paya Lebar.Originally posted by th1988:The former 90 was it serving Clementi to PLAB or BNV to PLAB? Did it withdrawn earlier than 92?
Service 92? Thought it was a pretty new service and currently still serve between Mount Sinai and Science Park 1. -
What rubbish, 92 served PLAB in the 90's bef it merged with 14. That's how the current 90 came to serve PLAB to the nearest NSL stn.
-
WARNINGOriginally posted by th1988:What rubbish, 92 served PLAB in the 90's bef it merged with 14. That's how the current 90 came to serve PLAB to the nearest NSL stn.
Please be careful with your language or word usage. We expect all forumnites to respect other people's post. -
I do not think service 33 is a good candidate. People boarding the bus before Dover and travelling to Kent Ridge will have to bear with a longer travelling journey.Originally posted by tranquilice:a. You can ask SBST to amend service 33 to serve Dover MRT station.
On the other hand, extension of SBST 111 or 32 to Kent Ridge will afect few but benefit many.
Rather, why would bus companies provides addtitional bus service for students (particularly NUS students in this case), most students uses concession passes. Though there could have a demand between DOver MRT and Kent Ridge, bus company (SBST) shall benefit little. -
I dont think 31 terminated at Geylang Lor 1. From what I recall in my Sec Sch days, 31 used to go from Tampines to loop in front of Indoor Stadium.Originally posted by SBS9818A:Hahaha, SBST loved to terminate buses at Lor 1 Geylang huh? Same for old Sv. 31 it seems? -
Hello, check your Bus Guide, and SBST 92 is currently serving Mount Sinai and Science Park1. SBS had recycled bus number 92.Originally posted by th1988:What rubbish, 92 served PLAB in the 90's bef it merged with 14. That's how the current 90 came to serve PLAB to the nearest NSL stn.
You should have corrected me rather then utter RUBBISH. -
Checked and noted. It's correct.Originally posted by delonchew:I dont think 31 terminated at Geylang Lor 1. From what I recall in my Sec Sch days, 31 used to go from Tampines to loop in front of Indoor Stadium. -
Service 92 was formerly a PAC loop service between Clementi interchange and RSAF Paya Lebar. It was integrated with service 14 in 1993. Also in the same year, FAC service 90 was introduced.Originally posted by iamgoondu:Hello, check your Bus Guide, and SBST 92 is currently serving Mount Sinai and Science Park1. SBS had recycled bus number 92.
You should have corrected me rather then utter RUBBISH.
In Dec 1997, services 16E, M1 and M2 were re-numbered as services 36, 92 and 42 respectively. -
Can you give a good reason why a link between NUS and Dover MRT station is important? Currently there are services 95 and 96 to Buona Vista and Clementi stations respectively.Originally posted by iamgoondu:I do not think service 33 is a good candidate. People boarding the bus before Dover and travelling to Kent Ridge will have to bear with a longer travelling journey.
On the other hand, extension of SBST 111 or 32 to Kent Ridge will afect few but benefit many.
Rather, why would bus companies provides addtitional bus service for students (particularly NUS students in this case), most students uses concession passes. Though there could have a demand between DOver MRT and Kent Ridge, bus company (SBST) shall benefit little. -
I believe Service 90 had a much longer history than that. I remembered taking Service 90 from Commonwealth Ave to Jalan Bukit Merah in the early 80's. (If I can remembered correctly.) The service was probably withdrawn/integrated when the E-W line starts running. It was one of the many buses like 209, 186, 144, 148, 2, 103... that were withdrawn, amended or integrated.Originally posted by tranquilice:Service 92 was formerly a PAC loop service between Clementi interchange and RSAF Paya Lebar. It was integrated with service 14 in 1993. Also in the same year, FAC service 90 was introduced.
Your Service 90 that was introduced in 1993 was probably a recycled number as well, just like 92. -
The reasons were pretty obvious:Originally posted by tranquilice:Can you give a good reason why a link between NUS and Dover MRT station is important? Currently there are services 95 and 96 to Buona Vista and Clementi stations respectively.
a. The link between Dover MRT and Kent Ridge Int is more direct and than that between Kent Ridge and BV or Clementi.
b. Moreover, there are fewer jams between Dover MRT and Clementi Road than Clementi MRT to Clementi Road.
c. What's more the students travelling to Kent Ridge from the East need not have to travel to Clementi to make transfer, they need only to alight at Dover which was one stop earlier. BV though was 2 stops away from Kent Ridge and was served by 95, was not really popular for those study in Engineering faculty (near Kent Ridge Interchange), as the journey was pretty long as compared from Dover to Kent Ridge or Clementi to Kent Ridge.
d. NUS provides Free Shuttle Service between University Cultural Centre between Dover and Kent Ridge when there are performances, only reflects the more direct connection it has had over Clementi MRT and Kent Ridge.
e. A link between Dover and Kent Ridge would benefit students, though it might not be likewise for SBST. Since SBST had monopoly over 95 and 96. I would rather prefer TIBS to take up the challenge.
How do you think? -
Correct. SBST will want as much dividends as possible so I think they would leave it to NUS to set up their own shuttle.Originally posted by iamgoondu:I do not think service 33 is a good candidate. People boarding the bus before Dover and travelling to Kent Ridge will have to bear with a longer travelling journey.
On the other hand, extension of SBST 111 or 32 to Kent Ridge will afect few but benefit many.
Rather, why would bus companies provides addtitional bus service for students (particularly NUS students in this case), most students uses concession passes. Though there could have a demand between DOver MRT and Kent Ridge, bus company (SBST) shall benefit little.