giving single deck services double decks..your top 3 choices
-
I agree.Originally posted by service_238:if 161 doesnt need DDs, think again.
if VSOs can ever be on 74, think again -
Er, I hope you can tell me why like that, I know only a little about our buses and am eager to know more.
-
For service 159, I think service_238 has given you the answer.Originally posted by SBS3624G:I cannot say which ought to have DDs, but I think that 161 does not require DDs at all. The VSOs ought to go to 74.
Okay lah, I think 159 needs a few DDs, can be quite packed at AMK.
I would like to stress again, before determining whether a service needs DD, you have to try out the service yourself or observe the service before slamming down the comment. Perhaps if you say service 161 doesn't need DD during off peak hours, I may agree. However service 161 definitely has loads to fill up a DD during peak hours.
Off peak loads for service 161 can be quite inconsistent, so it is better for the DDs to stay.
As for your opinion of VSOs to be on service 74, none of the depots controlling service 74 have VSOs. The VSOs are exclusive to East district depots, namely BRAM, AMDEP and BNDEP. -
Oh, thanks, I see.Originally posted by off_service:For service 159, I think service_238 has given you the answer.
I would like to stress again, before determining whether a service needs DD, you have to try out the service yourself or observe the service before slamming down the comment. Perhaps if you say service 161 doesn't need DD during off peak hours, I may agree. However service 161 definitely has loads to fill up a DD during peak hours.
Off peak loads for service 161 can be quite inconsistent, so it is better for the DDs to stay.
As for your opinion of VSOs to be on service 74, none of the depots controlling service 74 have VSOs. The VSOs are exclusive to East district depots, namely BRAM, AMDEP and BNDEP. -
139 had O305s tooOriginally posted by leeJZ:svc 130 IMO should get DDs if no limits, loads are quite good during peak hrs.
svc 139 had LAs and LO3Xs while it plied straight down Balestier Rd, they disappeared after it was amended to ply into St Michael's Est.
most services with SDs dun need DDs, but the ones I have written above need them.
svc 163 does not need DDs at all. I was waiting for an appointment @ Upp Thomson Rd during several days, morning peak hrs, so I just watched buses. svc 163 was easily the one with the worst freq (maybe besides 605), so just pump up the freq to maybe 9 min per bus. -
I rem, it's LO3x SBS9066COriginally posted by sBs_boy:Yap.. it did have.. Used to study at a school along RiverValley Rd.. used to see the 139's LO3x buses climbing the slopes... but.. sad to say.. i was quite young at that time.. didnt really take down the fleet.. -
How about 170?
Can DD be put on that svc cos it's quite crowded during peak hours.
Or cannot because it goes to M'sia? -
Malaysia roads does not have at least 4.5m clearance everywhere, some places only 4m. On Malaysia roads, vehicles travel at high speeds, their roads might not be as well maintained as S'pore roads, can be a very bumpy ride ( even using SDs, too dangerous to have DDs.Originally posted by my@jas:How about 170?
Can DD be put on that svc cos it's quite crowded during peak hours.
Or cannot because it goes to M'sia? -
161 needs DDs, too crowded in WDL int. A lot of people take 161 from WDL.Originally posted by SBS3624G:I cannot say which ought to have DDs, but I think that 161 does not require DDs at all. The VSOs ought to go to 74.
Okay lah, I think 159 needs a few DDs, can be quite packed at AMK.
74 still ok, VSO or VO not much difference, bus will still get crowded during peak hours.
159 can deploy more bus ( during peak hours ), instead of using DDs.