Originally posted by SBS6853S:5 DD 2SD iirc
More like 4 SDs and 3 DDs..
Originally posted by carbikebus:Hahahaha,SBST generous with DDs while SMRT lack of DDs..
And this really irritates me that LTA is sitting down and not doing anything when SBST services are pampered, and SMRT ones still need lot of upgrades.
Look at 187 - what a joke. Just going on adding buses.
Same for feeders/intratowns in SMRT region.
969 also so many rigids. When deserve more DDs.
The list can just go on...
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:And this really irritates me that LTA is sitting down and not doing anything when SBST services are pampered, and SMRT ones still need lot of upgrades.
Look at 187 - what a joke. Just going on adding buses.
Same for feeders/intratowns in SMRT region.
969 also so many rigids. When deserve more DDs.
The list can just go on...
when are the Wrights coming in?
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:And this really irritates me that LTA is sitting down and not doing anything when SBST services are pampered, and SMRT ones still need lot of upgrades.
Look at 187 - what a joke. Just going on adding buses.
Same for feeders/intratowns in SMRT region.
969 also so many rigids. When deserve more DDs.
The list can just go on...
Maybe this SMRT reluctant to take in B9TL Wrights since they havent won any package yet?Theyre too obsessed with the MAN A22s/A95s.As for SBST they got no problem with B9TLs as theyre the one who ordered the B9TLs first.
Interesting part is that most of the packages safeguard SMRT anyway. Seems like they have their clout with LTA.
Loyang - All SBST
Bulim - Mostly SBST, just few SMRT (didn't even include 61)
Seletar - Mostly SBST, few Yishun services but not really the high capacity trunks like 854, 856, 857.
SMRT will continue to have huge heavy weights like CCK, BPJ, Woodlands, Sembawang and Yishun (partial).
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Interesting part is that most of the packages safeguard SMRT anyway. Seems like they have their clout with LTA.
Loyang - All SBST
Bulim - Mostly SBST, just few SMRT (didn't even include 61)
Seletar - Mostly SBST, few Yishun services but not really the high capacity trunks like 854, 856, 857.
SMRT will continue to have huge heavy weights like CCK, BPJ, Woodlands, Sembawang and Yishun (partial).
Their bus operation is smaller compared to SBST.Furthermore Temasek Holdings subsidiaries mah..Dont be suprised if LTA let SMRT run Ulu Pandan since theyve already lost Yishun and Bt Batok..
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Interesting part is that most of the packages safeguard SMRT anyway. Seems like they have their clout with LTA.
Loyang - All SBST
Bulim - Mostly SBST, just few SMRT (didn't even include 61)
Seletar - Mostly SBST, few Yishun services but not really the high capacity trunks like 854, 856, 857.
SMRT will continue to have huge heavy weights like CCK, BPJ, Woodlands, Sembawang and Yishun (partial).
I think the reason is because prior to this GCM, SBS Transit operated around 75% of the bus routes and SMRT operated around 25%. Hence, SBS Transit is more prone to losing its bus routes than SMRT.
Anyway, it's good for SBS Transit and SMRT to lose bus routes in the current model because the current model cannot make profits without the help of advertising and rental - especially SBS Transit since they own a larger share of the bus routes.
Originally posted by gekpohboy:I think the reason is because prior to this GCM, SBS Transit operated around 75% of the bus routes and SMRT operated around 25%. Hence, SBS Transit is more prone to losing its bus routes than SMRT.
Anyway, it's good for SBS Transit and SMRT to lose bus routes in the current model because the current model cannot make profits without the help of advertising and rental - especially SBS Transit since they own a larger share of the bus routes.
Don't forget majority of our train operations are by SMRT.
Originally posted by carbikebus:Their bus operation is smaller compared to SBST.Furthermore Temasek Holdings subsidiaries mah..Dont be suprised if LTA let SMRT run Ulu Pandan since theyve already lost Yishun and Bt Batok..
Technically they didn't even lose Yishun... It's not stated as one of the interchanges that fall under Seletar.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:I really don't expect high loading until DTL3 opens. Once DTL3 does, yes I do expect housefull DDs between Bedok Reservoir MRT and Bedok North Road... and likewise from Tampines Ave 3 to Tampines West MRT.
Like 117, will be a waste of resources for next 2 years.
46 will have some loading between Tampines Int and Ave 5 / St 83, but not so much that will require majority DDs... 291 can do the job.
Originally posted by array88:Technically they didn't even lose Yishun... It's not stated as one of the interchanges that fall under Seletar.
Maybe they forget to stated..Anyway they already lose majority of Yishun service despite still hanging on svc like 171,853,854\E,855,856 & 857.10 service is already for biddings:800,803,804,805,806,811,812,851 & 852 and this 850E which i assume will amend to start from Yishun too.
Originally posted by array88:46 will have some loading between Tampines Int and Ave 5 / St 83, but not so much that will require majority DDs... 291 can do the job.
True but then 291 is already doing a good job with 16 buses. 46 is just a bonus and 46 loading will really depend on which bus arrives first towards Tampines.
Also at Tampines Interchange, if 46 berth is different from 291, 46 loading will be poor departing from interchange (just like 258).
Originally posted by carbikebus:Maybe they forget to stated..Anyway they already lose majority of Yishun service despite still hanging on svc like 171,853,854\E,855,856 & 857.10 service is already for biddings:800,803,804,805,806,811,812,851 & 852 and this 850E which i assume will amend to start from Yishun too.
Well YTBI is temporary ... there could be unneccesary additional incurred learning curve and overheads for the successful bidder if it is to run YTBI rather than leaving it to SMRT to manage.
Once the new interchange under the new condo is complete, it may be managed by the successful bidder.
Agree that 851 should never be operated by the same company who also operates 856. All 851 HC buses should be dedicated to 851 and not be pinched away to run on 61, 67 and 856 on peak hours.
Originally posted by AntiDennisLance:Well YTBI is temporary ... there could be unneccesary additional incurred learning curve and overheads for the successful bidder if it is to run YTBI rather than leaving it to SMRT to manage.
Once the new interchange under the new condo is complete, it may be managed by the successful bidder.
Agree that 851 should never be operated by the same company who also operates 856. All 851 HC buses should be dedicated to 851 and not be pinched away to run on 61, 67 and 856 on peak hours.
Don't get your logic for 851 and 856 not operated by same operator?
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:Don't get your logic for 851 and 856 not operated by same operator?
851 is complicated.
1. This:
Why should an AMDEP service donate bendies to a WLDEP service, it is beyond me.
2. 851 bendies are always the first to be donated to 61 and 67 during peak hours.
Originally posted by AntiDennisLance:Well YTBI is temporary ... there could be unneccesary additional incurred learning curve and overheads for the successful bidder if it is to run YTBI rather than leaving it to SMRT to manage.
Once the new interchange under the new condo is complete, it may be managed by the successful bidder.
Agree that 851 should never be operated by the same company who also operates 856. All 851 HC buses should be dedicated to 851 and not be pinched away to run on 61, 67 and 856 on peak hours.
Jurong East Temp Int is also temporary, but it is still going to be handed over to Tower Transit soon isn't it?
Originally posted by AntiDennisLance:851 is complicated.
1. This:
- Duty 851S152 (Bus: Bendy), Duty 851S153 (Bus: Bendy) & Duty 851S253 (Bus: Bendy) will perform one (1) crossover trip on Service 856 towards Yishun during Weekdays AM Peak.
Why should an AMDEP service donate bendies to a WLDEP service, it is beyond me.
2. 851 bendies are always the first to be donated to 61 and 67 during peak hours.
But all that is SMRT's problem. Not operator related. It is because SMRT has lack of DDs. If SBST had 851 and 856 for sure 851 would be majority DD fleet and 856 would be full fleet DD.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:But all that is SMRT's problem. Not operator related. It is because SMRT has lack of DDs. If SBST had 851 and 856 for sure 851 would be majority DD fleet and 856 would be full fleet DD.
Yes as long as SMRT no longer operate 851 can liao.
I hope they can speed up the Volvo B9TL Wrights/MAN A95s liao, to facilitate retirement of Volvo Olympian 3-Axle (Batch 3), Mercedes-Benz O405G (Hispano Habit). I dunno about B10TL / Tridents but since they are all WAB, I think they can wait until they tighten their regime, by Mandai Package tender.
They can start to replace 100 Scania K230UBs first (Batch 1 Euro IV) when 261,262,265,268,269,70,24,130,133,135,138,76,162 goes to Seletar Package.
This time around,suwey2 not enough Citaros,Maybe the Euro V KUBs also transferred over to the new operators.
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:And this really irritates me that LTA is sitting down and not doing anything when SBST services are pampered, and SMRT ones still need lot of upgrades.
Look at 187 - what a joke. Just going on adding buses.
Same for feeders/intratowns in SMRT region.
969 also so many rigids. When deserve more DDs.
The list can just go on...
Since you are so smart I should not be seeing you here as a keyboard warrior and instead go and join LTA and be part of their transport development team.
It doesn't come across to me that 187 is a DD needy service though to be honest and giving DDs would only be a waste of space and should be given to services that needs it more and most of the crowds should subside (for this case ITE CW) by 2000 or later as most students would've been home by then (if they do not have CCAs) and deploying DDs should last no more than peak periods and standbying 1 is already lenient enough.
For 969's case I can't comment much especially on weekday peaks but there is a clear demand on weekends, from what I can remember and hence the need to standby DDs on weekends.
Not every service is a high-demand service that requires the demand of DD (with the exclusion of feeders) and usually most of them are empty on the upper deck by 2100 hours or later.
Originally posted by SMB31X:Since you are so smart I should not be seeing you here as a keyboard warrior and instead go and join LTA and be part of their transport development team.
It doesn't come across to me that 187 is a DD needy service though to be honest and giving DDs would only be a waste of space and should be given to services that needs it more and most of the crowds should subside (for this case ITE CW) by 2000 or later as most students would've been home by then (if they do not have CCAs) and deploying DDs should last no more than peak periods and standbying 1 is already lenient enough.
For 969's case I can't comment much especially on weekday peaks but there is a clear demand on weekends, from what I can remember and hence the need to standby DDs on weekends.
Not every service is a high-demand service that requires the demand of DD (with the exclusion of feeders) and usually most of them are empty on the upper deck by 2100 hours or later.
whatever, smrt boy!!
I prefer if 2-4 SD to HC bus conversion though for 187. Last time got 1025, 1064, 1063, 1180 and 1089. Now left 2 bendies plus 2 DD
187 better with DDs as there are many long distance travellers..Maybe a fleet of 21 MAN A22/7 MAN A95.28 buses is enough.
Originally posted by carbikebus:187 better with DDs as there are many long distance travellers..Maybe a fleet of 21 MAN A22/7 MAN A95.28 buses is enough.
Yes my thoughts too. There are good number of long distance travellers that can occupy upper deck. + there are 2 high loading points for short distance.
Lakeside MRT -> JW/JE Ave 1
BBT MRT -> BBT West Ave 4