Yeah height restriction routes can also do with bendy but this
one I rather say not neccessary. These routes can still cope with
increased SD frequency. At 1 point I also used to say 105 can use
bendy. But how many units will u need to just sustain that 1
service plus 105 crosses some heavy congested areas.
But for feeders that go through congestion free small roads and
heavy loading, you dont need that many units to sustain that
service - definitely feasible.
Today I took SBS7496H on 88 from AMK station to Buangkok
Green during peak hours. If I run that distance, it takes
25-30mins. The bus took 40mins. Why? Cos every busstop had
heavy passenger activity in terms of both boarding and alighting.
And for a DD, the upper deck people must come down then people
can board and go up. So every busstop layover atleast 5
mins. Very slow. My point is not to say 88 needs bendy but I
will strongly believe 88 can do better with some DD slots
being split to 2SDs instead of 100% DD fleet.
That being said, this is the scenario that feeders face.
You put DD, this is what will happen. Atleast 88 sees this for
a certain sector of its route and DD might benefit the bigger
picture of TPY to Pasir Ris, so fine. But feeder see this start to
end, treating it this way will definitely be a step back in our
public transportation.
Some of your earlier points on bendies were legit. but some of
your points such as that on svc 88 is rubbish. It puts the entire
credibility of your bendy discussion to stake as you come across
anti-DD and bendy-biased (which I believe you are).
Anyway, my friend, get over it, bendies are gone. Not your or my
decision, but the higher authorities there! And I feel sad too, as
there should have been bendies for certain feeder/intra-town/height
restriction routes.