New Bus Services Announced by LTA/PTOs

last SG · 2014-10-14T00:04:39+00:00

Loyang district includes:- Loyang Industrial Estate- Old Tampines Road- Upper Changi North (not industrial estate though)- Flora* Considering this my guess i...

dupdup77 SG

i think its quite clear 116 could be better and so many people feedback. are you sure it will surely have been amended after so many people feedback? if it has achieved a 'minimum standard' then that is extremely low. i do think that LTA amending routes it planned itself would be tantamount to admitting that the route was poorly planned in the first place so to save face they wont amend anyway. to them, taxpayers money anyway, not their money lah

Hi mr TIB868X, did you write in or you just assume? Cheers.

dupdup77 SG

Well if you want to get into a wally of words, we can... You also seem to "know it all" even without doing ground work, and teach everyone here... how LTA is doing the right thing here and there. If you don't agree, learn to rest your arguments rather than go on and on.. or maybe you are paid for it.

Hi mr busanalyser, I do not like to get into a war of words. This is my style and has always been. I don't teach people and I don't expect any credits. Everybody who reads all these knows who always starts off all these nonsense and who likes to shoot people. You are one who is boastful and brings down people by your comments. Only knows how to criticize the authority when you don't get it your way. You have shot me few times while I still remain passive and do not bother to get into all these rubbish. Show your knowledge without being disrespectful to others. Keep on shooting me and show to others your naivety. This is not the first time. If admins here can ban people who always shoots people, you will definitely be one of them. I rest my case. Cheers.

TIB868X SG

Hi mr TIB868X, did you write in or you just assume? Cheers.

would it make any difference? simple observation of data such as fare data would establish some facts that loading audits can. even drivers can and have feedback.

quite clear to see many MPs taking credit for BSEP routes, thus its quite clear whose feedback matters most ;)

dupdup77 SG

would it make any difference? simple observation of data such as fare data would establish some facts that loading audits can. even drivers can and have feedback.

in my opinion, the opinions of the regular commuter that writes in to PTOs matter the least. the lobbyists within the government do however seem to matter. quite clear to see many MPs taking credit for BSEP routes, perhaps some lobbying was involved.

Hi mr TIB868X, why not? Do something constructive. Write in. If fail, write to your RC or even the MP if you think lobbying helps. At least if he or she cannot help, then at least you know you have done something. Better than lament here and there or in forums online lambasting the authority. Sbs 49 route was amended due to feedback to the RC and MP. Cheers.

BusAnalayzer SG

Well... stop "teaching" and stop taking side of LTA every single time. I "do not" criticize LTA all the time. They are not perfect, but I defend their routes like sv 49, 121 and sv 386... even though many ppl criticize.

You irritate me... coz anyone posts anything... u will say LTA will not allow this and LTA will not allow that... let ppl post freely...

All I was suggesting is 116 needs to be amended. I also gave my proposal which is definitely good and will not upset current commuters. I don't see any reason why you should keep on arguing to defend 116 which apart from me numerous other users have said is waste of money or let me put it politically more correct "not best use of our money".

If I was saying something similar about sv 4 or sv 20 or sv 50 or sv 972... yes you can shoot me down... but after telling you that I have observed this service 20+ times at NEX on 20 different days... taken it 10+ times... observed it equal number of times at HCI... you still want to show you are right... last time you said "today I saw sv 116 has around 40 pax"... u are saying 40 pax as if the bus is bursting. Your statement itself shows that sv 116 rarely gets 40 pax also...

Go on the ground and observe. If not, just shut your mouth. And I will be harsh with you, coz you really irritate me with your nonsensical posts. Sorry others for my language.

BusAnalayzer SG

You go on talking about sbs 49... it is not a major amendment... all they did is extended the route by 3 stops... which should have been done originally itself... next u will say sv 143M got a new stop along WC... shouldn't it have got it in the first place? Then we show... oh wow... new improvement.

TIB1112L SG

Not trying to critcise your route, but you have 82 from Punggol to Serangoon Ctrl (Loop)...

43M also is Punggol to Serangoon.

purpose of my suggestion was to merge 43M and 116 together thus withdrawal of either one services, such that resources can be utilised on other sides. The reason why I made the route this way was to try and retain the originality of 116 aft combining with 43M, and thus it became an amended version of 43M and runs from Punggol to Serangoon.

The proposed amended route can utilise current fleet of service 116+43M Citaros, where Wrights can be used to boost the full route of Service 43.

some sort of win win situation

dupdup77 SG

Hi admin, if you can ban people, I suggest you ban mr busanalyser from sgbuses. Show them you are not afraid of banning popular but totally rude and disrespectful people. See the way this was written. This is not the first time. Totally lack of respect. Suggesting I am being bought over. Oh my goodness. Admin, I hope you can do something about this. Cheers.

TIB1112L SG

Next is new stop for 43M along Punggol Central/Boundary and they start talking again

TIB1112L SG

Alright, both of you stop the arguments and lets get back to original discussion about underutilised routes.

dupdup77 SG

You irritate me... coz anyone posts anything... u will say LTA will not allow this and LTA will not allow that... let ppl post freely...

Go on the ground and observe. If not, just shut your mouth. And I will be harsh with you, coz you really irritate me with your nonsensical posts. Sorry others for my language.

Admin, please ban mr busanalyser from sgforums. Do not be rude to fellow forumers. Thanks.

TIB1112L SG

To be honest, I find that some BSEP servces can be extended and merged to become longer services to enhance connectivity.

For example,

Service 120 can be extended and merged with 201 to ply New Bridge Road-Pandan Gardens

Service 116 would have more potential loading if merged with service 43M

Service 141 merged with 159 to ply Sengkang-Lor 1 Geylang

TIB1112L SG

Both of you just STOP

you are making this thread popular for the wrong reasons.

TIB1112L SG

I predict some misconception for Service 35 as usual for red/white plate service extensions as seen from previous experience on 123M. Luckily some bus enthusiasts helped the BCs on the bus while joyriding to explain to passengers. An OCC Staff was deployed to Bukit Purmei too

i foresee that an OCC staff member will be deployed at Tanah Merah Ferry Terminal for the first day. Maybe the sign explaining red/white plate system found at Bukit Purmei will have a similar copy at Tanah Merah Ferry Terminal.

However I think that SBST has received feedback regarding confusion and thus for 49, the destos have the destination labeled on them and placed nearer to the door

I feel that SBST should format the EDS back to two-directional EDS format in order to reduce confusion.

dupdup77 SG

Both of you just STOP

you are making this thread popular for the wrong reasons.

I did not do anything wrong. When others abuse me, I do not rebut back. I go through proper channel of looking for the admin. My motto is never ever been rude and disrespectful to fellow forumers. All are free to voice out their opinions. Cheers.

dupdup77 SG

To be honest, I find that some BSEP servces can be extended and merged to become longer services to enhance connectivity.

For example,

Service 120 can be extended and merged with 201 to ply New Bridge Road-Pandan Gardens

Service 116 would have more potential loading if merged with service 43M

Service 141 merged with 159 to ply Sengkang-Lor 1 Geylang

Hi mr TIB1112, no offence please. Combining sbs 120 and sbs 201 will be a bit long-winded. Just my two cents worth. Cheers.

SBS2601D SG

Calls for +1.

sgbuses SG

LTA is not perfect. Data analysis has its limitations especially when it comes to covering totally new catchment areas.

Whether underutilisation of a route is a problem depends on how you view bus services as a whole.

Private operators who do route planning tend to focus on patronage numbers and profit maximisation. That is why many of our trunk routes are very long and winding.

The other approach taken up by governments is to treat bus routes as provision of a social good. BSEP involving new catchment areas seem to have taken on this approach. That means the route is designed in a manner that may be underutilized and loss-making, but is there because of the important links that it provides to the community. In other countries, this usually refers to the elderly and the low-income earners who cannot afford a car.

dupdup77 SG

LTA is not perfect. Data analysis has its limitations especially when it comes to covering totally new catchment areas.

Whether underutilisation of a route is a problem depends on how you view bus services as a whole.

Private operators who do route planning tend to focus on patronage numbers and profit maximisation. That is why many of our trunk routes are very long and winding.

Hi mr sgbuses, good point. Not every service needs to maximize its loading. Cheers.

BusAnalayzer SG

Admin, please ban mr busanalyser from sgforums. Do not be rude to fellow forumers. Thanks.

Cheers.

« Previous Page Next Page »