Capacity Upgrade/Downgrade Reporting on Bus Services

last SG · 2014-06-02T11:57:05+00:00

254/255/257 loads can easily cross 100 pax.. Why no BSEP yet or even fleet add from SBST side... Totally ignore the JIS area.

array88 SG

Now can. Even 961 has DDs... from past one month.

Ok I missed it out... If that's the case, I strongly suggest svc 62 to terminate at Lor 1 Geylang Terminal instead of looping there. 175 should also start deploying DDs, unless there are height restrictions along Depot Rd.

carbikebus SG

Lor 1 already face insufficient parking lots for basic bus service ever since SBST introduce 140 & 141 there.175 got fleet restriction along Depot Rd else SBST would have deploy 4-5 DDs already

array88 SG

Anyway I don't know why SMRT is so active in asking the authorities to trim the trees along its routes, while SBST just deploy SDs on its DD-unfriendly routes as if it's nobody's business.

carbikebus SG

Anyway I don't know why SMRT is so active in asking the authorities to trim the trees along its routes, while SBST just deploy SDs on its DD-unfriendly routes as if it's nobody's business.

SMRT one is Tree problem which can be solved by pruning while SBST case is the route itself or like low lying bridges..

Sbs6750E SG

175 can extend to Sims Pl so can make way for 62.

array88 SG

175 can extend to Sims Pl so can make way for 62.

Agree that 175 and/or 141 should be extended to Sims Place or Eunos. 141 can provide relief for 67 also

array88 SG

repeated post

SMB3095S SG

Yishun services like 851, 854, 855 and maybe 860 can have DDs after AMDEP have been reroofed to accomodate DDs later.

AntiDennisLance SG

So now 854 has capacity reduced coz of WLDEP bendies replaced by AMDEP SD's?

SinkTel SG

Anyway I don't know why SMRT is so active in asking the authorities to trim the trees along its routes, while SBST just deploy SDs on its DD-unfriendly routes as if it's nobody's business.

Kinda agree with you as with the case of 66 & 145, who only get DDs upgrades after SMRT introudce DDs.

BusAnalayzer SG

175 no need la... Loading does not justify. 62 a bit complicated as there are now people taking bus from Geylang road (they board here instead walking to Sims Ave to take bus). Always got 15-20 pax on board while turning from Lor 1.

BusAnalayzer SG

So now 854 has capacity reduced coz of WLDEP bendies replaced by AMDEP SD's?

That's insane if it is true :(

BusAnalayzer SG

Kinda agree with you as with the case of 66 & 145, who only get DDs upgrades after SMRT introudce DDs.

Lets be fair... SBST many services have DD luxury even if they don't need... SMRT on other hand has kept reducing bendy/high capacity fleet on overly crowded services.. .Only recently, some services are improved... Yet many services still neglected... The list is long... and to be honest.. these need it more than SBST services..

The only SBST services that really need DDs are the airport services that are hindered because of the infrastructure there. Now even at Yishun, you have more SBST DDs in the interchange than SMRT DDs.

AntiDennisLance SG

That's insane if it is true :(

Given SMRT's perennial hate and neglect of Yishun and Sembawang, that is unfortunately totally possible ...

AntiDennisLance SG

Agree bro. Some SMRT services should be given to SBST to operate especially the Yishun and Sembawang trunks.

TIB868X SG

Not surprising. Not one bit. SMRT very actively yet silently reduces capacity on routes like 851, 854 and 969 while boasting about an addition of a mere 1 double-deck bus on 856. Yes, ever since 969 went full WLDEP, the number of DDs have not increased while the number of bendies have decreased. I can clearly see that some of the AMDEP bendies have been replaced by A22s. Also, what happened to AMDEP crossovers to 969?

BusAnalayzer SG

Yes SMRT has been playing this trick for last one year. Look at sv 856. Was full bendy fleet. 1 slot got downgraded to SD, then 2... today fleet has 6 SDs from SMRT side... while the DDs have been added from BSEP pool.

Same goes for 187. Reduced 1 bendy slot... BSEP DD added. 172 frequently there are only 2 bendies perm.. sometimes have 3 or 4... now putting DDs

180 fleet has 11 buses for so long... when definitely needs more

184 should have been full fleet bendy... has so many rigids spamming

189 housefull buses yet only 4 bendies

851 has reduced so many bendy slots over years... same goes for 854

857/966/985 did not have any high capacity buses for so so long... and now you see both 857 and 966 have potential to get +100 pax... in spite of having DDs

307 neglected with so many rigids... when need bendies...

911/811 classic examples of intra-towns managed so badly.

carbikebus SG

811 no need 17 buses if the fleet have at least 8 high capacity buses,Just dump another 7 A22s will be enough.911 need 7 high capacity buses and 5 SDs.Since they dont have enough high capacity buses they dump more single deckers in return have to deploy more drivers and OTs..

carbikebus SG

So now 854 has capacity reduced coz of WLDEP bendies replaced by AMDEP SD's?

They made a grave mistakes by letting Amdep fully control 854,Should have left 7-8 Wldep duties which can deploy all DDs..969 also but Amdep can control a few SD duties which can be useful.I dont really know how SMRT bus plannings,All cock up big time..Save 1 problem then create another problems..In the end report will say lose money because of fuel usage..

carbikebus SG

I would rather let Wldep part control Yishun svc like 851,854,855 rather than fully Amdep control..The Feeders and Intratowns i got no problem full Amdep control though.

969 another big mistakes...Service that need minority Amdep control to reduce dead mileage should be 75,960,966 & 970

« Previous Page Next Page »