Like I’ll say.. and people like negotiable are just making
attacks…
I’ll repeat this.. Dun stalk and attack on people… Dun want to
reply dun bother typing
1) If the MRT breaks down at Joo Koon,
leaving with EWL trains turning around at
Boon Lay… May I know what’s the contingency plan? How are
passengers going to be quickly dispersed out of the congested
Pioneer Stn bus stop?
Say people anti SMRT this and that, then
when MRT breakdown… Maybe the next thing go
and ask why no shuttle bus, how come not enough bus to clear the
crowd…
negotiable can suggest something? Since you think I’m talking
with no logic?
2) The incident where the BC took no heed to wait for the
alighting pax… The BC still has the right to scold passengers for
not alighting quickly.
Made matters worst, all the buses were operated as 179… Many of
the buses fly stop at 27231 and 27251 except for alighting.
Do people know how SLBP timekeeper used to
make people squeeze on 179A during AM peak ops? Squeeze until the
exit door of LO3x has problem closing! People even had problems
alighting as there was people with no choice standing on the
staircase leading to the upper deck.
3) S241 BC flouting traffic rule,
S179 BC stopping at 27211’s zig zag line
whenever S179A is not operated, buses
alighting pax at Pioneer Stn by parking along the road beside the
S179 buses inside the bus stop bay… All these
are condoned?
4) S179A is not profitable. Chickenlittle2
is eating his own words. Many of the overoperated S179 are not even taking in pax into NTU with 10% loading factor. Why I’m saying 10% is
because of the losses…
The S179 bus is incurring runtime into
NTU and yet it only collects some $0.80 – $2…
Can this cover the additional time incurred in relation to manpower
cost?
Chickenlittle2 is better off working in the NTUC Fairprice. Because hearsay is that NTUC realised by running 24 hrs it’s not able to cover
the additional cost [additional revenue cannot cover the cost
incurred to run 24 hrs]... Since chickenlittle2 know how to defend,
I think NTUC or Sheng Siong would like him,
with knowing how to come with pattern to increase revenue at all
cost..
5) Overops issue and anti SMRT… Obviously
negotiable is condoning illegal bus ops just for the purpose to say
I’m anti SMRT…
If the bus get into accident, how to report the bus duty code?
and made worst, many of these buses the BC does not even have the
way bill with them onboard!
and say I anti SMRT for not letting them
to earn the revenue? I think negotiable is now attacking
LTA then since it was their stipulated
arrangement…
Furthermore, I didn’t know negotiable is ok if his own bus sv he
takes is underoperated just because ops staff say loading not high
enough…
Want to attack, better know what the matter is all about…
anyway.. if the matter goes to the media, see what happens… like
S190 case… buses not properly operated..
Want to flame on people, dun end up eating your own words just
to find it fun to attack on people…
You are such a hard commuter to please, and mind you, you don't pay
more for transport than for most of your other expenses, and
Singapore has a very low fare for its standards of service. So
really, you are getting a bargain for what the operators are
earning (or as your first post in this thread, losing).
1) Not sure where MRT breakdown fits into this discussion, but if
you are talking about 179 acting as a shuttle bus, I don't see how
SBS should be responsible in providing extra buses to clear the
crowds at Pioneer, the only thing they are required to do as a bus
operator running services in the region is to let passengers on for
free.
And if you are talking about the shuttle buses, please understand
that when the breakdown occurs, there is a chain of events that
need to occur before the buses get activated, and even so, it takes
time for the buses to get down, and that is provided you have no
jams along the way. I believe LTA, which has a control centre
(shown in the news during the December 2011 breakdown), should
respond first by sending their contracted traffic officers down as
an interim measure.
2) Do you think timekeepers want their passengers to suffer? They
are just doing their job, unfortunately you chose to see issues
which they have to mitigate as the fault of the timekeepers/bus
operators. Issues such as a jam in Boon Lay Interchange (which in
turn are infrastructural issues which the various authorities had a
say in), or late running due to traffic conditions along the way,
or even a bus which had unfortunately broke down.
3) If you see any vehicles flouting traffic rules, report it to the
relevant authorities, do you think airing it here would help?
Also, a bus is there to perform downroute on a normal 179 and is
early for the trip, and you complain about it. Do you prefer buses
not running at all? What is so special about 179A which you have to
take it no matter what? Why don't you suggest to your school to
allocate lots or build a bus terminal in the campus which will
ensure safer operating conditions and more reliable
operations?
4) So if you think 179 is unprofitable, 179A would be profitable? I
do not have any exact data regarding passenger numbers and revenue
collected, but clearly, operating 179A trips as 179 isn't going to
be a big issue as it brings you to the same place just a few
minutes slower? Again, why do you have to take 179A instead of a
normal 179? You are lucky to have 179A operating as a normal fare
route, instead of something similar to 74e and 151e serving
institutions such as NP, SIM, SP and NUS charging express
fares.
5) SMRT has explained the issues regarding that night when the 190
video was taken. In summary, trips were not operated due to the
breakdown of ONE bus and a traffic jam on PIE, given that the
fastest non revenue route which buses have to take from CCK to the
city is through PIE, they would have been affected by it, together
with the buses which are in service. The whole 190 issue stems out
from a lack of proper planning and infrastructure upgrades by the
government, and a government which has neglected buses ever since
they have gone for the rail option. The corridor where 190 serves
would had been better operated as an advanced and separate transit
system.
Back to 179, as I said before, since LTA has not issued any fines
for 179 for not meeting QOS standards, it would be safe to say that
179 has been operating within QOS standards, which simply throws
your arguments about 179 out of the picture. Do you not trust LTA's
figures? Even if certain trips are not running due to unforeseen
circumstances, the timekeeper has obviously done his job in
improving the situation by adjusting the timings of the trips,
otherwise QOS may not have been met.
Once again, you have shown that your understanding of bus
operations is lacking, so instead of making a fool out of your
comments, why not toughen up, keep quiet and board buses like all
other passengers do. If you think you can run a bus company, or be
part of it, kindly set up your own company or join the bus
companies. Otherwise, cease your rants and reflect on your online
behaviour.
