Bus Articles in the Newspapers and Stomp.sg

last SG · 2008-04-23T22:42:57+00:00

OK...This has caused my respect for SBS Transit to drop by a significant amount.It's simply unbelievable. I can see why they are so insistent on the fares, b...

chickenlittle2 SG

If the OCC says no, then not allowed.

you really dun understand me well.

http://www.sgforums.com/forums/1279/topics/291084?page=45

sinicker SG

i guess now sbst has stated their stand once and for all on wheelchair-bound users taking the WAB buses on non-WAB services......

eX.A.K.R. SG

I guess for the wheelchair-accessible service deployment problem, SBS Transit should consider putting a mini-placard (desto) holder in front of accessible buses to hold an easily-removable wheelchair-accessible logo, rather than using a sticker to display it. When the bus is on an accessible route, the bus must display the logo there; when deployed on a non-accessible route, the logo must be removed to avoid any potential confusion.

This method should allow for more flexibility, and shouldn't cost much to implement.

Superbus SG

If I remember correctly, those B9s which were redeployed on Service 14, had their wheelchair logos removed. Ditto for Service 25's, I presume?

201911 SG

IMO its quite stupid deploying WABs on non- WAB services... eg svc 88 which has got B9TLs for nearly a year but still not officially WAB service... either get the bus stops fixed so that they can be accessible by wheelchairs or just dont deploly WABs on the service and put them somewhere else instead...

just my thoughts, though i have a feeling that some people here will flame me for this post

n4l SG

We must be flexible at times. We are all humans afterall.

I don't think OCC/HQ would be very happy about this as they more than likely wouldn't recognize this fact.

I applaud the fact that the bus driver was being nice/flexible, but the guy went to write to forums - almost (albeit unknowingly) sabotaging him. Most drivers I believe, would just go by the book...I don't think it's a choice of flexibility in this scenario since when HQ does't permit PIWs onboard on certain services, they would definitely have their reasons....

lemon1974 SG

If I remember correctly, those B9s which were redeployed on Service 14, had their wheelchair logos removed. Ditto for Service 25's, I presume?

yes.. the logo were removed. But recently 7481/7483 got the logo back. Not so sure about other Sv 25 B9.

Really do not understand what is the point of deploying WAB buses but cant make them WAB services after more than one year for Sv 88. Sv 25 also got B9 for quite long alrd. maybe it is the difficulty of providing e-timetable.

lemon1974 SG

Do not understand why sbs transit reply the logo is due to "deployment issues" ? Never see any K230 from AMDEP cameo on those AMDEP B9 WAB services yet..None of the K230 services in AMDEP are WAB service also.

btw refer to http://www.sbstransit.com.sg/doyouknow/facts_wab.aspx, it seem like SBST did not bother to update which bus stops are WAB accessible.. See under Sv 2 and Sv 21. For Sv 21, B06/B12/B14 geyland rd are not accessible for PIW, but for Sv 2, these bus stops are accessible? Likewise for Sv 51/143. The bus stop outside haw par villa is accessilbe to Sv 143 B9 but, not Sv 51 B9? weird right?

SBS9888Y SG

i feel that SBST and LTA should start testing out every stop it operates and mark each stop whether they are able to board PIWs. once they have that data, it would clear one obstacle when SBST and LTA approve a particular service to a WAB one.

if they really want to go for it, work with LTA. for every bus sotp that is WAB friendly stick a wheelchair logo on the bus stop pole or something. this way it would really speed up the process and show the public they are really placing keen interest to help PIWs.

the reason "deployment issues" by sbst gave to argue about why the sticker was put up was clearly a riduclous excuse because for AMDEP/BRBP KUBs have never touched AMDEP/BRBP WAB serivces yet.

service_238 SG

the reason "deployment issues" by sbst gave to argue about why the sticker was put up was clearly a riduclous excuse because for AMDEP/BRBP KUBs have never touched AMDEP/BRBP WAB serivces yet.

Sometimes I find bus enthuasiasts are more vigilant than the employees themselves. Or rather HQ is trying to cover up what their lovely amdep did by stating 'deployment issues'

Oceane SG

Sometimes I find bus enthuasiasts are more vigilant than the employees themselves. Or rather HQ is trying to cover up what their lovely amdep did by stating 'deployment issues'

Some of the AM K230s had their blue logos removed.

chickenlittle2 SG

It is really the wrong initiative of putting wheelchair friendly stickers.

Oceane SG

It is really the wrong initiative of putting wheelchair friendly stickers.

They confuse people instead. And at least if they want to put the logos, something got to be done with the service what...

QX179R SG

Why no low-floor buses to old estate?

http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/viewContent.jsp?id=37272

eX.A.K.R. SG

Why no low-floor buses to old estate?

http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/viewContent.jsp?id=37272

I could solemnly swear that I have seen low-floor buses on routes 99 and 242.

SBS n SMRT SG

These are what i heard on radio

1. A pax complain 853 without new buses, old fleet

2. A pax compain NAC SD on 32, want more new AC buses

SBS n SMRT SG

I got a way to solve the WAB sticker fuss

Put destos slot for WAB destos, when the bus is not on a WAB swevice, the destos could not be put into the slot and taken off, then there is not a need for redeployments as an excuse

SBS n SMRT SG

the reason "deployment issues" by sbst gave to argue about why the sticker was put up was clearly a riduclous excuse because for AMDEP/BRBP KUBs have never touched AMDEP/BRBP WAB serivces yet.

nice excuse from SBST, they are super cover up, the normal sg pple will be fooled not us

vivienlee SG

These are what i heard on radio

1. A pax complain 853 without new buses, old fleet

2. A pax compain NAC SD on 32, want more new AC buses

Why no low-floor buses to old estate?

http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/viewContent.jsp?id=37272

Tat's wat I called, neglected bus svcs.

But 853 still not so bad wat, compare to 178/852/975.

SBS n SMRT SG

Tat's wat I called, neglected bus svcs.

But 853 still not so bad wat, compare to 178/852/975.

sadly, the radio sg pple must have compared 853 to 854 not 852

« Previous Page Next Page »