Services that needs/does not need certain buses

last SG · 2008-04-25T21:54:57+00:00

Can those ppl who are quarrelling please keep your mouth shut now? It pretty irritating to see arguements here and there..

I miss old annoucements SG

List what you think here. Personally, I feel that Service 24 should start getting new batch of K230UBs to de-merzlise it. Why new batch? New batch does not have the bumper issue so it can enter CGA tunnel. 145 should get it too. Generally, Volvo B10TLs should be used on feeders/shorthaul as they use more fuel. All VO3x batch 3 should be used in CBD. On a side note, is it very common for MKIVs to be used on shorthaul/feeders?

Superbus SG

Be patient. Service 24 will have its share of new buses when the time comes. Please stop your motion to 'de-Merc Service 24' already. It's irritating. Almost every thread here has your post on that motion.

As for the rest of your statements, I can only.."Sigh".

Oceane SG

It's just a bus.

service_238 SG

Personally, I feel that this thread would spark off another debate of "this service deserves this model better".

I recommend the closure of this thread should anything related to my previous paragraph is raised. As for now, no issue as long as the debate/argument is CONSTRUCTIVE.

service_238 SG

As for the rest of your statements, I can only.."Sigh".

and frankly speaking, I love Merc on S24 :)

chickenlittle2 SG

I think they want nissan instead.

takahashi32399691 SG

I do feel that the road surface at Upp Paya Lebar is uneven due to the road diversion somewhere near Tai Seng MRT station (Cricle Line), which may not be suitable for it.

As for the MK4, I hardly see it on svc operated by BNDEP since the N113 CAC and MK3 took over from the long haul ones in addition to the shorthaul services.

Oceane SG

I do feel that the road surface at Upp Paya Lebar is uneven due to the road diversion somewhere near Tai Seng MRT station (Cricle Line), which may not be suitable for it.

As for the MK4, I hardly see it on svc operated by BNDEP since the N113 CAC and MK3 took over from the long haul ones in addition to the shorthaul services.

There are. :)

BNDEP 222.

I miss old annoucements SG

There are. :)

BNDEP 222.

The next one I know of is BNDEP 35 which will only use it on weekends. 10, 23, 36, 12, 81, 15, 69, 33, 9, 197, 18, 5, 8, 81, 21, 518 and 222 also have perm MKIV DM3500s.

sBs_boy SG

Seriously, human needs and wants are unlimited. There is no way that we can satisfy the needs of every human beings on this planets when each and single one of us demand things to be the way that we want it to be. There will surely be a time when we are baised or rather greedy enough to ask for the best things that is available. Thus, i dont see a need in opening a thread like this..

If you really want to hear my point, I feel that the VSOs will be put on better use if they are put on long-haul or express services rather than short-haul or feeder services.

SBST390 SG

Any bus from any depor that is deployed on any route by any dispatcher would have a number of concerns to be considered.

Case closed

sv966 SG

Generally, Volvo B10TLs should be used on feeders/shorthaul as they use more fuel.

Hmm.. interesting point. Would be good if you have fuel consumption statistics to back up this stand - comparing a B10TL vs another model on the same service, and comparing the same B10TL on a feeder route viz-a-viz trunk route, holding one of the variable constant at a time for each comparison ;-)

Otherwise, I would very much prefer to see the "sleeper class" reclining seats of the VSOs put to good use on long-haul services (particularly express services). Shiok!

sv966 SG

On a side note, is it very common for MKIVs to be used on shorthaul/feeders?

Bukit Batok depot lor. Just go to Clementi and Bukit Merah and you get what I mean. But then again, that's because they pretty much don't have many other buses to play around with.

It's time for you to see beyond BNDEP ;)

sv966 SG

Frankly I am not surprised that such a motion would surface time and again. Service 24, 26, 53, 135, 139, 145 etc are long time "guardians" of Mercedes, and it is understandable for bus fans like us to wish to see other models of buses on these services to spice it up.

(Once upon a time Services 22, 70 and 133 belonged to this league too, until Volvos finally came in over the past year. And that was because these services had ADDs and hence had rectangular destos).

But putting aside this subjective view of personal desires, the reason why such services have yet to get Volvos or other models is basically due to
- Lack of rectangular destos
- Plenty of Merz in AMDEP that the deliberate usage of Mk IV (even as cameo) is not necessary

So I guess while such desire to "de-Merc Service 24" is perfectly natural, attempting to justify it with a myriad of illogical reasons based on "need" will not improve the situation.

We can only wait =)

sv966 SG

Adding on to my previous point and attempting to steer this discussion in the right direction,

If we are looking purely based on the perspective of "need" as the title says, then I have the following recommendations:

- Service 190 and 960 require high capacity double deck buses that offer greater passenger comfort across an expressway journey

- Service 222 and 291 require bendy buses with three boarding and alighting doors to quicken up boarding and alighting activities along heavy loading points

- Paya Lebar Road/Upp Paya Lebar Rd needs bendy bus services in the interim before Circle Line is complete. Most of the passengers in the industrial developments rely on the bus services as a feeder to the MRT station before and after work. Single decks on Services 24, 135, 43 etc cannot cope with the demand while the double decks from 28 and 76 are not well-utilised because people are not moving to the upper deck, and boarding and alighting activity is slow.

Now that's what I call deployment based on NEED. Not some random fetish or desire to see a particular model on a particular service.

I miss old annoucements SG

Adding on to my previous point and attempting to steer this discussion in the right direction,

If we are looking purely based on the perspective of "need" as the title says, then I have the following recommendations:

- Service 190 and 960 require high capacity double deck buses that offer greater passenger comfort across an expressway journey

- Service 222 and 291 require bendy buses with three boarding and alighting doors to quicken up boarding and alighting activities along heavy loading points

Now that's what I call deployment based on NEED. Not some random fetish or desire to see a particular model on a particular service.

But too bad that SBST does not have any bendies

heatblast SG

if 291 n 222 require bendies then y did SBST sell away the 2 bendies they had?

Volvo Olympian SG

if 291 n 222 require bendies then y did SBST sell away the 2 bendies they had?

Due to maintanance problem , more or less , spare parts hard to find.

bus555 SG

Service 72 should get rid of SBS7430Y and SBS7421Z. Replaced by SBS9888Y (haha just joking) and SBS555S (if possible) but THIS IS AMDEP choice lah

SBS2695H SG

Otherwise, I would very much prefer to see the "sleeper class" reclining seats of the VSOs put to good use on long-haul services (particularly express services). Shiok!

But somehow, I find that a VSO seems to make more noise than a VO3x batch 2 or 3 especially on the lower deck. VSOs look good because of Volgren bodywork and the interior, not the engine and I think future buses should have Volgren bodywork. That's why I previouly mentioned for VSOs to be on feeders.