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..

SBS9888Y SG

i got a feeling the 9828 and 9829 trial on 410 was a failure. and cos of the sharp turns at sin ming. they didnt wanna deploy DDs instead. thats sad for 52, 162 and 410.

Simple_boi SG

One arguement just stopped and another arise... When will all this arguements come to an end?

SBS9888Y SG

deleted

service_238 SG

Solve the manpower shortages then talk about other stuff.

hao_hao SG

i got a feeling the 9828 and 9829 trial on 410 was a failure. and cos of the sharp turns at sin ming. they didnt wanna deploy DDs instead. thats sad for 52, 162 and 410.

sin ming got sharp turns meh ?

Y_Shun SG

I find 16/f/lonely and dfs24's topic interesting... it shows us that deployment is not only about pax and roads but also about economic terms :)

ngjy22 SG

this thread is a great source of humour to me.

of coz we all can say, take this bus from there.. put here all.

but a lot of processes has to be done in terms of timetable, paperwork to transfer buses from this service to another so on & so forth. not just a simple "eh tmr put this bus on SXX ah hor. okay end of story."

it is a tedious process & when you carry it out, you must make sure you are successful in doing so. not to let it end up as a failure(not very good for the person working in sbst who suggested & proposed it. his capabilities may be questioned). in which, again, you all will open a new thread like this & continue brainstorming in vain.

i hope all understand this. sometimes when we work, we must find a way out with the constraints that we are facing.

the only good thing i see sbst in recent times is deploying VSO on short haul/feeder services. feeder service wise, i still feel it is inappropriate. no one wouldnt go up. unless it's 242 coz the route is long to get to where the target commuters are.

Very short haul services shouldn't be getting DDs, one of the reason is what as you said. Commuters wouldn't move up to the upper deck. Those very short route services with very high demand should get more SD instead, I'd rather see a few buses coming together with very good frequency than seeing a DD without many people at the upper deck while the lower deck is jam-packed. One of the good example is service 238.

But one thing is that, more SDs = more buses = more BCs required.
While more DDs = lesser buses = lesser BCs required.

hao_hao SG

den shld svc 354 get DDs

ngjy22 SG

den shld svc 354 get DDs

What do you think? Are the commuters willing move up when it's just a very short 5mins ride?

IMO, sv354 has enough buses now becuase of its distance, that's very short!

service_238 SG

But one thing is that, more SDs = more buses = more BCs required.
While more DDs = lesser buses = lesser BCs required.

ya keep it that way and i'm happy with my service

Scania N113CRB luver SG

What do you think? Are the commuters willing move up when it's just a very short 5mins ride?

IMO, sv354 has enough buses now becuase of its distance, that's very short!

DD for only 4-5 trips per day??

Not quite feasible also. During school days svc demand is VERY LOW. That time i take the bus, me and the BC were the only souls on board.

SBS9888Y SG

sin ming got sharp turns meh ?

yes my dear martian. the sin ming on earth (singapore) has sharp turns.

SBS2695H SG

DD for only 4-5 trips per day??

Not quite feasible also. During school days svc demand is VERY LOW. That time i take the bus, me and the BC were the only souls on board.

Maybe 354's route can be modified to be longer?

Volvo Olympian SG

Maybe 354's route can be modified to be longer?

What makes you think by making 354 longer then can have DD's?

SBS2695H SG

What makes you think by making 354 longer then can have DD's?

I'm not saying that it should have DDs, but having the route longer means that there will be more passengers to fill the SD bus.

dfs24 SG

I don't know why you people are arguing over this matter. Let me put it in a VERY simple way:

Each factor has its impact over another factor and all these factors will in turn affect the decision of the bus companies which we have no idea how they came to it unless you are one of them. In short they are all related. These are strategic decisions which you and I won't know unless any of us is part of the management.

And I doubt any management level staff will be stupid enough to leak company confidential information here.

Firstly, I think I have to clarify that there was no arguement between me and anyone involved in this discussion. It was a constructive discussion. So how is it different from an arguement? There was evidently no use of vulgarities or offensive language. Also, there was no childish name calling involved. Lastly, the tone of all the messages were rather obvious that all parties involved had the genuine intention of discussion, and exchanging differing viewpoints.

Let me ask you, what is the purpose of this forum. Why call it a discussion forum? I see the purpose of this forum as to exchange differing viewpoints, and everyone gets their space to share the viewpoints, and through this, everyone learns. So the whole purpose of this discussion, was to discuss the various possibilities. Sure, we do not know everything, but we can make reasonable inferences and deductions. Give you an example. None of us knows which services are going to get the new WABs. Yet we still discuss it. Does this mean that we should stop doing that? I think not. After all, we come here to discuss what the possibilities are, and substantiate our viewpoints with inferences and observation.

My conclusion is that, if we were only allowed to discuss things which we have information on, then we would have pretty much nothing to discuss. Either way, thank you for sharing your point of view, and thus giving me the chance to clarify the whole purpose of the discussion.

dfs24 SG

aiyer u everything = crap de.

Now, If you really want to know what crap is. It is the name calling you do to chickenlittle2. All the ayam and whatever. They are a real eyesore to the forum. You might argue that it is in the past, you have stopped your childish bickering. Fair enough. Then let us all look at this post. On a scale of 10, I think you know where this post of yours stand. Think about it, what is the value of this post. In my opinion, zero. I am confident that most other forum members would rate it in the similar range. I always belive that if you have nothing constructive to say, then don't say it. Think about it. I will not comment anymore. I think the other forum members can judge for themselves about your beahviour. You can reply whatever you like, but unless it is something constructive, I am telling you that I won't be bothered.

dfs24 SG

I find 16/f/lonely and dfs24's topic interesting... it shows us that deployment is not only about pax and roads but also about economic terms :)

Thank you very much. Your constructive feedback certainly encourges all to strive toward achieving better discussions in the future.

16/f/lonely SG

I find 16/f/lonely and dfs24's topic interesting... it shows us that deployment is not only about pax and roads but also about economic terms :)

Not really......

Deployment seems to be based on factors besides profits. Hardly any deployment seems justifiable looking at just costs alone.

On the contrary, it seems to be more about pax if we're talking about WABs and non-WABs, DDs and SDs. These seem to be the only categories of buses deployment seems to be based on.

On the other hand, it makes a lot of sense. After all, a bus is still a bus that brings us from point A to point B. Fuel consumption, comfort level etc etc will of course be ignored unless the problems incurred are too large to be ignored. So it makes sense that these factors are ignored, or the management will be over-burdened with all these to think of.

sv966 SG

A constructive discussion can turn into an argument if the very same persons contributing to the constructive discussion starts defending his point and not accepting that made by others :)

(Not targeting that at you nor anyone in particular, just a general reminder to all not to turn something originally constructive into yet another relentless argument)

« Previous Page Next Page »