SBS Transit and SMRT to ply the same route. Feasible?
-
One reader suggests that SBS Transit and SMRT to ply the same routes to create competition between both companies so that both companies will be motivated to provide better services. What you guys think. I'm thinking that this might really create very good outcome.
How does it work?
For example,
Service 190: Choa Chu Kang - New Bridge Road
This bus service requires 36 buses
SBS Transit to provide 18 buses (single decks + double decks)
SMRT to provide 18 buses(single decks + bendies)
The time interval for buses will be such that
10am - SBS Transit
10.05am - SMRT
10.11am - SBS Transit
10.17am - SMRTetc etc etc
Why will this work?
I feel that with both operators working on the same route, commuters can actually choose to take SBS/SMRT depending on which they prefer, if they are rushing for time, they can just take any bus. But if they are not rushing for time, they can actually choose to take whichever operator which provides better service, it's at most a 2 bus wait for the same operator bus to come.Current situation:
SBS Transit and SMRT both have their own areas to cover.
SBS Transit has places like Ang Mo Kio, Toa Payoh, Punggol, Sengkang, Bedok and alot of eastern regions
SMRT has places like Choa Chu Kang, Woodlands, Yishun and most of the western parts in Singapore.There is very little incentive for them to provide better services because no matter what, people in these areas have to board their buses anyway! So.. i feel this this solution might work. What you guys think?
Next, alternative to ease train congestions:
SBS Transit and SMRT to introduce routes that duplicates the train lines! It is definitely not a good idea to cut bus services just because a train line is opened and so. Because currently, with reduced frequencies and all, trains are still very packed and people still cant get in. It is not a problem with frequency already, i believe the capacity of trains have reached to a max. So i suggest both bus operators to introduce routes that duplicates the train lines so that passengers who do not wish to squeeze in trains or wait for a few trains before they can actually get in have another alternative - buses.
of course, this idea is subjected to the availability of buses..
What you guys think?
-
Even Hong Kong's cross harbour rts have gone away w/ dual ops...
It's all because operator can argue over the freq and the crossover time
-
no point.
at bedok int, 25 & 854..... i will wait for 854 even if 25 comes first. even if cannot catch-up with 25, i am still happy waiting for 854 and taking it.
-
haah what im trying to mean is.. there is very little incentive for both operators to improve on their services since they dominate in their respective areas.
only special cases like 25 and 854, and there are only that very few special cases.
somemore 25 and 854 dont ply exactly the same route too..
-
no point... Singapore people is a first-come-first-take one...
like just now at opposite Tampines SAFRA bus stop....
one service 18 Strider came in... the BC tried to open the doors to no avail... passengers all look in as to what has happened.. but the doors couldnt open... then came one service 8 behind, everyone went to the back.
so consider that service 18 opened its doors, all passengers would take the first bus.
what i am trying to say is.... if two buses come and ply same route, majority maybe >70% will take the first bus and it wouldnt be half-half. that's not utilising available resources properly. -
No point. SMRT can't even take care of its own bus services well. Now even worse, its MRT also cmi. Better that they do something to improve on themselves first.
SBST bus services generally well managed but a few services can be improved. I suggest that they get more double deckers to improve on them.
Anyway, services like 190 will see a demand drop once DTL opens in future. Therefore in future, there is no need for so many buses for 190 and till that point of time, SMRT can manage the service better with a smaller fleet.
-
Originally posted by SBS 1000U:
No point. SMRT can't even take care of its own bus services well. Now even worse, its MRT also cmi. Better that they do something to improve on themselves first.
SBST bus services generally well managed but a few services can be improved. I suggest that they get more double deckers to improve on them.
Anyway, services like 190 will see a demand drop once DTL opens in future. Therefore in future, there is no need for so many buses for 190 and till that point of time, SMRT can manage the service better with a smaller fleet.
I think SMRT shoud instead have more buses to their fleet instead of having a smaller fleet on the whole, unless you were referring to 190's fleet getting smaller. If they have more buses, they can be more equipped to do any train bridging services too if the train breaks down somwhere sometime again. Just look at how SBST can do the bus bridging by using its buses alone, but yet SMRT along NSL with roughly the same number of MRT stations had to make do with both its own buses & some other kind private bus operators who were willing to lease their buses out. It just kinda shows that when you have a larger fleet, it prepares better for any emergency, especially since they operate the 2 main MRT lines & also the Bukit Panjang LRT.
-
Originally posted by SBST163:
One reader suggests that SBS Transit and SMRT to ply the same routes to create competition between both companies so that both companies will be motivated to provide better services. What you guys think. I'm thinking that this might really create very good outcome.
How does it work?
For example,
Service 190: Choa Chu Kang - New Bridge Road
This bus service requires 36 buses
SBS Transit to provide 18 buses (single decks + double decks)
SMRT to provide 18 buses(single decks + bendies)
The time interval for buses will be such that
10am - SBS Transit
10.05am - SMRT
10.11am - SBS Transit
10.17am - SMRTetc etc etc
Why will this work?
I feel that with both operators working on the same route, commuters can actually choose to take SBS/SMRT depending on which they prefer, if they are rushing for time, they can just take any bus. But if they are not rushing for time, they can actually choose to take whichever operator which provides better service, it's at most a 2 bus wait for the same operator bus to come.Current situation:
SBS Transit and SMRT both have their own areas to cover.
SBS Transit has places like Ang Mo Kio, Toa Payoh, Punggol, Sengkang, Bedok and alot of eastern regions
SMRT has places like Choa Chu Kang, Woodlands, Yishun and most of the western parts in Singapore.There is very little incentive for them to provide better services because no matter what, people in these areas have to board their buses anyway! So.. i feel this this solution might work. What you guys think?
Next, alternative to ease train congestions:
SBS Transit and SMRT to introduce routes that duplicates the train lines! It is definitely not a good idea to cut bus services just because a train line is opened and so. Because currently, with reduced frequencies and all, trains are still very packed and people still cant get in. It is not a problem with frequency already, i believe the capacity of trains have reached to a max. So i suggest both bus operators to introduce routes that duplicates the train lines so that passengers who do not wish to squeeze in trains or wait for a few trains before they can actually get in have another alternative - buses.
of course, this idea is subjected to the availability of buses..
What you guys think?
You also need to think about how will they allocate buses like. It's not easy running a route that is dual operated. The starters will have a hard time figuring which bus is on which slot and stuff. Also, why would commuters would want to choose if they want to board a SMRT or SBS bus on a particular route? Most commuters i know will just take the bus, regardless of operator. As long they get to their desired destination, that is what matters.
-
such a system, in the long run, all stakeholders suffer..
this type of model is not viable at all
to the operators, they are not getting maximum returns/revenue for every dollar of capital. extra empty capacity in one operator, and overcrowding in another
also, commuters are indifferent.. meaning, they take buses because it is a necessity. they only want to get to their destination in a reasonable time and manner.
what operator or how old the bus is, dont matter.
taking buses is not like choosing pepsi or coca-cola you know
its more like cooking gas from piped gas or cylinder gas -
No point. The 2 operators should not ply completely the same route. But I'd prefer the 2 operators plying max 80% duplication of the route for often overcrowded bus services as a form of competition.
-
I mentioned in another thread before, but i guess what we should have is more competition between buses and trains, not within buses itself.
Having good alternate bus routes running to compete with trains (in terms of both Cost and Time) is a good way to move more people to taking buses. Some good existing examples are like 97, 857, and express services like 502 506 etc if only the fares are cheaper.
By having more of such services, hopefully reliency on trains will drop and so lesser people will act as if the world is ending when train services is down and they cant go anywhere.
However, this idea is a problem because both our operators are multi modal. No way they will spend a bunch of money to improve with their bus operations just to attack their own train operations. This will become a truer fact when sbst operaters the dtl in years to come.
So it seems we are stuck. Unless some 3rd bus co comes up to the compeition...
-
it is usually socially beneficial for competition to be present in a market. under competition, firms are forced offer their services (or goods) at a more competitive price, which translates to consumers paying a price near the cost of production of the service.
having competition between bus operators will no doubt force the operators to review on the quality of their services (which may include pricing of fares, waiting time, peak periods etc.). in order to gain a greater share of the market, they will definitely have to invest resources on research and development, and perhaps advertisement.
however, in the case of Singapore, having competition probably will not be feasible, and might end up bringing more harm to society, rather than improving lives for us.
imagine: bus operators do end up vying for businesses on the same routes. the frequency of buses will probably increase. but what will come after that?
first of all, air pollution will follow. with the increase in vehicles on the road (and i'm guessing that heavy vehicles such as buses will produce more harmful gas than the usual 4 wheel drives), the quality of air will deteriorate, bringing harm to the masses' health. more resources may be required to solve the air pollution problem.
secondly, traffic congestions may arise from it. right now, bus commuters enjoy bus lanes during peak hours, which allow public transport to be more efficient. with competition, bus departure timings may very well overlap, causing congestion in the bus lanes. this is especially possible during peak hours, when traffic is slow and is difficult to estimate.
thirdly, the extra resources (take for example, petrol) used on the overlapping bus services are not utilised efficiently. in an ideal case, each litre of petrol fuels a fully (and comfortably) filled bus of commuters to travel the maximum distance the litre of petrol allows it to. for example, 10 litres of petrol is required for a bus of 40 commuters to travel 10km. with 2 overlapping bus services, these 40 commuters may be split into 2 buses (each bus carries 20 commuters), and now 20 litres of petrol is required for the 2 buses of a total of 40 commuters to travel the same 10km.
also, consider the methods of competition. if resources were spent on improving the quality of commuting (example: seats that are more comfortable, safer and sturdier buses etc.), then perhaps society can benefit from this competition. however, should bus operators decide to advertise excessively, instead of improving their services (which is very common in many forms of market), society will not benefit from it. instead, resources are, again, inefficiently spent on excessive advertisements to shape the preferences of commuters.
another point to take note is how small our country is for there to be competition between bus operators. just take for example, the period when there were Mediacorp and Mediaworks operating at the same time. operators suffered and (i'm guessing) were not able to sustain. the public transport market may be different from the media industry, but similarities can be drawn.
in my opinion, it is not so much about competition that is lacking in the public transport industry in Singapore. it is the direction set by the management: they seem to have lost focus on providing an efficient safe, and comfortable transport to the masses in Singapore, and (i hope i'm wrong), have chosen to focus on the benefits of their shareholder; which brings me to my disagreement with having privatised companies run the public transport system. the operators should never be like other companies, seeking to maximise profits.
but o wells, if you know who are among the stakeholders, you'll come to understand why all these shit are happening.
anyway, it is great to see someone bothering to come up with solutions to solve this problem, rather than complaining about it over facebook and twitter, which serves no purpose at all.
great job =)
-
It will not work...
Just take a look at what is happening to HK cross-harbour services.
How do they work ?
Lets say example for svc 190.
New Bridge Rd Terminal :
0530hrs - 0700hrs : SBST fleet
0701hrs - 0930hrs : SMRT fleet
0931hrs - 1100hrs : SBST fleet
What happens is that under normal traffic conditions, this looks like a very very good plan to work on. But what happens if there is adverse traffic conditions on the road ? Let say there is a serious accident that happened along PIE and that all buses coming from CCK are stuck and are behind schedule for 1hr ?
The all SBS bus that arrives at New Bridge Terminal will then be asked to go off service towards CCK since its not the SBS Slot. While there are zero SMRT buses that will be departing from New Bridge Rd Terminal due to fact that they are all stuck at PIE.
With this kinda arrangement, both sides will just ask their bus services to go halfway or off service due to the fact that when the buses arrive at the terminal, its not the slot that belongs to them. Why shld i help my rival ???
Go to HK and this is what u experience for the cross harbour services with codeshare services. -
Is the threadstarter suggesting a scheme similar to what the Perth Circle Route currently has? I know all three operators (from three different depots) are responsible for that one.
-
Originally posted by sinicker:
no point.
at bedok int, 25 & 854..... i will wait for 854 even if 25 comes first. even if cannot catch-up with 25, i am still happy waiting for 854 and taking it.
Are you implying 854 has better or more exotic-looking buses than 25? -
Originally posted by SBS 1000U:
No point. SMRT can't even take care of its own bus services well. Now even worse, its MRT also cmi. Better that they do something to improve on themselves first.
SBST bus services generally well managed but a few services can be improved. I suggest that they get more double deckers to improve on them.
Anyway, services like 190 will see a demand drop once DTL opens in future. Therefore in future, there is no need for so many buses for 190 and till that point of time, SMRT can manage the service better with a smaller fleet.
DTL? That one could also render BPLRT (operated by SMRT Corp) a white elephant.
-
It's true, we need more competition MRT v. buses, not bus v. bus.
What SBST can do is run buses to compete with the EWL and NSL.
-
Originally posted by sBs_boy:
It will not work...
Just take a look at what is happening to HK cross-harbour services.
How do they work ?
Lets say example for svc 190.
New Bridge Rd Terminal :
0530hrs - 0700hrs : SBST fleet
0701hrs - 0930hrs : SMRT fleet
0931hrs - 1100hrs : SBST fleet
What happens is that under normal traffic conditions, this looks like a very very good plan to work on. But what happens if there is adverse traffic conditions on the road ? Let say there is a serious accident that happened along PIE and that all buses coming from CCK are stuck and are behind schedule for 1hr ?
The all SBS bus that arrives at New Bridge Terminal will then be asked to go off service towards CCK since its not the SBS Slot. While there are zero SMRT buses that will be departing from New Bridge Rd Terminal due to fact that they are all stuck at PIE.
With this kinda arrangement, both sides will just ask their bus services to go halfway or off service due to the fact that when the buses arrive at the terminal, its not the slot that belongs to them. Why shld i help my rival ???
Go to HK and this is what u experience for the cross harbour services with codeshare services.Hmmm seems confusing what you are writing...
i have taken 112,114 countless points but i dun get your drift...
i waited at the bus stop[last bus stop at Causeway Bay, below bridge] before it uses XHT, KMB, NWFB, NWFB, NWFB, KMB, NWFB, obvious tt route belongs to NWFB so more buses pump to the service but at no time was there a particular time slot in which KMB/NWFB operate 112.
Please elaborate on your point -
I think if you wanna have codesharing, you both run the route simultaneously. But honestly, it's better to have trunk duplication rather than full duplication (meaning to say you only share route on the main route part).
But remember HK has a different system, based on small terminals rather than big interchanges.