SMRT MAN NG363F A24 discussions
-
Wished that there are more bendies to compare with.
-
Originally posted by TIB868X:
some comments on the a24s in general:
horrible suspension, it feels like your ass is dropped onto the road whenever the bus goes over a hump.
the bus is really stiff as a whole, especially the joint. the bus doesn't bounce naturally like O405Gs.
the acceleration leaves much to be desired too. 360hp and 1800nm of nothing if the tuning is terrible. the voith transmission that is fitted does not help it either. the o405gs still have superior acceleration and comfort as a whole.
side note: i rode some a24 that was on 811 just now and the telematics was beeping all the way and the symbol for swaying as flickering
Aiya...
Also not like its not gonna end up on trunks...
For max 10+ mins of journey, want so comfortable ride for what... Many a time you're gonna end up standing anyway
And need so powerful torque and acceleration on small streets and lanes for what... The bus would prob hit a light/stop before it hits 40kmh if it has good acceleration anyways
Bendies need not be so well performing... Its just to fulfill its role as a mass transporter in the heartlands... For routes that hit the express, leave them to the DDs and A22s...
-
i was merely stating general observations and you seem extremely unhappy with them. you miss the forest for the trees
1. I didn't know services with A24s like 180, 190 and 854 aren't trunks
2. no one's asking for the comfort of a luxury limousine. maybe you'd like to ride home a bus with non-existent shock absorbers next time?
3. you fail to understand how important acceleration is in start-stop conditions for citybus operations, ESPECIALLY important for feeders and intra-towns, more so than trunks. you are clueless about the ramifications of poorly performing buses. absolutely clueless.
4. again, see point 3. your standards are so low bendy buses are only meant to simply transport people in the heartlands. let's just have bendy buses with 500nm of torque and without air conditioning, alright? you dont give consideration to other factors such as comfort, efficiency and economics, which are reliant on the bus' characteristics. no surprise citaros on 811 are regularly overtaken by a22s and always fail to keep up with the chedule, as a result of chronic poor performance.. and i didn't compare it to DDs and A22s, you did.
-
Originally posted by TIB868X:
i was merely stating general observations and you seem extremely unhappy with them. you miss the forest for the trees
1. I didn't know services with A24s like 180, 190 and 854 aren't trunks
2. no one's asking for the comfort of a luxury limousine. maybe you'd like to ride home a bus with non-existent shock absorbers next time?
3. you fail to understand how important acceleration is in start-stop conditions for citybus operations, ESPECIALLY important for feeders and intra-towns, more so than trunks. you are clueless about the ramifications of poorly performing buses. absolutely clueless.
4. again, see point 3. your standards are so low bendy buses are only meant to simply transport people in the heartlands. let's just have bendy buses with 500nm of torque and without air conditioning, alright? you dont give consideration to other factors such as comfort, efficiency and economics, which are reliant on the bus' characteristics. no surprise citaros on 811 are regularly overtaken by a22s and always fail to keep up with the chedule, as a result of chronic poor performance.. and i didn't compare it to DDs and A22s, you did.
190 is meant for trial purposes.
180 and 184 always bendy bus fleet only (O405G & MAN A24), no problems with the traffic, crowding or accident record, it will never be DD.
854 got no choice for the Ang Mo Kio Depot, because that depot cannot use DD until August 2015. -
Originally posted by TPS Timothy Mok:
190 is meant for trial purposes.
180 and 184 always bendy bus fleet only (O405G & MAN A24), no problems with the traffic, crowding or accident record, it will never be DD.
854 got no choice for the Ang Mo Kio Depot, because that depot cannot use DD until August 2015.they're still doing the above services that i have stated regularly. get out of your well. my point was that some of them still ended up on trunks, contrary to what 'SMB128B' claimed.
-
Originally posted by Bussyboy50:
do you mean like early retirement?
HAHA yeaps. I mean, since they're like so afraid of a Bendy getting stuck in the CGA PTBs by crashing into something... I guess it's far less costly (in terms of future revenue) if you crash a soon-to-dereg 904A compared to a Habit or even a A24 Bendy..
-
Relax,Its just a new bus.Driver feedbacks are essential to the mechanics to fine tuned them later.
-
Originally posted by TPS Timothy Mok:
190 is meant for trial purposes.
180 and 184 always bendy bus fleet only (O405G & MAN A24), no problems with the traffic, crowding or accident record, it will never be DD.
854 got no choice for the Ang Mo Kio Depot, because that depot cannot use DD until August 2015.Never be DD?!
Oh please....180 and 184 is in need of DD more than Bendy...where 80% of the passengers travel long distance...
-
Originally posted by TIB429E:
Never be DD?!
Oh please....180 and 184 is in need of DD more than Bendy...where 80% of the passengers travel long distance...
Yes,I agreed.Furthermore SMRT only buy a few bendy buses only..So boh bian trunk svc have to use DDs
-
sooner or later 95% of SMRT bus routes all will use DDs
only services like 925 927 950 will never use DD.
-
Originally posted by Bussyboy50:
sooner or later 95% of SMRT bus routes all will use DDs
only services like 925 927 950 will never use DD.
Dont think so,Unless its SBST which aims for 75% DDs and 25% SDs..SMRT ratio is 60% DDs and 25% SDs while 15% is Bendy
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Dont think so,Unless its SBST which aims for 75% DDs and 25% SDs..SMRT ratio is 60% DDs and 25% SDs while 15% is Bendy
Yeah, but next time i think it's LTA decide what buses for what area/package, so hope can distribute DDs more evenly. (bendies still a question though)
-
The MAN NG 363 is definitely derated from its paper specifications. One reason is because the gearbox can only safely transmit up to 1600Nm of torque for prolonged periods, and even then only in 3rd and 4th gears only, so right off the bat, the full 1800Nm is not in use. In lower gears, the maximum permitted input torque is reduced even further, particularly in 1st to control traction. You'll probably find that the in-use peak torque has been electronically reduced to 1400-1500Nm. Furthermore, the turntable controller restricts the torque output of the engine if the joint is not in the straight-ahead position, depending on angle of articulation.
-
no new bendy on 969 or 67 perm. 854 only smrt service with new bendy in east.
-
I would love to see 854 with DDs/SDs only.The bendy buses can deployed for feeder or even 860.
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
I would love to see 854 with DDs/SDs only.The bendy buses can deployed for feeder or even 860.
I think should go to all feeders/intra-towns... get more DDs to 854.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
I think should go to all feeders/intra-towns... get more DDs to 854.
Yes sir,Time to kick off those bendy from mid to long haul trunk svc.
IMHO,Service that should only operate with SD/DD will be 61,67,106,167,169
171,172,176,180,184,187,188,189,190,700,851,854,855,856,857,960,961,963
965,966,969,972,980 & 985
Svc that need SD/DD/BD will be 859,860,964 & 983.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
I think should go to all feeders/intra-towns... get more DDs to 854.
Not sure if this is a good idea. I think the depot/ Yishun interchange is still trying to determine if replacing a portion of the bendy/rigid fleet with DDs is a good thing?
Personally, I'm not convinced if DDs are best suited for plying the route of 854, given that throughout most of the day, this service is usuallly filled with many passengers (which means the bus will be stopping to pick/disembark commuters at almost every bus stop.)
It is also undeniable, that the time taken for a DD to disembark passengers would be slightly longer as compared to a rigid/bendy, as the bus captain has to ensure passengers at the upper level are clear before he can move off.
Given the high arrival frequency of the service, deploying DDs on 854 will only serve to lengthen the waiting time for passengers, as DDs often end up behind schedule, being overtaken by the buses behind due to the time it takes to pick/disembark passengers.
Personally, on two occasions, I hopped onto an 854 DD from Yishun interchange to Bedok to test its efficiency during a peak period. Turns out, despite the bus driver speeding up, the time taken for the DD to move off from one bus stop to another is agonizingly slow. And of course unsurprisingly, it wasn't just overtaken by one bus.
It was actually overtaken by 2 rigids, and 1 habit bendy from behind. By the time the DD i was in arrived at Eunos, opposite the road at the bus-stop, the 854 that went off before this DD from Yishun is already there at the other side. That was how much behind schedule the DD is.
-
Originally posted by Georgiex:
Not sure if this is a good idea. I think the depot/ Yishun interchange is still trying to determine if replacing a portion of the bendy/rigid fleet with DDs is a good thing?
Personally, I'm not convinced if DDs are best suited for plying the route of 854, given that throughout most of the day, this service is usuallly filled with many passengers (which means the bus will be stopping to pick/disembark commuters at almost every bus stop.)
It is also undeniable, that the time taken for a DD to disembark passengers would be slightly longer as compared to a rigid/bendy, as the bus captain has to ensure passengers at the upper level are clear before he can move off.
Given the high arrival frequency of the service, deploying DDs on 854 will only serve to lengthen the waiting time for passengers, as DDs often end up behind schedule, being overtaken by the buses behind due to the time it takes to pick/disembark passengers.
Personally, on two occasions, I hopped onto an 854 DD from Yishun interchange to Bedok to test its efficiency during a peak period. Turns out, despite the bus driver speeding up, the time taken for the DD to move off from one bus stop to another is agonizingly slow. And of course unsurprisingly, it wasn't just overtaken by one bus.
It was actually overtaken by 2 rigids, and 1 habit bendy from behind. By the time the DD i was in arrived at Eunos, opposite the road at the bus-stop, the 854 that went off before this DD from Yishun is already there at the other side. That was how much behind schedule the DD is.
What about 25? And the Express variant 854E?
SMRT had a similarly miserable time when they operated a mixture of bendy buses and double-deck buses on 963. Once 963 fully transitioned to double-deck buses, the headway improved significantly.
-
Originally posted by sgbuses:
What about 25? And the Express variant 854E?
SMRT had a similarly miserable time when they operated a mixture of bendy buses and double-deck buses on 963. Once 963 fully transitioned to double-deck buses, the headway improved significantly.
Headway improved significantly because buses are now taking the same but longer time to board. Its simple, when you have bendies loading, unloading and departing faster than double decks, there would be an uneven frequency when there is a mixed fleet. Also the timetable may had been adjusted to take into account the dwelling times of the double decks.
-
Originally posted by Georgiex:
Not sure if this is a good idea. I think the depot/ Yishun interchange is still trying to determine if replacing a portion of the bendy/rigid fleet with DDs is a good thing?
Personally, I'm not convinced if DDs are best suited for plying the route of 854, given that throughout most of the day, this service is usuallly filled with many passengers (which means the bus will be stopping to pick/disembark commuters at almost every bus stop.)
It is also undeniable, that the time taken for a DD to disembark passengers would be slightly longer as compared to a rigid/bendy, as the bus captain has to ensure passengers at the upper level are clear before he can move off.
Given the high arrival frequency of the service, deploying DDs on 854 will only serve to lengthen the waiting time for passengers, as DDs often end up behind schedule, being overtaken by the buses behind due to the time it takes to pick/disembark passengers.
Personally, on two occasions, I hopped onto an 854 DD from Yishun interchange to Bedok to test its efficiency during a peak period. Turns out, despite the bus driver speeding up, the time taken for the DD to move off from one bus stop to another is agonizingly slow. And of course unsurprisingly, it wasn't just overtaken by one bus.
It was actually overtaken by 2 rigids, and 1 habit bendy from behind. By the time the DD i was in arrived at Eunos, opposite the road at the bus-stop, the 854 that went off before this DD from Yishun is already there at the other side. That was how much behind schedule the DD is.
Sorry to say... but get yourself back to "reality"... while these bendies last it is okay... in future you will see them only on feeders... and after that who knows... maybe Singapore may not have any bendies anymore... the thought of that makes me sad... but it is the "reality"... and everything you mentioned... I don't know how many times it has been debated DD v/s Bendy.. both have their pros and cons... but at the end DDs are a superior bus model for Singapore.
-
Originally posted by SBS351M:
Headway improved significantly because buses are now taking the same but longer time to board. Its simple, when you have bendies loading, unloading and departing faster than double decks, there would be an uneven frequency when there is a mixed fleet. Also the timetable may had been adjusted to take into account the dwelling times of the double decks.
Rubbish. Best example is sv 25 and sv 854 who if both leave at same time from Bedok Interchange will not have more than 2 min difference until when they depart at YCK Road junction. Many times it is just a myth... because boarding time is the same... and bendies usually have to wait for the bus in front to go to call at the bus stop as it cannot fit its entire body... So most of the claims are not practical... they are good in theory!!
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Sorry to say... but get yourself back to "reality"... while these bendies last it is okay... in future you will see them only on feeders... and after that who knows... maybe Singapore may not have any bendies anymore... the thought of that makes me sad... but it is the "reality"... and everything you mentioned... I don't know how many times it has been debated DD v/s Bendy.. both have their pros and cons... but at the end DDs are a superior bus model for Singapore.
SMRT has an oversupply of bendy buses. They have such a large non-WAB bendy bus fleet, it brings them a lot of grief trying to meet the WAB quota on WAB feeder routes. IMO the order for MAN A24s is meant to ease that quota, but in the process the O405Gs are displaced and somehow ended up on long-haul trunk routes.
-
SD/rigids < Bendies < DDs
for most svcs.
969 case
at Tampines Interchange, it is fully seated but few standees. be it bendies or DDs.
DDs wins on number of seat available.
at bus stop opp KTB stn, rigid would be filled to the brim.
67
few pax on the upper deck is due to it not being a max loading stop. (TAM)
SD < Bendies = DDs
for feeders/intratown (except for 806/901/902)
804 case was bad enough to warrant full fleet bendies, but with just 40 units of A24s and it being a WAB, it would need some A95s to supplement.
likewise for 911/E. it is also a WAB svc and experience high loading. A22s will be packed.
SD < DD < Bendies
for 184, 902
at this moment only the above svcs where bendies fare well.
902 case was pax not moving up. it acts as a shuttle service with a very high frequency.
184 is a trunk that works as a shuttle service
-
no A24s under BSEP = LTA has no plans for bendies