Originally posted by array88:
Hope LTA can buy enough A24s to make 858 majority A24 or full A24 fleet...
Dont ask for more,Another 30 units will be enough if the concept bus is sucessful.At least excess A24 can be used for super short distance feeders with high loadings
Originally posted by SMB145B:Rego wrong or?
What is the A24 that I saw going off service?
Didn't I mentioned that SMB8040S doesn't exist and it'll never be registered at all?
Originally posted by carbikebus:Dont ask for more,Another 30 units will be enough if the concept bus is sucessful.At least excess A24 can be used for super short distance feeders with high loadings
You mean like 285? i doubt CLE has the correct infrastructure for bendies.
Originally posted by iveco:You mean like 285? i doubt CLE has the correct infrastructure for bendies.
Why 285 of all bus routes?
Originally posted by iveco:You mean like 285? i doubt CLE has the correct infrastructure for bendies.
I think he means more like 284, 902, 225 etc where pax only takes for 1 or 2 bus stops. 285 is comparably still okay as those at Pandan Loop area take 285 for a bit longer.
Although it's true that many SBST interchanges do not have infrastructure for bendies, thus mass deploying bendies on feeders there can be
If concept bus is going to be 3 door DD 12.8m just for feeder services, I will not support the idea. If LTA is so against Bendy, just deploy 12m DD and hope for the best.
First of all feeder services need buses that can maneuvre through narrower roads. The bendys are definitely more flexible than 12m DDs and 12.8m DDs are just going to be worse. Second, people's mindset is something you cant change. If you put DD on feeders, people will just fill lower decks first and then the rest will start standing and play the waiting game for someone else to go up. End up upper deck will be not even half full. 12.8m 3 Door DD is going to make it worse because lower deck floor areas will be smaller than 12m DD. SO if no bendy, still 12m DD better.
Third, 3 door bendy is quite defined where rear 2 doors are for alighting only. but in 3 door DD, people who actually go up may use either of the 2 staircases and alighting wise is going to be same too. Hence passenger flow, even with 3 doors is going to be messy and not going to be good like a bendy. For feeders with high passenger activity, 3 door DD will hence not solve the problem of high dwell times at busstops.
Whats the issue with bendy for feeders? They mostly ply non congested roads that have 1-3 services only at 70-80% of route. Also if parking area is the problem, depots can be multi-storied to utilise land area better. For interchanges, can just minimise lay over time in interchange by adopting jump bus or even operate routes directly from depots.
Conclusion: If want to use DDs, bus route structures got to change. If you want adopt london/HK way of DD/SD only, routes have to be changed too. Bus routes should not be catered to bring passengers to MRT stations mostly but instead serve as comeptitive and good alternatives for non-transfer direct travel. Then DDs will work better.
time for 11.3m DDs then.
Originally posted by randomguy10:If concept bus is going to be 3 door DD 12.8m just for feeder services, I will not support the idea. If LTA is so against Bendy, just deploy 12m DD and hope for the best.
First of all feeder services need buses that can maneuvre through narrower roads. The bendys are definitely more flexible than 12m DDs and 12.8m DDs are just going to be worse. Second, people's mindset is something you cant change. If you put DD on feeders, people will just fill lower decks first and then the rest will start standing and play the waiting game for someone else to go up. End up upper deck will be not even half full. 12.8m 3 Door DD is going to make it worse because lower deck floor areas will be smaller than 12m DD. SO if no bendy, still 12m DD better.Third, 3 door bendy is quite defined where rear 2 doors are for alighting only. but in 3 door DD, people who actually go up may use either of the 2 staircases and alighting wise is going to be same too. Hence passenger flow, even with 3 doors is going to be messy and not going to be good like a bendy. For feeders with high passenger activity, 3 door DD will hence not solve the problem of high dwell times at busstops.
Whats the issue with bendy for feeders? They mostly ply non congested roads that have 1-3 services only at 70-80% of route. Also if parking area is the problem, depots can be multi-storied to utilise land area better. For interchanges, can just minimise lay over time in interchange by adopting jump bus or even operate routes directly from depots.
Conclusion: If want to use DDs, bus route structures got to change. If you want adopt london/HK way of DD/SD only, routes have to be changed too. Bus routes should not be catered to bring passengers to MRT stations mostly but instead serve as comeptitive and good alternatives for non-transfer direct travel. Then DDs will work better.
I wrote about this at length previously. One way is to change the layover point of the articulated buses to be at the looping point, or have split bus stops as per Bukit Panjang MRT/LRT Station's current arrangements.
However, I suspect neither option will be popular with commuters.
The third door and third staircase are designed around passenger's mentality. If they bothered to move to the rear or upper deck more (especially for feeder routes), this would not have been necessary in the first place.
Originally posted by randomguy10:If concept bus is going to be 3 door DD 12.8m just for feeder services, I will not support the idea. If LTA is so against Bendy, just deploy 12m DD and hope for the best.
First of all feeder services need buses that can maneuvre through narrower roads. The bendys are definitely more flexible than 12m DDs and 12.8m DDs are just going to be worse. Second, people's mindset is something you cant change. If you put DD on feeders, people will just fill lower decks first and then the rest will start standing and play the waiting game for someone else to go up. End up upper deck will be not even half full. 12.8m 3 Door DD is going to make it worse because lower deck floor areas will be smaller than 12m DD. SO if no bendy, still 12m DD better.Third, 3 door bendy is quite defined where rear 2 doors are for alighting only. but in 3 door DD, people who actually go up may use either of the 2 staircases and alighting wise is going to be same too. Hence passenger flow, even with 3 doors is going to be messy and not going to be good like a bendy. For feeders with high passenger activity, 3 door DD will hence not solve the problem of high dwell times at busstops.
Whats the issue with bendy for feeders? They mostly ply non congested roads that have 1-3 services only at 70-80% of route. Also if parking area is the problem, depots can be multi-storied to utilise land area better. For interchanges, can just minimise lay over time in interchange by adopting jump bus or even operate routes directly from depots.
Conclusion: If want to use DDs, bus route structures got to change. If you want adopt london/HK way of DD/SD only, routes have to be changed too. Bus routes should not be catered to bring passengers to MRT stations mostly but instead serve as comeptitive and good alternatives for non-transfer direct travel. Then DDs will work better.
If you worry about passenger flow, you can refer to the structure of the trams in HK.
Generally it's quite straightforward. Passengers will only go in one direction. Thats because there isnt an incentive to go in the other. The set of stairs and doors (adjacent to each other) for entry is located at one end. The other set for exit at the other.
In Singapore, passengers who have to exit have to go against the tide from the seats at the back to the exit door in the middle. Essentially the structure in SG is [entrance] - [exit] - [seats], which can prove catastrophic. Made worse with DDs, as they have an additional upper deck to be taken care of by a single narrow stairway.
But in the mentioned concept varient, the structure is [entrance] - [seats] - [exit], which meant passengers will be spread even throughout — using the very own minsets of these passengers.
As for the middle door the solution is ridiculously simple — just make it an exit door like a bendy! Just program the ez link card readers to make it such. But I do feel, only the rear door should be made exit-only, as the middle door, having no stairs connected to it, serves as a useful entry/exit door for lower deck without having to share with upper deck.
I think it is absurd you will denounce three-door-dual-stair for 12m DD; 12m DD should just never show up in feeders and intratowns lah. It just ill performs in all aspects.
Originally posted by randomguy10:If concept bus is going to be 3 door DD 12.8m just for feeder services, I will not support the idea. If LTA is so against Bendy, just deploy 12m DD and hope for the best.
First of all feeder services need buses that can maneuvre through narrower roads. The bendys are definitely more flexible than 12m DDs and 12.8m DDs are just going to be worse. Second, people's mindset is something you cant change. If you put DD on feeders, people will just fill lower decks first and then the rest will start standing and play the waiting game for someone else to go up. End up upper deck will be not even half full. 12.8m 3 Door DD is going to make it worse because lower deck floor areas will be smaller than 12m DD. SO if no bendy, still 12m DD better.Third, 3 door bendy is quite defined where rear 2 doors are for alighting only. but in 3 door DD, people who actually go up may use either of the 2 staircases and alighting wise is going to be same too. Hence passenger flow, even with 3 doors is going to be messy and not going to be good like a bendy. For feeders with high passenger activity, 3 door DD will hence not solve the problem of high dwell times at busstops.
Whats the issue with bendy for feeders? They mostly ply non congested roads that have 1-3 services only at 70-80% of route. Also if parking area is the problem, depots can be multi-storied to utilise land area better. For interchanges, can just minimise lay over time in interchange by adopting jump bus or even operate routes directly from depots.
Conclusion: If want to use DDs, bus route structures got to change. If you want adopt london/HK way of DD/SD only, routes have to be changed too. Bus routes should not be catered to bring passengers to MRT stations mostly but instead serve as comeptitive and good alternatives for non-transfer direct travel. Then DDs will work better.
Outdated thinking.
Look what's LTA going to plan for feeder services in future, further improving the frequencies and also add more trunks along housing Estates. Bendy buses are basically unnecessary in the future when they add more buses to improve the bus services.
Basically they are trying to operate feeder services like SBST with better frequencies and new services within new towns linking MRT stations and other places. And your observations of DDs is exaggerated. Basically they work well in feeders in Tampines, Bedok, Boon Lay, Jurong East etc. And the roads they ply in these Estates are even more narrow than those in Woodlands and Yishun. However it looks like they are using more single Deckers to improve the frequencies of feeders instead, which is more space efficient and flexible for the GCM model and it looks to be set for the future of feeder services.
Originally posted by vicamour:Outdated thinking.
Look what's LTA going to plan for feeder services in future, further improving the frequencies and also add more trunks along housing Estates. Bendy buses are basically unnecessary in the future when they add more buses to improve the bus services.
Basically they are trying to operate feeder services like SBST with better frequencies and new services within new towns linking MRT stations and other places. And your observations of DDs is exaggerated. Basically they work well in feeders in Tampines, Bedok, Boon Lay, Jurong East etc. And the roads they ply in these Estates are even more narrow than those in Woodlands and Yishun. However it looks like they are using more single Deckers to improve the frequencies of feeders instead, which is more space efficient and flexible for the GCM model and it looks to be set for the future of feeder services.
I rather they had DD over rigids and dont pull more stunts. Rigids for feeders? No thanks.
If ADL built a three doors/dual staircase 12.5m DD for LTA and prove sucessful,Those 40 A24s exclusively for 858 and one more new SMRT svc to airport..Like it or not LTA will encourage pax to move upstairs and what are you going to lose when there is a rear staircase/door as well?
Originally posted by vicamour:Outdated thinking.
Look what's LTA going to plan for feeder services in future, further improving the frequencies and also add more trunks along housing Estates. Bendy buses are basically unnecessary in the future when they add more buses to improve the bus services.
Basically they are trying to operate feeder services like SBST with better frequencies and new services within new towns linking MRT stations and other places. And your observations of DDs is exaggerated. Basically they work well in feeders in Tampines, Bedok, Boon Lay, Jurong East etc. And the roads they ply in these Estates are even more narrow than those in Woodlands and Yishun. However it looks like they are using more single Deckers to improve the frequencies of feeders instead, which is more space efficient and flexible for the GCM model and it looks to be set for the future of feeder services.
Your post sort of explains why there are flame wars in this forum. People adovcating for more single deckers, others complaining that there are too much. Some like DDs, can't stand a single bendy, while others (like me) like bendies but are ok with DDs so long as numbers of DDs and bendies are at an efficient levels. Some want this, some want that. Of course there will be flame wars.
Originally posted by carbikebus:If ADL built a three doors/dual staircase 12.5m DD for LTA and prove sucessful,Those 40 A24s exclusively for 858 and one more new SMRT svc to airport..Like it or not LTA will encourage pax to move upstairs and what are you going to lose when there is a rear staircase/door as well?
LTA can encourage pax to move upstairs, but whether pax want or not is another thing, so the problem remains that pax refuse to move upstairs for short sectors and also the elderly.
Originally posted by vicamour:Outdated thinking.
Look what's LTA going to plan for feeder services in future, further improving the frequencies and also add more trunks along housing Estates. Bendy buses are basically unnecessary in the future when they add more buses to improve the bus services.
Basically they are trying to operate feeder services like SBST with better frequencies and new services within new towns linking MRT stations and other places. And your observations of DDs is exaggerated. Basically they work well in feeders in Tampines, Bedok, Boon Lay, Jurong East etc. And the roads they ply in these Estates are even more narrow than those in Woodlands and Yishun. However it looks like they are using more single Deckers to improve the frequencies of feeders instead, which is more space efficient and flexible for the GCM model and it looks to be set for the future of feeder services.
Ok to your post proper, regarding narrow roads, if you been to the narrow roads in Tampines St 2x/3x where 291 serves, and where during peak hours it is quite difficult for traffic behind the buses to overtake due to traffic on the opposite direction, the deployment of bendy buses would shorten the dwell times at the bus stop, reducing the waiting times for other vehicles waiting behind, and therefore improving the traffic flow. Because when it comes to narrow roads with lesser opportunity to pass, the length of vehicle doesn't matter as much as the dwell time when it comes to improving traffic flow.
It is not outdated to have pro bendy views, in fact a lot more countries in the world have bendy buses for transit applications than double deckers even though a lot of them had tried double deckers before. And most BRT systems use bendy buses over double deckers because they need the efficiency of a bendy bus; it is the closest a bus can match in terms of dwell times to a train. It is in fact, for a lot of cities, the future of transport.
Also, LTA may add buses, but how many buses is enough? Till there is a labour shortage (which there already is)? Till the roads are full of buses, with buses causing jams (see HK)?
I doubt, with such high level of security in Singapore, there won't be DD for airport svc?
Just imagine those passengers whom left their luggage at the lower deck, and went up. Can be an act of terrorism...
Think forward,Even SMRT didnt dare to order beyond 40 units,Why?Why?Sg is a funny jungle la,Once you implement the rule sooner everyone will follow like it or not.If LTA study the feasible of bendy,They have already buy hundreds of them for feeder svc.
Originally posted by carbikebus:Think forward,Even SMRT didnt dare to order beyond 40 units,Why?Why?Sg is a funny jungle la,Once you implement the rule sooner everyone will follow like it or not.If LTA study the feasible of bendy,They have already buy hundreds of them for feeder svc.
And we'd be seeing them deployed on 18, 96, 113, 222 & 285.
Originally posted by SBS351M:Ok to your post proper, regarding narrow roads, if you been to the narrow roads in Tampines St 2x/3x where 291 serves, and where during peak hours it is quite difficult for traffic behind the buses to overtake due to traffic on the opposite direction, the deployment of bendy buses would shorten the dwell times at the bus stop, reducing the waiting times for other vehicles waiting behind, and therefore improving the traffic flow. Because when it comes to narrow roads with lesser opportunity to pass, the length of vehicle doesn't matter as much as the dwell time when it comes to improving traffic flow.
It is not outdated to have pro bendy views, in fact a lot more countries in the world have bendy buses for transit applications than double deckers even though a lot of them had tried double deckers before. And most BRT systems use bendy buses over double deckers because they need the efficiency of a bendy bus; it is the closest a bus can match in terms of dwell times to a train. It is in fact, for a lot of cities, the future of transport.
Also, LTA may add buses, but how many buses is enough? Till there is a labour shortage (which there already is)? Till the roads are full of buses, with buses causing jams (see HK)?
Most major UK and Irish cities, Hong Kong and to some extent Sydney deploy DDs for public transit.
Originally posted by iveco:Most major UK and Irish cities, Hong Kong and to some extent Sydney deploy DDs for public transit.
I don't think you understand the concept of majority and minority. My point stated above was that majority of cities in the world that require high capacity turn to bendy buses.
Originally posted by iveco:Most major UK and Irish cities, Hong Kong and to some extent Sydney deploy DDs for public transit.
This is because the commuting patterns there allow them to do so.
Standard 12m SD is clearly unfeasible in SG for feeders and intratowns. This I've couldn't have repeated enough alr. Its either LTA does something and modify DDs into sth such as 3-door dual-stair, or keep using bendies.
Agreed,With our commuting attitude 12m DDs isnt really up to the job for feeders or super short distance trunk,LTA should introduce under 12.8m 3 doors/dual staircase and make public annoucement to encourage people that the new DDs is better than current buses.
Originally posted by A Bus Observer:Haha, that last part…
Or can the last staircase be used for alighting only? And the first to be boarding?
Can,If only our attitude is like the people of berlin,See how easy passenger boarding/alighting from the 13.7m three door/dual staircase MAN Lion City DD?
Just stick to bendy or SD for feeders/intra-town...
It's difficult to change the habit...take a look at the trials of the MRT queue at various MRT platforms..when it comes to peak hours, everything haywire.
Ideal layout would be...
- SBS Transit's Citaro ~ Wide standing space opposite doors, since more passengers love to crowd around there(the door).
- HK Buses ~ Wheelchair bay next to the door, boarding passengers have more space to "cut" and head for the rear.
- Dual Stairs, BUT side by side. Maybe that could change the direction of flow easily, rather than asking ppl to go all the way behind to alight.