User talk:Themystery

From SgWiki
Revision as of 01:32, 24 August 2019 by SMB315C (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Hi! If I have made any mistakes in any edit, please pardon me for my errors. I am open to any clarification for any matter if required.

SBS8159A

I added the note just in case some smart ass removes 8159A from the perms just because it is the only "perm" not in the duty table.

Thanks. SBS3004X

Service 165

Just to clarify, 8159A indeed has been on HG 165 for the past few weeks. But every day, it's not on an assigned fixed perm slot (ie. every other day, it's replacing some other MIA Sv 165 perm, even if the timings don't change, because they shuffle around the perms)

And 8159A DOES NOT have any assigned slot for HG 165 since Sch Hols ended.

On the other hand, 5225L has a perm slot assigned (sw-411 15A/22P) based on the internal system since Sch Hols ended, which is incidentally, 8159A's previous perm slot.

But looking forward, the fleet should stabilise only from end-Jul onwards.

Since you reverted my edits for the Sv 165 page, I suggest you KIV both 5225L & 8159A's actual duty number & timings for each day you spot them on 165 / away from 165.

Especially for 8159A, because its appearance for Sv 165 doesn't always 100% seem to tally with its perm status.

And then update accordingly / let me know, thanks.

- SBS9631X


Short-Trip Services & SBS Transit Bus Duties

Re: Short-Trip Services

Yes, I had the intention to roll out the new layout for the operating hours table to all operators. Have updated them as of few hours ago. Do edit if you have seen any errors. Thank you for reminding me as well.

Re: SBS Transit Bus Duties

Based on my knowledge, SBS Transit does not have a fixed duty arrangement according to their block number. Some services have their E shift duties positioned before the S shift duties, and vice versa for the other services as what you have mentioned for Services 63 & 165. I feel that it would be more appropriate to display them by the APSET format, instead of APEST format. However we will keep the duty arrangement in view for now.