User talk:BOG

Non WAB SG6219K

Hi BOG,

If you want to know what I mean by SG6219K being non WAB, you can check bus timing apps. It gets to Toa Payoh Int around 1045 hours over the past few days. I believe it is a problem with LTA datamall but as I saw the driver deploy the ramp for a pmd a few days ago. I do have photos of the “non WAB” but I wont share it for privacy reasons.

Edit: It’s on 88 now by the way reaching Pasir Ris at about 4pm. It’s a 88 perm so should easily be able to track it with the non-WAB status. LTA Datamall has been a bit broken currently as another example is bendy buses being deployed on TTS 41 for the past 3 days.

Regards, LTA Bus Irrationalisation

Re: I was not able to track the registration number. It just so happened that I saw the non WAB sign at bus arrival display at an mrt station. The bus is definitely 6219K as there is no othe bus. On my transport.sg, all buses will show the wheelchair sign except non WAB buses, which 6219K supposedly is.

Re:BRBP Bus schedules

Hi BOG,

This is 23ispolo. Thank you for your message to me earlier.

I am not fully sure what you mean by "duty table", but I am assuming that you are referring to deployment roster(s) for Service 31 (and other services).

If that is so, I actually have not personally seen such a duty table for service deployments for SBST. My edits on SgWiki are usually based on personal observations or information online (e.g. FB), and thus not based on roster data. I do not presently have access to such rosters, whether for Service 31 or even Service 88. The reason for my comment on my latest Service 31 edit was because other editors, including the one who originally created the duty allocation table (on that SgWiki page), have not regularly edited the duty information for Service 31 buses, besides myself occasionally.

That said, I ensure that my edits are reliable (most of the time) based on close observations for periods of time, spontaneous observations, as well as verifying other people's information with my own observations. That said, I have been impulsive and thus wrong at times, and am working to be a better and more reliable editor.

If you have other questions for me, feel free to message me again. Thank you.

Regards,
23ispolo

88 & BRBP

Hi Bog,

Seems like all BRBP services should be under HGDEP though they still park at BRBP. Do check on sv88 what's the two alphabets on the duty block number on the BC screen if you can (ie. 88-xx-123)

sv88 bus spotting

Hi,

Since you seem so passionate on updating sv88's fleet, you mind putting your observations here: https://sgwiki.com/wiki/SgWiki:Bus_Spotting/17_February_2025

Sample:

Registration Plate	Bus Service & Time	Spotter
SG0000M	88 @ 05:30	User: BOG
SG0001K	88 @ 06:00

88 duty sheet

Hi, I've read that you suggested seperating BRBP services back. Before that, if you have the chance look an any 88 duty sheet and see if the depot says "brbp" or "hgd"

Re:

Hi,

Thank you for your message and for highlighting this issue.

You're right to point out the operational distinction between BRBP and HGDEP. This has indeed been the subject of prior discussions, particularly around how depot assignments should be reflected – whether based on physical parking locations or what is shown in the fleet management system.

Historically, BRBP was listed as the operating depot since this was determined solely by where the buses were physically parked. However, with the implementation of the fleet management system, many services now display Hougang (HG) duties, even when the buses are still stabled at Braddell. This has understandably led to varying interpretations among editors: some favour operational oversight as the basis for labelling, while others argue the physical parking location should still take precedence.

Given the nuance, I fully understand your perspective. For the sake of consistency, we have adopted the current practice of listing these services under HGDEP, in line with the fleet management system. That said, if this approach creates confusion or misrepresents the actual arrangement, it is definitely worth re-examining.

As you may have seen, the notes section of the relevant bus service pages does reflect the overnight parking situation, e.g. "All HGDEP buses practise overnight parking at BRBP", which aligns with the point you're raising. I encourage you to bring this to the wider community for discussion to see if there's consensus to reconsider the labelling convention.

In light of the unique setup, one option could be to list it as 'HGDEP (BRBP) 88' at the bus model page to reflect both the operational and physical aspects. However, this should ideally be discussed and agreed upon with the community before implementation.

In the meantime, any further information or sources you can share would be very helpful.

Regards

Supernutorcrazy (talk) 10:37, 18 April 2025 (+08)