Inadequate Public Transportation

[Highfalutin]

Singapore school kids also take taxis commonly. That's also telling of Singapore living standard and public transport standard?

School going children who take taxis just so happen to fit into the lull period before those regulars who take taxis on company account and those who will be late for clocking in if they were to chance the MRT. One phenomenon in the taxi driver's favor.

 

[cleareyes]

That is a design problem. For the last stations, they design in such a way that there is only one track for in and out. That is why you need to wait.

Furthermore, it is because the trains are scheduled to leave later, not earlier, that is why there is a clout. Facts and figures pointed clearly to the fact that SMRT has REDUCED the trains back in 2004, from 2003.

If in 2003, it could run 89.6 million kilometers, why in 2004 it was reduced to 77.4m? You mean to say that the MRT system suddenly becomes worse or what? It was a deliberate reduction, not something that they could not cope!

Facts and figures don't lie my friend. Only human beings will lie or try to justify something with weird logic.

Goh Meng Seng

I think that is the issue here which you dont seem to understand and not willing to be on the ground and instead to depend on facts and figures which most of the time, only give you half the picture.

the design for the tracks was throught and flow, which means, there are TWO tracks and not ONE and there is a changable junctions before the approaching station so that trains can berth at either side in the situation where one berth is occupied.

Do take note we are talking about an END Station and not others. This design can be easily seen on elevated tracks near end stations as well as near interchange lines as well as near train depots.This changable junctions can be spotted for underground tracks if people pay attention. Two such example is at the Changi Airport Station as well as near Little India Station.

As for whether a train is scheduled to leave later or earlier before another approaching train come into the station, i think safety of passengers must be taken into account, especially when there could be a good chance where any eariler train had not cleared a certain amount of safety distance.

I dont based my findings on FACTS and FIGURES as most of the time, these "facts" end up blinding one from seeing what is really happening. I based my findings on observation, observing the time between the trains travelling and how the stations cope with both peak and non-peak traveling.

Again, I suggest you go down on the ground and do some legwork and quit behaving like those idiot PAP people who based their assessment just on "facts and figures" which most of the time, screw up other people's lives.

If you dont do that, I dont see why the people in tampines should vote for you as you are not behaving any better than PAP.

 

[cleareyes]

GMS
If you try to use figures and logic with them, they will simply counteract with their own figures and logic, none of which the ordinary singaporean voter will understand. They may even accuse you of having fake numbers and ridiculous logic.
In my opinion, the key is to go around and ask the voters this simple question:
"Is your life better or worse than before, especially before the foreigners started coming in droves?"
I am quite confident that most will answer in the negative and consider voting opposition. Of course, you need to know who to ask.

I ssssssssssssssoooooooooooooooo very much agree with you on this.

 

[cleareyes]

And who approved this designs by the way?

I agree on the point that the original design was approved based on estimation of population which some idiot did not foresee a population increase in the later years.

Now, new routes, stations and tracks are built to lessen the load of the existing ones. Its crap but at least its been carried out.

I just hope someone would use more brains next time.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Dear Cleareyes,

You still cannot get the picture. If MRT could afford to have higher frequency back then, well, why can't it have it now?

I think it is really crap to have a frequency of 1 train per 2 minute.

As for the design of the tracks, it really depends on locality. And the tracks are crisscross at the end stations. It either means that MRT did not plan in such a way to dispatch their trains fast enough and that is why the jam on the incoming ones.

Facts and figures are facts and figures. The year 2003 to 2008 are taken into considerations basically because within these periods, minimum addition to the tracks are done, unlike 2009 where you have circle lines.

There might be addition of tracks subsequently but it doesn't necessarily mean that the flow of traffic could be "diverted". Because you couldn't possibly ask someone traveling from CityHall to Ang Mo Kio to take circle line!

And if you are someone who don't believe in facts and figures, then the packed trains all time round the day is a good indicator for you. There are ways to improve the frequency of the trains as subways all over the world have been doing far better than Singapore.

Goh Meng Seng

I think that is the issue here which you dont seem to understand and not willing to be on the ground and instead to depend on facts and figures which most of the time, only give you half the picture.

the design for the tracks was throught and flow, which means, there are TWO tracks and not ONE and there is a changable junctions before the approaching station so that trains can berth at either side in the situation where one berth is occupied.

Do take note we are talking about an END Station and not others. This design can be easily seen on elevated tracks near end stations as well as near interchange lines as well as near train depots.This changable junctions can be spotted for underground tracks if people pay attention. Two such example is at the Changi Airport Station as well as near Little India Station.

As for whether a train is scheduled to leave later or earlier before another approaching train come into the station, i think safety of passengers must be taken into account, especially when there could be a good chance where any eariler train had not cleared a certain amount of safety distance.

I dont based my findings on FACTS and FIGURES as most of the time, these "facts" end up blinding one from seeing what is really happening. I based my findings on observation, observing the time between the trains travelling and how the stations cope with both peak and non-peak traveling.

Again, I suggest you go down on the ground and do some legwork and quit behaving like those idiot PAP people who based their assessment just on "facts and figures" which most of the time, screw up other people's lives.

If you dont do that, I dont see why the people in tampines should vote for you as you are not behaving any better than PAP.

 

[cleareyes]

Dear Cleareyes,

You still cannot get the picture. If MRT could afford to have higher frequency back then, well, why can't it have it now?

I think it is really crap to have a frequency of 1 train per 2 minute.

As for the design of the tracks, it really depends on locality. And the tracks are crisscross at the end stations. It either means that MRT did not plan in such a way to dispatch their trains fast enough and that is why the jam on the incoming ones.

Facts and figures are facts and figures. The year 2003 to 2008 are taken into considerations basically because within these periods, minimum addition to the tracks are done, unlike 2009 where you have circle lines.

There might be addition of tracks subsequently but it doesn't necessarily mean that the flow of traffic could be "diverted". Because you couldn't possibly ask someone traveling from CityHall to Ang Mo Kio to take circle line!

And if you are someone who don't believe in facts and figures, then the packed trains all time round the day is a good indicator for you. There are ways to improve the frequency of the trains as subways all over the world have been doing far better than Singapore.

Goh Meng Seng

Say all these to the voters and see if anyone understands you or even bother to listen to you.

 

[Zombie]

My researcher just came back to me to say that the occupancy rate of 73 is NOT percentage but rather... number of people within a cabin carriage....

And if you are someone who don't believe in facts and figures, then the packed trains all time round the day is a good indicator for you.

the figure says 73 per carriage
the max load capacity designed per train (ie 6 carriages) is around 1300 (?)
meaning 73/ (1300/6) = only 34% all time round the day
ie not even half-packed...

some figures cannot paint a good picture (eg peak hours, concentration of commuters at certain locations)..

 

[BlueCat]

it is more than enough.
too many taxi companies and drivers,now earning as a taxi driver is very tought.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

the figure says 73 per carriage
the max load capacity designed per train (ie 6 carriages) is around 1300 (?)
meaning 73/ (1300/6) = only 34% all time round the day
ie not even half-packed...

some figures cannot paint a good picture (eg peak hours, concentration of commuters at certain locations)..

Dear Zombie,

Normally in studying such figures from the establishment, I do not take their absolute figures that seriously, especially in this case, there is no side note on how they derive the occupancy rate.

My observation is this, Singapore's train carriage is slightly smaller than Hong Kong's train. According to HK MTR, their 8 cabins have a maximum load of 2500, meaning, each cabin can take 312 passengers.

But to take 73 persons per carriage as occupancy rate, this does not tally to our daily experiences on the train at all. This is why initially I would take that figures as percentage instead of passengers. 73% make more sense than 73 persons. SMRT did not explain how or what formula it uses to derive such figures.

But if they use the same formula for past few years, the relative terms would be more relevant. Meaning that the train is 35% more crowded than 2003. This is more meaningful and relevant to our daily experiences on the train now.

Goh Meng Seng