To all followers & readers, I took a long hiatus since my last post, as I didn’t see the need to repeat my views concerning the same recurrent issues on the prevailing train lines. We knew for a fact that the prevailing train lines were not maintained proper in the decades past, and it was only natural that wear & tear would haunt everyone – commuters & establishment.
All that said & done, surely everyone would have given the respective agencies the benefit of doubt, to do a good job with the implementation of newer lines. And I’m pretty sure there were minimal nor any major incidents reported for the Downtown Line 1 and Downtown Line 2. For that, I’m sure credit is due.
However, the problems that surfaced on newer developments now springs new thought bubbles, and questions.
It wasn’t too long ago, that the situations for Tuas Link Extension put on the blushers for the establishment. And it was quite evident that despite having a crew of ex-military top brass for management, can’t rid the company of some systemic problems down their food chain.
There were several, if not many, occurrences where commuters were left to their own imagination, as to whether the train service was genuinely experiencing delays, due to surge in human traffic during rush hour, or, if the train service was actually down.
To make matters worse, the announcements over public address system, seem to give commuters a false believe that the delays are minor and not crippling.
Now, in recent weeks, we’ve seen splashed across mainstream media & social media, the embarrassing situation of service downtime for some stretches of the spanking new Downtown Line 3, during their recent open house.
And then, over the weekend, we read there was a case of train fault, and they had to take that particular train back to the service depot.
Another part of the news mentions passenger triggering the emergency communication button; that added more delays to the already interrupted services on the line.
Ironic as it seems, but the higher echelons often compare this island city to Hong Kong SAR, citing that the 2 island cities have pretty similar characteristics (high human density). They cite comparisons that our public housing situation is better managed, stable economic situation here is less volatile etc.
How is it, that they won’t compare the service reliability of the very similar railway transit systems?
In Hong Kong, their rapid transit is susceptible to heavy monsoons & typhoons. Though the bustling island city paused for the days affected, but when the warning is lifted, services bounces back to normal almost like clockwork. Hardly any major problems reported.
In Taipei, their rapid transit serves a bigger population, susceptible to typhoons & tremors. Just like their Hong Kong counterpart, there’s hardly any major cases reported.
Now, that the new Thomson East Coast Line is awarded to a second public commute operator, let’s keep our fingers crossed, that it shall have as little reported problems as it’s prevailing North-East Line.