Train reliability has improved
According to the TR Emeritus article “Minister Lui: Train reliability has actually improved” (Mar 11) – “key performance indicators such as number of train withdrawals and service delays have been improving in recent years, as a result of a change to the approach to maintenance adopted by public transport providers.
Mr Lui noted that for most of last year, public transport operators have made “significant inroads in improving reliability”.”
Statement “full of holes”?
What on earth does “for most of last year” mean? 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 or 11 months?
What on earth does “significant inroads in improving reliability” mean? What exactly are the measurements of “reliability” that is being referred to? Being on time, number of major breakdowns, etc?
What on earth does “improving in recent years” means? Last 2, 3 4 or 5 years? Improving in “what” and by how much?
What on earth does “a change to the approach to maintenance” mean? Why not tell us exactly what was the change?
What on earth are all the “performance indicators”?
Only talk about “insignificant” indicators?
Why do we cite only, arguably “not so significant” indicators like the “number of train withdrawals and service delays”?
“For instance, the number of train withdrawals on the North-South (NSL) and East-West Lines (EWL) were halved to 1.1 per 100,000 train-km, compared to 2.2 in 2013 – back to 2007 standards” – As a commuter – how impactful is a 1.1 train withdrawal to you?
“Service delays lasting more than 5 minutes have also improved on the NSL and EWL by close to 20%, he said” – As a commuter – how significant is a delay of 5 minutes and 1 second to you? What period was used to measure the “also improved”?
“Significant” indicators not mentioned at all?
The statement ignores the obvious and most important indicators – major breakdowns, their number, frequency and length; waiting time during peak hours at major bottleneck stations, etc.
“Withdrawal rate for Bukit Panjang LRT and Sengkang-Punggol LRT had also come down” – Come down by how much for what period?
“I feel that we can do better in the coming years as this improved rate is still double that of the North East Line and Circle Line,” he qualified.” – The obvious question is completely ignored as to why a brand new line like the Circle Line also have so many major disruptions?
What is the “improved rate” – surely there is a “number” right?
Speaking “English”?
Does the above make you wonder as to which school taught the person – English?
Slower and end earlier?
Also, why are trains travelling so much slower nowadays on certain parts of the network, and why are the last train timings being changed to so much earlier?
Are there any countries in history whereby the operating hours keep shrinking despite huge increases in ridership?
“Spare no effort”?
As to ““I would like to assure Members that we will spare no effort to find out the cause of the recent spate of breakdowns, and take the necessary steps to stem the problems.” – I met a senior train maintainence person who is now retired. He told me that the primary reason for the spate of breakdowns is a design fault (I have no way of verifying this information).
Win battles lose war
TRS Contributor
Related:
LUI TUCK YEW: STATISTICS SHOW THAT TRAIN RELIABILITY HAS IMPROVED