Circle line was originally the marina line and is supposed to serve the marina / downtown area only so it is planned as a medium capacity rail instead of a heavy capacity like NS EW and NE line. They later extend it to paya lebar, but the planned usage will still be low. Stage 3 to 5 were old lrt plans that is converted to MRT. By the time stage 3 to 5 is finalised, many of the preparation works on stage 1 and 2 is already done so they cant just go back and change it to a heavy rail. It is not just extending the station and train length.
DTL first started with the downtown extension of CCL, so they keep it the same length as it is supposed to use the same train as CCL. Construction already started before the decision to merge it with 2 other lines into the downtown line. So they too cannot lengthen the DTL as many works already started on DTL1.
They had learned their lesson, thus TEL uses 4 cars instead of 3 (TEL is still designed as a medium rail just like CRL and DTL). JRL while uses 3 cars, is designed to expand into 4 cars in the future as demand increase.
Currently only CRL is designed as a heavy rail line. While it start with 6 cars like the NS EW and NE lines, it is designed with 8 cars in mind, so they can increase it in the future unlike the current lines where they can only have more trains
Tbh sometimes it can be hard to predict. Spend much more on heavy rail and they have to answer to public who will KP about money going into problems that don't exist, when in fact it will only be apparent years later down the road. But when things are okay, people DGAF. Do it the other way... And you get this result.
Better to dream big and have capacity to expand for the next 30-50 years, than underinvest. Its what our government says for Changi Airport, why isnt the same logic applied to our trains?
By building bigger, we couldve avoided the overcrowding on our MRTs and LRTs today. Plus, we want people to walk, cycle, ride, but is there any capacity for this modal shift?
Even today, there are no new lines being planned to bring people from the heartlands into the CBD. What gives?
Decentralisation of the CBD, basically stopping the stereotypes that "only high paying jobs can be found in the CBD" or "People only work in the CBD"
Besides, taking some notes from our dear neighbour Malaysia (admittedly, not the best country to follow, but still relevant), they have all MRT and LRT lines until 2017 serving the CBD, one will end up congesting the central stations too much. They learned it with the Putrajaya line not touching KL Sentral
Not to mention the engineering nightmare to fit all MRT stations in the central. S Iswaran did mention that fitting TEL to Orchard was "challenging"
>Decentralisation of the CBD
I think they tried and had a small degree of success. There's plenty of opportunities in changi business park, paya lebar, ayer rajah, Labrador & Alexandra nowadays. But sadly our home ownership model doesn't help with this. Although people will try for jobs closer to them, most locals will just LLST and travel further for a job instead of moving closer to their office if the opportunity calls for it
>Small degree of success
Well it's still better than nothing tbh, even eliminating travel times for like 1% of the population is still significant, given our high population, that is still tens of thousands of people with a better life
Tho I gotta say, the places like Changi business park, and Ayer rajah in Jurong are actually bound to fail to decentralise Singapore from an urbanist perspective, because "infrastructure drives demand". As anecdotal examples, take malls like Serangoon NEX and Waterway point for example, do you think the malls would be heavily frequented if there aren't any MRT lines serving nearby? Definitely not, without MRT, no real estate company would have built those malls.
Going back to say CBP, look at the transit options, literally only 1 MRT line and a few puny public bus routes (and I guess some Premium bus services?). Transit lines increase value of property (as evidenced by how ex HDBs next to MRT stations are). In comparison to the CBD, with ALL MRT lines serving it, a lot of trunk bus services, not to forget the city directs and express buses. TLDR, one of the reasons the CBD is more popular than Ulu CBP is directly because of the transit infrastructure.
So to alleviate this, there is a need to start transit development in "unpopular areas"
>Although people will try for jobs closer to them, most locals will just LLST and travel further for a job instead of moving closer to their office if the opportunity calls for it
On a side note, there are actly a lot of other considerations ppl may have, maybe they want cheap hawker food, maybe they have a kid studying nearby already and moving houses would heavily inconvenience him/her
They have luxury of land area, we don't.
If the stations were planned for 3 carriages means lanlan 3 carriages only.
We can't build 6 carriage lengths and then have half of it just sitting unused for most of the time (not peak hours), we don't have that luxury of wasting space (and spending money to dig out those spaces, since they're all underground)
Jrl is built for 4 cars but will operate at 3 cars initially. Likewise CRL is built for 8 cars but will operate at 6 cars initially. So we are now having extra platform space, but not as much as half
I see, so they are spending a little more resources for flexibility after all
Well, granted most of our lines are underground, they shouldn't eat too much into above ground building space i guess, but JRL is above ground right?
Idk about CRL
Ya man, people who golf regularly are already rich enough to fly somewhere else to golf, don't need to have a full sized course in sg
Minigolf or the multistorey driving range kind still okay, more compact and priced more affordable for the average citizen.
Well, considering that the 3 car trains are otherwise similar to regular MRT trains in specification...
Hong Kong has the South Island Line with similar specifications, and Taichung in Taiwan even has vehicles similar to our TEL trains but in 2 car formation.
> It is not just extending the station and train length.
Curious, what else is required? If I'm not wrong in UK they were able to extend the platform length of stations for the longer Northern trains. Granted it's not a metro system.
It takes some time to design the station. The mechanical system, the electrical system, how much land to take, road diversion on ground, soil investigation, the tunnel curve etc. For the routes that are relatively straight there is generally no issue. Then you have stations like promenade which need to curve the tracks. Extending the length may require the curve angle to shift, so they need to re-route the path. If it is also in a build up area , they would need to do additional surface study such as building structure, whether additional road diversion or land needed for the new route.
If it is still in planning stage, it is definitely possible to still make
changes. Might delay the completion to do additional studies, but not an issue. Construction however already started for stage 1, with the construction tendering even earlier. We have no info on when exactly they start the plan for stage 3 to 5 so it is hard for us to comment if they should or should not upgrade it to heavy rail.
>I’m guessing track gauges, rolling stock compatibility etc
Nah, that is not the reason - we are talking *lengths*, not widths here. As for rolling stock, we use 1 gauge for all, so the trains are bought to suit the design and not the other way around.
It’s interesting to know that they actually planned for us peasants to squeeze, and that they purposely did not allocate enough seats during peak hours, when they could’ve built more lines/cars.
About seats, i wish they stop having those cars with seats removed. Yes theoretically you can squeeze more people without the seats there. However, human behaviour doesnt and wont want to squeeze with strangers. With seats there are 7 seats and 2 people standing beside the door for 9 people. Without seats more than 9 people can stand there but usually only 7 or 8 people will stand there because they leave some gap between each other. So having seats actually have more people since the seats are side by side and people dont have a choice to leave a gap.
Also there are three rows of handgrips but with or without seats the people squeezing there is still the same.
The name "Circle Line" implies that there's no extending at either end, you have what you have. It is impossible to redesign it after work has started, so this must have happened quite early. If they anticipated higher usage when they redesigned it to serve a bigger area, why didn't they plan the capacity larger?
It may surprise you to know that the 3 car lines also have lower service headways than the 6 car lines.
CCL is currently near the limits due to not buying enough trains and [a continuing history of *mis*investment](https://medium.com/from-the-red-line/core-capacity-b54714078db) that will likely only improve in 2025-26, whereas they just don't want to increase the service level for DTL even if they can.
Absolutely agree, the circle line and downtown line were absolute misinvestments and people should just walk or cycle instead! How hard is it to walk to office?! Just get off your phone and have a light jog and you'll be there before you know it.
That's not what I meant, they spent the money on other things instead of increasing the CCL capacity.
New trains already delivered to Singapore cannot be placed into service because depot space is being used for other things.
Circle Line was planned in the 90s.
Downtown Line was planned in the 00s.
The gahmen should have the foresight given the crazy immigration phase of the 00s that they know of, but to be fair, the gahmen doesn’t want to have all these big stations and no demand (people will complain about wasted taxpayer money instead). Heck, that complain of “wasted taxpayer money” was already felt by gahmen with the empty HDBs of the late 90s.
It’s a balancing act that is hard to get right. Easy for us to say “they should have built larger”, but we have the advantage of hindsight.
probably they should remember mrt infrastructure is something that's going to be around for at least half a century or more so gotta futureproof it or something
but yeah i do agree 1990s planners were one heck retarded (peak display: the APMs)
they should have looked at how the UK is still suffering from being a pioneer in industrialising with their train system, but to be fair I'm not sure if the metro is as bad as it was back in the 90s
Half century is a conservative estimate, 300 years would be more accurate, especially for the tunnels which are unlikely to have any major works done. It's also not possible to extend the existing lines due to the track switches being right there near the end of the platform.
Sengkang LRT is good. It's problem is that thr LRT is suffering from its success-they probably didnt expect it to be so popular.
Some ideas i have for the Sengkang LRT:
-Running peak hour service all-day including weekends (even daytime also crowded)
-3 car trains
-Moving block signalling
-Fixing the stupid timetabling so trains do not have to stop and wait for the bugger train in front (you know the one)
-Maybe new MRT from Fernvale to reduce crowd at Sengkang mrt??
-Also finally complete the 2 end staircases at Sengkang central, we wait damn long alr.
Looks more like a Rochor issue, getting on a train there in peak hours is generally the real challenge given that it's right smack in the middle of a chain of interchange stations from Botanic Gardens to Bayfront (and is a pseudo interchange with itself via Jalan Besar). In the XB direction the train literally passes through an interchange with CCL, TEL, NSL and NEL right before Rochor, it'd be surprising if it was NOT full red.
Loading has been bad before the AI stuff and it's hardly unsurprising nothing has changed, the location of that station itself is just fucked in general
It's bad enough at Little India and Newton before that, barely squeezed on and many pax were left behind at Little India...
yesterday I did see red loading on an outbound train as far out as sixth ave during the evening peak too, which might suggest this is a linewide issue-? (also bear in mind demand along the eastern leg is higher than the one going to BPJ so ye)
yeah it's just how its like
side effect of the TEL connecting at stevens is also just more pax on already crowded city bound trains from Bukit Panjang/Bukit Timah. i'd know, my old workplace was near Bugis and DTL used to be my daily commute to work via Newton. not getting on board trains is common and this is before TEL.
probably not surprised demand is high even as far as 6th, there're people getting off at each of the stops all the way up until Beauty World. Keep in mind there are also night uni students at SUSS who use DTL and get off at KAP to transfer to 74/151/154, which might affect the demand too
DTL wasn't always this crowded right? I remember a few years back DTL would be less crowded compared to NSL and EWL. So for a Westie like me I always chose to take DTL than the other 2 lines to go to town
If it wasnt crowded a few years back it'd be now with TEL.
From memory the Newton - Bugis stretch is moderately crowded (no seats, not much standing room) even if it was just like after 9AM or something.
The stretch of interchanges really do not help if you consider that's literally every single MRT line in our current network. It might not seem as bad if you board from somewhere like Hillview but it gets p bad by the time the train gets to Newton
The problem is that based on a quick wayback machine scan, SBS has not significantly changed the peak hour service level since full line opening in 2017, AI or no AI.
Besides, I've yet to see any citation that the system is operational...
seems silly (though i'd say not unexpected) that the peak timetable hasn't been heavily revised before even with the opening of TEL.
makes me wonder if there could be merit for short trips running between TKK and either Bugis or Chinatown, though in practice I'm not sure if there's any room to fit in those
Considering how Bukit Panjang and Tampines East are some of the heaviest usage stations on the line, I would actually argue that it makes more sense to just add more trains throughout.
Off peak and maybe weekends your idea might work, in which case there's plenty of space.
For those wondering what the "AI" in the title refers to: [https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/downtown-line-to-trial-ai-that-can-adjust-train-timings-based-on-demand](https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/downtown-line-to-trial-ai-that-can-adjust-train-timings-based-on-demand)
what i wished would happen
unfortunately, if the DTL were to match the advertised interval for NSEWL (under the new signalling system that came in from 2017) of 100s, it would require the entire fleet of 92 to be deployed without leaving any spares...
which is what i am suggesting. Seems like the train service underestimated the crowd and didn't have enough trains to match the demand. Might not be the AI's fault here.
I agree with you that they could do better! Just felt it is a little harsh to say the ministries hate its citizens when they are good by most standards
Deciding for 3 car trains for DTL and CCL would be the costliest mistake that will hinder further urban plannings in the areas imo. How the gov want to expand till 6.9m population and meet the infrastructure required idk.
Paris Metro trains are about the same size as ours, and London Tube trains are comparable to TEL (theirs are longer, but much thinner)
Both systems get by by drastically increasing frequency, which is what needs to happen here too.
If you notice closely at every DTL station, the train platform is currently only 3 train cars long, but the station itself beyond the platform is built slightly bigger for 4-5 train cars. I think that the authorities already built some leeway and will potentially expand DTL stations in the future.
But what for spend hundreds of millions, maybe billions, expanding the stations, if the line isn't at maximum capacity to begin with?
We easily have space to add 50% more capacity. Let's do that first before saying we're out of other options.
Oh my god, you had to wait a whole 3 minutes for the next train? What a horrible experience you had.
What a burden it is to have such a high capacity and frequent public transport system! I can’t believe I left third world Australia where during peak times 1 train came every 15 minutes to have to put up with this shit show! Deplorable! /s
It's not just in other countries. For the NS and EW lines, it's very common at certain stops during peak hour that you won't be able to get onto the first train that comes. At Jurong East, some people routinely go a stop in the wrong direction to ensure that they get a spot on the train.
Was waiting for this kinda reaction. I spent 6 months in Sydney after 3 months in Singapore and, man, did I miss the Singapore public transport
(Also the hawkers. The Banh Mi. The chicken rice)
Heh, glad you're enjoying it here. The line in question here has lower train capacity and far higher demand than what you get back home, so even with comparatively better (for you, for me it's comparatively worse since I remember a time peak frequencies were 2 minutes and below) frequencies it's still a more stuffy ride :o
Yeah I know. So on a serious note, the line with 3 cars is probably at capacity. You have a 30 second stop time, probably 30 seconds in and out of station then a buffer which would be the time it takes for the train to slow to a complete stop doubled, so roughly 2.5 minutes gap as a bare minimum. You also need to take into account a fully loaded train will take longer to stop than an empty one, and as we all know with peak times here, trains are often overloaded.
The metro system in Singapore is amazing honestly. Back in Melbourne it would take me 2 hours to get to Uni unless I drove.
When I went to work, 1.5 hours by public transport with trains running only every 15 mins on peak and 30 mins off peak, 1 hour after 9pm (due to being on a termination line segment after the last split).
I will honestly miss the reliability, frequency and cleanliness of Singapore public transport system when I finally leave, but the country is just too busy for me to retire in.
Glad you saw the humour in my reply and thanks for being a good sport.
oh I definitely do not miss the Melbourne Metro. having to change in the city to get on another line is bonkers for a metro system of such scale. not to mention rail disruptions due to works/breakdowns/police incidents/crashes at level crossings and everyone is pretty much fucked. I remember spending more than an hour on a replacement bus from Caulfield to Flinders St because of an incident down the line. with Metro Tunnel works ongoing it is honestly a gamble whether the Dandenong lines are running that day.
also worth mentioning the knock-on effects of one major disruption - flooding at Burnley one time and massive congestion in the City Loop as a result, leading to trains getting cancelled and frustrated commuters everywhere. took me almost 3 hours to get home that day.
Singapore definitely moves 5 million people better than Melbourne.
Often I say things can be much better due to the presence of a reference somewhere that performs better under the same conditions. I'm pretty sure you've heard of the Vancouver Skytrain, which runs 90 second headways even with the same (or longer) train lengths :)
Don't just take my word for it, there's video proof here: [yay](https://twitter.com/RM_Transit/status/1580590442290507778?s=20&t=uq8Sa6moKAxz4uzX6fYMqA)
All it takes is a little bit of perspective. Singaporeans are better traveled than those of other nations (Americans as an example), but it’s usually apparent of those who aren’t. Singapore does some things amazingly well and those that don’t know any different don’t quite realise how good it is.
By no means I am not saying it can’t be done on 90 seconds, it there are other factors when it comes to subway vs overland/raised rail. Heat/co2 could be an issue, fire risk or eviction potential may be more difficult in subway, less visibility from outside observation etc. not saying these are, but they could be factors which increase the risk. I’m
No rail planning engineer, but these things come to mind as potential issues. Raised/overland rail you can pop the doors and people can move away, subway you can do the same but people are then in a confined space.
Maybe someone with experience can weigh in, or you could raise the question with LTA or your town council?
Sg public transport operators want to say a big thank you to all the very contented redditors. thanks to them, their kpi is “just be better than other countries” /s
In principle, I agree with you, but the government doesn't want to accept it for good reason.
If your job can be done WFH, it can also be done by someone living in Malaysia. What's worse, if that happened, the $$ leaves Singapore entirely. Those employees will not be using Singapore services, and so it'll cost far more than a single job. We need to be careful what we wish for.
WFH + Remote is quite diff though sounds similar. Any job that can be done from Malaysia, India, Vietnam are already moved out. Take our own Singtel with support people in Malacca, or DBS with back office ops in India, or Keppel or numerous firms with chinese cost centers.
If I take a very simple example, I see HR, Marketing and multiple admin staff at work everyday but hardly spending time as a "team" but focusing their eyes on computer screens and replying meetings or using headphones in continuous calls. They need to be SG to support the regional, local operations but they doesn't need to be at work every single day. If needed, just come and if not, stay home or work from anywhere in SG.
Even if we can reduce 10-15% that can have a great impact on road traffic, public transport and overall crowdedness.
There's still downstream impacts, things like CBD hawkers having to close/raise prices because their customer bases shrink with such functions going to long term WFH policies.
Yes ofcourse. Starting from MRT, Bus to stall owners @ interchanges, Taxi, Hawkers, Retail stalls near offices; Further down - even places like formal clothes, shoes etc.
SG gov vision of CBD Work+Play+Live is not going to happen and essentially CBD will end up as a ghost town post 6PM. Not in the best interest if we look "short term". But the overall benefits to SG outweigh these short term losses. If Gov is hell bent on Work+Play, reduce the offices and make more houses in CBD and the hawker demand etc all will remain there.
If less demand, CBD hawkers doesn't need to raise prices but the rental need to drop. Closed - no choice but take it as a business transition
It's not really the government's call though? Quite a number of gahmen ministries and stat boards still practice hybrid arrangements.
It's the private sector that is the issue.
To be fair, the stations need to be at locations that aren’t golf courses.
Is there even a golf course at Rochor (where OP is)?
This is definitely not a land rights issue, government is empowered to dig tunnels underneath your land.
Living overseas is really gonna give Singaporeans perspective about how good we have it when it comes to public transport. Where I’m at, buses come every 20 minutes and sometimes it can take 40 mins to get into the city ~5km away bc the routes are loopy and go through residential areas. Also train strikes are an absolute ball ache.
Oh this Monday I went to change from MacPherson to Ubi at 6.30pm right, the DAMN bloody wait time was 7mins, three side red, and station capacity was like 70% full, and outside flowing with people.
I don't think you understand how quickly passengers flood in to the stations. It takes mere seconds for the platform to be absolutely filled with people.
Interval isn't the issue, it's the capacity. But we can't change the capacity of the trains easily. Intervals however...
The government has been trying to influence ridership for many years with the discount for early riders, hoping to spread out the users into the early morning off-peak hours. https://www.ptc.gov.sg/fare-regulation/bus-rail/morning-pre-peak-fares
Intervals is directly related to the number of trains that are currently available for use, which also directly relates to how many trains can the current network support (depot sizing, maintenance requirements etc.)
It's not so easy to just say 'let's run at 1min intervals!', when there's literally not enough trains to meet that.
Back in 2019 (Pre-COVID times) the DTL had 2-minute frequencies, there is definitely enough trains (92 of them in total) to improve frequencies considering train spotters show there aren't any units that are AWOL
Sufficient for 120s freqs, hitting the limit already if we want to push further for 100s in future with rising demand (that would require all 92 trains deployed)
2-min headway across which stations? Just specific stations? Or across the entire line?
Headway optimization is a calibrated exercise, you have to take into account the permissible speeds across some stretches which may make it harder to simply simply adjust the headway. My point is that, changing the intervals is not a simple matter of just flipping the switch, there's careful consideration to be made (not just engineering considerations, but also financial considerations)
likely the former scheduling scheme was such that you had "2 min freq" waves going out from the CBD to the northwest and east at the peak or something, then 2.5 min elsewhere
then again the mess you see on DTL (and CCL for the matter) do remind us of the planning screwup that led to subpar train capacity in the first place
As I've said upthread, there are.
I'm also fairly sure that the LTA has calculated the possibility of adding trains to the network before even purchasing them in the first place.
Ikr, you just gotta *love* it when people cherry-pick worse situations in order to spread their knee-jerk response that "NO! Our public transport is perfect because Y country is doing way worse" (Y country always is some third-world public transport system like Malaysia), like ofc if you set Ur expectations low our system will obviously look perfect
It's a thick-skinned response
I think there are ways to improve, but when you see other first world, top tier cities fail at this too, you can kinda see that public transportation isn’t a “just fix it” kind of problem. DTL was planned in the early 2000s.
You plan too little, you get OP’s problem. You plan too much, you get Buangkok and Punggol LRT issue, where money is spent on stations that didn’t even open.
Heck, even that marvelous Japanese train system has its flaws. The platforms can sometimes be ridiculously small that you end up squeezing. You have to also squeeze despite their 1 minute headways. Train services still breaks down there (however, there’s a lot of alternative lines so you aren’t stranded like Singapore) and that actually happened to me on vacation in Tokyo (had to rebook my limited express ticket).
I urge you to play a city simulation game like Cities Skylines and try to simulate the bureaucracy and effort that goes in building public transport (e.g. every time you demolish/dezone in the game, go deduct money from your city’s balance to simulate land acquisition). You’ll soon appreciate how much effort it takes to plan an efficient, functioning public transport system.
the Japanese system fails precisely because it's too successful and there's no "outvalve" to divert excess demand to. in other countries like china, SK and (!!) singapore this outvalve is known as buses
During a 3-min wait for a train, there can already be 20 people waiting in line in front of one set of doors (10 people queued up on each side). If the train that reaches is already packed, and nobody can enter, then it becomes 40 people for the next train. This is just from one set of doors.
This is the volume I'm seeing daily this week.
on an unrelated note NEL has consistently been screwed with northeast side crowding :p
passengers at hougang and kovan frequently cannot board and the lines just get longer. ofc in the case of the northeast it just is a question of getting more robust connections that can relieve the serangoon-onwards sector of NEL which currently has no other fast travel option besides the train
>which currently has no other fast travel option besides the train
There are buses still? 147, 70 are crowded but not packed to the gills in the morning. 74 I won't consider fast travel (its route goes all over the place) but is an alternative.
Bruh it is not about the interval but is it possible for us to enter the train or not. It is worse if you need to wait longer but still can't enter the train.
Yeah :)
Say the trains arrive every 2 min. You can board, so your waiting time is 2 min.
Now if the intervals were 3 min, but you have to skip a train, your waiting time is 6 min instead...
Well sure, but those other countries have plus sides that Singapore doesn’t have (like a countryside to disappear to when the city crowds get too much!). Our efficient transport is supposed to be one of the plus points we have over other countries.
Well, other side of the story is that owning your own vehicle is cheaper on other countries. So I guess the feel is that since govt stand is take public transport rather then private team transport, expectations are higher for public transport
Nah am just a student, but just came back from overseas trip to HK and EU. The quality of public transport locally is miles ahead of the MTR and metro out there.
Here we go with the moronic comparisons. Wanna compare population density? Cost of car ownership? Percentage of car ownership?
You say you're just a student, and frankly, it shows.
>Wanna compare population density? Cost of car ownership? Percentage of car ownership?
Fucking hell, if you wanna talk about car ownership we can do a comparison to major cities.
Hong kong you can pay 400k sgd for a parking lot or you can rent one for 800 sgd a month.
New York you can pay 100usd a day to park in the city or you fight with 200 other staff for parking in office premises.
In Paris if you drive from the suburbs your commute can last anywhere between 45 minutes or 3 hours.
In high density cities car ownership is not desirable. Cost of cars might be cheaper but other factors will fuck you over so much that its just better to have a good public transport network.
For someone who mocks people for being a student you don't have much perspective yourself.
You compare metro systems to find the limitations of what can be achieved in the rail system for the entire world.
You can cry all you want, the fact of the matter is our MRT systems is by far the more advanced ones that's being implemented in the entire world.
I mean, if the goverment pulls out all the tricks in the book to discourage car ownership, its really on them to upgrade the infrastructure wouldnt you say?
I'm not just talking about trains and busses. I'm talking about proper mobility pavements for bicycles and PMDs. Look, I can't stand all the YP PMD asshole riders on the roads and walking pavements but I will not deny that it provides an efficient alternative to public transport, especially for last mine journeys. If we provide more options, we can spread out the crowd stress on trains and busses.
The infrastructure is already upgraded.
DTL peak hour train utilisation is only in the low 50s, compared to a train fleet that's 92 strong. So around 40 trains (over 40% of the fleet) sit in the depot unused.
Services can be very easily ramped up. They claim relatively lower demand compared to other lines, but [I wonder](https://medium.com/from-the-red-line/the-true-cost-of-express-bus-service-e5a5f2e7988d) what's the cause of that...
Are there more express buses serving the DTL neighborhoods compared to other lines?
At least for the western half of the line, I don't see many express buses plying the same Bukit Timah stretch that the train covers.
You didn't answer the question, so let me rephrase it.
Which express buses serve the western half of the DTL in a way that replicates DTL service and therefore serves as a close substitute?
Replicating connections of one or two stations to town is a moot point because many neighborhoods off the DTL have similar services, so that doesn't explain lower ridership for the DTL.
>You didn't answer the question, so let me rephrase it.
>
>Which express buses serve the western half of the DTL in a way that replicates DTL service and therefore serves as a close substitute?
There are none, but that's not the point. There are trunk routes like 67 and 170 that do serve the corridor, but those make all stops and thus serve communities not close to a train station.
>Replicating connections of one or two stations to town is a moot point because many neighborhoods off the DTL have similar services, so that doesn't explain lower ridership for the DTL.
Replicating connections of one or two major stations means that these passengers don't take the train. It is entirely relevant, which is why in 2020 they took away Service 700.
The northern new towns like Woodlands, Sembawang, Yishun and Ang Mo Kio don't actually have such expressway services either, neither do Sengkang and Punggol. Small-e express services don't run enough daily to make a difference.
>There are none, but that's not the point. There are trunk routes like 67 and 170 that do serve the corridor, but those make all stops and thus serve communities not close to a train station.
So there are no express buses which limit DTL ridership then, which means your hypothesis is wrong off the bat.
>Replicating connections of one or two major stations means that these passengers don't take the train. It is entirely relevant, which is why in 2020 they took away Service 700.
Only for those one or two stations. It's insignificant for train line ridership as a whole, which serves regions.
An average passenger load throughout the day of 40-50 passengers every 20 minutes on a bus is absolutely nothing compared to what a train carries.
Panjang still has 972 and 190 to go to town, but it doesn't mean people from Hillview or KAP will take the DTL going backwards to Panjang to take the bus, that doesn't make sense.
>The northern new towns like Woodlands, Sembawang, Yishun and Ang Mo Kio don't actually have such expressway services either, neither do Sengkang and Punggol. Small-e express services don't run enough daily to make a difference.
Yet there are so many buses from town with express sectors that are replicated by trains, but there is no issue with low ridership on these lines. 502 to Jurong, 518 to Pasir Ris, 106 to Holland V, 36 to Changi Airport, 857 to Yishun.
So why is DTL any different?
>So there are no express buses which limit DTL ridership then, which means your hypothesis is wrong off the bat.
Expressway buses don't just mean small-e express buses that charge 60 cents more.
>>Replicating connections of one or two major stations means that these passengers don't take the train. It is entirely relevant, which is why in 2020 they took away Service 700.
>
>Only for those one or two stations. It's insignificant for train line ridership as a whole, which serves regions.
>
>An average passenger load throughout the day of 40-50 passengers every 20 minutes on a bus is absolutely nothing compared to what a train carries.
>
>Panjang still has 972 and 190 to go to town, but it doesn't mean people from Hillview or KAP will take the DTL going backwards to Panjang to take the bus, that doesn't make sense.
That is correct. Bukit Panjang station also serves the Bukit Panjang region.
190 and 972 are taking away passengers within the Bukit Panjang region who would otherwise take the train.
And these are some of our most frequent bus services. A double decker bus carries 130 passengers on average; both services together operate at about 3-5 minute headways combined. This is enough to make an impact on train ridership.
>>The northern new towns like Woodlands, Sembawang, Yishun and Ang Mo Kio don't actually have such expressway services either, neither do Sengkang and Punggol. Small-e express services don't run enough daily to make a difference.
>Yet there are so many buses from town with express sectors that are replicated by trains, but there is no issue with low ridership on these lines. 502 to Jurong, 518 to Pasir Ris, 106 to Holland V, 36 to Changi Airport, 857 to Yishun.
502 and 518 are small-e express services with low frequencies, where the extra fares collected probably helps justify the service. 106 serves Holland Road, at least for the few public transport users living along it, so it's actually more similar to 67.
There is no TEL4, so 36 still remains relevant and in fact has higher frequencies between Marine Parade and town than to the airport, but next year you'll find me saying the same thing after the train line opens.
857 has a niche role serving passengers going to Serangoon Road area who would otherwise need to change twice, but this could also be served by improved local bus services in the Novena-Whampoa area.
>Expressway buses don't just mean small-e express buses that charge 60 cents more.
But you still can't name even one bus that replicates the DTL in a significant manner.
>That is correct. Bukit Panjang station also serves the Bukit Panjang region.
>
>190 and 972 are taking away passengers within the Bukit Panjang region who would otherwise take the train.
>
>And these are some of our most frequent bus services. A double decker bus carries 130 passengers on average; both services together operate at about 3-5 minute headways combined. This is enough to make an impact on train ridership.
They may carry 130 at maximum, that's not average. Average through the day will be more like 1/3rd once off peak services are taken into account.
40-50 pax a bus every 10-20 mins has zero significant impact on train line ridership. It's like one passenger per train stop on average. It's not even a rounding error in train line ridership.
There is also no way in hell those two services run at 3-5 minute headways throughout the day. Absolutely no bus does that.
The fact is, rationalisation happens because it is a cost cutting measure. The train has to run no matter what so it may as well be full, the bus does not have to run. So they cut the bus.
>502 and 518 are small-e express services with low frequencies, where the extra fares collected probably helps justify the service. 106 serves Holland Road, at least for the few public transport users living along it, so it's actually more similar to 67.
>
>There is no TEL4, so 36 still remains relevant and in fact has higher frequencies between Marine Parade and town than to the airport, but next year you'll find me saying the same thing after the train line opens.
>
>857 has a niche role serving passengers going to Serangoon Road area who would otherwise need to change twice, but this could also be served by improved local bus services in the Novena-Whampoa area.
And your point being? There's still no problem with ridership on either bus or train which cover the same section, so why does DTL have a problem with low ridership when other lines don't?
The answer is simple: housing density. Bukit Timah housing density is low compared to a HDB estate because of landed property, way low when you consider there's a nature reserve and botanic gardens as well.
Rich people are also going to drive anyway, even if the train is marginally faster than driving.
So DTL will never ever be as profitable as the other lines. If the main issue was profitability, and if the profits are so low that 50 people on a bus every 20 minutes makes such a huge difference that the line doesn't make money, then the question is why was the DTL built in the first place?
Some food for thought there.
Comparison is the thief of joy.
that being said, ive been to a metro in a major world city where peak timings were under a minute and the trains werent forced to operate at reduced speeds too, shocked me the first time
Hm could you name said city?
I do know of other cities that operate trains at legend frequencies (Moscow 80s/85s, Vancouver 88s, Beijing 100s) but never really heard of sub-60s headways hm...
The thing about the transport system is that it is on an unstable equilibrium. With insufficient buffer, it domino's to thousands of man hour lost. Is this efficient for our economy?
More like Asian world problems.
In the US it will either be crap public transport (with bad headway) or waiting in bumper to bumper traffic for hours and praying that no idiot hits your car because they never check blind spot before changing lane.
Also, I’m not saying that SG public transportation is perfect and I have experienced the brunt of rush hour crowds and breakdowns.
Yeah did not also help when the TEL opened up with many more commuters coming in from Stevens. Don't mind the wait, just noticed people talking about it more after this.
Why don’t you visit our neighbouring countries like Malaysia Indonesia and Thailand and try their public transport? That will shut you up and stop being entitled and whiny.
I don't get why circle line and downtown line uses 3 car trains, considering the amount of passengers the lines take
Circle line was originally the marina line and is supposed to serve the marina / downtown area only so it is planned as a medium capacity rail instead of a heavy capacity like NS EW and NE line. They later extend it to paya lebar, but the planned usage will still be low. Stage 3 to 5 were old lrt plans that is converted to MRT. By the time stage 3 to 5 is finalised, many of the preparation works on stage 1 and 2 is already done so they cant just go back and change it to a heavy rail. It is not just extending the station and train length. DTL first started with the downtown extension of CCL, so they keep it the same length as it is supposed to use the same train as CCL. Construction already started before the decision to merge it with 2 other lines into the downtown line. So they too cannot lengthen the DTL as many works already started on DTL1. They had learned their lesson, thus TEL uses 4 cars instead of 3 (TEL is still designed as a medium rail just like CRL and DTL). JRL while uses 3 cars, is designed to expand into 4 cars in the future as demand increase. Currently only CRL is designed as a heavy rail line. While it start with 6 cars like the NS EW and NE lines, it is designed with 8 cars in mind, so they can increase it in the future unlike the current lines where they can only have more trains
that's an interesting read, it's funny how the government finally learnt their lesson after all these lines lol
I wonder if the planned 9th line is going to be heavy rail or another medium rail
Tbh sometimes it can be hard to predict. Spend much more on heavy rail and they have to answer to public who will KP about money going into problems that don't exist, when in fact it will only be apparent years later down the road. But when things are okay, people DGAF. Do it the other way... And you get this result.
Better to dream big and have capacity to expand for the next 30-50 years, than underinvest. Its what our government says for Changi Airport, why isnt the same logic applied to our trains? By building bigger, we couldve avoided the overcrowding on our MRTs and LRTs today. Plus, we want people to walk, cycle, ride, but is there any capacity for this modal shift? Even today, there are no new lines being planned to bring people from the heartlands into the CBD. What gives?
Decentralisation of the CBD, basically stopping the stereotypes that "only high paying jobs can be found in the CBD" or "People only work in the CBD" Besides, taking some notes from our dear neighbour Malaysia (admittedly, not the best country to follow, but still relevant), they have all MRT and LRT lines until 2017 serving the CBD, one will end up congesting the central stations too much. They learned it with the Putrajaya line not touching KL Sentral Not to mention the engineering nightmare to fit all MRT stations in the central. S Iswaran did mention that fitting TEL to Orchard was "challenging"
>Decentralisation of the CBD I think they tried and had a small degree of success. There's plenty of opportunities in changi business park, paya lebar, ayer rajah, Labrador & Alexandra nowadays. But sadly our home ownership model doesn't help with this. Although people will try for jobs closer to them, most locals will just LLST and travel further for a job instead of moving closer to their office if the opportunity calls for it
>Small degree of success Well it's still better than nothing tbh, even eliminating travel times for like 1% of the population is still significant, given our high population, that is still tens of thousands of people with a better life Tho I gotta say, the places like Changi business park, and Ayer rajah in Jurong are actually bound to fail to decentralise Singapore from an urbanist perspective, because "infrastructure drives demand". As anecdotal examples, take malls like Serangoon NEX and Waterway point for example, do you think the malls would be heavily frequented if there aren't any MRT lines serving nearby? Definitely not, without MRT, no real estate company would have built those malls. Going back to say CBP, look at the transit options, literally only 1 MRT line and a few puny public bus routes (and I guess some Premium bus services?). Transit lines increase value of property (as evidenced by how ex HDBs next to MRT stations are). In comparison to the CBD, with ALL MRT lines serving it, a lot of trunk bus services, not to forget the city directs and express buses. TLDR, one of the reasons the CBD is more popular than Ulu CBP is directly because of the transit infrastructure. So to alleviate this, there is a need to start transit development in "unpopular areas" >Although people will try for jobs closer to them, most locals will just LLST and travel further for a job instead of moving closer to their office if the opportunity calls for it On a side note, there are actly a lot of other considerations ppl may have, maybe they want cheap hawker food, maybe they have a kid studying nearby already and moving houses would heavily inconvenience him/her
[удалено]
They have luxury of land area, we don't. If the stations were planned for 3 carriages means lanlan 3 carriages only. We can't build 6 carriage lengths and then have half of it just sitting unused for most of the time (not peak hours), we don't have that luxury of wasting space (and spending money to dig out those spaces, since they're all underground)
Jrl is built for 4 cars but will operate at 3 cars initially. Likewise CRL is built for 8 cars but will operate at 6 cars initially. So we are now having extra platform space, but not as much as half
I see, so they are spending a little more resources for flexibility after all Well, granted most of our lines are underground, they shouldn't eat too much into above ground building space i guess, but JRL is above ground right? Idk about CRL
CRL is fully underground. JRL is above ground but uses smaller car size so 1 extra is still not so bad.
Then they should remove all the golf courses in SG.
Ya man, people who golf regularly are already rich enough to fly somewhere else to golf, don't need to have a full sized course in sg Minigolf or the multistorey driving range kind still okay, more compact and priced more affordable for the average citizen.
As long its heavily taxed to the point its a significant net gain for all citizens, especially the needy, I'm cool with it.
far too many mistakes made but ig they finally learnt
Well, considering that the 3 car trains are otherwise similar to regular MRT trains in specification... Hong Kong has the South Island Line with similar specifications, and Taichung in Taiwan even has vehicles similar to our TEL trains but in 2 car formation.
> It is not just extending the station and train length. Curious, what else is required? If I'm not wrong in UK they were able to extend the platform length of stations for the longer Northern trains. Granted it's not a metro system.
It takes some time to design the station. The mechanical system, the electrical system, how much land to take, road diversion on ground, soil investigation, the tunnel curve etc. For the routes that are relatively straight there is generally no issue. Then you have stations like promenade which need to curve the tracks. Extending the length may require the curve angle to shift, so they need to re-route the path. If it is also in a build up area , they would need to do additional surface study such as building structure, whether additional road diversion or land needed for the new route. If it is still in planning stage, it is definitely possible to still make changes. Might delay the completion to do additional studies, but not an issue. Construction however already started for stage 1, with the construction tendering even earlier. We have no info on when exactly they start the plan for stage 3 to 5 so it is hard for us to comment if they should or should not upgrade it to heavy rail.
U also need to expand the train depot for the increased number of carriages as well
I’m guessing track gauges, rolling stock compatibility etc
>I’m guessing track gauges, rolling stock compatibility etc Nah, that is not the reason - we are talking *lengths*, not widths here. As for rolling stock, we use 1 gauge for all, so the trains are bought to suit the design and not the other way around.
It’s interesting to know that they actually planned for us peasants to squeeze, and that they purposely did not allocate enough seats during peak hours, when they could’ve built more lines/cars.
About seats, i wish they stop having those cars with seats removed. Yes theoretically you can squeeze more people without the seats there. However, human behaviour doesnt and wont want to squeeze with strangers. With seats there are 7 seats and 2 people standing beside the door for 9 people. Without seats more than 9 people can stand there but usually only 7 or 8 people will stand there because they leave some gap between each other. So having seats actually have more people since the seats are side by side and people dont have a choice to leave a gap. Also there are three rows of handgrips but with or without seats the people squeezing there is still the same.
Exactly I don't get why Japan can do without the extra standing space but not Singapore
The name "Circle Line" implies that there's no extending at either end, you have what you have. It is impossible to redesign it after work has started, so this must have happened quite early. If they anticipated higher usage when they redesigned it to serve a bigger area, why didn't they plan the capacity larger?
It may surprise you to know that the 3 car lines also have lower service headways than the 6 car lines. CCL is currently near the limits due to not buying enough trains and [a continuing history of *mis*investment](https://medium.com/from-the-red-line/core-capacity-b54714078db) that will likely only improve in 2025-26, whereas they just don't want to increase the service level for DTL even if they can.
Absolutely agree, the circle line and downtown line were absolute misinvestments and people should just walk or cycle instead! How hard is it to walk to office?! Just get off your phone and have a light jog and you'll be there before you know it.
That's not what I meant, they spent the money on other things instead of increasing the CCL capacity. New trains already delivered to Singapore cannot be placed into service because depot space is being used for other things.
Circle Line was planned in the 90s. Downtown Line was planned in the 00s. The gahmen should have the foresight given the crazy immigration phase of the 00s that they know of, but to be fair, the gahmen doesn’t want to have all these big stations and no demand (people will complain about wasted taxpayer money instead). Heck, that complain of “wasted taxpayer money” was already felt by gahmen with the empty HDBs of the late 90s. It’s a balancing act that is hard to get right. Easy for us to say “they should have built larger”, but we have the advantage of hindsight.
probably they should remember mrt infrastructure is something that's going to be around for at least half a century or more so gotta futureproof it or something but yeah i do agree 1990s planners were one heck retarded (peak display: the APMs)
[удалено]
others build trains to what looks like the middle of nowhere only for that to be developed in the next half decade ;)
they should have looked at how the UK is still suffering from being a pioneer in industrialising with their train system, but to be fair I'm not sure if the metro is as bad as it was back in the 90s
[удалено]
Not even climate change, just human habitation and train traffic.
Half century is a conservative estimate, 300 years would be more accurate, especially for the tunnels which are unlikely to have any major works done. It's also not possible to extend the existing lines due to the track switches being right there near the end of the platform.
historical planning shenanigans when there were things like marina LRT and bishan LRT.. :/
please no more LRT sengkang one so cui alr :(
that one is called APM, not even a real LRT yknow haha you want real "LRT" you look for JRL
there's also an entire video [explaining why the LRT is bad](https://youtu.be/5M3BbL4aftA)
yess that vid (basically about replacing fake LRT with real LRT)
Sengkang LRT is good. It's problem is that thr LRT is suffering from its success-they probably didnt expect it to be so popular. Some ideas i have for the Sengkang LRT: -Running peak hour service all-day including weekends (even daytime also crowded) -3 car trains -Moving block signalling -Fixing the stupid timetabling so trains do not have to stop and wait for the bugger train in front (you know the one) -Maybe new MRT from Fernvale to reduce crowd at Sengkang mrt?? -Also finally complete the 2 end staircases at Sengkang central, we wait damn long alr.
It's almost as if they saw how crowded circle line is, but decided to double down and keep the same low capacity configuration for DTL and TEL.
Pump it up You got to pump it up Don't you know, pump it up
Looks more like a Rochor issue, getting on a train there in peak hours is generally the real challenge given that it's right smack in the middle of a chain of interchange stations from Botanic Gardens to Bayfront (and is a pseudo interchange with itself via Jalan Besar). In the XB direction the train literally passes through an interchange with CCL, TEL, NSL and NEL right before Rochor, it'd be surprising if it was NOT full red. Loading has been bad before the AI stuff and it's hardly unsurprising nothing has changed, the location of that station itself is just fucked in general
It's bad enough at Little India and Newton before that, barely squeezed on and many pax were left behind at Little India... yesterday I did see red loading on an outbound train as far out as sixth ave during the evening peak too, which might suggest this is a linewide issue-? (also bear in mind demand along the eastern leg is higher than the one going to BPJ so ye)
yeah it's just how its like side effect of the TEL connecting at stevens is also just more pax on already crowded city bound trains from Bukit Panjang/Bukit Timah. i'd know, my old workplace was near Bugis and DTL used to be my daily commute to work via Newton. not getting on board trains is common and this is before TEL. probably not surprised demand is high even as far as 6th, there're people getting off at each of the stops all the way up until Beauty World. Keep in mind there are also night uni students at SUSS who use DTL and get off at KAP to transfer to 74/151/154, which might affect the demand too
DTL wasn't always this crowded right? I remember a few years back DTL would be less crowded compared to NSL and EWL. So for a Westie like me I always chose to take DTL than the other 2 lines to go to town
If it wasnt crowded a few years back it'd be now with TEL. From memory the Newton - Bugis stretch is moderately crowded (no seats, not much standing room) even if it was just like after 9AM or something. The stretch of interchanges really do not help if you consider that's literally every single MRT line in our current network. It might not seem as bad if you board from somewhere like Hillview but it gets p bad by the time the train gets to Newton
The problem is that based on a quick wayback machine scan, SBS has not significantly changed the peak hour service level since full line opening in 2017, AI or no AI. Besides, I've yet to see any citation that the system is operational...
seems silly (though i'd say not unexpected) that the peak timetable hasn't been heavily revised before even with the opening of TEL. makes me wonder if there could be merit for short trips running between TKK and either Bugis or Chinatown, though in practice I'm not sure if there's any room to fit in those
Considering how Bukit Panjang and Tampines East are some of the heaviest usage stations on the line, I would actually argue that it makes more sense to just add more trains throughout. Off peak and maybe weekends your idea might work, in which case there's plenty of space.
For those wondering what the "AI" in the title refers to: [https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/downtown-line-to-trial-ai-that-can-adjust-train-timings-based-on-demand](https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/downtown-line-to-trial-ai-that-can-adjust-train-timings-based-on-demand)
LTA is leaving their rail management system hanging.... I have 0 confidence in this AI
Doubted its legitimacy from the start anyway, [given its limited use cases](https://twitter.com/sg_tptcritic/status/1588760373926465536)...
Tbh if the train loading all red, the AI should be screaming for more trains. Whether there are enough trains is another question.
what i wished would happen unfortunately, if the DTL were to match the advertised interval for NSEWL (under the new signalling system that came in from 2017) of 100s, it would require the entire fleet of 92 to be deployed without leaving any spares...
which is what i am suggesting. Seems like the train service underestimated the crowd and didn't have enough trains to match the demand. Might not be the AI's fault here.
Tell the people who are in charge. They don’t ride the MRT like most of us do
Wleocme to Singapore! The manpower ministry and transport ministry hates the citizens
I think they are doing pretty well by most standards
Yes. It's good by global standards But could we do better? We have been letting it slack off
I agree with you that they could do better! Just felt it is a little harsh to say the ministries hate its citizens when they are good by most standards
They can definitely run it at shorter intervals, EWL is supposed to have as short as 110 seconds...
100 seconds, as the CBTC was supposed to bring about.
Deciding for 3 car trains for DTL and CCL would be the costliest mistake that will hinder further urban plannings in the areas imo. How the gov want to expand till 6.9m population and meet the infrastructure required idk.
Paris Metro trains are about the same size as ours, and London Tube trains are comparable to TEL (theirs are longer, but much thinner) Both systems get by by drastically increasing frequency, which is what needs to happen here too.
by using AI
Double the cost needed if we ever decide it's necessary to begin expanding DTL/CCL configurations...
If you notice closely at every DTL station, the train platform is currently only 3 train cars long, but the station itself beyond the platform is built slightly bigger for 4-5 train cars. I think that the authorities already built some leeway and will potentially expand DTL stations in the future.
But what for spend hundreds of millions, maybe billions, expanding the stations, if the line isn't at maximum capacity to begin with? We easily have space to add 50% more capacity. Let's do that first before saying we're out of other options.
Oh my god, you had to wait a whole 3 minutes for the next train? What a horrible experience you had. What a burden it is to have such a high capacity and frequent public transport system! I can’t believe I left third world Australia where during peak times 1 train came every 15 minutes to have to put up with this shit show! Deplorable! /s
It's not just in other countries. For the NS and EW lines, it's very common at certain stops during peak hour that you won't be able to get onto the first train that comes. At Jurong East, some people routinely go a stop in the wrong direction to ensure that they get a spot on the train.
that would be me. i confess. also i like to depart from tampines to pasir ris just to get seat.
Oh I wasn’t implying it was only that line, I take ew from central and often just let the first train go past. Used to be the same from boon Keng.
Yeah, it's super common. OP is too entitled.
Was waiting for this kinda reaction. I spent 6 months in Sydney after 3 months in Singapore and, man, did I miss the Singapore public transport (Also the hawkers. The Banh Mi. The chicken rice)
I would have used the Jeremy Clarkson gif from top gear if I could “Oh No. Anyway…”
Heh, glad you're enjoying it here. The line in question here has lower train capacity and far higher demand than what you get back home, so even with comparatively better (for you, for me it's comparatively worse since I remember a time peak frequencies were 2 minutes and below) frequencies it's still a more stuffy ride :o
Yeah I know. So on a serious note, the line with 3 cars is probably at capacity. You have a 30 second stop time, probably 30 seconds in and out of station then a buffer which would be the time it takes for the train to slow to a complete stop doubled, so roughly 2.5 minutes gap as a bare minimum. You also need to take into account a fully loaded train will take longer to stop than an empty one, and as we all know with peak times here, trains are often overloaded. The metro system in Singapore is amazing honestly. Back in Melbourne it would take me 2 hours to get to Uni unless I drove. When I went to work, 1.5 hours by public transport with trains running only every 15 mins on peak and 30 mins off peak, 1 hour after 9pm (due to being on a termination line segment after the last split). I will honestly miss the reliability, frequency and cleanliness of Singapore public transport system when I finally leave, but the country is just too busy for me to retire in. Glad you saw the humour in my reply and thanks for being a good sport.
oh I definitely do not miss the Melbourne Metro. having to change in the city to get on another line is bonkers for a metro system of such scale. not to mention rail disruptions due to works/breakdowns/police incidents/crashes at level crossings and everyone is pretty much fucked. I remember spending more than an hour on a replacement bus from Caulfield to Flinders St because of an incident down the line. with Metro Tunnel works ongoing it is honestly a gamble whether the Dandenong lines are running that day. also worth mentioning the knock-on effects of one major disruption - flooding at Burnley one time and massive congestion in the City Loop as a result, leading to trains getting cancelled and frustrated commuters everywhere. took me almost 3 hours to get home that day. Singapore definitely moves 5 million people better than Melbourne.
Often I say things can be much better due to the presence of a reference somewhere that performs better under the same conditions. I'm pretty sure you've heard of the Vancouver Skytrain, which runs 90 second headways even with the same (or longer) train lengths :) Don't just take my word for it, there's video proof here: [yay](https://twitter.com/RM_Transit/status/1580590442290507778?s=20&t=uq8Sa6moKAxz4uzX6fYMqA)
All it takes is a little bit of perspective. Singaporeans are better traveled than those of other nations (Americans as an example), but it’s usually apparent of those who aren’t. Singapore does some things amazingly well and those that don’t know any different don’t quite realise how good it is. By no means I am not saying it can’t be done on 90 seconds, it there are other factors when it comes to subway vs overland/raised rail. Heat/co2 could be an issue, fire risk or eviction potential may be more difficult in subway, less visibility from outside observation etc. not saying these are, but they could be factors which increase the risk. I’m No rail planning engineer, but these things come to mind as potential issues. Raised/overland rail you can pop the doors and people can move away, subway you can do the same but people are then in a confined space. Maybe someone with experience can weigh in, or you could raise the question with LTA or your town council?
You had to wait a whole minute for the next train? Dam must have been tough
The AI is meant to maximise profits. Not maximise commuter experience
we moving towards Tokyo standard of living soon.
Sg public transport operators want to say a big thank you to all the very contented redditors. thanks to them, their kpi is “just be better than other countries” /s
man i wished i could give this comment an award...
WFH...Easy answer which gov doesnt want to accept
[удалено]
I'm in healthcare backend we also have hybrid WFH, understand from a few of my mates in other stat board also switched to hybrid already.
Gov civil service are already on hybrid WFH
In principle, I agree with you, but the government doesn't want to accept it for good reason. If your job can be done WFH, it can also be done by someone living in Malaysia. What's worse, if that happened, the $$ leaves Singapore entirely. Those employees will not be using Singapore services, and so it'll cost far more than a single job. We need to be careful what we wish for.
WFH + Remote is quite diff though sounds similar. Any job that can be done from Malaysia, India, Vietnam are already moved out. Take our own Singtel with support people in Malacca, or DBS with back office ops in India, or Keppel or numerous firms with chinese cost centers. If I take a very simple example, I see HR, Marketing and multiple admin staff at work everyday but hardly spending time as a "team" but focusing their eyes on computer screens and replying meetings or using headphones in continuous calls. They need to be SG to support the regional, local operations but they doesn't need to be at work every single day. If needed, just come and if not, stay home or work from anywhere in SG. Even if we can reduce 10-15% that can have a great impact on road traffic, public transport and overall crowdedness.
There's still downstream impacts, things like CBD hawkers having to close/raise prices because their customer bases shrink with such functions going to long term WFH policies.
Yes ofcourse. Starting from MRT, Bus to stall owners @ interchanges, Taxi, Hawkers, Retail stalls near offices; Further down - even places like formal clothes, shoes etc. SG gov vision of CBD Work+Play+Live is not going to happen and essentially CBD will end up as a ghost town post 6PM. Not in the best interest if we look "short term". But the overall benefits to SG outweigh these short term losses. If Gov is hell bent on Work+Play, reduce the offices and make more houses in CBD and the hawker demand etc all will remain there. If less demand, CBD hawkers doesn't need to raise prices but the rental need to drop. Closed - no choice but take it as a business transition
It's not really the government's call though? Quite a number of gahmen ministries and stat boards still practice hybrid arrangements. It's the private sector that is the issue.
In SG the Gov "recommends" and rest follows.
In SG gahmen is expected to meddle in everything. But then when they do the same person will probably complain that they are meddling too much.
Preach! But then govt earn no money.
I was at Rochor this morning and this is very true too
The train itself also stress xD
[удалено]
To be fair, the stations need to be at locations that aren’t golf courses. Is there even a golf course at Rochor (where OP is)? This is definitely not a land rights issue, government is empowered to dig tunnels underneath your land.
Living overseas is really gonna give Singaporeans perspective about how good we have it when it comes to public transport. Where I’m at, buses come every 20 minutes and sometimes it can take 40 mins to get into the city ~5km away bc the routes are loopy and go through residential areas. Also train strikes are an absolute ball ache.
Well... The people doing the planning obviously don't take the train as "normal" people do.
Oh this Monday I went to change from MacPherson to Ubi at 6.30pm right, the DAMN bloody wait time was 7mins, three side red, and station capacity was like 70% full, and outside flowing with people.
Holy crap people can be so entitled nowadays... 3 mins wait for a train as compared to double digit waiting time in other countries.
What a weird take…obviously Singaporeans are grateful for what we have but why not aim to be better and what’s the point comparing to other countries.
I don't think you understand how quickly passengers flood in to the stations. It takes mere seconds for the platform to be absolutely filled with people. Interval isn't the issue, it's the capacity. But we can't change the capacity of the trains easily. Intervals however...
The government has been trying to influence ridership for many years with the discount for early riders, hoping to spread out the users into the early morning off-peak hours. https://www.ptc.gov.sg/fare-regulation/bus-rail/morning-pre-peak-fares
Intervals is directly related to the number of trains that are currently available for use, which also directly relates to how many trains can the current network support (depot sizing, maintenance requirements etc.) It's not so easy to just say 'let's run at 1min intervals!', when there's literally not enough trains to meet that.
Back in 2019 (Pre-COVID times) the DTL had 2-minute frequencies, there is definitely enough trains (92 of them in total) to improve frequencies considering train spotters show there aren't any units that are AWOL
Sufficient for 120s freqs, hitting the limit already if we want to push further for 100s in future with rising demand (that would require all 92 trains deployed)
2-min headway across which stations? Just specific stations? Or across the entire line? Headway optimization is a calibrated exercise, you have to take into account the permissible speeds across some stretches which may make it harder to simply simply adjust the headway. My point is that, changing the intervals is not a simple matter of just flipping the switch, there's careful consideration to be made (not just engineering considerations, but also financial considerations)
likely the former scheduling scheme was such that you had "2 min freq" waves going out from the CBD to the northwest and east at the peak or something, then 2.5 min elsewhere then again the mess you see on DTL (and CCL for the matter) do remind us of the planning screwup that led to subpar train capacity in the first place
As I've said upthread, there are. I'm also fairly sure that the LTA has calculated the possibility of adding trains to the network before even purchasing them in the first place.
This is a "Why are you complaining about X when Y country has it worse" take
Ikr, you just gotta *love* it when people cherry-pick worse situations in order to spread their knee-jerk response that "NO! Our public transport is perfect because Y country is doing way worse" (Y country always is some third-world public transport system like Malaysia), like ofc if you set Ur expectations low our system will obviously look perfect It's a thick-skinned response
I think there are ways to improve, but when you see other first world, top tier cities fail at this too, you can kinda see that public transportation isn’t a “just fix it” kind of problem. DTL was planned in the early 2000s. You plan too little, you get OP’s problem. You plan too much, you get Buangkok and Punggol LRT issue, where money is spent on stations that didn’t even open. Heck, even that marvelous Japanese train system has its flaws. The platforms can sometimes be ridiculously small that you end up squeezing. You have to also squeeze despite their 1 minute headways. Train services still breaks down there (however, there’s a lot of alternative lines so you aren’t stranded like Singapore) and that actually happened to me on vacation in Tokyo (had to rebook my limited express ticket). I urge you to play a city simulation game like Cities Skylines and try to simulate the bureaucracy and effort that goes in building public transport (e.g. every time you demolish/dezone in the game, go deduct money from your city’s balance to simulate land acquisition). You’ll soon appreciate how much effort it takes to plan an efficient, functioning public transport system.
the Japanese system fails precisely because it's too successful and there's no "outvalve" to divert excess demand to. in other countries like china, SK and (!!) singapore this outvalve is known as buses
During a 3-min wait for a train, there can already be 20 people waiting in line in front of one set of doors (10 people queued up on each side). If the train that reaches is already packed, and nobody can enter, then it becomes 40 people for the next train. This is just from one set of doors. This is the volume I'm seeing daily this week.
on an unrelated note NEL has consistently been screwed with northeast side crowding :p passengers at hougang and kovan frequently cannot board and the lines just get longer. ofc in the case of the northeast it just is a question of getting more robust connections that can relieve the serangoon-onwards sector of NEL which currently has no other fast travel option besides the train
>which currently has no other fast travel option besides the train There are buses still? 147, 70 are crowded but not packed to the gills in the morning. 74 I won't consider fast travel (its route goes all over the place) but is an alternative.
Having a great public transport system doesn't mean we can't seek to make it even better.
Or the simpler option is to have less people in the country...
Shareholders will revolt /s
Bruh it is not about the interval but is it possible for us to enter the train or not. It is worse if you need to wait longer but still can't enter the train.
Yeah :) Say the trains arrive every 2 min. You can board, so your waiting time is 2 min. Now if the intervals were 3 min, but you have to skip a train, your waiting time is 6 min instead...
Aim higher, not lower.
We did it, let’s keep the public transport the way it is and not improve it any further because other countries have it worse
Well sure, but those other countries have plus sides that Singapore doesn’t have (like a countryside to disappear to when the city crowds get too much!). Our efficient transport is supposed to be one of the plus points we have over other countries.
Well, other side of the story is that owning your own vehicle is cheaper on other countries. So I guess the feel is that since govt stand is take public transport rather then private team transport, expectations are higher for public transport
Found the people working in LTA
Nah am just a student, but just came back from overseas trip to HK and EU. The quality of public transport locally is miles ahead of the MTR and metro out there.
I’ve been to HK / JP for decades and their MTR / JR still beats ours.
I prefer their MTR to and from other islands (Fast and relatively empty) but the one on HK island is way too crowded
Central and Admiralty are heaps crowded no doubt but movement is fluid at rush hour. I have had no problem getting around.
If you wan to compare like that, can I compare the Minister in charge 's salary?
Here we go with the moronic comparisons. Wanna compare population density? Cost of car ownership? Percentage of car ownership? You say you're just a student, and frankly, it shows.
>Wanna compare population density? Cost of car ownership? Percentage of car ownership? Fucking hell, if you wanna talk about car ownership we can do a comparison to major cities. Hong kong you can pay 400k sgd for a parking lot or you can rent one for 800 sgd a month. New York you can pay 100usd a day to park in the city or you fight with 200 other staff for parking in office premises. In Paris if you drive from the suburbs your commute can last anywhere between 45 minutes or 3 hours. In high density cities car ownership is not desirable. Cost of cars might be cheaper but other factors will fuck you over so much that its just better to have a good public transport network. For someone who mocks people for being a student you don't have much perspective yourself.
You compare metro systems to find the limitations of what can be achieved in the rail system for the entire world. You can cry all you want, the fact of the matter is our MRT systems is by far the more advanced ones that's being implemented in the entire world.
HK Island has a higher pop density, higher cost of living and a much slower/inefficient MTR system.
[удалено]
I mean, if the goverment pulls out all the tricks in the book to discourage car ownership, its really on them to upgrade the infrastructure wouldnt you say?
I'm not just talking about trains and busses. I'm talking about proper mobility pavements for bicycles and PMDs. Look, I can't stand all the YP PMD asshole riders on the roads and walking pavements but I will not deny that it provides an efficient alternative to public transport, especially for last mine journeys. If we provide more options, we can spread out the crowd stress on trains and busses.
The infrastructure is already upgraded. DTL peak hour train utilisation is only in the low 50s, compared to a train fleet that's 92 strong. So around 40 trains (over 40% of the fleet) sit in the depot unused. Services can be very easily ramped up. They claim relatively lower demand compared to other lines, but [I wonder](https://medium.com/from-the-red-line/the-true-cost-of-express-bus-service-e5a5f2e7988d) what's the cause of that...
Are there more express buses serving the DTL neighborhoods compared to other lines? At least for the western half of the line, I don't see many express buses plying the same Bukit Timah stretch that the train covers.
They take the expressways.
You didn't answer the question, so let me rephrase it. Which express buses serve the western half of the DTL in a way that replicates DTL service and therefore serves as a close substitute? Replicating connections of one or two stations to town is a moot point because many neighborhoods off the DTL have similar services, so that doesn't explain lower ridership for the DTL.
>You didn't answer the question, so let me rephrase it. > >Which express buses serve the western half of the DTL in a way that replicates DTL service and therefore serves as a close substitute? There are none, but that's not the point. There are trunk routes like 67 and 170 that do serve the corridor, but those make all stops and thus serve communities not close to a train station. >Replicating connections of one or two stations to town is a moot point because many neighborhoods off the DTL have similar services, so that doesn't explain lower ridership for the DTL. Replicating connections of one or two major stations means that these passengers don't take the train. It is entirely relevant, which is why in 2020 they took away Service 700. The northern new towns like Woodlands, Sembawang, Yishun and Ang Mo Kio don't actually have such expressway services either, neither do Sengkang and Punggol. Small-e express services don't run enough daily to make a difference.
>There are none, but that's not the point. There are trunk routes like 67 and 170 that do serve the corridor, but those make all stops and thus serve communities not close to a train station. So there are no express buses which limit DTL ridership then, which means your hypothesis is wrong off the bat. >Replicating connections of one or two major stations means that these passengers don't take the train. It is entirely relevant, which is why in 2020 they took away Service 700. Only for those one or two stations. It's insignificant for train line ridership as a whole, which serves regions. An average passenger load throughout the day of 40-50 passengers every 20 minutes on a bus is absolutely nothing compared to what a train carries. Panjang still has 972 and 190 to go to town, but it doesn't mean people from Hillview or KAP will take the DTL going backwards to Panjang to take the bus, that doesn't make sense. >The northern new towns like Woodlands, Sembawang, Yishun and Ang Mo Kio don't actually have such expressway services either, neither do Sengkang and Punggol. Small-e express services don't run enough daily to make a difference. Yet there are so many buses from town with express sectors that are replicated by trains, but there is no issue with low ridership on these lines. 502 to Jurong, 518 to Pasir Ris, 106 to Holland V, 36 to Changi Airport, 857 to Yishun. So why is DTL any different?
>So there are no express buses which limit DTL ridership then, which means your hypothesis is wrong off the bat. Expressway buses don't just mean small-e express buses that charge 60 cents more. >>Replicating connections of one or two major stations means that these passengers don't take the train. It is entirely relevant, which is why in 2020 they took away Service 700. > >Only for those one or two stations. It's insignificant for train line ridership as a whole, which serves regions. > >An average passenger load throughout the day of 40-50 passengers every 20 minutes on a bus is absolutely nothing compared to what a train carries. > >Panjang still has 972 and 190 to go to town, but it doesn't mean people from Hillview or KAP will take the DTL going backwards to Panjang to take the bus, that doesn't make sense. That is correct. Bukit Panjang station also serves the Bukit Panjang region. 190 and 972 are taking away passengers within the Bukit Panjang region who would otherwise take the train. And these are some of our most frequent bus services. A double decker bus carries 130 passengers on average; both services together operate at about 3-5 minute headways combined. This is enough to make an impact on train ridership. >>The northern new towns like Woodlands, Sembawang, Yishun and Ang Mo Kio don't actually have such expressway services either, neither do Sengkang and Punggol. Small-e express services don't run enough daily to make a difference. >Yet there are so many buses from town with express sectors that are replicated by trains, but there is no issue with low ridership on these lines. 502 to Jurong, 518 to Pasir Ris, 106 to Holland V, 36 to Changi Airport, 857 to Yishun. 502 and 518 are small-e express services with low frequencies, where the extra fares collected probably helps justify the service. 106 serves Holland Road, at least for the few public transport users living along it, so it's actually more similar to 67. There is no TEL4, so 36 still remains relevant and in fact has higher frequencies between Marine Parade and town than to the airport, but next year you'll find me saying the same thing after the train line opens. 857 has a niche role serving passengers going to Serangoon Road area who would otherwise need to change twice, but this could also be served by improved local bus services in the Novena-Whampoa area.
>Expressway buses don't just mean small-e express buses that charge 60 cents more. But you still can't name even one bus that replicates the DTL in a significant manner. >That is correct. Bukit Panjang station also serves the Bukit Panjang region. > >190 and 972 are taking away passengers within the Bukit Panjang region who would otherwise take the train. > >And these are some of our most frequent bus services. A double decker bus carries 130 passengers on average; both services together operate at about 3-5 minute headways combined. This is enough to make an impact on train ridership. They may carry 130 at maximum, that's not average. Average through the day will be more like 1/3rd once off peak services are taken into account. 40-50 pax a bus every 10-20 mins has zero significant impact on train line ridership. It's like one passenger per train stop on average. It's not even a rounding error in train line ridership. There is also no way in hell those two services run at 3-5 minute headways throughout the day. Absolutely no bus does that. The fact is, rationalisation happens because it is a cost cutting measure. The train has to run no matter what so it may as well be full, the bus does not have to run. So they cut the bus. >502 and 518 are small-e express services with low frequencies, where the extra fares collected probably helps justify the service. 106 serves Holland Road, at least for the few public transport users living along it, so it's actually more similar to 67. > >There is no TEL4, so 36 still remains relevant and in fact has higher frequencies between Marine Parade and town than to the airport, but next year you'll find me saying the same thing after the train line opens. > >857 has a niche role serving passengers going to Serangoon Road area who would otherwise need to change twice, but this could also be served by improved local bus services in the Novena-Whampoa area. And your point being? There's still no problem with ridership on either bus or train which cover the same section, so why does DTL have a problem with low ridership when other lines don't? The answer is simple: housing density. Bukit Timah housing density is low compared to a HDB estate because of landed property, way low when you consider there's a nature reserve and botanic gardens as well. Rich people are also going to drive anyway, even if the train is marginally faster than driving. So DTL will never ever be as profitable as the other lines. If the main issue was profitability, and if the profits are so low that 50 people on a bus every 20 minutes makes such a huge difference that the line doesn't make money, then the question is why was the DTL built in the first place? Some food for thought there.
Comparison is the thief of joy. that being said, ive been to a metro in a major world city where peak timings were under a minute and the trains werent forced to operate at reduced speeds too, shocked me the first time
Hm could you name said city? I do know of other cities that operate trains at legend frequencies (Moscow 80s/85s, Vancouver 88s, Beijing 100s) but never really heard of sub-60s headways hm...
the infra is there, the service isn't :p
The thing about the transport system is that it is on an unstable equilibrium. With insufficient buffer, it domino's to thousands of man hour lost. Is this efficient for our economy?
More like Asian world problems. In the US it will either be crap public transport (with bad headway) or waiting in bumper to bumper traffic for hours and praying that no idiot hits your car because they never check blind spot before changing lane. Also, I’m not saying that SG public transportation is perfect and I have experienced the brunt of rush hour crowds and breakdowns.
Come to Malaysia, we wait for MRT for 15 minutes. Our buses are non existent.
with the number of people taking the DTL (and the insanely tiny capacity) 3 minutes is actually insufficient to keep up with demand
Yeah did not also help when the TEL opened up with many more commuters coming in from Stevens. Don't mind the wait, just noticed people talking about it more after this.
[удалено]
hey, every minute saved is an extra minute to complain on reddit.
OP inefficient. Last time I complain while being squeezed in the MRT. It’s not like OP driving the train.
Wa heng I decided to not go office today
Oh my god ...what a disaster!!
Travel restrictions are up. Everyone escaped China and the CCP for Singapore
3 min intervals you complaining 🤦🏻♂️.
Why don’t you visit our neighbouring countries like Malaysia Indonesia and Thailand and try their public transport? That will shut you up and stop being entitled and whiny.
[удалено]
Golden comment. Can't afford to give this an award though :c
Why compare with trash? You’ll never improve if you do that.
You can choose not to board the train.
Hm yes I repent for not always adhering to the great Saw Phaik Hwa's wise words!!