I dunno if this topic has been here before.

Now's that the Tanjong Pagar Railway Station will be shifted to Woodlands.
So lets disscuss what will the development for this station?

Convert it into another MRT station ? The Western Region Line.
The tracks should be usuable for the current KTM tracks, built another train suitable for it
.

Tanjong Pagar KTM Station to be preserved.
Tracks are to be changed to the standard gauge 1435mm from 1000mm.
Station to used for the future MRT line.
HHPSD to be installed.

The MRT Line could be from Woodlands to Tanjong Pagar via Buona Vista using the orginal KTM line whilst modifiying the track gauge

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4153/5041365120_93370b8d51_b.jpg


NW1 - Sungei Kadut
NW10/EW21/CC22 - Buona Vista
NW15/ NE2 - Kampong Bahru (Tanjong Pagar KTM Railway station converted)

Using KTM tracks.Changing the track gauage. This MRT line is called North West line

NW2/NS6 - Sungei Kadut
NW3 - Gali Batu
NW4/DT1 - Bukit Panjang
NW5/DT2 - Cashew
NW6/DT3 - Hillview
NW7 - Jalan Anak Bukit
NW8 - Holland Road
NW9 - Mount Sinai
NW10 - Ghim Moh
NW11/EW21/CC22 - Buona Vista
NW12 - Portsdown
NW13 - Alexandra
NW14/WR11 - Bukit Merah
NW15/NE2 - Kampong Bahru (former Tanjong Pagar KTM railway stn)

all station and tracks are on the ground with some exceptions at bukit timah section.

http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/7698/conceptplanoverallmap.jpg

I was suggesting such a use of KTM tracks on some other thread. But in my concept, it would feature a tunnel to Marina Bay and only few stations, to act as a line faster than MRT.

I speculated that stations could be at Marina Bay, Tanjong Pagar (interchange to the upcoming NE2 station), Buona Vista, Bukit Timah, Bukit Panjang, Yew Tee East and Woodlands.

I send this suggestion to LTA, although they only replied with their enigmatic 'we will consider that in our future review', I keep my fingers crossed. The masterplan you posted hopefully demonstrates they are for that idea.

Part of DTL phase 2 is or can already be considered part of the northwest line, you can already get the official map from the LTA official website, unlike the NEL, which was a single straight line from ponggol /senkang area to harbourfront, the DTL had 3 sections, if you break it up, you'll notice that part of it already cover the northwest region of singapore right up to bukit panjang.

It would be a real shame to waste so much precious land on this. Make it an underground MRT line. Extend it eastward beyond NE2 through the future Keppel-area CBD and terminate at either Raffles Place or Marina Bay.

There will be alot of work required if such a line is built using more or less, KTM's right of way. Firstly, you'd need to double-track the line, which will be the first stumbling block. There is clearly no space for that in many areas; places where there are roads crossing above the track were simply not built to handle a double-tracked narrow gauge, much less a double-tracked standard gauge.

Secondly, MRTs travel pretty fast and pretty frequent - this means nobody's gonna risk anybody crossing the tracks like at several places so this means fencing it up. There is a whole section where the track travels at-grade, crossing several roads even, so electrification, whether using 3rd rail or overhead cables, will be an issue.

Next, modernization. Wheelchair acessibility, air-conditioning, raising platform heights to suit MRT, half-height platform screen doors, advertisement, ventilation, electrical substations and those 'halon rooms' in MRT stations... If preservation is the main intention, what is Tanjung Pagar Railway station gonna look like? I shudder at the thought.

Lastly, the Circle Line and Downtown Line will achieve accessibility much better than this line.

^^ Space shouldn't be an issue. in the few build up places it could go underground or even be stacked. Viaducts could be build above current road crossings. Fencing it out wouldn't be hard, just like between Khatib and Yio Chu Kang so third rail wouldn't be a problem. At-grade railways are extremely common worldwide, even in very dense urban areas, and somehow they are doing fine. I see no point in digging tunnels at all cost, while in fact railways are less narrow and take less space than for instance roads.

Modernization could be skipped if no station was made at TP terminal. As I suggested, it could interchange with NE2. Just brand new stations would be build and nothing would have to be 'upgraded'.

Lastly, the one massive advantage of this idea - time and costs. It could be build way faster than fully underground lines. I dread to imagine how terrible the crowds on MRT will be before DTL and TSL even open. We need solutions ASAP.

^^ Space shouldn't be an issue. in the few build up places it could go underground or even be stacked. Viaducts could be build above current road crossings. Fencing it out wouldn't be hard, just like between Khatib and Yio Chu Kang so third rail wouldn't be a problem. At-grade railways are extremely common worldwide, even in very dense urban areas, and somehow they are doing fine. I see no point in digging tunnels at all cost, while in fact railways are less narrow and take less space than for instance roads.

Modernization could be skipped if no station was made at TP terminal. As I suggested, it could interchange with NE2. Just brand new stations would be build and nothing would have to be 'upgraded'.
Rail construction are time and capital intensive investments. As such, nothing should be a stop-gap situation. You wanna do it fast and yet, you suggest stacked underground and viaducts, and these things take time to construct. Even worse, you suggest it interchanges with NE2. Even if we started that right now, it's going to take at least 3 to 4 years to build.

I doubt the viability of such a line in the first place. If there was REALLY a need, DTL2/CCL4/5 should be 6-car already.

The biggest worries are the grade-level crossings. While electrified grade-level crossings can be made safe (e.g. Tokyo's suburban network, the Chicago "L", etc.), for a high-frequency rapid transit service, it could be inconvenient. The barriers would have to come down so often that people will wonder why they built a road there. Replacing any grade-level crossings will be expensive and difficult.

Besides, the corridor of the KTM is not the busiest nor is it one that will bring in revenue. Tanjong Pagar to Buona Vista is served by the East-West Line, and the Bukit Timah section is already well-served by DTL2. Buona Vista to Bukit Timah is served by CCL4. This entire line would be rendered useless in no time.

Actually instead of looking at it in a dichotomy - either it will succeed or fail... why isn't anyone looking at the possibilities of what such a linear strip of land can provide? If some decision maker comes along and decide on doing one thing - be it turning it into a park, or sell it as real estate, or turn into a single transit corridor, I will wonder how serious he/she is.

We can look at the corridor in sections. Generally I think it can be broken up into 8.
1. AYE corridor
2. Portsdown
3. Tanglin Halt
4. Ghim Moh
5. Blackmore
6. Upper Bt Timah Road
7. Woodlands Rd
8. Kranji-Sungei Mandai
Of course this is not exhaustive, a dedicated team of researchers and experts will definitely be able to break it down into even more sections and make better decisions on relevant uses while keeping to an overall vision for the corridor.

My idea is as follows.
1. AYE - not suitable for real estate due to terrain and proximity to AYE, can be used as part of a new MRT/transit line to serve areas that are currently "missed out" by EWL and CCL.
2. Portsdown - Can be integrated into new developments in the Alexandra/Portsdown area together with Alexandra Hospital, may be developed into a new entertainment and business hub integrating some of heritage elements such as unused rail tracks and the conserved buildings
3. Tanglin Halt - May be integrated into One North or new residential developments around the Commonwealth Stn area.
4. Ghim Moh - Surrounding areas are well developed leaving a narrow corridor - can remain as a park for the community - park connector can snake roughly along the corridor back to Tanjong Pagar as well, taking up the top of the MRT tunnels along the AYE stretch.
5. Blackmore - Definitely given back to real estate developments except for keeping some parts such as the old station and rail bridge as heritage landmarks.
6. Upper Bt Timah - Similar to Blackmore, as most of the leftover areas around the road and railway are wide enough. With exception to the Bt Timah nature reserve area of course, where a simple laying of timber boards above the track will make an excellent trekking route.
7.Woodlands Road, this portion probably has the least opportunities to recover land from. But the removal of the track does allow for more road connections between Woodlands Road and Choa Chu Kang area to provide a better transport network. Maybe a biking track can still be built for the foreign workers and cycling enthusiasts alike.
8. Kranji-Sungei Mandai - given back to nature! This area is a gem that should be preserved and hopefully connected back to Sungei Buloh via an additional inland green corridor.

The biggest worries are the grade-level crossings. While electrified grade-level crossings can be made safe (e.g. Tokyo's suburban network, the Chicago "L", etc.), for a high-frequency rapid transit service, it could be inconvenient. The barriers would have to come down so often that people will wonder why they built a road there. Replacing any grade-level crossings will be expensive and difficult.

Besides, the corridor of the KTM is not the busiest nor is it one that will bring in revenue. Tanjong Pagar to Buona Vista is served by the East-West Line, and the Bukit Timah section is already well-served by DTL2. Buona Vista to Bukit Timah is served by CCL4. This entire line would be rendered useless in no time.

The tracks could simply run on viaducts on the sections with current grade-level crossings. It wouldn't be really tough to build since the train services will be down.

Beside, lets look at the bigger picture - yes, in Singapore, we can agree that majority of densely populated areas are served by MRT lines. So what? The lines are grossly overcrowded and deserve bypasses on longer distances.

In case of this concept, the area adjacent to KTM tracks on short distances might not provide enough catchment but Woodlands, Bukit Panjang and the CBD alone are likely to do it. The hundreds of thousands that now take NSL, buses or drive could take that new faster line. TSL will be doing fine by itself as it runs through many packed areas like Ang Mo Kio.

Frankly speaking, this line could make more sense in relieving loads on existing lines than DTL2, which mainly runs through small condo/bungalow areas.

@chumpon

when was that map published?

The tracks could simply run on viaducts on the sections with current grade-level crossings. It wouldn't be really tough to build since the train services will be down.

Beside, lets look at the bigger picture - yes, in Singapore, we can agree that majority of densely populated areas are served by MRT lines. So what? The lines are grossly overcrowded and deserve bypasses on longer distances.

In case of this concept, the area adjacent to KTM tracks on short distances might not provide enough catchment but Woodlands, Bukit Panjang and the CBD alone are likely to do it. The hundreds of thousands that now take NSL, buses or drive could take that new faster line. TSL will be doing fine by itself as it runs through many packed areas like Ang Mo Kio.

Frankly speaking, this line could make more sense in relieving loads on existing lines than DTL2, which mainly runs through small condo/bungalow areas.
That is a poor argument. I'm not against the line but in its current version, the line is not effective nor adequate for the fact that it stops short of the CBD by ending at Tanjong Pagar. So to get to the other parts of the city, the line relies on a single station - NE2 and this is the line's biggest flaw. If a commuter living in the northwest wants to go to the Marina Bay area, he/she must transfer at NE2, and transfer to the DTL at Chinatown. If they want to go to Orchard or Bugis, transfer at NE2, and transfer at either Dhoby Ghaut or Outram Park. If going to HarbourFront, then transfer at either Buona Vista or at NE2.

I'm sure people living in Woodlands and Bukit Panjang will appreciate a line that will take them somewhere they really want to go, not an express line to nowhere, then be forced to make multiple rail line transfers on crowded lines to get to their final destination.

Agreed. I do not think that if a line is proposed on part of, or the entire KTM track, it will follow exactly the track from end to end. From Bt Merah, the line may divert towards the north onto the Neil Road area and connect to the CBD proper, bypassing Tanjong Pagar Station. Tanjong Pagar/Keppel Area will be served by NE2 on the north, and another line on the south in the future when there is a more comprehensive plan for the existing port.

That is a poor argument. I'm not against the line but in its current version, the line is not effective nor adequate for the fact that it stops short of the CBD by ending at Tanjong Pagar. So to get to the other parts of the city, the line relies on a single station - NE2 and this is the line's biggest flaw. If a commuter living in the northwest wants to go to the Marina Bay area, he/she must transfer at NE2, and transfer to the DTL at Chinatown. If they want to go to Orchard or Bugis, transfer at NE2, and transfer at either Dhoby Ghaut or Outram Park. If going to HarbourFront, then transfer at either Buona Vista or at NE2.

I'm sure people living in Woodlands and Bukit Panjang will appreciate a line that will take them somewhere they really want to go, not an express line to nowhere, then be forced to make multiple rail line transfers on crowded lines to get to their final destination.

To make it clear, I'm not really an advocate of the line, I'm just saying it might work.

Yes, I agree with you that if the station ran only to the current KTM Tanjong Pagar Terminal, it would be useless. But if it extended on a relatively short tunnel to Marina Bay (possibly with a shell station for connection to future CCL6 under TPCT), it could work out. In that case, rest of the CBD would be accessible with 1 or 2 transfers.

Bugis - From Marina Bay through Raffles Place/City Hall. Cross platform interchange would make the trip very smooth.
Chinatown, Harborfront, Little India - through NE2
Bayfront, Promenade - by CCLe
Orchard - straight train on NSL.

In this configuration, I suppose the demand would be pretty realistic to justify that line.

To make it clear, I'm not really an advocate of the line, I'm just saying it might work.

Yes, I agree with you that if the station ran only to the current KTM Tanjong Pagar Terminal, it would be useless. But if it extended on a relatively short tunnel to Marina Bay (possibly with a shell station for connection to future CCL6 under TPCT), it could work out. In that case, rest of the CBD would be accessible with 1 or 2 transfers.

Bugis - From Marina Bay through Raffles Place/City Hall. Cross platform interchange would make the trip very smooth.
Chinatown, Harborfront, Little India - through NE2
Bayfront, Promenade - by CCLe
Orchard - straight train on NSL.

In this configuration, I suppose the demand would be pretty realistic to justify that line.

no offence but that part from Tanjong pagar, NEL 2 and Marina bay/marina pier and also CCL 6 is already taken up by TSL

refer to TSL thread , page 42 and package D, where the tender conditions are already set by LTA.

for elevated tracks, these track needs a lot of maintenance and also ballast stones to keep the track stable, a good example is the existing NSEW lines, the tracks are also exposed to weather conditions where it can expand and contract in changing weather conditions, therefore constant maintenance is needed in these areas.

for underground tracks, the tracks are embedded in concrete,although it require lesser maintenance. it is unwise to use concrete embedded tracks on elevated areas as the weather conditons will cause stress not only on the concrete but also on the track itself which could pose a major problem, it's not as easy as you think it would be.

TSL will most likely run along the northern part of Tanjong Pagar, from Outram Park to Maxwell and along McCallum St. This leaves the Southern end - Hoe Chiang-Anson area still unserved by any MRT line. Development around this area has been phenomenal this few years, brought on by a lot of renewal and redevelopments, so I think ultimately either CCL6 or another line will have to serve this area.

I propose a new line to be built in the 2020s.

From somewhere in the as-yet-to-be-developed Tengah area, the TKL would interchange with the NSL at Bukit Gombak, a new station in the Hillview area, an interchange with the DTL2 at Beauty World, a new station near the Childrens' Aid Society serving Ngee Ann Polytechnic and the Singapore Institute of Management, an interchange station with the future Holland Line near Ulu Pandan Road and Holland Grove Road, an interchange with CCL and EWL at Buona Vista, then a few stations along Queensway and Jalan Bukit Merah, an interchange with the NEL at NE2, and finally some coverage of the future Keppel-area CBD including a CCL6 interchange.

^^That would be an interesting idea. I think the forested area in font of Ngee Ann Poly would be an ideal location. Besides, that area could be marked for development. You can try to send your idea to LTA and see their response. They may have another idea of what they want for that area. :)

That is the most complicated line that I have ever heard of, largely because of the lack of visual aids.

It seems that the southern section of your line - if I plotted correctly - follows the CCL5 alignment. It is like the DTL running parallel to the EWL.

Someone please plot his line on a map. I would love to see it!

I am not entirely sure where is Tengah though ahah.

North of Jurong, bounded by KJE, Brickland Rd, B. Batok Rd and PIE in my definition. Or Sungei Tengah area to most people.

Right, just got a map that mcarling sent me.

It seems that it will run parallel to the DTL until Hume before dipping down towards Buona Vista, run parallel to the EWL, interchanging at Keppel along the way before terminating somewhere to the south of Tanjong Pagar.

Yeah...I suck at descriptions. Will leave it to mcarling to post his map at his own discretion.

haha i was gonna try and illustrate this but seeing that it has been done, ill wait. haha

Will leave it to mcarling to post his map at his own discretion.

You may go ahead and post it if you know how. I had been hoping you might make it prettier. If someone else wants to pm me an email address, I'll send it.

I like the idea too.. especially the part where it runs thru the Queensway-Bukit Merah area. But instead of Hillview, I "straighten" out the line a bit to make the line run through the rest of Bukit Batok neighbourhood.

Here is the image u all want.

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/1402/tkl.png
Map from gothere.sg

^^
That's not quite what I had in mind. Please excuse the bad graphics.

http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/7870/tengahkeppel.png

such a line would be unnecessary. overlaps existing ewl and dtl:ohno:

Was working on Google Maps before switching over to the gothere.sg cleaner map.

I have never plotted a route before...and so here is my first try. Hope it captures mcarling's vision. Done using Microsoft PowerPoint and Paint. (Until someone teaches me how to make nice bold curves on Inkscape.)

http://i51.tinypic.com/2ltpncn.jpg

I like this proposal a lot! And it's also extremely easy to build due to the availability of existing reserves along the railway line, even some parts are already sunken so cut and cover can be done really quickly, and of course to a lot of commuters staying in the northwest (Bt Batok, Choa Chu Kang, Bt Timah and Bt Panjang, this line is very convenient both in terms of getting to the CBD, and making transfers to other lines.

But it replicates part of Holland Line, and there is a missed opportunity in terms of connecting to the west side of NUS and Teban Gardens. But I wouldn't say that it overlaps EWL and DTL. Due to the lack of bus interchanges along EWL between Clementi and CBD, connections between the EWL stations and the densly-developed Neil Rd-Bt Merah-Queensway corridor is still very weak. Bus services like 145A, 195 are often filled to the brim. Bt Batok area on the other hand has very bad road network system, and northbound NSL trains are always full after Coa Chu Kang, so it desperately need another line to serve it.

such a line would be unnecessary. overlaps existing ewl and dtl
Such a line is unnecessary today. As the new Keppel-area CBD is developed following the expiration of the TPCT lease in 2027 and the Tengah area is developed (probably at about the same time), a line which allows commuters headed toward the older CBD areas on the EWL, DTL2, and Holland Line to transfer outside the CBD to a train headed into the new Keppel-area CBD would be very useful. At the same time, it would allow commuters from the newly developed Tengah area a convenient route into any part of the CBD, without having to interchange inside the CBD, on the EWL, DTL, Holland Line, or Tengah-Keppel Line.

Hope it captures mcarling's vision.
Yes! Thank you Seloloving! The idea is that it would extend about four or five kilometers westward from Bukit Gombak Station to serve the as-yet-to-be-developed Tengah area. I have little idea exactly where to plan stations in Tengah because the area hasn't been developed yet.

^^Hmm, maybe they can have an extension from either Kent Ridge or Haw Par Villa to connect with areas that have not been connected like Teban Gardens. :)

I like this proposal a lot! And it's also extremely easy to build due to the availability of existing reserves along the railway line, even some parts are already sunken so cut and cover can be done really quickly, and of course to a lot of commuters staying in the northwest (Bt Batok, Choa Chu Kang, Bt Timah and Bt Panjang, this line is very convenient both in terms of getting to the CBD, and making transfers to other lines.

But it replicates part of Holland Line, and there is a missed opportunity in terms of connecting to the west side of NUS and Teban Gardens. But I wouldn't say that it overlaps EWL and DTL. Due to the lack of bus interchanges along EWL between Clementi and CBD, connections between the EWL stations and the densly-developed Neil Rd-Bt Merah-Queensway corridor is still very weak. Bus services like 145A, 195 are often filled to the brim. Bt Batok area on the other hand has very bad road network system, and northbound NSL trains are always full after Coa Chu Kang, so it desperately need another line to serve it.
Thank you for the kind words! However, the only extent to which the TKL would replicate part of the Holland Line would be a single interchange station near Ulu Pandan Road and Holland Grove Road -- assuming the Holland Line will run from that interchange station westward through Bukit Batok Station and eastward to interchange at Orchard Road Station before picking up from the CCL the stations from Dhoby Ghaut to Promenade. Both the TKL and the Holland Line can serve the Tengah area without duplication. Even if the Holland Line will not serve Orchard Road, different routes into the CBD are possible without duplication.

there is a missed opportunity in terms of connecting to the west side of NUS and Teban Gardens.

Hmm, maybe they can have an extension from either Kent Ridge or Haw Par Villa to connect with areas that have not been connected like Teban Gardens.
Please see my previous proposal for a West Coast Line. There is a thread so named.

Yes! Thank you Seloloving! The idea is that it would extend about four or five kilometers westward from Bukit Gombak Station to serve the as-yet-to-be-developed Tengah area. I have little idea exactly where to plan stations in Tengah because the area hasn't been developed yet.

You are welcome. :lol:

Where then does the Holland Line go, because in my mind, this line what I had envisioned for the western half of the Holland Line.

Where then does the Holland Line go?

I imagine the western part of the Holland Line would go something like this:
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/2018/hollandline.png

^^That would be an interesting idea. I think the forested area in font of Ngee Ann Poly would be an ideal location. Besides, that area could be marked for development. You can try to send your idea to LTA and see their response. They may have another idea of what they want for that area. :)


i seriously doubt they(LTA) will built 2 MRT stations near the vicinity of the poly premises regardless how large Ngee Ann poly is.

if they were to do that, then singapore poly, temasek poly, republic poly and nanyang poly would want the same thing to them also.

@mcarling

nice proposal, but curious, did you use the holland line in spec map to get the general direction? (from west to MRB area)

if not you could well maybe use part of that and the latter half of your propose line after holland Village and join up from there, it could turn up an interesting route, however beauty world may have to be dropped as the curve may be too sharp to bend if it goes to holland village

The only Poly which has the right to complain is Republic. Singapore is served by Dover. Temasek by Tampines West. Nanyang by Yio Chu Kang. :)

Come on...a ten minutes walk will not wear out those branded shoes.

Me? I am sticking to my school shoes.

did you use the holland line in spec map to get the general direction? (from west to MRB area)
I'm sorry. I don't understand your question. Could you rephrase it please?

beauty world may have to be dropped as the curve may be too sharp to bend if it goes to holland village
There is no sharp bend at Beauty World. It's a very gentle curve, well within MRT parameters.

As long as the curve radius is larger than the one than the Esplanade-Promenade turn, there shouldn't be too much of a problem. If there still is, they can always stack the tracks to make a slightly wider curve.

And either way, I doubt that - if this line is built - this line will run six-car trains, so there's even less worry about sharp turns.

The only Poly which has the right to complain is Republic. Singapore is served by Dover. Temasek by Tampines West. Nanyang by Yio Chu Kang. :)

Come on...a ten minutes walk will not wear out those branded shoes.

Me? I am sticking to my school shoes.
Republic is served by Woodlands. the distance between KAP/BTW to Ngee Ann's main gate is probably quite similar to that :lol:

AI doubt that - if this line is built - this line will run six-car trains....

My guess is that the number of cars per train that the TKL would need would depend on where the Holland Line goes. If the Holland Line will serve the Orchard Road corridor and take over the Dhoby Ghaut to Promenade section of the CCL, then the TKL might be 4 or 5 cars per train. If the Holland Line will serve the new Keppel-area CBD, then the TKL would probably need only 3 cars per train.

Personally, I think the TKL is better off keeping south of the EWL, traveling mostly along the AYE since the expressway itself has so many bus stops and serves so many communities... y2koh earlier pointed out that the line doesn't serve Teban Gardens (and might I add West Coast) which I think is a pity too. The western end of the TKL is best handed over to the Holland Line.

However, I think there is still a need to connect the EWL, CCL and DTL together so I think a branch line off Clementi Road to Beauty World would be a good idea. The line must interchange with the TSL (to offer connections to the 'uptown' area) and possibly join with the ERL (since mcarling doesn't like the idea of a TSL-ERL merger). This, and the Holland Line will provide a more complete relieve to the EWL at least for the western region.

I like the Clementi Road branch line idea. This corridor is very busy if you look at how crowded the buses are right now, eg. 184, 74, 61, 151.

Hey guys. I figured since we all have random thoughts about transport but doesn't necessarily fit in to the other threads (and avoid having other members going, "stop talking about this, lets go back to topic), I feel we should have this thread to because there are some conversations we should continue talking about (everytime this happens when someone says "lets go back to talking about DTL!) lolol.

Anyway, I'll start.

I think LTA should think about putting a South exit on the EWL Tampines (facing away from Tampines 1 and the bus interchange). I think it will help with the crowd. Also the east end of EWL Paya Lebar.

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/3070/tampewl.png

P/S Sorry for the bad photoshop

That's very interesting idea. Unfortunately, I think the retailers around the station will be crying foul. Actually the reason for the crowd at the station is partly due to SMRT trying to use every inch for their "xchange", so building the linkway you proposed will not be welcomed by SMRT as well. Of course people waiting within the station control area also contributed to the crowded.

What needs to be done is to reconfigure the gates to accommodate more people, and create a covered plaza space right in front with seating so that less people will crowd around the station control.

But I still think your idea is very good, in fact it will work extremely well for stations that are constructed at centre median of the roads, such as Clementi and Bedok. It's just that in the case for Tampines no stakeholder will support it.

i often get stuck in the jam of tampines. and its so silly to walk all the way to the front where you can get wet when it rains. it's not like the station is well equipped other than the exit towards tamp mall, one and bus interchange. outside the shops, you'll always find wet people. gah.

p/s haha i actually like my photoshopped photo lol

I think I am going to like this thread a lot.

Woodleigh MRT Station opening in June? P1 (http://multiply.com/mu/lightforspirit/image/3/photos/8/1200x1200/38/Woodleigh-MRT-Station-P2.png?et=FZspUqEthVU%2B2wIUpbI%2CGw&nmid=323943676)

Woodleigh MRT Station opening in June? P2
(http://multiply.com/mu/lightforspirit/image/3/photos/8/1200x1200/37/Woodleigh-MRT-Station-P1.png?et=gfVc3ikKNrRacYjhCFFbiw&nmid=323943676)

^^ Interesting article. It seems likely to be open this year but we have wait and see if it happens. :)

Thank God our half-height PSDs aren't like this
http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lfjszsllix1qb4lijo1_250.gif

^^ That is months old. Haha.

^^ That is months old. Haha.

Still funny. And relevant.

I don't think that is a PSD...looks like a normal sliding door in front of a bus. :lol:

This line is not so duplicating. Nice idea. Especially I see a need to have a MRT line to serve between EWL and CCL's Bukit Merah sector.

Looks like the Bogota BRT system to me...

Those platform screen doors are actually for a bus rapid transit system, yes. I doubt you will find anything like this on a metro system.

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_628796.html

You have got to be joking. (Okay, bad pun)

^^ Not surprising. The law is quite strict with such idiots. The moment you say something like that, they can call the police.

Yeah, my friends and I always say, "The T!" or "The B word"

^^ Well, just don't do it in front of a police officer or security guard cause it seems you are implying something.

Anyway, this is way off-topic. The proposal by mdzulkar9 for Tampines is just not feasible. Maybe, they can make a new entrance on the side that doesn't have an entrance. That would be a lot better, in my opinion. :)

Junction of ubi ave 2 and Eunos link has only one lane as a slip road to ubi ave 2. Tragic is still so congested after the road expansion. :/

We know that the lease on the Tanjong Pagar Container Terminal, Keppel Container Terminal, and Brani Container Terminal expire in 2027. We also know that the government plan for the CBD to expand into this area. In this thread, I want to consider which MRT lines may logically be expected to serve this future CBD area. Until the 2011 Concept Plan is released, this will be highly speculative.

In my opinion, the most obvious MRT line likely to serve this area is CCL6, closing the circle between Marina Bay and HarbourFront stations. I know ST published a map last year showing only two stations between Marina Bay and HarbourFront, but in my opinion, four or more stations would be better. The straight-line distance is 4km, so by rail 3 intermediate stations would yield interstation distances of more than 1000 meters, which in my opinion is too high in the CBD.

The Seletar Line also has the potential to serve this area, possibly passing through it to serve Sentosa.

The ERL could be extended westward to serve the future CBD, possibly interchanging with the NEL at NE2, then potentially running under the KTM right-of-way to interchange with the CCL and EWL at Buona Vista.

Finally, the NSL could be extended from Jurong East to run along the AYE, interchanging with the CCL at Kent Ridge Station, and then into the future CBD.

Any other possible future lines or extensions to existing or planned lines that might logically serve the future Keppel-area CBD?

Isn't this similar to the Tengah-Keppel thread you posted the other time?

If the ERL were to reach Buona Vista...I propose renaming the line. :)

If ERL does go to Buona Vista, having it called South-East Line would be alright.

If ERL does go to Buona Vista, having it called South-East Line would be alright.

No. Buona Vista is like South West portion of Singapore. Why not call it as the Southern Line? (SN1 , SN2 etc)

Considering that Keppel/Tanjong Pagar will the new commuter belt, I'd prefer if they named the line "Metropolitan line" (MP1...).

Before that, maybe we should ask ourselves that 20 years down the road, will it be necessary to define a geographical "CBD"? For myself, I'm thinking that in the future, everything will become more mixed-use again. A so-called extension of the CBD will most probably end up even more diverse than Marina Bay, with a balanced proportion of apartments and office. The difference between the areas will then depends on the "brand" or the special quality it has.

So most likely, if you would really want to loosely define a CBD, it would be encompassing the whole Central-south region of Singapore as a dense mixed-use area, while the outskirts are slightly less dense with a relatively higher proportion of residential component.

My opinion is that transit development will be shifted to increase MRT station density in a more evenly distributed way in the future. So while CCL Stage 6 will be constructed, the immediate plan will probably be the construction of more lines to serve the outer fringes to enhance connectivity between towns. Due to the aging population is slower rate of increase in working population, MRT lines will not be built at a faster rate than it is today. So having an additional line serving the Keppel area may not be as critical as we may think.

I agree with you though, that there should be more than 2 stations for CCL Stage 6 between Marina Bay and Harbourfront. The stations can be located more or less at the centre, and with the land relatively flat, walkways and podium linkages can provide convenient access to the stations. As for Pulau Brani, I see it as an extension of Sentosa Cove, featuring ultra-exclusive island living, so even if there is public transport, it will not be MRT.

I'm in favour of your NSL extension idea, and it can run along AYE. But I would keep the line north Telok Blangah/Keppel Road and connect it back to an existing station within the Tanjong Pagar area, this way it can be built as soon as 2020-22.

Thanks y2koh. I had hoped that I had asked an interesting substantive question. I was disappointed to see only semantic responses.

I hope you're right about the CBD becoming more mixed-use. Even if the CBD will become more mixed use, the residential units will necessarily be high-end, requiring many people to commute from the heartland areas. The more efficient that commute will be, the higher productivity will be.

I agree that one new line every second year is likely to remain the pace of MRT construction for a long while. (I'm counting the DTL as two lines for the limited purpose of considering the pace of construction.) I think the pace of 5 lines per decade can be continued at least through the 2030s.

If the NSL will be extended from Jurong East to the CBD, I would definitely favor it staying well north of Telok Blangah Road. However, I would follow Keppel Road at least as far as Shenton Way, then either stay with Keppel Road to Marina Bay Station or follow Shenton Way to Raffles Place Station. One way or another, I think this hypothetical NSLe, if built, should stay south of the EWL.

Currently LTA has been building radial lines that cut right into the existing CBD, but there is a limit to that. Underground space within the city centre is getting congested, and with NSE and SURS, the number of corridors where MRT lines can penetrate the city centre is getting scarce. One example is the Seletar line, to connect it to Somerset as originally planned, it will have to cut through NSE and CTE, and weaving it through the curved and narrow roads amongst the high-end residential developments south of Somerset is equally challenging.

Secondly, we are already looking at a trend of offices moving out of the CBD. While financial and banking services, and major companies in various fields are expanding within the CBD, some have chosen to move out into the fringe areas. Tampines, Changi, Bt Merah, Novena, Toa Payoh, Buona Vista and Jurong East are some of the planned commercial centres that has seen rental rates increasing in the recent years as more companies move there. However, there are also some areas where it has become popular for offices, such as Katong and East Coast Road, Alexandra, Bt Batok, Paya Lebar and Kaki Bukit, in a more ad-hoc manner. Some offices uses the upper levels of shophouses, while others takes advantage of the 40% allowable ancillary uses for Business1 developments within industrial estates.

Worldwide and local office rental rates will be rising in the next 5 years according to studies. Businesses that have relatively less revenue will have to either severely optimise their resources and office spaces, or be forced to move out from the CBD. So in the next few years transit patterns will shift significantly. For example, while overall ridership on the MRT has been increasing over the last 10 years, I've also noticed that over time there are increasingly more people alighting at the fringes of the CBD and sub-centres. For example, NSL trains are today most crowded at Yio Chu Kang to Braddell, before off-loading a lot of the passengers at Toa Payoh and Novena. Similarly, EWL trains are most crowded from Jurong East to Dover, and a lot more passengers are alighting at Buona Vista and Commonwealth than 10 years ago. Just 5 years ago few people board the southbound trains at Bt Batok during evening peak hours, but today the trains are even more crowded after this station.

So I'm thinking that while LTA will continue to building more radial and circumferential lines, more radial lines may have to terminate before it reaches the CBD due to space constraints, and also because that the demand for transit into the existing CBD may not be increasing so much at all. So we may see a lot more lines that are similar to the T7 line in the future, and possibly even an inner circle line.

I don't believe that underground space in the CBD is getting "so congested" that we've or are coming to a point where we should "stop soon".

Here, we've been able to speculate lines and stations but one thing that we've so far been unable to do is speculate demand for a line as a whole - this is crucial because it determines the number of cars, frequency, size of rolling stock, station et cetera. If one decides that a line only demands a rolling stock that's the size of Paris or Madrid's Metro, then it changes the game doesn't it? One could easily bury such tunnels underneath a narrow 2-laned road right?

y2koh, I do not agree you using trains are at their most crowded in areas outside the CBD to justify decentralization. Have you considered the fact that a commuter from Boon Lay or Yishun is more likely to take the train to the CBD than one living at Buona Vista? Once in the vicinity of the Circle Line, commuters are usually thrust with more public transport options; there might be more buses providing direct and comparable journey times to the CBD, if I live in Toa Payoh, I'd be more willing to take a taxi to work everyday than a train because I like its convenience.

Besides, I'm increasingly subscribing to the belief that the "CBD" is just a term to denote the ERP boundaries - personally, I consider ANYTHING within the Circle Line as the potential of the CBD; it's the potential, its absolute limits and for all intents and purposes, houses the most commercial activity.

Firstly, I did not say that we should "stop soon". Did I give the impression that I did? In fact, I was saying that while LTA will continue to build more radial and circumferential lines, it is possible that they will not continue into the current CBD. The reason is not just "congestion", it's really the lack of corridors to allow the lines to penetrate. Look at the options available for TSL to interchange at Orchard for example.

I went to say that it is possible that not continuing future lines into the existing CBD may not be detrimental. I'm not justifying decentralization, I'm just saying that based on observation, there is a trend where office space is shifting towards the outskirts of what we define as the CBD nowadays. Stating the T7 line as an example, we may have to expect that more lines will be connecting to other lines outside the CBD because based on the trends the passenger demand for travel into the CBD itself will not experience significant growth in the future.

In fact, with the advancement of technology and changing working environments, I do not even see whether the "city centre" or the term "CBD" itself (i.e Central Business District) denotes a geographical "centre". Whether such a centre is as large as the area within the circle line, or as small as it is now, I do not even think that there is fixed boundary where you can denote that "this is the CBD". It may be a collection of several dozen of nodes or "business hubs", where the connectivity can be replaced by high-speed networks. Remember we are looking at 2027 and beyond, I've probably watched too much Michio Kaku videos, but I don't think we should limit ourselves to thinking within the box.

I generally agree with what ddes wrote above. I acknowledge the validity of y2koh's argument, but there is a corollary counter-argument. As the CBD increases in size geographically, the need for public transport within the CBD increases. Also, the density of MRT stations within the CBD is, in my opinion, woefully low at the moment. Regarding congestion of the underground space, I believe that underground congestion will simply drive some of the future MRT lines deeper as they pass under congested areas.

I agree that the term CBD is likely to come to denote (or more likely connote) the area inside the ERP gantries.

I think as to whether the CBD will expand, or whether it will just turn into a collection of business hubs spread over the island, will affect where the demand for public transportation will be shifting, of course the reverse is true also, a transport node, coupled with proximity to related functions, will attract more businesses and offices to move to the location if it is convenient enough. One example is HDB hub in Toa Payoh, which attracted a whole bunch of real estate companies and law firms specializing in conveyancing to the town centre.

I guess we will know when the tender results for the first site in Paya Lebar Subcentre and second site for Jurong Lake are out.

Just one more semantic response. :)

I dislike the idea of the CBD growing within the confines of the Circle Line. When something grows, it is hard to impede its movements ever again. When have we ever seen the CBD contract ever since its implementation? I can imagine the chaos of cars spreading beyond Bishan and Serangoon all the way to Woodlands and Hougang and frankly, I don't really like it.

Tai Seng, if I remember correctly has already been zoned as an Industrial and Business hub, it will not take very long for it to expand upwards. In a way, we are effectively turning the whole island into the CBD. (Than again...we are zoning a city within a city)

I do not have much knowledge on the issue, sorry, I may be wrong on many many areas. :)

Just one more semantic response. :)

I dislike the idea of the CBD growing within the confines of the Circle Line. When something grows, it is hard to impede its movements ever again. When have we ever seen the CBD contract ever since its implementation? I can imagine the chaos of cars spreading beyond Bishan and Serangoon all the way to Woodlands and Hougang and frankly, I don't really like it.

Tai Seng, if I remember correctly has already been zoned as an Industrial and Business hub, it will not take very long for it to expand upwards. In a way, we are effectively turning the whole island into the CBD. (Than again...we are zoning a city within a city)

I do not have much knowledge on the issue, sorry, I may be wrong on many many areas. :)

I dont like the term of CBD. Because the entire Singapore is Singapore's capital. (Singapore's capital is um... Singapore)

^^ Well, it is true but you can't say that the entire island is a CBD. Anyway, I feel that once the lease ends, reclamation projects may occur. :)

^^ Well, it is true but you can't say that the entire island is a CBD. Anyway, I feel that once the lease ends, reclamation projects may occur. :)

But you cannot have endless reclamation because I think some parts (Tuas South extension) might be too close to Indonesia's island.

But you cannot have endless reclamation because I think some parts (Tuas South extension) might be too close to Indonesia's island.

Singapore and Indonesia signed a treaty agreeing on their maritime borders. The border with Malaysia is disputed, particularly the government of Malaysia has claimed (without any basis in international law) that Tuas is already in Malaysian territory.

How did we get so far off topic so fast?

Okay, going back to future developments at the existing port - Tanjong Pagar, Brani and Keppel Container Terminals, I do not think that any reclamation will be carried out. Which former harbour that has become new real estate has been reclaimed? Not in Oslo, not even Tokyo. And even the Kai Teck Aiport runway will not have any reclamation on the side to increase the land area.

The reason is simple. Container Terminals are designed to have maximum water edge so that more ships can anchor in the sides, and they are often sited at deep, natural harbours with islands to break the waves. So if they are converted to real estate, they are actually quite perfect in the way the amount of waterfront edge is maximised, hence more land can be sold at a higher price. Furthermore, any additional reclamation will require a lot more sand because the seabed is deep.

So when the city extends to the existing container terminals, it will make more sense to take advantage of the geography to have a higher value for the land, and save the sand for reclamation at somewhere else, maybe the long islands along East Coast Park. That is why that I can safely deduce that the shoreline will remain the same, and hence the CCL6 should suffice for the "new extension".

For the sake of argument, let's assume that y2koh is correct that there will not be any land reclamation at the container terminals (despite the ST illustration of CCL6 which clearly showed extension of Keppel toward Brani).

For CCL6 to suffice with only 3-car trains to deliver more people than EWL+NSL deliver to City Hall plus Raffles Place, frequencies would need to be 120-150 per hour (intervals of 24-30 seconds). Even if speed-of-light MRT travel were possible, intervals could not be shorter than dwell times. Hence, I conclude that at least three and perhaps four or five lines will eventually be needed to serve the future Keppel-area CBD.

Sorry for being off-topic, but speaking of CBDs, ERPs and those hubs outside of the CBDs, I have this feeling that, once these fringe centres and hubs grow, ERPs will be erected along its boundary, although highly unlikely.

My assumption was that the new extension will not reach the density of landuse that is used for office and commercial that Raffles place has. I don't like the way raffles place is full of transient crowd during working hours and suddenly empty out during the weekends.

I doubt we are looking at densities around Tanjong Pagar and Raffles Place in Keppel.

I will think the area will be milked for its waterfront residential potential as far as possible. there will be a need to ensure these units maintain a certain level of exclusivity and privacy and are not likely to be crammed together like the CBD towers are. only the more inward areas of Keppel may be used as a natural extension of commercial towers.

thus demand for connectivity will be less great since lesser people will be commuting to and from that area for work than the existing CBD. the residents of these exorbitant waterfront housing are mostly driving as well.

Firms want ocean-view locations just like residents do. That the land will be valuable does not suggest that it will be residential. I think we'll have to wait and see, but I'm expecting high-density development.

On the other hand, I think Brani may be the next Sentosa.

Firms want ocean-view locations just like residents do. That the land will be valuable does not suggest that it will be residential. I think we'll have to wait and see, but I'm expecting high-density development.

On the other hand, I think Brani may be the next Sentosa.

Is residential projects or Office firm projects generate more profit 2 our economy?

Is residential projects or Office firm projects generate more profit 2 our economy?
That depends on which is in greater demand at the time. If office rents were to be low due to oversupply and residential rents were to be exorbitant because of undersupply, Singapore would be unattractive to companies looking to relocate.

Neither, the future of a tertiarised economy in Singapore will have to be predominantly R&D and innovation-based. We'll need more of both residential and office spaces, but they will not be the regular spaces that we see today. Offices will be replaced by workshops, studios and labs. Residential spaces will have to cater to an increasingly cosmopolitan society. The entire city will have to be more fluid in terms of the usage of spaces to cater to different working and living lifestyles required by various groups of people.

All these kind of transformation is difficult to plan, and does not have a timeline, or a fixed location where it will all occur. There is always an easy way out for more profit, more IRs. :lol:

Neither, the future of a tertiarised economy in Singapore will have to be predominantly R&D and innovation-based. We'll need more of both residential and office spaces, but they will not be the regular spaces that we see today. Offices will be replaced by workshops, studios and labs. Residential spaces will have to cater to an increasingly cosmopolitan society. The entire city will have to be more fluid in terms of the usage of spaces to cater to different working and living lifestyles required by various groups of people.

There is an extent to which this will be true, but I suspect it will be comparatively minor. Singapore is just at the toddler stage of becoming a hub for international legal, accounting, and financial services. I expect the demand for traditional Class A office space to at least double over the next 25 years.

Where would the port move to? Tuas?

^^ I think there were plans to do so. There is also some land reclamation being done right now in Pasir Panjang to expand the port there. :)

question: which MRT station has the most number of exits? Is it Raffles Place?

^^ or Farrer Park.

According to the street directory - Farrer Park has 13 exits. According to Wikipedia, it has 14. According to my field trip last year - 9.

For Raffles Place, according to street directory - 12.

Farrer Park has 14 exits?! What the f- is that place? Narnia?!

Exit A - Rangoon Road
Exit B - Block 681
Exit C - Race Course Road
Exit D - Gloucester Road
Exit E - Block 14A
Exit F - Birch Road
Exit G - Serangoon Road
Exit H - Kitchener Road
Exit I - City Square Mall

WOW.

If it had Exit J that leads to Mustafa Center then yes, it is f-ing Narnia. lol

One wonders why Farrer Park needs SO many exits...the place isn't spectacularly big, just full of traffic lights.

Future interchange? :D

Maybe due to the rampant jaywalking and non-adherence to traffic rules in the area? ;)
Okay truthfully I think it's somewhat common along NEL from Harbourfront to Farrer Park, as some of the NSL and EWL stations around the central region had to be upgraded with more exits over the years, so LTA was trying to be preemptive then.

One wonders why Farrer Park needs SO many exits...the place isn't spectacularly big, just full of traffic lights.

Future interchange? :D

More exits = more confusion if you're not a regular there and u exit on the wrong exits.. even with the signage, i bet not many people bother to look up :lol: or maybe is unclear to them

For people like that, seriously, read the maps the government bother to spend money on. After all, you paid for it (IRAS anyone?), so use it! :)

hahaha believe it or not i was so lost trying to use the underpasses at Serangoon. :S

^^ Serangoon is very confusing...with exits on all 4 sides at the same traffic junction...I go there at least once a week and still can't get it right.

^^ If you call that confusing, good luck with navigation in NS.:lol:

One way is to check your direction of travel relative to the platform direction. You may have to do it consciously the first few times but after that you do not even have to think about it.

^^ If you call that confusing, good luck with navigation in NS.:lol:

NS you have compass and map. lol the station lacks maps lololol /excuses

Hahaha yeah in NS we did navigating without compass and map once, it was really fun!

^^ I agree. I always use the sun as reference in the day. The stars at night.

Seriously off-topic. :lol:

Anyway, I think Raffles Place is more confusing for a lot of people. :)

^^ I agree. I always use the sun as reference in the day. The stars at night.

Seriously off-topic. :lol:

Anyway, I think Raffles Place is more confusing for a lot of people. :)

And maybe Tanjong Pagar too

^^ Geez! That's what the signs are for people.

If you bother to read instead of assuming you know where to go, then you'd realize places like Raffles Place, Tanjong Pagar and Farrer Park are amongst the easiest to navigate exactly because the exits are so many and so specific.

People rely too much on signs, maps, arrow, etc, and forget how to use our biological compass + accelerometer. :lol:

^^ Geez! That's what the signs are for people.

If you bother to read instead of assuming you know where to go, then you'd realize places like Raffles Place, Tanjong Pagar and Farrer Park are amongst the easiest to navigate exactly because the exits are so many and so specific.

I know! Seriously, all the stations are pretty easy to navigate. No mean feat. You just need to get your orientation right. :)

^^ I agree. I always use the sun as reference in the day. The stars at night.

You are serious? They are dragging us back to ancient times? The stars at night? Am I supposed to learn the constellations of the universe? That sounds very interesting!

Anyway, just thought I would post these things I made in under 10 minutes. Relatively simple, so no flattering needed. ;)

You will see these by 2013!

http://multiply.com/mu/lightforspirit/image/1/photos/8/500x500/61/signboards.png?et=CEkdloRuYQxTCDSkKqjDWA&nmid=323943676

Thanks to deskoh91 for the LTA documents, I made it as accurate as possible here. :)

You are serious? They are dragging us back to ancient times? The stars at night? Am I supposed to learn the constellations of the universe? That sounds very interesting!


Learn it from my sergeant in SISPEC, now known as SCS.

Hmm, anyway, I always wondered how the present Promenade station will connect with the DTL station? Anyway, nice job, Selo. :)

is the font type or spacing off for the "to XXXXXXXX"?

Learn it from my sergeant in SISPEC, now known as SCS.

Hmm, anyway, I always wondered how the present Promenade station will connect with the DTL station? Anyway, nice job, Selo. :)
HarbourFront style. up the escalator, across the concourse, down another escalator.

is the font type or spacing off for the "to XXXXXXXX"?

I am relying on the official fonts in this case...and they do look rather weird to me too.

HarbourFront style. up the escalator, across the concourse, down another escalator.
Yup. In this case if you're on the MRM bound platform, you'll need to go up 2 levels. Ditto for the lower DTL platform.

I am relying on the official fonts in this case...and they do look rather weird to me too.
Its ok, even if it does look off its still pretty good. :) I do think that the Dhoby Ghaut will be on top and Marina Bay below though, going according to how Pasir Ris and Changi Airport are displayed now.

Or simply use Bayfront to transfer, walk across will do. But it's really time wasting, if you are travelling from Dhoby Ghaut side to DTL2 towards Bt Panjang, or vice versa.

http://i55.tinypic.com/10nrdkx.png

Er...I don't think any of us were doing backflips and somersaults...

:horse:

http://www.theedgesingapore.com/component/content/article/1254-why-taipeis-mrt-trumps-singapores.html?showall=1


TAIPEI’S CITY Hall is so proud of its mass rapid transit (MRT) system that it runs a competition every year, asking people to send in poems about the MRT. I can see why. The MRT is clean and comfortable (in addition to chewing gum, the nasty habit of betel chewing nut has been banned). People queue up in a civilised fashion before boarding trains. And, when the doors open, they don’t barge in before passengers can exit.

Signs and announcements are in Chinese and English and all carriages have electronic displays showing which station is coming up next. Every carriage has special seats for old folks, pregnant women or people with disabilities. I’ve never seen fit, young people pretending to be asleep in these seats.

However, the best part about Taipei’s MRT is its frequency. According to Taipei Rapid Transit Corp (TRTC), the company that runs the system, trains arrive at two to four-minute intervals at peak hours. Off-peak, it is four to seven minutes.

In reality, it is much more frequent. I know because I’ve timed it. At peak hours, trains come as often as every minute. As for off-peak hours? Well, I’ve never had to wait more than three or four minutes. As a result, even during the morning rush hour, the trains are never as packed as they are in Singapore.

TRTC has won praise not just locally but internationally. It has been ranked No 1 for reliability for four straight years (2004 to 2007), according to the Nova/CoMET International Railway Benchmarking Group (of which Singapore’s SMRT Corp is also part).

All this got me wondering just how TRTC is able to deliver such a world-class MRT service. Perhaps, it doesn’t have to transport as many people as in the crowded Lion City? Perhaps, it’s government-owned and isn’t under pressure to make as much money as possible and can run more trains?

So, I pulled up some numbers (see table). And the broad conclusion is that Taipei proves it is possible to offer a high-quality, high-frequency and affordable MRT service without losing money. It also suggests that certain services, such as public transport, tend to function optimally as natural monopolies and ought not to be owned by companies that seek to maximise profits.

Let’s look first at the one common element between the two: the cost of taking a train. Average ticket prices in Singapore and Taipei are about $1. This is pretty low by international standards, as anyone who has had the misfortune to take the London Underground knows.

Singapore and Taipei are also pretty dense cities, but the latter packs more folks (5.5 million of them) into a smaller area (272 sq km). In comparison, Singapore is home to 4.6 million residents spread over some 692 sq km.

As such, in terms of coverage, Singapore’s network of five MRT lines is more extensive, totalling 109.4km, versus TRTC’s 74.4km network. However, TRTC has more stations on its smaller network, which means less distance between stations and greater convenience for commuters.


MORE TRAIN RUNS IN TAIPEI
Just how many people take the MRT each day? In 2007, Singapore’s MRT moved an average of 1.56 million people a day. That’s just over a third more than what TRTC transported last year. So yes, TRTC’s network is smaller and it moves fewer people, which is one reason it feels less crowded.

However, what is illuminating is the difference in frequency. Last year, TRTC made an average of 2,171 train runs a day. SMRT clocked in at just over 1,000 a day for its fiscal year ended March 2008. This is not strictly an apples with apples comparison. SMRT’s system is older, has heavier loads and travels further than TRTC’s — factors which play a role in how often trains can be run. The comparison also doesn’t include data from SBS Transit, which runs the North- East Line. But, as SMRT accounts for more than four fifths of total MRT ridership, it is fairly representative of the whole picture.

Since February this year, SMRT has added about 900 extra train trips each week. According to the company, on average, its train frequency during peak hours is between two and five minutes. During off-peak hours, it is now between 3.5 and seven minutes. Given the existing signalling system and infrastructure, its average peak-hour frequency puts it among the top 20% of the world’s major metro operators, SMRT adds.

http://www.theedgesingapore.com/images/stories/TES350-Dec22-2008/taipei-mrt.jpg

Source: Land Transport Authority statistics in brief, SMRT, TRTC Annual Report 2007.


SMRT MORE PROFITABLE
Still, it’s safe to assume that its bumped-up frequency continues to lag TRTC’s. And this, to an extent, is reflected in SMRT’s bottomline, which is much heftier than TRTC’s. In FY2008, SMRT’s rail operations saw revenue of $436.9 million. Earnings before interest and tax was $129.3 million. In comparison, TRTC saw approximately $415 million in fare revenue in 2007 and just $41.3 million in pre-tax profit.

TRTC is 73.75% owned by the Taipei City Government. The Ministry of Transportation and Communications owns a further 17.14% while the Taipei County Government owns 8.75%. Clearly, public-listed SMRT’s returns on its rail operations are far better for its shareholders than TRTC’s. However, TRTC — which has been profitable every year except its first two — is better for its commuters, who have been inspired to pen a poem or two in praise of their well-regarded metro.

Sunita Sue Leng, previously an associate editor at The Edge Singapore, is now based in Taipei and writes on Greater China issues


Would making the rapid transit rail systems a government run agency be better?

I travelled very often on the Taipei Metro during my 11 day stay there in April this year. it does run a lot more frequently during off peak hours. its estimated arrival timings count down in 5 second blocks. its trains indeed perform better with less flatwheels and weak aircon. then again, their oldest stocks are 8 years younger than ours.

if SMRT is willing to maintain an average profit of $50 million like TRTC and SBS Transit, we might actually be able to see improvements in maintenance and frequency since an extra $100 million or so can be invested in these activities based on just current revenue. MTR is another example of a profitable monopoly providing good quality services.

I am of the opinion that a monopoly is better than a heavily regulated duopoly that we have here. our operators have not much say except in terms of deciding the number of trips to run and maintaining the system that is not built by them. there are really not much opportunities for direct competition since the routes are fixed. there is only so much productivity improvement you can make before resorting to profit maximization methods to increase shareholder returns.

I'm in Shanghai right now and I must say, I'm thoroughly surprised by the Shanghai Metro. There are A LOT of things Singapore can learn from here - won't say much until I return to Signapore, time limitations.

I agree with deskoh91 regarding Taipei Metro. It is an emerging system that is good and somewhat effective. I've been there last December 2010 and it seems as a great addition to the Taipei area transport network.

In fact, I feel that it is often underestimated. :P

:)

Why not learn from the biggest train operator in Asia & maybe the world - Tokyo. I was there 1-5 July & despite the compulsory power cuts due to the nuclear power problem & exceedingly hot summer, I never have to wait long before the train comes along. Believe me, it was hot AND crowded but you never feel it when the next train is just around the next bend. And some escalators are not turned on!

Sometimes what it takes is only an open mind and a sound understanding of conditions to see that our MRT system has room for improvement.

I was thinking. There should be a through service from NSL from Yishun all the way to Raffles Place and then continue to Outram Park instead of Marina Bay, then continue, terminating its service at JE.

Thoughts?

Definitely too random, potentially.. no.. actually, will be confusing for passengers. Besides, the Marina Bay area is coming into its own and is becoming a genuine destination in its own right.

^^ I agree. It somehow doesn't make any sense to do it.

Sorry to say, but the MRT will be getting worse and worse every year. Why? Because of its inherent capacity deficiency and late expansion. Have you seen Tampines during peak hours lately? Before 2017 the place will burst in seams.

The only way out would be (and I realize how I repeat myself again) immediate construction of express lines. Parallel to current MRT lines to increase, potentially even double the capacity. Build new stations in the CBD (Marina Bay, Padang, Outram, Dhoby Ghaut) areas and connect them to brand new bus terminals directly above, to reduce patronage on existing MRT stations. Since not many stations would be actually build, construction could be fast and come just on time to meet the impending disaster.

We need vast infrastructure improvements way sooner than DTL or TSL. Until then, operators will struggle to meet the demand, stations will remain undersized and trains too short. Population is and will continue growing no matter what the govt says. Before such improvements come, everything else will be just a patchwork attempt to control the damage that will always lag behind.

But knowing LTA, they won't bother doing shit because they already feel they're doing 'all they can'... :ohno:

^^ Err, it is just not possible to build the lines that fast even with lesser stations being build. Knowing the speed TBM can achieve, it would take even longer to make such a structure. So, even your idea is totally unfeasible. I feel another way is to have buses that run parallel to the stations and make permanent bus lanes throughout the island. Just my thought.....

I crey.

Before all the train lines can come online, only buses can act as the stop-gap measure. And the need for capacity expansion in our bus system is quite urgently needed if we are to relieve the load from our MRT system. There should be a massive (and I mean massive) increase in the number of buses on our roads, and many, many more bus routes that run parallel to MRT lines must be started. Currently, only a handful of bus routes duplicate a single MRT line, and to certain extents only; what we need are several bus routes that run parallel to certain high-demand stretches of the MRT lines, with frequency similar to the MRT at off-peak hours (yes, I'm suggesting bus routes running at 5 minute frequencies), and they should run either the whole day, or during hours when the stretches they are serving are crowded. Ideally, these bus routes should have a full fleet of high-capacity bendy or double-decker buses.

More bus lanes should also be implemented. In fact, every major road in the CBD should have an all-day bus lane, and by all-day I mean permanently closed to all other traffic all the time. Every other major road throughout the island with three or more bus routes running through it should also have bus lanes whenever feasible. Consider also bus lanes for expressways; this is almost insane, I know, but with so many bus routes running on the expressways nowadays, there is a need for these buses to truly run express along the expressway portion of their routes.

Traffic signals should also be modified and reprogrammed to favour buses; perhaps a kind of a radio transponder in them, as well as more 'B' signals for buses at traffic lights, might help speed bus services up.

You know, considering how the North-South and East-West Lines were built, they can be configured into some really interesting ways if they wanted to.

• Jurong East > Woodlands > Raffles Place > Outram Park > Jurong East (I call this the North-South Loop Line)
• Marina Bay > City Hall > Tanah Merah > Changi Airport (City-Airport Line?)
• Similarly, Marina Bay > City Hall > Tanah Merah > Pasir Ris (South-East Line)
• Joo Koon > Jurong East (western branch line?)

...and I haven't even factored in the future Tuas South branch line, guys.

More bus lanes should also be implemented. In fact, every major road in the CBD should have an all-day bus lane, and by all-day I mean permanently closed to all other traffic all the time. Every other major road throughout the island with three or more bus routes running through it should also have bus lanes whenever feasible. Consider also bus lanes for expressways; this is almost insane, I know, but with so many bus routes running on the expressways nowadays, there is a need for these buses to truly run express along the expressway portion of their routes.

Hmm.......a bus service that is completely separated/isolated from other lanes in a given road system. I think that's what they call as a Bus Rapid Transit System.

Yeah, a BRT is great thing.

Mith252, eX A.K.R., the fundamental problem with more buses is simply lack of space. Don't we already have plenty of buses, especially in the downtown core and in larger New Towns, that literally jam each other before bus stops? Beside, traffic on the roads isn't any better than that on the MRT.

There isn't road space for more dedicated bus lines. Especially on dual carriageways, closing 1 line for other traffic is a suicide. If the TBM speed is as low as you suggested, Mith252, then I feel we're just locked on a one way road to transportation hell.

^^ TBMs are not known for their speed. Why do you think it takes such a long time to build a line in the first place? Sometimes, I think it is time for the government to stop giving out COEs and control the amount of traffic in the island by removing any vehicle that is more than 10 years old. That would be a short term solution. Seriously, you are little pessimistic. Always look on the bright side of life. :)

^^ Hard to do that on my way to school and back.. At 6.45 AM in Simei, westbound trains are already so packed i sometimes have problems getting in.

Beside, I know one electrical engineer working on CCL. He says LTA is extremely paperwork orientated (on the world scale) and contractors often simply avoid them. I've got a feeling that the TBM's speed is not the only factor that drags the construction of new lines.

^^ Hard to do that on my way to school and back.. At 6.45 AM in Simei, westbound trains are already so packed i sometimes have problems getting in.

The way to avoid that is to do what people working in City Hall/Raffles Place like to do, take an eastbound train and let it reverse back, though it'll add an extra 10mins to your travelling time.

Alright. Guess we should stop building underground lines all the time, start demolishing buildings, and go back to elevated lines. That will solve the problem of tunnels not being dug fast enough.

Difficult times call for difficult measures, people.

^^ Interestingly, in Singapore there would not be a need to demolish many buildings anyways. Our streets are wide, we have nearly universal green medians and grassy sides. Plenty of space for pillars, Bangkok built its BTS in far tighter environment..

I simply don't understand the antipathy LTA has towards elevated lines. It's not like Singapore experiences regular Typhoons that would severely affect the services. Even if it did, people would still be unable to reach an underground station unless it had underground connection to every HDB and Condo lift. It is possible to integrate elevated stations with commercial developments as well, just build it around a station.

Elevated lines are cheaper, faster to build, but they first and foremost DO THE JOB. If EWL/NSL had higher design capacity, they would be doing their job perfectly fine as well..

y2koh, in my particular case, I live quite far away from the MRT so its a lesser evil to just stand instead of adding an additional 15-20mins to the already long journey, but thats not the point, obviously, the problem is capacity problems..

Yup I understand, I'm the same situation. It was a tongue-in-cheek reply, coz that was exactly what I advice to my friends. Truthfully, when people have to take the opposite direction just to board the train, then there's a very serious problem with the system. I have friends who actually have to do that, at AMK, Bt Gombak, and Jurong East.

actually, i don't see the problem with elevated lines. As a matter of fact, I love it. On the shallow side, you get to see the view from a really long mundane trip.

Take the North Shore Line. Taking the train from Pasir Ris to Sembawang/Woodlands would be awesome. So many things to see!

And Simon's right. I wish Singapore was more innovative in terms of elevated lines, like how the train station is built within a building. I think that would make it like an architectural marvel.

In certain areas where there are a lot of buildings, perhaps, we should go underground, but there's no need to build all stations underground just to get the "longest fully underground train line" status.

Well unfortunately we have nothing to say on planning. This belongs to LTA's decision makers and I wonder if they do take a commission for the value of contracts..

^^ Hard to do that on my way to school and back.. At 6.45 AM in Simei, westbound trains are already so packed i sometimes have problems getting in.



Well, we live with what we have. I live in Toa Payoh so it is as bad but somehow, I manage to get in.

Anyway, off-topic, which school do you go to?

^^ I'm at Millennia Institute, Bukit Batok. Thankfully, just 4 months of this 'fun' left until I'm done. Are you still a student, or working already?

^^ NTU right now. Final year. Just finished my attachment. FYP coming up :)

Nice! Good luck ahead. :)

eh simon! must you go NS? haha

About elevated lines, although I personally like them, I rather they build underground lines. Land is scarce in Singapore, and lands above underground lines can be built for other developments. To me, elevated lines takes lots of space also.

eh simon! must you go NS? haha

yep must go... At least i won't be commuting to the camp everyday for a while :P

yep must go... At least i won't be commuting to the camp everyday for a while :P

Sweet! So you're like a singaporean hahaha naise

^^ Surprise, huh? Anyways, back to the topic, lol.

recent blog posts by the new Transport Minister hints at improvements at off-peak hour train trips (big plus), a thorough review of the BPLRT (a surprise?), tighter QoS for buses, with a focus on feeders (another plus if they are stringent even during off peak) and many new bus routes within this 4 years as LTA rushes to have the train lines running. I will suppose in a way he has addressed the short term crunch issues by increasing the spread and quality of bus services.

this is timely since bus services have seen very little improvement ever since the planners moved towards a rail-centred system some years ago. I definitely support the initiative in having a stronger bus network in this transition period and look forward to standards such as maximum 12 minutes off-peak frequencies for a majority (75%?) of routes. I wonder how will the new tiny interchanges cope? many of them are in the pipeline now. this is what happens when one ding-dongs on policy decisions...

what I may suggest are more real bus lanes. the actual separation of the road isnt as important as ensuring there are no slip roads along the bus lane. non buses will just use the opportunity to cut in and take away whatever gain in speed that bus lane gave.

real express buses ( = comparable trip timings as compared to trains) that pick up passengers to and from popular corridors, run all day and not cost like $4 will also be an attractive alternative. since its difficult for a bus running parallel to a train route to beat the train speed, why not think about running these bus services from areas where commuters spend 10-15 minutes transferring to their nearest MRT station so they do not add to the train loads?

on the crowded trains issue, I dont think express lines will help that much since they will take just as much time to build, even if there are lesser stations. I dont believe conditions will remain as bad by 2018 when lines till TSL come online. we just need something to make things better in the meantime. yes its a stop-gap measure, but that is what we need the most right now.

remove any vehicle that is more than 10 years old.

I thought you guys already do that over there wherein a private automobile cannot legally be driven or operated if it has exceed a maximum 10 year lifespan.........unless you apply for the 'classic car licence' (aka 'red plates' wherein you can only use your vehicle on Sundays)

You know, for some reason, I can't see Tanjong Pagar being an interchange in the future - ever. It's like the only CBD MRT station (currently) that doesn't have any sign of interchangeability due to no sign from LTA/MOT/PTC, other than that baseless Straits Times article.

And Outram Park seems to get all the attention. That station is overrated, I swear. It's only busy because of the interchange of EWL and NEL. Whereas TJP is just sh1tballs of busy all the time

Just asking: anyone happened to have the official LTA font used for system maps?

LTA Identity/Typeface?

There is no official leaked version. I do have a counterfeit version, which works magically well.

Sorry, I don't give it out.

Yeah i gave it out for a limited time too

Not that one. Ocean Sans and LTA Identity are two different fonts.

The former is used on maps, while the latter on station codes and signboards.

aiya more or less the same lah.

Just for comparison, I guess. :lol:

http://i56.tinypic.com/155ou2x.jpg

Ocean Sans above.
LTA Identity below.

You know, considering how the North-South and East-West Lines were built, they can be configured into some really interesting ways if they wanted to.

• Jurong East > Woodlands > Raffles Place > Outram Park > Jurong East (I call this the North-South Loop Line)
• Marina Bay > City Hall > Tanah Merah > Changi Airport (City-Airport Line?)
• Similarly, Marina Bay > City Hall > Tanah Merah > Pasir Ris (South-East Line)
• Joo Koon > Jurong East (western branch line?)

...and I haven't even factored in the future Tuas South branch line, guys.

Seriously, the way Tuas South branch line going southwards, I see it should be in fact, evolved to another new line pointing northwards as well like the only elevated City Hall station. This is because ALL major housing estates has a heavy rail support and areas like Kebun Baru, Marymount / Sin Ming, Holland Village are more rather a sub estate of a bigger estate of Ang Mo Kio, Bishan and Commonwealth / Buona Vista respectively.


By then probably after 2030 ~ 2040, there will be a line going up to Tengah and possibly LCK simply because LCK is still considered as a housing estate if you go to HDB now despite the last HDB residents were enblocked nearly 10 years ago AND it is known that in govt's long term plan, they have plans to transform Tengah as well (Well after Punggol 21 and Jurong West. By then CCK should be even more Tampines than now). Whether will then joins NSL in Kranji or sort of (In sense of interchange and not like CGL) is a question but I think so.

Selo, you do know that the Ocean Sans zip i gave you had over 35 variations and one of them is LTA identity, right?

Not so sure, I just unzipped all of them.

I wonder if someone can pass me a copy of the LTA fonts.

Better yet, I hope someone leaks the font one day, like how beta builds of Windows gets leaked when they are supposed to be kept from the eyes and hands of the general public...

I wonder if someone can pass me a copy of the LTA fonts.

Better yet, I hope someone leaks the font one day, like how beta builds of Windows gets leaked when they are supposed to be kept from the eyes and hands of the general public...

With the likes of people protects Bus / Train company's "Confidential data" like posting boards of off service train are "illegal", there will not be anyone give me these fonts so that I will leak it out.

ALRITE!

As suggested by mcarling, extension of NSL to CBD seemed like a good idea to me, but also an opportunity to form sort of an express line(!!!) all the way to Tampines (actually just Bedok would do as well). What do you guys think?

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/6812/nslextension.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/402/nslextension.jpg/)

EDIT: Another option would be to scrap Tampines and make the line interchange at Bedok before turning south or north for an another station in the town.

^^
With the loop coming from JE to Marina Bay, the NSL is effectively another circular line. Nice.

But if it goes all the way to the east, it wont be call NSL anymore, will it?

I concede Simon91's point that the eastern part of the EWL is crowded and needs some relief. However, we already have the DTL3 and ERL coming. I would want to see how crowded traffic is on the EWL in 2022 with peak frequencies of about 30 trains per hour (2 minute intervals) and the DTL and ERL running before opining on a need for a fourth line to the east.

My thinking for extending the NSL from Jurong East to the CBD can be summarized as 6+6 -> 6+6 is better than 6+6 -> 6. Right now we have 6-car trains coming into Jurong East from CCK and 6-car trains coming in from Joo Koon with 6-car trains headed into the CBD. If the trains from CCK are more than half full when they arrive at Jurong East and the trains from Joo Koon are more than half full when they arrive at Jurong East (think of the Tuas extension), then not everyone will be able to board the train to the CBD.

If LTA had this idea in mind when they planned JEMP, would they have done JEMP any differently than they have?

^^ The problem with DTL3 and ERL is the alignment - effectively, they replace bus services between CBD and their respective areas but the interception of EWL traffic won't be great IMO. Maybe a significant number of commuters from Tampines East and West will choose to take it over EWL but the rest of the stretch is quite independent from it now.

Beside, keep in mind that govt is still dead serious about population increase. There will be more high density housing around EWL in near future and ridership is most definitely going to rise even beyond its current level. So, I think the eastern stretch is just as essential as the western one.

In fact, this idea can kill 3 birds in one stone. 1st is of course the 6+6 -> 6+6 argument that you have presented. 2nd is that you can solve the heavy public transport route along the AYE / Jalan Bt Merah corridor and reduce the demand on the buses playing this route. 3rd, you can make use of the rail corridor and build the tunnel box without needing to dig below ground. The top and sides of the tunnels can then be filled with soil and create an elevated linear park above that can be easily connected to both sides of AYE. This allows this future linear park to be relatively less affected by the pollution from AYE, and even the sunken parts of the rail corridor to be filled up to ground level.

I think the eastern stretch is just as essential as the western one.

The difference is that we've got a second 6-car line feeding traffic to the EWL at Jurong East. There is nothing like that going on at Tampines or Bedok, unless you want to count the Changi Extension. IF the Changi Extension were feeding as many commuters onto the EWL at Tanah Merah as the NSL feeds onto the EWL at Jurong East, then I would say relieving the eastern stretch would be just as essential. For now, I think loads on the eastern part of the EWL are probably best addressed by increasing frequencies.

^^ Ok well I can agree in opening this extension in stages, especially since most of the western stretch could be elevated/at-grade (from JE until West Coast Park and then along the KTM corridor until the old depot) and thus faster to build. Then, the eastern stretch could be build at the same time but open perhaps 2-3 years later. And the traffic should build up just appropriately by then.

While the extension of the NSL from Jurong East back east into the CBD, I can't help but wonder if it's too much infrastructure during non-peak hours.

Firstly, the route encourages even more crowds at present busy stations such as Jurong East interchange. This seems to be the complete opposite of what LTA is having - the whole idea of having stations close to each other but not connected - to disperse crowds.

Secondly, I believe the route is similar, but inferior to a speculated Holland Line. The Holland Line will be able to pinpoint and serve the housing estates more directly, and take commuters to town faster. With a NSL west extension, you're still requiring passengers to transfer through already and increasingly crowded hubs like Boon Lay bus interchange.

Thirdly. Looking at what is planned for Marina Bay, I feel that 2 lines coming in from 4 different directions will be better than a single high-capacity 6 car line serving 2 directions. Just look at how many lines, and the option for directions that Marina Bay will have with the NSL, CCL, DTL, ERL.

Having said that, unless we've come to a point where at all times, that commuters are on average only boarding the 3rd train, I do not think it's time for any form of express line, even this NSL thingy.

I agree with ddes that the Holland Line will relieve some pressure from the Jurong East to CBD stretch of the EWL, though I expect the Tuas Extension will add more pressure than the Holland Line will relieve.

Also, where exactly will the Holland Line go? If to the Orchard Road area, then it won't be attractive for commuters from the CCK area to transfer to the Holland Line unless Jurong East is so packed that they can't board the EWL.

Finally, How will CCK-are NSL commuters and Tuas-area and Joo Koon-area EWL commuters get to the future Keppel-area CBD?

While the extension of the NSL from Jurong East back east into the CBD, I can't help but wonder if it's too much infrastructure during non-peak hours.
Every MRT line is too much infrastructure during non-peak hours. That's inherent to peak / non-peak traffic patterns. If there is enough infrastructure during peak times, there will be too much during non-peak times.

Having said that, unless we've come to a point where at all times, that commuters are on average only boarding the 3rd train, I do not think it's time for any form of express line, even this NSL thingy.
That's a very low service standard. I think people will be clamoring for relief long before we get to boarding the 3rd train on average. If things are ever that bad at election time, I would expect the opposition to win.

I have not suggested that this would be any sort of express service. That was Simon91's idea. I see it as regular service with about 2km between stations from Jurong East to an interchange with the CCL (perhaps at Kent Ridge Station) and then about 1km between stations from there through the Keppel-area CBD to Raffles Place or Marina Bay.

Having said that, unless we've come to a point where at all times, that commuters are on average only boarding the 3rd train, I do not think it's time for any form of express line, even this NSL thingy.

Interesting point. If we wait until that time to start construction, before its opened we will see this island turning into hell - transport and civil unrest wise.

In fact, this approach of waiting until traffic justifies a line is what devastated the quality of commuting amid the increasing population. As a long-term, capital investment, MRT lines should always be build according to realistic forecasts of ridership increase in future and not the present conditions. Mind you, we have a million more people than 5 years ago in the city plus a far larger number of tourists.

What is going to happen in 5, 10 or 15 years? No, new signalling won't help EWL unless it can make trains ride on the top of one another into stations - it will just make them jam closer to each other outside them. Unless we can extend each and every station to 8 or 10 cars long, a directly parallel line in the very same corridor is necessary.

If we wait until that time to start construction, before its opened we will see this island turning into hell - transport and civil unrest wise.

In fact, this approach of waiting until traffic justifies a line is what devastated the quality of commuting amid the increasing population. As a long-term, capital investment, MRT lines should always be build according to realistic forecasts of ridership increase in future and not the present conditions. Mind you, we have a million more people than 5 years ago in the city plus a far larger number of tourists.

What is going to happen in 5, 10 or 15 years? No, new signalling won't help EWL unless it can make trains ride on the top of one another into stations - it will just make them jam closer to each other outside them. Unless we can extend each and every station to 8 or 10 cars long, a directly parallel line in the very same corridor is necessary.
I agree with all of this. I don't believe that URA would ever agree to extend every EWL platform to accommodate 8 or 10 cars per train.

However, I do believe that better signaling can get us to 30 to 40 trains per hour on the EWL. Combined with the DTL3 and the ERL, I am not at all convinced that a fourth line will be needed between the CBD and the Bedok/Tampines/Changi area.

I agree with all of this. I don't believe that URA would ever agree to extend every EWL platform to accommodate 8 or 10 cars per train.

However, I do believe that better signaling can get us to 30 to 40 trains per hour on the EWL. Combined with the DTL3 and the ERL, I am not at all convinced that a fourth line will be needed between the CBD and the Bedok/Tampines/Changi area.

Well sorry but I have to differ. Look at the fields around Tampines Central. If that area alone was developed into housing precincts, it would be enough to saturate DTL3. Mattar is going to host a new HDB estate too and these are just few out of many dense areas this poor little 3-car line is going to bear.

ERL will serve areas currently dependent on buses and ultimately the feed of commuters from Fort Rd, Marine Parade, Siglap and even Bayshore to EWL is relatively insignificant. For those working in the CBD buses are simply much more convenient than transfer into EWL. The latter will not see much difference in loads with the opening of ERL.

And don't forget, EWL is soon going to be handling Kallang and Paya Lebar sub-regional centers. I can foresee the industrial complex due south from Bedok MRT going, most likely for housing. Simei just gotten new HDBs and 2 more large condominiums are under construction. Pasir Ris has plenty of unused land which can and will be developed as well. The bottom line of my point is - EWL is not going to see much difference with ERL and DTL3, but the upcoming intensification of its east side will be overpowering even for the 30-40 trains per hour since they are simply too short.

So I still insist that if such an extension of NSL happens, it should be laid all the way east straight away.

^^

If the government do foresee that there is a need of another line (the 4th line) which serves the east on top of EWL, ERL and DTL3, then wouldnt the 3-car-DTL3 under-designed? If it is destined to be under-designed even before it is being built or operated, wouldn't that be a major flaw in the transportation policy?

Simon91, you make a good case and I know you know that part of the island better than I do. However, I think LTA will be skeptical of the idea.

I do think that Stadium Station needs another line to cope with post-event crowds and this extension could plausibly be routed to serve Stadium Station.

However, with the Tanjong Pagar Container Terminal lease expiring in 2027, I don't see LTA extending the NSL from Jurong East to the CBD (if they ever do) before about 2020. By that time, it will be much more clear whether or not another line to the east is needed to relieve the EWL.

If the government do foresee that there is a need of another line (the 4th line) which serves the east on top of EWL, ERL and DTL3, then wouldnt the 3-car-DTL3 under-designed?
Not necessarily. The optimal place for a fourth line might be between the EWL and the ERL, for example.

^^Well its still not up to us anyways. Good we accept and respect each other's opinion.

Well its still not up to us anyways. Good we accept and respect each other's opinion.

So true. I just look at JEMP and everything about it suggests to me that LTA had an extension of the NSL in mind when they planned JEMP.

Alright, really curious here, could you list some examples? ^^

Alright, really curious here, could you list some examples?

Look at it this way: If you were planning JEMP and your boss at LTA told you to optimize the design so that it would be easy to extend the NSL toward the CBD in the future, what (if anything) would you do differently?

Look at it another way: JEMP exists. How do you extend the NSL? Keep in mind that you want cross-platform transfers in both directions.

Alright, I must admit my knowledge of the layout of tracks at Jurong East is limited, in addition to the surrounding area...kinda.

I do not see how differently they could have implemented JEMP as the only other viable alternative is having it face the Joo Koon platform.

If they were to extend the NSL southwards, the configuration could be hypothetically modified to:

North Bound NSL
CBD Bound NSL
Joo Koon Bound EWL
Pasir Ris Bound EWL

The middle NSL platform leads directly into the EWL tracks towards Pasir Ris, any NSL extension would force it to cross paths with another train every five minutes.

Part of the reason I am *opposing an extension to the CBD is due to the constraints of the network, the line ages every year and I don't realistically believe LTA have any plans for extending NSL unless the situation is beyond desperate. Trains are already running overtime with 25 stations and hiccups will undoubtedly grow.

I only foresee the Beauty World Extension being the alternative once the population starts shifting away from Jurong East as more lines open.

As usual, my opinions are worth less than a cat, so yeah. :lol:

*(opposing is a strong word, discouraging convey the idea better)

Alright, I must admit my knowledge of the layout of tracks at Jurong East is limited, in addition to the surrounding area...kinda.
Everyone has limited knowledge. It might be helpful to refer to this schematic from LTA:
http://www.lta.gov.sg/images/JEMP%20Annex%202.pdf

If they were to extend the NSL southwards, the configuration could be hypothetically modified to:

North Bound NSL
CBD Bound NSL
Joo Koon Bound EWL
Pasir Ris Bound EWL
That would be suboptimal because it doesn't allow for cross-platform interchanges in both directions. I suggest:
CBD Bound NSL
(platform for cross-platform connections away from the CBD)
Pasir Ris Bound EWL
(platform for local Jurong East passengers and for irregular operations)
North Bound NSL
(platform for cross-platform connections toward the CBD)
Joo Koon Bound EWL

Part of the reason I am [discouraging] an extension to the CBD is due to the constraints of the network, the line ages every year .... Trains are already running overtime with 25 stations and hiccups will undoubtedly grow.
I'll be the first to concede that increasing the length of a line or the number of stations will result in more irregular operations. Adding 15 kilometers and about 10 stations would increase the difficulty of keeping the NSL running smoothly, though I think the effect would be minor. Also, serious irregular operations are rare and will become rarer with the upgrade to driverless trains and better signaling. Only in Singapore could anyone think of the NSL as an "aging" line. Look at the age of London's Tube.

... and I don't realistically believe LTA have any plans for extending NSL unless the situation is beyond desperate.
I don't see the logic in this part. You're [opposed] because you don't believe LTA have any plans for it??? Are you opposed to every possible idea for which you don't believe LTA have plans?

Right, took me a while to reply to this..

I believe you misinterpreted some portion of my sentence or my English is severely lacking. I don't oppose lines due to lack of plans, but rather signalling upgrades would not solve much. Most likely the effect would be minimal too, as trains jam at the other NSL stations waiting to clear the queue. Somedays, you can see at least four trains between Ang Mo Kio and Bishan alone. :)

Yes, I am aware of the irony that more trains in operation causes more delays instead. From what I have read about the London Tube, the older lines seems to be plagued with huge delays and entire stations being shut down for maintenance - and apparently, it is the norm over there. (Wikipedia, the not so reliable encyclopedia)

So my opinion is that NSL is definitely aging fast beyond it's operational limit. I am already having doubts about the Tuas and Tuas South Extension as I don't feel EWL could handle the additional stations.

All while keeping in mind train break downs occur almost twice every week now.

I would push for the decentralization of Jurong East (easier said than done) and have the Holland Line interchange at the surrounding stations while letting it split into two forks, one side towards Dhoby Ghaut and the other towards the new CBD.

I don't oppose lines due to lack of plans, but rather signalling upgrades would not solve much. Most likely the effect would be minimal too, as trains jam at the other NSL stations waiting to clear the queue. Somedays, you can see at least four trains between Ang Mo Kio and Bishan alone. :)

Exactly what makes me extremely pessimistic about future of our transportation. Unless better signalling can somehow warp train into another dimension before reaching the platform.

I believe you misinterpreted some portion of my sentence or my English is severely lacking. I don't oppose lines due to lack of plans...
I was concerned about that, which is why I sought clarification.

rather signalling upgrades would not solve much. Most likely the effect would be minimal too, as trains jam at the other NSL stations waiting to clear the queue. Somedays, you can see at least four trains between Ang Mo Kio and Bishan alone. :)Exactly what makes me extremely pessimistic about future of our transportation. Unless better signalling can somehow warp train into another dimension before reaching the platform.
The best signaling systems now on offer by the manufacturers are extremely primitive and based on the hopelessly inadequate paradigm of centralized control. The signaling systems being researched by the universities now approach the efficiency of flocks of birds in flight by copying their decentralized paradigm. Each bird in flight or train on the line makes independent decisions based on observing all the other birds in the flock or trains on the line and knowing not what they will do but only what they are physically capable of doing.

This should allow the following train to safely begin entering the platform before the leading train has completely vacated the platform. Frequencies of about 60 trains per hour will be possible.

From what I have read about the London Tube, the older lines seems to be plagued with huge delays and entire stations being shut down for maintenance - and apparently, it is the norm over there. (Wikipedia, the not so reliable encyclopedia)

So my opinion is that NSL is definitely aging fast beyond it's operational limit.
The London Tube opened 125 years before the MRT.

I would push for the decentralization of Jurong East (easier said than done) and have the Holland Line interchange at the surrounding stations while letting it split into two forks, one side towards Dhoby Ghaut and the other towards the new CBD.
As much as I support a non-forking Holland Line, it will not solve and cannot solve the described problem at Jurong East. Yes, the Holland Line can take some passengers from the NSL who would otherwise continue to Jurong East and change to the EWL. However, the Holland Line will also dump passengers onto the NSL who will transfer to the EWL at Jurong East. The only way to solve the described problem at Jurong East is to have another line go from Jurong East to the CBD. From the passenger perspective of minimizing transfers, the most efficient way to do that is to extend the NSL. It's consistent with JEMP and it's consistent with the continuing reports of plans for another orbital line.

The JEMP isn't some well thought-out project. All LTA wanted to do is build the infrastructure to allow consistent 2 or 3-minute frequencies on the NSL. I also don't think the NSL would be extended beyond Jurong East - the alpha-numeric code is probably an early indicator.

A forked Holland Line has two benefits. It offers another option for passengers to get to the CBD (faster in fact), if you drive, you'll realize this. Second, it allows passengers to bypass Jurong East if you're coming from Jurong West, straight to CCK/Bukit Panjang (I'm assuming one of the forks will terminate at Bukit Panjang). Combined with the extension of the DTL to the Woodlands area, it may just be the answer. In addition, I believe that it was mentioned that a Beauty World to West Coast line is being mooted? The TSL should also do wonders to relieve the NSL albeit indirectly.

I do think it's a pity that the authorities can't see express buses as a stopgap solution.

Before we move on, I think it'd be ridiculous to expect that the idea of a perfect rail network is EVERYBODY having a forward-facing cushioned reclining seat during peak hours. Peak hours is called that for a reason! It's gonna get uncomfortable!

I think that the issue is that we may never know whether LTA intend NSL to be extended beyond JUR. Of course as with all MRT infrastructure here, JUR may be designed with that kind of flexibility, but in the end whether it'll be part of the master plan, or a backup plan in case other lines cannot mitigate the crowding problems, we can only guess.

LTA may have a lot of backup plans that we do not even know of, or we are only thinking of right now. Whether or not they will allow the current designs to cater for the future connection depends on how they will adversely affect the design and costs, and also whether that future infrastructure is certain to be built.

For the issue at JUR, I don't think LTA never anticipated the shortfalls of JEMP alone. We can only assume and rely on what is happening right now, LTA had all the numbers to back themselves up. They may be seriously looking at an NSL extension, but they could also have been waiting for CCL4 to open and the traffic to stabilize and see whether it is really needed. But in any case I don't think waiting for Holland Line to open will do much, it'll be a 15-20 year wait. HLL will most likely only be able to handle the traffic from Tengah New Town and the expanded Bt Batok, as well as new commuters staying along the line making the switch from bus and cars to MRT. Jurong East and Choa Chu Kang is pretty much saturated in terms of residential population at this point in time, with new flats and condos along the EWL all completing within the next 5 years, so a short term measure is certainly required.

The issue now is that whether express bus is a viable solution. If it's expensive and runs along already congested roads then it'll not help. If it's cheap and fast, and the demand is too high it'll not be viable for companies to acquire hundreds of buses for that purpose and jam up the bus stops at the same time. It's a tough balancing act, so I'll not rely on it unless it's critical.

Now the numbers are in LTA's hands, so they'll have to make a careful decision, but I don't think we should dismiss the NSL extension so quickly.

An NSL extension does not need to wait for the Keppel-area CBD to be developed after 2027. I propose the following underground route, which could be opened at any time after the TSL and ERL. The extension would run from Jurong East Station with one stop at Pandan, then along West Coast Road with one stop at Clementi Road (at Kent Ridge Crescent), then pass under NUS to interchange at Kent Ridge Station. Then the NSL would follow the Ayer Rajah Exwy with one or two new stations before interchanging with the NEL at NE2. Finally, the extension would follow the AYE with two or three new stations before interchanging at Marina Bay Station.

The CCL6 could follow a more southerly route later when the lease expires on the Tanjong Pagar Container Terminal.

^^ That's pretty much congruent with my proposed alignment, but I initially used Haw Par Villa as the CCL interchange. :yes:

recently, i started taking the NSL regularly between JUR and WDL. i'm not sure if this is an old problem, but i began to notice in the last few days that there is a particular stretch along the NSL where the train noise (from wheel friction against the tracks) rises in volume considerably.

that stretch is between YWT and KRJ. to be precise, on the straight stretch along where the future NS6/Sg Kadut is meant to be. the southbound is especially noisy. have experienced it on C151s and 751Bs before, not yet had a chance to be in a 651 or 151A on the stretch.

anyone noticed too or has an idea why it happens? (mith252 you seem to be in that area a lot :cheers:)

The noise has been there for the longest time since I started taking the train on that stretch regularly 4.5 years ago. I have a feeling though that trains are travelling faster along this stretch recently though, since JEMP opened, which may contribute to the louder noise.

Train service disruption at Yio Chu Kang at 9 this morning. All passengers on the Marina Bay bound train were requested to disembark and wait for the next train.

Also saw someone recording the commotion using a camcorder...

The noise has always been high there since it a long non-stop sector along a gradual curve. I did notice last week it is becoming extremely noisy that it is nearly unbearable. I think it is the higher frequencies and faster speeds taking a toll on the ageing track without enough maintenance.

By the way, it is next to impossible to find C151As on NSL. LTA/SMRT seems wary of the heavier weight and resulting vibrations of the C151As damaging the floating slabs responsible for the December breakdowns.

The noise has always been high there since it a long non-stop sector along a gradual curve. I did notice last week it is becoming extremely noisy that it is nearly unbearable. I think it is the higher frequencies and faster speeds taking a toll on the ageing track without enough maintenance.

By the way, it is next to impossible to find C151As on NSL. LTA/SMRT seems wary of the heavier weight and resulting vibrations of the C151As damaging the floating slabs responsible for the December breakdowns.

Which still doesn't explain the C751Bs.

What do you mean? Are the 751Bs missing too? The C151A and 751B are very similar in design, and possibly specs as well.

Are the C151As missing on the EWL too? I haven't rode a C151A since the December breakdowns.

Are the C151As missing on the EWL too? I haven't rode a C151A since the December breakdowns.

Not really. I've seen many C151As plying the EWL when I take my bus to work everyday.

Not really. I've seen many C151As plying the EWL when I take my bus to work everyday.
I see them in the evening, one after another with one minute frequencies heading westbound.

Why would they run well on the EWL but not NSL?

Why would they run well on the EWL but not NSL?
I wonder the same thing too.

What do you mean? Are the 751Bs missing too? The C151A and 751B are very similar in design, and possibly specs as well.

7Bs are on NSL. What I meant was, the 7Bs and 1As have the same tonnage, so if they take all 1As out of NSL, why aren't the 7Bs leaving too?

The C151A are indeed running on EWL from what I observed, but I think it's more of an operational limitation, possibly because SMRT has decided to stable all the C151A at one of the depots, likely Tanah Merah, probably to have specialised maintenance teams for each type of trains.

I thought I heard in the news that the C151As are supposed to be 5 tons heavier than the older trainsets?

Anyone has the unladen weights of the C151, C651, C751B, and C151A trainsets?

My understanding is C151As are definitely heavier than C151 and C651, but I am not sure if the C751B is heavier. Nevertheless, it won't be easy having two maintenance teams at two sites since only BSD is equipped for heavier maintenance. Anyway C751Bs are mainly serving NSL if you all have noticed so they may just be "spreading the load"

The C151A are indeed running on EWL from what I observed, but I think it's more of an operational limitation, possibly because SMRT has decided to stable all the C151A at one of the depots, likely Tanah Merah, probably to have specialised maintenance teams for each type of trains.

actually, every time I pass Ulu Pandan Depot on PIE, i will always see some C151As parked there. i don't specifically recall 151As in the maintenance building though - they may stable in UPD, but be maintained only in Tanah Merah.

it might be a more complex issue - perhaps, for instance, how a (possibly) different collector shoe design on the 151As complicates the heavier weight of the 151A on the floating slabs to mess up the third rail.

i think the SMRT investigation into last december's disruptions will give us the answer.

anyway, the 151A is probably heavier than the 751B - just going by the increased provision of handgrips and grip poles. the poles are thicker too.

See: http://joeljoshuagoh.wordpress.com/2012/03/17/singapore-mrt-extension-proposal/

You seem to be missing out the point that stations take up urban space and as a result are randomly connecting the dots to prime locations for new lines.

Only your Northern and Seletar Lines seem viable, but the former's alignment is pretty much taken for granted that it will travel through the eastern/western sides of Woodlands, Punggol, Pasir Ris and Changi Airport.

In any case, welcome to the forums. :)

Hmm, how is the proposal "missing out the point that stations take up urban space" and a "random connecting of the dots to prime locations for new lines"?

You seem to be missing out the point that stations take up urban space and as a result are randomly connecting the dots to prime locations for new lines.
I'm not quite sure what you mean. Urban stations don't have to take up any ground-level space.

Only your Northern and Seletar Lines seem viable
I agree. The government have or had plans for Northern and Seletar lines, though the details have probably changed since the 2001 Concept Plan was released. At that time, the Northern Line (often called North Shore Line and sometimes called North Coast Line) was to have its western terminus at Sembawang. With the TSL and a line to JB terminating at Republic Poly, the Sembawang termination plan has probably changed. Your Seletar Line looks even better, but I would expect it to continue to Seletar. The traffic volumes suffice to justify it.

The Eastern Regional Line was announced in 2008 and will cover much of the eastern portion of your proposed Southern Line. Following the DTL3 and the ERL, there won't be any new MRT lines between the CBD and Changi for a long time. It looks like there will be a Holland Line from Tengah to Orchard and perhaps then into the CBD somehow. Until we know more about plans for the Holland Line, it will be difficult to say much about the western part of your proposed Southern Line.

Somehow, there needs to be an increase in capacity between Jurong East MRT Station and the CBD. In my opinion, the best way to meet that need is to extend the NSL southeast from Jurong East to the CBD.

In any case, welcome to the forums. :)
Yes, welcome. Don't let our criticism scare you away. We're a generally friendly bunch and we try to criticize constructively.

Welcome crosstheroad!

Conceptually, there's nothing wrong with your proposal. With the exception of the Thomson Line, Seletar Line and the Northern Line, which are clearly plucked from the Concept Plan 2001, the others are I guess, "current", and based on the existing traffic trends, and have, not at all, taken into consideration the provisional alignments for the Eastern Region Line, Thomson Line and Tuas Extension. At the end of the day, your proposal is only useful to an extent of establishing where the current heavy traffic corridors not served immediately by rail are.

Your map however, does bring out a poignant possible oversight by LTA - the lack of a rail connection between the Circle, Downtown and Eastern Region lines at two points, one at Marine Parade, and the other in the Bedok area.

deleted

There are multiple locations in your line that you did not seem to bother about avoiding high rise buildings. Tunneling under any High rise building is a no-no.

Delete

CCK North is close enough to Yew Tee, there could be an interchange.
And also, DTL Promenade is the deepest? station in the entire system, how would you stuff a station so deep, and in such a cramped area?
As far as I know, Teck Whye doesn't have enough space to build another exit, let alone a full 6-car station.
Your line seems to pass through a lot of built-up areas with no regard for the affected residents and buildings.
On another note, this is kind of the wrong place, you should submit your plan to MOT/LTA/URA instead and let them follow-up on it.
We can only provide suggestions here, but it will still remain ideas unless you inform the respective authorities about your plan.

Delete

Threads Merged

It seems that this line is a combination of the proposed Holland Line, and another unknown line proposed several forumers along the Bt Merah/AYE corridor (some forumers proposed it as an extension of North-South Line). Combining the 2 lines may actually be viable, but I guess the alignment needs to be tweaked a fair bit.

On the other end, I feel that the line seems to run in an area already congested with other lines and highly developed areas, such as Marina Centre, where underground space is unavailable. With ERL likely going through the same route around the Tanjong Rhu area, I think it's a bit unnecessary to have another line. That being said, I find your proposal of connecting the 3 eastern lines right on the fringe of CBD interesting. The trick is to also connect it to DTL3 as well. If such a connection is to be built, I guess it'll be another line separate from the other 2 lines I mentioned earlier. But I feel that it's really a lot more critical to connect the eastern lines further away, possibly at Bedok.

For CCK North, I really put it there and not an interchange with Yew Tee, so people who live there can have MRT.
DTL Promenade is yes the deepest. So maybe I can put the station a little north so its platforms can be higher. Maybe the same level as the DTL.
Teck Whye doesn't have space. So maybe can build it in Bukit Batok Rd and underground link to Teck Whye LRT.
Yes it passes through a lot of built up areas and it can affect many residents and buildings.
Maybe the line can't really work.
hmmmm... change of plans. maybe an above ground LRT system or a monorail system! =)
no plans to submit anywhere. just want to know what people think. =)

I live there, and yes, Block 610 is nearer to Yew Tee than you think.
The question is, orientation.

I presume this would be a 3-car line.

I find your proposal of connecting the 3 eastern lines right on the fringe of CBD interesting. The trick is to also connect it to DTL3 as well. If such a connection is to be built, I guess it'll be another line separate from the other 2 lines I mentioned earlier. But I feel that it's really a lot more critical to connect the eastern lines further away, possibly at Bedok.

I agree with y2koh that adding one more station at the eastern end of the line to interchange with the DTL3 would be invaluable. I'm not quite convinced that these interchanges would necessarily need to be farther east. Here's a wild thought: could the eastern end of the line be extended north to subsume the planned Seletar Line?

At the western end, I don't see viable traffic to justify the last three stations.

I think the essential idea is plausible, though (as already pointed out by others) there are alignment details that would need to be changed.

mcarling you just gave an idea... here it is
https://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=https:%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fsite%2Fy2kohwk%2FSeletar-Tengah%2520Line.kmz%3Fattredirects%3D0%26d%3D1&aq=&sll=1.433433,103.798973&sspn=0.034622,0.057764&vpsrc=6&t=v&ie=UTF8&ll=1.369031,103.818133&spn=0.138491,0.231056&z=13

Remove

mcarling you just gave an idea... here it is
https://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=https:%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fsite%2Fy2kohwk%2FSeletar-Tengah%2520Line.kmz%3Fattredirects%3D0%26d%3D1&aq=&sll=1.433433,103.798973&sspn=0.034622,0.057764&vpsrc=6&t=v&ie=UTF8&ll=1.369031,103.818133&spn=0.138491,0.231056&z=13

I like it!

Thanks AngeloBrylle and mcarling, AngeloBrylle you are one who have the initial spark of combining Holland Line and the Jln Bt Merah Line, I just merely refined it that's all. I was really attracted to the ongoing idea of combining Seletar and Holland Line, but the alignment at the CBD is rather tricky. I like how AngeloBrylle's detour actually resolves both issues of too many parallel lines in the CBD, and lack of lateral connections between the parallel lines. Such a detour actually cuts through the parallel line twice, once in the eastern outskirts of the CBD, and once across Marina South and Singapore River.

I find the idea of forming a true inner circle loop nice, the problem is that DTL doesn't quite do the job. Using this line and DTL3 together (interchanging at River Valley and Bendemeer) we can form an inner circle loop (without actually having to take commuters on a round trip). The problem though is that the alignment of this line around the CBD is quite loopy, although it seems that TSL is in a similar situation, and as the rail density in the CBD increases in density, things like that are bound to happen. The question is how many more lines.

Which brings back to the combination of the 3 proposed lines. I think it helps to complete all the 3 remaining radial lines that is left to be built into one, saving the CBD from having to tackle with more radial lines. With these radial connections out of the way, LTA can concentrate on pan-suburban lines like the pan-Island and north coast lines. It also helps to resolve the issue of possible low ridership around Napier-Holland-Ulu Pandan corridor for Holland Line, and the Jurong industrial estate part of the Jln Bt Merah/AYE line.

that's cool! really cool! =)
maybe extending it to Mandai / Zoo / Yishun and all the way to Seletar can make it an outer circle line!! =)

Yeah that's possible, if this is the outer circle line, it helps to solve the mystery of the apparent omission of HLL and SLL in the 3 lines LTA is looking into right now.

See: http://joeljoshuagoh.wordpress.com/2012/03/17/singapore-mrt-extension-proposal/

If you post here, how about letting logged-on members here see your diagram? Am I missing something about WordPress.com logon?

1) Some tender doc. mentioned Sin Ming Stn (T7) is a cross platform Stn.
2) Reports from Straits Times mentioned that future MRT Line may cut across nature reserve.
3) Location and orientation of Sin Ming Stn (T7) shows that the south west bound of T7 Line is likely to head towards nature reserve, travel along Island Club Rd, cut throught a short distance of golf course and nature reserve to Rifle Range Rd, all along the road and exit near Anak Bukit Raod and heading towards Clementi Road. This route will has minimum impact on nature reserve. Hopefully it will detour a bit here to Beauty World Stn and interchange with DTL.
4) The line will then follow Clementi Road and terminate at Haw Par Villa Stn. (as shown on concept plan 2001). Few soil investigating machines spotted along Clementi Road recently.:banana:

I doubt the SI rigs you saw are related to any future MRT lines.

If I'm not wrong the report seems to hint that the Pan-Island Line will be cutting across the Nature Reserve. Judging by the position of Sin Ming, the interchange provided for should be the Pan-Island Line then, not the Outer Circle Line.

Decided to merge all the random proposals and related topics into this thread.

Here's my contribution of the day, Punggol Interchange Station with North Coast Line.
3 Options are proposes, the yellow tunnels are for North-Coast Line.

Option 1: Side Platform Confguration, Double Underground Levels
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8299/7959629550_c8ea14e80e_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/y2koh/7959629550/)
Punggol3a (http://www.flickr.com/photos/y2koh/7959629550/) by y2koh (http://www.flickr.com/people/y2koh/), on Flickr

Option 2: Island Platform Confguration, Double Underground Levels
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8446/7959629960_88557e5ed3_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/y2koh/7959629960/)
Punggol2a (http://www.flickr.com/photos/y2koh/7959629960/) by y2koh (http://www.flickr.com/people/y2koh/), on Flickr

Option 3: Side Platform Confguration, Triple Underground Levels
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8038/7959630380_52d59196ba_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/y2koh/7959630380/)
Punggol1a (http://www.flickr.com/photos/y2koh/7959630380/) by y2koh (http://www.flickr.com/people/y2koh/), on Flickr

I live there, and yes, Block 610 is nearer to Yew Tee than you think.
The question is, orientation.

Hmm, Just Opposite Kranji Camp

with all these talks of new lines and what not, we must think - shit. the NSEWLs are getting old. is LTA going to stop building new lines by end-ERL and start upgrading and repairing the senior lines and temporarily closing them? thoughts

Rebuild the elevated sections underground!!!

Rebuild the elevated sections underground!!!

I don't think that will happen for at least another 25-30 years, likely longer.

SMRT is likely to start lifting rails to replace them with new ones over the years, causing disruptions on weekends akin to the London Underground. But I do not foresee a massive closure along any particular line since this will seriously disrupt the transport network even after adequate warnings have been broadcast.

That said, TSL is no substitute for the NSL route. It may approach the latter often but the areas it serve are 40% undeveloped.

I don't think that will happen for at least another 25-30 years, likely longer.
More than that, likely >50 years before studies for it even starts. You're not gonna spent millions on platform screen doors, platform fans, noise barriers and what not just to have it taken down in the near future. That said, the idea though fully supported by me, seems rather impossible to be done in areas like Clementi and Commonwealth without actually demolishing the existing rail viaducts (which means closing down the entire EWL), or closing off the road during construction period, both causing disastrous consequences with our rate of pop growth (by ahem). An alternative would actually be to redesign the route or relocate the stations for the elevated NSEWL in such areas.

I would definitely love to see the entire line to be underground but I just think that it will not happen within the next 20 years. At best, they will just refurbish the lines. It will likely be more than 50 years time as stated by circleline4.

True, but the more interim replacements and renewals we plan for the future, the later we will have to wait for the rebuilding of the lines. NSEWL will already be 40 years old in 2027, I will ascertain that with the recent update of concept plans, North Coast Line and CCL6 will definitely be brought forward to the next decade.

So LTA have 2 options, begin the tunneling for the elevated sections for NSEWL starting from 2030 to replace the lines by the time they reach 50 years, or do replacements of track sections and refurbishment of the stations immediately in 2024 onwards and further lengthen the shelf life of the elevated sections by another 30 years.

I do hope that they can take the first option, although I do agree that the current building works will have to be torn down in 25 years time. However, building the elevated sections underground sooner will help to optimize the land use further as soon as possible.

my opinion is that the mainlines are not likely to go underground anytime soon. scheduled signalling, sleeper, noise barrier and station modification works will end only at the end of this decade, with more to come. I forsee they want to extent the shelf life of the lines for as long as possible while focusing the bulk of resources into network expansion in the medium term.

its true it will just get even harder to tunnel as time goes by though. even right now I imagine its already quite a challenge with the viaduct pilecaps and no forseeable space for road diversions, especially along Commonwealth Avenue West and Commonwealth Avenue.

Realistically, I don't think burying entire lines are possible - some sections, yes. But at the end of the day, what does undergrounding achieve? In Tokyo, there is intense motivation for grade separation either by elevation or burying to enhance service frequency. In Shanghai, well, Longyang Road station's surrounding was undeveloped so they had cost and land advantages that we don't have. Here, there's little value other than noise reduction - it's not like burying the lines frees up any land of significant value.

For one, due to setbacks and railway safety zones, removing the viaduct that is along one side of the road potentially frees up a strip of land 50-60m in width, enough for a block of HDB flat.

Based on 12 storeys, that is equivalent of around 100units per 100m length inclusive of building-building setbacks, and up to 200units (25 storeys and above). Assuming an average of 150 units per 100m, that's 1500units/km length of viaduct removed.

This means that removing just 20-30km of elevated viaduct can yield 30,000 units of flats, that's 1/3 of the eventual number of residential units in Punggol.

In less than 50 years time, LTA will have to replace the existing elevated lines -- either by building essentially new elevated lines in the same place (which would involve long lasting service shutdowns) or by building underground lines adjacent to the elevated lines and cutting over during a weekend shutdown before demolishing the old elevated lines.