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.

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.....

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.

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)