IS it possible to have a Bus rapid transit system in singapore???

There is no doubt that BRT is possible in Singapore.

But I believe while transport systems like trams, monorails (on Mainland) and BRTs could work in Singapore but it doesn't mean that they HAVE to be introduced for the sake of it.

Introducing a new form of transport is not for novelty sake, but to suit the needs, demand and supply of the transport link.

I believe BRTs would work best on feeder routes. Firstly, BRTs need to have dedicated lanes, if not it's just a normal city bus and the "RT" part in BRT would not happen. This is where CityShopper services fail. They are express buses but operate in high capacity routes and often get stuck in jams during the weekends, making that 3 dollars too much to pay.

Secondly, BRTs need to have dedicated platforms. Supporting infrastructure like wheelchair accessibility related facilities would probably strain existing infrastructure.

yap. Bus rapid transit have its own road so it wont have traffic jiams (Dont have traffic lights) and also arrive in time unlike the buses here need to wait for 3o mins for a bus to come. Also they can carry more passengers than normal buses, high tech as well. Personally i feel public buses in singapore should be replace so we can keep up with the times.(This is just how i thought about it..):ohno:

somehow i have the idea that these kind of services are not possible in densely populated areas like singapore

^^ But, Jakarta which is much denser than singapore already have some corridores of BRTs :)

Do you mean singapore have a slight...... chance of having BRTs?:)

I think the chance of having BRT here is very slim considering that usually LTA always introduced new transport mode as a whole country approach not just a particular place. BRT is more useful for people to go for one place to another to avoid traffic jams etc... And the LTA continuous asking people to take MRT, will definetly put BRT out of the agenda. If you would say for example Yio Chu Kang to Marina Bay via CBD, which the North South Line is currently doing the same thing, obviously the BRT will win the MRT. You don't forget the MRT travels only at 80km/h, stop for 30 seconds every station and if it is 2 mins per train it will go even slower increasing the travel time by 2 - 5 mins. But I dare not to say that BRT will never come to Singapore, maybe it is in LTA Agenda and LTA is trying to evaluate the routes and to balance up the transport system so that traffic will not get involved.

O.. i see i see. If thats the case maybe LRTS can replace bus in singapore.(Now estates like punggol, sengkang and choa chu kang have this system). Maybe next time singapore have LRTS in every estate?^^

The issue of LRT came up at the time when the Sengkang LRT just started and the Bukit Panjang LRT had tonnes of glitches.

If I'm not wrong, LTA did consider LRT for every estate but it was ruled out because they said that LRTs could not serve towns as adequately as buses, they gave that famous example of Ang Mo Kio having an excellent feeder bus network which they said an LRT could not have done a better job.

Also, with more MRT lines coming up, like the Thomson Line and Downtown Line passing through towns, the LRT idea looks less and less likely.

All along, I thought that the best way of intra-town feeder operations was PRT instead of LRT as it is more personalized and suits commuter needs better.

PRT? ARE THESE PRT? http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fei%3DUTF-8%26p%3DPersonal%2520rapid%2520transit%26fp_ip%3DSG%26fr2%3Dtab-web%26fr%3Dyfp-t-501&w=750&h=563&imgurl=www.doodoo.ru%2Fimage-2005%2F10-29-Personal-Rapid-Transit-2.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.doodoo.ru%2Fmodules.php%3Fname%3DNews%26amp%3Bfile%3Dprint%26amp%3Bsid%3D353&size=39.8kB&name=10-29-Personal-Rapid-Transit-2.jpg&p=Personal%20rapid%20transit&type=JPG&oid=8f79ee5a700a801a&no=6&tt=713

Yeah, those are PRT.

Is PRT like a car? Can go to anywhere at anypoint of time by clicking on the button where u want to go? Also they said it is gonna start using first in 2009 at an airport in London...

haha.....we cant even solve the transport problems we r having now. no way we r goin to explore that.

We can solve our transport problems but our government and transport operators are in denial of that.

Sure, our trains aren't at full capacity. They say in Tokyo people are squeezed like sardines; that's possible if everyone is carrying a small briefcase.

Even Shanghai's metro authority has admitted that even though their trains are packed, 100% passenger capacity is far from being reached. They attribute these to different sizes, passengers carrying luggage, bags, handbags and the need for a little personal space.

PRTs are not cars. They run on "tracks" and because of their small size, can ideally run almost everywhere. "Stations" can even be right at your front door. The PRT can go everywhere the "tracks" are linked to.

The PRT will be used at Heathrow Airport, linking Terminal 5 to a car park site outside the airport boundaries.

O... It seems like singapore will stick to these three transport for a long time... (BUS, MRT AND LRT) :ohno:

Considering the space constraints, I don't think BRTs are viable. Or we could always build BRT viaducts above bus-intensive major roads like Orchard Rd, and Bukit Timah/Dunearn Rds

BRT viaducts above bus-intensive roads?

I have one word for that; "MRT".

somehow i have the idea that these kind of services are not possible in densely populated areas like singapore
Density is not a problem: there are busways in much more dense cities than Singapore: Paris, Bogota, Tehran,..

Density is not the right word for these circumstances.. Singapore is land-scarce.. there is much better use for the land than to reserve it for a bus-only purpose. I'm pretty sure France, Colombia and Iran has much more space to be much more liberal with their land.

O.. By the way IF you have the chance to choose between BUS and LRT in your estate, you prefer which one? For me is LRT simply because it is on time.

Bus or LRT.

For me, much has to do with the road network design of the town. Personally, towns like Bukit Panjang, Sengkang and Punggol which were designed for the LRT in mind are better off with LRT than buses.

Woodlands: Town too segregated, Woodlands Reg Ctr splits town into half, road network centres on individual MRT stations. No LRT.

Yishun: Will not serve town adequately. Hypothetical line along Ring Road still wouldn't connect residents properly. Khatib MRT makes LRT option less. Linkage to Simpang possible but depends on North Shore Line and URA plans for the area.

Ang Mo Kio: West and East (separated by MRT track) different in character. East is dense but too small for viable line, West side will have Thomson Line, no need for LRT.

Bishan: Possible LRT. Clear cut West and East Loop identifiable but Thomson Line, North South Line and Circle Line will render LRT less efficient that planned.

I could go on and on... But I'll just stop here.

Density is not the right word for these circumstances.. Singapore is land-scarce.. there is much better use for the land than to reserve it for a bus-only purpose. I'm pretty sure France, Colombia and Iran has much more space to be much more liberal with their land.

Sure. But usually the space used by the busways or the LRT is taken to the private cars by using two lanes in the middle of the street. No additional land is needed. And Singapore both try to reduce the use of private cars and have wide streets.

Perhaps it's time to think about underground LRT... or perhaps a skytrain system like that of Changi's in towns. Are either even appropriate?

I guess underground LRTs are possible, but it is going to resemble Paris' Metro or Seville's Metro which brings the viability and comparison to medium-rail like the upcoming Circle Line.

I don't know the actual figures, but if an LRT, albeit in an evolved form, much like Paris Metro's rolling stock, relatively short but quite a few cars and just 2.5m wide, can be substantially cheaper than LTA's definition of "Medium Rail", it can certainly be considered.

Once you go underground, the costs of building becomes higher and stakes also follow higher.

Changi Skytrain type in towns. Drive along the major roads in towns and you will see there's simply no space. It amazes me how liberal construction of new projects are taking place, outdoor space is no longer a consideration, except for Ion Orchard. Orchard Central, The Sail, Ocean Financial Centre literally leave no space between pavement and building.

I would personally like to see real trams, more LRTs, BRTs and maybe even PRTs in Singapore but right now, MRT is the priority.

So is there no chances of having some of the existing estates to have LRT?:bash:

I guess underground LRTs are possible, but it is going to resemble Paris' Metro or Seville's Metro which brings the viability and comparison to medium-rail like the upcoming Circle Line.

I don't know the actual figures, but if an LRT, albeit in an evolved form, much like Paris Metro's rolling stock, relatively short but quite a few cars and just 2.5m wide, can be substantially cheaper than LTA's definition of "Medium Rail", it can certainly be considered.



I'm not sure than it would be much cheaper. In Paris the Métro has been made narrower than the other networks not for economical reasons but because of a stupid challenge between 2 projects at the end of 19° century: The railways companies wanted to connect their networks under Paris and the city wanted an independant network. So they chose narrow trains and tunnels to make sure the railway companies could never use them.
As you say, once you go underground, either you have 2.5m wide trains or 3.10m should not make a big difference.

I'm sure a narrower rolling stock would be slightly cheaper than a wider rolling stock. Thus, smaller tunnels, smaller platform...

There are quite a few metros which seemed to purposely went narrow; like Seville, the older Shanghai and Beijing lines.

BRTS may be introduce by LTA. LOOK AT THIS ON PAGE 32 http://www.lta.gov.sg/ltmp/LTMP.html on the full report

Recently BRTs, particularly the ones in Delhi and Jakarta, have received flak for ironically adding to the congestion by taking out available lanes for other road users.

Oh so i think BRTS might not work... How about trams. LTA say that they might consider trams too...:nuts:

Me thinks trams are okay, but they need to seriously plan for it, with same processes as for rail reserves and all because I'm sure LTA doesn't want to shoot itself in the foot with trams.

I support the idea of reintroducing electric trams to Singapore, the modern ones of course. Many cities in the world have been operating trams successfully, noteworthy ones include Melbourne, Milan, Amsterdam, San Francisco etc, etc.

The spiritual sister of Singapore - Hong Kong still has the old-timers running thru its CBD and thru the northern shore of HK island. There are tram-like LRT trains in New Territories with some parts of the routes being street-running as well.

Novelty factors aside, electric trams running on tracks countersunk on the streets will bring in many benefits to Singapore. It depends on how the planning people want to integrate trams and its infrastructure into the city's streetscape.

Modern electric trams are non-polluting, quiet, fast accelerating (suitable for making frequent stops in busy downtown stretches), can carry a relatively large number of people as compared to buses (even bendy buses), level boarding good for the elderly and the disabled, etc, etc. In addition, a tram lane takes up less space as compared to a full-day bus lane as trams don't require steering and can negotiate narrow street corners easily. It simply follows the tracks laid on the street!

Lastly, trams are a high quality and a more attractive mode of public transport. If planned well, it sure can woo more people to using public transport.

Trams need not be powered using overhead lines right?

Trams need not have overhead lines. They can use a 3rd rail buried underground.

As much as I would welcome trams as an alternative public transport system, I think they are not relevant in Singapore's case.

Like LRTs, they cannot be altered to suit changes in traffic patterns. Do bear in mind that contractors love to occasionally open up the ground once in a while, can you imagine the chaos it will create?

Buses in contrast, can be altered to serve passengers more effectively. And their usage on the road will not take out any extra space.

For BRTs and trams, the assumption is you have to take out road lanes for tracks and dedicated lanes if not, it defeats the need to even have trams and BRTs.

As much as I would welcome trams as an alternative public transport system, I think they are not relevant in Singapore's case.

Like LRTs, they cannot be altered to suit changes in traffic patterns. Do bear in mind that contractors love to occasionally open up the ground once in a while, can you imagine the chaos it will create?

Buses in contrast, can be altered to serve passengers more effectively. And their usage on the road will not take out any extra space.

For BRTs and trams, the assumption is you have to take out road lanes for tracks and dedicated lanes if not, it defeats the need to even have trams and BRTs.
None of the reasons you mention for not having trams are in any way unique to Singapore. I see no reason why trams cannot be as successful in Singapore as they are anywhere else. They're a very popular and user friendly form of public transport and I think they'd be quite suited to certain areas of Singapore. It would be best if they used wireless tram technology though, since one of the nice things about Singapore is that there are very few wires spoiling views at street level etc.

Before we know it, there is a probability that STB may be already working with LTA on the bringing in trams into Singapore streets to reduce dependance on cars. My brother just told me long time ago that one of sources told him that trams are being explored at STB side.

Trams already powered from ground - available in France. So I believe LTA already explores the idea of having trams as the costs of building MRT/LRTs keep on escalating....

All we do is to wait and see.

But for sure, LTA has not 100% ruled out the idea of having trams.

hmmm... should i post my own version of the tram's layout?

Trams need not have overhead lines. They can use a 3rd rail buried underground.

As much as I would welcome trams as an alternative public transport system, I think they are not relevant in Singapore's case.

Like LRTs, they cannot be altered to suit changes in traffic patterns. Do bear in mind that contractors love to occasionally open up the ground once in a while, can you imagine the chaos it will create?

Buses in contrast, can be altered to serve passengers more effectively. And their usage on the road will not take out any extra space.

For BRTs and trams, the assumption is you have to take out road lanes for tracks and dedicated lanes if not, it defeats the need to even have trams and BRTs.


Well, personally I believe if trams can survive in a more densely populated and road space-precious urbanised place like Hong Kong then I'm confident it will work even better for Singapore.

Trams can play a good role as a secondary mass transit lines complimenting trunk MRT lines and bus services. It could fill in a gap as something both buses and heavy-rail trains cannot offer. Trams are like mini electric trains that run like a bus on the streets.

Modern trams possess the flexibility of using both dedicated lanes or shared road space with other motor vehicles whichever most suitable along the route. There are people in LTA who have suggested that tram lanes could even be built on canals (like those along bukit timah road) and then merge into streets when entering downtown area. Or another popular option is "grass tracks" which is increasingly popular in modern tram networks found in Europe. Tram tracks laid on the grass lawn acting as a road divider. It is visually pleasing and very environmentally friendly. Good examples include the new tram lines in Paris, France and Barcelona, Spain.

When in busy downtown areas, trams are great for short distance hop-ons and hop-offs, and are able to move a much larger number of passengers on street level more swiftly than buses. Electric tram do not contribute to street level emissions hence it is a green way to travel, and their electric motors are powerful and yet produce a lot lesser noise as compared to the buses' polluting diesel engines.

Who wants to go down to the MRT / LRT station platforms via a few flights of staircases or escalators just for a short distance ride? It would probably already cost you 3 - 5 minutes before you get to board the trains. Plus MRT trains can't stop as frequent as buses or trams, it is meant for relatively "longer haul" rides.

Modern low-floor trams are able to travel at a high speed similar to that of a MRT train in the suburban areas where it enjoys right-of-the-way on its dedicated tracks / lanes, usually in the middle of the road. And when trams enter busy downtown areas its tracks can merge with the street traffic and make frequent stops to provide a more door-to-door services similar to that provided by buses.

Besides, electric trams are more energy efficient in a sense that it takes less energy to move a fully loaded tram as compared moving a bus. Steel wheels and tracks have little frictional drag as compared to buses' rubber tyres with the road surface. Trams also have re-generative braking capability which allows the electric motors to work like a power generator when trams are braking or trying to reduce speed, thus returning electric power back to the power grid to be used by other trams in the network. (FYI: Our MRT trains also have re-generative braking)

On the street level, trams are not to replace all our bus services but to compliment them and offer more travel options and patterns for public transit users.

About the ''grass tracks'' do you mean this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTL7arPZjOU

Trams need not be powered using overhead lines right?

Personally, I'd still prefer the power collection is achieved through the use of a pantograph sliding against an overhead line strung above the tracks.

Because this is by far the most reliable and proven way for electric trams to receive steady supply of electric current, both safely and cost-effectively.

Having the "third-rail buried underground" is what called a conduit tramway system, which was once vastly employed in the pre-war London. Although it saves stalling overhead lines it is costly to build and a choice of high maintenance cost. I do not recommend this "wireless technology" to Singapore's future tramway system. I'm quite sure that Singaporeans will not appreciate trams losing electric power due to track faults or power failure.

Again, let's do it the kiasu Singaporean way, having a simple overhead line that costs much less and is 100% reliable.

I am sure Singaporeans will not mind seeing a single, thin, tightly strung wire about 5.7 meters above the tram tracks knowing that this particular wire actually powers a fleet of quiet and non-polluting trams that do not give out harmful exhaust having impact on their health. Besides, through landscape engineering, the overhead lines can be smartly hidden or blended into the greeneries. People don't always notice it anyway.

About the ''grass tracks'' do you mean this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTL7arPZjOU

Yes, that's the one. Grass tracks is something nice to have. You'll see trams "flying" on the grass as the tracks are almost covered by green grass. : )

Go to Europe and you'll see lots of tram operating cities are trying to make their trams "fly" on the grass. It is getting very popular now. :)

Can you picture which are the roads/streets of Singapore are suitable to implement grass tracks for trams to "fly" on? :cheers:

In solving congestion and gridlock in the city, one cannot look at it from only one perspective.

As much as I had the LTA for this, there needs to be a compromise in that we need to solve the road congestion in town, we need to alleviate traffic from our current rail lines, we need more land for more development all at the same time.

Trams can only be effective if they are allowed dedicated tracks in town, where they need this the most. I took the CityShopper services quite a few times and their main folly is the drivers' inability to control traffic conditions. So, trams MUST NOT merge onto streets.

Imagine, 577 from Ang Mo Kio jams on the CTE, on Newton Road, and along SMU/SAM and you paid 3 dollars for what was supposed to be a comfortable and quick ride. The result is almost a 70 min journey as opposed to a 25 min MRT journey down, the sacrifice is crowds on trains though.

In addition, I don't know if you realize this or not but most streets in town are one-way. There ARE parallel roads, but these are not considered 2-way because they are separated by a city block. This complicates tram routing. Should they go in opposite? Or should they run with the traffic flow? And will the tram adequately serve both "parallel" roads?

Believe it or not, people rather take the flight of steps to the MRT platforms or walk to their destinations. On personal experience (i do this every single weekend), people take buses for "long haul" routes more than "short haul". Look at the SMRT buses heading for Marina Ctr, they are usually lightly loaded after Heeren. People usually visit Orchard Rd, and are more often than not, willing to walk from Orchard MRT to Plaza Sing before taking the train down to City Hall.

People in Singapore are quite willing to walk. You don't go to Orchard Road to visit one specific mall, at least most people don't. You'll visit a few malls, wander here and there. Your feet may be killing you, but you walked already.

As in how trams can be integrated as part of Singapore's public transport network and in what areas trams' strengths could be magnified in Singapore's public transit milieu will largely depend on the professional planning people from the authorities.

I have friends in LTA who have told me that Singapore does not exclude the option of having trams in the future. After all, the trend now is to electrify public transport as much as possible. After all, electricity is considered a cleaner source of energy as compared to diesel. Unless Singapore does not mind having electric trolleybuses back on its streets again.

Tram lines might not appear in the busiest transit corridors in the city but I'm sure there are places in Singapore where a tram network could be found suitable. Maybe one will act as townlink or feeder serivices in a densely populated housing estate. We do not know yet.

You might understand what I'm talking about better if you have paid a visit to the Yuen Long and Tuen Mun districts in Hong Kong. The tram-like LRT vehicles are doing a good job complimenting MTR West Rail Line and the bus services there. The tram-like LRT trains sometimes speed on dedicated tracks like a train and sometimes have stops in the middle of a street. It is very flexible, fast and provides a more door-to-door light rail service. It is cheaper to build as compared to the LRT (fully elevated people-mover systems) in Singapore.

Personally as a citizen I hope Singapore, as a truly global city, could also possess a truly world-class and multi-modal public transit network that can match the status as an international metropolis. Sometimes, don't you find Singapore's streets are bored with only diesel buses?

Jam cannot be avoided on all land transport.

Government is trying their best to resolve the daily problems on the roads and rail network. Our rail network is now fast facing the pressure from daily peak hours crowds. Rail planners must be working furiously to keep facilities ahead of fast changing of travel patterns of commuters.

Costs of building rail networks are escalating - faster than the budget they have made provisions many years ago.

Bus operators are now facing shortages of drivers. Planners have already foresight that they cannot rely heavily on manpower to operate the trains. So all new lines after NEL are now being automated.

Bus servcies are going to be overhauled by the MOT.

Our population is now greying. More elders into our society. So trams would eventually come into our singapore streets. Some roads would be condoned off to cater to trams eventually. This can happen. Even in Paris - they have condoned off the streets for trams.

In long runs, Elders would be able to board the trams without a problem even wheelchair users would be able to board - bigger space and more capacity compared to any 12m single decker bus and 12m double decker buses and even bendy buses.

You know what? I'd like to see trams on Singapore's streets, along with monorails and PRTs in the city.