To say that LRT is less cost-efficient and, worse still, less
useful is an atrocious understatement.
Firstly, reliability. On
average the chances of an LRT breakdown to a bus is far less.
Judging by the SBST system for example. For every breakdown the system has, an average of
50 buses would break down. The advanced computer technology has
made the system effectively kept the number of faults and human
errors to a minimum. This is something a bus could simply not
achieve. Also, the LRT had managed to keep its frequency with
outstanding consistency. Even for the Bukit Panjang Line! Compared
to the buses who often come late due to arising traffic conditions
it is definitely an edge for the automover system.
Secondly, efficiency. Here I will be talking about this in the
long run. LRTs are far more efficient than buses because it saves
costs in the long run. Firstly, it saves manpower, as the cabs are
fully automated. Secondly, it saves time, as these cars can run
around without stopping every day, while for buses you need
turnover time and change shifts. Due to its automated system it can
also have flexible operating hours. The Sengkang LRT extends
operating hours on PH while 372 does not. The LRT can carry more
people in a single trip. A car of capacity of 105 passengers vs an
SD of approx 80 pax (assuming it's SDs because it is highly
inefficient to run DDs on feeders and compared to LRTs bendies are
no match in cost-efficiency) shows that the LRT system can have a
higher capacity than regular buses. Saves manpower, saves operating
cost. Despite its higher costs of construction as long as it is
built in the right neighbourhood it would be far more efficient
than buses in the long run.
Thirdly, convenience. Here I shall be commenting in the
perspective of a commuter. I mean, wouldn't you want a sheltered
walkway to the station, happily top-up your card (instead of giving
tedious coins) and travel on stable cars and reach town centre in a
matter of around 10 minutes? Versus a bus which takes longer to
come, uncomfortable to squeeze in, shaky, takes long time (traffic
lights) and yet have to tap out and in again, which wastes one of
the 5 trips you have on your ezlink card (assuming in the position
of te majority of commuting crowds which take the train to the
city), and thus indirectly wasting your money? For example,
Rivervale LRT Station. 119 vs LRT. I challenge you go count the
pathetic amount of people boarding 119, despite it taking the most
straightforward route available by road to STC. Seriously, the
overall commuting environment is much better on the LRT (proper
station with proper facilities) than the bus!
How could you say that LTA had not been doing trials properly?
When Bukit Panjang LRT opened it became a hit (partially due to
withdrawn services), only problem was its constant bugs. But LTA
had seen that, and thus made major improvements for the Sengkang
and Punggol LRTs, such as changing operator and using higher
quality trains. They even made signalling upgrades to BPLRT itself!
And what proof to say that LTA had decided not to invest anymore?
Remember, LTA had even INVESTED ADDITIONAL CARS to IMPROVE the
system. By 2016, 16 trains on the SBST system would be
dual-car!
Please do try the LRT for commuting and daily travelling
purposes before saying such a statement! As a former Tampines
resident I can bravely tell you, life is so much better with the
LRT, both for the operator and the commuter!
No doubt, trains can run faster than buses. Without the traffic
lights and traffic jams which buses experience, there is greater
assurance that they can run on time. However, I do not think we
need a LRT for this feature. Instead, we can simply install Bus
Rapid Transit infrastructure - such as a sensor which allows buses
to beat traffic light - to have such a feature on the buses.
Personally, I do not think a LRT car can carry 100 people
inside. If one end of a BPLRT car can carry around 12 people, I
think a LRT car (12*6 times the area of that one end) can carry
around 72 people. Meanwhile, there are around 36 seats on a Single
Deck bus. On the assumption that there can be around 20 people
standing inside a bus, a Single deck bus can carry around 56
people. Therefore, it is true that a LRT car has higher capacity
than a Single Deck bus.
However, if compare with DD, I think DD's capacity is higher
than LRT's. Double Decker buses have around 20 more seats, so it
can carry around 76 people. This is around 4 more than a LRT car.
Yeah, I know it may not be a big difference. But in monetary terms,
a DD is way more economical than a LRT car. Why? Because at least a
DD creates more employment opportunities than a LRT car. Well, I am
not sure about how much a DD or a LRT car costs (to purchase and
maintain), but I think a DD is cheaper. Therefore, although a LRT
may be more efficient than a Single Deck bus, it may instead be
less efficient and less economical than a Double Decker bus.
Whereas for convenience, I do not understand how LRT is more
convenient than bus. Personally, I prefer bus more than LRT,
because unlike LRT, I do not have to climb stairs or take lift
before I can board a bus. Besides, I do not think it's totally
correct to say that LRT is more able than buses in providing
shelter during rain because at the very least, water from the LRT
roof may drip down as I walk out of it - similar to when I exit
from bus. Therefore, in terms of convenience, it may be better to
commute on a bus than on a LRT.
It is mainly about money, actually.