Is this stifling SMRT's business initiatives?

[edutilos-]

but you do have to admit that a dead train will cause more inconvenience than a dead bus wouldn't it? :bsmilie::bsmilie::bsmilie:

I believe your point is that chartering of trains may disrupt service and cause inconvenience IF trains break down.

As long as there is also a possibility, I don't see how the above statement justifies the chartering of buses more than trains.

Because any use of public facilities for private event or purposes could cause inconvenience no matter what. If say, void decks are used for private functions, and this inconveniences the public in some way, be it messy aftermath or noise from event, based on your logic, a blanket policy should be adopted to disallow the holding of private events there? Shouldn't the focus be on the minimization or nullification of inconvenience, through measures such as service standards, etc?

 

[An drew]

Part of the attention is due to it being ACS. I believe if it were a non-elite school, SMRT would probably have been lauded for being flexible. People probably started jumping off their seats when they saw 'The Best Is Yet To Be' flashing on the LCD displays!! How can!?!?!

Ha ha ha, "The Best Is Yet To Be" indeed.

I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate ACS (I) for winning the Rugby Championship, so at least this controversy is worth all the trouble.

http://www.todayonline.com/sports/acsi-make-history-c-div-rugby-win

In the past I have seen Generals mobilizing 3-tonners for non-military purposes but this is the first time I see a General mobilizing MRT Trains. Well done!

 

[Kit]

Yes you can, if the situation described by SMRT is accurate.

Also, I may be wrong but there *is* a specific situation where a chartered bus breaks down and blocks a single-lane, one way road. Or are there no such roads in Singapore? Drivers..?

How about road closures for marathons? The roads are closed off and do disrupt the normal flow of traffic. Of course, there are arrangements made in advance for diversions, but the principle isn't quite far off, no?

I believe your point is that chartering of trains may disrupt service and cause inconvenience IF trains break down.

As long as there is also a possibility, I don't see how the above statement justifies the chartering of buses more than trains.

Because any use of public facilities for private event could cause inconvenience no matter what. If say, void decks are used for private functions, and this inconveniences the public in some way, be it messy aftermath or noise from event, based on your logic, a blanket policy should be adopted to disallow the holding of private events there? Shouldn't the focus be on the minimization or nullification of inconvenience, through measures such as service standards, etc?

I was responding to your comments about a bus breaking down and clogging the road.

 

[Sion]

In the past I have seen Generals mobilizing 3-tonners for non-military purposes but this is the first time I see a General mobilizing MRT Trains. Well done!

You are as yet to see a general mobilizing SIA planes.

:bsmilie:

 

[edutilos-]

I was responding to your comments about a bus breaking down and clogging the road.

1. You stated that trains warrant a different treatment from buses as a broken down train would inconvenience public. Hence it is OK to charter bus but not train.

2. My comments on bus breakdown arise from that argument in #1. It is not true that a broken down bus would not inconvenience the public. So the distinction between the 2 isn't that clear.

3. You then responded that a broken down train is - more - inconvenient than a broken down bus. Even if I do agree, this doesn't address the pt of contention in #2 that the public can and will be inconvenienced whether train or bus is chartered.

If you still don't see the chain of thought here then let's just leave it at that. I have no desire to waste both our time laying it out again. Cheers!

 

[richiemccaw1]

Ha ha ha, "The Best Is Yet To Be" indeed.

I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate ACS (I) for winning the Rugby Championship, so at least this controversy is worth all the trouble.

http://www.todayonline.com/sports/acsi-make-history-c-div-rugby-win

In the past I have seen Generals mobilizing 3-tonners for non-military purposes but this is the first time I see a General mobilizing MRT Trains. Well done!

I thought it was nice that both teams knelt together in prayer after the game.

I do wonder at what point in time does SMRT consider it impossible to accede to requests to charter trains.

 

[An drew]

You are as yet to see a general mobilizing SIA planes.

:bsmilie:

Have lah, we often take SIA overseas for our overseas military training.
Let me find the picture of me in SAF No.4 with SIA stewardess. :lovegrin:

 

[Sion]

I thought it was nice that both teams knelt together in prayer after the game.

One team thanked God for winning and the other team thanked Him for losing?

 

[Kit]

My view still stands. Given everything else is equal, the effects of a broken down train is far reaching, a broken down bus will be pale in comparison. Hence, chartering of trains should be viewed in different light. To me, the distinction is crystal clear.

 

[Sion]

Have lah, we often take SIA overseas for our overseas military training.
Let me find the picture of me in SAF No.4 with SIA stewardess. :lovegrin:

 

[An drew]

It would be up to SMRT to prove that things went on as per normal during the five trains' journey from One North to Stadium.

I do wonder at what point in time does SMRT consider it impossible to accede to requests to charter trains.

Actually I think this can be done in a proper way. SMRT just need to maintain the normal public schedule for the trains, then the chartered trains are additional trains squeezed between the normal train frequency. It then need to communicate this arrangement to public commuters and station additional staff to direct people and minimize any inconvenience and of course obtain clearance from LTA in advance.

 

[edutilos-]

My view still stands. The effects of a broken down train is far reaching, a broken down bus will be pale in comparison. Hence, chartering of trains should be viewed in different light. To me, the distinction is crystal clear.

Of course, this is based on the assumption that (god forbid) a train should break down during a chartered run.

I don't disagree with that view, unless you extend that to argue that this is a good reason to never charter trains. If the company can handle it well (i.e. maintaining normal service standards), my personal view is: Why not? Whether the company is likely to handle it well is a separate discussion altogether. Cheers!

 

[An drew]

No lah, this one is cosplay uniform.

SIA one like that:

 

[surrephoto]

I'm sure if SMRT has had a clean service record, there won't be such a huge outcry from the public. Not exactly wrong, but priorities not right either.

 

[Kit]

I don't disagree with that view, unless you extend that to argue that this is a good reason to never charter trains. If the company can handle it well (i.e. maintaining normal service standards), my personal view is: Why not? Whether the company is likely to handle it well is a separate discussion altogether. Cheers!

Let the record speak for itself

 

[alamak]

You have to consider the sharing of train stations as well. Buses can pick up/drop off from the specific venues but not with trains. Imagine 3000 pax packed inside a small CCL station + regular commuters, or they go thru special entrances/exits? Actually no need to imagine with the frequent train breakdowns lately.

 

[Foxshade]

F1 is a public event, when tickets for the public come with a significant price tag? Some of the marathons' entry fee goes close to $100. That's my issue with using a test of public versus private events. How you draw the line is highly debatable.

If I had spare $100, I can join the Marathon (it's $60 something only if I remember correctly). I can't join ACS even I have $300 or 10 F1 Tix.

 

[Foxshade]

I'm sure if SMRT has had a clean service record, there won't be such a huge outcry from the public. Not exactly wrong, but priorities not right either.

This one... Yeah I think so.

 

[edutilos-]

If I had spare $100, I can join the Marathon (it's $60 something only if I remember correctly). I can't join ACS even I have $300 or 10 F1 Tix.

So your definition of a public event means anyone can join, as long as they have money.

In which case, apparently a special gala dinner held at a top-end restaurant where a seat costs $10,000 is also a public event?

Anyways, there are many Marathons and all of them involve road closure in some way, because it is not easy to find 42 km in Singapore. Standard Chartered has a $95 category (i.e. if you are the 7,001th sign-up for the full marathon).

 

[Bukitimah]

This arrangement was reported days ahead of the event and repeated on radio. No LTA official listen to news meh? So serious why no objection till event is over? Someone make noise then act to show they are taking action? 'Horse behind cannon'

Like that how to have creativity?