In the news release, “Trains on the North-South and East-West Lines Safe for Service”, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) (2016) addressed the problems that it has faced and actions taken to resolve the issues in regards to the North-South and East-West lines trains. One of the problems mentioned was that battery housing flew open due to pressure. Secondly, cracks were also found on the draughtscreen of five trains. Operations of train services were not affected as these problems were rectified immediately. Lastly, hairline cracks were found on the surface of the car body bolster but as the cracks were impossible to repair, affected trains that were under warranty were sent back for replacement. To complete the rectification programme by 2019, LTA expressed they would send two trains at a time for servicing. Nevertheless, it’s dependent on the arrival of new trains along with the current ones which are undergoing re-signalling. However, the lack of information given regarding the hairline cracks and the contracts awarded in LTA’s article made it incomplete.
The first reason that makes the news release incomplete was that LTA didn’t address the issue about why the situation wasn't disclosed earlier, considering this was the information that public want to be answered. The news was first publicized through a Hong Kong investigation news website, FactWire (2016), who captured multiple photos of affected trains being transported out of a train depot and at Jurong Port. The leak of the news caused an uproar as to why the information wasn’t made known to the public initially and only after the news been leaked. Lim (2016) reported, Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan said “if there was a safety issue, LTA would have gone public”, which leaves the question whether LTA is hiding anything else from us. Though after that incident, LTA announced that multiple trains in both Bukit Panjang LRT (BPLRT) line and Sengkang-Punggol LRT (SPLRT) line were found with cracks. The case for the 19 affected trains on BPLRT line was released just 2 days after the initial news release. The cracks were found by the maker of the train, Bombardier, during their routine check in 2015, and currently majority of the trains are fixed, through welding methods in Singapore (Tan, 2016). SPLRT trains were the most recent case, 2 months after the first press release. The defects were found during the countrywide inspection from the July incident. Manufactured by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries from Japan, the trains were returned to operation on vary schedules; of 11 trains, six were back for operation while the remaining were expected to return by middle October (Tan, 2016).
Additionally, the news release is incomplete as the information regarding the new contract rewarded was not mentioned as well as the reasons for awarding both contracts to KSF. In light of the situation happening, Lim (2016) revealed KSF won another contract from LTA; in addition to the contract 151A KSF was awarded in 2009, just because LTA felt the problem was handled decisively. It was noted one of the criteria within the contract when selecting who to award to was the quality of the train (Lim,2016). Interviewed by Lim and Siong (2016), a senior lecturer at SIM university, Dr. Park, explained that 7 years for repairs is too long unless there is any risk yet to be solved. This reasoning was further supported by Former Hong Kong Railway Corporation acting chief executive officer, who claims the quality of the trains was under question due to the high frequency of issues (Factwire, 2016). Multiple former or retired SMRT staffs were also interviewed to understand more about the situation. One claims the need to for replacement shows how grave the situation is. Another staff added on that one can't expect much for the quality considering the cheap value of the trains (Factwire, 2016). Also taking into consideration how fast the LRT trains were being fixed as mentioned above, and being able to repair through wielding in Singapore, one might consider if LTA had acted too hastily with another contract.
In conclusion, while LTA’s article covered the 3 main concerns, it is considered incomplete due to the fact they left out several other information, including why the details about the faults weren't revealed by LTA earlier. The web page also failed to explain the quality of the trains, considering the fact that they awarded the contract to them, yet hairline cracks became appeared more frequently than before.
References:
FactWire. (2016). China Manufacturer for MTR secretly recalls 35 SMRT subway trains after cracks found.
Land Transport Authority. (2016). Trains on the North-South and East West Lines Safe for Service. Retrieved September 20, 2016 from
Lim, K. (2016). Going public on train cracks could have caused undue panic: Khaw. CNA News.
Tan, C. (2016). US-made LRT trains also had cracks. The Straits Times. Retrieved September 28, 2016 from http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/us-made-lrt-trains-also-had-cracks
Tan, C. (2016). Hairline cracks found on 11 Sengkang-Punggol LRT trains. The Straits Times. Retrieved September 28, 2016 from http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/hairline-cracks-found-on-11-sengkang-punggol-lrt-trains
