Welcome to TRANSIT!

TRANSIT logo

Welcome to TRANSIT’s website, a source of information & knowledge about public transportation in the Klang Valley and throughout Malaysia.

Navigation of TRANSIT’s website is easy!

Just use the tabs at the top of the page or the links below to take you where you want to go:

  • Home - Our Blog page, with postings arranged in reverse chronological order;
  • About TRANSIT – Information About TRANSIT, who we are, what we are trying to do, and how you can help us;
  • Updates – Information about projects as well as collections of articles & letters related to public transport;
  • Local Info – Useful information about public transport in Malaysia, from services (routes) to operators, to the laws that govern public transport and the government agencies in charge of the regulation of public transport;
  • Research - This page focuses on various aspects of research, from public transport advocacy to academic papers, and even architecture, culture (art, music & museums), Universal Design & Standards;
  • Ideas – TRANSIT’s proposals, memos, presentations and papers, as well as masterplans, proposals and other ideas to improve public transport in Malaysia;
  • Take Action – Information about how you can take action to improve public transport – from joining TRANSIT to complaining to the government, wakil rakyat or the media – to help in the feedback process;
  • F.A.Q.Frequently Asked Questions on Public Transport;
  • C.A.T. – Our page on Competency, Accountability and Transparency (note: this page has been temporarily removed for review and improvement).

SPECIAL NOTE 1:

SPECIAL NOTE 2: Information about the 4-months long closing of Puduraya and the Bukit Jalil temporary terminal can be found here.

SPECIAL NOTE 3: Information about Rapidpass “Pelajar” can be found here. Information about Rapidpass “Flexi” can be found here.

SPECIAL NOTE 4: Information about the Government Transformation Programme’s Urban Public Transport NKRA can be found here. TRANSIT needs your feedback on the proposals!

SPECIAL NOTE 5: Public Display and other information for current & proposed rail projects can be found at the links below:

We welcome your feedback. Let us know below what we can do to improve our website, or send us an email at klangvalley.transit@gmail.com!

TRANSIT analyses the MRT proposal & compares it to other rail proposals (Update #4)

  • Updated with poll!
  • Updated with additional drawings!
  • Updated with articles!

Introduction

This posting may be one of the longest that we have made in recent years, but we feel that it is necessary to get all stakeholders to sit down and look at public transport in an holistic manner.

As such, TRANSIT needs your feedback on these rail proposals – that means, detailed observations, comments, ideas, etc. We want to break our records in terms of the number of people who view and comment on this page.

Also, we want you to tell your friends, neighbours, and wakil rakyat to visit this page and give their comments as well.

A note from TRANSIT

Over the past few years, a number of proposals have appeared suggesting rail networks for the Klang Valley. Of these various proposals, 4 of them stand out, either because of the level of detail, quality of the proposal, or general audacity of those making the proposals.

In this post, TRANSIT will examine the 4 “main” rail network proposals for the Klang Valley, which come from:

You can click on the links above to see various versions of the different proposals. The slideshow & gallery of our drawings (courtesy of @Bukhrin) compares the various proposals.

Slideshow

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Gallery

Our Goal

Our goal is to examine the proposals above in some detail, looking for similarities and differences. We will also look at the economic and financial justification (keeping in mind that there is very little information available) and examine everything through three lenses, namely:

  • best practices in public transport investment
  • best practices in transport-oriented development (TOD)
  • cost-benefit analysis

Keep in mind that our resources are quite limited – but we believe that it is very important that the professional planners, engineers, and economists look at all of these proposals and come up with a real network solution.

Our intention with this post is to get the train rolling (as it were).

Details of the MMC-Gamuda Proposal

TRANSIT has been concerned with the recent announcement of an MRT network proposal for the Klang Valley, projected to cost between RM36-RM43 billion.

Graphic from the Malaysian Insider shows proposed phases for the "unsolicited", "unapproved" MRT project. MMC-Gamuda would like very much for this project to get started next year.

The StarBiz "snapshot of the MRT proposal" showcasing its "advantages" - Image courtesy of Star Biz (sort of)

StarBiz graphic showing the proposed routing for the City Circle Line.

Our concerns are namely:

  • That our existing public transport network is fragmented and that fixing the problems with existing service should be our priority;
  • That the money invested should be spread out through the whole country;
  • That there is no existing public transport service to act as a precedent to justify the cost of the MRT investment;
  • That the last time we built rail services without having a public transport precedent, we ended up with 3 separate railway lines operated by 3 separate companies and built using 3 separate technologies;
  • That all of the above railway lines had to be bailed out by the Federal Government;
  • That the proposal (which comes courtesy of construction company MMC-Gamuda) was unsolicited and presented directly to the cabinet, rather than to any government agencies, workshops or think tanks or to the public;
  • That the government has adopted the MRT proposal as part of the 10MP without consultation with other industry players, with SPAD or with the public;
  • That the government has only now appointed consultants to conduct a feasibility study, after announcing the MRT proposal as part of the 10th Malaysia Plan, as can be seen from this article: 12 weeks to conduct MRT feasibility study (StarBiz);
  • That the MMC-Gamuda proposal is the 4th proposal that we have seen for a public transport rail network (including Fikir Runding, DBKL, and Prasarana) and it seems that no one is examining the advantages and disadvantages of all proposals to come up with a final proposal

Knowing all of the above, you can imagine our skepticism and worry when we see reports of the proposal and letters from the unsuspecting public that suggest that the MRT is the solution to our public transport nightmare (as if the LRT worked so well). Examples of such comments & activities can be found at the following places:

We have similar concern over the other 3 proposals as well – as the reader can imagine, all of them have their advantages and disadvantages.

TRANSIT’s immediate goal is to present the details of each proposal, and examine the advantages and disadvantages.

In a future post, we will evaluate (as best we can) the proposals and give our recommendation for a future network.

The Key Details

Aside from the information that we have read in the media, TRANSIT notes that there are many “key details” of the MMC-Gamuda network proposal that we think are important and worth mentioning – and we will compare these details with the other 3 proposals.

A new perspective on “City Centre”

The proposal from MMC-Gamuda claims that the existing LRT lines do not serve the “City Centre” – which they have defined as the Golden Triangle, (KLCC, Bukit Bintang, Pudu, Pasarakyat) – and proposes that two of the new lines will interchange in this area.

[TRANSIT: The idea of serving the eastern side of KL, described as the "City Centre" in the proposal, is a good one, because it acknowledges that this area is high density and has a lot of potential for growth]

Northwest-Southeast Corridors

Both of the proposed MRT lines travel in a “northwest – southeast direction”, from Sg. Buloh to Cheras and Sg. Buloh to Serdang.

Similar corridors are also featured in the Fikir Runding proposal, DBKL proposal and Prasarana proposal. However, the MMC-Gamuda proposal has two lines, rather than one line.

[TRANSIT: Because of the consistent appearance of a northwest-southeast corridor in all of the plans above, we expect that at the very least, we will see the Kota Damansara - Cheras line (or a slight variation) built at some point within this decade. The most important thing is to identify the location of this line in the city centre and construct those segments, then move on to suburban extension.]

Multiple “Seamless” Interchanges

The proposal suggests that there is a need for additional interchanges between LRT and MRT stations in the Klang Valley and will plan the MRT lines to maximize the number of available interchanges.

The interchanges are also being described as “seamless” and designed in the same manner as interchanges in Hong Kong, Singapore and Kaohsiong.

Similar interchanges are proposed for the Fikir Runding, DBKL and Prasarana proposals, at different sites. For example, Prasarana proposes that KL Sentral stay as a main interchange, while the MMC-Gamuda and DBKL proposals seem to prefer Masjid Jamek.

[TRANSIT: Interchanges and network nodes are very important places in the network and having many interchanges will allow better flow of passenger movement throughout the network. In addition, the development potential for sites around interchanges is high - which can help to offset the cost of construction.

After having been exposed to the poorly designed interchanges in the existing rail network (particularly Kuala Lumpur-Pasar Seni and KL Sentral-KL Monorail) we do not think there would be objections to this.]

City Circle Line

The proposal includes a “City Circle Line” that will tie all of the LRT, MRT and monorail lines together. A similar line appears in the Fikir Runding proposal, while the DBKL proposal has multiple monorail lines that more or less surround the city centre and provide connections. There is no “circle line” proposed by Prasarana.

The main question about the city circle line would be its location – since the MRRI corridor – Jalan Tun Razak (formerly “Circular Road”) plus Lebuhraya Mahameru + Jalan Istana – could be used (it is included in the Fikir Runding proposal) but it is low density or already an engineering nightmare.

There is also a question of whether (or how) the line will serve communities surrounding the “city centre” namely older suburban areas like Bangsar, Sentul, Pudu and Ampang.

[TRANSIT: Having a "City Circle Line" is a nice idea but it is very unlikely that the line itself would be viable as a whole. Generally, circle lines tie together viable segments of radial lines and the whole is not always greater than the sum of its parts.

A good example would be Singapore's City Circle Line - which is only 3 carriages in length (similar to the Ampang LRT) rather than the 6-carriages of a traditional MRT.

We need a clear understanding of the projected capacity of this circle line - and frankly, it may be better to have a few monorail lines instead of the one circle line.]

Underground construction

The proposal from MMC-Gamuda has a great deal of underground construction proposed for the two main lines along the “northwest-southeast” corridors. Most of the City Centre line would be elevated (except the western stretch).

This contrasts interestingly with the DBKL proposal (which consists mostly of elevated monorail lines) and the Prasarana proposal (which will only be underground from Brickfields to Bukit Bintang). We have no details about the Fikir Runding proposal.

[TRANSIT: As you can imagine, the cost of underground construction is quite a bit higher than the cost of elevated construction - and with MRT trains being wider than LRT trains, the cost will surely be higher.  There is also the issue of the land under KL - which has many open caverns and underground rivers. It will be challenging to find proper corridors for tunneling.]

Building a Rail-Based “Backbone” and Increased transport demand

Each of the proposals recommends a rail-based public transport network based on the idea that it is the most efficient solution for our public transport needs. Rail has the advantage of being isolated from regular traffic and can therefore avoid traffic congestion.

The Fikir Runding, Prasarana and MMC-Gamuda proposals argue that MRT construction is justified and will lead to a high increase in public transport demand. The DBKL proposal seems to prefer monorail lines, but the emphasis is still on a rail-based network to move more people.

[TRANSIT: The advantages of a rail-based network are numerous and we do not argue against them. Our concern is that the cost of the rail network means that fewer areas can be served with public transport and that these areas must be mature, high density area.

Unfortunately, the recent trends in Malaysia have seen more of the population shifting to low-density areas, propelled by affordable private transportation.

Because the usage of public transport is so low, there is a huge gap between the existing number of public transport users and the anticipated numbers that are said to justify the construction of monorail, MRT or LRT.]

Rail good, bus bad

All of the proposals above are rail-based, and they mostly argue that the existing bus system cannot meet future public transport demand.

While the proposals (with the exception of Fikir Runding) do have varying degrees of bus usage incorporated in the design, it is clear that rail is in great favour.

The MMC-Gamuda proposal goes ahead to say that the SPAD proposal for bus lanes and BRT is unworkable because of congestion (shown in photos) on the existing roads where these routes have been proposed.

The MMC-Gamuda proposal takes a highly “selective” (biased) approach by using a photo of the TransMilenio BRT system in Bogota that suggests that the system will simply lead to more traffic congestion.

[TRANSIT: Selection examination of the details and all the options is nothing new. We at TRANSIT do it, so does the government and the public.

The key issue is what is behind that selective examination of the details. TRANSIT has got years of research and is aware of the best practices in public transport - and most importantly, our only stake in this is to see the best possible public transport system in the Klang Valley.

Can DBKL, Prasarana, Fikir Runding and MMC-Gamuda say that they do not have a huge financial stake in the future rail network for the Klang Valley?

That is why these proposals should be examined publicly, in an open and transparent manner - so that the ideas, thoughts, feeling and biases become clear and what emerges is the best possible choice.

It is also why we really prefer it that proposals do not come to the government from companies that have a direct interest in the proposal. ]

Benchmarking

The MMC-Gamuda proposal states that KL should have more MRT lines simply because other cities in Asia have more kilometres of MRT lines and we would not want the Klang Valley (or by extension, Malaysia) to be left out.

A similar argument is given in the other proposals – that having a longer, more complete network of rail-lines will give the Klang Valley significant economic advantages and improve quality of life.

[TRANSIT: Frankly, we do not buy arguments that compare "size" and "length" because the Klang Valley has a very different density pattern and public transport usage pattern as compared to many other cities in Asia.]

Feedback

TRANSIT needs your feedback on the above proposals – evaluating the advantages and disadvantages – and suggestions on what network would be best for the needs of the Klang Valley.

Thank you in advance for your feedback!

Have you ever been to West Ashfield station in London, UK?

TRANSIT took note of two very interesting blog postings detailing West Ashfield “station” on the District Line of the London Underground. Apparently, London Underground staff invited a number of these bloggers and other media representatives to visit West Ashfield, and their postings inspired a lot of interest.

West Ashfield "station platform" with roundel logo and bench. Image courtesy of London Reconnections.

What makes West Ashfield “station” so interesting is that it doesn’t actually exist. West Ashfield is a training centre mocked up to look like a real London Underground station – right down to the benches, kiosks, route maps, and “lifts.” There is even a ticket window – virtual of course.

Virtual ticket window at West Ashfield "station", courtesy of London Reconnections.

"Lift" at West Ashfield "station", image courtesy of London Reconnections.

So why all the effort from London Underground to create West Ashfield “station”? The reason is simple – to give London Underground employees as much training as possible. Which explains that train simulator

Train platform simulator at West Ashfield "station" courtesy of London Reconnections.

Driver's eye view of the train simulator with real track and points. Image courtesy of London Reconnections.

Not to mention, the fully-signalled model railway:

According to London Reconnections blogger @John Bull,

“It would be easy to think that West Ashfield station was simply a visual gimic – something to enliven training sessions – but this is not the case. West Ashfield isn’t just a decorated corridor, its a micro-station environment with a very clear purpose. It may contain a number of rooms and facilities that your average station doesn’t (more on those later), but it also places trainees, when appropriate, in an atmosphere that is as similar as possible to that in which they may find themselves working.”

You can learn more about West Ashfield station by visiting these interesting and comprehensive blogs about London’s public transport:

TRANSIT Says:

We are impressed mainly by two things that relate to West Ashfield. First is the level of attention to detail and careful training. West Ashfield has all the necessary features to give London Underground employees proper training in operations, management, safety and security and customer service. Everything is in its place and no details are left out. Considering how frustrating it can be to use public transport, we at TRANSIT appreciate it when a public transport operator makes a huge, real effort to train its employees.

The second thing is that London Underground invited bloggers and various media representatives to visit West Ashfield. For some reason, we at TRANSIT do not seem to rate as “media” in the minds of Prasarana and RapidKL – meaning that we do not receive press releases or invitations to walk around trains or depots – this despite the fact that we are Malaysia’s first and best public transport forum.

KTM Update: Electric trains on west coast routes in 5 years!

TRANSIT notes the following article which shares some positive news about train service in the west coast of Peninsular Malaysia (and the east coast and Sabah as well, when you think about it).

Electric trains for KTMB routes in west coast of peninsula Malaysia in 5 years (NST)
2010/08/31

Keretapi Tanah Melayu Bhd (KTMB) will introduce electric trains for its intercity service for routes in the west coast of the peninsula in five years.

Its general manager (Intercity service), Mohd Zain Mat Taha, said the service would be introduced for the Seremban-Gemas and Ipoh-Padang Besar routes.

“The electric trains will replace the locomotive coaches,” he told reporters at a Merdeka eve celebration organised by the KTMB Intercity service.

However, he said the locomotive coaches would still be used for its east coast route as the railway tracks there had yet to have electric cables.

The programme for the Merdeka eve celebration involved the participation of more than 47 students and teachers from Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Bandar Sri Damansara, members of the media and KTMB staff. – Bernama

TRANSIT Says:

Hot on the heels of our recent posting, Electric Trains to Reduce Travel Time, TRANSIT notes the above article which shows that the government is really trying to make up for lost time. With aggressive expansion plans, ETS Sdn. Bhd. will offer full-electric services on the west coast of Malaysia from Johor all the way to Alor Setar and Kangar (and some say Padang Besar, who knows).

The additional electric trains will augment the existing intercity train fleet, which will be used for journeys to the east coast rail. It is also possible that some of the trains may find themselves in Sabah when they become surplus to the west coast railway.

TRANSIT is pleased to note the announcement as we are looking forward to improved KTM intercity service, especially on the KL-Butterworth route (which is a very important route for Malaysian travelers). We are also looking forward to the possibility of Komuter service in the north (around Butterworth) and the south (around Johor Bahru) as soon as the respective electrification and double tracking projects are complete.

What are your thoughts on the potential for all-electric intercity service on west-coast rail services?

Bandar Tasik Selatan ITT to open next year

TRANSIT notes the following information about the Bandar Tasik Selatan Integrated Transport Terminal

Bandar Tasik Selatan ITT to open next year (The Star)
Monday August 30, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR: The RM570mil integrated transport terminal (ITT) in Bandar Tasik Selatan is scheduled to be completed on Nov 19.

The terminal will only be fully functional and opened to the public in 2011.

The bus terminal in Bukit Jalil that temporarily serves as a depot for south-bound buses will be moved to the Bandar Tasik Selatan ITT then.

In addition to buses, the terminal will also be an interchange for rail services like KTM Komuter, the LRT Ampang Line, the Express Rail Link to the Kuala Lumpur International Airport and RapidKL buses.

The six-storey building will consist of bus terminals on the first floor.

Departure and arrival bays will be on the second floor.

The lobby for passengers will be on the concourse level and taxi stands will be on the third floor.

There is a commercial area located on the fourth floor while parking bays will be on the fifth and sixth floors.

TRANSIT Says:

This waiting is killing us.

SPAD Website and Contact Information

TRANSIT takes note of the newly launched website for SPAD (Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat) – Malaysia’s Land Public Transport Commission.

TRANSIT: Interestingly enough, they are using the English address www.ltc.gov.my for their main site address instead of www.spad.gov.my. Do note that typing www.spad.gov.my or http://spad.gov.my will redirect you to www.ltc.gov.my.

Contact Information for SPAD’s address in KL is below. The information is taken from SPAD’s Contact Us page.

For enquiries and feedback, please email enquiries@spad.gov.my.

Address:
Level 12, Bangunan Setia 1,
15 Lorong Dungun,
Bukit Damansara,
50490 Kuala Lumpur.

Telephone: +603-2096 5000
Fax: +603-2096 5090

map – see http://www.ltc.gov.my/en/contact-us.html

Other information such as information about SPAD, the legislation that gives SPAD authority, the services that they provide and the projects that they are working on, can also be found on the main website. There is also a news page.

Organisation’s structure

to be posted soon

Commissioners

YB Tan Sri Syed Hamid bin Syed Jaafar Albar
Chairman

Tan Sri Datuk Seri Syed Hamid bin Syed Jaafar Albar was appointed Chairman of the Land Public Transport Commission on 3 June 2010.

Tan Sri Syed Hamid began his career as in the Judicial and Legal Service as a Magistrate in 1970 and was appointed President of the Sessions Court in 1971. He left the public service in 1972 to pursue a career in the banking and corporate sectors.

In 1990, he contested for the Kota Tinggi parliamentary seat and won. He remains the Member of Parliament for the constituency till today.

He was in the Cabinet between 1990 and 2009 and held various ministerial positions including the Minister of Law, Minister of Defence, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Home Affairs.

Mohd Nur Ismal Mohamed Kamal
Chief Executive Officer

Mohd Nur Ismal Mohamed Kamal was appointed Chief Executive Officer of the Land Public Transport Commission on 3 June 2010.

Mohd Nur Ismal started his career as a Senior Financial Analyst with CNA Financial Corp in Chicago, then moving on to AT Kearney Inc, a top-tier global management consultancy headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, as an associate. He then moved on to Accenture as Manager of Strategy and Business Architecture group, a global technology and management consultancy.

Between 2002 and 2006, Mohd Nur was a Senior General Manager of DRB-HICOM Berhad. Concurrently, Mohd Nur served as a member of the board of directors of DRB-HICOM Information Technologies Sdn Bhd where the company was involved in technology development, system integration, and trading.

Between March 2007 and July 2008, Mohd Nur was a Deputy Director at the Ministry of Higher Education. At the ministry, he assisted in the preparation of the ministry’s strategic plan and led various teams to develop the critically acclaimed National Higher Education Action Plan.

Mohd Nur was then engaged as a Special Adviser to the Ministry of Transport in August 2008. There, Mohd Nur successfully led the Urban Public Transport Lab in developing 11 high impact initiatives as a component of the Government Transformation Program.

Other members of the Commission

Dato’ Dr. Mahani Zainal Abidin

Dato’ Dr. Mahani Zainal Abidin is currently Chief Executive of the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS).

Prior to holding the Chief Executive post, she was Director General of ISIS between 2007 and 2009. Before that she was Deputy Director-General of the Department of Higher Education in the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia.

In terms of academic background, Dato’ Dr. Mahani Zainal Abidin holds a PhD (Development Economics) from the University of London. Her research interests are industrialisation and economic transformation, international trade and regional integration.

Datuk Khalid Ahmad

Datuk Khalid was previously Executive Chairman of Malaysian Resources Corporation Berhad. He has also served as a member of the Malaysian National Unity Advisory Board and Malaysian Financial Reporting Foundation.

Dato’ Siow Kim Lun

Dato’ Siow Kim Lun is currently Director of WZ Steel Berhad (formerly known Weng Zheng Resources Berhad), XingQuan International Sports Holdings Limited and Citibank Berhad. He is also an Independent Non-Executive Director of UMW Holdings Berhad.

In terms of academic background, Dato’ Siow Kim Lun holds an MBA, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium and a Bachelor of Economics (Hons), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. He also has attended the Advanced Management Programme, Harvard Business School.
Dato’ Dr. Mohd Irwan Serigar Abdullah

Dato’ Dr Mohd Irwan Serigar Abdullah is currently the Under-Secretary of the Economics and International Division of the Ministry of Finance.

He has a vast experience in working with the Ministry of Finance and the Economic Planning Unit of the Prime Minister’s Department.

In terms of academic background Dato’ Dr Mohd Irwan Serigar Abdullah has a PhD in Economics from International Islamic University, Kuala Lumpur; M.Sc. Energy, Management and Policy University of Pennsylvania from Philadelphia USA and a Bachelor of Arts. (Honours) in Population Studies from University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.
Prof. Dr. Ahmad Farhan Sadullah

Prof. Dr. Ahmad Farhan Sadullah is currently the Director General of the Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research (MIROS).

Before his appointment in MIROS, he was Dean of the School of Civil Engineering of Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM). During his tenure as an Associate Professor in USM, he was the Programme Chairman of Geotechnical, Highway and Transportation Engineering (USM) and Coordinator of Engineering Innovation and Technology Development Unit (EITD). He also conducted a number of research specialising in transport such as on Intelligent Transport System, travel behaviour and traffic engineering.

He has also published numerous books and journals relating to transport in Malaysia.

In terms of academic background, Prof. Dr Ahmad Farhan Sadullah has a PhD in Transport Studies from the University of London, United Kingdom. He has a Master of Science in Transport from the same university and a Bachelor in Civil Engineering from the Catholic University of America, Washington, United States. He also has a Diploma Imperial College (DIC) from the Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine.
Himmat Singh Ralla Singh

Encik Himmat Singh Ralla Singh is currently Deputy Director General II of the Economic Planning Unit in the Prime Minister’s Department. He is also a member of the Board of the Railway Asset Corporation.

Wan Ahmad Shihab Ismail Wan Ismail

Encik Wan Ahmad Shihab Ismail Wan Ismail is currently Special Officer to the YAB Prime Minister. He is also a Director of the Multimedia Development Corporation Sdn Bhd (MDEC).

TRANSIT Says:

We hope that, like the founding fathers of Malaysia, SPAD will lead us out of the public transport darkness and into a future with freedom of mobility and opportunities for economic growth – and giving the public a chance to participate in improving their society through improved public transport and stronger communities.

Is that too much to hope for in the euphoria of our Merdeka Day Holiday? We at TRANSIT think not!

So over to you, SPAD.

Electric trains to reduce travel time? We think double-tracking makes the biggest difference.

We at TRANSIT have been following the electrification and double-tracking of the Malayan Railways since the proposal was first mooted. And we regularly check in with the blogs and other resources that follow the EDT project to keep updated on what is happening.

We believe that the double tracking of Malaysia’s railways is of huge importance for the future growth of the rail industry.

This article in The Star featured below is an interesting one because it highlights the electrification of the lines, rather than the double-tracking, and suggests that it is the electrification that will make a difference to rail transport service in Malaysia.

Of course we at TRANSIT beg to disagree. But first, read the article.

Electric trains to reduce travel time (The Star)

Tuesday August 24, 2010

TRAVEL time between Kuala Lumpur and Penang will be halved when electric trains start operating on the double train tracks from Ipoh to Padang Besar in Perlis.

Progress on the project is now 53% and is on track to be completed by December 2013.

Almost ready: The Taiping portals of the Larut twin tunnels. Blasting is still being carried out to excavate the tunnels but is nearing completion with a few hundred metres left. Image courtesy of The Star.

The 329km stretch, called the Electrified Double Tracking Project (EDTP), is a MMC-Gamuda joint venture and costs RM12.5bil.

The EDTP will be part of the KTM Bhd rail network running from Johor to Perlis and continues from the Seremban-Ipoh service, which was launched on Aug 12.

[TRANSIT: Not exactly. EDTP is a capital project to build an electrically-powered. double-tracked railway. If KTMB chooses to offer an electrically-powered intercity service (like ETS) or freight service that is up to them. As we have seen from the huge gap between the completion of the Rawang-Ipoh EDTP (in mid 2007) and the launching of ETS service (in August 2010), EDTP and electric train service are not necessarily going hand in hand.]

All laid out: The manufacturing depot for the railway tracks. Image courtesy of The Star.

Previously, a train trip from Penang to Kuala Lumpur took nine hours but with the new trains, it will only take three hours to make the same journey.
[TRANSIT: Didn't they just say "halved" in the introduction? Well, which is it? Halved, or cut by two-thirds?]

The project also has some unique structures such as an elevated land viaduct, marine viaduct, swing bridge and two tunnel designs that take trains over or through uneven terrain.

[TRANSIT: Of course, some of these "unique structures" already existed before the EDTP and are being upgraded.]

These structures allow for straighter tracks to be laid, making for a smoother, quieter and faster ride aboard the electric trains, which can travel up to 160km per hour.

A smoother ride is the result of new jointless [continuously welded] tracks which are used in place of the usual tracks which are bolted together, and quieter as the familiar clanging of the train’s wheels would no longer be there.

However, this could prove deadly for animals and people who wander onto the tracks because they would not be able to hear the train in time to move out of the way.

[TRANSIT: Right ... there always has to be a drawback to technology. It is strange here that they would imply that the clanging of a train allows it to be heard from a distance - as if the sound of the engine, rushing wind and the vibrating tracks (which also transmit sound) would not be a clear indication that a train was coming. Animals are generally smart enough to avoid trains, humans less so. An electric train traveling at 140-160km/h would definitely make enough noise to be heard.]

Steel support: A section of the Bukit Berapit tunnel which runs under the North-South Expressway. Image courtesy of The Star.

TRANSIT Says:

We find the above article very interesting because it implies that the presence of the electric trains will be making a huge difference to the number of services operated by KTM as well as the reduced travel time.

Actually, it is the presence of the double tracking that will allow KTMB to increase the number of trains (freight and intercity) on the rails. It is in fact a great investment for the government and KTMB to make. Increasing the number of tracks by a factor of 2, allows an increase in the number of rail services (as in, train trips) by a factor of 10!

This means that train services will not only be faster and more frequent, but also more reliable. There will be less need to spend time waiting at stations or sidings for other trains to pass (as it happens on a single-track system).

And in time, if the proposed bypass from Alor Gajah to Port Klang to Batu Gajah is built, freight trains can be removed from the Klang Valley almost entirely. Not to mention, similar double tracking of rail lines in Penang and South Johor will allow higher-frequency passenger commuter services to Penang and Johor Baru.

So where does electrification fit in? Well, electric trains have a few advantages over diesel trains in that they:

  • can accelerate faster but requiring less energy – meaning reduced carbon emissions;
  • have more torque (pushing or pulling power applied to moving the train);
  • do not pollute at site (meaning that there is no smoke/soot/particulates/emissions around the train itself);
  • can return kinetic energy to the electric power grid during braking;
  • are quieter and smoother than diesel trains;
  • cost less to operate & maintain than diesel trains.

All of these things are huge improvements – but make no mistake about it – the improved travel time will come more from the double-tracking rather than the electrification. Electrification is just the “icing on the cake”, helping KTMB find greater efficiency by increasing speed and reducing costs (maintenance, pollution, operations & labour, wasted time, etc.)

Hear from the “Experts” on what the proposed MRT will bring for KL

TRANSIT has noted that the MRT proposal is receiving more and more attention. Today, we take note of 3 articles which focus on the changes that the MRT would bring to KL – with “experts” commenting on different aspects of these changes.

TRANSIT will provide links to these articles as well as some highlights of each article with comments. However, what is really needed here is your participation in the discussion about the public transport needs of Malaysia in general and the Klang Valley in particular.

Article 1: Expert: MRT should be managed by a single body (The Star)

The “Expert”: Stephen Robinson, Director of Engineering firm Aecom

The Highlights:

  • All the MRT lines should be integrated with the network – one body should manage the network; [TRANSIT: What about KTM Komuter? Where should they fit in?]
  • Commercial takeover may be impossible but fares should be integrated; [TRANSIT: Ok, but Prasarana does own the 3 "rail" lines (LRT & Monorail)]
  • Current network does not serve the city centre well; [TRANSIT: Er....yeah.]
  • The money spent on highway construction and fuel subsidy over the years would have been more than enough to develop a comprehensive MRT network; [TRANSIT: Er...see our comment above]
  • Rail developers should be allowed to acquire strata title for lands adjoining the project; [TRANSIT: in other words, they should be able to acquire the air rights and underground rights to the land adjacent to rail lines and especially railway stations - this would facilitate railway construction & allow for improved, stable and reliable funding]

Article 2: MRT can boost city (The Star)

The Expert: T.C. Chew, Project Director of Hong Kong MTR Corporation Ltd

The Highlights:

  • No system can carry more people than the MRT; [TRANSIT: Have you seen the services offered by Southeastern trains in the SE Greater London and the South East of the UK recently?]
  • KL deserves to have a [MRT] system similar to London, Hong Kong and Beijing; [TRANSIT: Wow. Not even close! KL does not "deserve" anything and we are nowhere near the density of any of these cities (let alone the level of responsibility, accountability, competency, professionalism etc.) ... not to mention that our public transport usage has actually decreased since we built the LRT and monorail lines!]
  • The Draft KL City Plan 2020 estimates a targeted rail capacity (passenger per hour per direction) of 183,700 is required for its modal share target; [TRANSIT: This would be in all of the lines (including KTM Komuter?). Currently the Kelana Jaya LRT carries about 11,000 passengers per hour per direction, while the Ampang LRT carries closer to 20,000.]
  • The current rail capacity provision during peak hour is about 60,000 passengers [per hour per direction?] while the proposed fleet expansions and headway reductions under the urban transport National Key Result Areas (NKRA) will only increase to 104,000 passengers. [TRANSIT: We are pleased to know that rail service capacity can be improved by more than 40% if we just buy a lot more trains and improve our signaling systems. So what has the government been doing for the past decade while they watched the public transport system failing right in front of them? Oh yeah, they introduced a competitor to the existing bus operators.]
  • An LRT system alone is not enough. A MRT system located in high-demand areas in the city centre is essential to reduce the current high proportion of car users. [TRANSIT: OK. MRT, in the city centre is needed.]
  • proposed MRT lines should work with the existing lines and connect with them as much as possible to provide passengers with a seamless journey and as close as possible to one another.; [TRANSIT: Er. yeah.]
  • If Hong Kong can do it, so can KL [TRANSIT: Is someone angling for a job?]

Article 3: Expert: System will help optimise use of existing lines (The Star)

The Expert: Goh Bok Yen from MAG Techncial & Development Consultants

The Highlights:

  • MRT should be part of the network with MRT at the top of a clear system hierarchy; [TRANSIT: Order! We demand order in our rail network!]
  • A circle line is a common and crucial element in a metropolitan [line]; [TRANSIT: Er, no, circle line usually exist for the purpose of connecting radial lines. Sometimes "Circle lines" are not actually circles - like the CCL in Singapore, Circle Line, Overground and Crossrail in London - and many cities do not have "circle lines" becuase they do not have a circular development pattern.]
  • “The alignment, while fulfilling the present demand, must also tap the future mega projects. The planning committee must have the foresight, as well as enough information, to link the MRT with these future hubs. “These are the main objectives that the MRT needs to achieve, without these, you are merely adding another three lines that do not serve a good purpose,” he added. [TRANSIT: Can you say "non-transparent, secretive, backroom planning? Somehow, we think that people in backrooms all over the Klang Valley are rubbing their hands with glee at Mr. Goh's comment here.]

  • The MRT and LRT extension lines will increase Kuala Lumpur’s track coverage from 15km per million population to 30km when completed, as compared with 40km in Hong Kong, 35km in Singapore and 10km in Bangkok, (which has better placement of stations). [TRANSIT: That shows you what good planning and government authority can do.]
  • “When the new lines are fully completed and supported by an efficient bus network, we can cover 80% of the population of Greater KL (within 20km radius from the city centre). In other words, a commuter will reach either a train or a bus station within 400m of walking and be linked to the whole system. [TRANSIT: since the talk about MRT started back in June, has anyone heard any mention of the importance of an efficient bus network as part of the overall public transport network - besides Mr. Goh here of course?]
  • Feeder buses can become more reliable: “Once it is well integrated, then buses need to only loop 3km to 5km as feeders to the stations. The waiting time can be limited to five to 10 minutes with a fleet of eight buses for a 3km loop,” he added. [TRANSIT: Mr. Goh consistently talks about the importance of buses. We like the way Mr. Goh thinks.]
  • Estimates that travelling from one end of the system to the town centre will take about 35min to 40min. There’s still room to improve, such as using KTM as an express option by reducing its stops. [TRANSIT: Another interesting idea and similar to a proposal we have already shared with KTMB.]
  • Pay more attention particularly to areas undergoing urban redevelopment such as Old Town, Section 13 and Section 52 in Petaling Jaya, Jalan Ipoh and Segambut,” [TRANSIT: We agree!]
  • A well-integrated system ought to be supported by a good ticketing system, effective dissemination of information and flexibility for expansion. [TRANSIT: Sure, but we do not need to construct an MRT in order to remake the existing system into a well-integrated one. We just wonder what Prasarana has been doing (on the topic of integration) since 2003. Fare integration in Hong Kong took 7 months. Fare integration in KL has taken 7 years (and counting).]
  • Institutional integration is of paramount importance. The public land transport commission (SPAD) should be as dynamic and innovative as a private entity; [TRANSIT: Er...yeah. And look at the man in charge. Show of hands, please: who sees Syed Hamid Albar as dynamic or innovative? Please, keep your hands up while I count.]
  • having a public-listed company to operate the urban public transportation would eventually benefit everyone. [TRANSIT: We wonder about this. At this stage / state that we are in, shouldn't a public transport operator be able to concentrate on providing the most efficient service, rather than paying dividends to shareholders?]
  • foresees a drastic change in lifestyle after the completion of the MRT. Parking trend, among others, will see a shift as demand drops and the underground stations — more than 20 — will also lead to an increase in underground shopping space.
  • [TRANSIT: Great! Because KL does not have enough shopping space already....right? Maybe we can convert some of these unused parking spaces to offices, gardens, and ... wait for it.... shops! But who wants to bet there will still be double parking on the streets of KL, even with a surplus of parking lonts>]

TRANSIT Says:

Some of the details/highlights and comments above reveal some very interesting viewpoints about the future of public transport in KL. All groups seem to think that the MRT will make a huge difference in public transport and will change the face of the Klang Valley, and the “experts” above seem to share that enthusiasm. But at least Mr. Goh talks about the reality of the situation and includes the buses in the picture – we at TRANSIT do not want the buses left out.

Speaking of feeling left out, do you notice that there is no commentary from other experts like “Prasarana” or “SPAD” in this set of articles? After all, we at TRANSIT want to hear what the real players think about the MRT.

Not to mention, we at TRANSIT want to know what you think of the MRT proposals and the changing face of public transport in the Klang Valley. After all, we are Malaysia’s
Public Transport Forum!

Oh, and what about the money? Is anyone talking about money here? Not only the construction costs, but social and economic costs and benefits. As well as, how much are passengers willing to pay for this great MRT+LRT+Komuter+monorail+bus network?

Prasarana reveals info about upgrades to LRT stations

The media were all abuzz recently with Prasarana’s announcement of details about three upcoming/ongoing upgrade projects at LRT stations Masjid Jamek, Hang Tuah and Titiwangsa.

According to V. Ravinderan of Prasarana, the stations would be upgraded in the following manner:

Masjid Jamek – RM9 million, for:

  • relocating the existing ticketing counter room for the Ampang line;
  • raising part of the existing Concourse 1 to the level of the plaza floor;
  • providing facilities including toilets, surau and kiosks, facilities for the disabled such as link bridges (from Kelana Jaya to Ampang line stations), lifts, ramps and a chairlift, covered walkway from the station to the Jalan Melaka bus stop (opposite Standard Chartered Bank),

Titiwangsa – RM5 million for:

  • Fully-enclosed integration with the monorail station;
  • providing facilities such as additional lifts, a new waiting area, surau, ramps to the toilet for the disabled, queue boxes with tactiles and a chairlift at the existing pedestrian bridge.
  • Upgrading of ticketing and Touch ’n Go counters, as well as new LED and energy-saving light fittings and the refurbishment of existing toilets

Rendering of future Titiwangsa LRT/Monorail station courtesy of The Star.

Hang Tuah – RM8 million for:

  • integration of paid and unpaid areas of the Hang Tuah LRT (Ampang Line) and Hang Tuah Monorail stations;
  • A new lobby and ticketing counters at the Hang Tuah LRT station (Ampang line),
  • providing new kiosks and public facilities including an information counter, Touch ’n Go point of sales, a new facade, new extended roof, new LED lighting and energy-saving light fittings and upgrading of power supply.
  • The station platform will be widened from 3.5m to 8m;
  • Facilities for the disabled such as lifts, toilets, ramps, escalators and tactiles will also be installed.

Rendering of future Hang Tuah LRT/Monorail station courtesy of NST.

More information about the upgrades can be found at the following sites/articles:

TRANSIT Says:

Given that these three stations are major interchange stations on the LRT/Monorail network, we are happy to hear about these upgrades and improvements. Of course, we at TRANSIT are curious about the details of the plans, including floor plans and interior design, as well as timelines for the project.

So Prasarana, how about publishing more information about the project beyond the list of upgrades from your press statement and the 3 renders of the stations outside. Inquiring minds want to know what their public transport stations are going to look like when the project is finished.

Updates #57

Updates #57

1. Article: Rail discounts at Matta Fair (The Star) – Self explantory

2. Article: 1 killed, 9 hurt in bus crash (NST) – A bus driver was killed and 9 passengers injured when the bus, which was speeding on wet roads, collided with a lorry at km 306.2 of the N-S Expressway.

3. Article: New KTM trains set to improve recent poor service (The Star) – KTM blames poor service on the lack of trainsets and claims that service will improve once new trains arrive in 2011 and 2012.

4. Article: Delay in work to upgrade Puduraya (The Star) – Federal Territories Minister Raja Nong Chik comments on an anticipated delay to the Puduraya upgrades, but states that the terminal should still be operational by the end of 2010. He also states that Puduraya will still be used as an express and long-distance bus terminal once it is reoccupied. However, after the Integrated Transport Terminals at Bdr. Tasik Selatan & Gombak are complete & operating, Puduraya will be used as a terminal for short-haul and long-haul city buses.

5. Letter: Train service leaves much to be desired (The Star) – Upset Commuter of KL complains about poor KTM service. Disappointed of Petaling Jaya responded with this letter, KTM services marred by frequent delays (The Star).

[TRANSIT: Ok, once again. KTM Komuter services are poor because they do not have enough trains. KTM Komuter services are poor because they do not have enough trains. KTM Komuter services are poor because they do not have enough trains. That said, at least the service to Batu Caves has finally opened, and new trains are presumably coming, someday. But we do agree that KTMB could work on improving customer service in the meantime.]

6. Article: Ridership of Bus Expressway Transit increased by 120 per cent since January (Bernama) – In this congratulatory statement, Minister of Transport Kong Cho Ha attempts to speak positively about public transport like his predecessor. This time, the RapidBET service is commended for increased passenger numbers – two lines have reached 500 passengers per day.

[TRANSIT: To keep this in perspective, 500 people can fit easily inside a Kelana Jaya 2-carriage LRT train]

7. Article: Feasibility study on KL MRT to be completed next month (Star Biz) – If you haven’t seen it already, the feasibility study on the MRT project (not necessarily the MMC-Gamuda Proposal) will be complete in September.

Creating a bus system that works

One of the topics that is dear to the heart of the people at TRANSIT is the bus system and how to make it efficient, well-managed and most of all, effective. That means, how do we create a bus system that is stable (functionally and financially) and reliable, with frequent service that is appropriate to our tropical climate.

All that we have seen over the past few years of studying public bus transport in the Klang Valley, Malaysia and other countries has shown us that, in order for a public transport system or bus transport system to be effective, the government has to become involved in the management and funding of public transport.

In the Malaysian context, the government takes a total “hands-off” approach to bus transport except for the control of permits. However, as you can see from the article below, the “hands-off” approach does not apply to government linked (as in, government-owned) companies, RapidKL and RapidPenang. And that is upsetting a major player in the public transport industry.

Klang Valley bus service needs restructuring (The Star)

Saturday June 26, 2010

The biggest private bus operator, Datuk Mohd Nadzmi Mohd Salleh, talks about the challenges in the business and what needs to be done to overhaul bus service

RUNNING a private bus operations in the Klang Valley today is not a viable business, says Datuk Mohd Nadzmi Salleh, the biggest private bus operator. Nadzmi, who had bought the privatised Kumpulan Kenderaan Malaysia Bhd (KKMB) from Mara Holdings in 1997, says he has suffered “millions of ringgit of losses” in the running of public “stage” and express buses.

“I regret venturing into this business,” says the chairman of Konsortium Transnasional Bhd (KTB) in a candid interview with StarBizWeek recently.

Among the factors that has made bus operations non-profitable over the years is the escalating cost of operations including purchase of buses and rising staff salaries.

Datuk Mohd Nadzmi Salleh says the Government should tender out specific routes to private companies, with the most suitable candidates chosen. Image courtesy of The Star.

The government-imposed cap on ticketing prices has been another issue why it is difficult to sustain the business.

However, he reckons that the biggest blow to private operators is the situation since 2004 when RapidKL ventured into the business of operating buses. “In almost all our the routes that we ply in the Klang Valley, we are up against RapidKL,” says Nadzmi, who is also chairman of Proton Holdings Bhd since January this year.

To be sure, it has long been the grouse of operators like Nadzmi that they are in a disadvantageous position, having to compete with the government-owned RapidKL

RapidKL, or Rangkaian Pengangkutan Intergrasi Deras Sdn Bhd, is owned by Syarikat Prasarana Negara Bhd, which in turn is 100% owned by the Finance Ministry.

Another significant problem is the lack of drivers, as there are so many companies wanting to hire them as well as lack of controls over how ticket sales is managed, says Nadzmi.

Nadzmi says the Government [TRANSIT: Which government? Federal, State or Local?] should tender out specific routes to private companies, with the most suitable candidates chosen. In return, the operator is paid a fixed fee per km that they run, which includes the operators’ cost plus a profit margin.

[TRANSIT: Or, the government can just operate the service directly as an arm of the government and skip the need to pay operator costs and profit margin.]

Ticket sales on the other hand should be entirely in the hands of the Government, using prepaid tickets.

“All revenue should go directly to the Government. While the Government may not necessarily make a profit from this (after paying the operators’ fixed fee) it would certainly not be making the losses Prasarana is enduring today. So the Government will be paying less to subsidise public transport.”

[TRANSIT: That would of course depend on how much costs Nadzmi or other operators would claim, as well as how much they would want in profits.]

Star Graphic showing different methods of government involvement in bus operations. Click here for a larger view.

To ensure that operators provide a high quality of service, certain key performance indicators or a customer service index can be created to ensure that bus companies do their jobs well.

Interestingly, Nadzmi’s plans are not too different from those of the recently-formed Land Public Transport Authority or SPAD.

[Or TRANSIT, for that matter! See our proposals in our Ideas page!]

But Nadzmi had earlier expressed his disappointment about not being included in the urban public transport laboratory that had come up with plans to revamp the public bus sector.

Nadzmi has also played a key role in the development of the Express Rail Link service and has been the executive chairman of ERL Sdn Bhd since its started operations in 2001. The ERL remains the only major private sector-driven public transport project that does not needed to be bailed out by the Government.

[TRANSIT: Interestingly enough, we recall an "investigation" of sorts by The Sun newspaper which noted that ERL receives a piece of the Airport fees paid by every passenger who uses KLIA - even if they are not using the ERL. So that, plus the reasonably good fares, might explain why ERL has not needed a government bailout.]

TRANSIT Says:

We have always wondered why, despite so many people thinking “the same way” the only notable improvements to public transport in the past few years has been a revival of an old fare system (Touch n Go based payment), new flexible payment options, and a bus service (RapidBET) that carries an extra 1500 passengers per day but is trumpeted as a major success by the government.

The idea that enters our mind is that, while everyone privately agrees that the existing system is not working, few of us have the guts to admit it in public – and even fewer have the guts to do what it will take to unravel the existing mess and change the system from within.

Even when a government is interested in taking a more active role (yes, we’re talking about Malacca) they have the wrong idea about how to implement an effective, government-managed public transport system – not to mention, the operators are sending the wrong message too!

Fortunately, public transport researcher and blogger Dr. Paul Barter has done some of the necessary research and his interesting findings and summary can be found on his blog, Reinventing Transport. Of particular interest to this topic is one of his older postings, Bus Systems that Work. We at TRANSIT think it is definitely worth reading.

New Penang Hill Railway coaches arrive

TRANSIT notes this story in the Star which shows that the new Penang Hill Railway coaches have arrived in Penang.

Old Penang Hill Railway Coach - image courtesy of The Sun

New Penang Hill Railway Coach - image courtesy of The Star.

The total redesign of the Penang Hill Railway undertaken by Prasarana courted significant controversy because of the changes to the original design of the railway, including the removal of the middle station.

New hill railway coaches ready for the ride (The Star)
Friday August 20, 2010

GEORGE TOWN: The new Swiss-made coaches for the Penang Hill funicular train service have arrived.

The two coaches, each weighing 16 tonnes and measuring 16m in length, were unloaded at the foot of the hill after arriving here at 1am yesterday from Port Klang.

Penang Public Works, Utilities and Transportation Committee chairman Lim Hock Seng said the coaches, with five compartments each, would be put on the tracks for a trial run once the RM63mil upgrading of the funicular system was completed in November.

Trains arrive on time: Engineers and workers unloading two new Swiss-made funicular coaches at the Penang Hill railway station Thursday. The air-conditioned coaches - able to carry 50 people each - can travel non-stop to the top station. The coaches were bought under the Tourism Ministry’s RM63mil upgrade programme. - K.T. GOH / The Star

“The modern coaches will still have the wooden benches, which shows that we are still keeping the heritage value intact,” he said when met at the foot of Penang Hill yesterday.

TRANSIT: Sounds to us like they just didn’t want to pay for the cost of cushions.

He added that the upgrading was originally scheduled for completion in September but had been delayed as the contractors needed more time to strengthen the tracks’ foundation and slopes.

On Feb 22, the 87-year-old funicular train service ceased operations to make way for the RM63mil upgrading project by the Tourism Ministry.

The new air-conditioned coaches, which can carry 50 people each, will travel non-stop between the foot of the hill and the top station under the upgraded system unlike the old system where passengers have to change trains at the middle station.

Swiss style: The new funicular coach at the Penang Hill station Thursday. Image courtesy of The Star

Lim said the commuting time of the new service would be less than 10 minutes per way compared to 30 minutes previously.

He said the new service would be able to carry 1,000 passengers per hour compared to 250 under the old system.

He said the coaches would be able to glide down at a slower speed to the lower station should there be any technical glitch or power supply disruption.

Lim said there would also be a sensor system to enable early detection of landslides or trees falling onto the rail tracks as well as a stand-by generator to provide power should there be electricity supply disruption.

TRANSIT Says:

We are interested to see how the new Penang Hill Railway will operate. Hopefully the tests will go well and the service will go back on line in October 2010 or sooner. For pictures of the old Penang Hill Railway, please see our posting