In the news release “Trains on
the North-South and East-West Lines Safe for Service” (2016) from The Land
Transport Authority’s (LTA) website, LTA explains the faults it has encountered in its trains on the North-South
and East-West lines and announces that the trains are safe for operations. It
all started when Kawasaki Heavy Industries and CSR Sifang were contracted to supply
LTA with 35 trains. Cracks were found on the draughtscreen of five trains
caused by errors during the installation process. LTA also discovered hairline
cracks on 26 of the trains. After rigorous assessment by LTA, the cracks, which were caused by an impurity in
the car-body bolster material, were found to not have any impact on the
operational safety of the trains. An “independent third-party assessor, TUV
Rheinland,” agreed (Land Transport Authority,
2016).
LTA then decided that the most practical way to rectify the defect was by
substituting the whole “car-body shell” (Land Transport Authority,
2016).
Thus, the affected trains are being shipped back to their manufacturer for
repair works gradually. Out of 26 trains, the car-bodies of five trains have
been changed and the sixth one will be completed soon. In accordance with the
safety guidelines, LTA and TUV Rheinland will conduct continual inspection to
ensure all trains are safe for operation.
The article addresses the faults that are found by LTA
and the actions taken to ensure that the trains are safe for operations. However,
the lack of information regarding the suppliers and elaboration of the defects makes the
article ineffective in enhancing public confidence.
One
reason why the news release is ineffective is because the defects were not
fully explained. LTA’s news release mentions an impurity in the car-body
bolster material but not the severity of it. Tan, a senior transport
correspondent, mentions that the impurities may deteriorate the structural
stability of the trains over time (Tan, 2016). An engineer
concurred with Tan by saying that “impurities in aluminium-alloy is a
catastrophic problem – in any industry” (Tan, 2016). Even though the
results of the tests conducted by LTA show that the trains are operationally
safe, an engineer’s opinion says otherwise. According to an article by FactWire, a former SMRT worker mentions
that the train’s life span is halved. (FactWire, 2016) Thus, not fully
explaining the extent of the defect may affect the public’s judgement of the
situation. In this case, the engineer’s opinion may cause the article to lose
credibility among the public.
Another reason why the news release is ineffective is
because of the lack of justification of contracting the suppliers. In LTA’s
news release, Kawasaki Heavy Industries and CSR Sifang are only introduced as
the suppliers of the trains and are not mentioned much after. Information such
as the background of the suppliers is not seen in the news release. An article
in The Online Citizen mentions that
Kawasaki Heavy Industries and CSR Sifang were not the lowest bid and would end
up providing 26 defective trains in 2013 (Onlinecitizen, 2016). Also, according to Vasagar, Mitchell, and Whipp of
the Financial Times, CSR Sifang’s bid to supply
for Boston’s subway was eliminated (Vasagar, Mitchell, & Whipp, 2016). This was due to
Massachusetts transport officials finding that the “technical, manufacturing
and quality” of CSR Sifang’s components cannot be guaranteed (Vasagar, Mitchell, & Whipp, 2016). An article from The Independent states that CSR Sifang
has a history of issues, such as traction motor issues, problems with bearings,
break failures and more (The Independent, 2016). However, the
article only mentions the rectifications done by LTA even though the problem
stems from the suppliers of the trains. There is a lack of justification of the
continued supply from the contractors and may not enhance public confidence.
In conclusion, even though the article shows the
competency of LTA in the presence of train faults, it does not acknowledge the
root of the problem. As a publicly listed company, LTA should be transparent on
why the contractors were awarded the contract, given their history, and also
the first batch of faulty trains. Being transparent then may enhance the trust
and confidence of the public.
References:
China manufacturer for MTR secretly recalls 35 SMRT
subway trains after cracks found. (2016, July 5). FactWire. Retrieved from https://www.factwire.news/en/MTR-securetly-recall.html
Even China’s own railway operator condemns CSR Sifang. (2016, July 9). The Independent. Retrieved from http://theindependent.sg/even-chinas-own-railway-operator-condemns-csr-sifang/
People’s Power Party’s statement on defective trains
from China.
(2016, July 7). The Online Citizen. Retrieved
from
http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016/07/07/peoples-power-partys-statement-on-defective-trains-from-china/
Tan,
C. (2016, July 14). Nothing routine
about MRT cracks. The Straits
Times. Retrieved from http://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/nothing-routine-about-mrt-cracks
Trains on the North-South and East-West Lines Safe
for Service. (2016,
July 6). Land Transport Authority.
Retrieved from https://www.lta.gov.sg/apps/news/page.aspx?c=2&id=0f8b1220-0289-4bef-99c9-b2455f17a66c#_ftn1
Vasagar,
J., Mitchell, T., & Whipp, L. (2016). Singapore returns faulty trains to China for repair. Financial Times. Retrieved from
https://www.ft.com/content/3a618d42-4350-11e6-9b66-0712b3873ae1
