Bangkok desperately needs more mass transit

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
Bangkok desperately needs more mass transit
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Banning older cars from the roads will not ease traffic congestion; getting people out of cars and onto good public-transport systems will

The police have come up with a proposal that is unlikely to be popular - cars more than 10 years old should be banned from Bangkok's streets. The Metropolitan Police Bureau (MPB) has made the suggestion to the government and the Transport Ministry as part of a plan to improve traffic flow. Older cars would only be allowed if the owners pay the same tax rate as for new vehicles, advises Police Major General Adul Narongsak, deputy commissioner of the MPB in charge of traffic.

Between 30 and 40 per cent of the registered vehicles in Bangkok are more than 10 years old, according to Adul. He said such vehicles break down more often and cause long tailbacks, with the latest incident happening a few days ago.

The proposal has met opposition and criticism, with car owners saying it would not be effective in easing traffic congestion, but instead would negatively affect many motorists.

Adul appeared to soften his stance in the face of the negative reaction. He stressed it was just an idea intended to improve traffic flow in the capital, but the police would need to discuss it with relevant government agencies and the private sector before making any proposal to the government. Meanwhile, he said, the MPB would soon get strict about the no-parking areas on Bangkok's 10 most-congested roads.

Strictly enforcing traffic laws and no-parking regulations should be the first priority for Bangkok's police in attempting to improve traffic flow. Those who drive carelessly and fail to obey the rules often cause accidents and unnecessary congestion. Bans should be imposed on motorists who have committed multiple violations, and their driving licences should be suspended or revoked.

Double-parking and parking in prohibited areas during rush hour worsens congestion. Traffic police appear to turn a blind eye to offenders, and there are allegations of bribes being paid. Traffic policemen themselves are often seen violating the traffic laws, such as riding their motorcycles against the traffic flow.

Certainly there are cases of old cars breaking down and causing congestion on busy roads. But these incidents are far less frequent than violations that worsen congestion.

We should not be concerned about the age of a vehicle, but rather its working condition. This requires strict enforcement of the law by the Land Transport Department, with tough examination of vehicles during the annual renewal of licences. Vehicles unfit to run safely should be taken off the road.

Another obvious reason for traffic congestion is that there are too many cars on the roads. About 7 million cars and motorcycles are registered in Bangkok, while the city's road space is estimated to be sufficient for less than 3 million. Due to the inadequate mass transit, many people choose to travel by private vehicle.

Governments in the past made mistakes by building expressways rather than a mass-transit network. They focused on facilitating the movement of cars rather than commuters. As a result, Bangkok has a vast network of expressways covering all corners, but only a few short mass-transit routes. This is why we suffer severe traffic congestion on a daily basis.


-- The Nation 2013-10-10

[lemonjelly]

maybe a tram system similar to that of the Netherlands would be an option..... a lot cheaper to build than BTS too.

[Curt1591]

Hopefully, when projects like the MRT extension, to the Purple line and points beyond, is completed, more commuters will consider Mass transit.

I know many in my neighborhood can't wait!

[Mangosteen1]

I agree. What politicians in almost every major city never realize is that these big projects takes time. they always need to pre-plan. for example a city like BKK "one of the biggest in the World". Everybody knows that more people from every part of Thailand will move her and search for jobs. BTS, MRT, HIGHWAYS all this need to be systematically pre-built. Like todays BKK traffic(I heard that some wealthy BKK-people even move to other cities in Isaan because of the traffic-jams and freedom to drive their expensive cars) Like it is Today even If I had the most expensive car in the World and lived inside BKK. I would still prefer the BTS, and even better: "those river boats"

[deckard]

Maybe if some Goverment body looked at some of the western countries ideas of relieving traffic conjestion there might be some improvement . One idea springs to mind , operating a park and ride system at outlying BTS stations e.g Baring. Encourage comuters , shoppers etc. to use a safe , free car park would surely have some effect on the traffic problem in BKK .

[toybits]

Should do what Singapore does. Tax car ownership to the MAX. Then people will use mass transit more often. But then the government must also provide more train routes, more buses and bus routes.

Thailand could learn from Brazil's Curitiba Bus Rapid Transit System - such a brilliant system - if I may add. (http://www.pps.org/great_public_spaces/one?public_place_id=613).

[siampolee]

Bangkok desperately needs more mass transit

Politicians desperately need more money.

[nami]

Nothing nobody didn't know already. Infrastructure investment has been close to nil for more than 5 year now. What this country, not only Bangkok, needs is more trains, BTS and MRT, and the proper maintenance associated to them. What we don't need is all this corruption, bribery and commissions associated to the adjudications and construction of these kind of projects. All this is slowing down, even blocking in some cases, the projects and inflating the prices.

[albro]

I rarely hear anyone talk about this, but in my experience one of the big contributors to traffic is overloaded trucks. Sometimes it's because the truck is old and in poor condition, but sometimes the truck looks fine but is just carrying too much weight; either way, such a truck slows to a crawl any time the ground slopes upward, including all overpasses and elevated u-turns, as well as any time it needs to pull out from a stop, such as a light or u-turn.

As a result, truck drivers frequently pull into the right lane when they see a somewhat slower truck, in order to conserve momentum and avoid spending the next 2 km ramping back up to their desired speed. Effectively, then, the slowest/most overloaded truck sets the speed of the left lane, and the second slowest truck sets the speed of the right lane. If I had a baht for every time I got stuck behind one truck moving at 31 kph and another moving at 33 kph, I'd be Thaksin.

If load limits were enforced, perhaps this wouldn't happen. Just my $0.02.

[steveyinasia]

I am a huge fan of the BTS, although it is getting very crowded in peak times now. BTS need to increase the length of the trains to accommodate the increase in users as the network expands. I think though they bought trains that cannot have carriages added, does anyone know?

[bkk_mike]

Should do what Singapore does. Tax car ownership to the MAX. Then people will use mass transit more often. But then the government must also provide more train routes, more buses and bus routes.

Thailand could learn from Brazil's Curitiba Bus Rapid Transit System - such a brilliant system - if I may add. (http://www.pps.org/great_public_spaces/one?public_place_id=613).

You can't do that in Bangkok, because so much of Bangkok doesn't have ANY mass transit.

I'm in Bangkok (outskirts, but still a Bangkok district - not PathumThain or Nonthaburi, etc.) - I'd have to take two Songtaews to get to the nearest bus stop - and I think two buses from there to get to an MRT station (I think Lad Prao) - I'm not certain on the buses because, oddly enough, I have a car, and I'm pretty near an expressway.

Yes - Bangkok built expressways rather than building mass transit - probably because it works better than mass transit in suburban Bangkok. (Some moo baans are quite large - i.e. a ten minute walk to get to the entrance, and once there - there isn't even a bus stop! If you want a Park and Ride system to work, you'd need several locations - easily accessible from the expressways (WITHOUT turning into a massive traffic jam). There's no point having park and ride that has worse traffic than the parking space they have at their office. And if it's all in one place, you'd never be able to get on a train there. (The trains are already so full in the centre that at 9am, you can often wait for several trains to go through before getting room to squeeze on.)

My personal favourite place to get to to park currently is still coming off the Sukhumvit 50 exit on the expressway, and parking at Tesco at On Nut Skytrain station. But it's only a good option for a quick trip because the parking gets expensive after 3 hours. (If it didn't get expensive - lots of people would be parked there all day and go to work on the Skytrain.)

However, Tesco having to charge so much for parking does show that Park and Ride could work if, like that Tesco, the car park is next to the skytrain - and near an expressway exit.

P.S. How exactly would you collect the tax. Thailand already has massive car taxes on imported cars, but you'd need to somehow tax Bangkok specifically because, doing what the UK does in setting road tax and fuel prices to levels to cut car ownership in London isn't exactly useful for people in rural Scotland with no choice other than a car (guess where I'm from) - the same would be true in Thailand where farmers are already borrowing too much money to buy a pick-up.

Would you restrict driving in Bangkok to cars with Bangkok licence plates? (would make travel from ChonBuri to Hua Hin interesting - works for Singapore because nobody has to drive through Singapore to get somewhere else). I could possibly see a congestion charge like London working, but you'd need to build the park and rides (outside the charging zone) first, or you'd simply force companies to move their offices to be outside the charging zone.

[Phronesis]

Wow...if the public transport problem in Bangkok is described as desperate, what word can we use to describe Phuket.

[Yunla]

Investment in modern public transport and large amounts of it, is always a good thing, regardless of which part of the world you live in. Many modern Western nations have ancient crumbling rail systems and so forth, it is not only a problem in develpoing nations. The concept that plentiful and modern public transport is central to improving national economies and quality of life, is a very important concept which should be embraced by leaders globally. It is not even about the environment, from a purely economic and quality of life perspective, a good public transport system is essential for basic things like freeing up the roads for cargo vehicles, and small things like being able to work on your laptop on the way to work (impossible in a car), this improves work efficiency.

The banning of 10+ y/o cars is a scam. This is to sell more new cars to people who can't afford them, and get more people into debt, which will further seperate the wealthiest families from everybody else. Old cars are perfectly good if they are well-maintained, so why not reform all aspects of motoring in Thailand ; driving standards, vehicle standards, road standards. But that doesn't sell new cars or escalate the growth of the debt-victim underclass.

[gemini81]

A real problem is that Bangkok's roads are like a spider web, and small little lanes and insufficient amounts of lanes for one. Organized cities are like a grid. Hard to overcome that issue due to private property. But I can't see how more debt sunk into mass transit, nor trying to get people out of their 10 year old cars is a good move. This place may indeed a mix of 3rd world and developing world till the end of times. I think if they wanted to be smart, they'd consult Japanese, Dutch and real experts. It appears they're too arrogant to do that, like they are consulting those same folks and getting them involved in flood prevention safety members.

[metaben]

Strictly enforcing traffic laws and no-parking regulations should be the first priority for Bangkok's police in attempting to improve traffic flow. Those who drive carelessly and fail to obey the rules often cause accidents and unnecessary congestion. Bans should be imposed on motorists who have committed multiple violations, and their driving licences should be suspended or revoked.

A few thoughts:

As in many places, enforcing existing laws is the priority before edicting new ones that in-turn would not be enforced. Good luck on that.

The BTS has plateform space for 5 carriages, they already ramped it up from 3 to 4 in peak hours, what's the hold up for the 5th?

Does anyone know when the new planned lines open (not the 3trillion lines, the previous ones)?

[bkk_mike]

It was never a ban on 10yo cars. It was a requirement for 10yo cars that wanted to drive in Bangkok to be charge the same tax (where at the moment, cars over, I think, 7 years old), are charged at half the tax rate.

i.e. If you have a 10yo car and want to pay the current tax, you can't drive it in Bangkok.

(It's actually a lot more sensible than the headlines had it. - where if you just read the headline, things like the King's Rolls Royce would have had to go and stay in Hua Hin).

Also it's not like the car tax here is particularly onerous. My brother's car in the UK is about 24,000 baht a year (he has the misfortune of needing a 4WD as he lives in rural Scotland, which means road tax rates that are set with the aim of cutting the number of 4WD vehicles in Chelsea).Thailand's is miniscule in comparison.

[Lakegeneve]

Nothing nobody didn't know already. Infrastructure investment has been close to nil for more than 5 year now. What this country, not only Bangkok, needs is more trains, BTS and MRT, and the proper maintenance associated to them. What we don't need is all this corruption, bribery and commissions associated to the adjudications and construction of these kind of projects. All this is slowing down, even blocking in some cases, the projects and inflating the prices.

Wow, that is so blatantly wrong that I can only think that you live in another country and have little idea what is going on. Agree. with everything else that you have written though.

Firstly, 4 new lines or exts have been built in the last 5 years;

1) SRT Light Red line,

2) BTS Bearing ext (funded by the BMA),

3) BTS WWY ext (funded by the BMA),

4) SRT ARL line

Secondly, there are currently 5 lines or exts under construction - all having started in the last 3-4 years - and most were approved and funded by the previous govt (pre mid 2011) or the BMA. The current govt has continued the process though as usual there are delays with tenders. Here is the list of what is currently being built;

A) OPENING SOON

1) BTS Light Green Line (Silom line) from Talat Phlu (S10) to Bang Wah 2.8km, 2 stations ( S11 and S12 to open 5 Dec 2013)

B ) LINES/EXTS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION

2) MRTA Subway Blue Line ext from Bang Sue to Taopoon: 1.2km, 1 station (to open late 2014)

3) MRTA Purple Line from Taopoon to Bang Yai: 23km, 16 stations (Opening late 2015)

As of June 2013 civil works construction is at 68.5%. Website: http://www.mrta-purpleline.com

4) MRTA Blue Line ring ext (subway) and Bang Khae/Phetkasem rd ext (Completion late 2016/2017) Website: http://www.mrta-blueline.com/

a) Bang Sue - Tha Phra, 13.1 km, 7 elevated stations,

b Hua Lamphong - Lak Song, 13.9 km , 7 elevated & 4 underground stations.

5) BTS Dark Green line (Suk Line) Bearing to Paknam ext funded by MRTA: 12.6km, 7 stations (Work started mid 2012, opens 2016)

6) SRT Dark Red Line suburban line from Bang Sue to Rangsit: 26km, 8 stations* (Work started March, opens 2016)

*Note: SRT Dark Red Line is metre gauge, electric

7) New Intercity terminal at Bang Sue for all N, NE and S SRT intercity trains, Airport Line extension and both SRT Red Lines. (Construction started May, opening 2016?)

You can find an updated list of all lines and extensions planned at this thread, http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/406991-the-new-skytrain/page-8

Thirdly, after decades - literally 50 years - of being completely run down the previous govt committed a huge amount of funding to upgrading the SRT network primarily with expanding the dual tracking program and providing funds for procurement of new rolling stock. I can obtain the specifics amounts and give you an over of works if so desired. Though most info is contained your linked in this thread, http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/654977-state-railway-of-thailand-bidding-for-dual-tracking-project-soon/page-2

The current govt has both continued that funding, expanded it for improving the SRT network and also continued the previous govts plans of building a HSR rail network with some changes to suit their own political priorities. Yes, it is a given as with all projects that there will delays, corruption, waste and poor planning.

Your statement is most erroneous and you may wish to undertake some research on exactly what has been going on first. I'd guess that more money has been spent on mass transit - boith BKK metro wise and the SRT - in the last 5 years than the previous 20 altogether!

[whybother]

I am a huge fan of the BTS, although it is getting very crowded in peak times now. BTS need to increase the length of the trains to accommodate the increase in users as the network expands. I think though they bought trains that cannot have carriages added, does anyone know?

The BTS has just recently increased from 3 to 4 carriages, and the system is designed for 6 carriages.

On the Sukhumvit line, the 4 carriages has made quite a difference. On the Silom line, the increase to 4 carriages coincided with the opening of new extensions, so, although making a difference, it wasn't as noticeable.

[Lakegeneve]

Strictly enforcing traffic laws and no-parking regulations should be the first priority for Bangkok's police in attempting to improve traffic flow. Those who drive carelessly and fail to obey the rules often cause accidents and unnecessary congestion. Bans should be imposed on motorists who have committed multiple violations, and their driving licences should be suspended or revoked.

A few thoughts:

As in many places, enforcing existing laws is the priority before edicting new ones that in-turn would not be enforced. Good luck on that.

The BTS has plateform space for 5 carriages, they already ramped it up from 3 to 4 in peak hours, what's the hold up for the 5th?

Does anyone know when the new planned lines open (not the 3trillion lines, the previous ones)?

The info is most likely in this updated list of works, http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/406991-the-new-skytrain/page-8 If not, just query specifically and I'll attempt to find an answer for you.

In relation to platforms and rolling stock. All BTS platforms are designed for eventual 6 carriage operation. Since the arrival of the extra carriage for all Siemens BTS stock all trains should now be 4 carriage - I haven;t seen a 3 carriage on for many months now. The delay from 3 to 4 carriage operations which should have started back in 2008/9 was soley due to the fact that the operator - BTSC - being a private debt laden company did not have sufficient funds to purchase extra rolling stock.

Twice the purchase of extra stock was delayed as the BTSC had funding issues. The first being the 12 CNR (Chinese ones which have had many problems) 4 car trains which arrived in late 2010, the 2nd being the 35 extra Siemens rolling stock to make the original 3 cars to 4 which arrived in Aug 2012. In respect of both orders delivery was also delayed.

The latest order is for the Silom line WWY to Bang Wah ext which will be fully opened by 5 Dec 2013. This was for 5 more, 4 cars trains from CNR. They are due to arrive later next year so overcrowding on the Silom line will worsen again before it improves.

As for 5 car operations, base on pax numbers they probably should have started back in 2011 but as you can see everything is behind pax numbers due to the operator having insufficient funds. It is on of the primary reasons that the private concessionaire model is fundamentally flawed in my view. A centralised govt agency running an integrated, multi-model network with a single ticketing platform is much more efficient and would have the funds to ensure adequate rolling stock is purchased BEFORE the pax numbers grow.

[kirk0233]

I don't see the BTS, MRT or any extension as the solution to Bangkok’s traffic. It is too expensive. From Phrom Phong to Chit Lom it is 28 baht. I imagine the cost from the purple line in Nonathburi when it is completed to chit Lom would be prohibitive for the same Thai that now takes a van ride to Bangkok. A van from Nonthaburi to Victory monument is 25 baht. I doubt there will be any attempt to will match this cost. Why can't the BTS, MRT etc service be subsidized so a lower cost can be provided to the average Thai? It would get these reckless vans and many computer cars off the streets and improve the air quality of Bangkok while providing a relatively safe way to compute to Bangkok.

[bkk_mike]

Your statement is most erroneous and you may wish to undertake some research on exactly what has been going on first. I'd guess that more money has been spent on mass transit - boith BKK metro wise and the SRT - in the last 5 years than the previous 20 altogether!

You were making a good point, but I think you're wrong on the last 20 years part.

Remember the existing Skytrain (opened in 1999), MRT (2004), and Airport (2006) and the associated Airport Rail Link (2010) - would have all involved rather a lot of spending in the 1988 to 2008 period. And that's not including the amount spent on Hopewell between the start of construction in 1990 to it's suspension in 1992 before it's final cancellation in 1998.

[whybother]

I don't see the BTS, MRT or any extension as the solution to Bangkok’s traffic. It is too expensive. From Phrom Phong to Chit Lom it is 28 baht. I imagine the cost from the purple line in Nonathburi when it is completed to chit Lom would be prohibitive for the same Thai that now takes a van ride to Bangkok. A van from Nonthaburi to Victory monument is 25 baht. I doubt there will be any attempt to will match this cost. Why can't the BTS, MRT etc service be subsidized so a lower cost can be provided to the average Thai? It would get these reckless vans and many computer cars off the streets and improve the air quality of Bangkok while providing a relatively safe way to compute to Bangkok.

So they can't afford 28 baht, but they can afford a car? The people that can't afford 28 baht OR afford a car will be able to get around in the vans much quicker if the people that CAN afford 28 baht use the BTS or MRT.

[kirk0233]

I don't see the BTS, MRT or any extension as the solution to Bangkok’s traffic. It is too expensive. From Phrom Phong to Chit Lom it is 28 baht. I imagine the cost from the purple line in Nonathburi when it is completed to chit Lom would be prohibitive for the same Thai that now takes a van ride to Bangkok. A van from Nonthaburi to Victory monument is 25 baht. I doubt there will be any attempt to will match this cost. Why can't the BTS, MRT etc service be subsidized so a lower cost can be provided to the average Thai? It would get these reckless vans and many computer cars off the streets and improve the air quality of Bangkok while providing a relatively safe way to compute to Bangkok.

So they can't afford 28 baht, but they can afford a car? The people that can't afford 28 baht OR afford a car will be able to get around in the vans much quicker if the people that CAN afford 28 baht use the BTS or MRT.

That was not the point I was intending to make. I believe public transport should be affordable for all. Based on the 28 baht cost from Phron Phong to Chit Lom the cost from Nonthaburi on the purple line to Bangkok will likely be unaffordable for the Thai who take a van into Bangkok. Should the BTS etc only be those who can afford a car? It seems the pricing would suggest it is for the most part it is.

[whybother]

I don't see the BTS, MRT or any extension as the solution to Bangkok’s traffic. It is too expensive. From Phrom Phong to Chit Lom it is 28 baht. I imagine the cost from the purple line in Nonathburi when it is completed to chit Lom would be prohibitive for the same Thai that now takes a van ride to Bangkok. A van from Nonthaburi to Victory monument is 25 baht. I doubt there will be any attempt to will match this cost. Why can't the BTS, MRT etc service be subsidized so a lower cost can be provided to the average Thai? It would get these reckless vans and many computer cars off the streets and improve the air quality of Bangkok while providing a relatively safe way to compute to Bangkok.

So they can't afford 28 baht, but they can afford a car? The people that can't afford 28 baht OR afford a car will be able to get around in the vans much quicker if the people that CAN afford 28 baht use the BTS or MRT.

That was not the point I was intending to make. I believe public transport should be affordable for all. Based on the 28 baht cost from Phron Phong to Chit Lom the cost from Nonthaburi on the purple line to Bangkok will likely be unaffordable for the Thai who take a van into Bangkok. Should the BTS etc only be those who can afford a car? It seems the pricing would suggest it is for the most part it is.

Someone has to pay for public transport. Yes, it should be affordable, but it is already very crowded. It would be unusable if everyone could afford to use it.

If more people use the MRT / BTS, there will be less people driving, which means less traffic, and the cheaper forms of transport will be able to move faster.

There has to be a balance.

[Lakegeneve]

Your statement is most erroneous and you may wish to undertake some research on exactly what has been going on first. I'd guess that more money has been spent on mass transit - boith BKK metro wise and the SRT - in the last 5 years than the previous 20 altogether!

You were making a good point, but I think you're wrong on the last 20 years part.

Remember the existing Skytrain (opened in 1999), MRT (2004), and Airport (2006) and the associated Airport Rail Link (2010) - would have all involved rather a lot of spending in the 1988 to 2008 period. And that's not including the amount spent on Hopewell between the start of construction in 1990 to it's suspension in 1992 before it's final cancellation in 1998.

Respectfully I disagree. I'm taking a guess but I think it is a good one.

I would think that one has to exclude Hopewell both as it was private funding not govt AND it was never completed. What is the purpose on comparing costs with a project that never passed 10-13% of construction, minimal costs that they would be - 3 billion baht perhaps?? Do you want to include the Lavalin bridge over the river as well??

Similarly, why include the new Airport in a discussion about mass transit in BKK in the context of road congestion??? It has no applicability in the discussion as someone cannot fly from the airport home in BKK - perhaps in the future!

The ARL was completed within the 5 year period which is the time reference point I am responding to.

So in actual fact we compare the original 23km of the BTS which opened in Dec 1999, with the 21km MRT in 2004, half of the funding of the ARL prior to 2008, against the following:

1) BTS bearing ext 5.25km (some pre 2008)

2) BTS WWY ext 5.3km (most pre 2008)

3) SRT Red LIne 15km

4) half of cost of the ARL line,

5) MRTA Purple line 23km 60 billion 70% done,

6) Blue Line ext 27km, 83 billion, 30% done

7) BTS Bearing to SP 12.6km 15%

8) Dark Red line less than 5%

9) Bang Sue Terminal " "

Of course this is not s detailed financial comparison as a subway is 2-3 more time expensive than an elevated metro and differing amounts are expended as different times of a project but it gives one a guide to make a comparison.

AND I said the SRT funding which amounts to 80 billion baht for Phase 1 dual tracking, 60% of which was completed in the last 5 years. Add in another 15 billion for new SRT rolling stock, another 10 billion for system upgrades that have been spent. I'm not going to go through and list every single project or purchase.

The SRT funding alone easily amounts to more spent on metros and the SRT in the last 20 years easily!

The main point is that the assertion was patently incorrect and I attempted to highlight that with some facts of what has been funded and built. In relation to funding for mass transit in general, the obvious picture for any casual observer is that after many years of little or nothing happening finally in recent times adequate and significant funds have been allocated and spent.

Whatever ones personal views on the feasibility, merit or efficiency of such a package of projects, the huge 2.2 trillion baht funding package will accelerate that last few years of funding over the next 20 years. Thailand and BKK are playing a long delayed catch up game on the mass transit front after decades of neglecting to provide funds or delaying projects

[kirk0233]

I don't see the BTS, MRT or any extension as the solution to Bangkok’s traffic. It is too expensive. From Phrom Phong to Chit Lom it is 28 baht. I imagine the cost from the purple line in Nonathburi when it is completed to chit Lom would be prohibitive for the same Thai that now takes a van ride to Bangkok. A van from Nonthaburi to Victory monument is 25 baht. I doubt there will be any attempt to will match this cost. Why can't the BTS, MRT etc service be subsidized so a lower cost can be provided to the average Thai? It would get these reckless vans and many computer cars off the streets and improve the air quality of Bangkok while providing a relatively safe way to compute to Bangkok.

So they can't afford 28 baht, but they can afford a car? The people that can't afford 28 baht OR afford a car will be able to get around in the vans much quicker if the people that CAN afford 28 baht use the BTS or MRT.

That was not the point I was intending to make. I believe public transport should be affordable for all. Based on the 28 baht cost from Phron Phong to Chit Lom the cost from Nonthaburi on the purple line to Bangkok will likely be unaffordable for the Thai who take a van into Bangkok. Should the BTS etc only be those who can afford a car? It seems the pricing would suggest it is for the most part it is.

Someone has to pay for public transport. Yes, it should be affordable, but it is already very crowded. It would be unusable if everyone could afford to use it.

If more people use the MRT / BTS, there will be less people driving, which means less traffic, and the cheaper forms of transport will be able to move faster.

There has to be a balance.

I agree there should be a balance; and I don't currently see it. From the purple line in Bangyai, Nonthaburi to Asok in Bangkok there are about 26 stops. Who knowns how much this will cost as well as any problems associated with changing from the puple to the blue line. I expect that very few car owners will give up their car for the problems of a compute; such as the availability of parking for their car near a station for the communte to Bangkok, the long ride and expected high cost of the communte and the inconvenience of not having a car once they reach Bangkok in order to get to work. I think the consumers that would actually make use of the lines, the van riders, will find the commute too costly.

[Lakegeneve]

Strictly enforcing traffic laws and no-parking regulations should be the first priority for Bangkok's police in attempting to improve traffic flow. Those who drive carelessly and fail to obey the rules often cause accidents and unnecessary congestion. Bans should be imposed on motorists who have committed multiple violations, and their driving licences should be suspended or revoked.

A few thoughts:

As in many places, enforcing existing laws is the priority before edicting new ones that in-turn would not be enforced. Good luck on that.

The BTS has plateform space for 5 carriages, they already ramped it up from 3 to 4 in peak hours, what's the hold up for the 5th?

Does anyone know when the new planned lines open (not the 3trillion lines, the previous ones)?

As for 5 car operations, base on pax numbers they probably should have started back in 2011 but as you can see everything is behind pax numbers due to the operator having insufficient funds. It is on of the primary reasons that the private concessionaire model is fundamentally flawed in my view. A centralised govt agency running an integrated, multi-model network with a single ticketing platform is much more efficient and would have the funds to ensure adequate rolling stock is purchased BEFORE the pax numbers grow.

I should have emphasised my point about operators having insufficient funds for new rolling stock leading to overcrowding by also mentioning that the BMCL, operator of the subway, are 3 years behind their original time line for new rolling stock arriving ie. it was to have arrived in 2009/10! They are even more in indebted than the BTSC and I don't believe that new trains are arriving until 2015.

Also, the SRT has not had funds for new rolling stock for the ARL even though some funds were allocated in late 2011. They took too long to order new stock and for the last 6 months the issue has been messy with a debate about whether to buy Siemens stock or cheaper CNR trains. That means that the original plan to have new 7 new trains by mid 2014 looks like being more like 2016. Overcrowding is a big problem on the ARL cityline. http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/369458-airport-rail-link-again-sorry/page-19#entry6906909

[whybother]

I agree there should be a balance; and I don't currently see it. From the purple line in Bangyai, Nonthaburi to Asok in Bangkok there are about 26 stops. Who knowns how much this will cost as well as any problems associated with changing from the puple to the blue line. I expect that very few car owners will give up their car for the problems of a compute; such as the availability of parking for their car near a station for the communte to Bangkok, the long ride and expected high cost of the communte and the inconvenience of not having a car once they reach Bangkok in order to get to work. I think the consumers that would actually make use of the lines, the van riders, will find the commute too costly.

There are hundreds of thousands of people that use the existing trains rather than using vans or driving themselves. As more lines are opened, the trains will quickly be filled (as seen on the ARL City Line).

If the trains were so cheap that all the people that are using vans and buses could afford to use them, then, as I said earlier, it would make them unusable.

At the moment, all the train lines are overflowing during peak times and often quite full out of peak. That indicates that the price is not too expensive.

[kirk0233]

I agree there should be a balance; and I don't currently see it. From the purple line in Bangyai, Nonthaburi to Asok in Bangkok there are about 26 stops. Who knowns how much this will cost as well as any problems associated with changing from the puple to the blue line. I expect that very few car owners will give up their car for the problems of a compute; such as the availability of parking for their car near a station for the communte to Bangkok, the long ride and expected high cost of the communte and the inconvenience of not having a car once they reach Bangkok in order to get to work. I think the consumers that would actually make use of the lines, the van riders, will find the commute too costly.

There are hundreds of thousands of people that use the existing trains rather than using vans or driving themselves. As more lines are opened, the trains will quickly be filled (as seen on the ARL City Line).

If the trains were so cheap that all the people that are using vans and buses could afford to use them, then, as I said earlier, it would make them unusable.

At the moment, all the train lines are overflowing during peak times and often quite full out of peak. That indicates that the price is not too expensive.

I agree that the trains in Bangkok are crowded. This is easily remedied by installing more carriages: which no one cares to do. Traffic on the BTS and MRT currently is local. I suggest that movement on the new line from Nonthaburi , another province, to downtown bangkok will used sparsely by car owners for this long commute for the reasons I have already listed. It will be sparsely used by van riders because it is too expensive.

[Lakegeneve]

I agree there should be a balance; and I don't currently see it. From the purple line in Bangyai, Nonthaburi to Asok in Bangkok there are about 26 stops. Who knowns how much this will cost as well as any problems associated with changing from the puple to the blue line. I expect that very few car owners will give up their car for the problems of a compute; such as the availability of parking for their car near a station for the communte to Bangkok, the long ride and expected high cost of the communte and the inconvenience of not having a car once they reach Bangkok in order to get to work. I think the consumers that would actually make use of the lines, the van riders, will find the commute too costly.

There are hundreds of thousands of people that use the existing trains rather than using vans or driving themselves. As more lines are opened, the trains will quickly be filled (as seen on the ARL City Line).

If the trains were so cheap that all the people that are using vans and buses could afford to use them, then, as I said earlier, it would make them unusable.

At the moment, all the train lines are overflowing during peak times and often quite full out of peak. That indicates that the price is not too expensive.

I agree that the trains in Bangkok are crowded. This is easily remedied by installing more carriages: which no one cares to do. Traffic on the BTS and MRT currently is local. I suggest that movement on the new line from Nonthaburi , another province, to downtown bangkok will used sparsely by car owners for this long commute for the reasons I have already listed. It will be sparsely used by van riders because it is too expensive.

A few things to throw into the discussion. Read the above posts on the extra carriages issue.

If the BTS had been allowed to increase fares as per the concessionaire contract, then the current max fare would be 65 baht!

From what I remember the BMCL is going to be able to set a max fare for the Purple line when it opens in late 2015 or early 2016 (currently a little spat between the govt & BMCL so there may be a 9 month delay) of 51-53 baht. I need to check that but it will be around that range.

Fares are have always been set to attract primarily the middle class and growth has proceeded accordingly. People pay a slight premium not be to stuck in traffic. Around 12.5%-15% of the fare is theoretically the profit for the operator. The ticketing framework is also set up as stand alone for that operator which adds to a slightly increased price.

The main way to reduce fares would be to have a proper integrated, multi-model ticketing platform so that people could travel on a bus, ferry & metro line or two and use the same ticket with a reduced cost than buying separate tickets for each journey. This has been promised but we are many years away from that. Think about the first visitor to BKK who decided to take the ARL, then the MRT and then the BTS to get to a hotel and ends up buying 3 different tickets!! A single operator, pref govt agency, running an integrated network would also be much more efficient.