Bangkok officials discuss high speed transport vehicle as remedy for traffic

BANGKOK, 3 May 2016 (NNT) – Bangkok officials have stepped up efforts to more efficiently manage traffic congestion in the capital, considering the use of a high speed public transport vehicle.

The Bangkok City Council and the city’s Traffic, Transport and Drainage Commission have met to cooperate on remedying traffic congestion in the city. Council Member Chatchai Phromlert chaired the meeting, which discussed the introduction of a high speed public transport vehicle.

Councilors pointed out that the possible solution to heavy road traffic would be more cost effective than electric trains and more convenient for users as they would run on existing streets.

A prototype has been running on Narathiwatratchanakarin Road and Rama 3 Road since May 29 2010 at a fare of 5 baht. The pilot project proved to be successful in addressing traffic on the route caused by the construction of the Green Line train.

The findings of the latest meeting will be mulled over further by the Bangkok City Council for possible implementation in the city.


-- NNT 2016-05-03

good thing they stopped letting motorcycles cross the bridges in Bangkok. That really helped. NOT.

"which discussed the introduction of a high speed public transport vehicle"

Are the minivans not going fast enough yet?

But this is not rocket science and has been concluded around the world in pilot projects:

"Councilors pointed out that the possible solution to heavy road traffic would be more cost effective than electric trains and more convenient for users as they would run on existing streets."

Reserve one lane for buses/vans gives the same benefits as a tram or train, at a fraction of the costs.

Besides, when a line is not having enough passengers you can easily turn the reserved lane into a normal lane for all traffic.

Why isn't it done more often in many places?

Main reason is that the initiative is not "sexy". Politicians like big projects with high speed trains that will last their time in office so they have success stories. Its the same all around the world.

Edited May 3, 201610 yr by Bob12345

Hmm lol you couldn't make this stuff up if you tried. Easy to solve, first stop allowing new taxis and then add a congestion charge for all incl motorbikes. London was about a tenner a day last time I was there, so I'm sure 500baht would turn inner Bangkok into ghost town.

They are missing the obvious choice for a solution in the wet season and the dry.......the hover board!

good thing they stopped letting motorcycles cross the bridges in Bangkok. That really helped. NOT.

The head of the traffic police has also come out to say that he will instruct all traffic people to be on the lookout for foreign registered cars driving in Bangkok. If caught, they will be fined 10,000 Baht and must be towed to the border for export. Apparently, according to a 2009 ordinance it is an offence to drive a vehicle not registered in Thailand and paying Thai road tax into Bangkok.

The other reason being that foreign registered vehicles contribute to road congestion and pollution. I don't disagree, but how many foreign registered vehicles are in Bangkok at any one time? Not more than around 10 I'd say. I can only assume that this idea comes from the insanity that was Chinese New Year when thousands of Chinese registered vehicles descended on Thailand with more than a few entering Bangkok. Still, only the new law that has finally been confirmed to come into effect by late June, that requires foreign cars to seek advance permission to enter Thailand will truly keep them off Bangkok's roads.

But this is not rocket science and has been concluded around the world in pilot projects:

"Councilors pointed out that the possible solution to heavy road traffic would be more cost effective than electric trains and more convenient for users as they would run on existing streets."

Reserve one lane for buses/vans gives the same benefits as a tram or train, at a fraction of the costs.

Besides, when a line is not having enough passengers you can easily turn the reserved lane into a normal lane for all traffic.

Why isn't it done more often in many places?

Main reason is that the initiative is not "sexy". Politicians like big projects with high speed trains that will last their time in office so they have success stories. Its the same all around the world.

This is already done on Rama 3 and Sathorn with dedicated bus lane. Its funny how during non-rush hour, police wait to catch cars that run on the bus lane on Rama 3. But during rush hour, the police don't catch because the road is so congested the bus is stuck in traffic.

Dedicated bus lane won't work well in Bangkok because roads are too narrow to begin with. I think dropping the cost of BTS and MRT so low income can afford it will make a bigger different, less buses on the road. More incentive for car owners to take BTS as well.

Bangkok also lacks a highway that goes to Thonburi side of the river, this is another major cause of traffic jams.

Also more incentives in different Bangkok regions for business owners to move their offices there.

The real Solution is Simple and very basic....

Enforce existing traffic regulations adequately. Prevent gridlock.

Place the traffic lights on a computerised and modelled system.

Prevent parking & Stopping on ALL main roads.

Educate drivers in courtesy above selfishness.

Consistent and Firm (and honest) policing.

Once all this is done can measures be taken to make further improvements which ultimately will only involve cutting down the numbers of cars on the roads... through either an inner city congestion charge or increase in Petrol / Gas prices.

The reality is - even quiet towns become congested because of none other than poor, ignorant and inconsiderate driving....

Nothing will really improve until the actual Driving Culture itself is addressed directly....

make sure to include an escape pod for the driver, so he can easily get away after the inevitable high-speed accident

But this is not rocket science and has been concluded around the world in pilot projects:

"Councilors pointed out that the possible solution to heavy road traffic would be more cost effective than electric trains and more convenient for users as they would run on existing streets."

Reserve one lane for buses/vans gives the same benefits as a tram or train, at a fraction of the costs.

Besides, when a line is not having enough passengers you can easily turn the reserved lane into a normal lane for all traffic.

Why isn't it done more often in many places?

Main reason is that the initiative is not "sexy". Politicians like big projects with high speed trains that will last their time in office so they have success stories. Its the same all around the world.

This is already done on Rama 3 and Sathorn with dedicated bus lane. Its funny how during non-rush hour, police wait to catch cars that run on the bus lane on Rama 3. But during rush hour, the police don't catch because the road is so congested the bus is stuck in traffic.

Dedicated bus lane won't work well in Bangkok because roads are too narrow to begin with. I think dropping the cost of BTS and MRT so low income can afford it will make a bigger different, less buses on the road. More incentive for car owners to take BTS as well.

Bangkok also lacks a highway that goes to Thonburi side of the river, this is another major cause of traffic jams.

Also more incentives in different Bangkok regions for business owners to move their offices there.

" I think dropping the cost of BTS and MRT so low income can afford it will make a bigger different, less buses on the road. More incentive for car owners to take BTS as well."

Well said.

Given the success of the low speed airport train line and its public maintenance issues, I hold great fears for anything that could remotely be defined as high speed.

But this is not rocket science and has been concluded around the world in pilot projects:

"Councilors pointed out that the possible solution to heavy road traffic would be more cost effective than electric trains and more convenient for users as they would run on existing streets."

Reserve one lane for buses/vans gives the same benefits as a tram or train, at a fraction of the costs.

Besides, when a line is not having enough passengers you can easily turn the reserved lane into a normal lane for all traffic.

Why isn't it done more often in many places?

Main reason is that the initiative is not "sexy". Politicians like big projects with high speed trains that will last their time in office so they have success stories. Its the same all around the world.

Also use of existing infrastructure = no construction kickbacks

The real Solution is Simple and very basic....

Enforce existing traffic regulations adequately. Prevent gridlock.

Place the traffic lights on a computerised and modelled system.

Prevent parking & Stopping on ALL main roads.

Educate drivers in courtesy above selfishness.

Consistent and Firm (and honest) policing.

Once all this is done can measures be taken to make further improvements which ultimately will only involve cutting down the numbers of cars on the roads... through either an inner city congestion charge or increase in Petrol / Gas prices.

The reality is - even quiet towns become congested because of none other than poor, ignorant and inconsiderate driving....

Nothing will really improve until the actual Driving Culture itself is addressed directly....

The real Solution is Simple and very basic.. And way too hard to put into action.

Why not stop putting everything in Bangkok - there is the rest of a whole country good for something other then rice they can't grow or sell enough of at the right price.

But this is not rocket science and has been concluded around the world in pilot projects:

"Councilors pointed out that the possible solution to heavy road traffic would be more cost effective than electric trains and more convenient for users as they would run on existing streets."

Reserve one lane for buses/vans gives the same benefits as a tram or train, at a fraction of the costs.

Besides, when a line is not having enough passengers you can easily turn the reserved lane into a normal lane for all traffic.

Why isn't it done more often in many places?

Main reason is that the initiative is not "sexy". Politicians like big projects with high speed trains that will last their time in office so they have success stories. Its the same all around the world.

This is already done on Rama 3 and Sathorn with dedicated bus lane. Its funny how during non-rush hour, police wait to catch cars that run on the bus lane on Rama 3. But during rush hour, the police don't catch because the road is so congested the bus is stuck in traffic.

Dedicated bus lane won't work well in Bangkok because roads are too narrow to begin with. I think dropping the cost of BTS and MRT so low income can afford it will make a bigger different, less buses on the road. More incentive for car owners to take BTS as well.

Bangkok also lacks a highway that goes to Thonburi side of the river, this is another major cause of traffic jams.

Also more incentives in different Bangkok regions for business owners to move their offices there.

" I think dropping the cost of BTS and MRT so low income can afford it will make a bigger different, less buses on the road. More incentive for car owners to take BTS as well."

Well said.

The BTS/MRT is already overloaded and unpleasant during peak hours. Either add an extra carriage to each train (duh) or increase frequency of trains.

Maybe an "Off-Peak" rate for BTS/MRT would be useful, but foreigners use the service during the day and really they should pay at least double by Thai rules.

The first and obvious solution to improving the Bangkok traffic congestion would be for the Royal Thai Police farce to enforce existing traffic rules efficiently. But we all know that is unlikely.......

Why not stop putting everything in Bangkok - there is the rest of a whole country good for something other then rice they can't grow or sell enough of at the right price.

My thoughts exactly I thought the name of this country was Thailand not Bangkok where the majority of spending seems to be ending up. Bangkok already has enough eggs in its basket. Save a tiny slice for Chiang Mai.

Tinkering isnt gonna do s$%t...except perhaps even make it worse, cos the "anomaly" of a high speed vehicle shoe horned into an otherwise log jammed "system", is going to create localised disturbances to that system, that decrease overall efficiency, then some a## h@^e of a face saving nonse will do the usual TIT smoke and mirror pile of t*&d flip flop cover up BS, and claim it a success. See this coming a mile off, or perhaps 200 miles off.

There are much more fundamental problems that need to be solved before any tinkering could ever possibly have a real positive effects.

1. The area % of Bangkok that is covered by functioning quality main artery roads (not the tiny little sois that cant accommodate bicycles let a lone modern day cars) is far too low.

2. Too many cars, each carrying on average too few people.

3. Other transport modes (bus, boat, BTS, etc) are not integrated nor extensive.

4. Its just too hot, a really bad idea, and wow - Leicester won the Prem!!

There is no hope. Move out of Bangkok is the only option. We did that last year and i wished we had done it earlier. You spend most of your time in bangkok stuck in traffic.

But this is not rocket science and has been concluded around the world in pilot projects:

"Councilors pointed out that the possible solution to heavy road traffic would be more cost effective than electric trains and more convenient for users as they would run on existing streets."

Reserve one lane for buses/vans gives the same benefits as a tram or train, at a fraction of the costs.

Besides, when a line is not having enough passengers you can easily turn the reserved lane into a normal lane for all traffic.

Why isn't it done more often in many places?

Main reason is that the initiative is not "sexy". Politicians like big projects with high speed trains that will last their time in office so they have success stories. Its the same all around the world.

This is already done on Rama 3 and Sathorn with dedicated bus lane. Its funny how during non-rush hour, police wait to catch cars that run on the bus lane on Rama 3. But during rush hour, the police don't catch because the road is so congested the bus is stuck in traffic.

Dedicated bus lane won't work well in Bangkok because roads are too narrow to begin with. I think dropping the cost of BTS and MRT so low income can afford it will make a bigger different, less buses on the road. More incentive for car owners to take BTS as well.

Bangkok also lacks a highway that goes to Thonburi side of the river, this is another major cause of traffic jams.

Also more incentives in different Bangkok regions for business owners to move their offices there.

" I think dropping the cost of BTS and MRT so low income can afford it will make a bigger different, less buses on the road. More incentive for car owners to take BTS as well."

Well said.

If you're going to do that, and it is a very good idea, then you will have to make the trains longer, The current sets are 4 carriages I think, but the platforms can take 8 carriages?

The answer is to place high speed trains on the streets.

Eventually auto and motorcycle traffic will disappear.

There is no hope. Move out of Bangkok is the only option. We did that last year and i wished we had done it earlier. You spend most of your time in bangkok stuck in traffic.

Agreed. I worked out I was spending 2 hours a day sitting going nowhere in a taxi when I lived in BKK. I moved to Pattaya ten years ago before the Chinese hordes began cluttering up the roads with their parked coaches blocking 50% of the lanes on some main thoroughfares. It took me 70 minutes on Monday for a 30 minute journey.