August 2017
M T W T F S S
« Jul    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Task Force MRT-3

Metrobus Istanbul 2010

Bus rapid transit in Istanbul

MRT3 is a long-standing issue. Things need to be fixed. But the problem has many dimensions:

  • The MRT-3 is in disrepair. It cannot operate at full capacity.
  • Its designed capacity is insufficient to absorb people using EDSA.
  • Taking it down for repair is not feasible – traffic would get even worse.

A quick solution must also think of the future. This is where I had this idea today which I am now outlining.

Solution Proposal Summary

The solution that I consider the most sensible for the MRT-3 conundrum and EDSA traffic would have three phases:

  1. Build a BRT system similar to that in Istanbul.
  2. Shut down the MRT3 for overhaul.
  3. Operate both after the overhaul.

This sounds crazy but it is in my opinion feasible and helpful. Why do I think it is:

  1. BRT systems can be up and running very quickly.
  2. The MRT needs a total overhaul to run properly again.
  3. Both systems together would absorb a lot of people using EDSA.

One would need some experts to help a local core team run from DOTC and controlled there:

  • Experienced BRT people from cities that have it. Istanbul, Bogota, Curitiba or Brisbane, it doesn’t matter. To build and enable a local Filipino team.
  • Experienced subway/tram people from cities that have it. Munich, Prague, I don’t care. To build and enable a local Filipino operation/maintenance team.

IMHO the local teams should all be from DOTC. Build own capabilities to be competent in supervising subcontractors. Make sure real lessons are learned from past glitches.

Building the BRT

Bf Bln Sw, 126 552

1924 train coach from Germany

The BRT could be built up quickly using the following steps:

  • Built bus rapid transit lanes by fencing off one EDSA lane on each side. Simple barriers are I think enough.
  • Build provisional stops where the MRT-3 stops and stairs are at present. This should not be too hard either.
  • Have bus operators drive on the left-hand side in the BRT lanes. So that boarding is alway on the right of the bus.

The following could be the way to deal with the BRT system set-up:

  • BRT experts have a look at the roads to see whether there are any problems with setting up barriers and building stations.
  • Where barriers or stations cannot be built that easily, have the buses cross to the normal road and use it for a while.
  • Get the work on the barriers and stations done and make sure the bus contractors are all on board and use them on Day X.

The BRT would replace the buses chaotically blocking EDSA on the sides. So no loss by getting it running quickly.

Buses in the BRT system would go on as normal buses to wherever the bulk of people live. I think this can be found out.

Divide the concessions based on different lines – Makati-Fairview, Makati-Pasig, whatever. Let old normal concessions expire.

Overhauling the MRT-3

As for overhauling the MRT-3, look at what needs to be done in the following areas and make sure the current state of the system is meticulously documented to avoid conflict:

  • Overhead lines and rail tracks
  • Stations and access to them
  • Coaches and engines

Find local contractors for each area. Agree on technology transfer within what is possible if foreign partners are involved. Contracts should have strict delivery and quality clauses.

BRT and MRT

MRT-3 Manila train towards Ayala Station

MRT-3 near Ayala

As soon as the BRT and MRT are working in parallel, do the following:

  1. make the MRT fare more expensive than that of the BRT – to get back the cost of overhauling the system.
  2. Built new lines using the team that overhauled the MRT-3 and their subcontractors to use their capabilities.
  3. The same team should become fully local after a while, and take care of maintenance and operation of all lines.

This is to avoid the same problems from occuring once again after a few years.

Is this crazy?

Yes it is. But it is much crazier to let the system continue to rot. It is both a quick fix and a long-term solution.

Having two systems also means having a fallback option. Ideas to enhance this proposal are very welcome.

Irineo B. R. Salazar, München, 12. January 2016

38 comments to Task Force MRT-3

  • karlgarcia

    We are told that BRT is cheaper in the long run, but Ottawa thinks it is the other way around.

    https://www.planetizen.com/node/71026

    Ottawa Offers Lessons in Transitioning from BRT to Light Rail

    Nour Aoude examines the planning efforts behind Ottawa’s new Confederation light rail line, which will replace sections of the over-used Transitway bus rapid transit line.

    Ottawa is planning to begin light rail service on the new Confederation Line in 2018, with the Western LRT replacing service along a section of the current Transitway bus rapid transit system that spans the city.

    As Nour Aoude reports, the Transitway was originally constructed with an eventual transition to rail in mind. “The impression was that it would be cheaper to build BRT first, and then convert to LRT. However, the high costs of operating and replacing buses over the years, and of converting the Transitway to light rail ($540 million for the Confederation Line alone) have put this wisdom into question. Today, it seems that building LRT from the start might have saved costs in the long run.”
    —-
    Here is another article that says the same opinion about rail vs brt.

    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01441647.2016.1155851

  • karlgarcia

    Removing rails and replacing trains by buses.

    http://business.inquirer.net/213390/dotr-mulls-bus-rapid-transit-system-for-metro

    DOTr mulls bus rapid transit system for Metro | Inquirer Business

    12 months ago
    The LRT-2, which opened in 2003, is the newest of Metro Manila’s three elevated train systems. Even then, Tugade said the LRT-2 was already showing signs of ageing and wear and tear.

    The operations and maintenance of the LRT-2 was among the public private partnership projects (PPPs) left hanging by the Aquino administration. Already, four groups have pre-qualified for the PPP. Tugade’s latest statement casts doubt on whether the PPP deal would still proceed under President Duterte.

    The Transportation Department under President Aquino had studied a BRT for Metro Manila before. This was for the Quirino Highway to Manila City Hall route. The project, however, never materialized. CDG/rga

  • karlgarcia

    The presidential assistant for Visayas is against BRT.
    http://www.philstar.com/cebu-news/2017/07/02/1715586/city-eyes-study-second-phase-cancel-brt-dino?nomobile=1

    CEBU, Philippines – Presidential Assistant for the Visayas Michael Dino will lobby for the cancellation of the Bus Rapid Transport (BRT) project in Cebu.

    “If the BRT project is just a waste of effort, time and money and it will be a total disaster for Cebu, we have to stop it,” Dino said following the presentation of transport expert Rene Santiago yesterday.

    “I will lobby before the president and all other government agencies to cancel the BRT project. This project will only prove disastrous for Cebu. Why let Cebuanos be part of that suffering? What we need is an LRT. Manila has already 8 LRTs unya ang Cebu kay zero,” Dino said.

    In his presentation, Santiago said the BRT cannot solve the rising demand for “ridership” in Cebu, as it will only “replace” existing jeepneys.

    It would even reportedly cause more traffic as buses would be plying narrow roads. He pointed out that the city’s BRT project is already four years delayed of its scheduled implementation.

    He cited places whose BRT project failed like Hanoi in Vietnam where it took 10 years for the project to implement. Hanoi ended up with a $100M loan from the World Bank.

    It reportedly failed because of lack of planning, bad design, and lack of international experts on the subject matter.

    He also cited the E-trike project of the government in 2010 worth $300M, which was cancelled in November 2016 because it does not fit in Philippines.

    “So if we can cancel e-trike, which was already an approved project for Philippines, why can’t we cancel BRT when it cannot give solution to rising demand of ridership?” Santiago said.CEBU, Philippines – Presidential Assistant for the Visayas Michael Dino will lobby for the cancellation of the Bus Rapid Transport (BRT) project in Cebu.

    “If the BRT project is just a waste of effort, time and money and it will be a total disaster for Cebu, we have to stop it,” Dino said following the presentation of transport expert Rene Santiago yesterday.

    “I will lobby before the president and all other government agencies to cancel the BRT project. This project will only prove disastrous for Cebu. Why let Cebuanos be part of that suffering? What we need is an LRT. Manila has already 8 LRTs unya ang Cebu kay zero,” Dino said.

    In his presentation, Santiago said the BRT cannot solve the rising demand for “ridership” in Cebu, as it will only “replace” existing jeepneys.

    It would even reportedly cause more traffic as buses would be plying narrow roads. He pointed out that the city’s BRT project is already four years delayed of its scheduled implementation.

    He cited places whose BRT project failed like Hanoi in Vietnam where it took 10 years for the project to implement. Hanoi ended up with a $100M loan from the World Bank.

    It reportedly failed because of lack of planning, bad design, and lack of international experts on the subject matter.

    He also cited the E-trike project of the government in 2010 worth $300M, which was cancelled in November 2016 because it does not fit in Philippines.

    “So if we can cancel e-trike, which was already an approved project for Philippines, why can’t we cancel BRT when it cannot give solution to rising demand of ridership?” Santiago said.CEBU, Philippines – Presidential Assistant for the Visayas Michael Dino will lobby for the cancellation of the Bus Rapid Transport (BRT) project in Cebu.

    “If the BRT project is just a waste of effort, time and money and it will be a total disaster for Cebu, we have to stop it,” Dino said following the presentation of transport expert Rene Santiago yesterday.

    “I will lobby before the president and all other government agencies to cancel the BRT project. This project will only prove disastrous for Cebu. Why let Cebuanos be part of that suffering? What we need is an LRT. Manila has already 8 LRTs unya ang Cebu kay zero,” Dino said.

    In his presentation, Santiago said the BRT cannot solve the rising demand for “ridership” in Cebu, as it will only “replace” existing jeepneys.

    It would even reportedly cause more traffic as buses would be plying narrow roads. He pointed out that the city’s BRT project is already four years delayed of its scheduled implementation.

    He cited places whose BRT project failed like Hanoi in Vietnam where it took 10 years for the project to implement. Hanoi ended up with a $100M loan from the World Bank.

    It reportedly failed because of lack of planning, bad design, and lack of international experts on the subject matter.

    He also cited the E-trike project of the government in 2010 worth $300M, which was cancelled in November 2016 because it does not fit in Philippines.

    “So if we can cancel e-trike, which was already an approved project for Philippines, why can’t we cancel BRT when it cannot give solution to rising demand of ridership?” Santiago said.

  • karlgarcia

    http://www.quezon.ph/2008/07/16/planes-trains-and-automobiles/comment-page-4/#comment-875429

    hvrds
    July 19, 2008 at 9:50 am (UTC 8)
    Interesting to note that there are many buisness projections on the viability of the railroad but no one has laid down the frame for the more important economic analysis.

    The business analysis only becomes viable if the economic analysis projects it to be viable.

    It is also amazing that many do not know the workings of the ODA format for loans. All ODA loan formats are eseentially vendor financed loans. They lend you the money at low rates but you have to buy their goods and services. It is a closed end propostion.

    Simple economic analysis as to the effects on the economy going forward from 50–100 years. First the linkages to the productive sectors. There is almost no loinkage to the manufacturing secotr. In point of fact we are actually exproting labor value to a foreign country.

    The only productive industrial activity is construction. Even the future mainatenace and supplies of the railroad will tie the business to the supplier going forward for more than 25 years.

    Add to this the projections of forex risk. You earn in pesos and pay for capital stock and supplies in yen or dollars. You have to make very broad assumptions about your cost structure depending on a forex rate band.

    Then comes your ate to be charegd since this is not BOT. No need for take or pay. The state will most assuredly subsidze rates as even if it were electric driven that would entail an increase in generating capacity of the power industry.

    Who would benefit??? Landowners along the route would see the value of their lands surge and hubs will be establsihed for housing and commercial applications.

    You will simply expand the Manila model and create enclaves for the rich and the rest would live in slums and middle class communities.

    Once again you will fail to create meaningful growth that will lead to development as the model is simply expanding the urban areas to create bedroom communities for Metro Manila.

    The entire project is simply to create spurts in growth in construction and create revenue for the transportation and ancilliary services.

    Once again the Sy’s , Ayalas and Gokongwei will simply expand their mall models
    outward.

    It is the Edsa model with the MRT. Off course no telling what the price of the entire project willbe with all its cost overuns and the cost of energy going forward.

    The Philippines economy is still based on the land value model. Everything revovles around land valuations. The creation of capital stock whether physical or metaphysical is not part of the wealth creation process in the Philippines.

    Point of fact the government expects consumption taxes and realty taxes that will be generated along the railroad to compensate for the subsidized fares that will be charged.

    GMA and Co. are simply creating impact projects for the medium term for projections which is not linked to any long term growth model leading to developing the entire economy. The target is May 2010 elections at any price. Any way the futrre generations that will be paying for this project will not have a say or vote in this. executive privilege and even if not most people today are clueless…..

    What is so funny is the state wants to direct the planning of behavior between man and woman in the bedroom but is not planning for the long term on providing the physical framework for viable communities to grow.

    That would mean sustainable growth with good quality job creation to solve the poverty probelm. Instead you blame the poor for having too many babies and blame them for our maldevelopment and underdevelopment.

    Politicans simply plan to remain in political power to further their vested interests.

    There really are a lot of highly schooled and trained ignorant people in this country.

  • sonny

    what does BRT stand for?

  • https://fightformar.wordpress.com/2016/03/16/walang-nagawa-sa-mrt/ – interesting input… this is from the new fight for Mar blog.

    Ongoing for me is a portrait of Roxas – and to complete that “judgement” I will of course listen to both “defense” and “prosecution”.

  • Pinky

    Govt should simply appoint rail experts. Local or foreign. Not apprentices

    • They have the Busan people from Korea on board now, after the previous governments made many mistakes.

      Government does not own the MRTC totally yet, which is shown in detail in the MRT article I posted below.

      Appointing Vitangcol who recommended a company with his uncle in it was not the smartest thing to do I think.

      Now Vitangcol is facing charges.. and there is a new manager Buenafe who is an engineer from what I have read.

      I also recommend d0ctrine.com which is by a Filipino expert. I think the government should tap these people more.

      The mistake of most governments was to focus too much on hiring foreign experts instead of promoting local people.

      At least the DOST is now working on its own train system which can be maintained locally – my article “On Being Modern”.

      Secretary Abaya has what you would call a suicide mission in the army, where you can come out alive or possibly not.

  • http://joeam.com/2016/01/31/on-a-clear-day-you-can-see-the-mrt/ details excellently the MRT, especially the work planned and being done now:

    On the buy-out:

    They have Congress approval on the buy-out and Php54b has already been allocated in the 2014 budget for this.
    The legalities are overwhelming and they are currently working it out, seeking lots of high legal advice.
    When they have finalized the legal aspects, they will then approach the shareholders.
    Due to the delicate nature of the situation, DOTC cannot disclose any proceedings for the time being.

    On upgrading:

    48 new light rail vehicles (LRV) have been purchased. Prototype is being tested. The rest expected to be delivered Q1 2016 in batches, total delivery by December 2016
    Current the train configuration is one engine pulling 3 LRV. After upgrade it will be 4 LRV to one engine.
    Automatic ticketing system has been installed which will cut queue time.
    Elevators/escalators to be replaced
    Portions of the rail will be replaced
    Train engines to be replaced
    Signalling systems – both hardware and software, will be replaced.
    Ancillary systems will be added — depo bays, power substations, etc
    New radio systems will be installed
    Construct an additional footbridge at North Avenue
    Overhaul existing 72 trains

    This is very good, let us see where it goes.

  • http://www.sunstar.com.ph/pampanga/local-news/2016/01/15/hybrid-road-train-benefit-clark-451927

    The CDC and DOST finally launched the Maiden Trip Hybrid Road Train at Clark Freeport in a bid to improve the transportation system in the area.

    “The presence of the light hybrid train service in Clark will indeed be beneficial for employees of Clark Freeport Zone. This can be considered as an alternative means of public commuter to answer the mass transportation dilemma in highly urbanized cities,” Tanjuatco said.


    • Billions of government funds spent yearly on subsidy for train commuters can be saved through a cost-effective mode of transportation, Secretary Mario Montejo of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) said Tuesday, as he touted the hybrid electric road train developed by the agency.

      The hybrid road train is one of the various technologies featured in DOST’s annual National Science and Technology Week celebrations being held in Pasay City this week.

      “Sasabihin kailangan i-subsidize ang mass transport? Pag tinanggap natin yun, talo na tayo…We just have to open-minded. We have to learn other technologies,” Montejo said in a forum on the efficiency of mass transport sytems.

      The government, through the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC), asked for a P6.6-billion allocation to subsidize commuters riding the Metro Rail Transit (MRT) this year.

      “Pwede kumita ang mass transport from day one. Pwede pa madali i-operate at i-repair,” Montejo said.

      He said the road train was designed to increase the number of passengers carried in a given road space.

      “Yung ating road system or road network, finite yun, napakahirap maglagay ng right of way so we have to start with the given,” the Cabinet Secretary said.

      Montejo said the road train launched last month in Clark can accommodate four commuting passengers per square meter compared to the capacity of buses at two passengers per square meter.

      “Mass transport is the most convenient way of conveying passengers per given space. It can handle the most number of passengers,” Montejo said.

      Developed by local scientists, the hybrid road train measures 40 meters and is suitable for three-lane roads. In the same forum, however, it was raised that the law only allows buses measuring 18 meters to travel.

      The road train has three to four coaches, with each coach capable of accommodating 65 passengers.

      Engr. Jonathan Puerto of the DOST Metals Industry Research and Development Center added that the train is diesel-electric powered, has fully-airconditioned cabins, and has wide automatic sliding doors.

      As to when the road trains will be able to service commuters, Rio Pagtalunan, the project leader of the technology, said it would depend on the interest of private investors.

      “Ang gobyerno kasi gusto nila PPP (Public-Private parternship) kaya kailangan ng investors para dito,” he said in an interview.

      He said the road train can run on major roads like EDSA but there must be a dedicated lane for it.

      “Dagdag pa dyan, kailangan din maganda ang quality ng surface, yung road worthiness, so kailangan ayusin muna ang mga kalsada otherwise bumpy ang dadaanan ng road train,” Pagtalunan added. — TJD, GMA News
      – See more at: http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/529934/scitech/technology/dost-touts-road-train-to-ease-ncr-traffic#sthash.8AxCjZda.dpuf

  • http://www.railway-technology.com/news/newsphilippines-dotc-contracts-korean-filipino-consortium-for-mrt-3-maintenance-4773367 – international railway webpage:

    A Korean-Filipino Consortium has secured a PHP3.8bn ($80m) contract from the Philippines Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) to carry out the maintenance of Metro Rail Transit Line 3 (MRT-3) system.

    The consortium is comprised Busan Transportation, Edison Development & Construction, Tramat Mercantile, TMICorp and Castan.

    Under the deal, the consortium will undertake maintenance works of the rolling stock and signalling system.

    There are currently 12 qualified technical experts, including rolling stock, signalling, and track specialists, from Busan carrying out the necessary activities for transition and system assessment…

    Apart from fulfilling maintenance requirements, the contract also covers the general overhaul of 43 coaches over the course of the agreement period, and the total replacement of the signalling system within 24 months.

      • Bonifacio is a different topic – I mean C-5 which goes from the Fort all the way to Katipunan/Commonwealth.

        A BRT there would run parallel to EDSA and could absorb people from Fairview, Marikina, Pasig going to Makati if there is a connection to Buendia via 32nd.

        That BRT if possible should use the DOST Roadtrain which is like 5 buses – almost the same capacity as one MRT double coach. I suspect C-5 BRT is easier than C-4(EDSA).

        • traffic from Market Market to Libiis is also hell, when there is no truckban trucks occupy two lanes.
          i only know fx routes coming from market market.
          maybe a brt is a good idea.

          • So sacrificing one lane on each side for BRT like in Istanbul is not a big loss, especially if people use it and instead of cars/FX.

            Stops on the Istanbul Metrobüs are simple as well: a wider centre island with a roof and connected to a pedestrian overpass.

            Buses drive left so you use ordinary busses. In Manila you could even have companies pay for using the route – collect own fares.

            In some areas, a JRT – jeepney rapid transit – might even make sense. But for shorter hauls not the long haul on C5.

            The vision for a C5 BRT could be Fairview to NAIA. The nice thing about BRT is that you can extend it, and ordinary busses can continue overland.

  • In selecting a dictator blog of Joe.

    Being a dictator you bypass all the systems.

    Among the choices,Mar knows what system or systems to bypass go solve this DOTC mess.

  • I think I was corrected by Sal a few months ago at Joe’swhen I said that going back to buses is moving backwards.Ok that was hip shooting.I would go on with my hip shooting.just correct me if i am wrong.
    Demolish MRT and replace it with BRT.
    MRT is no longer upgradeable because it is too narrow.

    What about the LRT, which is older?????
    I do not know.

    • 1) Demolish MRT is not really an option. Why? You have hundreds of thousands of people using it per year. Imagine all those people in buses or worse in cars. And imagine the demolition job on EDSA and the extreme inconveniences while that is happening. Total collapse will become not a possibility but possibly a reality.

      2) Berlin is a major example. The U2 line from West to East was heavily neglected when the Wall was up. In the West it is partly overground like the MRT or the No. 7 line of the New York Subway. Overground lines are subject to weather influences. Rails are sensitive to corrosion. Electrical systems to short circuits if they get dirty or damaged by rain and by the sun afterwards. The underground part of the U2 is with the narrowest and lowest tunnels and oldest stations in probably the whole of Germany. But demolishing it was nearly impossible. Also because the S-Bahn (suburban) lines were just as broken and old. So by the time they closed down the S-Bahn from Westkreuz to Bahnhof Zoo (Zoo Station) for months on end for overhaul, they already had gotten the U2 reasonably fixed and West-East bus lines running, so people in affluent areas like Grunewald did not have to all take the car to the zoo. Even then underground and bus lines were clogged. Even new West-East car tunnels were awfully full.

      3) Electrical systems are a major point of failure (we who are in IT or have done IT know what that is about) for rail systems. The point of contact between overhead lines and the coaches is for example something SBI does as a specialty. Signaling systems are also not that easy to keep running. Munich S-Bahn had problems with its antiquated signalling systems from the 1970s in the early part of the millenium – a complete upgrade was necessary because some stations burned due to short circuits. They had to close it down on weekends and at night for maintenance because no way to replace a system used by the suburbs to get to work during the week. Then you have the electrical systems in the stations, and the fire protection systems and fire exits inside the stations – full upgrade was necessary there as well. 5+ years of work.

      4) The finger-pointing and unclear real technical situation with the MRT in my view necessitates a total shutdown and evaluation of what is damaged, then fix it and make sure operation and maintenance are better defined. Circumstantial evidence so far points to Sumitomo and MRTC not having taken care of their homework before, and the system may still have run well until 2012, but was already rotting from inside – the botched deal of Vitangcol and uncle did not make things any better 2012-2015.

      5) BRTs have the additional advantage of less complexity. It is a less advanced system, the capacity is slightly lower, but put in DOST Roadtrain for example then you might not have that less capacity. No rails, no signalling, no complex electrical transmission to take care of. Seems that before the short circuit on January 8, Meralco provided fluctuating voltage, something that always was common in the Philippines. Train systems are highly sensitive to that. Too late to make MRT diesel-based because Buendia and Ayala stations had to be underground. Another possibility which I would look into while MRT is shut down is to replace the metal rails of the MRT with DOST AGT concrete rails and make the DOST AGT (which has rubber wheels, easier to maintain and procure as well) run on the existing infrastructure already there.

      LRT is older but seems to run relatively smoothly – or is it just not that much in focus? LRT2 is very modern and higher capacity than MRT3, absurdly. Seems that LRTA did a better job of handling their system. Maybe removing MRTC and giving everything to LRTA after overhaul is an option – I think it has already been considered. Operating contracts should have buy-out and exit clauses, especially in case of negligence or unfulfilled service levels. Could be PPP has learned from these lessons.

      A BRT on C-6 could also be an option of EDSA is too narrow for a Instanbul type BRT in the middle – which is efficient because own lanes and bus stops in the middle. You can have several private operators run because unlike some BRTs no modified bus models needed, just drive on the left and load/unload on the right.

      Max-flow/min-cut theory is important in this regard – maximum flow in any network (transport, digital) is equal to the capacity of the largest bottleneck or min-cut.

  • http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Nation&title=maintenance-provider-denies-sabotage-in-mrt-breakdown&id=121290

    THE METRO Rail Transit Line 3’s (MRT-3) German maintenance provider denied allegations of a “sabotage” after the train broke down last Friday, saying the rolling stocks and signaling system are now “obsolete.”..

    “We are being harassed. There are silly notions and conclusions of sabotage and I’m including that in the supplementals [for the graft case],” SBI-CBT’s Mr. Bacar said.

    Last month, he filed graft charges before the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon against Mr. Buenafe, Transportation Undersecretary Edwin Lopez and three other MRT officials for allegedly not paying for the group’s services in full.

    The Transportation department had hired seven different subcontractors to handle the train line for six months. During the transition period last week, the agency extended the contracts for another month — except that of SBI-CBT’s…

    Mr. Bacar said these components are now “definitely obsolete” and it will take six months to one year for the major spare parts to be ordered.

    This could be true given that the maintenance of the system was probably neglected over several administrations.

    It is a bit strange for the MRT-3 general manager (Mr. Buenafe) to publicly accuse a subcontractor of sabotage. Neutral pros should I think be hired to evaluate the condition of the system.

    Schunk Bahn-Industrietechnik are also pros of course. They deal with similar systems in London, New York and Madrid among others as I have found out. Just like Fraport manages airports worldwide.

    • Since GM Buenafe plans to seek assistance of the NBI, he might as well go straight to the DOJ, he might be facing a damage suit

      • Schunk is like I noted active worldwide. They have a reputation to lose as a globally reknowned company.

        As if Fraport/NAIA3 wasn’t enough of a lesson. This could even be worse. Tanim-bala like methods against international firms?

        • For this to reach Wallace, you can comment on his latest article and link this.
          That is if he reads his comment section.

          • Wallace is not too important for me. I focused on the project and technical aspect more because I see myself as being more competent in that regard.

            As for contracts, it all isn’t that simple. I usually am a subcontractor in my IT projects, and let the main contractor handle the contracts with end customers.

            The best practice in dealing with disagreements is usually not to publicize them but to find a compromise. Because each side will usually have some fault.

            The moment you go public it is basically like a couple going to a divorce lawyer instead of quarreling in the bedroom. Not in the kitchen there are knives there…

            As for MRT: there is in my view too little local experience in handling a system like that – LRTA might have it though. Better get some experienced consultants.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>