Singapore Mass Rapid Transit tweeted on Monday (13 February) morning during rush hour that its North-South Line (NSL) was experiencing a train fault.
Commuters were then asked to add 20 minutes travelling time from Jurong East to Ang Mo Kio towards Marina South Pier.
smrt1
It said that free regular bus was available between Woodlands and Yishun in both direction, noting that the fault occurred at Admiralty. smrt2
SMRT then estimated that the service would resume to its normal speed at 8.25am.smrt3
At around 7.50am, it tweeted that the trains service had resume. However, it noted that the trains were travelling at a slower speedsmrt4
Commuters were complaining as last Friday, the line also experienced the disruption during peak hours.
SmooshiMooshi wrote that he spent 40 minutes at Bukit Batok.
Danial wrote that the train’s door at Jurong East did not close for ten minutes.
Queen of Craps asked SMRT to hold its announcement in English as not everyone understands Mandarin.
Ramu wrote that the train did not move for 30 minutes straight.
Rise and fallen wrote that the Government should impose penalties to SMRT for every fault like it did to the telcos.
J4w4d asked SMRT why the train towards Jurong East were also affected as he changed direction but the trains were also delayed.
Che Lun Bing asked the same question with J4w4d, adding that there was an announcement within the train about the delay.
Many commuters posted pictures of the crowds inside the stations.
nsl1 nsl2          nsl4 nsl5 nsl6 nsl7 nsl8 nsl9 nsl10nsl11 nsl12 nsl13 nsl14 nsl15  nsl17 nsl18 nsl19 nsl20nsl25 nsl24 nsl23 nsl22 nsl29 nsl28 nsl27 nsl26

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

PAP elitist, don’t feel for the people – Ngiam Tong Dow

The following is an extract of the transcripts of an interview held…

谁是2018年国会“缺席王”?

当过父母家长的,都会敦促孩子上学表现,包括孩子们有没有乖乖上学,如果孩子被发现逃学影响学业,免不了要教训一顿。 而身为百姓父母官、人民选出的代议士,他们的表现绩效也有迹可循。感谢本社英语站同事,从国会记录中整理议员们2018年的国会出席和缺席率。在去年,国会共召开32次会议: 1月:三次 2月:五次 3月:九次 4月:无 5月:六次 6月:无 7月:三次 8月:一次 9月:一次 10月:二次…

【舆论】集选区制度形同“买一送一配套”

日前,荣誉国务资政吴作栋在接受《海峡时报》专访时,捍卫集选区和市镇理事会制度,也认为这些都是有助我国政治体制的“稳定器”。 对此工人党前非选区议员余振忠,也提醒如今集选区制度也成了行动党的双刃剑,一旦在野党团队更为强大,有关集选区就成了在野党堡垒区,行动党不容易夺回。 再者,余振忠也强调,若要新加坡有真正的”稳定器“,那么就应确保集选区和市镇会的交接工作,都是负责任、不偏袒的。 事实上,除了余振忠的上述分析,集选区另一备受争议的要点,正是减少选民的选择权益。 在集选区,朝野政党都是以团队形式上阵,“选民是选择一组配套,而不是选择单一的候选人。”即使团队中一些候选人选民不需要,但要么投选整支团队,要么拉倒。 再者,一些较不具备素质的候选人,也大可在民望较高候选人的庇护下,成功跻身国会。 就拿最近选举“林绍权”风波来说吧。若不是林绍权主动在提名日前提辞呈不参选,裕廊集选区选民可能面对一种两难处境:投选更有民望和胜算的尚达曼,与此同时,还“附送”一个选民们原本就不需要的林绍权。这不是让选民们难做吗? 至于副总理王瑞杰最后一分钟移师东海岸集选区,他曾解释是因为担心东海岸在原议员林瑞生和李奕贤退位后,不忍后续无人才转战于此。 除了王瑞杰外,行动党在该区其他候选人还包括国防部兼外交部高级政务部长孟理齐博士、陈舜娘和陈慧玲,以及新人陈杰豪。 然而这一举动,亦可视作要保障东海岸选票的策略,必须派“强人”驻守。但与此同时,是否选民只是因为要投选王瑞杰,才在该区给予行动党委托呢?那么为何要纳税人承担和支付更多议员的薪资?集选区真的有更好地反映选民的实际选择吗?