Reader's response 2nd draft

In the article of Lee (2015), Lee reported that he believes the world’s most profitable system is Hong Kong Mass Transit Railway Corporation (MTRC). Lee (2017) complemented that Hong Kong passengers rarely experience train delay even during peak hours. It was cited that a small percentage of 0.1% Hong Kong passengers encounter train delay as compared to Singapore which stands at 4%. The high train frequency has helped to manage the crowd and provide a smoother transport experience. Investments of over HK$6 billion have been made on high maintenance, renewal and service improvements which kept the system operating efficiently together. The preserving, restoration and service enhancement on train system takes up about a third of MTRC's funds. Lastly, the system is being controlled by an Operation Control Centre to prevent any shortcomings and reacting to downtime efficiently with the use of the black “incident box”.

Based on the statistics presented, MTRC has invested a huge amount of 37 per cent of their revenue to its maintenance compared to Singapore’s SMRT which uses 19 per cent of its revenue. Lee (2017) believes that SMRT is under-investing on rail maintenance. I agree to a certain extend that the higher budget used by MTRC as compared to SMRT is reasonable and realistic. However, it also fails to study and discuss other aspect that may influence their expenditure. 

Firstly, I had the opportunity to experience both Hong Kong’s MTRC as well as Singapore’s SMRT train transport system. The MTRC system was founded in the year 1979 and eight years later, Singapore established SMRT. Possessing the upper hand of advancing eight years before Singapore, it was an eye opener to witness how MTRC train system is still well maintained and continuing holding high standard of cleanliness and efficiency. Thus, considering the maturity of MTRC’s railway system, the maintenance budget expenditure should definitely be heavily invested and higher than Singapore to ensure stability.

Secondly, having a larger scale of railway network system naturally contributes to the higher maintenance expenditure. Hong Kong is nearly twice the size of Singapore. Considering the size of both countries, MTRC is calculated to have a longer daily route length of 221km with all nine commuter lines as compared to SMRT’s combined length of 168km with all five main commuter lines. Therefore, I strongly believe that the size of the railway should be considered when making such comparison. Having more train stations and higher mileage travelled, it would eventually result in train’s wear and tear issue. If maintenance frequency is not sufficient, there will be an increase amount of trains breakdown and delay. Considering that MTRC has to have frequent maintenance work, it means that their maintenance budget will be higher than SMRT’s.

However, I agree that MTRC has performed exceptionally well as compared to SMRT. The statistic showed that the average breakdown of MTRC system was one in every 300,000 km travelled while SMRT clocked in more at one in every 137,000 km travelled. In my opinion, I feel that MTRC’s preventive maintenance has paid off. Having to walk the train tracks once in every three days and using ultrasonic technology aid them to detect faults before any faults occurs. SMRT can learn from MTRC to further reduce the amount of breakdowns occurring.