ALL consolidated SMRT/NEL/KT.. simisai BREAKDOWNS here!

[Wishcumstrue]

instead of resorting to argumentum ad hominem, why are you not considering the facts of the situation, including LTA's official response to the news? It seems to me that the HKG report is fairer than your focus on their use of the term "secret" and their motives.

 

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"^[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

 

 

oh. Just as a tabloid (or any news agency) is trying to gain readership, are you trying to clock posts or troll other forumers?

 

bye for now.

 

Let's agree to disagree.

 

If IYV consider me "trolling", you are welcome to ignore my postings.  Is that difficult ?

[Wishcumstrue]

Hai... what I have been trying very hard to say is this: the foreign media can have their objective to stir extreme right wing sentiments against China, for all I care.

 

If the defects (an acknowledged fact) hasn't happened and the shipping back of the trains hasn't happened, secretly or not secretly, no one will be able to make a story out of it.

 

My contention is that since it has happened, why hasn't LTA told the public? This question will have nothing to do with foreign politics.

 

My point exactly... this doesn't change the facts. Assuming there IS foreign intervention, does that mean therefore we cannot question LTA?

 

I would certainly be less suspicious of  FartWire (*typo intended* ) real intention if it hadn't clearly attempt to hype up and sensationalist in its reporting . If its founders want their young enterprise to be regarded as respected news provider in the field of  "investigative journalism", why don't they even bother to send a single reporter and ask for an interviewer with a LTA official regarding the defective trains and how it was handled ?

 

Isn't that what its founder promised to do with all those crowdfunded $ ?

"...A truly independent, impartial, and nonpartisan news..."

[Alheych]

I would certainly be less suspicious of  FartWire (*typo intended* ) real intention if it hadn't clearly attempt to hype up and sensationalist in its reporting . If its founders want their young enterprise to be regarded as respected news provider in the field of  "investigative journalism", why don't they even bother to send a single reporter and ask for an interviewer with a LTA official regarding the defective trains and how it was handled ?

 

Isn't that what its founder promised to do with all those crowdfunded $ ?

"...A truly independent, impartial, and nonpartisan news..."

 

Assuming that they are hyping it up by calling it a secret.

 

Assuming that they are sensationalising the story by not verifying with LTA.

 

Assuming that they are political in wanting HK-ers to protest against China products.

 

Assuming that the trains were not returned in secret but just as part of a normal process.

 

Does that mean that the public is precluded from questioning LTA on why it didn't inform the public all along?

 

We are now questioning LTA. Not Factwire. If the facts on which LTA is being questioned is disagreed by LTA, then ok, we suspend our questions and verify the Factwire claims first. But we haven't even talk about the falsification of train performance data yet. We are talking about the return of the trains, which LTA has already admitted to. Why can't we question LTA on that?

Edited July 8, 2016 by Alheych

[Porker]

Assuming they are hyping it up by calling it a secret.

 

Assuming that they are sensationalising the story by not verifying with LTA.

 

Assuming that they are political in wanting HK-ers to protest against China products.

 

Assuming that the trains were not returned in secret but just as part of a normal process.

 

Does that mean that the public is precluded from questioning LTA on why it didn't inform the public all along?

 

Props to you for your patience 

[Fcw75]

Heard that SMRT will stop buying the trains from Qingdao Sifang.

 

Instead they will now buy from

 

Zhende Chibai.

[Wishcumstrue]

U forgot to mention that HK govt knows about the hairline crack a year ago but HK MTR still buys from the same contractor.

 

Maybe you can also tell us about the pc of article on TaiShan nuclear power plant.

 

I believe you are relying on another FartWire report (5 July) which it based on several emails from unknown "government" sources that were allegedly send to HK gov during the 1st half of 2015 claiming Singapore has added "thousands of brackets" to the defective models as "temporary measure".

Source: https://www.factwire.news/en/HK-Government-Received-Complaints-of-Singapore-Train-Cracking-in-Early-2015.html

 

 

LTA responded to that FartWire's report on 7 July

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/no-brackets-added-to/2938818.html

SINGAPORE: The Land Transport Authority (LTA) on Thursday (Jul 7) refuted a report by Hong Kong-based media outlet FactWire suggesting that the cracks found in 26 of the 35 trains delivered to SMRT in 2013 affected the structural integrity of the trains.

 

Maybe we should be asking the question - From whom did Factwire got those emails and if it had done duel-diligence in their source verification before publishing those emails...Once that is clear , then we start talking about nuclear power plants construction.

 

 

 

Edit:

btw Another poster also mentioned below email reported by FartWire, saying this overseas source as "legit"...

...but on what basis ? I don't know. I only know so far FartWire editor hadn't defended against LTA's response.

http://www.mycarforum.com/topic/2674920-all-consolidated-smrtnelktm-simisai-breakdowns-here/?p=5873215

 

I think it is high time that FactWire sent their investigative team back to Singapore (minus the drone) and request for an interview with LTA.

 

 

 

Edited July 8, 2016 by Wishcumstrue

[Shibadog]

LOL an anonymous prick disliked my reply and commented "why so f**king defensive?"

 

how am I being defensive?

pls go check a dicktionary  for the meaning of "defensive"

 

and using  vulgarities ? no intelligent  input?

[Wishcumstrue]

In Singapore, if nvr announce to ppl, it means ppl no need to know.

 

In HK, if nvr announce to ppl, it is a secret.

 

U must understand the cultural difference.

 

Well...looking at how HK's growing "culture" of indifference, defiance, xenophobia and insecurity. ....I certainly would NOT prefer we go down that same path.

 

 

身在福中不知福

[Wishcumstrue]

Assuming that they are hyping it up by calling it a secret.

 

Assuming that they are sensationalising the story by not verifying with LTA.

 

Assuming that they are political in wanting HK-ers to protest against China products.

 

Assuming that the trains were not returned in secret but just as part of a normal process.

 

Does that mean that the public is precluded from questioning LTA on why it didn't inform the public all along?

 

We are now questioning LTA. Not Factwire. If the facts on which LTA is being questioned is disagreed by LTA, then ok, we suspend our questions and verify the Factwire claims first. But we haven't even talk about the falsification of train performance data yet. We are talking about the return of the trains, which LTA has already admitted to. Why can't we question LTA on that?

 

I already state my position on those comments in red, esp about an official answer by LTA, if not KBW himself:

http://www.mycarforum.com/topic/2674920-all-consolidated-smrtnelktm-simisai-breakdowns-here/?p=5872413

 

Notice in all those 4 assumptions you listed,  I have yet to see anyone defending FartWire report by claiming it isn't politically motivated nor has any unsaid agenda.

[Kusje]

I already state my position on those comments in red, esp about an official answer by LTA, if not KBW himself:

http://www.mycarforum.com/topic/2674920-all-consolidated-smrtnelktm-simisai-breakdowns-here/?p=5872413

 

Notice in all those 4 assumptions you listed,  I have yet to see anyone defending FartWire report by claiming it isn't politically motivated nor has any unsaid agenda.

 

As long as their agenda has nothing to do with attacking Singapore's interest, why should we care?

 

According to your suspected agenda, the Singapore govt is collateral damage from their expose and Singapore citizens are the unintended beneficiaries.

Edited July 8, 2016 by Kusje

[Wishcumstrue]

As long as their agenda has nothing to do with attacking Singapore's interest, why should we care?

 

According to your suspected agenda, the Singapore govt is collateral damage from their expose and Singapore citizens are the unintended beneficiaries.

 

We should because FartWire break that basic 101-rule when comes to journalism - Able to substantial your source reliability ,provide views from BOTH sides of the story and, most importantly, able to practice editorial objectivity  without the need to turn to tabloid-ish news reporting.

 

We know how HK media is - free, open, competitive and controversial -That's their choice, and perhaps one form of mess entertainment.

 

But if foreign media or news agencies starts to get involve with Singapore's domestic affairs and worst making accusations of "secret" operation while doing their own "secret" act by illegally flying drones over our restricted zones...well, you get the idea.

 

So, I am surprised you consider FartWire's behavior as "beneficial" to Singaporean ?!

Bro...I hope you aren't the same group of people who used to hip praise on TRS and its stories as gospels..

Edited July 8, 2016 by Wishcumstrue

[Volvobrick]

No waves without wind!

Factwire's nice aerial footage would keep LTA and SMRT on their toes for a while.  Exposure of secrets is great to keep the system clean.

 

LTA has yet to cum clean on why awarding a second contract to the same company when it already knew the first batch of trains had problem.

 

It is like buying another VW with problematic DSG when your first one VW is still in the workshop.

 

Simple question deserves simple answer.

[Yewheng]

Lucky smrt had been on service since 1980s and have a lot of train in service. So they could still use existing train and perhaps delay retirement for some older train.

 

Imagine if it is a newly built train line and there are no existing train to play around with. New train come and 3/4 cannot be used and need to send back to manufacture to rectify the defects. The train operation will be greatly affected. We are not talking a few months it's a few years.

 

So hopefully lta learnt a big lesson and for the future train project, they will be extra careful regarding the ordering of trains.

Edited July 8, 2016 by Yewheng

[Yewheng]

Assuming that they are hyping it up by calling it a secret.

 

Assuming that they are sensationalising the story by not verifying with LTA.

 

Assuming that they are political in wanting HK-ers to protest against China products.

 

Assuming that the trains were not returned in secret but just as part of a normal process.

 

Does that mean that the public is precluded from questioning LTA on why it didn't inform the public all along?

 

We are now questioning LTA. Not Factwire. If the facts on which LTA is being questioned is disagreed by LTA, then ok, we suspend our questions and verify the Factwire claims first. But we haven't even talk about the falsification of train performance data yet. We are talking about the return of the trains, which LTA has already admitted to. Why can't we question LTA on that?

Minewhile...

 

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/ahtc-seeks-clarification/2941594.html?cid=fbcna

 

They are wasting resources arguing about handover of town council for the account audit for duplicate work.

 

So to them this is a lot more serious then the train defects that affected 3/4 of the new order.. Sigh..

 

This time WP at big fault for what is reported in the news. Darn waste tax payers money. No matter which party run the town council there is only one conclusion. For benefit of own party be it pap or other opposition party. End up more resources is wasted for all these stupid nonsense. If we have smaller government less resources will be wasted. No need see so much nonsense.

Edited July 9, 2016 by Yewheng

[Maxus-MIFA9]

I already state my position on those comments in red, esp about an official answer by LTA, if not KBW himself:

http://www.mycarforum.com/topic/2674920-all-consolidated-smrtnelktm-simisai-breakdowns-here/?p=5872413

 

Notice in all those 4 assumptions you listed,  I have yet to see anyone defending FartWire report by claiming it isn't politically motivated nor has any unsaid agenda.

 

No Singaporean will defend Factwire cos we are we and they are they.....  . We don't go rioting or camping-out parliament house for weeks or months.

 

We thanks them for bringing the matter up and LTA LLST have to make it known to public that there was such things as trains being send back to the manufacturer due to cracks.

 

Some questions need to be answered:

 

If LTA deem that the cracks are non safety issue, why send them back ? ( mean LTA doubt our very own Bishan Workshop engineers & mechanics to do the repairs ? )

 

Of the 35 brought, 26 send back deem not serious ?

 

Knowingly that the first batch of trains got faults, Why buy from same manufacturer again for second batch ? (just because of discount ?)

 

 

I had been taught in my Workplace Safety Courses that Singapore used to follow American Safety Standard code, then we followed the British Standard code and recent years we added the European & Japanese Standard code which were set at a very high safety standard.

 

We even came out with our very own Singapore Safety Standard code which comprised mostly of all the above.

 

With LTA managing the trains could overlook such Safety Standard code and order a second batch of trains again from the same manufacturer, then we should throw away our Singapore Standard code.

 

As a big organisation that ferrying few hundred thousand of passengers daily, they should set an example of maintaining the highest Standard code in due respect to passengers safety, their very own maintenance workers, technicians & engineers safety and to ensure the best quality trains are put to service.

 

If the reports are true and made known only recently, then we are duped since 2011. Even so if it were minor cases in 2011, then how to explain from 2013 onwards...  '

 

 

 

My personal opinion on this matters ...

[Sabian]

No waves without wind!

 

Factwire's nice aerial footage would keep LTA and SMRT on their toes for a while.  Exposure of secrets is great to keep the system clean.

 

LTA has yet to cum clean on why awarding a second contract to the same company when it already knew the first batch of trains had problem.

 

It is like buying another VW with problematic DSG when your first one VW is still in the workshop.

 

Simple question deserves simple answer.

Precisely. Jaguar owners also have the same approach mah. If not problematic then no need to buy another. 

[Sosaria]

...

Some questions need to be answered:

 

If LTA deem that the cracks are non safety issue, why send them back ? ( mean LTA doubt our very own Bishan Workshop engineers & mechanics to do the repairs ? )

...

..

 

If I'm not mistaken, read that the train body structure has to be re-cast, i.e. completely new, by the japanese partner company, with the prc company relegated to doing only the re-assembly.

 

It's not just mere replacement of a small structural part, such major works can only be done at the manufacturer's factory. And this also explains the long time-line for completion of the work.

[Alheych]

I already state my position on those comments in red, esp about an official answer by LTA, if not KBW himself:

http://www.mycarforum.com/topic/2674920-all-consolidated-smrtnelktm-simisai-breakdowns-here/?p=5872413

 

Notice in all those 4 assumptions you listed,  I have yet to see anyone defending FartWire report by claiming it isn't politically motivated nor has any unsaid agenda.

 

So you believe that if Wife is cheating on Husband, and Husband (ok) Unrelated Stranger exposes the affair by hacking Wife's phone when he is not supposed to, the issue of hacking the phone is infinitely more important and Husband must confront Unrelated Stranger first, even if Wife has already admitted to cheating?

 

I rest my case, because I am obviously a different kind of person from you. 

 

@Porker, I also run out of patience liao.