Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan reiterated yesterday that the hairline cracks found on 26 China- assembled trains were not a safety risk, and withdrawing them from service for rectifications did not affect capacity levels on the North- South and East-West lines.
This was why the defects – brought to light last month by Hong Kong media outfit FactWire – were not publicised, he said in Parliament in response to questions from MPs.
He added that the Japanese-Chinese consortium that supplied the trains, Kawasaki-Sifang, won subsequent tenders fairly and had displayed exemplary behaviour in shipping the trains back to China to have their car bodies replaced – at its own expense.
The warranty period on the car bodies and bolster parts was also reset for five years – one year for defective liability and another four years of extended warranty, he said.
Hairline cracks were found in 2013 – some two years after the trains went into service – on the bolsters, an aluminium alloy structure under the train carriages that are welded to the car bodies.
The cracks developed due to defects in the manufacturing process that resulted in impurities being introduced in the aluminium.
Since July 2014, the trains have been sent to Qingdao progressively to be fixed, and five trains have gone through the rectifications. One train is currently in Qingdao, with the other 20 to be rectified by 2019.
“The concern about the defects had thus been resolved when we called the tender for more trains in 2014 and 2015,” he told the House.
“Our train tenders have always been conducted in an open and transparent manner, and are based objectively on quality and price assessments,” Mr Khaw said, recapitulating points he made to the media last month.
In 2009, Kawasaki-Sifang was awarded an initial $368 million contract to supply 22 new trains for the North-South and East-West lines, with more trains purchased later.
It continued to win more orders, including a $749 million contract in 2014 to supply 91 four-car trains for the upcoming Thomson-East Coast Line.
In reply to Non-Constituency MP Dennis Tan’s question about whether cracks were found on other train models, Mr Khaw said they were also discovered last year on the underframe of train cars used on the Bukit Panjang LRT.
He said that manufacturer Bombardier inspected the defects and found the trains safe to operate.
The cracks on the 19 trains are being welded here, Mr Khaw said. To date, 12 trains have been rectified, with the rest to be fixed by October.
Khaw addresses key issues raised
The cracks found on China-made MRT trains came under scrutiny in Parliament yesterday, with eight MPs questioning Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan on the issue. Here are the key points:
WHY WAS THE ISSUE NOT MADE PUBLIC EARLIER?
Mr Sitoh Yih Pin (Potong Pasir) asked why the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and SMRT did not inform the public about cracks on the bolster – an aluminium alloy structure under the train carriage – after they were discovered in July 2013, or the subsequent decision to ship them back to China for repairs.
Mr Khaw said the LTA did not publicise the hairline cracks for three reasons:
• There was no safety risk to commuters.
• Manufacturer Kawasaki-Sifang took immediate and full responsibility for the defects and said it would pay for all replacement works, including replacing the bolsters with a new set made in Japan and welding them to new car bodies in China.
• The manufacturer accepted LTA’s replacement work schedule, which meant that train services and capacity levels are not affected by the incident.
The LTA would have publicised the defects if any of these factors had not been satisfactorily dealt with, said Mr Khaw.
WAS THERE A SAFETY RISK?
Non-Constituency MP Daniel Goh asked if the defects not being “safety-critical” meant they pose zero safety risks for commuters.
Mr Khaw said the trains can take more than three times the maximum stress they may experience during operations, and the cracks have not reduced this safety margin. An independent assessor, TUV Rheinland, confirmed that the trains are entirely safe to operate.
WHAT DID TUV RHEINLAND FIND AND WILL ITS REPORT BE MADE PUBLIC?
Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang) asked about TUV Rheinland’s technical report. Mr Khaw said the consultant found that “an inherent defect” in certain batches of bolsters was the primary cause of the hairline cracks. The report will be published on LTA’s website if the firm agrees.
WHY DID KAWASAKI-SIFANG WIN FURTHER CONTRACTS FOR ADDITIONAL TRAINS?
Non-Constituency MP Dennis Tan asked about the consortium clinching subsequent orders for new trains. Mr Khaw said concerns about the defects had been resolved when tenders, which are based on quality and price assessments, were called.
“Kawasaki-Sifang won the subsequent tenders fairly,” he said.
WHAT IMPACT HAS THE ISSUE HAD ON THE MRT SYSTEM?
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied GRC) and Mr Sitoh asked if the issue has affected operations as well as plans to improve rail reliability and increase capacity.
Mr Khaw said 124 out of 140 trains for the North-South and East-West lines are put on service during peak hours. Only one train is sent back to China at a time, well within the standard 10 per cent buffer of trains for repairs, upgrading and standby. It does not affect the planned capacity expansion on these lines.
The Kawasaki-Sifang train incident has not affected the reliability of the system, as no train delays were caused by the bolsters’ hairline cracks, Mr Khaw added.
HOW LONG IS THE WARRANTY PERIOD FOR TRAINS?
Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang GRC) asked about the duration of warranty.
Mr Khaw said there is a defects liability of one year, then an extended warranty of four years.
This period is reset after the bolsters and car bodies are replaced, but the reset applies only to those train components.
WHY ARE THE BOLSTERS FROM JAPAN?
Mr Goh asked why the decision was made for bolsters to be supplied from Japan rather than China and if there is a confidence issue with train parts made in China.
Mr Khaw said the manufacturers had decided to use new bolsters from Japan, and his ministry had agreed. He said the first-generation Kawasaki trains are all on Japanese bolsters. “I don’t think we need to read anything more than that into this,” he said.
There were no cracks in those earlier trains.
This article was first published on Aug 17, 2016.
Get a copy of The Straits Times or go to straitstimes.com for more stories.
