10 3.0. INFERENCES AND ANALYSIS The rail travel in the Coastal belt from Colombo to Matara is about 32% of the total passenger traffic. The congestion on the roads is very heavy in the suburbs of Colombo and within the City limits. The study on change of patterns and present trends in the interaction of public transport, revealed the problems, deficiencies and limitations encountered and these have been analysed in the following paragraphs. 3.1 Existing Traffic The existing traffic vehicular volumes over the A2 highway varies with the distance from Colombo. From the studies done for the Southern transport corridor project the following pattern is observed, fig.3.1(a) (Appendix 11). (a) Over 40,000 v.p.d. on the approaches to Colombo (bi Up to 15,000 v.p.d. as far as Kalutara {cL Between 6500 and 10,000 v.p.d. as far as Galle. (di Around 4500 - 5000 v.p.d. beyond Galle. It is also noted that higher volumes are observed locally in the vicinity of urban areas, fig 3.1(b) (Appendix 11). The overall journey time to Matara for a car is 3 hr. 45 min while for express bus is 4 hrs. 30 min. The average rural road speed of around 40 kph up to Aluthgama and 50-60 kph beyond is observed however in urban areas such as Panadura, Aluthgama, Ambalangoda, Hikkaduwa and Galle the speed is reduced further. In some of these towns such as, Panadura, Ambalangoda, and Galle although by passes have been constructed, their purposes have been since lost, due to permitting commercial activities to flourish on either side. See fig 3.2.(Appendix 11) The accidents encountered on this road per month and the traffic per day is given in fig. 3.3 (Appendix 11) 3.2 Anticipated Traffic Growth Based on recent growth trends it is anticipated that traffic demand will increase by year 2007,in the following manner. These volumes of traffic will substantially reduce speeds in the suburbs and in the City limits. See fig.3.4 and fig 3.5_( Appendix 11) (a) 8000-12000 v.p.d. beyond Galle. (b) 12000-20000 v.p.d. section north of Galle. (c) 20000-25000 v.p.d. section north of Kalutara. (d) 60000 v.p.d. on the approaches of Colombo. 11 3.3 Analysis 3.3.1 Regional Gross Domestic Product Regression analysis reveals with increase in RGDP there is no significant increase in rail demand while any increases get diverted to buses. ;.!tKough travel times of rail during peak hours is less. The main reason for this phenomenon ' Muld be attributed, for the period during which the regression analysis was done (i.e.) 4990-1997>therewasthardly:any investment to; improve the rail services to capture any additional traffic. The rail ways. main, focus, and . concern has been so far to retain'the existing services rather than to expand the services. Hence the 'X' coefficient observed in the regression analysis does not indicaterthe impact of an improvement and is only a measure of J the 'existing .service levels; refer, table. 3.1.(Appendix 1). The regression analysis reveals that the increase in bus fares too does not give an appreciable shift of passengers to rail and there is no significant price elasticity for buses at present.level of rail service. The following inferences are made. (a)Increase in RGDP does not reveal a significant increase in the rail demand. (b)Increase in bus fares too does not reveal an appreciable modal shift towards the rail. 3.3.2 Operational Delays of Trains Although presently rail is running its optimum capacity during peak hours, the failure to increase capacity, operate at higher frequencies, improve reliability, punctuality and comfort are reflected in the period for which regression analysis has been done. It is noted that during the period 1990-1997, delays too have occured due to derailments, speed restrictions due to weak rails, sleepers and inadequate ballast, track improvements and maintenance work, loco failures, inadequacy of power sets for commuter service, significant loss of time at stations due to difficulties encountered in entraining and detraining due to inadequate capacity. Due to the above deficiencies it has been difficult to keep to the schedules, which results in alteration of booked crossings and delays being reflected to more trains. From the graph in table 3.1 it is seen although demand for buses have increased over the years, the rail demand remains constant. This means reduction in bus passenger km. observed in 1997 is attributed to transfer of passengers to private road transport. A summary of reasons why passengers are not attracted to train travel; (a) Delays due to weak track, loco failures, and cancellations without notice in lieu of derailments. (b) Inadequate capacity. Hence a formidable transfer of bus passengers to private road transport is noted. 3.3.3 Capacity From passenger statistics for both bus and rail, it is evident that the true potential of the rail is not realised. During peak hours from the results of the passenger count it is revealed that each carriage of a train takes around 280-300 people which is around 2.0 times more than its designed capacity with standing accomodation, refer tables 3.2 and 3.3.(Appendix 1) On the other hand the train km on Coast line railway is substantially less than the buses from the passenger statistics available (refer table3.4) it could be disclosed that number of passengers 12 carried per operated km in the case of rail is 27.43 and in the case of buses is only 0.223 for 1996 while it is 24 and 0.223 respectively for 1997. From above there is evidence to show that the buses have come to a saturated level of overcrowding and passengers do not want to risk their safety by further overcrowding. On the other hand passengers prefer to overcrowd in trains rather than in busses. This may be because the journey time in trains is comparatively less than in buses and the duration that passenger need be uncomfortable is less. In general the number of passengers travelled by rail has increased with the increase in operated kilometers, except 1994 which has become unusual may be due to general elections and the curfew imposed for a few days, where operated route km. have been less than the previous year. From above, following inferences are made; (a) The rail carries a higher number of passengers per operated km than the buses. (b) The journey times in trains are much less than in the buses during peak hours. Table 3.4. Train Bus Km No.of Passengers No.of Passengers Passengers per Km Train Bus Train km Bus km 1991 4951 - 104955 - 21.20 1992 5107 769846 106896 191166 20.93 0.24 1993 5196 875397 119397 257534 22.98 0.29 1994 4665 1083754 132182 293380 28.33 0.27 1995 4764 904508 129085 195147 27.10 0.22 1996 4781 1135243 131181 257201 27.43 0.22 1997 5618 819614 135117 181932 24.05 0.22 The number of passengers transported per bus km has remained static over the past three years, which means the number of busses serving the commuters have adjusted itself with the demand or since the passengers do not risk overcrowding further they have opted to other modes of transport for eg. motor cycles, vans or the train. The railway on the other hand has increased the number of kilometers operated in 1997 to a significant 5618 km/day from 4781 km/day in 1996. This is due to rescheduling some of the Coast line commuter trains in 1997 and operating additional two trains. 3.3.4 Fares From the regression analysis, even with an increase in bus fares over and above train fares there is no significant shift towards rail taking into consideration the present level of service offered by rail, with a limited investment on infrastructure and rolling stock. Further with the increase in regional gross domestic product too the shift towards the bus is much more than the rail although rail is much faster during peak hours. The reasons for this may be that rail has not contributed much to Urbanization and Industrialization and the fact that more people 13 opt to use a single mode of transport for their convenience even though they have to spend marginally more time. See fig 3.5(a)Appendixl 1, the present locations of comparative urban hierarchical strength. From above it is observed that marginal reduction in time of travel and fares are not decisive factors in selecting a mode. People opt for their convenience, and prefer a reliable and a punctual alternative. 3.3.5 Speed Further railway has failed to increase its speed of 80 Km/hr for the last 40 years or so. Although presently the train is faster than the bus fig 3.6(Appendix 1 l),this time difference is very marginal and is not significantly appreciable to attract more passengers to travel by rail. This is again because majority of rail commuters have to depend on another mode of transport at the commencement and destination of their journeys. It could be concluded that it is essential that railway improves on its operational speeds, frequency and punctuality if it is to attract more passengers in the future. 3.3.6 Operating Costs Table 3.5 Train Km/day Bus Km/day Total Operating Total Operating cost of Train cost of Busses Rs Rs 1991 4951 - 891180 - 1992 5107 769846 919260 20,785842 1993 5196 875397 935280 23,635719 1994 4665 1083754 839700 29,261358 1995 4764 904508 857520 24,421716 1996 4781 1135243 860580 " 30.651561 1997 5618 819614 1011240 22,129578 Operating cost per train Km - Rs.