[sustran] Re: DETERMINING MRT FARES

Prof S L Dhingra dhingra at civil.iitb.ernet.in
Mon Dec 6 00:39:32 JST 1999


I may correct the info' given by Mr Kishen Mehta.
The peak hour loads on Mumbai suburban (Mass Rapid) trains comprising
9 coaches is 4500 persons on Central railway line and 5400 persons on
western rly line against the capacity of 1700 persons (sitting +
standees). The peak hour load as rly jargons is more than super dense
crush load definitely very urgently needing augumented capacity preferably
by UG metro or elevated  Mass rapid rail corridors at network level and
not only for a single corridor. 

With warm compliments,
Sincerely,
dhingra
***********end of message*******************
* Dr S. L DHINGRA                          *
* Prof. of TRANSP. SYSTEMS ENGG. (TSE)     *
* HEAD, CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT       *
* INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY           * 
* POWAI,BOMBAY-400 076,INDIA               *
* VOICE:091-022-5767300/01(OFF)/8329(RES)  *
*               5777001(RES) Private       *
*               5782545 EXTN 7329/7300(Off)*
*		5786530  ..  7348(LAB)     *
*  			 ..    8329(RES)   *
* FAX :091-022-5767302/5783480             *
* GRAMS:TECHNOLOGY,BOMBY,INDIA             *
* TELEX:011-72313 IITB IN                  *
* EMAIL:dhingra at civil.iitb.ernet.in        *
*       dhingra at gemini.civil.iitb.ernet.in *
* URL:http://www.civil.iitb.ernet.in/      *
*     civil_people/faculty_dir/dhingra/    *
*     index.html                           * 
********************************************




On Sat, 4 Dec 1999, kisansbc at bom5 wrote:

> Dear Friends:
> 
> We have just received Ramon Fernandes III email of 03.2.99 on the builder's
> proposal to charge Php 44 equivalent to US$ 1.10 for single journey which
> President Estrada has reduced  to 0.85,.  The fare of   1.10 or even 0.85
> is prohibitive by any standards in the developing countries. The common
> man,
> in whose name project is planned and executed, would not be able to use it.
> Moreover Metro Manila would not be able to reduce trafic snarls in any case
> because the motor car owners would not change over to Metro and vehicle
> journeys would not  reduce.
> 
> We feel fairly convinced that public transport has invariably to be
> subsidised to ensure efficiency in urban areas and to reduce private
> vehicles.  The question remains as to who should subsidise and how? 
> In European cities and more particularly in London between Fifties and 
> Seventies, public road transport and commuter railway 
> services in cities were subsidised by the state-state or federal govt. 
> This was 
> considered a part of the welfare support to  citizens.  But this was not a 
> standard practice universally applied. Public transport udertakings devised
> peculiar practices in their respective areas of operation. In Mumbai,
> municipalised public road service-  BEST Undertaking-has the
> franchise of distributing electricity in a small part  of Mumbai while 
> it operates buses throughout Mumbai and neighbourhood. Its  earnings
>  in   electricity distributon  subsidises bus service providing 4.5 to 5
> million 
> journeys dily, by far the largest service in the world. The
> fares range from Rs.2 for 1.6 km distance upto Rs.11-12 for 30 km journey
> (Rs 43 is equivalent to US $ 1.00). Suburban railway system in Mumbai and
> extending to 30-50 km beyond  limits into suburban areas provide
> about 5 million accounting for 40% of daily  journeys provided by the
> Indian 
> Railways throughout India). Fares start at Rs 2 for the shortest stage. 
> Out of the four suburban rail services in Indian cities - Mumbai, Calcutta,
> 
> Chennai, and Delhi, Mumbai is the only one that earns profits. This is of 
> course possible through overcrowding. A railway train having 750 capacity 
> carries 2500 to 3500. Capacity of some trains is recently increased  by 
> increasing cmpartments from nine to twelve.Thus the railway service  is
> subsidised by commuters themselves through overcrowding and risky
> uncomfortable travel.Overcrowding is much more than we experienced in the
> Manila LRT.
> 
> The primary object of the commuting services-road or railway is to provide
> to the bulk of the citizens a safe, fast and direct facility to move for
> ensuring efficiency in urban conurbations. The fares have to be within the
> affordable capacity of the poorest of the poor urbanite. A two way journey
> cost in the Metro Star Express of Pho 88, the Manila Metro proposal or Pho
> 8, President Estrada's directive of Phs 68 works out at 45 and 35% of
> the minimum wage of 195. No citizen can afford to spend so high an amount
> on
> travel. Probably the 195 is not universal payment paid to all citizens.
> Sometimes it  is shared by the family of five.
> 
> We feel that there is no room for the BOT in public  transport like in many
> public amenities that the state is obliged to provide to  citizens.In the
> present case, the Metro Manila must cover its capital cost through malls or
> any other means.Even the erection of malls is at the public cost and 
> inconvenience so it is the citizens who bear the cost.
> 
> Where do we go from here? It is clear that the state should provide the
> basic services including transport. Either it can be through budgetary
> support or by taxing private vehicles which use  public faciliteis like
> roads and markets.  Vehicles cause crowding and pollution plus  delays 
> to public transport. They should be made to provide
> funds through charges to cover  total cost of road infrastructure as well
> as 
>  pollution and
> congestion taxes.Unfortunately the governments in the developing countries
> have adopted "motorisation"as a goal and giving all faciliteis to private
> vehicles an obligaton because mobility of private vehicles is treated as
> the requisite for  being accepted as modem. Multilateral funding agencies 
> like the World Bank, ADB  help the governments in giving all facilities to 
> private motor cars. This distorts national priorities. Common man continues
> 
> to suffer.Elevated roads in Manila are of no use to the common man 
> yet more and more are being pursued  and built.
> 
> Kisan Mehta
> President
> Save Bombay Committee
> 



More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list