Baghdad plans $3bn subway

paulm17781

breakingnews.ie wrote:

Baghdad today announced plans to build a $3bn (€2.35bn) subway system to help cut pollution and ease traffic on the city’s chronically clogged streets.

Mayor Sabir al-Issawi said that Iraq’s cabinet has already earmarked funds for the project.

The subway would have two lines. One will run 11 miles from Shiite-dominated Sadr City in the east to the predominantly Sunni neighbourhood of Azamiyah in north Baghdad.

The second line will cover 13 miles and link mixed central Baghdad to the primarily Sunni western suburbs. Both lines will have 20 stations.

Sweet, a country that's been war torn. Suffered UN sanctions then was war torn several more times and is currently a total mess. Looks likely to get a Metro system before "The Celtic Tiger" does. Excellent. :rolleyes:

Irish and Proud

paulm17781 wrote: »

Sweet, a country that's been war torn. Suffered UN sanctions then was war torn several more times and is currently a total mess. Looks likely to get a Metro system before "The Celtic Tiger" does. Excellent. :rolleyes:

Come on mate!!! :(:(

Sure that's all US dosh... :pac::pac::pac:

Regards!

paulm17781

It says Iraq's cabinet has earmarked the funds. Also, the US is in a wee bit of a recession at the moment too, it's not just us. Iraq perhaps has oil money. None the less we had our own cash for years but instead we squandered it on consultant reports and bringing Prof. Mellis over here to tell us how (to use common sense) to build a metro system quickly and cheaply and now we have no Metro. Baghdad meanwhile will probably have one in two years.

BendiBus

It'll make a handy air raid shelter.

Aquavid

They would want to have pretty good security screening on that metro system.

I guess they are hoping that by the time it finally gets built, tensions have cooled.

Btw, a little Irish link, back in 1982 the Baghdad Passenger Transport Authority was the only operator other than CIE to buy the Shannon-built Bombardier double-decker.

Aquavid

godtabh

paulm17781 wrote: »

we have no Metro.

They have no Metro now. They have just announced it.

paulm17781 wrote: »

Baghdad meanwhile will probably have one in two years.

Thats laughable.

You reckon that they could build two lines 24 miles including the desing, tender nad build process in a war torn country that is still in conflict?

old boy

how long will it last, i recon the sucide bombers will be queing up to be the first to try to blow it to smithereens

paulm17781

Brilliant, you're here to argue for no reason.

kearnsr wrote: »

They have no Metro now. They have just announced it.

Yes, I'm aware they don't now. However they most likely will before we do.

kearnsr wrote: »

Thats laughable.

You have so much to share.

kearnsr wrote: »

You reckon that they could build two lines 24 miles including the desing, tender nad build process in a war torn country that is still in conflict?

I would near guarantee they have it running before us. Before you go on, Spain did two lines in what, 18 months? I would near guarantee Iraq (even with it's war) gets this built and finished before we do and we've been talking about it for how many years now? Oh yeah, 34.

Ham'nd'egger

Paul, while we are slow to get things done as a whole in Ireland it is worth noting that countries that are recovering after wars tend to be building from scratch and massive infrastructure projects tend to be easier to plan and to find companies willing to work on them. A city like Dublin or Edinburgh in the UK will find it harder as there is more physically in the way such as older landmarks and heritage. Many countries also don't have as readily accessible planning procedures and courts such as we have here that makes it easier for M3 or N11 style appeals that has marred major transport projects over the years.

paulm17781

Hamndegger wrote: »

Paul, while we are slow to get things done as a whole in Ireland it is worth noting that countries that are recovering after wars tend to be building from scratch and massive infrastructure projects tend to be easier to plan and to find companies willing to work on them. A city like Dublin or Edinburgh in the UK will find it harder as there is more physically in the way such as older landmarks and heritage. Many countries also don't have as readily accessible planning procedures and courts such as we have here that makes it easier for M3 or N11 style appeals that has marred major transport projects over the years.

I don't disagree with that, they have to do a major clean up of Baghdad and it gives them a lot of room to do what they need to. My point is really that a country that has been destroyed since 2003 and wasn't exactly a hot spot for 15 years before that is now talking about building a mass transport system. They are doing it with little or no economy yet we've been talking and talking like we always do about it and it is still looking unlikely here.

Schuhart

paulm17781 wrote: »

Sweet, a country that's been war torn. Suffered UN sanctions then was war torn several more times and is currently a total mess. Looks likely to get a Metro system before "The Celtic Tiger" does. Excellent. :rolleyes:

I think the whole problem with Iraq is that development has been far too Baghdad-centric. Its ludicrous that, in a country of 28 million, 7 million live in the Greater Baghdad area. This Metro will only make this problem worse.

A far more sensible idea would be a Western Rail Corridor between Ar Rutbah and Mosul. To people who would question if Iraq is too short on resources to afford such a railway, I would ask if they can afford not to. If they proceed with this Metro project there is a real danger that Iraq will tip into the sea, spilling all of their oil into Persian Gulf and causing an environmental catastrophe.

murphaph

Schuhart wrote: »

I think the whole problem with Iraq is that development has been far too Baghdad-centric. Its ludicrous that, in a country of 28 million, 7 million live in the Greater Baghdad area. This Metro will only make this problem worse.

A far more sensible idea would be a Western Rail Corridor between Ar Rutbah and Mosul. To people who would question if Iraq is too short on resources to afford such a railway, I would ask if they can afford not to. If they proceed with this Metro project there is a real danger that Iraq will tip into the sea, spilling all of their oil into Persian Gulf and causing an environmental catastrophe.

lol, classic.

Alun

paulm17781 wrote: »

Before you go on, Spain did two lines in what, 18 months?

Spain's approach to appropriating land needed for public projects like this tends to be somewhat more aggressive, shall we say, than what would be tolerated here though isn't it? Compensation seems to be a word that doesn't have any direct translation in Spanish, at least in government circles.

BluntGuy

Alun wrote: »

Spain's approach to appropriating land needed for public projects like this tends to be somewhat more aggressive, shall we say, than what would be tolerated here though isn't it? Compensation seems to be a word that doesn't have any direct translation in Spanish, at least in government circles.

"Indemnización" is the Spanish for "compensation"...

Doesn't sound all that friendly to me...

Amtmann

You'd be a brave man to use a subway in Baghdad.

Carawaystick

Metro de Sevilla started in 1999, hasn't opened yet according to wikipedia, due to open next month ( for a long time) like a longer version of man~ana

Metrobest

If anything a metro can be a safer system than buses, which have historically been more prone to suicide attacks.

The Iraqis may need to learn from the Israelis about security management. I've been to Israel and the security at transport interchanges is intense, but as there are few points of entry and exit at stations these can be controlled - the security works whatever one's opinion of the political situation there.

In congested Jerusalem work is progressing on a tram line inspired by the Luas. The trams will be almost identical to Dublin's - expect in Jerusalem they'll be bullet proof.

I read somewhere that the drivers were supposed to do training in Dublin but the Irish palestine solidarity group kicked up a fuss. Pity - I'm sure Tallaght would have been a good training ground for the Jerusalemites.

BrianD

Metrobest wrote: »

If anything a metro can be a safer system than buses, which have historically been more prone to suicide attacks.

The people of London and Madrid would disagree along with the folks in Tokyo.

In congested Jerusalem work is progressing on a tram line inspired by the Luas. The trams will be almost identical to Dublin's - expect in Jerusalem they'll be bullet proof.

Best of luck with that ... I hope they are learning from how not to do it rather than looking for inspiration. I suggest they look elsewhere in Europe for inspiration.

... I'm sure Tallaght would have been a good training ground for the Jerusalemites.

That's an unfair remark and a slur on the people of Tallaght. If they want a lesson on fare evasion they should take the green line. I believe the folks on that line believe that they don't have to both with fares like the people of Tallaght do.

Alun

BluntGuy wrote: »

"Indemnización" is the Spanish for "compensation"...

Doesn't sound all that friendly to me...

Well, yes, of course they have a word for it, but from what I can tell, in certain parts of Spain anyway, if the garden of your house is in the way of, say, a road that is considered essential for the general good of the community or some such phrase, they can just appropriate it and you can kiss any compensation goodbye.

I also understand that the French don't take any hostages in that regard either when planning routes for new TGV lines.

paulm17781

Alun wrote: »

Well, yes, of course they have a word for it, but from what I can tell, in certain parts of Spain anyway, if the garden of your house is in the way of, say, a road that is considered essential for the general good of the community or some such phrase, they can just appropriate it and you can kiss any compensation goodbye.

I also understand that the French don't take any hostages in that regard either when planning routes for new TGV lines.

This is how they get things done. They ignore petty nimby-ism and don't et one person stand in the way of development. I do wish our politicians had spines.

asdasd

This is how they get things done. They ignore petty nimby-ism and don't et one person stand in the way of development. I do wish our politicians had spines.

I doubt the accuracy of this statement with regards to the French. The French metro follows street lines because people own their property underground as well.

the US tends to just take stuff but their law is crap.

asdasd

I think the whole problem with Iraq is that development has been far too Baghdad-centric. Its ludicrous that, in a country of 28 million, 7 million live in the Greater Baghdad area. This Metro will only make this problem worse.

A far more sensible idea would be a Western Rail Corridor between Ar Rutbah and Mosul. To people who would question if Iraq is too short on resources to afford such a railway, I would ask if they can afford not to. If they proceed with this Metro project there is a real danger that Iraq will tip into the sea, spilling all of their oil into Persian Gulf and causing an environmental catastrophe.

I had to lol at the number of thanks this message got. Iraq is highly centralized. That tends to be the case in dictatorships. On the other hand the US and Germany ( and most democracies) are highly federalised.

so Ireland is as centralized ( or more so) than some shoddy ex-Middle Eastern dictatorship. And this is a source of pride :-)

(Any post war American withdrawal in Iraw would have to involve a decentralized solution, too, of course. )

Schuhart

asdasd wrote: »

I had to lol at the number of thanks this message got. Iraq is highly centralized. That tends to be the case in dictatorships. On the other hand the US and Germany ( and most democracies) are highly federalised.

so Ireland is as centralized ( or more so) than some shoddy ex-Middle Eastern dictatorship. And this is a source of pride :-)

I had to lol at the lack of logic in your reply, typical for the mindset I was parodying.

Firstly, you are confusing the word 'centralized' in the sense of power with 'centralized' in the form of population concentration. But that's not the main point.

The main point is that the US and Germany are much larger countries than Ireland. Ireland would actually be much smaller than the largest American states, so your comparison is invalid.

But I've a feeling you'll have trouble digesting this.

asdasd

Firstly, you are confusing the word 'centralized' in the sense of power with 'centralized' in the form of population concentration. But that's not the main point.

Nope I was not confusing the two. It makes sense for dictatorships to concentrate power, wealth and population. Can you think why?

Ireland would actually be much smaller than the largest American states, so your comparison is invalid.

In terms of population, of course it isnt. Can you think of some small federal countries that are long term democracies? good man.

But I've a feeling you'll have trouble digesting this.

As always. Crap is hard to digest.

murphaph

asdasd wrote: »

I had to lol at the number of thanks this message got. Iraq is highly centralized. That tends to be the case in dictatorships. On the other hand the US and Germany ( and most democracies) are highly federalised.

lol, Germany's population hasn't suddenly decentralised since a certain A. Hitler ran the show. In fact, the GDR had quite a dispersed population (East Berlin/Leipzig/Dresden all comparable population wise) despite being a communist dictatorship. Likewise-the UK is heavily London-centric, despite not being a communist dictatorship-you have no point to make in this regard I feel. Geography (eg Canada with pretty much everyone living along the 49th parallel) plays just as important a role in population dispertion as politics!

Schuhart

asdasd wrote: »

Nope I was not confusing the two. It makes sense for dictatorships to concentrate power, wealth and population. Can you think why?

I stand by my original statement and reject this blatant attempt to paper over the crack in yours. Dictators will centralise power. That's what dictatorship means. Population distribution, on the other hand, simply varies by country as murphaph points out.

asdasd wrote: »

In terms of population, of course it isnt. Can you think of some small federal countries that are long term democracies? good man.

Indeed. Now can you explain why you used two countries (US and Germany) as a point of comparison, given that Ireland has about one third of the population of the State of Bavaria?

asdasd wrote: »

As always. Crap is hard to digest.

Thank you for your capitulation.

donvito99

Metrobest wrote: »

If anything a metro can be a safer system than buses, which have historically been more prone to suicide attacks.

The Iraqis may need to learn from the Israelis about security management. I've been to Israel and the security at transport interchanges is intense, but as there are few points of entry and exit at stations these can be controlled - the security works whatever one's opinion of the political situation there.

In congested Jerusalem work is progressing on a tram line inspired by the Luas. The trams will be almost identical to Dublin's - expect in Jerusalem they'll be bullet proof.

I read somewhere that the drivers were supposed to do training in Dublin but the Irish palestine solidarity group kicked up a fuss. Pity - I'm sure Tallaght would have been a good training ground for the Jerusalemites.

That'll have changed after its opened, and dont think it'll ever get off the blocks at least for 5 or 6 more years.

donvito99

Metrobest wrote: »

If anything a metro can be a safer system than buses, which have historically been more prone to suicide attacks.

The Iraqis may need to learn from the Israelis about security management. I've been to Israel and the security at transport interchanges is intense, but as there are few points of entry and exit at stations these can be controlled - the security works whatever one's opinion of the political situation there.

In congested Jerusalem work is progressing on a tram line inspired by the Luas. The trams will be almost identical to Dublin's - expect in Jerusalem they'll be bullet proof.

I read somewhere that the drivers were supposed to do training in Dublin but the Irish palestine solidarity group kicked up a fuss. Pity - I'm sure Tallaght would have been a good training ground for the Jerusalemites.

We could train iraqi bus drivers, show them how to drive through Finglas on halloween, and see how many windows are left...

Victor

Guys, knock off the aggro.

Schuhart wrote: »

I think the whole problem with Iraq is that development has been far too Baghdad-centric. Its ludicrous that, in a country of 28 million, 7 million live in the Greater Baghdad area. This Metro will only make this problem worse.

You are of course, partially correct - compare modern day Baghdad to this map in 1944. http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/baghdad_1944.jpg

A far more sensible idea would be a Western Rail Corridor between Ar Rutbah and Mosul. To people who would question if Iraq is too short on resources to afford such a railway, I would ask if they can afford not to. If they proceed with this Metro project there is a real danger that Iraq will tip into the sea, spilling all of their oil into Persian Gulf and causing an environmental catastrophe.

Not that difficult a proposition - provided you use the exisiting line and connect somewhere between Akashat and Al Qa'im and most importantly extend into Jordan - creating a system. Indeed such a proposal seems to exist.

http://me-railways.uic.asso.fr/public/networks/iraq_network.html
http://www.ajg41.plus.com/images/iraq/map-of-iraq.pdf
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/atlas_middle_east/iraq.jpg
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/txu-oclc-192062618-iraq_pol_2008.jpg

Run_to_da_hills

Aquavid wrote: »

They would want to have pretty good security screening on that metro system.

I guess they are hoping that by the time it finally gets built, tensions have

The system would have to be based entirely on a registered smartcard with photo id that way no one will get from an asses roar from the system without being screened.

Cookie_Monster

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The system would have to be based entirely on a registered smartcard with photo id

1) Why?
2) And so what if it has to be done? It won't affect you unless you plan on going to Iraq any time soon

Run_to_da_hills

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

1) Why?
2) And so what if it has to be done? It won't affect you unless you plan on going to Iraq any time soon

They are not going to pump billions into a metro system and not have it a secured against terrorist attacks. For starters no one will use the system it if they feel threatened.

No I don't plan to be in Iraq in the near future.

Cookie_Monster

Sure feeling threatened is probly a national pasttime over there.:D

----

I am sure they will install a reasonable and appropriate level of security like any other system in the world.

How exactly would a smart card system and photo ID prevent suicide bombers anyway? They get themselves setup like everyone else and can walk straight onto a train. It's not like they'll be flagged on the system for next time when they are decorating the walls, floor and ceiling of the train...

paulm17781

This is a radical one and unlikely of a "terrorist" (note the sarcasm) they steal some wallets, bags or do some pickpocketing and they have someone else's ID.

I think they'd need better than the all powerful and civil liberty removing (again, sarcasm) RFID smart card.

Run_to_da_hills

paulm17781 wrote: »

This is a radical one and unlikely of a "terrorist" (note the sarcasm) they steal some wallets, bags or do some pickpocketing and they have someone else's ID.

I think they'd need better than the all powerful and civil liberty removing (again, sarcasm) RFID smart card.

The Verichip :eek:

Metrobest

What they'll do is have security controls at the entrances to every station. Search anyone with a bag or bulky jacket.

This is what happens at all major transport interchanges in Israel. And they know a thing or two about preventing suicide bombs.

'Baghdad' is a misleading name - most passengers on a metro don't have big bags, and with the Iraqi climate bulky jackets are not a common clothing item for most of the year, the metro would probably be one of the safest places to be.

Schuhart

Victor wrote: »

You are of course, partially correct - compare modern day Baghdad to this map in 1944. http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/baghdad_1944.jpg

I'm afraid I'm lost. I understand that I'm only partially correct. But I can't figure out which part that was. Was it

1. That the whole problem with Iraq is that development has been far too Baghdad-centric.

And/Or

2. That its ludicrous that, in a country of 28 million, 7 million live in the Greater Baghdad area.

And/Or

3. This Metro will only make this problem worse.

Victor wrote: »

Indeed such a proposal seems to exist.

Is there any long-standing commitment to drain the Tigris?

lostexpectation

they just reopened the main railline in baghad, nobody will go on it.

BrianD

Metrobest wrote: »

What they'll do is have security controls at the entrances to every station. Search anyone with a bag or bulky jacket.

This is what happens at all major transport interchanges in Israel. And they know a thing or two about preventing suicide bombs.

'Baghdad' is a misleading name - most passengers on a metro don't have big bags, and with the Iraqi climate bulky jackets are not a common clothing item for most of the year, the metro would probably be one of the safest places to be.

Surely you are winding us up? Here's you talking about how great a metro would be in Dublin and how many people they carry per hour etc and now you are saying it will take, probably take about 3 hours to clear security.

Mass transit systems are a magnet for terrorists and they nearly impossible to secure as Japan, London and Madrid have found out.

Here's the conclusions of a study undertaken by UCLA

http://www.international.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=26530 wrote:

Public transit systems are open, dynamic and inherently vulnerable to terrorist attacks.
Threat of terrorism is probably not universal; most major attacks occur in large cities.
Transit managers are struggling to balance costs and benefits of increasing security versus attracting passengers.
Close coordination among government, security and transit sectors is critical to effective planning.
Standarization of emergency training, security audits and guidelines, and disaster preparedness is important.
Much work remains.
Passenger education is a challenge; passengers should be informed but not so fearful that they stop using public transit.
Role of crime prevention through environmental design in security planning is waxing
Transit agencies have been more likely to adopt comprehensive, multipronged approaches to security after Sept 11, 2001.
Given the uncertain effectiveness, anti-terrorism measures' most tangible benefits in transit may be a reduction in crime

Basically they are saying - pick-pocketing down but no chance that we'll avert the next attack.

Incidentally, I read that the Baghdad underground may already be partially built. Apparently there was talk of it being built in the late '80s and the WMD brigade stated that the tunnels were used for storing the non-existant WMDs. Saddam was also supposed to use them for getting around.

Metrobest

From experience, it takes about 3 seconds to clear security control at the entry to the central bus station in Jerusalem, a little longer if you're carrying a bag that will be searched. Efficient security works.

So long as all stations are underground or evevated, in a metro system they only need to screen passengers entering the station. Passenger in-flows are different to out-flows as people are not all entering the station en-masse, as they do when the passengers from each metro exit the station.

Madrid's bombs were on commuter trains, not metros, and on London's Tube I understand many lines run on the surface in the suburbs where any Joe Sixpack could get on board with a bomb in his bag. Had a proper security infrasture been in place, the bombs could have been prevented. But London's underground wasn't planned for terrorist attacks. Baghdad's will have to be. InTel Aviv, a city which experienced countless suicide attacks on buses, there is also a metro planned. It's a lot easier for a suicide bomber to board a crowded bus with no security screening than to get past a security control in a metro station.

In Baghdad, the metro will obviously have to be designed with a security infrastructure in place, because like Israel they live in a war society. But the metro is a key part of the reconstruction of Baghdad, a city which in 10 or 20 years may prosper like never before.

BrianD

Metrobest wrote: »

From experience, it takes about 3 seconds to clear security control at the entry to the central bus station in Jerusalem, a little longer if you're carrying a bag that will be searched. Efficient security works.

So long as all stations are underground or evevated, in a metro system they only need to screen passengers entering the station. Passenger in-flows are different to out-flows as people are not all entering the station en-masse, as they do when the passengers from each metro exit the station.

Madrid's bombs were on commuter trains, not metros, and on London's Tube I understand many lines run on the surface in the suburbs where any Joe Sixpack could get on board with a bomb in his bag. Had a proper security infrasture been in place, the bombs could have been prevented. But London's underground wasn't planned for terrorist attacks. Baghdad's will have to be. InTel Aviv, a city which experienced countless suicide attacks on buses, there is also a metro planned. It's a lot easier for a suicide bomber to board a crowded bus with no security screening than to get past a security control in a metro station.

In Baghdad, the metro will obviously have to be designed with a security infrastructure in place, because like Israel they live in a war society. But the metro is a key part of the reconstruction of Baghdad, a city which in 10 or 20 years may prosper like never before.

Metro, by defininition a metro does not need to run underground. Many metros around the world run underground and overground e.g. the tube in London and indeed the system in New York. I zero difference between the Madrid communter trains and anything you might describe in its narrowest form as a "metro". They are all mass transit systems where people board at stations. Even our own "metro" in Dublin will have very sparse open stations similar to the Luas stops.

Your comparison with Israel is not exactly reasonable. Israel has roughly the same population Baghdad and while it is a densely populated country the population density and therefore usage of a mass transit system in Baghdad would be greater. Even by your own admission the large scale security checks are not enough to stop the "countless suicide attacks" and I would hazard a guess that in a country (Israel) that is considerably wealthier than Iraq that private transport would be the preferred mode.

The bottom line is that it is extremely difficult to secure a mass transit system and still get the utility out of what is a very large investment.

Having said that, fair play to the Baghdad government for planning ahead. I'm sure that the average Joe Plumber is delighted to see what the next thing he will be paying for in Iraq.

Highsider

Fair play to them. Think i read something somewhere about a fella going into a bookies and putting down a bet that the proposed tunnel between Africa and Europe will be completed before the Dublin metro is finished. At the time how i laughed at that:rolleyes: