HOT TOPICS
SPOTLIGHT AGENCIES
CAG's rap on Delhi metro phase I ridership projection
Written By vinod_shankar - 20 July, 2009
Delhi Review CAG Passenger India ridership Metro Rail
2.5 Projection of ridership
2.5.1 According to the DPR of 1995, 31.85 lakh passenger trips per day (i.e. ridership)
was expected on completion of the Project in the year 2005. The subsequent DPR of 2003
projected daily ridership of 22.60 lakh. With this extent of ridership projection, benefits
of speedier and safer travel for commuters, abatement of atmospheric pollution, reduction
in fuel consumption, reduced accident rates and decongestion of roads were expected.
2.5.2 The highest daily average ridership attained was, however, 6.62 lakh only in
November 2007, which was 21 per cent of the original projections and 29 per cent of the
revised figure. The reasons for the shortfall in ridership were stated to be mainly as
under:
(i) Higher fare structure of Metro in comparison to the other modes of Public
Transport (Bus);
(ii) For commuters the cost barrier went beyond the cost of Metro tickets, to also
include cost of travel from the residence to the Metro Station and from the Metro
Station to the workplace;
(iii) Lack of proper connectivity; and
(iv) Lack of feeder bus system for adjoining area to Metro System.
2.5.3 Despite low ridership, there was congestion on the Metro during peak hours. The
congestion was attributable to various factors like lower number of passenger cars, suboptimal
speed over the rail network, lower frequency of trains, and absence of differential
fares during peak hours.
When i read through the report i felt what manivanan said regarding the efficiency of governments holds true, even if its DMRC headed by a stalwart like Sreedharan. Delhi metro phase I was on schedule, which is commendable. Overall the ridership is 1/3rd or less compared to the projection(both original and revised).
IMPLICATIONS FOR BANGALORE METRO PHASE:
With these figures the hopes of decongesting bangalore(namma metro) with phase I seems like a pipe dream. It wouldn't meet any projection i feel. It would be good if someone can shed more light on ridership targets for phase I of bangalore metro.
vinod
COMMENTS
asj - 20 July, 2009 - 12:28
http://www.cag.gov.in/html/reports/commercial/2008_PA17com/contents.htm
Only read the conclusions - the problems run deeper than just ridership.
ASJ
Will they follow the ecommendations of the CAG?
Vasanthkumar Mysoremath - 20 July, 2009 - 12:45
Talk about solutions
Aoart from Rap and Conclusions of CAG's report, it is worth while having a look at the considered opinion and recommendations of CAG for creating proper benchmarks while executing such mega projects:
link:
http://www.cag.gov.in/html/reports/commercial/2008_PA17com/recommendations.pdf
Is BMRCL listening? Just trying to meet the deadlne will not ensure Q&A of such public related mega projects. Sitting in ivory towers and leaving the field work to probationers or apprentices will only bring bad name to the work.
- Vasanthkumar Mysoremath
Lets focus on solutions to increase ridership....
vinod_shankar - 20 July, 2009 - 14:17
I agree there are a number of issues raised by the CAG report, testing to transparency in the bidding process. It has questioned the standing of DMRC with respect to its legality and accountability. Most of the recommendations are related to processes to be put in place, which DMRC has to wake up to. But ridership is where we at praja can discuss/suggest solutions to sustain/increase ridership which might serve DMRC/BMRCL hopefully. So lets focus on ideas/ways to increase ridership for metros.
vinod
sanjayv - 20 July, 2009 - 18:19
The press seems to be now in a Delhi Metro beat up mode. The CAG report does bring up some important and relevant issues, but I did not find anything which indicates a major scam or disaster. There is always scope for improvement and the Metro and the govt will do well to act on some of these recommendations.
Maybe I am ignorant here... but the CAG appears to be making some engineering recommendations and judgements (automation in trains, wear and tear in rolling stock etc.) based on recommendations made by an IIT study. Personally, I am not sure if academic institutions such as IIT and their faculty are the right people to review stuff like this. Secondly, is it really within the scope of a CAG audit to comment on the engineering aspects? Second guessing these decisions needs a lot of expertise and benchmarking against golbal projects.
I think the reasons for the recent accidents will have to be determined through an analysis of engineering qualitys, processes, practices of the contractor etc. This is best left to an expert engineering committee. The general press appears to be trying to find some flaw in Mr. Sreedharan or corruption to explain these accidents.
The biggest worry from a Praja perspective is the low ridership numbers. As Vinod mentioned... maybe causes and solutions is what we should focus on. What do people think of the ridership projections of the Bangalore metro?
idontspam - 20 July, 2009 - 11:44
(iii) Lack of proper connectivity; and
(iv) Lack of feeder bus system for adjoining area to Metro System
I dont know how DTC works but these 2 are killers anywhere. A feeder bus system should focus on reach and not speed. More stops and penetration into local streets in the residential localities are required. Even if the frequency is less adherence to timelines to the minute will help plan travel. If the feeder does not have reach AND reliability any backbone transit system Metro/Mono/Tram/BRTS will fall through.
Either ways Phase 1 of bangalore metro is too less to make any significant impact. We need to build more distance and multiple modes faster.
PRAJA.IN COMMENT GUIDELINES
Posting Guidelines apply for comments as well. No foul language, hate mongering or personal attacks. If criticizing third person or an authority, you must be fact based, as constructive as possible, and use gentle words. Avoid going off-topic no matter how nice your comment is. Moderators reserve the right to either edit or simply delete comments that don't meet these guidelines. If you are nice enough to realize you violated the guidelines, please save Moderators some time by editing and fixing yourself. Thanks!