Destruction of Ramsetu

.
But... I do not BELIEVE nor support this Proposal of SEA-CANAL

...since TECHNICALLY Convinced as Baseless Theoretical Goose-aim..

...and the Reality will be FAR FROM THE PURPOSE & GOAL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pizzalot

Hats off Sudhama ! So technically no one should be offended with Sethu Project ! If the the project is renamed to somethingelse instead of "Sethu" in it there will not have been any confusion !

Proposal for Sethu Samudhram Canal Project is a very old one originally proposed by the British Marine Engineer Comm.A.D.Taylor of British Marines in 1890. The project had gone through more than nine committees and detailed studies have been conducted on economic and environmental impacts. All these happened between 1890 and 1922. Investment was what was lacking. 5 more commitees went through the project after Independence during Nehru as PM. Under the chairmanship of Sir A.Ramaswamy Mudaliar in 1956 it took the final shape of Sethu Samudran Canal Project. The project was again sleeping until revived ambitiously by AB Vajpayee. Kudos to him.

Now that it is being implemented by another Government they want to create trouble so as increase their catch.

Politicians ! Politicians !

---

Sudhama .. you never know.

Do not evaluate a project based on the existing demand. Once it is laid out you will see new oppurtunities getting created. New use will emerge. When humans invented computer, we thought the machine will be demanded only for computing. Today they are used widely for other purposes like means of cimmunication, media players and even in cars for driving control. Same way the project should be evaluated creatively. In the 60s South India was NOT a automobile hub. Now it is one. What is so wrong in opting for the sea means of transportation ?

Those who disown the project should think twice. Because chances of it succeeding is expected to be at a big level. We are talking about another Singapore in the making. Let us see.

.
. Al Nashar Dream.!... SELF-DECEPTIVE Cat-plan.!!

Well.. My Dear Pizzalot... Welcome to differ with my stand.

In fact I will be very very happy... if my stand is proved WRONG...

...and if this White-Elephant Plan can materialise into Reality...

...as per its Scope and Purpose.

But... Are we just DREAMING?...

...And have we considered well on the Pros and Cons.?

May I know your POINTS OF DEFENCE...

...in reply to Captain Balakrishnan's Analytical critisms [quoted below]...

... on this IMPRACTICABLE Scheme

...which will Neither be VIABLE.. Nor PURPOSEFUL... Nor ECONOMICAL as anticipated...

..he justifies... wonderfully... and UNDISPUTABLY.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pizzalot

Sudhama .. you never know.

Do not evaluate a project based on the existing demand. Once it is laid out you will see new oppurtunities getting created. New use will emerge. When humans invented computer, we thought the machine will be demanded only for computing. Today they are used widely for other purposes like means of cimmunication, media players and even in cars for driving control. Same way the project should be evaluated creatively. In the 60s South India was NOT a automobile hub. Now it is one. What is so wrong in opting for the sea means of transportation ?

Those who disown the project should think twice. Because chances of it succeeding is expected to be at a big level. We are talking about another Singapore in the making. Let us see.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wrap07

http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/oct/

'The Sethu Samudram does not make nautical sense'

October 01, 2007

Continuing our series on the Sethu Samudram Shipping Canal Project, Shobha Warrier speaks to Captain (retired) H Balakrishnan of the Indian Navy to know a mariner's view of the project. Captain Balakrishnan has been associated with the navy for 32 years. He was one of the first batch of three Indian naval officers to do specialisation in anti-submarine warfare in the erstwhile USSR Naval War College. Out of interest, he did a study on the Sethu Samudram Shipping Canal Project from a mariner's point of view. Ever since the series appeared in the Indian Express, the captain has been much sought after for his interesting calculations.

Why did you get interested in the Sethu Samudram Shipping Canal Project?

I don't belong to any political party. It was purely a mariner's interest that made me research the project. There were many reports and statements in the media but I found that the mariner's point of view was not talked about at all. It is sad that even today the entire discourse on the project has got completely side tracked from the main issue; that is, the project is for ships and the shipping industry. As a mariner, how do you describe the Sethu Samudram project? The Sethu Samudram project, if I can put it simply from a mariner's stand point, does not make any nautical sense.

Why do you say so?
I have worked on the project from three different perspectives, all concerning the nautical world. I analysed the project in the backdrop of the environmental factors that would impinge the safety of the ship and also the safety of lives at sea. Number two was the security aspects which is maritime terrorism as it stands today. And the third was certain aspects of general navigation.

What does your research on the environmental factors say?
We mariners call the coast between Rameswaram and Cuddalore the cyclone coast. The India Meteorological Department has assigned this coastline as a high risk probability. To site one example, in 1964, the Pamban Bridge was washed away by a severe cyclonic storm.

A ship is safe when she is moving at the onset of a cyclone. Imagine a ship waiting to pick up its pilot as it approaches the Palk Straits to enter Sethu Samudram. No captain will wait for the pilot; his safety lies in heading south, towards Sri Lanka.

The wind and waves bring in a large amount of silt and wash it ashore. The same thing is going to happen to the Sethu Samudram Canal. This brings me to another point. Marine scientists have identified five areas on the Indian coastline they call high-sinkage pits, and one of them happens to be the Palk Straits. What is left unsaid by the Sethu Samudram authorities is that maintaining the 12 metre depth (of the channel) will entail round the year dredging. Once you establish the channel, you have to maintain it. You mean other than the capital expenditure, there will be maintenance expenditure too. Will that be expensive? Naturally. But this cost is not mentioned anywhere. This is the hidden cost which the authorities will have to pay to the dredging company. It is a high siltation and sedimentation area. So, what you pick up today is going to get filled up the next day.

What is the security threat you spoke about?
The Sea Tigers of the LTTE have control of that area off the Jaffna coast. What the Sea Tigers may do is difficult to say. Piracy exists even today.
Those who are against the project say the 12 metre depth of the Canal is not enough for big ships to pass through the canal.

As a mariner, what is your opinion on this?
It is quite true. If you take global shipping trends today, to reduce operating cost, they go in for larger ships of the order of 60,000 deadweight tonnes and above. A 60,000 deadweight tonne carrier will need anything in excess of 17 metres of draft. And as far as tankers go, the days of the super tanker are gone and you see only very large crude carriers of the type of 150,000 and 185,000 tonnes. It makes more sense to have such big tankers as in one voyage, you are bringing in more cargo and reduce your operating cost. None of these big ships will ever be able to use the Sethu Samudram.

So, the question is, for whom are you building the canal?
30,000 tonnes was alright when Sethu Samudram was conceived in the early fifties and the sixties. That leaves you with only the coastal bulk carriers that carry coal from Kolkata, Paradeep and Visakhapatanam to Chennai or Tuticorin.

How much time and money are saved if the ships go through the Sethu Samudram Canal instead of going round Sri Lanka?
I plotted physically on a chart what we call 'passage planning' for a bulk carrier on passage as it happens today from Kolkata to Tuticorin; one of them circumnavigating Sri Lanka as is happening today and the other one going through the canal. The voyage distance from Kolkata to Tuticorin around Sri Lanka works out to 1227 nautical miles. If you went through the canal, it is 1098 nm. So, you are saving just 120 odd nm.

The story doesn't end there. The majority of our bulk carriers go at a speed between 12 and 13 knots. That is the average speed at sea. I have checked with my friends who currently sail. They all said they do 12 knots. However, I worked in a bracket of 12-15 knots. So, if you are going around Sri Lanka at 12 knots at constant speed at sea, the time taken to reach outer anchorage at Tuticorin is 102 hours and 15 minutes. When you go through Sethu Samudram, the point to be remembered is, you cannot proceed at the speed at which you are sailing at sea. The reason is the shallow water effect or what we call the 'Squat Effect'. So, the moment you enter Sethu Samudram, you have to reduce the sped by 50 per cent or more depending on the conditions prevailing at that particular time. So, I worked on a speed bracket of 6-8 knots. But many of my friends tell me 8 knots is too high for a 30,000 tonne bulk carrier. In all my calculations, I gave the benefit of doubt to the Sethu Samudram project.

The second aspect is, it is not an open seaway; it is like entering a port. A pilot boards the ship, who is a local mariner with greater knowledge of the marine environment. The same thing has to be done at Sethu Samudram also. I have given one hour delay for the ship to reduce speed for the pilot to climb aboard. You repeat the process at the other end too for him to disembark.

With this 6 knots speed and 2 hours pilotage delay, my time to Tuticorin via Sethu Samudram works out to 100 hours 30 minutes. If you went around Sri Lanka, it is 102 hours 15 minutes! So, your net savings in time by going through Sethu Samudram is 1 hour 45 minutes! Is it worth spending Rs 2,400 crore to save 1 hour 45 minutes? You spoke of travel time. What about the cost?
The Sethu Samudram project from the media reports and the statement given by the finance minister will cost at Rs 2,400 crore, of which Rs 971 crore is through a special purpose vehicle. The debt portion has been pegged at Rs 1,465 crore. Assuming an interest burden of 10 per cent, the interest payment on Rs 1,465 crore is Rs 146 crore per annum. Twenty to 25 years is the time given for repayment.

Assuming 25 years for Rs 1,465 crore, capital repayment works out about 56 crore per annum. So, Rs 146 crore for interest burden and Rs 56 crore as repayment works out to roughly Rs 204 crore per annum which is what the authorities will have to repay to any financial institution. This is only to break-even. But the web site says it is a profitable industry and it is going to make 'mammoth profit'.

As the earning is going to come only from ships, I asked, how many ships are going to transit in a year through the canal?
Ships that can use the canal will be coal carrying bulk carriers as long as the Tuticorin thermal power plant exists. Having made the calculation, I feel they are rather optimistic in their figures. They have given a mean value of about 3,055 ships meant to use the canal in the year 2008 and by the year 2025, they expect it to go to in excess of 7,000 ships. Mind you, for 12 metres of depth! But I can't see more than 1,000 ships using the Sethu Samudram canal in a year.

If you take Rs 204 crore as annual repayment, and 1,000 ships use it, your per ship cost works out to Rs 22 lakhs pilotage charge to break even. There is an interesting comparison done by K S Ramakrishnan, former deputy chairman, Chennai Port Trust. He pegs around Rs 50 lakh as pilotage rate per ship if you have to make a; profit.

Then I calculated the fuel consumed. These ships consume 1 metric tonne of fuel per hour, which costs Rs 24,000. For the Sethu Samudram canal, you have to add the pilotage cost too. In effect, if a ship goes through the canal, a shipping company loses Rs 19 lakh per voyage. It is more cost effective to circumnavigate Sri Lanka from the point of view of the shipping industry.

Therefore, neither are you saving time nor is it viable economically. These are the two aspects that need to be highlighted. So, there is absolutely no advantage to the ships and the shipping industry. So, what are we gaining by spending Rs 2,400 crore of tax payers' money? It is a white elephant in the making.

So, you must be against realignment which some political parties are talking about. Any course, any realignment, is going to prove uneconomical to the shipping industry. If it is of no use to the shipping industry, why build it? You can bring about better economic progress to the southern districts of Tamil Nadu by building expressways. That is why I say the Sethu Samudram shipping canal project makes no nautical sense. That is the tragedy of the project.

Those who support the Sethu Samudram Canal compare it to the Suez Canal and the Panama Canal and say the Sethu Samudram is the Suez of the East. In the case of the Suez and the Panama canals, ships save thousands of nautical miles in sailing distance and hundreds of hours in sailing time vis-&-vis the Sethu Samudram where a ship will probably save a few hundred miles and at the most twohours in sailing time. This is the difference.

Peace is doable.

---

.

Abhi ayega maja khelka !

Who is this Balakrishnan ? Is his analysis of the impact of SS Project on security the official version of the Indian Navy ? Does he understand that he is making serious allegations apart from talking about Nautical miles ?

He only reminds me of the Pied Piper story that we all read in the kinder gardens. "all the kids in the town of Hamelin, followed the pied piper, dancing and singing, except for two. The blind and the lame, who came back crying...".

It is a common man's knowledge that your house his safe when you do not desert it. There will not have been a Kargil crisis in 1999 if there were roads laid to Kargil from Srinagar. My simple analogy to Balakrishnan, playing his own game.

In 1800s,India had 2 routes for transport development. 1.Water 2.Land. All major cities were on Land. So they opted for land route. Result was we lost several million hactares of agricaultural and forest land for contructing our railways and roadways. We have spent millions and millions in laying and maintaining them. Instead if we had opted for Water ways, we will have still retained our forests @ 75% and Agriculture blossomed to great heights. But despite that blunder , without any fuss, we have seen how the 3 metros Mumbai, Chennai and Calcutta were still growing on the coasts. That is the power of waterways. Waterways is the most environment and pocket friendly means of all transportations This even a layman knows. Nature has already acquired the land and laid the water ways for you. You will just need to learn and respect it. Had we gone for dredging our rivers and and developed the river transportation instead, we will have seen all the cities naturally leading us to the Port Cities which again lead us to the outside world. We may not need to be in the place where we are today spending millions maintaining the roadways and railways and the court cases, and subsidising the farmers for our blunders. And we will not have have lost the Industrial and Agricultural revolution what the rest of the world has taken advantage of, in the last few centuries.

Talking about the present and future, in anycase, we have no more land to write-off to meet the increased demands on transportation. The need to decide between "land vs water" is all the more critical today than it was yesterday. Chennai is becoming the World hub for Automobile. No more games at domestic level. We need to atleast think at Asia level even if you just want to maintain a hindu growth rate of 3.5%. Right now we are going at >8.5%. If it comes down to 8% tomorrow, that will mean 750,000 less emplyment.

Balakrishnan is correct in measuring nautical miles saved from Kolkotta to Trivandrum. Has he done his homework for Tamils ? Did he tell us how much more miles we can save from Chennai to Tuticorin or Chennai to Trivandrum ? Is it wrong for Tamilars to see Chennai-Pondicherry-Cuddalore-Nagapattinam-Cochin-Kanyakumari-Trivandrum as prominent economic hubs of the future ? Instead of travelling 400 miles why should I go 1000 miles touching Colombu waters and thus endangering myself ?

Mr. Balakrishnan, you have plotted the actual route and the nautical impacts of SS Project. Now, please plot the following and you will see where the kids of Hamelin have gone. following the pied-piper 1. India's National Water Grid connecting all major rivers which is already a plan in the making is one point 2. Substituting/Complementing the Roads/Railways with hitherto untapped domestic Waterways is another point 3.Linking Domestic Waterways to the Coastal Gateways and using Sethu.

Ask Balakrishnan if he can see things from Strategic perpectives like his bosses in the Navy and the Government. He will notice how his voice is fading out.

Mr. Sudhama, thank you for giving me the oppurtunity to explain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sudhaama

.
Well.. My Dear Pizzalot... Welcome to differ with my stand.

In fact I will be very very happy... if my stand is proved WRONG...

...and if this White-Elephant Plan can materialise into Reality...

...as per its Scope and Purpose.

But... Are we just DREAMING?...

...And have we considered well on the Pros and Cons.?

May I know your POINTS OF DEFENCE...

...in reply to Captain Balakrishnan's Analytical critisms [quoted below]...

... on this IMPRACTICABLE Scheme

...which will Neither be VIABLE.. Nor PURPOSEFUL... Nor ECONOMICAL as anticipated...

..he justifies... wonderfully... and UNDISPUTABLY.

.....
Peace is doable..

---

No. He is wrong again. Peace is NOT doable now that he himself has ridiculed the re-alignment.

And dont even bring Tsunami. As I said it makes me laugh. Do you think they will eat the mud that is dug out of the canal ? Dont you know that the trenched-out mud will only block the tsunami protecting all lands west of the Canal while lying perpendicular to the tsunami waves ?

It makes perfect sense to all those who need to understand. May be Balakrishnan should have tried a little harder and followed the other kids of Hamelin instead of complaining for having been left behind.

But I will admit there is some impact on the environment. But again, anything and everything is bound to have an impact on the environment or else Newton will become angry. :D

Excellent views pizzalot.

Thanks punnaimaran.

The following were the latest updates on Sethu row in Supreme Court. The whole emphasis is on so called "belief of 800 million" people. I am requesting them to make that number 1 less. Do not include me, please.
:lol:

Here is the summary (not ditto of the proceedings but just a summary so that you get an idea)

Court: "Swamy, who goes to the site to worship?"

Swamy: "We all worship the sun. But we don't go to the sun to worship it"

He cited few "strange coincidences" as a means to show the power of God reigning over the Sethu.

1. A dredging machine that was used there suddenly broke down.

2. Another crane was deployed to retrieve the parts of the machine, it too broke down.

3.Then the authorities used another crane, with the words Hanuman written over it. That too broke.

4. Authorities called a Russian expert for the dredging operation but he ended up breaking both his legs.

5. Subsequently, a formal worship was organised. But a Tamil Nadu legislator who performed the worship died of heart attack the next day.

I am interested to know if even in this century there are people who really believe in these things. In all their arguments there was nothing "technical". They were suddenly talking on behalf of the 800 million hindus of India.

Swamy, if "something" is already preventing the authorities from dredging the "bridge", why do you need the court for ? What are you opposing ?

Thoongaravana ezhupalam. Nadikiravanai ezhuppa mudiyuma ?

Then those things like cost, returns, environment blah blah blah. They made their intention clear to the court and nation. That they want only one thing. The project should be scrapped at anycost. That is all.

Their malafide intention is what is going to be the strength for those in favor of the project.

It is my opinion that the Supreme Court has set a very bad precedent with this judgement(?). It gives religious extremists the right to stop a development project in the name of religion in future.

Tomorrow the Christians and Muslims may try to stop development projects saying that it 'hurts' their religious sentiments.

Do not be surprised if in future there is a judgement from the Honourable (?) Supreme Court like this:

"No one is allowed to build houses in or around Ayodhya as it involves digging the ground that Lord Rama had once walked."

Exactly.

The posers' intention to scrap the project "at anycost " is their weakness.

I do not think the alternative alignments will work. They were proposed by the posers. They claimed that it is sound on economics, ecology and hindu friendly. Those who trusted their words ditto will now feel disappointed. They will realize that the whole thing is a conspiracy. It is not about "faith". It is about power.
Did you see one the irony ? Rama wanted that the bridge be destroyed, because the Rashashas should not follow the trail. But "believers" of today want the sethu to be "saved".

So it is never about "faith". It is only politics. Belief or not , it is all manipulated.

To me the case proves there is no Rama. Simply Rama or not it is what they say he was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pizzalot

Exactly.

The posers' intention to scrap the project "at anycost " is their weakness.

I do not think the alternative alignments will work. They were proposed by the posers. They claimed that it is sound on economics, ecology and hindu friendly. Those who trusted their words ditto will now feel disappointed. They will realize that the whole thing is a conspiracy. It is not about "faith". It is about power.
Did you see one the irony ? Rama wanted that the bridge be destroyed, because the Rashashas should not follow the trail. But "believers" of today want the sethu to be "saved".

So it is never about "faith". It is only politics. Belief or not , it is all manipulated.

To me the case proves there is no Rama. Simply Rama or not it is what they say he was.

---

As you have pointed out, it is never really about faith. It is the Hindutva groups' old trick of whipping up passions.

But would our people ever understand this? I sincerely hope they do.