By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following an investigation into the flawed design of the Aishbagh RoB in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, the government has taken action. Seven engineers, including two Chief Engineers, have been suspended due to the construction’s serious negligence. The construction agency and design consultant have been blacklisted. A committee has been formed to address the technical issues of the bridge, with plans to modify the sharp 90-degree turn and expand the bridge’s width once additional land is secured.
Read the original article here
Bhopal’s 90-degree bridge: 7 engineers suspended, 2 companies blacklisted – CNBC TV18, a situation that seems to have captured the imagination of many, is the crux of the matter. This news, as reported by CNBC TV18, paints a picture of engineering negligence and a system failure that allowed a bridge with a seemingly impossible design to reach near-completion. The sheer audacity of a 90-degree turn on a bridge is enough to raise eyebrows, but the fact that it got so far along in construction is truly astonishing. The initial reaction seems to be a mix of disbelief, amusement, and perhaps a touch of cynicism, given the location.
The most immediate question that arises is, how did this even happen? Many wonder aloud about the absence of oversight from railway authorities or the municipality. Why wasn’t the issue flagged earlier? One can only imagine the meetings, the blueprints, and the approvals that were required, yet somehow, a design that looks like it belongs in a video game made its way into reality. Some even suggest that the engineers might have honed their skills on a city-building simulator rather than in a proper engineering program.
The motivation behind the design, the reason for this sharp bend, seems to be the lack of available land. The constraints imposed by a metro station are cited as the reason behind the design. However, many feel that a compromise on safety and practicality for a bridge is unacceptable. This brings to light the role of land acquisition, or the lack thereof, as a key factor. Was there a genuine attempt to secure more land, or was it a matter of making do with what was available, no matter the consequences?
The blame game is already underway, with seven engineers suspended and two companies blacklisted. This action is a direct response to the apparent failures of the bridge’s design and construction. The focus on the engineers is understandable, but many feel it’s important to recognize that this isn’t simply the fault of a few individuals. It suggests a deeper-rooted problem with the system.
The comments also raise the specter of corruption and negligence, pointing out that this may be a reflection of a broader issue. Comparisons are made to other incidents of questionable infrastructure development in India, where shortcuts, compromised materials, or even complete disregard for safety are reported. There are also allusions to the purchase of degrees, implying a systemic weakness in the quality control of engineering and the need for better standards and enforcement.
The reactions to the bridge range from humorous observations to serious concerns. Some commentators suggest that the bridge could be treated as an intersection and have a stop sign, while others joke about the need for exceptional driving skills, or perhaps even a “drifting skill” challenge, to navigate the sharp turn. The picture of the bridge sparked thoughts of similar challenges elsewhere, such as the old S-curves of Lake Shore Drive in Chicago. This all paints a picture of the bridge’s absurdity, and makes one wonder how anyone could greenlight a design like this.
The cost of the project, ₹ 18 crore, or approximately $2 million, is also mentioned, reminding us of the investment made in a bridge that is clearly problematic. The scale of the financial investment adds to the sense of wastefulness and the need for accountability. The fact that a committee has been formed to address the situation suggests that demolition or major modifications are in the cards, which only adds to the cost.
The article ends with a final thought that the project looks like an MVP (Minimum Viable Product), a term often used in the tech world to describe the initial version of a product. This comparison shows the kind of issues that can arise from a lack of planning or project coordination. Ultimately, the incident serves as a cautionary tale about the importance of quality control, proper planning, and the need for checks and balances in infrastructure projects. It reminds us that, in the world of engineering, as in many other spheres, cutting corners can lead to some disastrous and, as in this case, ridiculous results.