Questionnaire on Istanbul metro signaling

The question of Istanbul metro signaling: CHP İBB Councilor Taner Kazanoğlu with CHP, brought the issue of signaling in the subways.

Taner Kazanoğlu CHP Chairman Topbaş asked: Is it true that the public has been damaged by paying more than 50 Million Dollars (135 Trillion) because of the false bidding of Metro Signaling in Istanbul?

CHP İBB Council Member CHP Taner Kazanoğlu in his proposal prepared and orally read the council meeting; By bringing the issue of Signalization in the subways to the agenda and the damages to the citizens, he said, getir We all know that transportation in Istanbul has brought our city to an uninhabitable dimension. The solution is obvious only by public transport and especially by metro. But we will not prevent corruption and unfair gains to be made. Here I have only examined the smallest part of these transactions and I am expecting the public to pay at least 50 million dollars due to the wrong procurement of the transaction, en he said. has been awarded as a separate station. How many separate sections will be awarded later? Taksim – 4 by Alstom. While the Levent Metro was extended from Yenikapı tamamen Hacıosman, the Alstom system was completely dismantled and the Siemens system was installed. What is the amount of payment made by Alstom to both companies? Which of these signaling companies have been tendered on the Metro lines that have been tendered as currently available? What are the tender costs of each metro line? Is there a check for the price paid for each extension station?

Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM) Assembly in June 2015 meeting of the members of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality CHP Av. Taner Kazanoğlu, MD The written question which was submitted to the Presidency of İBB with the rights of Hakkı Sağlam and Hüseyin Sağ and submitted to the Presidency by unanimous vote:

ISTANBUL METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY CHAIRMAN

Question Proposal
Subject: It is about the signalization in the subway and the damage suffered here.

We all know that transportation in Istanbul has brought our city to an uninhabitable level. The solution is obvious only by public transport and especially by metro. But we will not prevent corruption and unfair gains to be made. I have only examined the smallest part of these transactions, and I am of the opinion that because of the wrong procurement of the transaction I see here, the public has been damaged by paying more than 50 million dollars.

Firstly, let me explain the signalization; Each rail system vehicle has its own safety type. Since trams enter traffic from time to time, driving is provided by seeing, while in tunnel subways there is no such situation, driving is provided by the “interlocking” system. Information of all line length equipment is collected at the control center and it is decided whether a train will be allowed to enter a rail zone or not. When a train enters a truss or rail zone, the zone is locked until that train leaves this rail zone and no action is allowed in the zone. In this way, the collision of the trains is prevented, as the trains cannot enter the other block from the allowed block [because it will be stopped by ATP / ATC (to be stopped)]. (The train accident that caused the death of 2004 people in Pamukova in 41 occurred due to the lack of signalization.)

  1. Signalization software has source codes. Thanks to these source codes, software changes can be made in the system. For each signaling system, these codes are different and confidential. Source codes and code writing techniques are trade secrets of signaling companies. Therefore, no one can interfere with the firmware of any company. Signaling firms profit from source code privacy. Hardware prices are 10 cost of a job, but they are billed as% 90 engineering service. For example; Taksim – 4 by Alstom. While the Levent Metro was extended from Yenikapı tamamen Hacıosman, the Alstom system was completely dismantled and the Siemens system was installed.
  2. X If the signaling company Y has to be installed on the system of signaling company (which generally does not); in such cases additional control center equipment costs arise. Hardware prices are 10 cost of a job, but they are billed as% 90 engineering service. For example; Taksim – 4 by Alstom. While the Levent Metro was extended from Yenikapı to Hacıosman, the Alstom system was completely dismantled and the Siemens system was installed. When the cost dimension of the job is left to one side, it is not possible to control the train on the same screen.
  3. The main reason for the high cost of signalization companies in extensions is the wrongly planned projects and 2 or 3 station extension auctions. For example; While the signaling system of 16 stations costs 20 M Euro, 3 M Euro can be requested for the new 10 Stations. In Istanbul Kadıköy-Çamçeşme-Sabiha Gökçen line consists of approximately 25 stations. If these 25 stations were tendered at once, it could be completed for 25-30 M Euro. However, since 16 stations +3 stations +3 stations are tendered at present, the cost will be completed to much higher figures. Of course, as the administration, you can say that these tenders do not concern me. These costs are the problem of the companies that received the tender. These tenders and their continuation are entirely Transportation As. Control is.

For the aforementioned reasons, the auctions were made primarily;

  1. The tenders that have been made have been awarded as a separate station. How many separate sections will be awarded later?
  • Taksim – 4 by Alstom. While the Levent Metro was extended from Yenikapı tamamen Hacıosman, the Alstom system was completely dismantled, and the Siemens system was installed. What is the amount of payment made by Alstom to both companies?
  • Which of these signaling companies have been tendered on the Metro lines that have been tendered as currently available?

  • What are the tender costs of each metro line? Is there a check for the price paid for each extension station?

  • Armin

    sohbet

      Be the first to comment

      Comments