daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old August 15th, 2013, 10:53 PM   #6261
@sof
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 7
Likes (Received): 2

Le Clerk, you are really boring with your plans. Could you stop being a politician? Come with pictures/videos/reality... International audiance will appreciate it more. Thanks.
@sof no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old August 15th, 2013, 10:57 PM   #6262
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 35,479
Likes (Received): 12043

1. I am not a politician.

2. I am answering points raised.

There are tons of vids/pictures on the Romanian forum, which I used to post here, and were not appreciated, so I won't bother anymore. If others want to post them, they are welcome. Why don't You post them, for a change?!
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History: Lipscani Area |Victoriei Ave. | Elisabeta Bld.
Yes, it's Dracula's Castle
Best picture collection of UNESCO sites in Romania
Castles and Mansions in Romania
Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2013, 11:30 PM   #6263
alwn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bucuresti
Posts: 469
Likes (Received): 85

[QUOTE=cove_adrian;106199292]
Quote:
Are you telling me that if we have a highway through Barlad Valley, the traffic from W Romania and W Europe won't choose Albita? Right now lorries from W Romania go to Albita, instead of Ungheni/Stanca Costesti or even Oancea. It's logic and fast to through Albita and from there to Republic of Moldova.
Of course. But only till they build Tg Mures- Iasi- Ungheni (let's say by PPP ) when the traffic from western will follow this straight route instead of detour Cluj- Brasov- Ploiesti- Focsani- Albita.

Quote:
Financial support in percent of 85% is available for Pan-European Corridor, not for Botosani or Pascani.
I understand that the corridor is already set up towards Barlad- Albita. The whole discussion was if we can move the route of the IX's. If not, discussion is useless.
__________________
Bucuresti/ Romania
alwn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 12:10 AM   #6264
alwn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bucuresti
Posts: 469
Likes (Received): 85

Quote:
Originally Posted by Le Clerk View Post
Did I miss your part above that a motorway must connect the important cities in a certain region?
So, how can you miss Craiova, and miss the link with the Craiova-Pitesti motorway!?! Otherwise put: how did Timisoara get on A1 in the end, because it was not on the begining there?!

BTW: The motorways in any given country shouldn't be built only for the international traffic. The local traffic has a point too. I thought that was obvious by now, especially that Romania contributes with money too.

As I said. With the construction of Pitesti-Craiova, all the traffic from the bridge will go to C IV north, which will be hopefully completed by 2016. On the other hand, international trucks and local traffic are becoming a huge problem on the current route of CIX. How do you deal with that?!

That was the point of the minister too, I believe.
Do you know any statement about the intention to change the Corridor IV, southern branch, from Arad- Lugoj- Caransebes- Calafat- Sofia- thessaloniki with Sibiu- Pitesti- Craiova- Calafat- Sofia- Thessaloniki? Till then the corridor doesn't include Craiova not a bit

I thought the meaning of the Calafat/Vidin bridge was to provide an alternative route from south eastern Europe to central europe besides the shorter one through Serbia.. So it means that both countries have to improve the infrastructure on the corridor no IV (southern branch) towards Lugoj, where making the junction with the other branch of the corridor IV.
Indeed, bulgarians are already preparing an expressway from Botevgrad to Vidin (170 Km) to link Hemus motorway (Sofia- Pleven- Varna..) with the bridge. On the other hand, romanians will build (hopefully with EU funds) the motorway link from Calafat towards Lugoj.

This answer also to your inquiry why they had to move the corridor's direction through Timisoara making a detour instead building the motorway straight towards Arad- Deva. For sure they wanted to connect also a major city like Timisoara but it was not the only reason. Actually they needed to build a southern motorway also in order to connect Hu Border with Calafat bridge and of course it was not feasible to build 2 parallel motorways so close (Arad- Deva vs Arad- Timisoara- Lugoj). At the end they chose to build a common one for both branches (Nadlac- Arad- Timisoara- Lugoj where split)

Quote:
With the construction of Pitesti-Craiova, all the traffic from the bridge will go to C IV north
Are you sure, all traffic? Frankly when deciding to build a bridge in Calafat/ Vidin the aim was not to connect the traffic from Bulgaria with Craiova. What traffic from Bulgaria to Craiova? and even further to Pitesti- Sibiu? There are no traffic on this way.
Even more, looking the map, why to chose Calafat/Vidin, which requires longer links (Botevgrad- Vidin 170 km expressway, Calafat- Craiova 90 km) instead of building the bridge at Bechet/Oriahovo (50 km from planned Hemus, 70 km from Craiova) or Corabia (40 km from Hemus, 90 Craiova)?
Vidin/Calafat bridge looks like a big detour if the idea was Craiova..

However it will be also a link between the bridge and Craiova. Of course when building motorway towards Nadlac- Arad- Timisoara- Lugoj- Caransebes- Tr Severin- Calafat obviously it has to be linked also with Craiova- Pitesti- Bucuresti. Not such a big deal to make a 90 km link. Again, this doesn't mean that Craiova is a part of CIV.
__________________
Bucuresti/ Romania

Cutarescu liked this post

Last edited by alwn; August 16th, 2013 at 12:52 AM.
alwn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 12:31 AM   #6265
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 35,479
Likes (Received): 12043

Quote:
Originally Posted by alwn View Post
I thought that the meaning of the Calafat/Vidin bridge was to provide an alternative route from south eastern Europe to central europe besides the shorter one through Serbia.. So it means that both countries have to improve the infrastructure on the corridor no IV (southern branch) towards Lugoj, where making the junction with the other branch of the corridor IV.
You are contradicting yourself here by avoiding the discussion of the importance of domestic/local traffic and the importance of motorways following leading cities. Should motorways built in Romania, partly from Romanian money, serve or serve not the domestic traffic and economic interests?!

Quote:
This answer also to your inquiry why they have moved the corridor direction through Timisoara making a detour instead building the motorway straight towards Arad- Deva. For sure they wanted to connect also a major city like Timisoara but it was not the only reason. Actually they needed to build a southern motorway too in order to connect Hu Border with Calafat bridge and of course it was not feasible to build 2 parallel motorways so close (Arad- Deva vs Arad- Timisoara- Lugoj). At the end they chose to build a common one for both branches.
Yes. And there will also be a motorway connecting Craiova to A1. Why not connect that motorway to the C IV south!? The EU has approved for financing a connection between A1 and A3, because it was important to connect Cluj to A1. Why should't it be equally important to connect Craiova to A7, or whatever the number of CIV south !?

Quote:
About connecting with Craiova and further Pitesti, Sibiu obviously when deciding to build a bridge in Calafat/ Vidin the aim was not to connect the traffic from Bulgaria with Craiova. What traffic from Bulgaria to Craiova? and even further to Pitesti- Sibiu? There are no traffic on that way.
The bridge was built also to connect Romanian and Bulgarian economies, not only to serve pan-continental traffic. What regional traffic?! Reading the Romanian forum and the media, one can notice the the malls, businesses and markets in Craiova have been lately flooded with Serbian and Bulgarian clients.

I think it is important that the CIV south to be linked in Craiova to CIV north. It is really dumb to leave Craiova out of the CIV south, when the city is the trade and industrial center there. I though you were arguing for major cities being caught by motorways?!
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History: Lipscani Area |Victoriei Ave. | Elisabeta Bld.
Yes, it's Dracula's Castle
Best picture collection of UNESCO sites in Romania
Castles and Mansions in Romania

Last edited by Le Clerk; August 16th, 2013 at 12:46 AM.
Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 03:35 AM   #6266
alwn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bucuresti
Posts: 469
Likes (Received): 85

[QUOTE=Le Clerk;106202660][QUOTE]

I think it was a misunderstanding.. I never said Craiova to be left away of the motorways network. Besides Pitesti- Craiova, you can connect Craiova by motorway with Tr Severin (120 km on the plain) and then build a short link (expressway) from the bridge, not longer than 10-15 km.
I thought you were saying to change the southern Corridor IV from Arad-Timisoara- Lugoj- Caransebes- Tr Severin- bridge into a huge detour like Arad- Timisoara- Lugoj- Deva- Sibiu- Pitesti- Craiova- bridge. So basically to give up or postpone Lugoj- Caransebes- Tr Severin- bridge..
If so, you will lose the international traffic, which will chose the much shorter Serbian transit (almost full motorway till Bulgarian border)
__________________
Bucuresti/ Romania

Cutarescu liked this post
alwn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 08:35 AM   #6267
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 35,479
Likes (Received): 12043

No, this is what I am saying: instead of building the straight slim line from Calafat to Drobeta and then further to Lugoj, we should build Calafat-Craiova-Drobeta-Lugoj, in order to catch the most important city of the route which is Craiova and make the connection with Caiova-Pitesti motorway.



or alternatively:



Though it's a bit lesser of a point to build a huge motorway intersection in a middle of a field.
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History: Lipscani Area |Victoriei Ave. | Elisabeta Bld.
Yes, it's Dracula's Castle
Best picture collection of UNESCO sites in Romania
Castles and Mansions in Romania

jarekles, gogo3o liked this post

Last edited by Le Clerk; August 16th, 2013 at 08:53 AM.
Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 10:37 AM   #6268
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 35,479
Likes (Received): 12043

Quote:
Originally Posted by alwn View Post
I thought you were saying to change the southern Corridor IV from Arad-Timisoara- Lugoj- Caransebes- Tr Severin- bridge into a huge detour like Arad- Timisoara- Lugoj- Deva- Sibiu- Pitesti- Craiova- bridge. So basically to give up or postpone Lugoj- Caransebes- Tr Severin- bridge..
If so, you will lose the international traffic, which will chose the much shorter Serbian transit (almost full motorway till Bulgarian border)
I am saying that the construction of Craiova-Pitesti motorway and the current upgrade of Craiova-Calafat will postpone CIV south, yes. Just because the CIV north will be closed through Craiova. At least that's what I understand from the fact that they started building on CIX, and from the fact that the minister said that CIX will be completed by 2020.

Whether this will lose the traffic from CIV to Serbia, it is a moot point. Currently most of traffic is done through Serbia anyway. However, that traffic is steadily moving through Romania too. Once a corridor will be full - and CIV north will be first anyway - a lot of traffic will move through Romania. But not all, and never all. And by the time we finish CIV south, either 2020 or 2025, Serbia will be in the EU too - I think by 2020, so there is nothing to lose to Serbia which will retain the bigger part of traffic anyway when will become a EU member.
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History: Lipscani Area |Victoriei Ave. | Elisabeta Bld.
Yes, it's Dracula's Castle
Best picture collection of UNESCO sites in Romania
Castles and Mansions in Romania
Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 10:38 AM   #6269
and802
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Izabelin
Posts: 526
Likes (Received): 55

the second picture is more reliable with "intersection in the middle of nowhere". who cares its gonna be there ? "Y" city connections are attractive for sponsors.

why motorway ? why not a kind of expressway with facilities for future motorway if needed later ?
and802 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 01:03 PM   #6270
jarekles
Registered User
 
jarekles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Wrocław / Gostyń (Poland)
Posts: 1,206
Likes (Received): 18

fantastic :-)

go Romania :-)
__________________
jarekles no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 01:33 PM   #6271
alwn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bucuresti
Posts: 469
Likes (Received): 85

Quote:
Originally Posted by Le Clerk View Post
No, this is what I am saying: instead of building the straight slim line from Calafat to Drobeta and then further to Lugoj, we should build Calafat-Craiova-Drobeta-Lugoj, in order to catch the most important city of the route which is Craiova and make the connection with Caiova-Pitesti motorway.

or alternatively:
This one would be more proper!
__________________
Bucuresti/ Romania

Cutarescu liked this post
alwn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 02:36 PM   #6272
alwn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bucuresti
Posts: 469
Likes (Received): 85

Quote:
I am saying that the construction of Craiova-Pitesti motorway and the current upgrade of Craiova-Calafat will postpone CIV south, yes. Just because the CIV north will be closed through Craiova. At least that's what I understand from the fact that they started building on CIX, and from the fact that the minister said that CIX will be completed by 2020.
Whether this will lose the traffic from CIV to Serbia, it is a moot point.Currently most of traffic is done through Serbia anyway.
Obviously, in Serbia they have motorway, In Ro / Bul they don't have So we need to build one in order to become competitive. If we postpone the southern branch of the corridor IV, as you suggest, is no way to compete Serbia in terms of the international traffic.

Quote:
we should build Calafat-Craiova-Drobeta-Lugoj
Quote:
I am saying that the construction of Craiova-Pitesti motorway and the current upgrade of Craiova-Calafat will postpone CIV south, yes
So we should build Lugoj- Drobeta but it has to be postponed? So it is a priority or not? It is a contradiction here..
Quote:
However, that traffic is steadily moving through Romania too. Once a corridor will be full - and CIV north will be first anyway - a lot of traffic will move through Romania.
Regarding the international transit I understand you suggest to postpone CIV -south and follow the below route:
Sofia- Botevgrad- Vidin/Calafat- Craiova- Pitesti- Sibiu- Deva- Lugoj- Timisoara- Arad-Budapest
aprox: 1200 km
and you believe to be a viable alternative to the shortest way: Sofia- beograd- Budapest which has 750 km only?
Is no way to attract the international traffic to Craiova- Pitesti- Sibiu. The international traffic's target is western europe and not making promenade through beautiful Romania. I thought that was the meaning of the bridge Calafat/Vidin, to provide an alternative to the Serbian route and to improve Corridor IV south branch which, I repeat, it doesn't include Craiova.
As for the regional/local importance, do not forget that the bridge was financed by EU, so the main target is the international traffic and not the local greengrocers.
About my opinion to change the route of the corridor IX a little north in order to catch also Iasi and the international traffic from Western Europe and W Romania also, in the light of the new planned motorway Tg Mures- Iasi- Sculeni, it is not the same. The detour through Iasi is obvious less than Calafat- Craiova- Sibiu- Arad. Focsani- Albita 170 km vs Focsani- Bacau- Iasi 290 km.
Quote:
But not all, and never all. And by the time we finish CIV south, either 2020 or 2025, Serbia will be in the EU too - I think by 2020, so there is nothing to lose to Serbia which will retain the bigger part of traffic anyway when will become a EU member.
Of course if we are waiting 2025 and Serbian's integration in EU, the bridge from Calafat will lose any advantage over the Serbian corridor no X
__________________
Bucuresti/ Romania

Cutarescu liked this post

Last edited by alwn; August 16th, 2013 at 02:51 PM.
alwn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 03:19 PM   #6273
vchira
vreau la TM pe Autobahn!
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Wien
Posts: 433
Likes (Received): 54

I don't get it...all countrys are tring to get rid of traffic...so why should Romania want to attract more traffic? What's the advantage in having high traffic on the roads?
vchira no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 03:28 PM   #6274
albertocsc
Translator and traveller
 
albertocsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt - Hahn
Posts: 495
Likes (Received): 49

Quote:
Originally Posted by cove_adrian View Post
the forgotten land of Moldova : no-highway land!
I don't know which side of the Prut you are talking about. In both sides there are good highways, like DN 2 in Moldova Region or M1 (I love it) in Republic of Moldova. You might say it is a no-motorway land, which makes more sense.
albertocsc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 05:31 PM   #6275
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 35,479
Likes (Received): 12043

I think there is an unhealthy obsession with a so-called competition with Serbian international route. That was not the point of the Vidin-Calafat bridge! The point was first to connect 2 disconnected EU member states, which have only 1 bridge on more than 500 km of Danube river. If we build another bridge or even 2 more, that means we'll suddenly get 1 or 2 corridors?!

What is with this fixation that Romania should derail the CX traffic from Serbia to Romania?! This will not be feasible, because by the time we build CIV south, Serbia will be in the EU and the whole point of CIV south as a Serbia alternative will be lost.

The bridge is neither for the vegetable growers. It's really sad you reduce it to that.
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History: Lipscani Area |Victoriei Ave. | Elisabeta Bld.
Yes, it's Dracula's Castle
Best picture collection of UNESCO sites in Romania
Castles and Mansions in Romania

Last edited by Le Clerk; August 16th, 2013 at 05:38 PM.
Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 05:35 PM   #6276
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 35,479
Likes (Received): 12043

Quote:
Originally Posted by and802 View Post
the second picture is more reliable with "intersection in the middle of nowhere". who cares its gonna be there ? "Y" city connections are attractive for sponsors.

why motorway ? why not a kind of expressway with facilities for future motorway if needed later ?
I also think the Y junction is better there, though ussualy it would serve betrer an urban agglomeration.
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History: Lipscani Area |Victoriei Ave. | Elisabeta Bld.
Yes, it's Dracula's Castle
Best picture collection of UNESCO sites in Romania
Castles and Mansions in Romania

MichiH liked this post
Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2013, 07:39 PM   #6277
and802
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Izabelin
Posts: 526
Likes (Received): 55

a "Y" junction has got another feature. once it is bulit it attacts some new investors like logistic companies, etc. actually the junction develops the region it is situated. so soon nowhere-place becomes attractive, no-unemployment-rate region.
and802 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 17th, 2013, 08:26 AM   #6278
Theijs
Registered User
 
Theijs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 418
Likes (Received): 133

Quote:
Originally Posted by Le Clerk View Post
I think there is an unhealthy obsession with a so-called competition with Serbian international route. That was not the point of the Vidin-Calafat bridge! The point was first to connect 2 disconnected EU member states, which have only 1 bridge on more than 500 km of Danube river. If we build another bridge or even 2 more, that means we'll suddenly get 1 or 2 corridors?!
Sorry Le Clerk, but this is a false assumption. The Yugoslav war in the early 90s was the reason to build a 2nd bridge. Moreover, in its vision, the EU wanted to have a customs free transit road to Turkey, avoiding the unsecure future of Serbia. So economic, geopolitical reasons. The Romanian minister of transport at that time, Mr Basescu opposed, and that's why it will still take time before the additional highways (and railway track) in this corridor will be constructed.
The road along the Black Sea coast (Constanta - Vama Veche) exists as well (and another one). Not all roads with Bulgaria are part of the TEN-T axes.
Theijs no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 17th, 2013, 09:16 AM   #6279
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 35,479
Likes (Received): 12043

This is another fabulous myth. So, you are saying that without the Balkan wars, Romania and Bulgaria, two EU members, would not have built bridges, financed by the EU, because the EU didn't need them!?! So, can you tell me why are they planning additionally 2 new bridges, also financed by the EU, if not for their interconnection, first of all?!

As for Basescu, he disputed the location of the bridge, not the fact that a bridge must be built. In his opinion of the time, the brige is not that beneficial to Romania. And you can see that from the discussion above about how to draw the motorways in the region, RE Craiova connection.

As for the delays, I am sorry, but the bridge was already delayed 3 years by the builder. I fail to see how this affected the motorway connections there, when the EU did finance other motorways both in Romania and Bulgaria, in that same period when soem people claim an alternative to Serbia should have been built. So, then, why did the EU supported totally different routes both in Romania and Bulgaria, other than the Serbian alternative through the bridge!?!

Only now, they are considering the motorway connections for the bridge, even though Serbia is a candidate country and will join the EU by the time these connections will become available. So, where's the strategic reasoning for a by-pass of Sebian corridor?!
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History: Lipscani Area |Victoriei Ave. | Elisabeta Bld.
Yes, it's Dracula's Castle
Best picture collection of UNESCO sites in Romania
Castles and Mansions in Romania

Last edited by Le Clerk; August 17th, 2013 at 09:29 AM.
Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 17th, 2013, 10:10 AM   #6280
mcarling
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,605
Likes (Received): 491

Come on, guys! The EU is not a monolith of unitary motives. There are many actors in the EU and they don't all have the same motives. Was developing connections between Romania and Bulgaria an important factor in leading the EU to fund construction of bridges across the Danube? Yes, absolutely. Was developing customs-free routes to Turkey an important factor in leading the EU to fund construction of bridges across the Danube? Yes, absolutely. There is no contradiction here.
mcarling no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
highways, infrastructure, motorways, romania

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium