ملف رقم ٩٣٠ لسنة ١٩١٢ "سكة حديد المحمرة - خرم آباد؛ [ظ‎‎١‎٢‎٧] (٣٩٦/٢٦١)

■
27
f
7i;
% .
Branch lines-
(l) Tn the
British zone.
(2) In the
neutral zone.
* Colonel Cox mentions three possible points at
■which the line might touch the coast* viz., Gwetter,
Gwndur and Pasni. We have taken the latter as being
on the more direct route. Our remarks apply with
slight modification to the routes via Gwetter aud
Gwadur.
render it essential that the Government of India should select the Karachi connection in
preference to that viz Seistan and Nushki.
Taking now the comparative advantages of the two routes ending at Karachi, we may first
give a general description of the country on t' e
Pasui, * Bampur, Bam, Kerman and Yezd
alignment. The length of the route, as taken
from the route books, is 1,147 miles Prom
Karachi to Pasni (296 miles) the line would
run in the vicinity of the sea shore; the
grade would he level and the chief works
would be those connected with the crossing of creeks and drainage from the hills. The
only point of doubt in respect of this portion of the route is whether the fresh water supply
for working locomotives would be sufficient. This is a matter which will need careful investi
gation. At Pasni the lin« would turn to the north-west and running by a sloping, hilly
country for 159 miles would cross a range 3,000 feet high, dropping beyond io a level of
1,500 feet. Prom this point there would again be a steady rise till about the 8U0th miley
where a very sharp rise would have to be faced, the line to reach Kerman having to cross a
ridge 8,400 feet high and dropping into the town beyond to 5,600 feet level. Prom Kerman
to Yezd the line would be at a high level, but with no ranges of any height to cross.
In the absence of any information as to the cost of making railways in Persia, it is
difficult to frame any estimate of the cost of this section of the line. But labour and supplies
•.would be scarce and, iu view of the engineering difficulties of the alignment, the cost of
construction and cost of working would certainly be very high. In so far as we are able
ito frame an estimate, we would put the cost rf the section between Karajhi and Yezd vid
Pasni and Kerman at not less than 17 crores or rupees.
Turning to the alternative route, viz , from Karachi along the coast to Bandar Abbas and
thence direct to Yezd, the section as far as B.mdar Abbas should offer no particular difficulties
as regards construction, and it would provide a level road to run over. Prom Bandar Abbas
to Yezd the general slope of the country is easy and there is no abrupt rise such as is met on
the Pasni-Kerman section. As an engineering proposition, therefore, the section from Bandar
•Abhas to Yezd does not appear to be open to any great objection. We estimate the cost
of constructing the entire line from Karachi to Yezd via Bandar Abbas roughly at 14 crores of
rupees, as against 17 crores for the Yezd-Kerman-Karaehi route. As a through route between
Russia aud India it would certainly be quicker than the Kerman route, though of greater
Jength, since the easier grades would permit of a faster train service. This alignment also
p ssesses the strategical advantages—
(1) That it avoids bringing the through line to Kerman, which is only 289 miles from
the Afghan border.
(2) That the entire route from Bandar Abbas to Karachi will lie sufficiently near the
coast to allow the co-operation of the sea and land forces of the Empire in its defence.
* ‘ • . ii ' . ;
The Bandar Abbas-Karachi coast line would, it is true, do little towards devel oping trade
with the interior of Persia, but we would propose, if this route is adapted, that a branch line
should he run either from Bandar Abbas or Charbar to Regan and Bam with a possible later
extension to Kerman. The connection of Kerman with a port on the coast bv means of a
branch line would have this advantage over its inclusion in the main through route that it
would enable Indian commerce to compete for the south-eastern Persian market on more
favourable terms than would be the case if Russia were able to transport her goods direct to-
Kerman.
We would recommend, therefore, that on sti’afegical-and political grounds the Govern
ment of India should express a strong preference for the connection with Karachi, and that,
of the two possible routes connecting Karachi with the main line, they should'sejecc that
via Bandar Abbas and Yezd as being the easier, quicker, more economical, and more advan
tageous from the point of view of military defence.
: ’ ' . ; i r 7
8. We have next to consider the important question of the branch fines to be
constructed in the event of the proposals for the through route coming to maturity*
Assuming that the Kerman-Seistan-Nushki alignment is rejected, there will be ho absolute
■necessity from the commercial or strategical point of view for the construction of a branch
from Bandar Abbas to Kerman, but, as we have already indicated, it would be most desirable
that, with a view to the development of our trade with Persia, entry into the markets of
south-eastern Persia should be secured by a branch line from some port on the coast within
the British sphere. Whether this branch should lead from Bandar Abbas or from some other
port, such as Charbar, we would leave for future decision after the routes have been
examined, but we think it desirable that in the negotiations to be entered into with Russia it
should be stipulated that it should be open to Great Britain to construct a branch line
‘ connecting Kerman with the coast by whatever route may prove to be the most convenient..
It is further important in our opinion to make it a condition of our acceptance of the
main proposal that Russia will support us in obtaining such concessions for branch lines