On the morning of September 21, 2010, Commonwealth Games preparations received a setback. A 95-metre long pedestrian footbridge outside the Jawaharlal Nehru stadium collapsed, injuring 23 workmen. The setback occurred 12 days before the scheduled opening of the Games.
The bridge, a critical link between the stadium car park and its arena, was indispensable for the security, convenience and safety of participants, spectators and staff.
The CWG Organising Committee requested the Indian Army for a replacement bridge on September 25. The army accepted the formidable challenge and constructed it by September 30.
I have no doubt that the army, without even being placed on warning, must have mobilised its engineers (colloquially called Sappers) for a replacement bridge, within hours of the collapse of the bridge, in the belief that, finally, the buck could stop at its doorstep.
A task force must have been earmarked, its leader and Second-in-Command nominated, and a physical staff check carried out on the total equipment and tools needed for bridge construction plus a spare 50 metres.
The design section must, at the same time, have carried out an anticipatory reconnaissance on the site. It is not beyond the meticulous and time tested army planning norms that the bridge material must have been concentrated in one location, loaded in designated vehicles, (each with its own load table) and kept ready for move with a route and distance map given to each vehicle commander.
Grouped with the equipment would have been the supporting engineer vehicles like cranes, earthmovers, fork lifts, survey vehicles, radio communications, a water tanker, a mobile kitchen, fresh and dry rations, a langar with cooks, cooking wherewithal, cleaning staff and, not the least, an ambulance for self-contained 24x7 site servicing of the task force.
On site, the work would proceed with military precision with specific soldiers detailed for each sub task; from dismantling the existing structure to identifying, on the ground, how exactly the new bridge would come up.
The actual construction would then proceed with the minimum of fuss, as per the method plotted on a PERT chart. (A PERT chart is a very useful project management tool used to schedule, organise, and coordinate tasks within a project, PERT stands for Program Evaluation Review Technique).
It helps identify the critical path to be followed for task execution and indicates possible bottlenecks and how they should be negotiated. It goes without saying that, in the final analysis, it is inspired, hands-on leadership and a practical feel for the task that gets high grade work done, and on time.
Part of the working style of the army would have been the critical need for 24 x 7 insight into actual work done, in percentage or man-hour terms plotted against the available time.
This is deliberately reduced by the commander by five to ten percent, in order to spur the men to greater effort. This also ensures that work is finished within the overall time allotted.
The situational awareness at all levels of command and work execution is therefore planned in such a manner that everyone in the chain knows in real time how much work has been completed and how much is left to be done, and thus, be in a position to help with resources or with decisions in real time rather than when it is too late.
Not the least, is the fact that each nut, bolt, strut, weight bearing member is clearly marked, taken to its fitment location, fitted, tested, certified, re-tested and only then does construction continue.
Human error or over-confidence is, thus, ruthlessly eliminated within the task force, as also by on site officers, who monitor construction with hawk-like alacrity, but interfere only when a safety norm is violated, so the overall bridge safety is not compromised.
