Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Rotary Wing Transportation System for Steep Mountain Range at Papua_revised For_Full_Papers_APTE_2010

Rotary Wing Transportation System for Steep Mountain Range at Papua_revised For_Full_Papers_APTE_2010

Ratings: (0)|Views: 61|Likes:

More info:

Published by: Dr. Ir. R. Didin Kusdian, MT. on Sep 29, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Rotary Wing Transportation System Alternative Supply for Steep Mountain Range at Papua
R. Didin KUSDIANAssociate ProfessorDepartment of Civil EngineeringUniversity of Sangga Buana YPKP Bandung, IndonesiaEmail:kusdian@yahoo.com 
Many of Papua people have been living around top mountain range since a long time ago. They live in theirwide spread villages, which the distance between each-other villages are far enough. To held the equity publicservices for the people of middle mountain area of Papua will need transportation system that can reachpeople at all village with no exception. Because of topographic condition of this service area is strongly steep,it will be very difficult and expensive to build continuous wide spread road network that can reach all spot of living area. In the other view the development of wide spread continuous surface transport will find a seriousconflict with environ mental conservation, Rotary Wing air transportation system is one alternative which canconsider to avoid the conflict between region growing improvement and conservation interest.
: wide spread villages, steep mountain range, conservation interest, rotary wing transportationsystem
The function of transport is including development of civilization, economic role, social role, and politicalrole. Transport as a system or in ‘total’ term will, therefore, be considered, not in any abstract sense but as atangible service to the community (Faulks, 1992). There is always need one or more reason to develop orimprove the transport system of the region, but in reality it is not always easy to find a complete or perfect setof reason. For example if the economic scheme is must be the main or important reason, it will be difficult forsome region to improve community’s quality of life by improve it transport system. This case especially willhappen in ‘left behind’ region of development country. These region usually has little amount of population,but still has equally important in political and social view as a part of country and nation, and as entity of human life for each people in population.This paper is written a part of study of transportation system for middle mountain range in province of Papua,Indonesia.
The study area means in this case is a part of the province of Papua, Indonesia which take a place in themiddle of it. The geographic condition of it is mountain range. Because of this geographic condition inIndonesian it call ‘Wilayah Pegunungan Tengah’, means ‘Middle Mountain Region’. Furthermore, it can betell that this area is only not mountain area, but steep mountain area. The steep condition of this mountainrange is special extreme characteristic of topographic condition which strongly influence to the reliability,workability, or at least level of difficulty of planning, survey, design, and, construction of surfacetransportation, including it cost. And also, in this area there is mapped or took a place an important forestconservation area, called ‘Taman Nasional Laurenz’. Again this reality make more dilemmatic situation forsurface transportation planning decision.Even this area can be tell as a difficult environmental for human life, but in reality people life in wide spreadof this mountain range. According to Indonesia’s constitution, all of citizen life anywhere in Indonesia eachhas same or equal knit of quality of live improvement.
The disparity of quality of live is still the serious problem that will be a continuous ‘home work’ for transportplanner. In the other hand the wide range of Indonesia as one state and nation make special difficulty indevelop all region and area to be more comfortable for human life. With the principle back round to make thepublic services nearer, easy, more effective and more efficient, The state of Indonesia run autonomyregulation. In autonomy era there are 33 (thirty tree) provinces, and beginning in 2000 province of ‘IrianBarat’ expanded to be two provinces, Papua and West Papua.The expanding of provinces follows by the expanding of regencies and cities. This happened too for provinceof Papua. This regency administrative division illustrated in figure 3.1.The next step to reach the goal in develop all regencies is develop the transportation system. Thisdevelopment must be considered and analyzed carefully, following the limits of we called ‘sustainabledevelopment’. Minimum targets or standards and maximum limits or threshold relevant in such analysis canbe categorized as: 1) standards of living or human needs satisfaction; 2) environmental limits of naturalresource capacities and standards of pollution or contamination; 3) ecological limits of the carrying capacityof bio productive systems or vulnerable lands for sustaining human populations in a particular territory; 4)standards of equity in the interpersonal, -regional and –generational distribution of income and wealth, accessto natural resources, and the distribution of environmental costs and benefits; and 5) other cultural, political,social or demographic standards or targets (Bartelmus, 1994)
The people of middle mountain range of Papua live in their villages which spatially scattered in long distancewith another villages. They live in long history of their own civilization. The world (mean the planner view ordevelopment analyst) must be careful to set their goal in development program, for example if the externalworld say that the goal is to raise the people to avoid from poverty, they may be refuse because in their mindthey do not have a feel that they are poor people. They have their own civilization and local wisdom. This isonly o problem of view.During president Soeharto ‘s era, the government of Republic of Indonesia has developed the road line fromJayapura as province capital to Wamena as the center city of middle mountain range. As the main idea orconcept of this program is to draw the people which live around mountain top down to road line side and
Figure 3.1 Regency Administrative Division of Study Area
Source :Study of Integrated Transportation Network Development of Middle mountain Range,Papua Province
hoped their social and economic be growth at around the road trace as the beginning. The road it self wascompletely has constructed, but the people have not move down, they still live in their own historical placefrom long generations before, around mountain. They think that they do not need road, and there is noproblem with this in their view. So then the road is no used and many kinds of plants sprout up over it, again.Now in reformation and autonomy era the new approach as a concept to develop the middle mountain rangeregion of Papua is to set the infrastructure near to the people. The infrastructure must be developed in order tomake the basic important public service as healthy and education service can be straightly and wide spreadtouch the people in equitable and spread through the region.
To estimate the transportation demand of middle mountain of Papua region, this study used the four-stepmethod approach. The prior people and freight movement matrix data used is the results of national Origin-Destination (O-D) survey held at 2006. In trip generation step this study found synthetic formula by regressO-D data series versus population data series of six regencies. For people movement the data shown in table5.1. and synthetic trip generation formula as a result of regression model is expressed by formula (1) forproduction and formula (2) for attraction. For freight movement is shown by table 5.2 , formula (3) andformula (4).
REGENCY/CITYAREA(Km2)POPULATION(people)Oi [people]Dd[people]
Pegunungan Bintang5516.0035549.00305920708Yahukimo1955.0023621.00995713673Jayawijaya1201.0057909.00145075774Tolikara210.5531590.0025736433Puncak Jaya888.0047952.00118145123Paniai1106.0056867.001285212852
Table 5.1 Population versus People O-D datas for 2006
Oi = 0.234991771 p (1)Dd = 0.175920835 p (2)Where Oi is people production going movement from zone i, Dd is people attraction coming movement tozone d, and p is population for related year. Future Oi and Dd in future year can determine by these formulasif future population has estimated before by used growth factor derived and adopted from population dataseries.
Table 5.2 Population versus Freigt O-D datas for 2006REGENCY/CITYAREA(Km2)POPULATION(people)Oi [ton]Dd [ton]
Pegunungan Bintang5516.0035549.002377924363Yahukimo1955.0023621.007147571276Jayawijaya1201.0057909.006678872749Tolikara210.5531590.001982921181Puncak Jaya888.0047952.006148658689Paniai1106.0056867.004890652866
 Oi =
p (3)Dd =
p (4)In this case Oi and Dd is according with freight movement, and future freight movement can be estimate withthe same method with future people movement describe above.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->