Even after reading the piece, I'm still struggling to understand the mechanics of it all.
Under normal conditions, when people walking in front of you stop, you stop also so you don't bump into them. Makes sense, right?
So you would think that as long as everybody obeys that simple rule of movement, this should never happen.
But having been caught in a much less serious "crush" once, I know it's not that simple.
In my case, I was at a similar event -- religious in nature, lots of people from all around the world, and mostly traveling in groups -- and although everybody was polite and non-aggressive, as groups traveled through the crowds, nobody wanted to be separated from their groups, and that caused major issues.
For instance, a lot of groups traveled while holding hands in an effort to remain together. But imagine how much more difficult it is for a bunch of worm-like people chains to travel through a crowd than it is for discrete individuals to do so.
The surge I was caught in was little more than a momentary push forward, but it was very scary to lose control over my ability to move freely.
I would hope that with most people having cell phones nowadays, which gives them the ability to more easily regroup after separation, it should be a priority in cases like this to urge people to not form chains and to devalue staying with their group if it affects the flow of traffic.
There's also a good New Yorker article that made a lot of the same points, but in the form of a longform article, if you prefer that: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/02/07/crush-point. The bottom line is that past a certain "person density", crowds are actually governed by a lot of the same laws as fluid dynamics. When you introduce a "wall" in front of the flow, the people at the back don't even know it because they're too far away to notice. They can't know to "stop" any more than water at the back of a pipe can suddenly stop if the water ahead of it encounters an obstacle.
The problem is that people don't stop immediately. You stop, the person behind you stops just a little bit later, the person behind them a little bit later than that. As you're walking the gaps in between people shrink. Finally the person in front of you stops, you try to stop but the person behind you is close and bumps in to you a bit as you try to stop, you bump the person ahead of you who has stopped because they can't move forward, which squeezes the person ahead of him. Repeat for thousands of people and you have a collection of tiny small bumps and pushes that squeeze people to the point of death.
Thinking about the sheer numbers might help imagining the mechanics. 2 million pilgrims crowded into very specific places at or near Makkah that year. For reference, the population of Chicago is 2.7 million.
> I would hope that with most people having cell phones nowadays, which gives them the ability to more easily regroup after separation, it should be a priority in cases like this to urge people to not form chains and to devalue staying with their group if it affects the flow of traffic.
While true, the reception at such events is usually non-existent due to the sheer volume of people with devices. Even with a healthy quantity of cellular base stations or wifi access points, there will still be serious issues and connections will be spotty at best.
And the GP has rediscovered that viscosity is much higher for a fluid made up of long-chained molecules (think motor oil) than a fluid made up of short-chained ones (think gasoline).
Under normal conditions with rational drivers, there shouldn't be any car crashes. It's when the assumptions fail—distractions, obstacles in the middle of the road, weather, inebriation—that people crash.
The Saudi royal family derives significant prestige from being seen as successfully managing the Hajj. However, they're not particularly competent at anything approaching governance or management, since being competent isn't a good way to get prestige, money, power, etc (being related to the right person, or possibly being extremely holy, is). So, you get continual fuckups, and continual coverups. Their debacle in Yemen proceeds under a similar pattern, as do their attempts to "modernize" their economy, and so on.
Perhaps no regime, other than maybe North Korea, has a more negative accrued karmic balance. And honestly, North Korea does less to screw up the rest of the world than the Saudis.
The Saudi government blamed Africans for the stampede even though it was mostly Iranians and South Asians who died. They're just making this tragedy worse in so many ways. The incompetence is apparent.
>Article doesn't mention any steps the organizers are making to fix it
That's because they are making none. The "steps" (rituals) of Hajj have been the same for over 1400 years, there's no reason for such accidents to happen when you:
Know where people are headed.
When people are headed there.
The number of those people.
And most importantly UNLIMITED fucking ressources!
Knowing that many people lost their lives because incompetent idiots can't manage shit infuriates me and especially when a royal Saudi clerk (can't find an English source) says that the Sub-Saharan victims were better off dying in the "holy lands" than in their messy countries.
I am so glad I've renounced my religion, people often poke fun at the materialism of christianity by mentioning Indulgence and not realize Hajj is the most exploitive religious act anyone can engage in.
The Saudis have tried to fix the problem, but not very effectively. They've built lots of tunnels and ramps. But they tend to build hard-sided walkways without escape routes. They also have too many long pathways where people can't see what's happening ahead. So anything that causes a stoppage can cause a crush.
The Mina crush may have been started by a VIP visit by the Saudi minister of defense, with a big entourage, interfering with the traffic flow. The 1990 tunnel crush was triggered by some people falling off a bridge over the tunnel exit, stopping traffic at the exit to a long tunnel.
But it's the long, inescapable walkways which are the problem. There's a good analysis at a crowd safety site.[1]
A German firm did the crowd planning for the Grand Mosque capacity upgrade in 2010, and that seems to be working well.[2] That's six miles from Mina. The Grand Mosque area is now insanely overbuilt
(the giant five star hotel with giant clock tower, run by Fairmont Hotels, across from the Kaaba, looks like something from Vegas) but has much more traffic capacity.
This comment contains both informative content and uncivil insults that the guidelines ask us not to make. Please give us the former without the latter. It's even more important around controversial topics that we comment civilly and reflectively.
I think expansion of the pathways and re-architecting the landscape to take on capacity has created conditions for "mega" stampedes, so instead of few people here and there, the stampede cascades and creates bigger chaos and takes more lives.
This is what happens when expansion of capacity is done without decent safety measures in place.
Safety measures aren't enough. The requirements are impossible: In finite time window T, N people attempt pass through finite region R. N increases every year, past the point where they just don't fit.
I saw the entire thread of comments under yours, and I'm glad that you were so willing to admit, you crossed a line, so I am commenting in general, just to understand better. And offer my thoughts, if you don't agree please explain to me why.
>I am so glad I've renounced my religion, people often poke fun at the materialism of christianity by mentioning Indulgence and not realize Hajj is the most exploitive religious act anyone can engage in.
Are you comfortable renouncing your religion? I personally prefer a secular prefix than an ex prefix. For example, couldn't you have just continued to be less religious. Making arguments based on science and known facts, to counter dogma. Without ever bracketing yourself as an 'ex'. I believe from within you can bring about more change in any community.
Also in that way, you continue to enjoy all the biryanis[1] and all the sewais[2], and all the nice fraternity - which is largely good. Just my opinion on whats healthier. I typically sincerely seek to understand all sides. And my view is extreme positions are harder to change (very obvious point I know).
[1] & [2] -- some nice Muslim food in the Indian subcontinent
Some types of controls can make it worse. A physical barrier, for instance, could result in (and has at other crushes) people being crushed against the barricade itself. You need to control the inflow to the traffic channels, because the people at the back don't know they're killing people. They'll press not realizing the impact of their decision. The people in the middle and, possibly, the front have nowhere to go.
So while steps aren't being taken, several steps can be taken. Any way you can isolate one large group into several small groups, you prevent extreme pressures from building. This can be accomplished with barriers and gates to dampen waves and pressure. (As long as you don't introduce crush against these barriers)
Woody Guthrie wrote a song about a true story - 1913 Massacre - a devasting and haunting song.
The song is based around the Italian Hall Disaster - a tragedy that occurred on December 24, 1913, in Calumet, Michigan. 73 men, women, and children, mostly striking mine workers and their families, were crushed to death in a stampede when someone falsely shouted "fire" at a crowded Christmas party.
...but here's the second half which describes the scenario:
The copper boss' thugs stuck their heads in the door,
One of them yelled and he screamed, "there's a fire,"
A lady she hollered, "there's no such a thing.
Keep on with your party, there's no such thing."
A few people rushed and it was only a few,
"It's just the thugs and the scabs fooling you,"
A man grabbed his daughter and carried her down,
But the thugs held the door and he could not get out.
And then others followed, a hundred or more,
But most everybody remained on the floor,
The gun thugs they laughed at their murderous joke,
While the children were smothered on the stairs by the door.
Such a terrible sight I never did see,
We carried our children back up to their tree,
The scabs outside still laughed at their spree,
And the children that died there were seventy-three.
The piano played a slow funeral tune,
And the town was lit up by a cold Christmas moon,
The parents they cried and the miners they moaned,
"See what your greed for money has done."
On a side note, why are areas separated based on countries of origin? If I were a muslim on the Hajj I'd be enthralled to be around people of all cultures and countries around me.
Its easier in terms of organisation and more easier to deal with groups of people who speak the same language rather than a hodgepodge. Many in these groups are illiterate and have never written or read in their lives, it can be quite difficult to manage people when one doesn't even speak their language.
"Tents in Mina are reserved through the hajj ministry, which organizes pilgrims according to where they come from."
Seriously is this because of discrimination or due to some sort of "optimization" that is not explained in the article. Vendors speaking same language kinda thing perhaps.
Mostly optimization because its easier to deal with people who all speak the same language rather than having a hodgepodge of languages and cultures. One has to try and imagine the amount of different kind of people these are, its quite over-whelming.
Regarding doing it in waves. Its technically not possible because its a certain time of the year that one can do Hajj, and its not a whole year thing otherwise it wouldn't be such a issue. Its a five day period starting on a specific date determined by the Islamic Calendar which is based on the Lunar Cycle.
So, For Example, the Hajj start this year on the 12th of this month and continues for a five day period in which millions of people will flock to the country. Last year it was 2,000,000 people in total.
At the end of day, it is possible to manage large crowds such as this but Saudi's are basically not putting in the effort. The amount of resources they have, don't justify this being this bad. Hell, Most other Islamic countries also often criticize Saudi's specifically on this issue. I think Iran has called them murderers or something for last years accident.
Way more people can celebrate new year on Times Square, too, if they do it in waves, say starting on December 25 for the first wave and ending on January 8 for the last.
Problem is that there's a fairly strict clock synchronizing the motions of all pilgrims.
Under normal conditions, when people walking in front of you stop, you stop also so you don't bump into them. Makes sense, right?
So you would think that as long as everybody obeys that simple rule of movement, this should never happen.
But having been caught in a much less serious "crush" once, I know it's not that simple.
In my case, I was at a similar event -- religious in nature, lots of people from all around the world, and mostly traveling in groups -- and although everybody was polite and non-aggressive, as groups traveled through the crowds, nobody wanted to be separated from their groups, and that caused major issues.
For instance, a lot of groups traveled while holding hands in an effort to remain together. But imagine how much more difficult it is for a bunch of worm-like people chains to travel through a crowd than it is for discrete individuals to do so.
The surge I was caught in was little more than a momentary push forward, but it was very scary to lose control over my ability to move freely.
I would hope that with most people having cell phones nowadays, which gives them the ability to more easily regroup after separation, it should be a priority in cases like this to urge people to not form chains and to devalue staying with their group if it affects the flow of traffic.