|
sweet geek swag posted:Of course there are building codes. But without knowing the underlying geology and hydrology it is impossible to know how they should be applied. "You need to understand the underlying soils" is actually part of the bridge guidelines. They even tell you how many borings you need based on the size of the bridge and abutments, and how close the borings should be to the actual location.
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 01:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
I take it he’s wearing a safety harness, because there’s no way he caught that rope. OSHA-approved.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 02:13
|
|
|
Lazyhound posted:I take it he’s wearing a safety harness, because there’s no way he caught that rope. What are you talking about? He pulled a chute.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 02:17
|
|
|
Lazyhound posted:I take it he’s wearing a safety harness, because there’s no way he caught that rope. So you're saying he didn't catch that rope after falling 40 feet from it? Hmmm, maybe....
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 02:48
|
|
|
Maybe we should all have mini-paracutes instead of saftey harnesses
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 03:09
|
|
|
Maybe we shouldn't be walking across a canyon on a thin rear end rope https://i.imgur.com/zUEuzYZ.gifv Syrian Lannister fucked around with this message at 03:35 on Oct 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
I don't think I've ever been quite so worried as I was for the first 15 seconds of that gif
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 03:53
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:I don't think I've ever been quite so worried as I was for the first 15 seconds of that gif Same, I had great concern for that poor dog.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 03:55
|
|
|
New Tetris is not necessarily better than the original.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 04:28
|
|
|
Cross post from the Funny Pictures thread, straight out of the "good enough, let's go to the pub" files.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 04:33
|
|
|
Memento posted:Cross post from the Funny Pictures thread, straight out of the "good enough, let's go to the pub" files. "Huh, I guess I left my tape measure in the truck or something"
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 04:59
|
|
|
Structural tape measure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 06:42
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/ECsK7Aq.mp4
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 07:08
|
|
|
 Holy gently caress, I hope they wore their brown pants.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 07:14
|
|
|
I'm the tree exploding on the other side of the road.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 08:00
|
|
|
I didn't even notice that, holy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 08:02
|
|
|
I’m the local quadrupeds crossing the road and delaying the cammer by just enough to avert a crash.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 08:11
|
|
|
im the followup boulders
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 08:57
|
|
|
I like that little " ok dangers over I can now proceed my driveohshitnothereismore" maneuver.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 09:05
|
|
|
Helios Grime posted:I like that little " ok dangers over I can now proceed my driveohshitnothereismore" maneuver. Im the socially maladjusted impulse to continue driving rather than, you know, checking for survivors?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 09:23
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:Im the socially maladjusted impulse to continue driving rather than, you know, checking for survivors? It's a China thing. Why help someone if it isn't your job or it isn't your fault. See also "it can't be helped".
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 09:47
|
|
|
Lurking Haro posted:It's a China thing. Why help someone if it isn't your job or it isn't your fault. Ah, those are cows not moose. I thought it was Maine or Alaska or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 09:48
|
|
|
Lurking Haro posted:It's a China thing. Why help someone if it isn't your job or it isn't your fault.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 09:54
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:It could also be a "let's get the gently caress out of the danger zone" thing Yeah, I don't think 'there's an avalanche crushing cars in front of me, better put it in reverse' is a seering indicement of social attitudes and more and acknowledgement that big rocks hurt if they land on you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 09:59
|
|
|
I appreciate the feedback everyone. I’ll keep going because it seems well received. I wanted to write a bit about another relatively recent one that was talked about quite widely within the industry at the time, at least in this country. 22nd January 2014 a group of three ultrasonic rail testers who were all very experienced turned up to perform a test on Newark South Junction, 70 meters south of Newark North Gate station (Newark England, not Newark New Jersey, sorry). One was assigned as “Controller of Site Safety” (COSS), one was doing the testing, and a man called John Wright was assigned as lookout. The COSS stayed in the van the three had arrived in. A few minutes after they arrived, at 11:34, the 10:08 London to Newark North Gate train approached the junction. The driver saw the track workers and blew the warning horn. Wright and the tester moved to a position of safety away from the tracks and both raised an arm to acknowledge the warning. Then 12 seconds later, for some reason, Wright turned away from the train and walked back to roughly where they had been standing. The train driver blew the horn again and applied the emergency brakes but Wright did not react until too late and was hit by the train. They were seriously injured and died 9 days later in hospital. There’s a lot to unpack here. Why was the COSS not on site? Why were they working on running lines in the first place? And obviously, the big question, why did John Wright walk into the path of a train he had only just acknowledged? The Network Rail works planner back in Doncaster depot was the person responsible for drawing up the “Safe System of Work” that would allow the ultrasonic rail testing to be done. They have a number of different categories of system to choose from ranging from the safest “green zone” working (lines closed, no train movements) to the least safe “red zone” working (all lines open, trains running normally on all lines, workers protected by lookouts). If the work is lengthy and complicated and requires a big work gang they are likely to choose a more restrictive method of work like arranging a “possession” of the track and creating a green zone. Normally the signaller is considered to be the owner of a section of line. If the track workers have a possession it means the signaller is temporarily not in control of movements in that area and therefore cannot run trains through it. You might do that for major works, but it is not always considered feasible for routine testing. After the accident Network Rail provided figures that showed 95% of the testing work from that region was red zone work. Red zone working should only be used if no other system was feasible. The investigation concluded that “flexibility” had taken priority over this instruction at the Doncaster depot. All three members of the gang were competent to act as COSS or lookout. Whoever is assigned as COSS for the day is responsible for assessing the Safe System of Work and making sure it’s appropriate. It isn’t possible to do that from your van. The COSS is responsible for briefing the gang on features of the site, which would include in what directions trains travel on each line (more on this later). This was done while they were in the van on the way to the site according to the surviving two. So the COSS hadn’t assessed the site before giving the briefing. The most junior member of the gang, the tester, had 13 years of experience. The most senior, the COSS, had 36 years experience. John Wright had 30 years. They had all worked frequently at Newark in the past. Perhaps nothing would have been done especially differently if the COSS had been on site, assessed the SSOW, and then given their briefing. But the whole thing suggests an air of complacency about the risks of what they were doing. All of these procedures, processes, and qualifications are there as mitigation for the risks involved in the choice by the planner to have this work conducted in the most dangerous out of all the available options. Why did John Wright walk into the path of the train? Unfortunately his injuries precluded him giving an explanation. Newark has a southbound line, a northbound line and a bay platform. Newark South junction is where trains cross from the northbound line to the bay platform, crossing over the southbound line. The two workers were working on the southbound line, walked away from the tracks, then Wright turned towards the station and walked onto the southbound tracks again. If the train had been going into the northbound platform 1 he would have been safe. In fact it was crossing over the southbound lines to go into platform 3. Presumably he was not aware of this. It was still approaching the junction when he moved away and acknowledged it, so its eventual route wasn’t obvious. He did not look back in the direction of the train until roughly 1 second before the impact. The most likely explanation is that Wright assumed the southbound line was not affected by the trains’ movement, and due to complacency about his knowledge of the location he did not think to look. To me it seems like low levels of situational awareness, or autopilot. Like when you drive home and get there and realise you can’t remember any of the journey. I doubt he consciously thought to himself at any point “that train’s going into platform 1, so the southbound line is clear”. He probably just acted on instinct/autopilot/preconditioning and didn’t even think about it. We all do that all the time, we’re just not normally in an environment where it can kill you. Examining Wright’s training and assessment history it seemed he had been badly let down in recent years by those supposed to be looking out for him. Incidents had happened and never been documented. He’d been doing the job so long no one really considered the possibility of skill fade over time. People don’t generally consciously note moving from a “normal” mental state to a “concentrating” mental state. But sometimes you need to make a decision to flick a switch in your head, or put your game face on. It’s what we now refer to as “non-technical skills”. A constant program of assessment, monitoring, briefings, and professional discussions can help to foreground in people’s minds that what they are dealing with can kill them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 13:08
|
|
|
Syrian Lannister posted:Maybe we shouldn't be walking across a canyon on a thin rear end rope 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 13:21
|
|
|
OrthoTrot posted:But sometimes you need to make a decision to flick a switch in your head, or put your game face on. It’s what we now refer to as “non-technical skills”. A constant program of assessment, monitoring, briefings, and professional discussions can help to foreground in people’s minds that what they are dealing with can kill them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 13:47
|
|
|
OrthoTrot posted:After the accident Network Rail provided figures that showed 95% of the testing work from that region was red zone work. Red zone working should only be used if no other system was feasible. The investigation concluded that “flexibility” had taken priority over this instruction at the Doncaster depot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 13:50
|
|
|
kw0134 posted:After 30 years of institutionalized "meh", I wonder if any procedure could have worked. Yeah, there's two types of people that do the dumbest poo poo. The first is the new guy who thinks he knows what he's doing and fucks it up, because he's too new to know what he is doing is stupid. The second is the guy who's been doing it for decades who "knows" what dangerous shortcuts he can take, because he's been doing it for years and it's never been a problem yet! Until he fucks it up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 14:06
|
|
|
I'm the car in front that continues driving without either noticing or acknowledging anything unusual.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 15:06
|
|
|
Lurking Haro posted:It's a China thing. Why help someone if it isn't your job or it isn't your fault. China lacks Good Samaritan laws, which is something that we take for granted in the U.S. (not sure about Europe). So if you stop and help and, in the course of getting them out of the car, somehow injure them further, they can sue you for those injuries, so there's a strong disincentive to help in the event of an accident.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 15:17
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:China lacks Good Samaritan laws, which is something that we take for granted in the U.S. (not sure about Europe). So if you stop and help and, in the course of getting them out of the car, somehow injure them further, they can sue you for those injuries, so there's a strong disincentive to help in the event of an accident. There's a common belief that if you help someone, you could end up liable for all their hospital costs - not due to injuring them, but just as a result of being there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 15:24
|
|
|
kw0134 posted:After 30 years of institutionalized "meh", I wonder if any procedure could have worked. Watching a co-worker die in front of him might have achieved it. So, he provided that lesson to his co-workers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 15:50
|
|
|
It's a common belief in China because of a famous court case where that was precisely the outcome: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xu_Shoulan_v._Peng_Yu quote:In 2006, Peng Yu had encountered Xu Shoulan after she had fallen and broken her femur. Peng Yu assisted Xu Shoulan and brought her to a local hospital for further care. Xu Shoulan accused Peng Yu of having caused her to fall, and demanded that he pay her medical expenses. The court decided in favor of the plaintiff and held Peng liable for damages, reasoning that despite the lack of concrete evidence, "no one would in good conscience help someone unless they felt guilty". The country did recently (2017) implement a Good Samaritan law, though it's apparently not especially legally sound, but at least it's a start.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 15:50
|
|
|
spog posted:Yeah, I don't think 'there's an avalanche crushing cars in front of me, better put it in reverse' is a seering indicement of social attitudes and more and acknowledgement that big rocks hurt if they land on you. Yeah, if you run up and start giving aid and more rocks fall then they might fall on you. Now there are two people needing treatment where before three was just one. The best thing to do is probably call emergency services. You could also try to give aid and have someone spot uphill for you but both you and the spotter are taking a risk. If a hillside is shedding rocks, the one you just saw probably isn't the last one it's shedding today.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 15:51
|
|
|
Reminds me of this much more horrifying one from Taiwan a few years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbSeIc4RpeM (if you watch closely at the very start of the video, you can spot the moment it begins to fall)
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 16:03
|
|
|
Megillah Gorilla posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbSeIc4RpeM That McDonalds looks very welcoming 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 16:07
|
|
|
OrthoTrot your posts are both informative and engaging, please keep writing them for as long as you want. When I was doing my PhD, a friend’s flat mate was killed in the Ladbroke Grove crash. I’ll be honest, I didn’t feel relaxed using the train for at least the next year, which is problematic if you live in Wandsworth.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 16:16
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Watching a co-worker die in front of him might have achieved it. So, he provided that lesson to his co-workers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 17:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
drgitlin posted:OrthoTrot your posts are both informative and engaging, please keep writing them for as long as you want. Thanks. I will try and write something about Ladbroke Grove next as its a really big deal. Like Clapham Junction it has had a massive impact. You can still get killed on the railway easily enough but it's hard to imagine something like that happening again. Our biggest risk these days is probably rear end collisions or a Germanwings style "I'm going down and I'm taking you all with me". It's conceivable weve already had one of those actually - the Moorgate crash.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 17:47
|
|