 |
Re: "Violent Convulsions" WTF? Now we're all going to be buried??
Author: BOB2
Date: 09-23-2018 - 23:20
Gary Hunter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bob2- My point is that CA has a higher level of
> probability for a major earthquake than almost
> anywhere else in the US. The speed of
> reconstruction of rail infrastructure would be
> much slower in underground alignments. I suppose
> at the most fatalistic level, it doesn't matter
> whether you get buried in a tunnel, are thrown of
> the side of a mountain grade, or whatever other
> options are provided by a surface alignment. It
> is just my perception that surface running is a
> bit better when possible in mountainous terrain.
> There is a picture in a book about Tehachipi from
> 1952 right after the quake that shows the rail
> line curving right into the side of the mountain.
> About 150 ft. or so away, sits an empty tunnel
> portal. Yeah, I'll stick with "violent
> convulsions". Northridge anyone?
Have you seen all of the pictures of all of the earthquake damage from the massive earthquakes in Japan? Did you see the collapse of the "evil" BART tunnels in the "violent convulsion" from the'89 quake, or any damage at all? Didn't all of the Caltrain tunnels collapse in a "violent convulsion" during the '89 quake in the Bay Area, burying trains? Didn't the earthquakes in '71, and the later Northridge, collapse all of the Metrolink/UP tunnels west of Chatsworth, or to the Santa Clarita (1876) tunnel?
Yes, natural disasters can happen. And, since I've taken just a few of those hard courses, I've actually had a chance to work with folks like Dr. Lucy Jones, from Cal Tech and the USGS, on identifying earthquake infrastructure risks in SouCal. So, I actually had a real "scary" list of freeway interchanges and bridges, that are at risk, mostly due to shaking impacts, but also from liquefaction, due to high water tables in the LA Basin. And, I also worked on the 710 tunnel proposal through the Raymond Hill/Hollywood fault complex, where we looked at this issue. So what do I know....?
The collapse of these rail or subway tunnels, from a "violent convulsion" caused by even the "big one" that are supposedly going to "bury" the trains, as you seem so fearful about, was among the least of our infrastructure concerns. We have learned to design tunnels pretty well for things like "bad", "evil", "catastrophic", "violent convulsions" from earthquakes, in comparison to some very real risks to our freeway system.
So, at this point, from the nature of the utter fearmongering nonsense you seem to be peddling, I'm kind of thinking that this spiel of yours is really just troll bait, right?
.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bob2- My point is that CA has a higher level of
> probability for a major earthquake than almost
> anywhere else in the US. The speed of
> reconstruction of rail infrastructure would be
> much slower in underground alignments. I suppose
> at the most fatalistic level, it doesn't matter
> whether you get buried in a tunnel, are thrown of
> the side of a mountain grade, or whatever other
> options are provided by a surface alignment. It
> is just my perception that surface running is a
> bit better when possible in mountainous terrain.
> There is a picture in a book about Tehachipi from
> 1952 right after the quake that shows the rail
> line curving right into the side of the mountain.
> About 150 ft. or so away, sits an empty tunnel
> portal. Yeah, I'll stick with "violent
> convulsions". Northridge anyone?
Have you seen all of the pictures of all of the earthquake damage from the massive earthquakes in Japan? Did you see the collapse of the "evil" BART tunnels in the "violent convulsion" from the'89 quake, or any damage at all? Didn't all of the Caltrain tunnels collapse in a "violent convulsion" during the '89 quake in the Bay Area, burying trains? Didn't the earthquakes in '71, and the later Northridge, collapse all of the Metrolink/UP tunnels west of Chatsworth, or to the Santa Clarita (1876) tunnel?
Yes, natural disasters can happen. And, since I've taken just a few of those hard courses, I've actually had a chance to work with folks like Dr. Lucy Jones, from Cal Tech and the USGS, on identifying earthquake infrastructure risks in SouCal. So, I actually had a real "scary" list of freeway interchanges and bridges, that are at risk, mostly due to shaking impacts, but also from liquefaction, due to high water tables in the LA Basin. And, I also worked on the 710 tunnel proposal through the Raymond Hill/Hollywood fault complex, where we looked at this issue. So what do I know....?
The collapse of these rail or subway tunnels, from a "violent convulsion" caused by even the "big one" that are supposedly going to "bury" the trains, as you seem so fearful about, was among the least of our infrastructure concerns. We have learned to design tunnels pretty well for things like "bad", "evil", "catastrophic", "violent convulsions" from earthquakes, in comparison to some very real risks to our freeway system.
So, at this point, from the nature of the utter fearmongering nonsense you seem to be peddling, I'm kind of thinking that this spiel of yours is really just troll bait, right?
.
