this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2025
16 points (100.0% liked)

World News

904 readers
660 users here now

Rules:
Be a decent person, don't post hate.

Other Great Communities:

Rules

Be excellent to each other

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/45538232

Part of a recently-opened bridge collapsed in China's southwestern province of Sichuan along a national highway linking the country's heartland with Tibet on Tuesday (Nov 11), local authorities said, but there were no reports of casualties.

[...]

Construction of the bridge finished earlier this year, according to a video posted by the contractor Sichuan Road & Bridge Group on social media.

There is no estimated timeline for the reopening of the highway, local authorities said, as reported by China Daily.

The bridge is located near Shuangjiangkou hydropower project. The South China Morning Post reported earlier that the project, which will be the world’s tallest dam when completed, began storing water on May 1.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Geobloke@aussie.zone 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well you'd generally do a fairly hefty geotechnical survey that would call this risk not and mitigate it.

I mean it could be a 1 in 100 year event. Feels unlikely that it would occur within months of opening though

[–] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Feels unlikely that it would happen within months(much more than that, since the start of construction) of a massive construction effort that involved forcefully and repeatedly vibrating large masses to settle and compact the road surfaces, adding tonnes of concrete, and letting heavy vehicles pass through at-speed on a slope that never saw such traffic before?

Ya don't say? By your logic, the regular inspections that caught the cracks would have been absolutely unnecessary.

[–] Geobloke@aussie.zone 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

How does my logic say inspections are unnecessary?

[–] MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 38 minutes ago* (last edited 37 minutes ago) (1 children)

They generally base such things on the likelihood of finding issues in a given timeframe.

Pretending that's lower so soon after construction "if only it were built properly" is backwards and wrong. In-depth inspections are more common and necessary in the weeks, months, years closer to initial construction, and their findings identify issues that need checked as time goes on.

You don't check more often and thoroughly because you did a shit job at construction, in fact avoiding/faking inspections is one of the CHIEF hallmarks of shody work and corruption.

You see, that's when people die.

[–] Geobloke@aussie.zone 1 points 29 minutes ago

Cool, 100% agree