Christchurch earthquake: 'Dead bodies lying around'

I have a first cousin who lives in Christchurch, he is a theatre nurse at Christchurch hospital. He has just posted on Facebook saying that he's all right.
 
I wouldn't call it a discussion, more like some loudmouth boor in a public place bragging about his conquests on his bitches...
 
good lord, the lefties in this thread are so rabid...i was just teasing voltaire...we were playing WW and i thought i would mess him in the politcs forums

you guys need to lighten up, you're a bunch of angry partisans
 
i am rather surprised that the buildings were not better reinforced

new zeland is located on the ring of fire and subject to earthquakes

building codes sho9uld have been enforced and existing buildings retrofitted
 
Schadenfreude said:
i am rather surprised that the buildings were not better reinforced

new zeland is located on the ring of fire and subject to earthquakes

building codes sho9uld have been enforced and existing buildings retrofitted
Click to expand...

I think you will find that Building Regs in NZ are at the very least the equal of the US. Indeed, they will be based on those of the UK (probably via Oz) which are considerably better that the US. 'American Standards' are notoriously easy to meet which is why BS (British Standards) are quoted on most if not all major construction projects.
Certainly the cathedral, which I think is something like 120 years old will not have had standards to meet, but modern buildings most certainly did.
Remember that this quake was directly beneath Christchurch and very shallow (as earth quakes go) at 3 miles.
Most modern major infrastructure projects are built to a 120 year design life which means that they must be designed to withstand anything that may happen in a period of 120 years not that they must last for 120 years.
There have been hundreds of aftershocks since the quake of September and little or no damage has been caused.
 
Lowaicue said:
I think you will find that Building Regs in NZ are at the very least the equal of the US. Indeed, they will be based on those of the UK (probably via Oz) which are considerably better that the US. 'American Standards' are notoriously easy to meet which is why BS (British Standards) are quoted on most if not all major construction projects.
Certainly the cathedral, which I think is something like 120 years old will not have had standards to meet, but modern buildings most certainly did.
Remember that this quake was directly beneath Christchurch and very shallow (as earth quakes go) at 3 miles.
Most modern major infrastructure projects are built to a 120 year design life which means that they must be designed to withstand anything that may happen in a period of 120 years not that they must last for 120 years.
There have been hundreds of aftershocks since the quake of September and little or no damage has been caused.
Click to expand...
Right. 8.2 hits San Francisco, the stadium cracks and there is some road repair and a few people die, not from building collapse. I know this to be the case because when I was in the Navy I was there when it happened. Now compare it to what happens in NZ and your crowing about how our building codes suck is a bit off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top