But in a country of 1.4 billion people and where China uses half the concrete being used worldwide, such incidences are bound to happen from a statistical view. Having said that, there ought to be a review in the design of such viaduct. Very likely the viaduct was just not designed to handle loads that far exceed the design load.I hope the famous "good enough" attitude is not a factor.
Didn't PLAN show off a bit during RIMPAC? Like they had a cannon target set up where it's a big sheet of some material proped up by two buoys with poles, and when it came time for PLAN destroyer to open fire the PLAN destroyer fire at and sunk both buoys.They haven’t. Ironically PLAN has participated in 2014-2016.
Didn't PLAN show off a bit during RIMPAC? Like they had a cannon target set up where it's a big sheet of some material proped up by two buoys with poles, and when it came time for PLAN destroyer to open fire the PLAN destroyer fire at and sunk both buoys.
They're probably pretty annoyed.
You are overthinking this.In your first alternative, whose fault is it? The bridge or the warning sign can not force them to drive on the middle lane if they insist on driving on the outer lane, can it?
Your second alternative does not add any blame to this design if you consider all the other examples of same design, does it? Wouldn't the same incident happen there if a driver does the same thing?
There is always technical alternative (as you are trying to suggest) to avoid or delay the happening of a disaster, but can the disaster be avoided if the person ignore, neglect or has no such knowledge and precaution? The answer is no, that is what happened. Just look at the pandemic disaster in the west, there is certainly the Chinese alternative, but the westerners choose not to follow because either unable to comprehend (like denialers), or ignore (I know but I prioritize freedom).
You are overthinking this.
This looks like an engineering design flaw.
If the bridge managers cannot control traffic and bridge is expected to support load up to 200 tons or more over its lifetime, the bridge should be designed under all expected circumstance to support the maximum load plus additional tolerance. There is no other way to reasonably prevent such preventable accident.
Also delaying the disaster by one year or two is not the goal. It will just always be another accident waiting to happen, The goal is to reasonably anticipate the expected load and eliminate such preventable accidents from happening over the lifetime of the bridge.
This does not mean that a bridge has to be design to withstand a direct nuclear explosion as that is not what the design goal is.
THis looks like a preventable accident with proper design and/or traffic control.
JUst to add context. The Ministry of Transport spokeperson is unlikely to find fault on the design of a bridge that they should be regulating, reviewing the design and approve.
View attachment 80062View attachment 80063View attachment 80064
A few typical responses to the recent news. Every last leader of the CPC would be wise to aware themselves of the untamed rabidness and rampant, near universal thirst for Chinese blood in America.
Every accident is preventable with hindsight.