I love that mindset. Europeans would have simply refused and 100 years later it would have probably been build after all legal has been cleared. Indians instead never say no. That's how you build software, so why not bridges.
I love that mindset. Europeans would have simply refused and 100 years later it would have probably been build after all legal has been cleared. Indians instead never say no. That's how you build software, so why not bridges.
https://chicagoyimby.com/2023/08/lost-legends-8-the-lake-sho...
It's easy to point the finger at them and say "why did you greenlight this?", but I'm quite sure they are completely expendable in this shitshow and the people actually responsible would've simply gotten some batch of new engineers who would've greenlit it in the end anyway.
misaligned incentives between different government fiefdoms led to nearly impossible constraints, which led to a design silly from an engineering perspective
meanwhile, I wouldn't be surprised if the engineers had to choose between refusing to design something silly, vs putting food on the table for their family
https://indianexpress.com/article/trending/trending-in-india...
I joined a company as lead [software] engineer because I prefer that track while I have experience in management and C-Suite. dumb product and marketing decisions impact some engineering work, and I know the solutions for
I mostly avoid saying anything except when solving those things is the answer to the goals the PM keeps asking me about. When I do say things I’m told not to.
Enjoy your proverbial 90 degree turns!
What if their manager had insisted they use cheaper concrete or less rebar? At a certain point, you have to refuse to put your signature on to something.
It's not entirely clear how far up the chain of command the suspensions go, but if they're including decision makers in the suspension, I think it's a good lesson to others to not just rubber stamp designs.
It's more like 120 degrees which is still bad.
BTW It's not uncommon these days that enshitification causes products to fail at their primary function. See the original Google Nest thermostat failing to turn on the heat without an internet connection. There have been several others, but I don't remember them. It's sad when a mechanical mercury switch has better up-time than fancy tech.
Looks like drivers
When I don't bring things up, I wind up sitting in a tedious and insulting retrospective meeting about "what went wrong"
When I do bring things up I get told "don't worry too much about that, that's the PMs job and they have it all figured out"
Defining acronyms/initializations the first time they are used is best practice[1]; I hate the opposite of just throwing around acronyms that the reader may not be familiar with.
[1] "Define them the first time you use them in content" https://www.stylemanual.gov.au/grammar-punctuation-and-conve...
Unemployment is a different constraint, but still a very real one. Doesn't matter now principled you are, there's always someone who'll take the money that isn't. Maybe these seven were the scabs and the heroes who said "no" are just forgotten.
After you commission a project, you don't micromanage it, you assume that the professionals you hand it to can do it better than you.
Should the politician who assigned the contract be fired too? How about the public who voted for them and didn't say anything while the bridge was being built?
The blame's gotta stop somewhere.
When I finally surfaced, and Mum drove me into town for something or other, I felt visceral panic that she was driving on the "wrong" side of the road.
As a design engineer, all you can do is explain to the stakeholders how the constraints will affect the outcome and suggest alternatives.
Ultimately, the engineers will have to work with what they are given, and as long as the outcome is safe and its limitations are communicated, they can't be blamed.
It is most definitely bad engineering as having a more gradual curve would’ve made it completely acceptable. Elements of corruption and “not my job” mindset.
Put differently, give engineering an unsolvable constraint set, expect engineering to drop some constraints. That is a management problem, not an engineering one, necessarily. (Granted, I'm assuming they didn't silently drop said constraints...)
The ones who plan ahead tend to not end up in these organizations to begin with since they have leeway to say no much earlier.
The job of an Engineer implies a capacity for technical judgment and willingness to not do something if it's unsafe or doesn't make sense. Even if we're not official, licensed "Professional Engineers," we still need to make these calls and stop projects like this from happening. Whether it's building a ridiculous, unsafe bridge, or building ridiculous, defective software, if the engineer doesn't have the agency to stop it, who does?
Just letting it happen and letting it fail with a "malicious compliance" smirk on our faces is passive aggressive, and doesn't elevate our profession.
"100° Aishbag Railway Bridge (Iconic Engineering Landmark)"
The engineers built the 90-degree layout specified by their clients!
I wouldn't be surprised if there's a paper trail documenting the engineers' objections, signed and notarized by the clients.
It's hard for me to judge the engineers without knowing more.
At the very least, I would have let it be known that I did not think the resulting bridge was a good design for traffic and has only been designed to appease the process. "I do not recommend constructing this design" would have been my CYA.
The only way to make this kind of thing work is by threatening to send people to jail. Like building-engineers having to report asbestos, or electricians being forced to report code violations and authorities actually following up on it. Of course regulation is like kryptonite for the engineering/HN crowd, so let's keep building shit on thoughts and prayers.
Caveat that this is targeted towards US software environment, I’m under the belief that engineers designing roads and buildings are actually accredited and protected in this way in some countries
I have a memory of driving into Cleveland on a multi-lane highway in the 80's or 90's and encountering a 90-degree turn when it got to the lake.
Or am I thinking of another city?
Do you expect engineers to do what you ask them to do, no matter how stupid. If you do and your engineers execute your stupid orders, then you are at fault. It was your job to have common sense, ask the right people, etc... You failed.
Now you may expect your engineers to call you and your stupid plans out, and if they didn't, it is their fault. They should have called you out and they didn't. They failed.
In the west, we usually expect the latter, so engineers should certainly be penalized. In India, I don't know.
India has a similar system for public works projects where a licensed engineer MUST supervise the work.
Frankly, sometimes I think the software world would be a lot better off with a similar system.
The people in the article said yes and also got fired.
But somehow it's suddenly acceptable to debate when the gun is abstracted a tiny bit to say "make a bridge that absolutely will kill multiple people if it's used"?
The entire point of the "licensed" part of "licensed engineers" is to have someone we trust to say "absolutely not" and hold the line, or they personally get held accountable.
Did all of you conveniently forget the mandatory ethics courses in STEM education after the NYC scaffold incident killed a dozen people?
Some hotel collapses? Do you blame the engineer who was rushed because they needed to open to begin making payments on the debt? If the engineer refused, they would have found someone else.
Some part of a car is difficult to fix? They needed to get 35mpg + have enough trunk space to fit a stroller.
When I see these stories, there is always a finger to point, but I don't think these are black and white. There are customers, governments, and financial considerations at play.
I’ve always wondered how they came to shoot themselves in the foot like that - any basic consumer or journalist test would have flagged that.
Put it this way: sometimes a licensed engineer, who can lose the license for shoddy engineering, is paid to say “no”. Say “yes”, lose your license, no longer get paid.
While there is no licensing in our industry, we can (should?) have our personal standards play a similar role.
Close old company, start new one. Problem solved!
In all reality everybody down the food chain knew this was a stupid design but the culture prevented them from speaking up (go ahead, be the nail that gets hammered down! plenty of other people will gladly take your job and do what they are told. explain to your family why you can't put food on the table... or just smile, nod and do what you are told (which is probably some variant of pass that hot potato onto some other poor sap that will in turn do the same thing))
This isn't a blanket statement - there are plenty of Indian engineers I've worked with in real tech companies that are not at all afraid to push boundaries, cause fusses, say no to even the top of the food chain, etc. But the type of environment I'm describing is very different.
The real failure was at the management/political level where the impossible constraints were created, but the cultural dynamic ensured no engineer felt empowered to refuse the task. This is no different than any other case where management throws the engineers under the bus for a mess they caused.
Not acknowledging who is really at fault (hint: not the engineers) plays right into the corrupt politicians who greenlit this in the first thing. You think they were somehow in the dark about the design of this bridge? It doesn’t take a genius engineer to see that shits fucked. Everybody top to bottom knew it.
> the final result “is neither fulfilling the functional requirement nor safe for road users.”
Customers can say all sorts of crazy things, they havo no knowledge of what's a good design or not. It's up to engineers to ensure design is safe. If an engineer knowigly signs-off on the design that is not safe, they deserve all the punishment.
Wait, what? I'd heard that they were deprecating the first gen Nest, but that it would still function as an offline programmable thermostat. Are you sure it won't be able to work in offline mode?
That's the kind of app that needs internal audit, where some objects are audited, but as the data is never used, the audit in fact only works on a fifth of the project and is never used.
Please say 'no' more often.
Both in the US[1] and UK[2] you can find bridges with actual 90-degree angles. The one in India[3] is more like 75 degrees.
[1]https://maps.app.goo.gl/3CBqVHbVEtonHjcr9 [2]https://maps.app.goo.gl/8cVB44VDJRPadY6s6 [3]https://maps.app.goo.gl/ikPSmLEGYwVJLqDz7
[1]https://maps.app.goo.gl/3CBqVHbVEtonHjcr9 [2]https://maps.app.goo.gl/8cVB44VDJRPadY6s6
It's not bad actually. It's a three-way bridge. The right angle part is ped/bike only.
In India, land is the most valuable thing in general and all land/housing/infra related industries are infested with politicians.
There are exceptions of course, and unless this company is one, they'll just be back with a new name, and the political party will be advertising to the public how they're so unbiased that they shut down the company of their own political brother.
You think the people at the top weren’t aware this thing was unworkable?
#2 is a bike path.
The one in India is designed for several hundred thousand people to pass through daily; it doesn't look like either of these is intended for those kinds of numbers.
There are 2 main kind of people in India
1) Majority - suffering daily quietly while knowing things are not good despite whatever official data/reports say.
2) Internet yahoos - small minority with their money and big support slave underclass labor who find any fact as "insult to India", "racism" , "foreign interference" and so on
In any case, you can't rely on people to do the right thing just because it's the right thing. Real engineers have skin in the game. They put their signature on stuff and they're responsible if it goes wrong. If it's particularly egregious, they can lose their license or even be criminally prosecuted. That's a powerful backstop against pressure coming from above. Software doesn't have this, so naturally people are much more likely to give in to that pressure.
You think the corrupt politicians didn’t know about the design of this bridge? It doesn’t take a genius engineer to see it’s fucked.
That engineering signoff is a rubber stamp on a corrupt project. Fire the politicians not the person who has to rubber stamp it (because again, they’ll find somebody to signoff on it… the signoff is a mere formality on a project like this)
i don't think that's necessarily the case. civil engineering implies personal responsibility. we get to pretend like our bad choices don't have real-world impacts because we don't have a universal standards board or mandated ethical guidelines for computer engineering (in the vast majority of cases).
https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/en/2024/07/09/new-ghent-motorway-b...
Belgium has run into the same problem and they went on with it
The picture looks like a driveway, and my local interstate has 75K cars/day at 65 MPH and takes 4 lanes and they're pondering making it a 6 lane due to massive congestion due to economic and population growth in the area. I'm looking forward to saving a lot of time after they build the 6 lane.
I would theorize this is merely an on-ramp to a road network that overall passes 300K. It might be adequate for that if its just a few thousand cars per day.
I'm also impressed they can carry 300K people/day on a $2.3M bridge. Not unusual to blow half a billion per mile on a reconstruction project for a large wide interstate in the USA. $2M will get you roughly a small freeway overpass in the USA. The picture in the article looks more like an overpass or onramp than a mainline bridge. A new, long, wide, heavy weight limit mainline bridge over a large river can exceed a quarter billion in the USA. Its possible they're clickbaiting calling a mere onramp a "bridge" as if they're replicating the florida keys LOL.
Satisfying all the constraints ? - well done, difficult, but great work !
And nice bridge - good to have, task finished. Better access is something that can be worked out later on.
(you get what you give)
I like to think that it's (posh accent) "Yes good sir, I do indeed keep an extensive collections of references to exotic bridge layouts"
What would be neatest is to learn that there is an exotic geospatual query language. "no junction and road bend radius less than 20M within 50 meters of bridge"
But I suspect it is a well formulated web search "Complaints about right angle overpass"
And final thoughts, Your right, it is not much different than a common freeway offramp system. So I am not sure what the fuss is about. Perhaps too constrained, and it needs a larger turning area?
Anyway, here is a real British one:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/VAdfguBXNcDB74Yu5
I don't think it's that uncommon especially when crossing rivers because roads typically run along the river bank. A lot of roads and field boundaries were set down 1000s of years ago.
The British way is that so long as you put up big 'ol black and white arrows then 90° is child's play, it could be a 180° hairpin. I don't drive much but I hated multi-story-car-park-spiral ramps that for four floors would be a 1560° turn at full lock in a small car. Feels like I am failing astronaut training as my stomach turns over.
Also, depending on the org, you may or may not come out unscathed on the other side.
Again, if I’m being asked to risk people’s lives, I’d push back harder and resign if I can’t change minds, but I’m not doing any of that to “elevate our profession”.
It's even worse than merely being fired from the project though, they were suspended.
Nobody saw it coming, but it turned out to be a "suspension bridge" after all ;)
Search for "swept path analysis" for just one component of what you're missing. (There are many other components of design of a curve like this to consider.)
A 90 degree change in direction is fine by itself provided there is sufficient radius for vehicles to make the turn at the design speed.
In this case, if its two lane you may not be so convinced of its safety when it's your loved one on a scooter who got hit by a bus which tracked over into the oncoming lane just to navigate the curve. Or if its a single lane, when they died on the ambulance which was stuck in traffic on the bridge because two vehicles are unable to pass and everyone behind them would need to backup in unison to sort out the resulting cluster.
But safety is only part of the duty to the public here. The bridge needs to function for its intended specification and if it fails to do so for basic engineering reasons, you absolutely have no business holding a license and signing off on public plans and indeed you would be disciplined or stripped of your license for something like this.
My city has one of these. https://maps.app.goo.gl/GiNq1DmnDs5aTaRM8
But we all know the reality of whether we expect moral pushback from the armed forces for just about anything.
Was it a good deal when hundreds of thousands of bystanders died in Iraq? It doesn't matter. It's not the place of the rank and file to question authority, regardless of constitution this or moral that. The same is true for rank and file engineers.
As long as software engineers can be fired for denying to do things asked by people in power, "standards" and "ethics" take second place. This applies to virtually every profession, so maybe start making bad bosses and bad managers take actual responsibility for their irresponsibility before blaming on engineers.
In life there is no responsibility when there is no autonomy. And as much as certain crowds love to say "just walk way", giving away your means of survival is also not real autonomy. This is not WW2.
However, they did meet spec. I’d fire leadership first.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” - Upton Sinclair
“Sharp turn ahead, reduce speed to 5 km/h”
There's a great deal of evidenced backed engineering practices and solutions to draw from to solve issues like this. Unlike software in noncritical applications, you can't just pull things out of a hat and hope it works. People die if you do that.
You can't just say "here's how fast you can drive this road." You have to design the features of a road to calm traffic. If you design a road like a freeway and then put up a 15mph speed limit sign, people aren't going to just drive 15mph. Thats just not how traffic and people work. If you want people to go slower you should design traffic calming features into the road.
Its generally bad to have inconsistent design speed for different features of a road. And by bad I mean people will get killed at disproportionate rates. It happens all the time anyway for various reasons but not very often.
So yes, ultimately the politician(s) should be taking this one. Certainly not the engineers, who it seems had to work around conflicting and shifting requirements, quite likely objecting at every step.
The problem with all things engineering with systems and/or software is there are zillions of tools x several options x infinitely unique backgrounds, most of which are informal. There isn't nearly enough standardization, scant convention over configuration, and not nearly enough formal, rigorous (testing) methodology even where it's needed.
~20 years ago, I had multiple long talks with an applied systems prof about the constraints, barriers, and motivations on the professionalization of software/systems engineering.
"the stormwater impacts of the proposed alterations to the site are negligible"
"the foundation will be constructed with 3500psi concrete"
And so on.
A huge fraction of the industry is a money fire at the public's expense. It's on the same order as all the "the hospital paid what for gloves?" type stuff that only the worse of the worst will defend.
So sadly there was no exotic geospatual query language involved - although that would have been a way cooler answer. :/
Engineers are held to high standards of safety over their works. In Canada they can opt to swear an oath, similar to the Hyppocratic, that they recognize the moral weight of their career on other's wellbeing. In most developed countries there are specific licenses that imply added judgmental weight on their work; simply having an engineering degree isn't even enough to legally call oneself an "engineer" in some jurisdictions.
I'm not saying the bosses aren't equally guilty, but the footsoldiers who chose to carry out those "illegal" orders are, in this case, very specifically trained and warned to not do so.