←back to thread

Seven Engineers Suspended After $2.3M Bridge Includes 90-Degree Turn

(www.vice.com)
171 points _sbl_ | 8 comments | 10 Jul 25 16:10 UTC | HN request time: 0.608s | source | bottom
Show context
oc1 ◴[10 Jul 25 16:21 UTC] No.44522688[source]▶
<< According to official records, the design for the bridge shifted multiple times over the past seven years, largely due to conflicts between the Public Works Department (PWD) and the Railways. The two agencies couldn’t agree on how to share land, and in trying to work around both railway property and the new Metro line, they ended up producing a final layout with an abrupt 90-degree angle.

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.

replies(14): >>44522771 #>>44522797 #>>44522901 #>>44523126 #>>44523197 #>>44523198 #>>44523260 #>>44523451 #>>44523656 #>>44523670 #>>44523959 #>>44527192 #>>44527686 #>>44529344 #
cs702 ◴[10 Jul 25 17:20 UTC] No.44523260[source]▶
Shouldn't the bureaucracies be penalized, instead of the poor engineers?

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.

replies(6): >>44523356 #>>44523517 #>>44523544 #>>44523630 #>>44525019 #>>44529354 #
1. strogonoff ◴[10 Jul 25 17:29 UTC] No.44523356[source]▶
Sometimes we are paid to say “no”.
replies(2): >>44523376 #>>44523428 #
2. cruffle_duffle ◴[10 Jul 25 17:30 UTC] No.44523376[source]▶
Depends entirely on the culture. Some cultures saying “no” is simply not what you do.
replies(2): >>44523559 #>>44528742 #
3. teamonkey ◴[10 Jul 25 17:34 UTC] No.44523428[source]▶
More often we are paid to say “yes”
replies(2): >>44523571 #>>44530837 #
4. ◴[10 Jul 25 17:46 UTC] No.44523559[source]▶
5. strogonoff ◴[10 Jul 25 17:46 UTC] No.44523571[source]▶
It might have been a bit of wishful thinking.

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.

replies(1): >>44523736 #
6. dsr_ ◴[10 Jul 25 18:00 UTC] No.44523736{3}[source]▶
That's the role of a professional standards organization: to protect the public.

If that doesn't exist, you don't have protection for yourself, you only have your own ethics. It's more important, and also more dangerous.

7. strogonoff ◴[11 Jul 25 05:47 UTC] No.44528742[source]▶
That doesn’t sound like a good justification.
8. potato3732842 ◴[11 Jul 25 11:15 UTC] No.44530837[source]▶
Most of the work of professional engineers consists of being paid to say what everyone already knows or affirm that the default option is fine but is forced by the law to pay you to say on their behalf record.

"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.