• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Who Else Is Watching Chernobyl?

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I'd bet you a new $20, that the single tunnel design was a cost compromise.

And that the original Engineering plans called for redundant tunnels, for safety.

I could be wrong, of course-- some engineers are caught up in the save-money-at-all-cost mental state too.
Saving money is typically not an engineer's goal.
When money matters, directives come from the "bean counters".

When I was at Northrop on the F-18 program, we had one cost goal,
which was the amount of money we could spend to increase production
cost to save a pound (weight for you Limeys). Never was safety
sacrificed for cost savings from what I saw..
I remember some details about an airplane design, circa WW2, that had pretty much the same issue-- all control systems went past some specific points in the airframe. Made sense at the time, simplified assembly, etc.
Routing of airplane flight controls has been a long & involved learning process.
WW2 designs often had compromises not just due to cost, but time constraints.
(The time frame for concept to production was incredibly fast, eg, the P-51.
This was because of the war. Design compromises made it obsolete by the
Korean war, eg, vulnerable radiator on the underside of the fuselage.)
Accidents throughout the latter half of the 20th century led to advances in
hydraulic system safety, & redundant control system isolation.

Engineers aren't born knowing what to do.
We learn thru failure.
But in a warplane? A well placed bullet rendered those controls inert. Including the backup systems.. So both the primary and secondary controls were gone, with one well placed bit of damage. Not something you want, in a device subject to intentional damage.
A single bullet wouldn't be a control system issue.
It could compromise the pilot's life though.
Later designs split the two systems...

... one thing about WW2? Was the incredible and rapid pace of design changes, even as the planes were being built.

My grandfather's letters to my gran' were full of such things-- he was working in Wichita, Boeing's airplane plant, during WW2 (flat feet). One particular letter of note, was on the B29's bomb bay doors.... it seemed there were design changes made to the drive motors for these massive doors. According to the plans, the wiring of the motor was indifferent as to which wire went where-- my suspicion was the original motors were AC/induction style. Not unreasonable, as I've no doubt alternators were the primary power generators, as these are typically much lighter than generators of the same power capacity.

But when my Grandad was working? (he was foreman) he observed that during testing, they had a high failure rate of the motors, once installed in the sub-assembly. He also observed that the motor wires were color-coded--but the plans indicated they were both the same color... hmmmm..... the connection terminals were not coded, though. He made some tests (inferred by his language in the letter-- he wasn't this specific) and discovered the motors worked, if you connected the red wire to the same terminal every time (and the black wire to the other, obviously). Notes were put into the plans. Their success rate went up dramatically...
I'd wager that they were DC.
Yeah. Rapid design changes were a thing in WW2. Reading up on the venerable B17? Sometimes the changes varied from one unit to the next, in the number sequence.

My admiration for ground service crews cannot be higher--these people were the most amazing sorts-- Unsung Heroes, IMO. Yes, they were (usually) not put directly in Harm's Way, but without them? Nobody was flying anything-- not even Snoopy's Dog House. :)
Everyone involved has a critical role...engineers, production, pilots, repair crews, etc.
 
Last edited:

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Fair enough. I tend to get..... hyperbolic. It's a pet peeve of mine, on the subject of corporate pollution :D

(why yes.. I was bucking for Understatement of the Year...why do you ask?)
That's understandable.
The media train us to hate all those evil corporations....who
are all evil, each in its own evil way. Did I mention "evil"?
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
I'd wager that they were DC..

I'm quite sure of it-- wired up "backwards" the doors did not work properly. An AC motor wouldn't work like that.

Everyone involved has a critical role...engineers, production, pilots, repair crews, etc.

Agreed--- my comment was meant to note that these ground support crews were often working with different variants in the aircraft's design, and had to account for those, when repairing the airplanes. I guess I didn't make that clear enough.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
Chernobyl, Episode 4 is up on HBO Go

I'm watching even now-- between customers at work.

I have rigged a twin-screen system at work, so I may watch on the upper screen, and do other things... like post here... on the built-in screen.

The series has grown darker with each episode....

... I had forgotten how dismal housing could be under the USSR.. the same-ness.

But. As I remember, there was no real homeless under that State-- they either found you somewhere to live? Or they took you off to the gulag. Or? If you ran afoul of the KGB, you simply vanished without a trace...

But nobody went homeless... not like here in the USA.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Chernobyl, Episode 4 is up on HBO Go

I'm watching even now-- between customers at work.

I have rigged a twin-screen system at work, so I may watch on the upper screen, and do other things... like post here... on the built-in screen.

The series has grown darker with each episode....

... I had forgotten how dismal housing could be under the USSR.. the same-ness.

But. As I remember, there was no real homeless under that State-- they either found you somewhere to live? Or they took you off to the gulag. Or? If you ran afoul of the KGB, you simply vanished without a trace...

But nobody went homeless... not like here in the USA.
.
Soviet Communism has never been demonized in Italy..after all, there was the most influentual Communist Party in the West, the PCI, Partito Comunista Italiano.

The Italian Left before 1992 was an authentic left wing, defending socialist values, workers' rights, creating the most sophisticated labor legislation in Europe. With the Partito Socialista Italiano and Partito Comunista Italiano.


Then there was a judicial coup d'etat in 1992 that wiped out all the old parties and the left was incorporated into a big American-like party, that was called Partito Democratico...like in the USA...and this was a return to liberism and its disastrous anti-workers policies.
 
Last edited:

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
that's hilarious... oh, wait... they were serious.... laughing harder...

It is really incredible....
I mean...it is so obvious that negligence causes disasters.
In the nuclear plant of Latina, south Rome, there was one of the most powerful reactors in Europe...whose speedness was decreased enormously because Italians don't like to risk. Never.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
TV News ..Italy, 2 days after the disaster.
It is incredible how the Soviet authorities were in denial.
He quotes American sources mainly.

 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
The bad design in Chernobyl is so evident.

Our nuclear plants have the highest safety standards in Europe...excellent design..after all, it's Enrico Fermi's land.

 
Top