The problem is that we have created the same problem in different
locations on ever larger scales as we continue to expand the
urban areas. New Orleans is the current poster child, but even a
temporary loss of utilities such as electricity and/or water
would quickly produce the same problems in any large urban area.


On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 02:49:55 GMT, "John Chase"
wrote:

"Tom Gardner" wrote ...
[ snip ]
This combination effectively blocks Louisiana,
New Orleans or private companies, from independent action
involving dykes, levees, drainage or wetlands.
Actions that I'm sure would have been taken since the
threat of destruction has been known for 80 years.

I didn't know that, I stand corrected! I still have an issue with people
building below sea level or on a flood plain or in an earthquake zone and
I have to pay for their inevitable disaster.

My objection is limited to being "forced at gunpoint" to pay for their
inevitable disaster.

-jc-

In article , John Chase says...

And also by law, they control *intra*state commerce having to
do with drug laws. They can nullify california state law
having to do with purely intrastate commerce, because they
don't want medical MJ legalized.

I can't seem to find that grant of power to the federal government in my
copy of the US Constitution. Would you please identify it for me?

LOL. Neither can I. But they did it anyway.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

In article , F. George McDuffee
says...

The problem is that we have created the same problem in different
locations on ever larger scales as we continue to expand the
urban areas. New Orleans is the current poster child, but even a
temporary loss of utilities such as electricity and/or water
would quickly produce the same problems in any large urban area.

How long could NYC stay liveable if all the water were shut off?

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , F. George
McDuffee
says...

The problem is that we have created the same problem in different
locations on ever larger scales as we continue to expand the
urban areas. New Orleans is the current poster child, but even a
temporary loss of utilities such as electricity and/or water
would quickly produce the same problems in any large urban area.

How long could NYC stay liveable if all the water were shut off?

Jim

NYC is "liveable"?

In article , RAM^3 says...

The problem is that we have created the same problem in different
locations on ever larger scales as we continue to expand the
urban areas. New Orleans is the current poster child, but even a
temporary loss of utilities such as electricity and/or water
would quickly produce the same problems in any large urban area.

How long could NYC stay liveable if all the water were shut off?

Jim

NYC is "liveable"?

You can fight fires if they break out, you can flush toilets and
drink the water from the taps. Granted a minimal existence but
imagine of those three features were removed from the NYC experience.
It would get nasty in a hurry.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"RAM^3" wrote in message
...
"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , F. George
McDuffee
says...

The problem is that we have created the same problem in different
locations on ever larger scales as we continue to expand the
urban areas. New Orleans is the current poster child, but even a
temporary loss of utilities such as electricity and/or water
would quickly produce the same problems in any large urban area.

How long could NYC stay liveable if all the water were shut off?

Jim

NYC is "liveable"?



You beat me to the punch but if someone were to shut down the supply of
water you can bet your butt it wouldn't last long, even if it took a bucket
brigade.

--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com

In article , John R. Carroll
says...

You beat me to the punch but if someone were to shut down the supply of
water you can bet your butt it wouldn't last long, even if it took a bucket
brigade.

Who's gonna carry all those buckets up to the top of the high-rise
buildings? And what if something catches on fire? Big trouble.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 12:27:27 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

Cliff wrote:

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 00:59:32 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

I believe I posted somewhere else that bedrock is supposedly 80 feet
under New Orleans.

70 to 100 feet by one source.

Cliff:

Well that's a little different than your original WAG of MILES!,

I clearly indicated that I did not know. Some deltas are very deep
in sediment indeed.

now
isn't it. Glad to see you checking your facts, even if a little
belatedly. LOL

The actual facts still remain a bit murky.
--
Cliff

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 06:45:41 -0700, Robert Sturgeon
wrote:

Ports NEED to be on the coast

Why?
--
Cliff

Cliff wrote:
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 06:45:41 -0700, Robert Sturgeon
wrote:


Ports NEED to be on the coast


Why?
Well "Sea ports" at least because that is where the "sea" is.
:-)
...lew...

"Lew Hartswick" wrote in message
ink.net...
Cliff wrote:
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 06:45:41 -0700, Robert Sturgeon
wrote:


Ports NEED to be on the coast


Why?
Well "Sea ports" at least because that is where the "sea" is.
:-)
...lew...

The Port of Houston is ~50 miles inland from the Gulf of Mexico...

On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 17:37:41 -0500, "RAM^3"
wrote:

"Lew Hartswick" wrote in message
link.net...
Cliff wrote:
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 06:45:41 -0700, Robert Sturgeon
wrote:


Ports NEED to be on the coast


Why?
Well "Sea ports" at least because that is where the "sea" is.
:-)
...lew...

The Port of Houston is ~50 miles inland from the Gulf of Mexico...

The Port of New Orleans is inland too IIRC G.
And thsese days some ports/terminals are actually out at sea.
--
Cliff

Cliff wrote:

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 12:27:27 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

Cliff wrote:

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 00:59:32 GMT, BottleBob
wrote:

I believe I posted somewhere else that bedrock is supposedly 80 feet
under New Orleans.

70 to 100 feet by one source.

Cliff:

Well that's a little different than your original WAG of MILES!,

I clearly indicated that I did not know. Some deltas are very deep
in sediment indeed.

now
isn't it. Glad to see you checking your facts, even if a little
belatedly. LOL

The actual facts still remain a bit murky.

As with most anything you spew out here.

--
Ragheads - worthless pig **** eaters..
Illegal aliens - just as worthless as ragheads.

On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 17:37:41 -0500, "RAM^3"
wrote:

"Lew Hartswick" wrote in message
link.net...
Cliff wrote:
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 06:45:41 -0700, Robert Sturgeon
wrote:


Ports NEED to be on the coast


Why?
Well "Sea ports" at least because that is where the "sea" is.
:-)
...lew...

The Port of Houston is ~50 miles inland from the Gulf of Mexico...

That's true enough. The ports of Stockton and Sacramento
are both quite a distance from the coast. But they ARE
nearly at sea level, which is the part that will bite them
if sea level rises or falls.

--
Robert Sturgeon
Summum ius summa inuria.
http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/

On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 07:51:55 -0700, the blithe spirit Robert Sturgeon
clearly indicated:

On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 17:37:41 -0500, "RAM^3"
wrote:

The Port of Houston is ~50 miles inland from the Gulf of Mexico...

That's true enough. The ports of Stockton and Sacramento
are both quite a distance from the coast. But they ARE
nearly at sea level, which is the part that will bite them
if sea level rises or falls.

Ooh, Stocton 15', Sacto 54'. Stockton will definitely feel a
tsunami. And in a few hundred years, maybe the effects of the
horrible Global Warming thing.

-------------------------------------------------------------
give me The Luxuries Of Life * http://www.diversify.com
i can live without the necessities * 2 Tee collections online
-------------------------------------------------------------

Larry Jaques wrote:

Ooh, Stocton 15', Sacto 54'. Stockton will definitely feel a
tsunami. And in a few hundred years, maybe the effects of the
horrible Global Warming thing.

Look at a map. Stockton is well inland. A tsunami on the Pacific coast
will be greatly restricted by the Golden Gate. Little, if any effect
would be noted at Sacramento or Stockton

Rising sea levels are entirely another matter.

Jon

On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 11:01:39 -0700, the blithe spirit Jon Anderson
clearly indicated:

Larry Jaques wrote:

Ooh, Stocton 15', Sacto 54'. Stockton will definitely feel a
tsunami. And in a few hundred years, maybe the effects of the
horrible Global Warming thing.

Look at a map. Stockton is well inland. A tsunami on the Pacific coast
will be greatly restricted by the Golden Gate. Little, if any effect
would be noted at Sacramento or Stockton

I suppose it would take a direct wave into the bay to wash that far
up, but a series of waves would stop the regular river outflow and
make it rise quite quickly upstream, especially of the wreckage of the
mothballed ship flotilla in Suisun Bay area bottled up outflow at the
Golden Gate or Benicia Bridge (the one between my mother and sister.)


Rising sea levels are entirely another matter.

As if that (massive rise) is gonna happen any time soon...


-------------------------------------------------------------
give me The Luxuries Of Life * http://www.diversify.com
i can live without the necessities * 2 Tee collections online
-------------------------------------------------------------

The polar ice won't flood the world. This has to be said over and over.
The tons of solar system ice might. Tons fall onto the polar regions every month.
The volume is high enough to have been watched and studied with Radar and physical
sightings.

Martin
Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder


Jon Anderson wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote:

Ooh, Stocton 15', Sacto 54'. Stockton will definitely feel a
tsunami. And in a few hundred years, maybe the effects of the
horrible Global Warming thing.


Look at a map. Stockton is well inland. A tsunami on the Pacific coast
will be greatly restricted by the Golden Gate. Little, if any effect
would be noted at Sacramento or Stockton

Rising sea levels are entirely another matter.

Jon

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 07:51:55 -0700, Robert Sturgeon
wrote:

On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 17:37:41 -0500, "RAM^3"
wrote:

"Lew Hartswick" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Cliff wrote:
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 06:45:41 -0700, Robert Sturgeon
wrote:


Ports NEED to be on the coast


Why?
Well "Sea ports" at least because that is where the "sea" is.
:-)
...lew...

The Port of Houston is ~50 miles inland from the Gulf of Mexico...

That's true enough. The ports of Stockton and Sacramento
are both quite a distance from the coast. But they ARE
nearly at sea level, which is the part that will bite them
if sea level rises or falls.

The ports in the Great Lakes are up to 600 feet
above mean sea level.
--
Cliff

Cliff wrote:
Well "Sea ports" at least because that is where the "sea" is.
:-)
...lew...


The ports in the Great Lakes are up to 600 feet
above mean sea level.

OH! Are they REALY "seas"? :-)
...lew...

THe facts that a port is above or below 'mean' sea level means zero - zed - nothing.

The tides move more that 120' in some bays of Maine.

Look at the Erie canal - what are the locks for ? Getting one dock level to another...

Martin
Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder



Cliff wrote:
On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 07:51:55 -0700, Robert Sturgeon
wrote:


On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 17:37:41 -0500, "RAM^3"
wrote:


"Lew Hartswick" wrote in message
thlink.net...

Cliff wrote:

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 06:45:41 -0700, Robert Sturgeon
wrote:



Ports NEED to be on the coast


Why?

Well "Sea ports" at least because that is where the "sea" is.
:-)
...lew...

The Port of Houston is ~50 miles inland from the Gulf of Mexico...

That's true enough. The ports of Stockton and Sacramento
are both quite a distance from the coast. But they ARE
nearly at sea level, which is the part that will bite them
if sea level rises or falls.


The ports in the Great Lakes are up to 600 feet
above mean sea level.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 22:49:02 -0500, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:

Look at the Erie canal - what are the locks for ?

Does that still exist in operation ANYWHERE?
It used to go very near a house I once lived in in Ohio IIRC.
Buckeye Lake in Ohio was constructed to provide
some of it's water IIRC.
--
Cliff

Cliff wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 22:49:02 -0500, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:


Look at the Erie canal - what are the locks for ?


Does that still exist in operation ANYWHERE?
It used to go very near a house I once lived in in Ohio IIRC.
Buckeye Lake in Ohio was constructed to provide
some of it's water IIRC.

The Erie Canal, as in "... From Albany to Buffalo..." is still very much
in existence and functional. As it is entirely within the state of New
York, I am not sure how much water it would need from a lake in Ohio.

--
jeff

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 12:26:35 GMT, jeff
wrote:

Cliff wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 22:49:02 -0500, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:


Look at the Erie canal - what are the locks for ?


Does that still exist in operation ANYWHERE?
It used to go very near a house I once lived in in Ohio IIRC.
Buckeye Lake in Ohio was constructed to provide
some of it's water IIRC.

The Erie Canal, as in "... From Albany to Buffalo..." is still very much
in existence and functional. As it is entirely within the state of New
York, I am not sure how much water it would need from a lake in Ohio.

Looks like it was for the Ohio Canal, part of the
Ohio-Erie Canal System.
http://www.buckeyelakecc.com/history.html
--
Cliff

Erie canal still exists like the Panama canal with massive locks (oceans are not the same height)
The Mississippi has locks in the re-direction of that and more and more.

Martin
Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder



Cliff wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 22:49:02 -0500, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:


Look at the Erie canal - what are the locks for ?


Does that still exist in operation ANYWHERE?
It used to go very near a house I once lived in in Ohio IIRC.
Buckeye Lake in Ohio was constructed to provide
some of it's water IIRC.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 21:01:07 -0500, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:

Erie canal still exists like the Panama canal with massive
locks (oceans are not the same height)

My query was about the canal, not locks.

The Mississippi has locks in the re-direction of that and more and more.

I don't really recall many locks on the lower Mississippi.

Martin
Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder



Cliff wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 22:49:02 -0500, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:


Look at the Erie canal - what are the locks for ?


Does that still exist in operation ANYWHERE?
It used to go very near a house I once lived in in Ohio IIRC.
Buckeye Lake in Ohio was constructed to provide
some of it's water IIRC.
--
Cliff

Greetings and Salutations....

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 09:08:12 -0500, Rex B wrote:


Pope Secola VI wrote:

Second little note, you know the two levies that failed, According to
the District Engineer for the Corps of Engineers on the PBS News Hour
they were new levies constructed in 2003-2004. They were a new method
of construction that just didn't work. (Well back to the Drawing boards)

I wondered about that. They looked like basic vertical concrete fences,
with no apparent broad-based support. I'm no civil engineer, but it
looked like a weak design to me. Probably good enough for a trnquil lake
or canal.

Well, I wondered a bit about that myself. However...I did see
ONE schematic that indicated that the posts were actually pilings that

went fairly far into the body of the levee itself. I seem to recall
that at least half the length was buried in the ground. *IF* they
allowed for the stress load at the ground/air intersection, and
made that point a LOT stronger, that should have kept the
supports stabile. However, as has been said over and over...they
were built for a catagory 3 hurricane...which is an order of
magnitude or so LESS stress than a 4. In a way, I am kind
of impressed that the system only failed in a couple of places.
It could have been much worse.
Regards
Dave Mundt

"Dave Mundt" wrote in message
...
Greetings and Salutations....

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 09:08:12 -0500, Rex B wrote:


Pope Secola VI wrote:

Second little note, you know the two levies that failed, According to
the District Engineer for the Corps of Engineers on the PBS News Hour
they were new levies constructed in 2003-2004. They were a new method
of construction that just didn't work. (Well back to the Drawing
boards)

I wondered about that. They looked like basic vertical concrete fences,
with no apparent broad-based support. I'm no civil engineer, but it
looked like a weak design to me. Probably good enough for a trnquil lake
or canal.

Well, I wondered a bit about that myself. However...I did see
ONE schematic that indicated that the posts were actually pilings that

went fairly far into the body of the levee itself. I seem to recall
that at least half the length was buried in the ground. *IF* they
allowed for the stress load at the ground/air intersection, and
made that point a LOT stronger, that should have kept the
supports stabile. However, as has been said over and over...they
were built for a catagory 3 hurricane...which is an order of
magnitude or so LESS stress than a 4. In a way, I am kind
of impressed that the system only failed in a couple of places.
It could have been much worse.
Regards
Dave Mundt

Dave,
The other thing you have to keep in mind is that the failures were the
result of improperly secured barges beating a hole in the levee wall at the
top, not the bottom. They didn't have a blow out at all. They had an
incursion. The real question is how the hell the barges got loose, not why
the levee failed. The levee system would NOT have been breached by any level
of storm or flooding from the lake. It would have been topped, and that was
what was simulated. The levee's were topped by the storm surge from a CAT 3
hurricane and the simulations all showed that. That isn't the same as a
breached levee at all. The breaches let the lake and the city equalize at a
much lower level than a topping would ever have done. A topping would only
"slopped over" the surge, not the entire lake. When the origin of those
barges is determined, somebody is going to have their tit in a nasty little
ringer. They will also be both culpable and liable to some degree.

--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com

"John R. Carroll" wrote in
:

When the origin of those
barges is determined, somebody is going to have their tit in a nasty
little ringer. They will also be both culpable and liable to some
degree.

It won't matter. The owner of the barges won't have near enough insurance.
Plus his business and assets won't cover squat. I wouldn't want to be in
his shoes when they figure out who it is. There's probably a million people
that wouldn't mind seeing his head on a stick on top of a levee.


--

Dan

"D Murphy" wrote in message
...
"John R. Carroll" wrote in
:

When the origin of those
barges is determined, somebody is going to have their tit in a nasty
little ringer. They will also be both culpable and liable to some
degree.

It won't matter. The owner of the barges won't have near enough insurance.
Plus his business and assets won't cover squat. I wouldn't want to be in
his shoes when they figure out who it is. There's probably a million
people
that wouldn't mind seeing his head on a stick on top of a levee.



Looked like a COE dredging barge to me. Could have been a contractor though.
The photos I saw were funny, if that's the word for it. The breaches matched
the barge dimensions side on pretty well. I think that's what clued people
in. That and the reports of noise.
I wonder if there would be criminal liability in a case like this.
Negligence?

--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 05:43:34 GMT, "John R. Carroll"
wrote:


"D Murphy" wrote in message
. ..
"John R. Carroll" wrote in
:

When the origin of those
barges is determined, somebody is going to have their tit in a nasty
little ringer. They will also be both culpable and liable to some
degree.

It won't matter. The owner of the barges won't have near enough insurance.
Plus his business and assets won't cover squat. I wouldn't want to be in
his shoes when they figure out who it is. There's probably a million
people
that wouldn't mind seeing his head on a stick on top of a levee.



Looked like a COE dredging barge to me. Could have been a contractor though.
The photos I saw were funny, if that's the word for it. The breaches matched
the barge dimensions side on pretty well. I think that's what clued people
in. That and the reports of noise.
I wonder if there would be criminal liability in a case like this.
Negligence?

How can you prove negligence? That should be and interesting case,
with a Cat 4 hurricane blowing those things around like rubby duckies
in a bathtub full of 4yr olds. Im not sure HOW you could moor one of
those big *******s and get it to stay in place. Silt bottoms make
loosy anchorages and ground anchors...when you see the storm surge
lifting cargo container carriers a half mile inland...shrug..

It will be interesting to say the least. During the last hurricanes
in the Delta..did barges get loose? We know the casino boats got
toteled.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

In article , John R. Carroll
says...

Looked like a COE dredging barge to me.

Was there a photo?

This is the first, and only discussion of a barge
damaging the levees that I've come across.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

Looking at the Google Earth satellite pictures of the flooded area there are
no barges in the 17th Street canal or anywhere close to the other break. As
I understand it the 17th street canal break started as an underwash that
broke through the backing berm. When the berm washed out there was no
support for the wall.

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , John R.
Carroll
says...

Looked like a COE dredging barge to me.

Was there a photo?

This is the first, and only discussion of a barge
damaging the levees that I've come across.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , John R.
Carroll
says...

Looked like a COE dredging barge to me.

Was there a photo?

Video Tape,
I was in San Diego last week and have it down there. I also say something on
two of the cable networks and both clearly showed the barge in the water
looking through the breech from the 9th ward.


This is the first, and only discussion of a barge
damaging the levees that I've come across.

I will find you something you can link to. I read more about it this morning
so it shouldn't be hard to find. This mornings statements were to the effect
that the failure was a combined result of the over topping, barge incursion
and then the extra flow from the damage resulted in rapid undermining of the
levee wall.



--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com

"Glenn Ashmore" wrote in message
news:bRIVe.25298$hp.3729@lakeread08...
Looking at the Google Earth satellite pictures of the flooded area there
are
no barges in the 17th Street canal or anywhere close to the other break.
As
I understand it the 17th street canal break started as an underwash that
broke through the backing berm. When the berm washed out there was no
support for the wall.


The barge never actually escaped from Alcatraz and stayed in the levee.
Early on, when I watched the film footage, the levee top was destroyed to
what looked like a depth of 5 to 8 feet or so but that was it.
As the hole was just a bit wider than the barge was long and a witness
reported a lot of noise resembling an explosion, the surmise early on was
that the barge beat the top of the levee apart but didn't get through.

--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com

Gunner Asch wrote in
:

Im not sure HOW you could moor one of
those big *******s and get it to stay in place. Silt bottoms make
loosy anchorages and ground anchors...when you see the storm surge
lifting cargo container carriers a half mile inland...shrug..


Hindsight being 20/20 sending them all up the river would have been a good
idea. Leaving them moored in the lake not so good. It probably doesn't
matter that the bottom is silt. A 29 foot storm surge will yank any anchor
off the bottom. From there its going to follow the current and wind.

--

Dan

On 14 Sep 2005 06:42:08 GMT, D Murphy wrote:

Gunner Asch wrote in
:

Im not sure HOW you could moor one of
those big *******s and get it to stay in place. Silt bottoms make
loosy anchorages and ground anchors...when you see the storm surge
lifting cargo container carriers a half mile inland...shrug..


Hindsight being 20/20 sending them all up the river would have been a good
idea. Leaving them moored in the lake not so good. It probably doesn't
matter that the bottom is silt. A 29 foot storm surge will yank any anchor
off the bottom. From there its going to follow the current and wind.


Ayup.

And when the wind is 150 mph plus...even the current isnt all that
much of a factor.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

In article , John R. Carroll
says...

Was there a photo?

Video Tape,
I was in San Diego last week and have it down there. I also say something on
two of the cable networks and both clearly showed the barge in the water
looking through the breech from the 9th ward.

Possibly one of teh barges they tried to use to jam the breach in the
levee? They attempted this before they realized just how big the
hole was.

This was the first inkling I had that nobody there knew what was
going on:

ACOE boss: "Well, stick a *barge* in the hole."

Tug captain: "You don't really understand how much trouble you're in, eh?"

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , John R. Carroll
says...

Was there a photo?

Video Tape,
I was in San Diego last week and have it down there. I also say something
on
two of the cable networks and both clearly showed the barge in the water
looking through the breech from the 9th ward.

Possibly one of teh barges they tried to use to jam the breach in the
levee? They attempted this before they realized just how big the
hole was.

I guess I wouldn't be surprised to much but that wouldn't explain the hile
bashed in the top.
I am sure the failure modes will be well investigated.


This was the first inkling I had that nobody there knew what was
going on:

ACOE boss: "Well, stick a *barge* in the hole."

Tug captain: "You don't really understand how much trouble you're in,
eh?"


Real genius LOL.

--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...2/210912.shtml

Why New Orleans Flooded
Phil Brennan, NewsMax.com
Tuesday, Sept. 13, 2005
A steel barge that came crashing into one of the levee walls, and not
the failure of that levee to hold back an immense tidal wave, was to
blame for much of the flooding that drowned parts of New Orleans.

Lying an average of seven feet below sea level, surrounded by the
waters of Lake Ponchartrain, the Mississippi River and Lake Borgne,
which separates Lake Pontchartrain from the Gulf of Mexico, and
protected by a series of sinking levees, the city of New Orleans was a
disaster waiting to happen.
It happened on August 29, 2005, just as the city was breathing a
collective sigh of relief that hurricane Katrina had not been as bad
as
predicted.

It turned out to be far worse, not because of the destructive winds of
a Category Four hurricane, but because three massive walls of water
spurred by those winds inundated many parts of the city after the
winds
moved away.

As politicians play the blame game, many facts about the roots of the
disaster have either been overlooked or deliberately ignored because
they are inconvenient to those seeking to put the onus for the tragedy
upon their political targets. One of them was the story behind the
flood that turned a major disaster into a catastrophe of immense
magnitude.

In a fact-filled retrospective that told the full story, the Wall
Street Journal explained in great detail just what happened when much
of the Big Easy became an adjunct of Lake Ponchartrain.
The Journal told the truth, but the truth hurts when you are seeking
to
put your spin on the assignment of blame. So the remainder of the
media
simply ignored a story the American people are entitled to know.

Facts Ignored and Not Investigated

Among the facts exposed of the Journal which the mainstream media has
studiously ignored:
· In two cases, storm-driven water, far higher than the levees were
designed to hold back (up to 15 feet of tidal surge), overwhelmed them
and went pouring down on parts of the city. According to the Journal,
the waves inundated the mostly working-class eastern districts, home
to
160,000 people. In some places, the water rose as fast as a foot per
minute, survivors told the Journal. These levees did not break.
According to engineers, scientists, local officials and the accounts
of
nearly 90 survivors of Katrina interviewed by the Journal, the first
of
the three waves swept from the north out of Lake Pontchartrain.

The wave of undetermined height poured over 15-foot-high levees along
the Industrial Canal, which were several feet lower than others in the
central areas of the city. Wrote the Journal: "About the same time, a
similar wave exploded without warning across Lake Borgne, which
separates Lake Pontchartrain from the Gulf of Mexico. It filled the
lake, engulfed its surrounding marshes, raced over levees and poured
into eastern New Orleans."

· Another huge wave came across Lake Pontchartrain in the north. It
sent a steel barge ramming through the Industrial Canal, a major
shipping artery that cuts north to south through the city, possibly
creating a breach that grew to 500 feet, letting water pour into
nearby
neighborhoods of the city's Ninth Ward.
The barge's remains were found lying on the bottom of the gap. An
early
eyewitness reported seeing the barge smash through the levee. His
report was never followed up by the media.
Shea Penland, director of the Pontchartrain Institute for
Environmental
Studies at the University of New Orleans, said that break was
particularly surprising because one of the levee breaks was "along a
section that was just upgraded."
"It did not have an earthen levee," Dr. Penland told the New York
Times. "It had a vertical concrete wall several feel thick."

· Vital repairs for which a whopping $600 million had been
appropriated by the federal government were stopped after residents of
the Ninth Ward complained about the noise created by the repair
project
and sued to halt it.
The Industrial Canal, now operated and maintained mostly by the
federal
government, which the Journal described as "the area's defining
presence since it was built in the 1920s," has been damaged by the
passage of time and heavy use.
Barges and ships were routinely delayed because of growing traffic
levels and the lock was "literally falling apart at the hinges" in
1998, according to a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers report, which called
it an "antique" and recommended replacing it.
The lock replacement project didn't get very far because Ninth Ward
residents complained about noise and launched a legal fight that
bogged
down the work.

Levees Not Tall Enough
The levees along the Industrial Canal's eastern side are supposed to
stand at a height of 15 feet, according to the New Orleans district of
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Joseph Suhayda, a retired Louisiana State University coastal
oceanographer, who told the Journal he suspects the levees aren't
actually that tall, partly due to sinking of the land beneath them.
Mr.
Suhayda now consults for a maker of flood-protection barriers. If he's
right, that would mean the levees weren't high enough to handle even a
Category 2 or 3 hurricane. Katrina was nearly a Category 5.

The Corps of Engineers concedes some of its levees in the area "have
settled and need to be raised to provide" the level of protection for
which they were designed, according to a fact sheet on the Corps's Web
site dated May 23, 2005. But federal budget shortfalls in fiscal 2005
and 2006 "will prevent the Corps from addressing these pressing
needs."
Even had sufficient funds been available the work could not have been
completed in time to prevent the Katrina floods.

Designed for the Mississippi, Not the Gulf
In an earlier September 2 story the Journal noted that in Louisiana,
coastal wetlands provide some shelter from surging seawater, but more
than one million acres of coastal wetlands have been lost since 1930
due to development and construction of levees and canals. For every
square mile of wetland lost, storm surges rise by one foot.

"Moreover, the levees in New Orleans were built to keep the city from
being flooded by the Mississippi, but instead caused it to fall below
sea level. Now the Gulf of Mexico has moved into the city," says the
Journal.

As the hurricane rolled into New Orleans, scores of boats broke free
or
sank. In the Industrial Canal, the gush of water broke a barge from
its
moorings. It isn't known whose barge it was. The huge steel hull
became
a water-borne missile. It hurtled into the canal's eastern flood wall
just north of the major street passing through the Lower Ninth Ward,
leading officials to theorize that the errant barge triggered the
500-foot breach. Water poured into the neighborhood.

When the storm was over, the barge was resting inside the hole. "Based
on what I know and what I saw, the Lower Ninth Ward, Chalmette, St.
Bernard, their flooding was instantaneous," said Col. Rich Wagenaar of
the Army Corps.

It didn't help that the Mississippi River, which runs along the
southern border of these neighborhoods, rose 11 feet between Sunday
and
Monday mornings. Coastal experts say that could have worsened flooding
by limiting the water's escape route.

As the water roaring out of the Industrial Canal turned the streets of
eastern New Orleans into rivers, the same areas were hit from the
other
side by the storm surge coming off Lake Borgne. Engineers say the
estimated 20-foot surge also appeared to overflow levees just north of
St. Bernard Parish. Shrimp boats were dumped in a marshy section
between Lake Borgne and the city.

Responsibilities Unfulfilled

The city of New Orleans issued a "Comprehensive Emergency Management
Plan" for hurricanes well before Katrina arrived. The city accepted
the
responsibility for issuing a warning, ordering and managing
evacuation,
arranging for buses for those without any other transportation,
setting
up and maintaining shelters, and other critical duties.

As one editorialist wrote, "Given the corruption in municipal agencies
- one not necessarily cynical Louisiana politician (Billy Tauzin) said
some time ago that "Half of Louisiana is under water and the other
half
is under indictment" - it was inevitable that a picture of
responsibilities unfulfilled would emerge after a storm like Katrina."

Among the city's self-proclaimed responsibilities was the job of the
mayor to order an evacuation 48 hours before the hurricane came
ashore,
not 24, hours, as Mayor Nagin did; the New Orleans Regional Transit
Authority was meant to "position supervisors and dispatch evacuation
buses" to evacuate at least some of the "100,000 citizens of New
Orleans [who] do not have means of personal transportation," but it
did
not, and the flood claimed the buses.

Moreover, the city was responsible for establishing shelters
co-ordinated with "food and supply distribution sites" which the
American Red Cross, the Salvation Army and others were to provision,
but the city did not.

Both agencies provided the supplies but as Fox cable News
correspondent
Major Garret revealed, they were barred by local authorities from
delivering them to those stranded in the city at places such as the
Superdome who most needed them in the immediate aftermath of the
storm.


As the Journal reported on September 2, city officials appear to have
been well aware of their responsibilities. As late Aug. 1, officials
close to the planning confirmed to the New Orleans Times-Picayune that
the transit authority had developed plans to use its own buses, school
buses, and even trains to move refugees from the city when disaster
struck.

Failed Execution of the Plan

Part of its "Future Plans" section, for example, concerns the levees.
It also includes discussion of "the preparation of a post-disaster
plan
that will identify programs and actions that will reduce of eliminate
the exposure of human life and property to natural hazards."

In 9,000 words, there are only four references to the Federal
Emergency
Management Agency. Nowhere, not even in a section on catastrophic
events, do the words "Department of Homeland Security" appear.

The city declared that its hurricane preparedness procedures were
"designed to deal with the anticipation of a direct hit from a major
hurricane." Such a hurricane hit, and New Orleans was not prepared.
The
first questions that legislators in Washington and in Baton Rouge
should be asking are simple: Why didn't the buses run? Why were people
left to starve? Where did all those dollars go?

What the Journal reported showed the immense magnitude of the disaster
and explained what created a catastrophe beyond anything most people
in
New Orleans anticipated. The real cause of the tragedy lay in the
history of the city's below sea level location -a fact that can be
traced back to the city's founding.

The attempts to prevent the Mississippi from rising over its banks and
flooding the area has been a recurring problem, as have the
miscalculations surrounding the ability of the dikes to deal with
storms even less severe than Hurricane Katrina.

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner