Single Point Failure law

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

I'm wondering if anyone would back passing a single point failure law.

Here's an example
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/canada/archives/2011/10/20111006-163350.html
and before anyone starts crying, I really don't care if this happens in Atlasia or not, this is just an example.

Here's a case where one thing happened, one thing failed, and the entire system came crashing down.

Here's another
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tasman_Bridge_disaster

There are a number of cases where things, many things, are vulnerable to single point failures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_point_of_failure

I'd like to try to get a law in place, a budget thing, that says the government will find, and fix, these problems.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I think this is a good idea... though IRL there have been standards for a long while now that prevent non redundant construction methods, at least when applied to bridges/infrastructure



It is believed that the "gusset plates", which are thin, rectangular sheets of steel bolted onto the joints where the pillars hold the bridge up were too small for the bridge design and were fatigued and showed signs of damage prior to the 35W bridge collapse in 2007.

The bridge design did not have redundancies so when one of the gusset plates failed under the load of slow moving rush hour traffic and loads of heavy construction equipment, the whole bridge failed catastrophically.

Luckily we haven't built bridges like this for a long time and new bridge designs nowadays have many redundancies.  In fact, the new bridge that replaced the collapsed bridge is one of the most high tech in the world with hundreds of sensors that constantly give readings on the bridge integrity.  Such smart bridges are increasingly cheaper to build and will give early warnings to engineers automatically the second any damage to the bridge is done.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

I think this is a good idea... though IRL there have been standards for a long while now that prevent non redundant construction methods, at least when applied to bridges/infrastructure



It is believed that the "gusset plates", which are thin, rectangular sheets of steel bolted onto the joints where the pillars hold the bridge up were too small for the bridge design and were fatigued and showed signs of damage prior to the 35W bridge collapse in 2007.

The bridge design did not have redundancies so when one of the gusset plates failed under the load of slow moving rush hour traffic and loads of heavy construction equipment, the whole bridge failed catastrophically.

Luckily we haven't built bridges like this for a long time and new bridge designs nowadays have many redundancies.  In fact, the new bridge that replaced the collapsed bridge is one of the most high tech in the world with hundreds of sensors that constantly give readings on the bridge integrity.  Such smart bridges are increasingly cheaper to build and will give early warnings to engineers automatically the second any damage to the bridge is done.

No offence, but FAIL. There's another bridge right beside it.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I think this is a good idea... though IRL there have been standards for a long while now that prevent non redundant construction methods, at least when applied to bridges/infrastructure



It is believed that the "gusset plates", which are thin, rectangular sheets of steel bolted onto the joints where the pillars hold the bridge up were too small for the bridge design and were fatigued and showed signs of damage prior to the 35W bridge collapse in 2007.

The bridge design did not have redundancies so when one of the gusset plates failed under the load of slow moving rush hour traffic and loads of heavy construction equipment, the whole bridge failed catastrophically.

Luckily we haven't built bridges like this for a long time and new bridge designs nowadays have many redundancies.  In fact, the new bridge that replaced the collapsed bridge is one of the most high tech in the world with hundreds of sensors that constantly give readings on the bridge integrity.  Such smart bridges are increasingly cheaper to build and will give early warnings to engineers automatically the second any damage to the bridge is done.

No offence, but FAIL. There's another bridge right beside it.

A 3 lane bridge that empties onto city streets on both sides.  The 35W bridge was 8 lanes with large shoulders.  I believe the new one is 10 or 11 lanes.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

...Really?

Look I gotta go to bed soon. I'm going to kill this, and tomorrow, find all transportation examples.

There is...

A Rail Line
Broadway
Plymouth
Hennepin
3rd
10th
Washington
I94
Franklin

That all bridge over that river. I don't qualify that as a single point.

If you guys truly don't understand what I'm saying, I will, in the morning, find examples

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ll=37.79934,-122.356453&spn=0.083419,0.154324&t=m&z=13&vpsrc=6


http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ll=37.825243,-122.471466&spn=0.083389,0.154324&t=m&z=13&vpsrc=6


Examples from other countries:


http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ll=-36.828936,174.744329&spn=0.042251,0.077162&t=m&z=14&vpsrc=6


These are just highway examples.

I'm talking about rails, roads, electric networks, communication networks, etc. Anything part of our national infrastructure, and even, legal laws.

The highway example is "If this one bridge fails, there will be a lot of traffic". I'm saying "if this one bridge fails, everyone has to drive hours out of their way"

We don't need to find the examples, that's why we tell some government department to do it. All we do is tell them to find these examples, and, fix them. This would generally mean things like second bridges or what. If one satellite can take the entire North of Canada out of operation (no air travel, can't do business, phones don't work) then that's a big problem, and something we should be working to avoid.

[Ban my account ffs!]

My point was that the bridge collapsed because of a single point of failure... so to call it "FAIL" and then list a bunch of other bridges is kinda rude.

I know U.S. Highway 2 in the UP of Michigan is a "single point of failure" if the road is closed for whatever reason.  On our return bus trip from NYC to Minnesota in April 2002, rapid spring snow melt flooded the highway.  We had to take a 4 hour detour down into Wisconsin just to bypass a short strip of flooded highway.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

Yes, excellent example.

If my wording is off I am open to different wording?