Mike in Syracuse Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 I realize this belongs on PPP but I'm cross posting this here because it's just too important. http://gov.louisiana.gov/Disaster%20Relief%20Request.pdf
Ghost of BiB Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 I realize this belongs on PPP but I'm cross posting this here because it's just too important. http://gov.louisiana.gov/Disaster%20Relief%20Request.pdf 428683[/snapback] And I answered you on PPP. Did you read the letter and do you understand what it says?
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 And I answered you on PPP. Did you read the letter and do you understand what it says? 428692[/snapback] I didn't catch it Bib... What is it under in PPP?
Bear Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 Dear Mr. President, Big storm coming. Emergency procedures underway. Will need help with aftermath. Thank you, LA Did I miss anything?
Ghost of BiB Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 I didn't catch it Bib... What is it under in PPP? 428694[/snapback] Over there it is called "someone is lying".
Dan Gross Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 ...and, according to this timeline, Bush signed disaster declarations on the 27th, which I believe is effectively what the note (sent a day later, on the 28th) is asking for...am I wrong?
Dan Gross Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 Hmmmm, the Governor's statement on the mandatory evacuation status on the 28th included the following: “I want to thank the following people: President Bush for his concern; Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi and his outstanding team of professionals; the many governors who have called offering help; “The parish presidents, mayors and elected officials of southeast Louisiana who have cooperated magnificently; the emergency personnel all across the state; FEMA’s presence and support; the news media for delivering information to our people. " ...but I thought FEMA didn't bother to do anything until Thursday...?
Ghost of BiB Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 Georgia Ivan Florida Ivan Anyone notice a common theme in how these are written and formatted?
Mike in Syracuse Posted September 4, 2005 Author Posted September 4, 2005 Georgia Ivan Florida Ivan Anyone notice a common theme in how these are written and formatted? 428802[/snapback] Well it appears that there is a standard "we're having a hurricane and need help" form letter. It's really unfortunate that our gov't has turned tragedy into routine. To me, it appearred a lot more sinister at first glace.....I was wrong. I will delete my original post.
Ghost of BiB Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 Well it appears that there is a standard "we're having a hurricane and need help" form letter. It's really unfortunate that our gov't has turned tragedy into routine. To me, it appearred a lot more sinister at first glace.....I was wrong. I will delete my original post. 428895[/snapback] I think tragedy IS routine, and a form letter ensures that the t's get crossed and the i's get dotted so all parties know the requirements of the Stafford Act are being complied with. This isn't limited to hurricanes. There's wildfires, floods, earthquakes, tornados...There's room in there for additional explanations of things. Sometimes a form letter can be a good thing. These things should happen pretty well in a hurry (current events notwithstanding) and having something essentially pre-formatted cuts out the trying to figure out what they want factor. A lot of government, especially the military works the same way. My usual line of work is operational planning. A warplan can be as thick as two telephone books, but it's under a standard format called JOPES. The intent is that anyone picking it up wanting to know for example what the consequence management plan is for that situation can immediately go to Annex T and not have to scan through 1,100 pages to find what they need to know.
Chef Jim Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 I think tragedy IS routine, and a form letter ensures that the t's get crossed and the i's get dotted so all parties know the requirements of the Stafford Act are being complied with. This isn't limited to hurricanes. There's wildfires, floods, earthquakes, tornados...There's room in there for additional explanations of things. Sometimes a form letter can be a good thing. These things should happen pretty well in a hurry (current events notwithstanding) and having something essentially pre-formatted cuts out the trying to figure out what they want factor. A lot of government, especially the military works the same way. My usual line of work is operational planning. A warplan can be as thick as two telephone books, but it's under a standard format called JOPES. The intent is that anyone picking it up wanting to know for example what the consequence management plan is for that situation can immediately go to Annex T and not have to scan through 1,100 pages to find what they need to know. 428898[/snapback] I thought that letter was too good to be thrown together during the tragedy they faced. More likely in 32pt letters: HOLY SH*T BIG !@#$ING MESS GET YOUR AZZ DOWN HERE NOW!!!
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 Why is everybody missing the point? NOLA made it through the storm... The surge sloshed over the levee by not that much... The levee should have AT LEAST HELD. Bad design yes. Bad designs cause some flooding. But, total failure in only (I say only considering the emense levee project) three spots? Something else happened and it wasn't because of bad design or the levee wasn't high enough. I may be wrong but, everyhting points to poor levee maintenace and inspection. Something (maint. and inspect) that is first to go in tight budgetary times. This is my opinion and it might not be worth squat... But, I KNOW THE IMPORTANCE ABOUT BEING ANAL RENTENTIVE ABOUT THESE THINGS.
SilverNRed Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 Why is everybody missing the point? NOLA made it through the storm... The surge sloshed over the levee by not that much... The levee should have AT LEAST HELD. Bad design yes. Bad designs cause some flooding. But, total failure in only (I say only considering the emense levee project) three spots? Something else happened and it wasn't because of bad design or the levee wasn't high enough. I may be wrong but, everyhting points to poor levee maintenace and inspection. Something (maint. and inspect) that is first to go in tight budgetary times. This is my opinion and it might not be worth squat... But, I KNOW THE IMPORTANCE ABOUT BEING ANAL RENTENTIVE ABOUT THESE THINGS. 429206[/snapback] If the levee was built for Cat 3 and NO got hit with Cat 4, then why shouldn't it have failed? The parts that failed were recently upgraded, supposedly. The locals knew they were only safe for Cat 3, but 20% of the city ignored a mandatory evacuation and the governor was reluctant to even call for that same evacuation. There's your problem right there.
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 If the levee was built for Cat 3 and NO got hit with Cat 4, then why shouldn't it have failed? The parts that failed were recently upgraded, supposedly. The locals knew they were only safe for Cat 3, but 20% of the city ignored a mandatory evacuation and the governor was reluctant to even call for that same evacuation. There's your problem right there. 429256[/snapback] I am not disputing that is a problem. IMO... All facits of goverenment have been cutting. The Corps has gone through a lot. I have heartburn that EVERYBODY turned a blind eye to what amounted to be a sleeping tragedy. NOBODY CARED. Everybody talks security in this country. Do we really practice it. NOLA was left unsecure and it went straight up the chain... No matter how incompetant state and local gov't where does the buck stop. Where was the La National Guard? It stops some where and blaming "bottom down" is no the answer. Where was the oversight? This was so typical "not my job" it is too funny. Who was supposed to be the bigger man, the man with the resources, they guy to say "Stop all the BS."
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 4, 2005 Posted September 4, 2005 Forgot to add above that those "Cat 3" levees held through the "Cat 4" storm that passed 40 miles to the east. They are saying the surge started to slosh over the top... That is expected since it was a "Cat 4" hurricane. What I don't get is before the levee broke, they were saying that the pumps were working and then all of a sudden stopped and broke down... Why the breakdown before the breaches? Once the Breach happened I could understand that the pumps would go down since they would be submerged (assuming the huge turbines were designed to operate above water). IMO... Everything leans towards mechanical breakdown, poor maintenance leading to complete failure. Like your car engine... Does it just blow-up at 3,001 miles since your last oil change? Older levees and subsequently lower levees have the potential to hold even know the water may be going over the top (but not too much... As in this case). I assume that is why the pumps kicked on when the "Bath tub" overspilled? Why did they break before the breach? They had to break from behind... What was behind the concrete and earthen structure... Were they maintaining low ground cover on the earthen portions? Anything tall (like trees, shrubs, ect...) with extensive root networks could have caused catatrophic damage. For some reason I just don't trust the answers they will give. This is the same Corps that is slashing maintenance budgets around the country. This is the same Coprs that is looking to farm out all facits of these critical yet, underappreciated jobs. I fear too many chefs spoiled the soup. Again, just my $.02. Take it for what it is worth.
SilverNRed Posted September 5, 2005 Posted September 5, 2005 Forgot to add above that those "Cat 3" levees held through the "Cat 4" storm that passed 40 miles to the east. They are saying the surge started to slosh over the top... That is expected since it was a "Cat 4" hurricane. What I don't get is before the levee broke, they were saying that the pumps were working and then all of a sudden stopped and broke down... Why the breakdown before the breaches? Once the Breach happened I could understand that the pumps would go down since they would be submerged (assuming the huge turbines were designed to operate above water). IMO... Everything leans towards mechanical breakdown, poor maintenance leading to complete failure. Like your car engine... Does it just blow-up at 3,001 miles since your last oil change? Older levees and subsequently lower levees have the potential to hold even know the water may be going over the top (but not too much... As in this case). I assume that is why the pumps kicked on when the "Bath tub" overspilled? Why did they break before the breach? They had to break from behind... What was behind the concrete and earthen structure... Were they maintaining low ground cover on the earthen portions? Anything tall (like trees, shrubs, ect...) with extensive root networks could have caused catatrophic damage. For some reason I just don't trust the answers they will give. This is the same Corps that is slashing maintenance budgets around the country. This is the same Coprs that is looking to farm out all facits of these critical yet, underappreciated jobs. I fear too many chefs spoiled the soup. Again, just my $.02. Take it for what it is worth. 429295[/snapback] No idea on any of that. I'm an engineer too and I know all about designing with plenty of room for error and a focus on redundancy. They knew that these levees failing would basically destroy a major U.S. city so why were they designed with only Cat 3 in mind? If we're talking about hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives, why not design it for some sort of fictional Cat 6 storm? A disaster like this takes an old bad design and decades of neglect to happen. Then you take into account how poor the city's plan was for this event, which is another story.... We may have the perfect storm of stupidity and neglect here.
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 5, 2005 Posted September 5, 2005 No idea on any of that. I'm an engineer too and I know all about designing with plenty of room for error and a focus on redundancy. They knew that these levees failing would basically destroy a major U.S. city so why were they designed with only Cat 3 in mind? If we're talking about hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives, why not design it for some sort of fictional Cat 6 storm? A disaster like this takes an old bad design and decades of neglect to happen. Then you take into account how poor the city's plan was for this event, which is another story.... We may have the perfect storm of stupidity and neglect here. 429372[/snapback] Hey we agree! Cool. Where we disagree is that the Corps should have manned up to all this years ago and should have done the right thing in the absence of any sane reasoning. Seems everybody kept saying it is not my job. No matter how jaded I am or how troubled I am by someone else's lack of initative never things slide!
SilverNRed Posted September 5, 2005 Posted September 5, 2005 Hey we agree! Cool. 429387[/snapback] I think we've agreed for the most part from the start. Where we disagree is that the Corps should have manned up to all this years ago and should have done the right thing in the absence of any sane reasoning.Seems everybody kept saying it is not my job. No matter how jaded I am or how troubled I am by someone else's lack of initative never things slide! I certainly think someone needed to step up. I don't know for sure (is it OK to admit that in 2005?), but it seems like a lot of people blew a lot of chances to get things right.
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 5, 2005 Posted September 5, 2005 I think we've agreed for the most part from the start. I certainly think someone needed to step up. I don't know for sure (is it OK to admit that in 2005?), but it seems like a lot of people blew a lot of chances to get things right. 429544[/snapback] As much as it seems I am against people here, I am for all purposes pretty onboard with your reasoning. Read Dan's article on how there were other immediate proposals... Stop gap measure that could be done before the Corps finished. Why was the Corps against some of those plans. Why? What people don't realize is the power they have... The past prestige they wield. I know doubt think that they were the "monkey wrench" in the machine. That is why I blame the feds at the top of the chain.
Recommended Posts