777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9864
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

New Cracks Found At CDG

Tue May 25, 2004 4:05 pm

New cracks have apperared in more parts of the new 2E Terminal. Cracking sounds were heard coming from the ceiling which forced the evacuation of everyone that were inside the damanged terminal.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1223797,00.html
http://www.chieftain.com/national/1085464800/4

Sounds like the whole new 2E Terminal has to come down now
Head Forum Moderator
moderators@airliners.net for all Moderator contact
 
User avatar
ua2162
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 11:53 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Tue May 25, 2004 4:24 pm

This is really scary! I think they'll just have to shut down the whole terminal for a while. Let's just hope everything gets squared away before the arrival of the A380.
 
777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9864
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Tue May 25, 2004 6:01 pm

Terminal 2E is closed pending a criminal investgation. Only airport Employees and Emergency Services personal/Search and Rescue are allowed in the damanged terminal.
Head Forum Moderator
moderators@airliners.net for all Moderator contact
 
aviationwiz
Posts: 882
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 7:20 pm

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Tue May 25, 2004 10:19 pm

I think it's time to just level the whole terminal...  Sad
Proudly from the Home of the Red Tail.
 
ScottishLaddie
Posts: 2309
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 8:30 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Tue May 25, 2004 10:33 pm

I'm not surprised. A big chunk has already collapsed so the rest of the structure is going to be weakened, it has to be bulldozed, otherwise it'll go itself.
 
richierich
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2000 5:49 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 12:16 am

I can't imagine how they'll save this terminal but I hope they are able to.
Of course, if there is any doubt to its structural integrity, then bring out the wrecking ball. It'll be a shame because I'm sure whatever they put in its place will not be as interesting or architecturally pleasant. But safety must come first!
None shall pass!!!!
 
7e72004
Posts: 3440
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 12:15 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 12:19 am

Someone screwed up somewhere!  Pissed
The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
 
scottysair
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:07 pm

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 12:26 am

Yeah, they need to make reconstruction of 2E again.
 
IanatSTN
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 2:27 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 12:34 am

ScottishLaddie pretty much got it....

Cheers  Angry
Ian@STN
Ian@STN ::
 
CON207
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2003 4:33 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 2:59 am

Comes as no surprise !!
The structure has been weakened and lives have already been lost.
The whole terminal would be better off pulled down and started again.
PEOPLES LIVES ARE MORE IMPORTANT!
You can rebuild a building. You cannot replace a human life.Someone really did mess up here big time .  Angry

Sue

[Edited 2004-05-25 20:04:12]
Being ill sucks. Never take life for granted!!
 
Guest

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 3:04 am

Some of you peoples are real fatalists. Criminal investigations, The structure is weak and can't be repaired. Let the engineers look at it and then decide. Not a single building in America can withstand a 767, does this mean we should tear them all down? Maybe we should stop driving, or flying all together. You know, we might be at risk.

Ease up folks.

One last thing...If in fact someone is held criminally liable for a design or build fault, that's just wrong on so many levels. One person? After multiple reviews on a project. Man, I'm glad I live in America.

[Edited 2004-05-25 20:06:58]
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 3:08 am

Actually BoingGoningGone,

I believe criminal investigations are normally opened under French Law to determine if such events are really accidents. It is considered part of the investigation, as opposed to the US where an investigation commences then a criminal investigation follows.

Just a little nuance of the French system.

But if flaws are turning up in other parts of the building that seems to indicate indirectly that it might be a design or materials issue, rather then a work flaw in just that one section.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
ScottishLaddie
Posts: 2309
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 8:30 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 3:10 am

Not a single building in America can withstand a 767, does this mean we should tear them all down? Maybe we should stop driving, or flying all together. You know, we might be at risk.

What has that got to do with a building that has already partially collapsed and could well go all together. Buildings aren't built to intentionally collapse like that, and you don't expect a 767 to impact one everyday either.
 
dontlikeairbus
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 3:37 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 3:10 am

Boing,
where have u been
u act as if liability issues arent a problem here in the States
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 3:17 am

Not a single building in America can withstand a 767

That's not true.

In the case of the twin towers however, their were built to withstand the impact and burn-out of a 707.

Some more modern structures (e.g., Riverbend Nuclear Power Plant's reactor) have been [re]built to withstand the impact of a 747.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
Guest

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 3:18 am

Boing,
where have u been
u act as if liability issues arent a problem here in the States


That's why we have insurance.

What has that got to do with a building that has already partially collapsed and could well go all together.

Nothing. It's an extreme example of some of the fatalism I've seen over this issue. Reading the threads on this is like reading European News... I mean tabloids.
 
jwenting
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:12 pm

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 3:34 am

The WTC towers were designed to withstand the impact of a 707 on approach to one of the NYC airports.
That means an aircraft with low fuel.

Had the impacting 767s been low on fuel the towers would likely not have collapsed (they would probably have to have been torn down though).
It was the hot fires from the burning fuel which caused structural supports to melt that brought down the buildings.

Quite different from a building which collapses of its own accord only a year after being constructed.
A building moreover that had been warned about having structural problems that could lead to collapse even during construction but which warnings were willfully ignored!
I wish I were flying
 
Guest

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 3:39 am

A building moreover that had been warned about having structural problems that could lead to collapse even during construction but which warnings were willfully ignored!

If that's the case, then the organization behind it's build was either ignorant to too bureaucratic to fix the problem before hand.
 
Espion007
Posts: 1653
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 9:29 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 4:41 am

creepy-i was at the terminal just a couple months ago.it seemed very,very large,but nothing to support it inside-just a long concrete tube.maybe that may have something to do with it.
Snakes on a Plane!
 
FLYtoEGCC
Posts: 929
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:56 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 4:53 am

"it seemed very,very large,but nothing to support it inside-just a long concrete tube.maybe that may have something to do with it."

Espion007
With all due respect, if you read the articles to which there are links above, you'll see that the design and structure were checked and double-checked by independent experts, and as such, this is unlikely to be the cause. At this stage all people can do is speculate, but if you have a look at the other thread on this topic that was started on the day the terminal collapsed, you'll find people in there with, i suspect, a bit more of an engineering background than yourself with some interesting comments on what may have been the cause.
Come fly with me, let's fly, let's fly away...
 
RIX
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 4:46 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 4:59 am

The WTC towers did withstand the impact of a 767. They would withstand fire alone too. They did not withstand both impact and fire, as the impact destroyed the thermal protection on structural supports, then the latter melted of fire...

Still, that has nothing to do with the situation. Same as "European News... I mean tabloids" - please, don't be that cheap and disrespectful.
 
lnglive1011yyz
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 12:23 pm

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 5:12 am

Boing / all,

One last thing...If in fact someone is held criminally liable for a design or build fault, that's just wrong on so many levels. One person? After multiple reviews on a project. Man, I'm glad I live in America.

I have to say, that there are places all over the world that have buildings that I'm sure don't meet today's standards, and probably shouldn't have people in them as we speak.

There are issues with construction of things ALL the time. (whether it be a building, or product, just look at the Three Mile Island Nuclear meltdown that occurred some time ago) The best outcome from ANY tragedy is to learn from mistakes, and ensure nothing happens again, which I'm sure the French will do in this case.

Boing, you are correct when you say that Insurance covers liability for issues such as this (as I'm sure you'll see when this all wraps up), but American's aren't immune to the cost of the claims when such tragedy's like this occurs -- check out your Insurance rates since 9/11. Here in Canada, they've almost tripled. Insurance isn't the end-all-be-all solution.

In my opinion, SOMEONE (individual or company) has to take responsibility for what happened. If we look at the current facts, you can see that clearly, structural failure has occurred. Whether it be from construction, poor workmanship, bad materials, someone is responsible ultimately. Who is responsible and what SHOULD be done will be decided by the outcome of the investigations.

On an side note, in reading the few threads on this subject, as well as pretty much any other thread that happens on here, it's amazing to see the complete split between the U.S and the rest of the world (A vs B ,etc), when it comes to certain topics and certain individuals. Some people really take National pride WAY out of control. I'm the first person to admit that I love my American friends just like they're family. We all know that you're the "Superpower" of the world, and we all don't need to be reminded of it, even subtly.

To the families and to the FRENCH PEOPLE --> The rest of the world (including MANY MANY Americans) feel your pain and offer our condolences for your loss.

1011yyz.
Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
 
Guest

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 5:13 am

Still, that has nothing to do with the situation. Same as "European News... I mean tabloids" - please, don't be that cheap and disrespectful.

You mean realistic????
 
N777UA
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:06 pm

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 5:15 am

Six people die, a major part of a major airport might have to be demolished and rebuilt...

...but let's not forget about the effect on the A380!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Come on people, an airplane's an airplane, they can park it at remote stands until the terminal gets fixed or rebuilt, you can't replace the lives lost.
 
captaingomes
Posts: 6251
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 1:33 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 8:53 am

Very well said, 1011yyz. It saddens me to see that some people will just say "oh, that's what insurance is for" or something to that effect. Sure, it may not cost YOU directly, but it costs everybody indirectly. Same with trival lawsuits, so common in the USA for millions of dollars over spilled coffee. It costs everybody indirectly, and it affects the design of consumer products, for better or for worse.

It truly is sad that people's lives were lost, and let's hope the investigation, which is crucial by the way, will determine whether it was a material, construction, or criminal problem that occured in the new terminal at CDG.
"it's kind of like an Airbus, it's an engineering marvel, but there's no sense of passion" -- J. Clarkson re: Coxster
 
Guest

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Wed May 26, 2004 9:38 am

This is an investigation into a safety concern. The purpose is to find the cause to prevent it in the future, not place blame. Don't over do it with this criminal BS.
 
bezoar
Posts: 746
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2001 4:47 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Thu May 27, 2004 3:20 am

Tragedies of this nature are often the result of multiple factors, not just one. Remove just one of the factors, and you have a very different outcome. Aviation mishaps and other 'accidents' also fall in this category. Though any comments regarding this collapse is speculation, it is difficult for me to see how a tunnel-shaped building above the ground could resist collapse of the roof without significant bracing of the ceiling from the inside, or the lateral walls from the outside. I am not an engineer, however.
"There are none so blind as those who will not see."
 
varig md-11
Posts: 1112
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2000 7:17 pm

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Thu May 27, 2004 3:30 am

Jwenting

I know you're a specialist in anti-France propaganda and tabloid-like posts but the warnings were not ignored during construction: pillars were reinforced with carbon fiber and later with steel sheets.

Nevertheless it's utterly atrocious that the building has to collapse on its own and burry peaceful pax.
it's a bit soon to make quick conclusions though; I just hope the responsible persons will be prosecuted
AF TW AA NW DL UA CO BA U2 TP UX LH SK AZ MP KL SN VY HV LS SS TK SQ PC RG IW SE LI TN
 
LH423
Posts: 5868
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 1999 6:27 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Thu May 27, 2004 3:38 am

This is an investigation into a safety concern. The purpose is to find the cause to prevent it in the future, not place blame. Don't over do it with this criminal BS.

Not exactly. As L-188 pointed, in many European countries, they don't follow the "innocent until proven guilty" route that Americans often take (at least in theory). This is a criminal investigation to see if negligence falls on someone's head, might it be the architect, structural engineers, contractors, workers, etc. If, at the end of this, they find that no one is at fault, the investigation will no longer be criminal but now will be one to find out what exactly happened, why it happened, and if it will happen again.

I will, however, agree that people need to stop with the whole "rip it down" and "someone will pay" mantra. It's much too soon to tell if this is the case.

LH423
« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
 
elwood64151
Posts: 2410
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 10:22 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Thu May 27, 2004 3:53 am

But if flaws are turning up in other parts of the building that seems to indicate indirectly that it might be a design or materials issue, rather then a work flaw in just that one section.

Not necessarily. It may be that the several sections of the building depend upon each other for support. That means if one section falls, the others are all weakened.

whether it be a building, or product, just look at the Three Mile Island Nuclear meltdown that occurred some time ago

TMI was not a construction issue. It was an old, faulty indicator that caused the crew working the station to do exactly the wrong thing in the situation they were actually facing. The real problem was redundancy in instrumentation and a realistic replacement schedule for that instrumentation. It's a little different than what they (probably) face at CDG.

On an side note, in reading the few threads on this subject, as well as pretty much any other thread that happens on here, it's amazing to see the complete split between the U.S and the rest of the world (A vs B ,etc), when it comes to certain topics and certain individuals. Some people really take National pride WAY out of control. I'm the first person to admit that I love my American friends just like they're family. We all know that you're the "Superpower" of the world, and we all don't need to be reminded of it, even subtly.

To the families and to the FRENCH PEOPLE --> The rest of the world (including MANY MANY Americans) feel your pain and offer our condolences for your loss.


So do we.

As far as being subtly reminded of our "Superpower" status, I don't know how to leave that out of certain discussions. In this thread, it's inappropriate, and the people who say, "This would never happen in America," are obviously mis-informed because it happens all the time. We recently had a highway bridge support fall down because the manufacturer labelled it backwards. Three people in a passing car were killed. So it does happen here.

Believe me, there are Nationalists in this country, but those of us who are Patriots know that we're not infallible.

Same with trival lawsuits, so common in the USA for millions of dollars over spilled coffee.

And of course, there are Nationalists in other parts of the world, too. We're not the only idiots will frivilous lawsuits.

it is difficult for me to see how a tunnel-shaped building above the ground could resist collapse of the roof without significant bracing of the ceiling from the inside, or the lateral walls from the outside. I am not an engineer, however.

Actually, there was significant bracing from the outside. This is a common construction technique for un-obstructed spaces. The largest unobstructed space in the world that I know of is Bartle Hall in Kansas City, where the roof is supported by suspension cables from above. It would be even larger if the suspension towers didn't come up through the middle of the building. I'm sure since 1995 a larger unobstructed space has been built, but back then that's what it was. In any event, there are no internal vertical supports for the roof. Even the suspension towers do not assist in keeping the roof up, except in transferring the load from the suspension cables.

I just hope the responsible persons will be prosecuted

Assuming the accident was forseeable, I agree with you completely. Whomever is responsible should be held financially and criminally liable.

If it was not a forseeable event with the known facts, then I would say we should just chalk it up to experience and let the insurance handle it.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
 
garnetpalmetto
Posts: 5351
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:38 am

RE: New Cracks Found At CDG

Thu May 27, 2004 4:49 am

Same with trival lawsuits, so common in the USA for millions of dollars over spilled coffee.

A) In the infamous Liebeck v. McDonald's case, Liebeck did not sue for "millions." She sued to recover her hospital bills

B) It wasn't a trivial case. Do a websearch, as I've explained the facts of the cae until I'm blue in the face on a.net and elsewhere. Here's a basic analysis of it

http://www.wis-injury.com/injurymcdonaldscoffee.html

C) In the instance of this case, if there's any negligence found I wouldn't be surprised to see multiple suits being tossed around. Here's hoping that the truth is found as to what happened. My heart goes out to those who were affected by this.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.