6 ms·
> The Port of Seattle says it could cost as much as $78 million to fix an apparent design flaw A good detailed simulation that would have caught this would be
by hirundo 4y ago
> The Port of Seattle says it could cost as much as $78 million to fix an apparent design flaw
A good detailed simulation that would have caught this would be a small fraction of that cost. Release it as part of flight sim games and let the public explore it. Offer rewards for suggestions that lead to design changes. With such an expensive risk of mistakes it should be only a matter of time before detailed explorable sims of major projects become routine.
- just_steve_h 4y agoOur world we be so much better if the people responsible for mega projects actually thought this way! But, I suspect that a person needs to have a certain hubris to believe themselves worthy of heading a huge project, and that this belief militates against seeking input from outsiders that might catch mistakes.
- chasd00 4y agoThey didn’t need a detailed simulation all they needed was to import 2d dxf’s of the planes into the terminal drawing and see if they fit. I bet requirements changed and no one reviewed those last 4 gates before construction docs were printed.
- sidewndr46 4y agoWouldn't it have sufficed to check the planes wingspan?
- stonogo 4y agoThey had a good detailed simulation. Any competent construction project does, and most of the time, agencies are federally mandated to require BIM both for the construction phase and the maintenance phase. No amount of detailed simulation can help if your contractor thinks you wanted 16 widebody bays and 4 narrowbody bays. There was nothing wrong with the execution; the disagreement is about what was to be built.