cthia wrote:It's quite alright if you didn't read it all. It was included as a reference and a convenience.
Of course the children were not crushed by cranes. In a counter-grav culture? Cranes, and the enormous mass and dangers they represent, was only included as a modern day analogy. That construction site was much too dangerous for any field trip. The students should never have been allowed onsite. IMHOcrewdude48 wrote:First, I have to say as a desclamer, I stopped reading at the point where you bolded the paragraph titles. I honestly tried, but I just couldn't make my self. Were they directly from some sort of government regulations?
As for your question. They weren't crushed by a crane. The kids were standing under a completed section of the dome, where they would have been perfectly safe if the dome had been constructed to spec. The fact of the matter is that where they were standing was probably safer than out in the open. From the descriptions of the work site, the counter grav cranes were picking up these HUGE panels, and flying them to where they were being installed. The odds of a crane's CG failing or a failure in the tractor or claw causing the panel to drop were much higher than a dome collapse. Assuming no sabotage, the only way for them to be safer would be for them to stay home.
Also, there is no way in hell that the Grayson OSHA requirement were written with counter grav or huge domes in mind. If the safety zone around a crane is defined as the height of the crane plus a safety margin, it would be largely useless for a crane that is 3 meters tall, but can fly.
The kids at the school site were standing under a completely finished portion of a dome which, when finished, would have been the better part of a mile and a half in diameter. They were being carefully kept there by their guides, teachers, and chaperones. Had the materials in the site met code standard, and had the footings for the support pylons not been deliberately sabotaged, the area in which they were standing would have stood firm even in the face of a major earthquake. I apologize for not stating all of this in detail in the book, but I thought it was relatively clear from context (especially when Skydomes begins analyzing the video) and that readers would recognize that Graysons are not going to casually risk the lives of children . . . which was, in fact, part and parcel of the reason public's reaction to the collapse was so virulent. Their initial thought was that risks must have been taken for the kids to be exposed to the disaster when it occurred; only later did the fury over the substandard materials come fully to the fore.
There were no cranes, no panels, no operatinghieavy equipment, and no structural members being manipulated by cranes within a half mile of them and --- I reiterate exactly what Adam Gerrick told you in the book --- if the plans had been followed and the materials met code standard had been met that collapse could not have happened. Dunno how I can make it any clearer than that.