Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge • Hacker News Board

Re: Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge

#31

Post by dang » Mon, Jun 09, 2014, 5:18 AM UTC

austinz wrote: post #20

malandrew wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nationality, not race. The People's Republic of China is a country of many races. The one race that most people in the US think of when they hear "Chinese" is more specifically known as Han Chinese ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Chinese ). This piece is more nationalistic/jingoistic in spirit than racist. Furthermore, countries (and their people) do typically exhibit identifiable differences relative to other cou…

Parent was replying to a comment by a now-banned account, not to the article.

The misunderstanding was because of a rare collision: we banned that commenter a few seconds before carbocation posted his reply.

We almost never kill comments when they have replies. (And strictly speaking we didn't do that here either.) But that comment was so egregious that I'm not inclined to unkill it. Anyone who wants to can read it by turning 'showdead' on in their profile.

On a positive note, the recent changes that we and, more importantly, the community have made to HN threads have had the interesting side effect of making banning less common. It's mostly restricted now to throwaway trolls, spammers, and users with a clearly negative track record on the site.

Re: Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge

#32

Post by debaserab2 » Mon, Jun 09, 2014, 5:22 AM UTC

clarkm wrote: post #12

brohoolio wrote: post #4

Original story - http://www.sacbee.com/static/sinclair/sinclair.jquery/baybri... It's a pet peeve of mine when it's really a story about a story.

I really love the progress bar on the top of the page. I wish more long form articles were like that.

Lucky for you, it's baked in to every modern web browser in existence - just look to the right for a built in progress bar that even lets you click to a particular section of the article based on it's progress.

Re: Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge

#33

Post by adventured » Mon, Jun 09, 2014, 5:23 AM UTC

austinz wrote: post #26

literalusername wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. You apparently didn't read the article. "Caltrans employees and U.S. contractors who supervised the job lived fulltime in Shanghai, and top officials flew there often. Tony Anziano, toll bridge program manager, alone spent more than $300,000 on travel. "Part of that cost was for Anziano’s room at the five-star JW Marriott Shanghai Tomorrow Square for up to $470 per night, according to his expense reports.…

Do you think the citizens of countries such as Japan, Canada, and Turkey should be offended that their governments are paying hundreds of millions of dollars to 'foreign' companies in the U.S. for (e.g.) the F-35 fighter?

Lots of companies from around the world can build bridges at a very competent level while remaining near budget.

Quick, name the current generation alternatives to the F35 and the country behind said alternative.

Re: Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge

#34

Post by vwinsyee » Mon, Jun 09, 2014, 5:24 AM UTC

crahrah wrote: post #8

Seems the fact that the company was Chinese is pretty irrelevant - and yet it's repeated over an over. China is the new bogeyman.

In many cases, I'd agree with you. But in context of what happened here, the fact that the company was Chinese (or simply just foreign, for that matter) is absolutely relevant. A few outstanding points:

1. The company was "unaccustomed to the rigor of American construction rules" and "lacked basic quality control", leading Caltran to "relax U.S. standards when the firm couldn’t finish fast enough."

2. "ZPMC violated the job contract by delivering key documents in Chinese instead of English. ABF lacked sufficient quality-assurance staff to speak directly to its own subcontractor – also a contract violation."

3. "Counting the money spent on travel and living costs for Caltrans and its contractors, the suspension span consumed much more than the $250 million in ZPMC’s assumed efficiencies that made the Chinese steel so cost-effective." On living costs alone, Caltran "paid about $50,000 annually per person to rent more than a dozen well-appointed rooms."

Asked for justification, "Caltrans described the accommodations as "reasonable and appropriate" in a written statement. 'The hotel provided a government rate that was comparable to rates at other western hotels,' and followed bargaining agreements, based in part on providing adequate 'safety and support for employees far from home.'"

Re: Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge

#35

Post by tolmasky » Mon, Jun 09, 2014, 5:25 AM UTC

ChuckFrank wrote: post #29

manifesto wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just searched on Delta.com. If you book a week ahead, the price for a round trip ticket in First/business class ranges from $6,000 to $11,000, so spending 10k in a month is "normal".

Why would you need to book a week ahead? And why would you go first/business class? It's a huge project, there's got to be scheduled client side meetings, and those should be scheduled months in advance.

Yeah the article states that coach would have cost $1,500 instead.

Re: Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge

#36

Post by cloudwizard » Mon, Jun 09, 2014, 5:26 AM UTC

swampthing wrote: post #14

It seems like the author is trying to make the assertion that all sorts of poor decisions were made - it'd be helpful to have a comparison to other similar projects, in order to make that determination. Otherwise, these could be completely routine issues for all I know (as a layperson). If you took any software engineering project, and described it by detailing all the mistakes in isolation, it would look like a comp…

The whole thing was a mess http://www.sacbee.com/2013/04/12/5338065/supplier-of-bay-bri...

The bolts made by an Ohio company broke and they maybe a danger to the bridge,

Re: Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge

#37

Post by swampthing » Mon, Jun 09, 2014, 5:27 AM UTC

slashedzero wrote: post #27

swampthing wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't actually find the hotel price to be necessarily offensive in the absence of any other information... in foreign countries, you often have to pay a premium to get American-standard lodging (if it's even available).

The idea of requiring (and then paying for) "American-standard" lodging seems ridiculous when we outsource it for developing country prices.

I don't think people outsource to developing countries because they think they'll get cheaper hotels there... it's more about the cost of the services / goods being delivered.

Re: Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge

#38

Post by Natsu » Mon, Jun 09, 2014, 5:30 AM UTC

crahrah wrote: post #8

Seems the fact that the company was Chinese is pretty irrelevant - and yet it's repeated over an over. China is the new bogeyman.

I'm not concerned because the firm was Chinese. I'm concerned because they tried to override the engineers and hired a company with zero experience who massively underbid the project. That screams "bad management" to me, personally.

Re: Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge

#39

Post by austinz » Mon, Jun 09, 2014, 5:32 AM UTC

adventured wrote: post #33

austinz wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think the citizens of countries such as Japan, Canada, and Turkey should be offended that their governments are paying hundreds of millions of dollars to 'foreign' companies in the U.S. for (e.g.) the F-35 fighter?

Lots of companies from around the world can build bridges at a very competent level while remaining near budget. Quick, name the current generation alternatives to the F35 and the country behind said alternative.

Responding to this from the parent comment (highlight is mine):

> Moreover, the fact that so many tax dollars were paid to a foreign company is offensive. Even if that company was at all competent, it shows a disregard for the American economy.

Competence is explicitly not the OP's point.

Re: Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge

#40

Post by FatalLogic » Mon, Jun 09, 2014, 5:34 AM UTC

crahrah wrote: post #8

Seems the fact that the company was Chinese is pretty irrelevant - and yet it's repeated over an over. China is the new bogeyman.

Parts of the story will feel terribly familiar to anyone who has had much manufacturing done in China. Sometimes, things go smoothly, but in the worst cases, like this one, there's a huge mismatch between 'Western' quality demands and the output of their Chinese partners.

The typical pattern will be for the manufacturer to start sending back work which is totally unacceptable. When their partner protests, the manufacturer will grudgingly raise the standard to 'barely tolerable'. Time runs out, exhaustion sets in, decision makers don't want to draw attention to the fact that they chose the wrong manufacturer - so the client has to lower their standards.

Caltrans officials were amazingly naive and blinkered if they weren't aware of the long history of stories just like this one. Perhaps they did know the history, and they thought they would be protected by quality checks embedded in the contract, but that's just more naivety. Contracts don't have much power in that environment, particularly when your project is already falling way behind schedule.

Blaming 'The Chinese' though, is stupid. Caltrans was in charge of this deal. If they chose the wrong partner and didn't stay in control of things, they are responsible.