Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6B Embarrassment

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 210 posts

Re: How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6B Embarrassment

#161

Post by hn9780470248775 »

mrich wrote: post #90
schoen wrote: post #79

When I last visited Berlin, I heard a joke about the airport's problems that I thought was very funny: "Niemand hat die Absicht, einen Flughafen zu errichten!" ('Nobody has the intention to build an airport!') Context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#Construction_begin...

The other popular joke, after all these years and billions spent: "Let's just move Berlin to a functioning airport"

My favorite Berlin airport joke:

"Did you hear about the new grammar reform? It includes a new tense, Futur III, to allow us to speak of the completion of Berlin/Brandenburg airport."

http://www.der-postillon.com/2012/08/neue-zeitform-futur-iii...

Re: How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6B Embarrassment

#162

Post by hn9780470248775 »

spathi_fwiffo wrote: post #120
detaro wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK the smoke was pulled in at the ceiling of the floors. And then sent downwards and vented out somewhere on the side instead of on top of the building. The original design was never tested, because the building as originally designed never existed. Each addition ordered up by Schwarz required shifting passenger flows through the terminal. That meant rebuilding walls, exits, emergency lights, ventilation systems,…

IDKSAS, but wouldn't a system like this (electrically powered venting) be prone to failure in an actual fire? If power fails with side/down venting, the smoke would have no where to go.

It does sound like a situation where "excessive cleverness" is being applied to an engineering problem, where a simple/robust/passive/failsafe solution may be available.

Re: How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6B Embarrassment

#163

Post by sliverstorm »

uqbartlon wrote: post #144
sliverstorm wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find how well that works is directly related to how closely related English is to the language in question. The further you get from its Germanic and Latin roots, the proportionally less sense a rough translation makes. Some of that is figures of speech, some of it is colloquialisms, some of it is just weird grammar. For example, Japanese tends to omit the subject, which is incredibly confusing when directly transl…

I think german grammar is really diferent from english. For example they make a sandwich with verbs. For example: I have been in Berlin. vs I have in Berlin been. Its not the exact translation and maybe theres a beter example but its the idea. Ich bin in berlin gewessen. There is also all the declinations. But yeah its noy japanese.

See, "I have in Berlin been" is 100% understandable at least to me... it might even be archaic but valid English grammar.

Re: How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6B Embarrassment

#164

Post by thaumasiotes »

uqbartlon wrote: post #144
sliverstorm wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find how well that works is directly related to how closely related English is to the language in question. The further you get from its Germanic and Latin roots, the proportionally less sense a rough translation makes. Some of that is figures of speech, some of it is colloquialisms, some of it is just weird grammar. For example, Japanese tends to omit the subject, which is incredibly confusing when directly transl…

I think german grammar is really diferent from english. For example they make a sandwich with verbs. For example: I have been in Berlin. vs I have in Berlin been. Its not the exact translation and maybe theres a beter example but its the idea. Ich bin in berlin gewessen. There is also all the declinations. But yeah its noy japanese.

> I think german grammar is really diferent from english. For example they make a sandwich with verbs. For example:

> I have been in Berlin. vs I have in Berlin been.

Here's another example: "I took out the trash" vs "I took the trash out".

Re: How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6B Embarrassment

#165

Post by Sanddancer »

spathi_fwiffo wrote: post #120
detaro wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK the smoke was pulled in at the ceiling of the floors. And then sent downwards and vented out somewhere on the side instead of on top of the building. The original design was never tested, because the building as originally designed never existed. Each addition ordered up by Schwarz required shifting passenger flows through the terminal. That meant rebuilding walls, exits, emergency lights, ventilation systems,…

IDKSAS, but wouldn't a system like this (electrically powered venting) be prone to failure in an actual fire? If power fails with side/down venting, the smoke would have no where to go.

Yes it would. My assumption is that they were planning on it only needing to hold out long enough to evacuate everyone. Still, it's indeed the better design to fail safely, and still let some smoke waft out the chimneys, than the actual fail mode, which is to burst into shrapnel.

Re: How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6B Embarrassment

#166

Post by shimo5037 »

hkmurakami wrote: post #148
ubernostrum wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And to get into the hall of fame, you do an Olympics.

Look no further than the $2.5 billion debacle that is the new Tokyo Olympic stadium. A rather lavish expenditure for a country that is deep in debt.

They scrapped the plans. http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/07/17/olympics-japan-stad...

Re: How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6B Embarrassment

#167

Post by jamesknelson »

uqbartlon wrote: post #144
sliverstorm wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find how well that works is directly related to how closely related English is to the language in question. The further you get from its Germanic and Latin roots, the proportionally less sense a rough translation makes. Some of that is figures of speech, some of it is colloquialisms, some of it is just weird grammar. For example, Japanese tends to omit the subject, which is incredibly confusing when directly transl…

I think german grammar is really diferent from english. For example they make a sandwich with verbs. For example: I have been in Berlin. vs I have in Berlin been. Its not the exact translation and maybe theres a beter example but its the idea. Ich bin in berlin gewessen. There is also all the declinations. But yeah its noy japanese.

Compared to Japanese, "I have in Berlin been" almost sounds natural.

In Japanese, you'd say "Berlin ni ita", or translating rather literally, "Berlin in was". You'd omit the "I", which can lead to some interesting misunderstandings.

Needless to say, Google translate borders on useless here.

Re: How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6B Embarrassment

#169

Post by rasz_pl »

slowmotiony wrote: post #29
codeshaman wrote: post #25

Bribe the inspectors and open up on time - then somehow patch the problem later. Everyone wins. That's what they would do in a lot of places in the world. If a German airport, with a huge budget, has 150.000 defects of which 85k are serious, then what about airports in other countries, which don't make use of the world-famous german high quality standards ? What about airports in countries were things are solved with…

World-famous german high quality standards were a thing fifty years ago, from my experience this is often not the case any more.

>german high quality standards

are not a thing when you subcontract to imtech

Post reply on HN