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

Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

nopromiseofsafety.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 127 posts

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#51

Post by jerf »

peterwwillis wrote: post #47
chiph wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Water is incompressible. So the fall ends up being pretty close to 300 ft. to concrete vs. 30 ft. to concrete. Entering the water toes-first would just mean you have broken legs as well as being dead.

It seems to me the surface tension is the deal-breaker here. When you land feet first, your feet break the surface of the water, which allows for the water to move around the incoming object. You want to minimize distribution of force to only the bottom of the feet. Of course the force exerted on your feet would more than likely break your ankles and possibly your knees/legs, and severely impinge your hip joint. In a…

They did some stuff with cliff-style diving too (not quite that high, but it was good enough). That's one of many episodes that convinces me that they play at being more ignorant than they really are in the show, for dramatic purposes; it just isn't plausible that they do enough research to find a guy specialized in high diving, but somehow didn't find out what he could do before he came. I enjoy the show and I enjoy the results, but wish they would be a bit more honest at times, or be a bit more willing to say "Before we start, here's what the 'book' answer to the question is", because it's often obvious they have it. Also, editing makes it hard to tell, but it's pretty clear they very often come prepared with plans B and C to the offsites, again, making it pretty clear that they aren't as surprised that A failed as they play at.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#52

Post by base698 »

glurgh wrote: post #31
nathanb wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Water is noncompressible. Maybe the word "definitely" was misused because there's always the possibility for a fluke, but my understanding is that at terminal velocity hitting water is functionally equivalent to hitting concrete. Look up the "hammer drop" episode of Mythbusters if you want to see the long explanation. The second point still stands, though. I'd rather fall onto the concrete, where I could get help qui…

In a 300 foot fall, you're not reaching the bottom at terminal velocity. Mythbusters have in fact gone over this a few times and the results are a bit different - falling from such a height onto more or less anything is almost certainly lethal. Given equivalent height, even at terminal velocity, you're still slightly better off falling into water.

You're still going about 80 mph. Just from memory it's roughly 20 mph/second until you hit 4 seconds where it's reduced to 10 mph/second due to air resistance. The greatest chance you'd have is to impact shallow water with mud. This has saved at least three people, of which there are fairly spectacular Youtube videos.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#53

Post by themstheones »

DanBC wrote: post #38
dkokelley wrote: post #32

I'm really not sure how I feel about these things. On one hand, these are great escapades, and they result in fantastic pictures. I do like seeing "forbidden and forgotten areas". On the other hand, I would never want to encourage anyone to do something like this. It's illegal for a reason. The reason is not just your own safety. If he had fallen on to the road side of the bridge, not only would he die, but he would…

People committing suicide would tend to jump off the bridge into the water? There are, very roughly, one person committing suicide per fortnight from the Goldengate Bridge. One idea to slow down that number o fdeaths is to install a big net. It'll hurt when people land on it, and that might be enough to snap them out of the impulsive decision to end their lives. The net would cost about $45m. Some people might feel t…

I've seen an interesting television program about meth production. It's called "Breaking Bad." If anyone has an interest in the industry I suggest checking it out.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#54

Post by aroch »

devb wrote: post #37
aroch wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd be trespass and other crimes on federal properly, so 5 years, no?

How is it federal property? It's owned and operated by an independent quasi-governmental organization.

The bridge is classified as a national monument, which would protect it as federal property.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#55

Post by WestCoastJustin »

DanBC wrote: post #38
dkokelley wrote: post #32

I'm really not sure how I feel about these things. On one hand, these are great escapades, and they result in fantastic pictures. I do like seeing "forbidden and forgotten areas". On the other hand, I would never want to encourage anyone to do something like this. It's illegal for a reason. The reason is not just your own safety. If he had fallen on to the road side of the bridge, not only would he die, but he would…

People committing suicide would tend to jump off the bridge into the water? There are, very roughly, one person committing suicide per fortnight from the Goldengate Bridge. One idea to slow down that number o fdeaths is to install a big net. It'll hurt when people land on it, and that might be enough to snap them out of the impulsive decision to end their lives. The net would cost about $45m. Some people might feel t…

I read something about How The Mapo Bridge In South Korea Has Stopped People Committing Suicide [1]. They basically have illuminated signs that say encouraging things to people who are thinking about jumping. Dropped the suicide rate by 77%.

[1] http://www.sickchirpse.com/mapo-bridge-suicide/

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#56

Post by jcbmllgn »

joshfraser wrote: post #49
incision wrote: post #29

If you like this sort of thing, you might appreciate Vitaly Raskalov [0]. 0: http://englishrussia.com/2013/03/22/on-top-of-the-pyramide/#...

I was offered the chance to do this in Egypt. I was told that it was totally safe as long as I brought along enough bride money in the event that we got caught.

I think that'd be worth the bribe money :)

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#57

Post by DanBC »

dfc wrote: post #43

It is the most photographed landmark in the country I am sorry but that is BS. I could not find any statistics about "photographed landmarks" but a quick check of any measure of tourism and this seems extremely unlikely. For starters San Francisco's tourism does not come close to NYC.

(http://www.nbcnews.com/id/43240059/ns/travel-travel_tips/t/m...)

> Mining data from 35 million Flickr photos, scientists at Cornell University made some surprising discoveries: Not only did the world's most photographed cities (and the most captured landmark in each) emerge, but also so did the most common angles for shooting each place.

There are some American cities in the top twenty-five; and some Californian cities there; and San Francisco is listed at number 3, but for Union Square, not the Golden Gate Bridge.

This[1] AOL page has another list of US sights. (http://news.travel.aol.com/2009/08/27/must-snaps-americas-mo...) - they say it's the Coit Tower.

[1] A bafflingly bad page! Here's the tiny text-reading box on my display. (http://imgur.com/aRPqWr5)

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#58

Post by maxerickson »

peterwwillis wrote: post #47
chiph wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Water is incompressible. So the fall ends up being pretty close to 300 ft. to concrete vs. 30 ft. to concrete. Entering the water toes-first would just mean you have broken legs as well as being dead.

It seems to me the surface tension is the deal-breaker here. When you land feet first, your feet break the surface of the water, which allows for the water to move around the incoming object. You want to minimize distribution of force to only the bottom of the feet. Of course the force exerted on your feet would more than likely break your ankles and possibly your knees/legs, and severely impinge your hip joint. In a…

It's the density and incompressibility. When you slap water, it hurts because there is more incompressible water in the way of the water you slap, not because the film on the surface of the water is holding together. Falling into water from some great height is pretty similar to slapping it. A smoother entry dissipates the energy of the fall over a longer period of time, reducing the experienced forces (hence diving).

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#59

Post by bicknergseng »

nsxwolf wrote: post #17
bluetidepro wrote: post #2

Amazing things like this make me wish I wasn't afraid of heights. Even the pictures sort of make me feel uneasy. Haha Regardless, this is incredible.

You're not afraid of heights, you're afraid of falling. To me, NOT being afraid of heights is irrational.

I'm afraid of dying as the result of a fall from significant height, to be clear. Skydiving with a parachute? No sweat. Bungie jumping? Uncomfortable, but not too bad. Being anywhere near the edge of a 40 foot cliff? My palms are made out of water.

Re: Illegally climbing the Golden Gate bridge at dawn (2011)

#60

Post by ryguytilidie »

DanBC wrote: post #38
dkokelley wrote: post #32

I'm really not sure how I feel about these things. On one hand, these are great escapades, and they result in fantastic pictures. I do like seeing "forbidden and forgotten areas". On the other hand, I would never want to encourage anyone to do something like this. It's illegal for a reason. The reason is not just your own safety. If he had fallen on to the road side of the bridge, not only would he die, but he would…

People committing suicide would tend to jump off the bridge into the water? There are, very roughly, one person committing suicide per fortnight from the Goldengate Bridge. One idea to slow down that number o fdeaths is to install a big net. It'll hurt when people land on it, and that might be enough to snap them out of the impulsive decision to end their lives. The net would cost about $45m. Some people might feel t…

I'm genuinely curious how a net to go under the bridge would cost $45m. How?
Post reply on HN