0
   

100 YEARS AGO APRIL 18,-THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE

 
 
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 06:24 am
It happened at between 5:12 and 5:14 AM on that date. the mayor, E Schmitz turned this disaster into what was arguably one of the worst examples of disaster recovery that has only recently been surpassed for incompetence. The major damage was not strictly from the earthquake, it was from the fires that resulted from gas line rupture. The photo in this URL was taken from a tethered balloon, 5 days after the earthquake . SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE DESTRUCTION
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,147 • Replies: 19
No top replies

 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 07:06 am
Gus Ratzenhofer and I were walking along Market Street that day, heading towards the Ferry Building. (We were still in knee-pants back then, of course.) We were just talking of this and that, the way kids do, mainly discussing alternative ways of skipping school that wouldn't get us into too much trouble. We'd almost gotten to Lotta's Fountain, near the corner of Montgomery Street, when the first tremblors hit. The earth sort of shook and the world kind of tilted. Gus shook his head and said, "Man, that's the last time I sneak a sip of the old man's moonshine this early in the morning."
0 Replies
 
eoe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 07:37 am
There was an interesting documentary on the History Channel last night. It airs again tomorrow at 8pm.
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 08:17 am
Farmerman, you may already know this, the photo you posted is only half the original photo which was a panoramic view of the city. The fire destruction was much worse than the photo suggests, and that is bad enough.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 09:16 am
ALL I could fit . If they sized it right, itd be too small to see anything. The interesting aspect of thegas service was that much of the lines were marked with pinholes and corrosion from the soil. This led to lots of small gas pockets in the soil that just took off when the initial fires started. The quake was just a tool to set off a fire that was years in the preparation.

Ill have to look for the TV show tomorrow. Was it good?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 09:23 am
Precipitous, traumatic urban renewal . . . you got a problem with that?
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 09:34 am
My father was born in Santa Rosa, a city a little bit north of San Francisco, ten weeks after that earthquake. Lucky boy re timing and location.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 09:52 am
The gas main corruption was actually a double-whammy. First, of course, it set off the fires. But the combination of earthquake tremors and gas main explosions also did serious damage to the water mains. As a result, the fires couldn't be put out even when there were enough volunteers to fight them -- the hydrants had been put out of operation.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 10:44 am
Farmerman

Considering it's close proximity if the Hayward fault slipped would that have any effect on the San Andreas fault?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 12:53 pm
There are a bunch of faults that lie transcurrent to the San ANdreas. Some of the really big quakes were already on the Hayward and the MEndocino. Energy can be stored by one fault when its move transcurrent to another..

MA, when the situation really got going badly, the Army was actually starting many fires , with their misconception that they could extinguish fires with slow burning explosives like gunpowder or guncotton. They actually started more fires than the earthquake.

It was a bad coupla weeks all around.
0 Replies
 
eoe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 02:22 pm
farmerman wrote:
MA, when the situation really got going badly, the Army was actually starting many fires , with their misconception that they could extinguish fires with slow burning explosives like gunpowder or guncotton. They actually started more fires than the earthquake.


They talked about that in the documentary last night, which seemed very informative. But instead of slowburning explosives, they used tnt (I think that's what was said) and of course, when the exploded debris, all lit up, fell, it only started more fires. It seems so stupid now but this was 1906. We've learned alot since then.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 02:46 pm
Have we?

You mean, like, FEMA?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 04:36 pm
well. TNT was available in the US since the 1870s. It would, however , IMO , be an explosive that would better be used to snuff a fire. Im probably all wet . Maybe the actual explosions just blew the existing fores all around and started new ones. The idea was to rob the fire of air, not blow it all over the place.Course the general in charge was a bit of an "overachiever"
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 08:06 pm
I guess it was Van Ness Ave. that provided the firebreak at long last. It's a while since I've read up on the subject but I seem to recall that there was some talk of actually burning down the houses on the West side of Van Ness to provide a backfire. Wiser heads prevailed and most of the property west of Van Ness was saved. Do I have that anywhere near right?
0 Replies
 
eoe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 08:07 pm
Setanta wrote:
Have we?

You mean, like, FEMA?


damn Shocked
0 Replies
 
LionTamerX
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 08:13 pm
Just finished watching the PBS special on this... It seems that a good part of the blame for the fire, stems from someone cooking breakfast , unaware that their chimney had been compromised.
Try googling "ham and eggs fire"... Interesting stuff.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 08:16 pm
Sort of like Mrs. O'Leary's cow in Chicago, LTX?
0 Replies
 
LionTamerX
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 08:21 pm
Something like that.
0 Replies
 
LionTamerX
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 08:25 pm
Here's one that I found

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/04/12/MNGQQUAKE12.DTL
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Apr, 2006 08:35 pm
Interesting. Thx for that link, Lion.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
  1. Forums
  2. » 100 YEARS AGO APRIL 18,-THE SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 11/05/2024 at 07:26:19