I’ve never seen an entire tower fall over like that, that’s kinda terrifying.

    • Wahots@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      One update said there was no corrosion damage. That was my guess, too. The mystery continues! Maybe eroding soil?

      • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nzOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        You’d expect to see the concrete base come out if that happened. It does sound more like poor maintenance than anything else.

    • Dave@lemmy.nzM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yeah, that’s a good guess. I presume they do regular inspections, so it would be interesting to know how this got missed.

      • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nzOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Funnily enough, I just watched a YouTube video of yet another bridge collapse in the states, if it’s anything like that case, the corrosion and decay would have been duly noted on successive inspections, and duly ignored by the powers that be.

        • Dave@lemmy.nzM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          I wonder if we will ever know, or because they are a SOE they may fall outside the power of anyone to investigate them.

          • Xcf456@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            That’s not a thing at all. SOEs face investigations like any other company. Kiwibank for example is getting prosecuted at the moment by the commerce commission for fair trading act breaches

            • Dave@lemmy.nzM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              Sorry I should have been more careful with my words. The government does investigations into itself all the time, and because of the Official Information Act they results generally get made public, even if they was no issue found.

              But for a company, the rules are different. If there is some legal action to be taken, then that happens whether it’s SOE or company, but if it wasn’t negligent then we don’t have any path to get info from the internal investigation.

              • Xcf456@lemmy.nz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 months ago

                Ah right that’s fair enough, SOEs definitely are a blindspot from an OIA perspective. I thought you meant in comparison to a private company, which would be the same if not worse.

                I think in this case a combination of the huge public interest and the heavily regulated environment transpower operates under the causes will come out. But I guess we’ll see

                • Dave@lemmy.nzM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Yeah my original comment did a terrible job of communicating my point 😆

            • Dave@lemmy.nzM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              Yeah sorry, poor wording. What I meant was companies only get investigated when they are negligent or breaking a law, and only if they get charged do we get information about it.

              Government departments will do internal investigations and then the results are accessible under the Official Information Act, regardless of outcome, so we tend to get more info if it’s government.

              But on thinking about it, Transpower are probably keen to give people an explanation if it was some freak accident to protect their reputation, so we may find out anyway.