BS: Earthquake in Kent

Subject: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: GUEST,Arnie at work
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 11:15 AM

Bit of a surprise to experience an earthquake at 0815hrs this morning! Kent is not usually known as being in an earthquake zone so we're not used to this sort of thing down here. The house shook under me accompanied by a loud rumbling noise. My first thought was that the roof had fallen in, but then my son rang to say that Dover had just been hit by an earthquake and everyone in his street was standing outside in their pyjamas! Folkestone, which is the next town along the coast was the worst hit with chimneys toppling and one person buried in rubble. Latest reports are that it measured 4.3, which doesn't sound a lot unless you experience it first hand. The last earthquake to hit Kent was in 1950 so hopefully no more for another 50 years, by which time I don't suppose I'll be too bothered....

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: black walnut
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 11:44 AM

It's been on the CBC (Canadian) news all morning! You must be all shook up...

~b.w.

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 12:34 PM

Any chance of an elf combining the two identically titled threads?

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: Arnie
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 12:49 PM

Sorry about the repeat thread! Strange though, as I had a look before I posted and couldn't see any other earthquake thread. My mistake and as my entry was later, please ignore this one!!

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: leeneia
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 12:56 PM

Isn't Folkestone the mouth of the Channel Tunnel? How has the tunnel fared?

A quake which buries a person in rubble sounds serious indeed.

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: GUEST,Rollie Squires
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 01:59 PM

It was probably Penelope Rutledge that did it. She's most likely having another illicit affair, and you know what happens then! Best not to be within at least 75 miles of the "epicentre" unless you're standing in a doorway or a vacant lot when the tremors hit. Mind you, the epicentre is not such a bad place to be, I'd wager...

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: GUEST, Topsie
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 02:32 PM

Arnie, I think your thread takes precedence since you were there, and felt it.

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: Greg B
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 02:40 PM

We told them that no good would come of the Chunnel.

And now this.

No doubt a leaky bit of the chunnel lubricated the tectonic
plates.

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: GUEST,blindlemonsteve
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 03:05 PM

Evidently there was one in Northern France as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: Linda Kelly
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 03:15 PM

I ain't goin' through that tunnel no more...............

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 03:34 PM

A 4.3R in a country that traditionally builds on foundations less than 3' deep is a real concern. In Greece a 4.3 would hardly have moved the pictures on the wall out of alignment, but look at the destruction here... I am not advocating using the same anti-earthquake specs as Greece and Japan (foundations half again as deep as the height of the proposed building, reinforced concrete pediments, elastic frames) but digging down a metre or two wouldn't add that much to the cost of building, and proper pediments would mean that subsidance wouldn't be an issue as frequently as it is now.

Still, I suppose we have also all those lovely, quaint, century-plus old houses that we can do nothing about; I wouldn't mind living in one of those, they are beautiful. But obviously not safe.

My sympathies to the Kentish; the feeling of an earthquake can be one of the scariest experiences of the natural world, a sharp reminder of our insignificance.

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: Little Robyn
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 05:55 PM

We had a 4.5 earthquake here a few days back but apart from waking people up (2:40am) there was no damage. But we're used to them and 4.5 isn't too big in NZ. Chimneys are built to withstand them and the old brick buildings have been replaced with earthquake-proof buildings.
(I still don't enjoy them tho'.)
Look out for leaks in that tunnel.
Robyn

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: skarpi
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 06:57 PM

Hallo all, as in NZ we here in Iceland we have earthquake-proof buildings
all buildings has to be that way .

2000 we got 6.7 and 6.5 some damage but no loss of lifes . I am not worry
about the earthquakes , what worrys me are volcanos here in Iceland .....
one of them ( Katla ) is over the time and there has been alot
of earthquakes , I fear that it will blow up , the pressure is huge
and ( if ) it will then ...............

I live about 2 1/2 hours away from that mountan ( clacier ) so I hope we
get some time to leave the area.

Now you in Kent wont have to worry for next 50 years or so ...... :>)
unless there s a pressure down there in the ocean ?

All the best Skarpi Iceland

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: Cats
Date: 29 Apr 07 - 08:21 AM

George - we have one of those centuries old houses that are keyed directly into the granite. Don't know how that would fare.

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 29 Apr 07 - 12:28 PM

Greg B: any tune to go with that (beautifully non-pc) link?

CHEERS
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: Greg B
Date: 29 Apr 07 - 03:18 PM

'Fraid not. It's a bit of verse that I recall first seeing
going around (probably on rec.music.folk) about the time
the chunnel was supposed to open.

I believe it's best recited as a bit of a rant (not of
the Morpeth variety).

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: Bert
Date: 30 Apr 07 - 12:23 AM

But obviously not safe.

Oh I dunno, Greensted Church has been safe for over a thousand years. And so has St. Peter's on the Wall.

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 30 Apr 07 - 02:46 AM

Cats, you should be OK anchored onto granite. The next thing to consider would be the elasticity of the walls and frame; but I think you have a good clue in "centuries old", the building has proved itself by now. The only other thing I can think of is the roof slates/tiles - sometimes in old houses they are "hanging" off each other rather than fixed, and might be more easily dislodged; but that can be left for the next time you have a any roof work donw.

Subject: RE: BS: Earthquake in Kent
From: Cats
Date: 30 Apr 07 - 09:49 AM

George, some of my walls are 5 feet thick, but most about 4 ! The slates are amazing. When we had the solar panel put in a couple of months ago they took some of them off and some are over 3 feet square! Like you say.. it's stood the test of time and what it has seen.. from being shot at in the English Civil War [we still have the musket ball holes in the bedroom wall over the fire place and cannon balls in the garden] when it was only half a century old ....to us moving in