ViruRulez Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 RIP They are saying it is 6.3 earthquake. The pics I saw of the building collapses and the tragedy is really amazing for a 6.3 earthquake. I have seen loads of 6.3 and above level earthquakes here in India and they hardly even collapse or affect one single building and pass on normally. I am not sure why such a earthquake nearly destroyed a whole town in NZ. Being a developed nation NZ buildings would have been more earthquake resistant than Indian buildings and so a bit surprising. Where was the epicenter of the earthquake. A 6.3 earthquake can cause such devastation only if the epicenter of the earthquake is in the town itself. Really unbelievable destruction for such an intensity earthquake.
Desi Cartman Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 RIP They are saying it is 6.3 earthquake. The pics I saw of the building collapses and the tragedy is really amazing for a 6.3 earthquake. I have seen loads of 6.3 and above level earthquakes here in India and they hardly even collapse or affect one single building and pass on normally. I am not sure why such a earthquake nearly destroyed a whole town in NZ. Being a developed nation NZ buildings would have been more earthquake resistant than Indian buildings and so a bit surprising. Where was the epicenter of the earthquake. A 6.3 earthquake can cause such devastation only if the epicenter of the earthquake is in the town itself. Really unbelievable destruction for such an intensity earthquake. It was 10 kms from the city center. They also had a major earthquake in sept, since the buildings were already shaken only few months ago more buildings collapsed this time
IKnowU Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 RIP They are saying it is 6.3 earthquake. The pics I saw of the building collapses and the tragedy is really amazing for a 6.3 earthquake. I have seen loads of 6.3 and above level earthquakes here in India and they hardly even collapse or affect one single building and pass on normally. I am not sure why such a earthquake nearly destroyed a whole town in NZ. Being a developed nation NZ buildings would have been more earthquake resistant than Indian buildings and so a bit surprising. Where was the epicenter of the earthquake. A 6.3 earthquake can cause such devastation only if the epicenter of the earthquake is in the town itself. Really unbelievable destruction for such an intensity earthquake. I believe the city was right under the epi centre, and not only this but they already had a quake 5 months ago. This would have loosened up some buildings and the latest one was too much for most of the buildings to handle. Regardless New Zealand is one of the most cleanliest, beautiful, pristine, peaceful countries in the world. Its like your in heaven going through the country side checking the mountains, snow, wildlife and natural reserves.:isalute:
EnterTheVoid Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Regardless New Zealand is one of the most cleanliest' date=' beautiful, pristine, peaceful countries in the world. Its like your in heaven going through the country side checking the mountains, snow, wildlife and natural reserves.:isalute:[/quote'] Hows Auckland ?
Riley's Girl Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 I am very grateful that the members of my family who lives in Christchurch are safe. My thoughts and prayers are with those families who lost loved ones, who have loved ones who are still missing and to every single person who was affected by the quake.
ViruRulez Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 It was 10 kms from the city center. They also had a major earthquake in sept' date=' since the buildings were already shaken only few months ago more buildings collapsed this time[/quote'] The earthquake epicenter proximity must have been the reason. The previous earthquake would not have affected much as I have seen at least 5-6 earthquakes of that level here in India in the span of a single year and it has not much affected the subsequent earthquakes and those also passes off without any damage. So, it is the epicenter for sure and perhaps the previous earthquake also had nearly the same epicenter at such proximity to the city center.
The Outsider Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 The earthquake epicenter proximity must have been the reason. The previous earthquake would not have affected much as I have seen at least 5-6 earthquakes of that level here in India in the span of a single year and it has not much affected the subsequent earthquakes and those also passes off without any damage. So' date=' it is the epicenter for sure and perhaps the previous earthquake also had nearly the same epicenter at such proximity to the city center.[/quote'] VR, in addition to the distance on land of the epicenter, the depth is also very important. From what I read somewhere this one was much closer to the surface than is usual for an earthquake.
Recommended Posts