Months before the deadly New Orleans vehicle attack on New Year’s Day, the city modeled scenarios for how an attacker could enter Bourbon Street at various intersections in a crew-cab Ford F-150 similar to the one used to kill 14 people and injure dozens more.

Engineers found such a pickup could enter the crowded tourist strip at speeds ranging from 12 to 70 mph - and yet city officials are now installing new street barriers that can only withstand 10-mph impacts, according to an April city-contracted engineering analysis and city bid documents reviewed by Reuters.

Those new barriers, known as “bollards,” had not yet been installed on Bourbon Street on New Year’s but are planned to be completed by the Feb. 9 NFL Super Bowl in New Orleans. The documents reviewed by Reuters, which have not been previously reported, make clear that the system won’t be able to prevent vehicle attacks at moderate-to-high speeds.

  • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Well, they were only planning for a built-in, easy way to block off the road temporarily. They didn’t have a reason, at the time, to need to plan against a terrorist ramming the crowd with a vehicle. Just something better than temporary mobile barricades needing to be moved in and out basically every night.

    On the other hand, this entire scenario shows how ridiculously and needlessly large and dangerous modern trucks are, like the F150 used here. So naturally, that aspect will be completely ignored by the media and politicians.

    • HellsBelle@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Except (from the article) …

      Months before the deadly New Orleans vehicle attack on New Year’s Day, the city modeled scenarios for how an attacker could enter Bourbon Street at various intersections in a crew-cab Ford F-150 similar to the one used to kill 14 people and injure dozens more.

      Engineers found such a pickup could enter the crowded tourist strip at speeds ranging from 12 to 70 mph - and yet city officials are now installing new street barriers that can only withstand 10-mph impacts, according to an April city-contracted engineering analysis and city bid documents reviewed by Reuters.

      • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        And? That doesn’t really contradict what I said. There’s a TON of shit that gets modeled and never ends up in the final design chosen when designing any infrastructure improvement.

        At the time those decisions were made (months ago), I’m sure there were many factors used in weighing what option to go with. Things like:

        1. The odds of this scenario actually happening at various speeds and with various vehicles.
        2. The initial purchase and installation cost difference between the various options available.
        3. Ongoing maintenance costs associated with the various options.
        4. The convenience to officers/officials using the installed option every day to close and re-open traffic.
        5. The option of just closing the street permanently to traffic, and the knock-on effect that would have with all other surrounding traffic in the region.

        I’d bet thousands that many of the people complaining now about the fact a simple and now clearly inadequate option is being installed, are the same ones that would complain (or did complain at the time, I don’t live in the region, so I don’t pay attention to their council meetings) about more expensive options that were likely being considered as well. What got approved is clearly one of the cheapest options available, just above having to put out and bring down mobile barricades every day. When the cheapest option is picked, it’s usually because something better than the status quo is necessary but NIMBY-type dipshits were the ones in the council meetings complaining about cost over everything else and effectively controlled the conversation.

        Perhaps the news should research and go back through those council meetings and see why this option specifically was chosen/approved. I’m willing to bet we’ll see that exact scenario play out.