Looking on the news footage about yet another hurricane, I catch myself thinking that it is something basically wrong in that imagery.
If you compare f.e. Florida devastaion images and current footage from Ukraine or Donbass and you are an engineer, than you obviously find out that poor villages on Ukraine damaged diring battles looks better than much more expensive realty remnants in hurricane devastations in US.
And main thing - as engineer you will notice that overhelming majority of US houses destroyed by hurricane is really just a framing from wooden sticks covered by sheets of plywood or drywall, or by planks in the best case, and often don't even have a proper foundation, while on the other side of globe people build their houses from stone, concrete or logs and they withstand even direct hits of shells or missiles.
I don't understand that. If you live in area where hurricanes are not a rare thing, why would you build your house from sticks and plywood instead of building one that will just withstand the storm.
In Russia framed houses exists too, but it is usually a cheap vacation homes where people spend weekends. If one decide to live permanently in a rural area, the house from bricks, concrete or logs would be built, even if there is no any historical records of hurricanes or tornadoes in region.
So why build houses that are absolutely not designed for the hurricanes in area where hurricanes are regular thing, instead of just building concrete houses that will sustain hurricanes with minimum damage? Replacing few windows are much cheaper than rebuilding even cheapest possible framed house from the ground. And you hardly have a probability of injury or death if a hurricane catch you in normal building.
Even more - I know that in Montana, f.e., where hurricanes are not an issue, some people build houses from logs, that with high probability will withstand hurricane. And even on some footages from Florida I saw rare untouched concrete buildings among the totally destroyed realty.
So what I'm missing here? Why in areas that often hit by hurricanes people don't bother to build normal, reliable houses from proper materials and instead continue to build a boxes from sticks and plywood again and again with the same result after next hurricane?
That would be because news crews don't go around filming the houses that are built in the way you described because....they don't make for very good footage to affect the viewer emotionally and stay invested with the newscast and not click away during commercials.
Why do you think the "mostly peaceful protests" still had flaming wreckage in their backgrounds? That would be because they are still hardwired to create newscasts in a certain way as I described above, even after given specific instructions to downplay their mentally ill brown shirts destruction of the west.
Plenty of builders do exactly as you mention. Sorry to interrupt the anti-america circle jerk. You may continue.
Got it! Engineering questions are anti-american. And math is racist. OK :) :) :)
Of course I understand news bias and intention to show the worst, and as I mentioned, even in such biased news I still see untouched normal buildings surrounded by devastation.
But it is still unclear for me why in such hurricane rich places still exist any areas that continue to give that devastation footage for the news.
IDK, say nobody build houses in the Northen regions without good thermal insulation. So even if you need a fearmongering picture of hundreds of frozen out houses with freezing families in trouble from yearly disaster named winter, you will not be able to find anything.
But somehow, in the abovementioned Florida, there are still plenty of places where news could easily get nasty pictures of devastation every year.
I understand that. I don't understand why there still exists districts or counties that get destroyed every year.
There are no districts or counties that massively freeze out to death every year in nothern regions f.e. But in much more pleasant (and so more expensive) places to live, somehow such districts exists.
Funny, I mentioned f,e. Montana where, suddenly, people never build houses that are not suitable for local weather conditions. You hardly find a a single house with thin walls and without insulation that will not withstand cold weather in winter. Somehow Montana is not a part of US now?
If you want to stick a label to me, choose something else. Say something about "anti-southern coastal circle-jerk" or whatever term you have for that hurricane prone regions.
If you are heavily abused by comparison of something american with something from other country and feel raped or offended like LGBTXYZ+ whiners, then tell me please, why in Montana US people always build houses appropriate for local regular cold winters, but in Florida US people are not always build houses appropriate for regular hurricanes. Both states I compare here are in US, so you should not be offended.