The Zookeeper said:
TxAgswin said:
Kenneth_2003 said:
I've never gotten involved with the off campus group, but am close friends with a lot of the folks that were instrumental in it's beginning.
The changes that were implemented to improve stability of the stack were badly needed but I don't think the existing leadership in 1999 would have had the courage necessary to make those changes in the name of tradition. The 1994 partial collapse was trying to tell everyone that the stack had serious structural problems but lacking professional oversight no one in a position to instill a change did so (or even existed).
In short, I sadly believe that the 1999 tragedy was an accident waiting to happen as the current design, and flawed logic, was continuing year over year.
100% accurate.
The fact that we learned nothing from 1994 is pretty inexcusable.
I was a freshmen in 94 and I unbiult the hell out of droopy bonfire. It was pretty stupid and we lucked out that nobody died in that process. We were just up there snapping bailing wire and kicking logs in a super crazy game of death Jenga. No idea what we were doing, cuz no precedent on how to take the ****ing thing down. Every other year jet fuel and a lit torch took care of that part.
I do remember thinking, where are the ****ing grown ups? Senior reds should not have been the beginning and end of decision making. They're 22 and they are kind of insane. Their decision making is very predictable. They have no brake pedal and they are immortal. Nothing wrong with that. Everyone is invincible at 21. That's why we don't put them in charge.
Giving them carte blanche was a huge oversight and the consequence was the worst day in A&M history.
One of my young engineering profs back in 94 proposed a new design with us, utilizing 4 additional anchored poles around the centerpole to strengthen the structure. IMO, I don't think there was a specific responsible party/person/audience to consider or review an alternate design ... just a group of redpot students, I assume. Prof began by asking us students to get him to the right people ... he asked the same of people above him in the engineering dept.
Sad that the University didn't step in with more authority and put qualified people in place.
Side note --- I remember thinking that Cut was dangerous AF. 18yr old kids swinging axes, led by 19yr and 20yr olds. Most were still buzzed from just a few hours before ... hung-over at best.
It has been 30yrs and I still haven't found that left-handed sky-hook.
If memory serves, there was a Bonfire Advisory Board, but I don't think it had any real teeth and were just window dressing. Bonfire was the sacredest of sacred cows and it would be political suicide to try and implement any significant changes,
So those faculty and staff were perfectly happy to keep their mouths shut and put that committee appointment on their resume and not much that had anything to do with actually building it. Most of their responsibilities revolved around procedural stuff with the city and the Fire Department and PTTS, UPD, CSPD, maybe some media stuff, press releases, etc.
But if somebody dared propose a design change, I don't see that going well. I know it changed significantly a handful of times, most of it just getting bigger and more wedding cake. I think the City limited height to something like 80 feet after it started to get absurdly tall (109 ft in the 70's I think?) -
But the core design, process, and management was almost exclusively run by students and it seemed to me like it was tradition and word of mouth pass downs. I remember the Reds had their little note books held together by duct tape and bailing wire with the holy ancient secrets scribbled in there. Browns and yellows and butts and whatever had some stuff like that as well, but it definitely was not stamped CAD drawings that a P.E. or a contractor would sign off on.
There may have been some more formal plans somewhere, but I wouldn't have any visibility there. I was northside corridor. Our primary objective was to cause as much chaos as possible. And we did just that.
They did "anchor" a bunch of logs around centerpole, if by anchor, you mean dig like a four foot hole and then plant it tightly inside of it. And inside that was a bunch really skinny trees that served as a kind of tightening sheeth. Looked good to me and made sense...Probably could have used some more trained eyeballs, especially considering we had hundreds of those experts right across the street.
Another thing that often gets overlooked is that as the student demographics began to change over the years, the quality of the workforce gets less and less experienced with this kind of work. In the early days, you had more farmers, ranchers, and dudes who grew up working with their hands. Most city kids aren't great with tractors and ropes and bailing wire and chainsaws and whatnot. In my opinion it happened quick. In '95 I remember second and third deck grounds were tight and the browns had them all level after each shift. They were like dance floors up there. By '97, there were gaps everywhere and tons of logs had only two or sometimes just one set in. And forget about pennynailing. You could move second stack logs in like 6 to 8 inches of slack. That may have been something that contributed in '99 as well.
And oh, yeah cut was dangerous as ****. I mean, you don't have to take a deep dive to figure that out. Hundreds of college students, most with no experience with chopping wood, cutting down trees, or swinging an axe of any kind. We're gonna give each one an axe and turn them loose to cut down and top thousands of trees as fast as they can. They'll be a little hungover. Some might be drunk. Don't worry, it will be just fine.
That left-handed sky hook is probably still next to the stump capper in the Blue Pot Lounge behind the Pink Pot's woods. Where it should be.
