Engineering Catastrophes watch online HD

Why would anyone consult with a bio engineer on a dam failure? Or a freaking nanochemist on the topic of civil engineering? It's insultingly bad, especially when you consider they had a "civil engineer" make some comments on a previous topic of the same episode. Could they not be bothered to have the civil engineer talk about the failure mode of the concrete spillway? Or have the chemist talk about the rusting of bridge supports? But at least they tell us super important things in the narrative. Like Mr. "Physicist," "...for engineers this is bridge heaven" I'm very glad to have had an expert tell me that. Wow. So important to know. Besides the cancerous "experts" the show manages to be a worthwhile watch. The narration is quite well executed and topical, and the technical details of the narrative, while being a bit layman, suffice to document the "catastrophe" in question. Overall, a show worth watching while browsing the internet and there's nothing better on - if you remove the "experts."

As an engineer with 35 years experience, I find their "experts" both laughable and horribly cast.

It's really hard to take people serious that can't keep themselves from physically looking like idiots. Nobody wants to get thier info from somebody that resembles Krusty the clown (corina kwami).

This show would be halfway tolerable if they got rid of the idiot millennial 'experts' from every field under the sun. What does a twenty-something "neuroscientist" know about engineering?? A biochemist? Added to which, their resident engineering 'expert' is (forgive me) so astonishingly homely it's impossible to look at the screen (sorry, Corina). Good God, just ditch these spurious 'experts' and give us a decent show. What happened to the Season 1 format? At least that was entertaining.

This four part series was a major disappointment. For one thing, it does not meet the average person's criteria for either disaster or catastrophe. For another, it provides only scant hard information or visual documentation for the actual failures. For a third thing, the hand waving 'explainers' are labeled but are rarely of a profession related to the technical problems they are hand waving about. Probably half of the items discussed concern buildings and roads built over unreliable, sliding, or soft subsurface material. These are not really satisfying engineering disasters so much as poor decision making on the part of the funders. There was a case of a building put together with human leg sized bolts which apparently degrade in place, then break and fall many stories to ground level. How about an example of even one of these broken bolts. Save your time, save your money, watch something else.