The earthquake strikes in medical-disaster drama D-Day
by javabeans
Character posters and initial teasers have been released for JTBC’s upcoming medical-disaster drama D-Day, which is still a couple months from premiere but is well into shoots. A good thing, because the drama looks to be taking a grand-scale, epic approach to its Seoul-in-disaster story; in fact, they intend to produce the show over 80 percent in advance, in order to give themselves enough time in order to keep standards up.
I like the somber mood of the first teaser, though the second one is a leetle over-the-top, in that I can’t quite watch without laughing. I think it’s the Hunger Games-esque grandiose music, although that’s nothing compared to this one key point: Your harrowing, Seoul-shaking, catastrophe-inducing disaster is a 6.5 earthquake? That’s it? I mean, c’mon, here in earthquake country The Big One suggests at least an 8.0, or even a 10.0 if we wanted to get fancy. D’you think Superman would have turned the earth backwards for a mere 6.5?
To be fair, I’m sure a 6.5 temblor can do quite a lot of damage, and I’m not saying I’d smile to be caught up in one tomorrow. But this is utter fiction—you get to create the stakes out of thin air, and amp up the tension and conflict according to your whim! Why would you stop yourself halfway and think, “Eh, medium is good enough”? Doesn’t “Korea’s first disaster drama” deserve more… drama? Is there any way we can get JTBC to add a few orders of magnitude between now and September?
As for the character posters, we’ve got nine of the main cast shown above, mostly playing rescue workers and medics: In the top row we have the series leads Kim Young-kwang, Jung So-min, and Ha Suk-jin, all playing doctors who’ll rush in to save lives in the wake of the earthquake.
Below them are Cha In-pyo as a politician and third-generation chaebol who shows some kidn of “ulterior motive” after the disaster hits; Kim Sang-ho as a firefighter chief; and more docs with Kim Hye-eun (an ER doctor), Yoon Joo-hee, Kim Jung-hwa (a psychiatrist), and Infinite’s Sungyeol (an ER intern).
D-Day follows Last on JTBC, and premieres in September.
Via Chosun
RELATED POSTS
- The rescue team is dispatched in disaster drama D-Day
- JTBC picks up Yoon Kye-sang thriller Last, D-Day to follow
- Disaster medical drama D-Day confirms lineup, awaits scheduling
- Ha Suk-jin considers doctor role in disaster drama D-Day
- Jung So-min up to rescue disaster victims in D-Day
- Kim Young-kwang courted for JTBC disaster drama D-Day
- Disaster to hit JTBC with D-Day
Tags: D-Day, Jung So-min, Kim Young-kwang
![[Beanie Recs] Dramas about fangirling](https://d263ao8qih4miy.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/BeanieRecs.jpg)
Required fields are marked *
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
1 amyonn
July 27, 2015 at 3:11 AM
wow! look very interesting. :D hope this one deliver.
Required fields are marked *
2 darcyM
July 27, 2015 at 3:28 AM
The 2011 Christchurch earthquake in NZ was "only" 6.3 magnitude and killed 185 people plus caused major damage to the city. In a place like Seoul which could have something like 30 times the population (sorry, my maths is bad, in anycase the difference in population is HUGE), and is exponentially more built up, I think the effects of a 6.5 would be catastrophic. I get your point that this is fiction, so why not go big, but sometimes a realistic event can have more of an impact on the audience because it's more likely to happen.
Required fields are marked *
songsong
July 27, 2015 at 3:33 AM
Exactly. Being a city the Christchurch earthquake even at 6.3 was devastating!
Required fields are marked *
windsun33
July 27, 2015 at 7:48 AM
Problem with the plot is that Korea is one of the most earthquake free zones on the planet. The highest ever recorded there was a local one of 5.3. http://www.arirang.co.kr/News/News_View.asp?nseq=160116
Required fields are marked *
Xine
July 27, 2015 at 12:30 PM
That's right - it's depth and type as I understand it not magnitude. Christchurch is still suffering the after effects and won't be fully functioning and rebuilt for some years yet
Required fields are marked *
Gidget
July 27, 2015 at 1:53 PM
The amount of damage caused really about how the energy transfers through the ground. How well the buildings are built can also be a factor.
Here's an example.
In Northern California's 6.9 magnitude Loma Prieta earthquake:
In my office on the 9th floor of a building in Downtown San Jose, the shaking could best be described as violent. It progressed from a bouncy rumble to a violent whiplashing, then quickly subsided. The 1980's era building was built to withstand it and piers anchored it to bedrock. The damage was basically a lot of pictures fallen off walls and furniture moved across spaces. Only a couple of things overturned.
A few blocks away, buildings built in the late 1800s and early 1900s that weren't anchored or retrofitted suffered partial collapse.
My house 1.5 miles away had a book end fall off a table. The house was built in 1926, but it was incredibly well built (perhaps in response to San Francisco's 1908 earthquake).
A friends' house in Los Altos (further from the epicenter) suffered a few effects to the structure, but massive destruction of the contents. Furniture was tipped over and in some cases tossed across the rooms. Reason: it was at an area where the valley floor met foothills. Energy transfer was magnified by the different subsoil/rock composition.
In San Francisco's Marina district (much further from the epicenter) there were small pockets of devastation where entire buildings collapsed. The buildings in the Marina District were all built in the 1920s so age wasn't necessarily a factor. The neighborhood's soils was the problem. The area was constructed on landfill, which is notoriously unstable. In landfills a condition called liquefaction occurs during strong earthquakes, whereby the soil behaves like it's a liquid. Although all of the buildings weren't damaged the unstable soils caused water main and gas line ruptures. A fire started due to a gas line rupture and there was no water to put it out. Eventually they had to pump water from the nearby San Francisco bay to put out the fire. If there wasn't a bay nearby the whole thing could have burnt.
In Oakland and San Francisco, sections of a major freeway and a major bridge collapsed. Reason: They were old and not upgraded to withstand that type of earthquake.
So metaphorically the sun, moon and stars can align to create an unpredictable and sometimes unimaginable outcome.
This will give you a feel for how it all looked.
Perhaps a better way to talk about it is the effects of an earthquake, rather than its magnitude.
Required fields are marked *
confusedturtle
July 28, 2015 at 9:56 AM
I remember the Loma Prieta Earthquake! My family was fine (ish) in East Oakland, except we were the only apartment with electricity and water and pretty much everyone in our building slept in our house that night through the after-shocks. Some (The intensity of the aftershocks also caused some damage.) And of course the portion of the Bay bridge and Cypress collapsed, which was terrifying. Lots of structural damage and we lost a lot of old buildings. Even though it was a 6.9 it was very violent- not rolling like some quakes but forceful shaking. The only reason more people didn't die is because so many people were at the world series and traffic was light. You're really right, if the buildings aren't built for it a lot of damage can occur. But I also understand being a little skeptical of the depiction of a 6.5 earthquake from a place that doesn't have a lot of earthquakes. When an earthquake happened in DC my family was crazy posting on facebook and getting all scared about a few bricks falling off of buildings. (Kind of like how pictures of tornadoes terrify me even if they don't do anything.) If I'm going to watch a crazy natural disaster movie, I want the disaster to be worse than what I experienced myself.
Required fields are marked *
xidae
July 27, 2015 at 6:52 PM
Exactly, the magnitude doesn't mean everything. The depth, location and geography is also a factor - shock waves travel differently though different kinds of rock and earth. I live in Christchurch and experienced the 6.1 quake plus over 8000 aftershocks of different sizes. I can tell you that the 6.3 we had in 2011 felt much, much worse than the 7.1 we had in 2010. Sometimes a 5 can feel like a 6 if it's right under you, or a 6 can be barely noticeable if it's 70km deep. Also important is the building structures. Most people were killed because of falling buildings which weren't designed to withstand that kind of shaking. If the tall buildings in Seoul fall that would be potentially devastating.
Required fields are marked *
Reese
February 8, 2016 at 11:37 AM
I agree! Seeing how long it takes to get medical assistance, food, water, etc to thise in an extreme situation like suggested(8-10 on rictor) you wouldnt have a drama about the earthquake and people immediately jumping in and having to struggle with what they have, running out and actually having help on the way as an option. If you went with a much worse disaster, you would spend half of your drama with people doing nothing, with nothing and a recovery mission at best. This was much more realistic. I loved this drama by the way. The cinematography was impressive, a cant miss on that alone! The acting was top notch, especially from a few of the younger stars who have done nothing close to these roles. They definitely showed that they were all grown up now and could handle a role this meaty! *Spoiler* The scene with Lee Hae Sung at the scene and in the ambulance with (family) was gut wrenching!
I cant believe I didnt hear more about this drama, because it was one of the best that Ive seen in a while. My husband even became interested in it,just by watching a few scenes, and he doesnt watch dramas!
Required fields are marked *
Reese
February 8, 2016 at 12:40 PM
I also want to add that in episode one you see the meetings of the politicians and experts, trying to tell them that a big one is coming and that they need to.spend the money to reinforce buildings etc and bring things to code. They try to explain what price they will pay if it happens(their readings had indicated more activity) as well as life loss,etc. Nobody would listen because it had never happened in that area and where they were located suggested they wouldnt be effected. Crooked hospital CEO's lied about the money they spent for preparedness, saying the fines they would pay if caught would be cheaper than the amnt they were being asked to spend on things they thought they'd never use. This drama pointed out many things done on a daily basis to put peoples.safty at risk over all mighty money! Yes,as in all dramas their were things unrealistic. As someone that retired from a job dealing with crisis, death and injury, ive seen how quickly even the smallest situation can be changed from "it was no big deal" to out of control chaos. I also saw that Mother Nature has no rules! The ones that man tries to place on her, she occassionally likes to throw a monkey wrench into, just to makes fools of us and keep us on our toes..This drama helped remind you of that. Dont think that because you have been fortunate enough to survive several earthquakes of 6.5-7.0 that it is nothing for someone else. You have just been lucky so far. Life is fragile and natural catastrophies of little to no magnitude, can take lives or cause people to panic. That alone can be a catalyst. when people think they are going to die or be without the necessities of life, they react. Whether it is to help others or help themselves will shock you.
It was suggested even that this drama was done to get people to get involved in making demands on public officials for safety changes etc. If a drama can say that they evoked that type of action, then can they not say that alone is success? I will say again that this was.not your typical drama, but was more realistic and was one of the better that ive seen in a while!
Required fields are marked *
3 jjnsa
July 27, 2015 at 3:30 AM
Sure, 6,5 scala richter. To do a lot damage especially outside building in advance country it need at least 7SR or even more. Even in my country 6,5 SR it could make a frail wall cracked and several objects falling apart. But outside it doesn't really affecting phisically. Exclude, psychological trauma. So i am agree witg dramabeans at this one.
Required fields are marked *
4 jjnsa
July 27, 2015 at 3:33 AM
And also just a several days ago in several town in my country. An eeathquake alson happening about 6SR. Fortunately, no victim. Ofcourse it will different with tsunami.
Required fields are marked *
5 Daehoney
July 27, 2015 at 3:42 AM
I don't really know how much damage a 6.5 could cause because I rarely experience it (call it irony, I live in a country where earthquakes are common). But a 6.5 in a big city in my country was devastating, killing 6000 people. It could've done the same to Seoul, if the center is close or even right below the city. I don't know the science, but I hope they will make sense since it's said to be large-scale.
I am divided about the teaser. The music is too loud for my liking. Love the tense though.
Required fields are marked *
Daehoney
July 27, 2015 at 3:43 AM
What I mean I think it depends on the center of the earthquake. The closest to a city, the more damage it will cause (not counting tsunami of course, it's a different problem).
Required fields are marked *
Jon G.
July 27, 2015 at 3:52 AM
How devastating it is does not only depend on the strength and location of the earthquake but also on the infrastructure.
In, say, California or Japan, cities are built with consideration of possible earthquakes and are much safer than in countries without the resources or the requirement to build quake-proof. A similar earthquake in a city with similar population might only do a tiny fraction of the damage.
In reality, a 6.5 Richter scale earthquake with the epicentre beneath Seoul would be devastating, considering the overall low quality in building stock (by OECD standards) and the fact that nobody ever expected a major earthquake to happen there.
Required fields are marked *
Daehoney
July 27, 2015 at 6:14 AM
Ah, yes. Now that I think about it, it makes sense. They were not prepared. And it happened in the morning if I'm not mistaken, when people haven't left the house.
Required fields are marked *
iamdeb
July 27, 2015 at 10:11 AM
The depth of the earthquake is also a very important factor. The one at Christchurch was only a few km deep and quite shallow.
Required fields are marked *
Gidget
July 27, 2015 at 2:15 PM
To put it in perspective, because of the infrequent incidence of strong earthquakes in Korea, earthquake standards weren't even established until 1988. I read that as of 2011 only 10% of Seoul's buildings had been built and/or retrofitted to withstand an earthquake.
Required fields are marked *
6 lemondoodle
July 27, 2015 at 4:03 AM
Kim Young-kwang's poster is amusing me for some reason. He's coming across more sultry and less stuck in the middle of disaster drama.
i agree that while 6.5 could kill a lot of people it doesn't have the oomph of say...going with 9.0 or 10.0. Something like that.
Required fields are marked *
darcyM
July 27, 2015 at 4:21 AM
A 6.5 might not have the initial awe factor as a 10.0, but I think because a 6.5 is more likely to happen in Korea than a 10.0 it could have a greater impact on the audience. If you watch a 10.0 earthquake on a drama, it's very easy to dismiss it, and the devastation that follows, as something that'll never happen in real life. But a 6.5 is much more realistic, therefore the catastrophe that follows is much more realistic to the audience and can help to intensify the drama.
Required fields are marked *
lemondoodle
July 27, 2015 at 6:02 AM
I can see that too. They might be going for a more realistic angle. Makes sense.
Required fields are marked *
sogazelle
July 27, 2015 at 6:59 AM
+1
Required fields are marked *
windsun33
July 27, 2015 at 8:14 AM
A 10.0 is close to impossible, or at least something that shows up every 20 million years or so (except in SyFy movies, where it is every year). Largest ever recorded was 9.5, in Chile in 1960.
But the biggest factor is how well the buildings stand up, which is why the 6.2 in China killed so many last year. Often the tsunami is the biggest killer, but you need more CGI special effects for those :P
Required fields are marked *
Gidget
July 27, 2015 at 2:44 PM
And add to that: a 9.0 or 10.0 earthquake near Seoul would be an entirely different drama.
Korea rests on the western edge of the Amurian plate. And the fault line that runs along Korea's western coastline is an expansion fault.
That would mean this: if drama envisioned a 9.0 or 10.0 earthquake along that fault, it'd also be a drama about new volcanoes and the ecological disaster of toxic, boiling seas.
Required fields are marked *
Daehoney
July 27, 2015 at 6:19 AM
10 is too ridiculous. A 8.9 (some said 9.1) in my country killed around 200,000 people. That's too big of a scale for the production team.
Required fields are marked *
7 gustave154
July 27, 2015 at 4:04 AM
Don't underestimate mother nature. Anything higher than 6.5 and there might not even have a story to talk about!
Required fields are marked *
windsun33
July 27, 2015 at 8:15 AM
6.5 is not that big. The one that hit Chile in 1960 was 9.5, largest ever recorded.
Required fields are marked *
8 alpha
July 27, 2015 at 5:16 AM
They could have gone at least upto 8.0 richter.
Required fields are marked *
Jon G.
July 27, 2015 at 5:21 AM
6.5 means something like 100000 Hiroshima bombs detonating simultaneously under a city with zero protection against earthquakes.
8.0 would be 200 times as much.
Required fields are marked *
9 kanz
July 27, 2015 at 5:30 AM
Talking from my experience, here in Indonesia, where earthquake is common occurrence, 6.5SR is not really that bad. Anything above 7SR would do more damage.
Just yesterday, there was an earthquake in my city, 6.3SR, the epicenter is in Indian Ocean, quite far from the city center and literally the wall and the furnitures are only shaking. Fortunately, no damage and no victim reported, except everyone was a bit scared and worried.
Maybe it would be different if the epicenter was in downtown Seoul, but Seoul itself is far from ocean or mountain. Well, it's just a drama, suspension from disbelief is needed.
Required fields are marked *
AleV
July 27, 2015 at 6:08 AM
Yes very true! only yesterday did i experienced a 6.3SR earthquake in Surabaya. it shook quite strongly but not even one thing fell off from its place.. they really need to up it at least 2.0 SR so that everything will makes sense..
Required fields are marked *
AleV
July 27, 2015 at 6:11 AM
and not to forget the very low quality of buildings here that is like hundred times worse than in SK
Required fields are marked *
Gidget
July 27, 2015 at 3:08 PM
I'm guessing that part of the story line will probably go the same direction as the plot device in Angry Mom. I'd imagine that's why they have a story line about a chaebol with an agenda.
And until 1988 there were no earthquake standards in Seoul. So the drama could imagine vast stretches of Seoul's older office buildings and high-rise residential buildings suffering damage and partial collapse. And the partial collapse of Seoul's subway system. (The first 5 lines were built before 1988.)
LOL. This could set us up for an anti Drama along the lines of Healer. It'd show a network earthquake drama that was produced as part of a conspiracy between network executives, construction companies, real estate developers and corrupt public officials. The plot: the drama intentionally showed an improbable earthquake scenario, in order to spur public approval for government-funded earthquake retrofit projects and to facilitate the condemnation and redevelopment of older areas of town.
Required fields are marked *
shapby
July 27, 2015 at 6:09 AM
But you also have to remember the 2006 Yogyakarta earthquake was "only" a 6.3 SR earthquake, and that had more than 5,000 casualties. Rather than the value on the SR, it's more about the epicenter position and the depth of the epicenter. The Yogyakarta earthquake was a very shallow one, very close to the surface.
6.5 SR at a shallow depth and near a very densely populated area could be deadly.
Required fields are marked *
cheekbones
July 27, 2015 at 6:38 AM
Yes, definitely it's all about the epicenter and the depth of it, counting out tsunami.
Required fields are marked *
Daehoney
July 27, 2015 at 6:11 AM
Well I'm from Indonesia too, and I used 2006 Yogyakarta earthquake as example above. It was not even 6.5. It was 6.2, some even said 5.9 but the damage was great, given the houses are not capable of holding it and the center is near the land. I think it really depends on some factors.
Required fields are marked *
kanz
July 27, 2015 at 6:58 AM
It depends on some factors, Yogyakarta is near vulcanic mountain (Merapi) and the buildings maybe were in poor condition.
An 6.3SR earthquake in Jakarta or Surabaya (Indonesia's big cities) probably does more damage too, than the same earthquake in small cities or rural areas.
Required fields are marked *
Indramaslumps
July 30, 2015 at 8:37 PM
there is no connection between earthquake that happened in Yogyakarta with vulcanic mountain (Merapi) tho....
Required fields are marked *
Indramaslumps
July 30, 2015 at 8:33 PM
I actually want to stay silent because that what i usually do in here (SR) but I just can't with this comment....It's hurt to read my fellow Indonesia ppl say something like this when I experienced 'a mere' 5.9 SR (or some say 6.2) earthquake which cause more than 5,700 deaths in Yogyakarta. Even now, 9 years after that happened, I and a lot of ppl in Yogyakarta still have a reflex to run outside the house when there's an earthquake because a lot of ppl death trapped in their house at that time. That how traumatic the event is. I still remember how the world shake, how ppl just drop to the ground because it's hard to standing, how some house just collapse, and how ppl screaming and crying for their family members that still in the house...So, yes, and 6.5 earthquake can be a disaster if the center near the city and ppl didn't prepare themself. It's even more logical if Seoul never experience big earthquake before because I think that what happen to my city. We never have a big earthquake before so there no education for what should we do if there an earthquake and ppl didn't build their house strong enough to withstand earthquakes. And what with "but Seoul itself is far from ocean or mountain" ? Why that's make it 'disbelief' ?
Required fields are marked *
10 Sajen
July 27, 2015 at 5:53 AM
Am I the only one that hears every resident of the Pacific ring of fire laughing at 6.5 in my head. I know for instance that Japan builds earthquake resistant buildings.
I wish they had gone with the perspective of the survivor instead of rescue worker, everyone goes with rescue worker. The only exception that I know of being the anime Tokyo Magnitude 8.0.
Required fields are marked *
Indramaslumps
July 30, 2015 at 8:48 PM
No, I'm resident of the Pacific ring of fire and I'm not laughing -_- Please don't underestimate the power of earthquake
Required fields are marked *
11 mary, high priestess of the cult of rim
July 27, 2015 at 6:05 AM
It looks scary and doomsday enough, but what is going to happen, Show?
I mean, the earthquake will come, transportation and communication will be down. People will be injured. Supplies will be hard to get.... but what?
Does the Big Bad Chaebol hoard food and medicines? Do the leads try to find a missing loved one? Is war going to break out with North Korea?
It feels weird not knowing more. :|
Required fields are marked *
windsun33
July 27, 2015 at 8:23 AM
That is a good question. OK, so some buildings collapse - standard disaster movie fare. But what then? What is going to make this any different than 100 other shows just like it?
And yeah, the leads ALWAYS -100% of the time - have to dig through rubble, stupid politicians, and many other obstacles to find some missing loved one, who of course will also be a hero.
I have serious doubts about this show, but will probably watch it just to just point out the plot holes and cliches.
Required fields are marked *
Gidget
July 27, 2015 at 3:39 PM
Add to the scenarios: Damaged gas lines and water mains along subways and under high-rise buildings. You could have both uncontrollable fires going on above ground while people are being electrocuted and drowned underground. A scenario almost impossible to respond to.
Add:
...the railings at Namsan Tower collapsing under the weight of a gajillion jiggling locks...
...Mary frantically wondering if Rim's ok... :-)
For the chaebol I'm guessing they'll go the route of Angry Mom. (Don't dramas always play off similar themes, anyway?)
Required fields are marked *
mary
July 27, 2015 at 5:51 PM
Ehe so the disaster drama will have one fangirl trying to look for her missing Oppar? :D
But in all seriousness, I was kinda attached to a plague kind of D-day. That's why I found the "after an earthquake" premise plain. At least during a plague, you could be racing to find a cure, right? Or in meteorite or even giant storm, you could be racing to prepare yourself before all hell breaks loose?
For an earthquake scenario, just a vague "they will race to save survivors" is hard to sell. I hope the writer has something prepared to make the story more focused and hook us in. *crossing fingers*
Required fields are marked *
12 Almet
July 27, 2015 at 6:14 AM
Actually an earthquake happened in my country and it was 5.3 nothing much happened there are people who didnt even know that there was an earthquake so i think a 6.5 earthquake is not a disaster...
Required fields are marked *
Jon G.
July 27, 2015 at 6:26 AM
5.3 is already pretty strong if it happens just beneath your feet. If the epicentre is a few hundred miles (or more) away and in the deep crust, then you will not notice much of it, of course. It's not really a 5.3 earthquake at your position though.
A 6.5 earthquake is about 60 times stronger than 5.3 one (in terms of released energy).
Required fields are marked *
iamdeb
July 27, 2015 at 10:17 AM
It was probably an eartquake that was quite deep. There are quite a lot of earthquakes high in the Richter scale that occur deep in the earth every year but aren't really noticed by us (but are recorded by instruments). Many are usually out in the middle of the ocean! Must be traumatizing for those mysterious sea creatures of the great deep!
Required fields are marked *
13 C.W.
July 27, 2015 at 6:51 AM
i've watched more than enough absurdity in that doctor hairdo, like snakes on the head...disturbing..
Required fields are marked *
14 lc
July 27, 2015 at 8:15 AM
@ Windsun33, until last month, no one would have thought of an earthquake in nearby Malaysia. Then a 5.9 earthquake struck Sabah on 5 June 15 and claimed 18 lives.
These types of things you will never know until it happens.
Required fields are marked *
15 Trinity 🍆
July 27, 2015 at 9:07 AM
I think it depends on the areas. I was in a 7.3 earthquake when I was young. My brother was outside biking at the time and said the road was literally rolling. But all that happened were some fallen telephone polls and some cracked roads and foundation. I don't think any dishes even broke in our house. But that was also in California which builds everything with earthquakes in mind.
But then you hear of Haiti that had a 7.0 earthquake that killed over 200 thousand people or Iran that killed 30 thousand with a 6.6. So I think it depends on how prepared the cities are and how earthquake proof they are.
Required fields are marked *
16 SuziQ
July 27, 2015 at 10:01 AM
I experienced the 6.9 Loma Prieta earthquake which occurred 5:04 P.M.on Oct.17, 1989. Luckily, most of the people were at Candlestick Park watching the World Series otherwise there would have been more casualties if they were going home on the freeways. I was starting my Swingshift at work in San Francisco, and they wouldn't let us go home that night because of dangerous aftershocks. I didn't have phone service for 3 days, and there were no gas available for 2 days. We have always been getting small tremors because of the San Andreas Fault so you live with it and prepare for the next one.
We have been told that another BIG ONE is coming!
Required fields are marked *
iamdeb
July 27, 2015 at 10:23 AM
Its so weird how other continents and seismically active areas have had their "big ones" but N.America hasn't. There was a recent article about how the Pacific Northwest (Portland,, Seattle seemed to be focused on) also being overdue for a big one and as someone planning to move to Cali and eventually Seattle, it was a bit scary to read. All we can do is be prepared!
Required fields are marked *
damadelpuente
July 27, 2015 at 6:40 PM
there've been large earthquakes in North America, though. Perhaps not as recently, but in 1985 there was an 8.1 magnitude earthquake in Mexico which caused a great deal of damage to Mexico City. And the second largest earthqueake ever registered was in Alaska in 1964 (9.3).
Required fields are marked *
iamdeb
July 28, 2015 at 10:35 AM
I'm talking about more recently, as in the last 10-15 years.
Required fields are marked *
Gidget
July 27, 2015 at 3:59 PM
I was there too. (Comments 2.3.1)
People who lived in the City were told not to go home. So after they confirmed their friends and loved ones were safe, there was a sleepover party at Casa de Gidget.
*Yep, nothing like being in your early 20s...*
Required fields are marked *
17 Caro
July 27, 2015 at 10:18 AM
With earthquakes what matters the most is the depth. A 6.5 at 150km depth is just a tremor but at 5km depth it can be catastrophic. It also depends on how seismic resistant and how prepared the city is.
Required fields are marked *
18 trisha
July 27, 2015 at 10:25 AM
if u want to know what earthquake 6.5 to 7.4 can do really then u could have heard the recent disaster caused in our country NEPAL
Required fields are marked *
19 iamdeb
July 27, 2015 at 10:27 AM
I'm just happy we are finally getting a different genre! Please more thinking outside of the box like this! Hopefully its good and not overracted, nonsensical and full of plot holes. I have faith in you JTBC!
Required fields are marked *
20 pogo - now sailing HMS Queen of Tears with Corn Salad on deck🍉
July 27, 2015 at 10:32 AM
ah, come on, a 6.5 with an epicentre in the middle of one of the world's most densely populated urban areas is not something to eyeroll at.
The Nepal earthquakes this year were of 7.8 and 7.3 magnitude respectively, and the first earthquake alone still killed over 9000 people and left over 20,000 injured as per official stats. And that was with an epicentre 80 km away from Kathmandu! I imagine a 6.5 in Seoul could easily be worse.
Required fields are marked *
FlightlessBird
July 27, 2015 at 6:37 PM
Totally agree with you pogo. A 6.5 earthquake is nothing to be sniffed at.
A 6.5 earthquake struck about 50 kms from where I live a couple of years ago. It was really shallow (depth of about 14 kms) and WOW! It felt like a much bigger earthquake.
We have really strict building codes but even so some unfortunate people's homes were destroyed. Fortunately it's a rural area so there wasn't much to fall down and amazingly no one was killed.
However the Christchurch Earthquake was only a 6.3 and that flattened ChCh (and killed people). If a shallow 6.5 earthquake was to hit somewhere like Seoul...............
Required fields are marked *
21 windsun33
July 27, 2015 at 4:22 PM
A giant sinkhole would have been cooler.
Required fields are marked *
cheekbones
July 27, 2015 at 11:28 PM
Yeah
Required fields are marked *
22 pinktape
July 29, 2015 at 8:03 PM
I experienced a 5.7 earthquake in 2005 and it destroyed nearly the whole city. It's been 10 years and not everything has gone back to normal. I nearly lost my school as well. So, yes, an earthquake doesn't have to be 8.0 or 10.0 to be deathly.
But I do agree with javabeans that if this is promoted as the biggest disaster drama ever, they need to create more reasons to convince the viewers that this is real and they're not exaggerating. I personally agree that, for dramatic purpose, they should have made a bigger scale of earthquake
Still, if D-Day turns out to be good, the scale of the earthquake just won't matter anymore. I believe in the cast and I love the first teaser (the second one is.. cringeworthy)
P.S. This is so Kim Youngkwang centered, I need more Jung Somin!
Required fields are marked *
23 Moo
October 5, 2015 at 2:18 PM
No one designs anything based on an earthquake's "magnitude". No seismologist or engineer designs based on the Richter Scale period. Take the Codes and such they mention in the drama with a grain of salt.
Magnitude means nothing if you're not close enough to feel it. Unless you know the precise location of the faults and its distance to your building, you really don't care about its magnitude in terms of design. You design for a certain earthquake return period (i.e., 1 in 2475 year, etc.)
tl;dr, they're dumbing it down for viewers
Required fields are marked *