Sındırgı Depremleri: Birikimli Hasarın Ardındaki Bilimsel Gerçekler
Akademik Kaynaklar, Raporlar ve Videolar
2025 verileriyle güçlendirilmiş öneriler – Prof. Dr. Ali Osman Öncel
Sındırgı Earthquakes: The Scientific Realities Behind Cumulative Damage
Academic Sources, Reports and Videos
Recommendations enhanced with 2025 data – Prof. Dr. Ali Osman Öncel
Özet – Bu Yapay Zeka Araştırma Asistanı, Sındırgı 2025 depremleri makalesini analiz ederek, her bölüme uygun Q1-Q2 akademik yayınlar, resmi raporlar ve doğrulanmış YouTube videoları önermektedir. Kaynaklar APA 7 formatında listelenmiş olup, jeodezik analizden afet yönetimine kadar geniş bir yelpazeyi kapsar.
Abstract – This AI Research Assistant analyzes the Sındırgı 2025 earthquakes article, recommending Q1-Q2 academic publications, official reports, and verified YouTube videos for each section. Sources are listed in APA 7 format, covering geodetic analysis to disaster management.
In 2025, two significant earthquakes occurred in Western Anatolia, Turkey, affecting the Sındırgı district disproportionately despite not being the direct epicenter. The first earthquake struck on August 10, centered near Soma, with a magnitude of 6.1 Mw. The second followed on October 27, centered near Aktaş–Dursunbey, also with a magnitude of 6.0–6.1 Mw. Although Sındırgı was not the epicenter of either event, its proximity—approximately 45 km from Soma and 20 km from Dursunbey—resulted in cumulative structural damage and social disruption. This study evaluates the spatial relationship between these seismic events and the rationale behind declaring Sındırgı a disaster zone.
In 2025, two significant earthquakes occurred in Western Anatolia, Turkey, affecting the Sındırgı district disproportionately despite not being the direct epicenter. The first earthquake struck on August 10, centered near Soma, with a magnitude of 6.1 Mw. The second followed on October 27, centered near Aktaş–Dursunbey, also with a magnitude of 6.0–6.1 Mw. Although Sındırgı was not the epicenter of either event, its proximity—approximately 45 km from Soma and 20 km from Dursunbey—resulted in cumulative structural damage and social disruption. This study evaluates the spatial relationship between these seismic events and the rationale behind declaring Sındırgı a disaster zone.
Epicenter distances were calculated using geodesic methods based on AFAD-reported coordinates. Damage assessments were compiled from official AFAD and municipal reports. Field observations, media coverage, and community feedback were analyzed to understand the social impact and administrative response. The study focuses on the timeline between the two earthquakes and the cumulative effects leading to the disaster zone declaration on November 5, 2025.
Epicenter distances were calculated using geodesic methods based on AFAD-reported coordinates. Damage assessments were compiled from official AFAD and municipal reports. Field observations, media coverage, and community feedback were analyzed to understand the social impact and administrative response. The study focuses on the timeline between the two earthquakes and the cumulative effects leading to the disaster zone declaration on November 5, 2025.
Epicenter Distances:
• August 10 (Soma): ~45 km from Sındırgı
• October 27 (Aktaş–Dursunbey): ~20 km from Sındırgı
Damage Assessment:
• 22,616 buildings inspected
• 560 buildings and 898 units identified for reinforcement or reconstruction
• 109 containers installed for temporary shelter
• 100 families relocated to TOKİ housing
• Prefabricated workplaces, social spaces, and livestock shelters established
• Financial aid and household support distributed
Administrative Action:
• Sındırgı declared a “General Life-Affecting Disaster Zone” on November 5, 2025
Epicenter Distances:
• August 10 (Soma): ~45 km from Sındırgı
• October 27 (Aktaş–Dursunbey): ~20 km from Sındırgı
Damage Assessment:
• 22,616 buildings inspected
• 560 buildings and 898 units identified for reinforcement or reconstruction
• 109 containers installed for temporary shelter
• 1003 families relocated to TOKİ housing
• Prefabricated workplaces, social spaces, and livestock shelters established
• Financial aid and household support distributed
Administrative Action:
• Sındırgı declared a “General Life-Affecting Disaster Zone” on November 5, 2025
The Sındırgı case illustrates how spatial proximity to multiple seismic events can amplify regional vulnerability, even when the district is not the direct epicenter. The short interval between the two earthquakes and their shallow focal depths contributed to cumulative damage. The disaster zone declaration provided psychological reassurance and logistical support to affected residents. However, long-term recovery depends on sustained aid, resilient infrastructure, and community engagement. This case underscores the importance of preparedness and scientific communication in disaster-prone regions.
The Sındırgı case illustrates how spatial proximity to multiple seismic events can amplify regional vulnerability, even when the district is not the direct epicenter. The short interval between the two earthquakes and their shallow focal depths contributed to cumulative damage. The disaster zone declaration provided psychological reassurance and logistical support to affected residents. However, long-term recovery depends on sustained aid, resilient infrastructure, and community engagement. This case underscores the importance of preparedness and scientific communication in disaster-prone regions.
“Earthquakes don’t kill, unpreparedness does. What Sındırgı experienced is a warning to us all: Empower yourself with science, live in solidarity.”
“Earthquakes don’t kill, unpreparedness does. What Sındırgı experienced is a warning to us all: Empower yourself with science, live in solidarity.”
This study highlights the need for proactive seismic risk assessment in regions adjacent to active fault lines. The Sındırgı experience demonstrates that cumulative effects from sequential earthquakes can warrant disaster zone status even without direct epicentral impact. Future policy should integrate geodetic monitoring, community education, and rapid response mechanisms to mitigate similar outcomes.
This study highlights the need for proactive seismic risk assessment in regions adjacent to active fault lines. The Sındırgı experience demonstrates that cumulative effects from sequential earthquakes can warrant disaster zone status even without direct epicentral impact. Future policy should integrate geodetic monitoring, community education, and rapid response mechanisms to mitigate similar outcomes.
Vs30 Zemin Analizi: Sındırgı merkezinde zemin sınıfı genellikle orta sertlikte (Vs30 > 360 m/s) iken, Karagürler gibi kuzeybatı kırsal alanlarda Vs30 değerleri daha düşüktür. Bu durum, deprem dalgalarının büyümesine ve hasarın artmasına neden olabilir.
Vs30 Soil Analysis: While central Sındırgı generally has medium-stiff soil (Vs30 > 360 m/s), northwestern rural areas like Karagürler show lower Vs30 values, increasing seismic wave amplification and damage potential.
Sındırgı ve çevresindeki zemin türlerini incelemek için interaktif haritayı kullanabilirsiniz. Karagürler gibi bölgelerde düşük Vs30 değerleri dikkat çekmektedir.
Haritayı Aç
“Zemin, sessiz bir büyüteçtir. Karagürler’deki yumuşak tabaka, sarsıntıyı büyütür; hazırlık, bu sessizliği duymaktır.”
“Soil is a silent amplifier. The soft layer in Karagürler magnifies shaking; preparedness is hearing this silence.”
Tüm Bölümler İçin APA 7 Formatında Kaynak Listesi
APA 7 Reference List for All Sections
- Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlığı (AFAD). (2025). Balıkesir Sındırgı Hasar Tespit Raporu. Ankara: Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlığı.
- Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlığı (AFAD). (2025). Deprem Ön Değerlendirme Raporu (M6.1). https://deprem.afad.gov.tr/noise-analysis/reports/DepremOnDegerlendirmeRaporu(6.1).pdf
- Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Kandilli Rasathanesi. (2025). 10 Ağustos 2025 Alakır-Sındırgı (Balıkesir) M6.1 Depremi Ön Değerlendirme Raporu. http://www.koeri.boun.edu.tr/sismo/2/10-agustos-2025-alakir-sindirgi-balikesir-m6-1-depremi-on-degerlendirme-raporu/
- DEUNET Jeofizik. (2025). MW 6.1 Sındırgı-Balıkesir depremi artçı şok dağılımı. https://jeofizik.deu.edu.tr/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/M6-1_Sindirgi_ve_M5-3_Simav_depremle-ri_raporu.pdf
- Doğan, A., & Emre, Ö. (2006). Ege graben sisteminin kuzey sınırı: Sındırgı-Sincanlı Fay Zonu. Türkiye Jeoloji Kurultayı Bildiriler Kitabı, 83–84.
- Sinnott, R. W. (1984). Virtues of the Haversine. Sky and Telescope, 68(2), 159–162.
- Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Resmi Gazete. (2025). Afet Bölgesi Kararı, Sayı: 32360. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/
- U.S. Geological Survey. (n.d.). Global Vs30 Map Server – A Global Grid of Vs30 Values. https://usgs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8ac19bc334f747e486550f32837578e1
Doğrulanmış YouTube Videoları
Verified YouTube Videos
- Giriş: IRIS. How Does an Earthquake Occur? [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hdg7jxExAM8
- Giriş: IRIS. Elastic Rebound of the ground during an earthquake [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQFTDAzhbZM
- Bulgular: Prof. Dr. Ali Osman Öncel. Balıkesir Sındırgı 6.1 Depremi ve Bölgede Deprem Riski [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yiE9CEziZ0
- Bulgular: Prof. Dr. Ali Osman Öncel. Balıkesir Depremi, Artçılar ve Etkileri [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_GiJ45z1UE
- Bulgular: Prof. Dr. Ali Osman Öncel. Depremin Şiddeti, Derinliği ve Zemin Etkisi [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nh1zySkpEcU
- Tartışma: IRIS. Neden Bazıları Yıkılırken Diğerleri Yıkılmaz? [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzIu46aigTY
Comments
Post a Comment