Forum

< Previous Page 49 of 272 Next >

Post a comment Contact webmaster

Posted September 8, 2013, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Personally I feel like the historic name given to a bridge ought to go with it if the span is relocated and I think this should still be known as the Masterson Bridge. I think it's important to keep ties with the bridge's heritage and those people who have fond memories of it at it's original location.

I have also suggested to James about adding "Relocated" to the status field so that bridges that are moved won't show as being lost on their original page. They may be lost from their original location but certainly not gone altogether. Big difference.

My two cents...curious what the gallery thinks...

Charles Dana Bridge (New Hampshire)
Posted September 8, 2013, by Mike Mulligan (steamshovel2002 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Hmm, the plan is to build a new bridge a half a mile downstream. They want to rehabilitate the current bridge. Rehabilitate “Island Park”...turn the island into an unobstructed grassy park with picnic areas. So the bridge and Island would be in direct connection with all the local trails for hiking and biking. The 1921 bridges would be a walking bridge.

I just want to get the heavy traffic off this bridge it was never designed for.

They are a heartbeat away from closing the bridge for safety reason and making me a legend in my time.

I have been confronted with mono and simpleton thinking people all my life.

So you guys are bridge and safety luddites?

http://steamshovel2002.blogspot.com/2013/08/an-act-of-love-t...

"Act of Civil Love or of love of civil…"

"It is a demonstration of my love of government and with a centralizing organizing force."

"It is my symbolic act of violence against no government…"

"It was my violent reckless conduct against the philosophy of no government and the widespread public sentiment with hating their government..."

Posted September 8, 2013, by Stacy Thomas Grimm (sgrimm48 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

This message is for Mark Stuempel. My name is Stacy Thomas Grimm. I'm also about building bridges. Please contact by cell #502-931-8114. I'm from Louisville,KY. Thank you, looking forward to hearing from you. Stacy

Posted September 7, 2013, by Luke Harden (lukemh9 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I think the standard procedure for relocated bridges is to create a page for the new entry and link it to this one.

So I'll go make a entry for the relocation.

Posted September 7, 2013, by Max

Added to Rock Island railroad category. Line used to be part of the Memphis, TN to Amarillo, TX line. Line is abandoned in some places, some are still operated by other smaller railroads.

Posted September 7, 2013, by Max

Added to Rock Island railroad category. Line used to be part of the Memphis, TN to Amarillo, TX line. Line is abandoned in some places, some are still operated by other smaller railroads.

Posted September 7, 2013, by Anonymous

AMS USA is the mill mark for Arcelor-Mittal Steel. They were formed from French (Arcelor) and Indian (Mittal) steel companies, and have bought a number of mills in America over the last few years.

Posted September 7, 2013, by Chris Gonnerman (chris [at] gonnerman [dot] org)

I have been told by a member of the Northeast Missouri Old Threshers that this bridge has been moved to their site adjacent to the fairgrounds just north of Shelbina, Missouri, and is now carrying their steam locomotive (which runs on a limited track within the facility). I have no idea what the proper status of this bridge should be.

I plan to get pictures at the new site and post them within the next week. However, if someone wants to tell me what status to apply (or just go ahead and correct it for me) I'd be much appreciative.

Posted September 7, 2013, by Luke Harden (lukemh9 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I have no objections to adding "(Steel/Iron Manufacturer)" onto the end of "Phoenix Iron Co." to distinguish that it's the parts manufacturer.

I have actually gone through and edited some of pages to list the steel manufacturers as "________ (Steel/Iron Manufacturer)"

However, that's not the issue I'm having with Julie.

The issue I have (this time) is that she is adamant that they shouldn't be in the builder's section when, as the site layout currently stands, there is no other logical part of the entries for them to be put.

Posted September 7, 2013, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Looks like we either need an executive edict from the webmaster or a consensus: Does the company that puts its name on the steel at the mill count as a builder/fabricator?

I have W8x18 beams holding up my deck. They have a manufacturer's roll mark of "AMS USA". American Metal & Steel Int'l Corp did not build my deck. They almost certainly do not even know of its existence. No one could reasonably consider them one of the builders of my deck.

The tires on my car are marked "Continental". Continental Tire Company did not build my car.

I personally believe we should distinguish between a builder and a parts source. The source of the steel can be an important piece of the history but I think it belongs somewhere other than in the same category as a builder or fabricator.

And I believe we should all play nice while we are guests in James's yard.

Charles Dana Bridge (New Hampshire)
Posted September 7, 2013, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

The walkway sounds like a good project for a prospective Eagle Scout: Repairs to historic bridge linking towns/states. The situation doesn't sound quite desperate enough to call for civil disobedience.

With luck, in the future the states will build a new crossing that avoids the RR tracks and other obsolete traffic obstructions. The historic bridges can be there for non-polluting traffic.

Charles Dana Bridge (New Hampshire)
Posted September 7, 2013, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

I Think your barking up the wrong tree here Mike... The mass majority of the people on this site want this bridge left right where it is. Restored... NOT replaced.

Charles Dana Bridge (New Hampshire)
Posted September 7, 2013, by Mike Mulligan (steamshovel2002 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

So four counts and a felony…you should see the numbers of errors on the complaint and my bail paperwork.

The bail paperwork said my driver license was removed…the police said three days later it was all a mistake.

The bail bondsman is a long time local in our town…he got his job from a state high political leader who happens to live in Hinsdale also. I have been protesting on and off at the bridge for three years. He tried to humiliate me while in police custody as we were discussing the bail condition. He never mentioning to me he grabbed my license till the Oct 3 arrangement. The court is a couple of towns away from me …the 8th district course. He is a court employee and it questions if I can trust the court with integrity. He was trying to punish me outside a court proceeding.

Cause For Concern

http://www.commonsnews.org/site/assets/PDF/COMM-0215.pdf

My blog:

http://steamshovel2002.blogspot.com/2013/08/cause-for-concer...

Posted September 7, 2013, by N Smith (sawport [at] gmail [dot] com)

The picture from the railroad tracks is looking north.

The road bridge is hiway 1 from Washington to Brighton.

The highway was realigned on to the railroad right-of -way and the railroad bypassed Washington and realigned from Ainsworth to brighton

Posted September 7, 2013, by Mike Mulligan (steamshovel2002 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Right, the Navy Seabees bridge is a modern rendition of a truss bridge. What makes it almost vibration free is the deck arch design. The middle of the bridge on the roadbed is about a foot or so higher than the roadbed sitting on the footing or bridge concrete foundation.

A heavy load on the arch creates compressive stress on the roadbed deck large steel members creating a much stronger bridge. I get it a large amnount of weight is transfered to the huge upper truss by their cables atached to the deck.

That has taken out most of the vibration out of this bridge….

Charles Dana Bridge (New Hampshire)
Posted September 7, 2013, by Mike Mulligan (steamshovel2002 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I wrote to the NHDOT complaining about the dangerous walkway boards way before this. They blew me off. As with the selectmen. The police told me it was state property, there is nothing they could do.

The walkway boards weren’t attached to the bridge. The plank nails and screws had completely rusted away. I easily pulled the planks up by hand.

I put substantial safety barriers up at both ends of the bridge…when I was done I called 911 and reported myself to the police. I made sure the police were inspecting my work within a hour at the completion of my job.

Posted September 7, 2013, by Mike Mulligan (steamshovel2002 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Yea, the NH state bridge inspector gave me that one with bridge vibrations too. He told me to go up to the new Navy Seabees a few mile north on route 9. It vibrates just like the 1921 bridge. Except it was rock solid. The Navy Seabees bridge is really a beautiful bridge.

This is really about NH not being able to fund their transportation agency…the state bridge inspectors defaulting to document and inspection falsification because they don’t want to disrupt 10,000s of people.

Posted September 7, 2013, by Jimmy (9jcjiv [at] gmail [dot] com)

Its sad because they plan to remove it

Posted September 6, 2013, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

Agree. Concrete box beam, with 1930's or so warren pony truss webs an decoration. I suspect it was a "compromise", allowing the engineer to use a "safe" concrete span, but quiet the noise from the folks wishing their truss bridge was still there. A mutt bridge.

Posted September 6, 2013, by Julie Bowers (jbowerz1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Workin' Bridges is delighted to announce we are formally working with the friends to keep this bridge functioning for the people and the ospreys.

Posted September 6, 2013, by LStauff (LAWPerry [at] aol [dot] com)

It seems as though I have run across this bridge's pictures as well, but not where you might think: eBay. When I am researching something, I start checking eBay every week-to-ten-days for the length of the project (or from its conception) for stray items passing through. Wondering if that is where I've seen it?

Worthwhile to keep watch, anyway. While you might not win the bid, you can right-click on many and at least have a reference image and an idea where to look for another copy.

Posted September 6, 2013, by LStauff (LAWPerry [at] aol [dot] com)

I took some pictures perhaps 15-20 years ago onsite - a wicked mess of overgrowth and undergrowth and watch your step!!! Anyway, the mid-river pilings underneath the Fobes Rd Bridge remain, and appear to have been made of iron, not wood. If I remember the jaunt and pictures correctly, they had been painted white, and the rust was bubbling through. But goodness! That was some 70,000-75,000 pictures ago.

Will post photos when I can locate them again. Or, if someone 1,000 miles closer to the site wouldn't mind pushing through the brush (CAREFULLY) to take a pic, well, that might be a bit faster!

Posted September 6, 2013, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

You nailed it. The trusses are decorative. It might be a box beam from the looks of the underside.

Lower Gassaway Bridge (South Carolina)
Posted September 6, 2013, by Don Morrison

Whatever it is at those coordinates looks like it might be an old span. It may have connected River Street to Six Mile Norris Highway. It may also just be a flatbed trailer or something. Bing bird's eye is not clear at all, and Google maps shows low quality.

Looks like a number of roads in the vicinity are named "____ Bridge Road", but there are also a number of modern bridges.

It looks like a neat area to explore, with old dams and other interesting sites as well.

Posted September 6, 2013, by SaDonna (fgpp [at] sbcglobal [dot] net)

Actually, the ferry is not closed. $14.00 to cross it, if you come back on it in the same day you can do it for half price. I took the ferry over into Kentucky Sunday, September 1, 2013. First time I had took the ferry in over 40 years. Eventually, I also went to the park too. Beautiful area.

Posted September 6, 2013, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Obviously this bridge has problems that need to be corrected. But, I do take issue with one of Mr. Mulligan's arguments...

He is concerned about the bridge vibrating when a car goes across it. Of course it vibrates. That is what bridges do. A modern UCEB will also vibrate as weight is transferred from one section to another. All it means is that the bridge is doing its job.

If you want to try something fun, stand on the walkway with your hands on the diagonal members. You will actually feel the weight being transferred. Please be safe when doing this, and please do not violate any laws, but you will gain an appreciation for how a truss bridge functions.

Posted September 6, 2013, by Michael Miller (michael_a_miller [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Don,

You are absolutely correct. It will be lost forever IF a google streeview car ever passes through there, but I highly doubt it will be anytime soon as the upstate of SC is not covered very well by streetview. Also, this is a very narrow & rural road and I was shocked that they had even been on this road.

All that being said, I know you can take a screenshot & then crop the picture, but I don't know about copyright issues.

Michael

Lower Gassaway Bridge (South Carolina)
Posted September 6, 2013, by Michael Miller (michael_a_miller [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I wish I had seen your comment before I went up there last Thursday! I was within a quarter mile of the lat/long that you gave. I'll take solace in the fact that I was pressed for time and might not have had a chance to look at what you spotted and will just have to venture back up there in a few weeks!

Posted September 6, 2013, by Michael Miller (michael_a_miller [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I will preface this by saying that I'm not an engineer, but do not believe this is a truss bridge. Does it have trusses? Yes. There used to be a truss bridge here. I know this because I have crossed it before, but they demolished the truss bridge & built this new bridge just a few years ago. It appears as if they kept the steel from the old truss bridge & incorporated it into the design so that it is strictly ornamental and not structural. This is actually a concrete stringer bridge now. I tried doing some online research, but I couldn't find anything relating to the construction of this bridge.

Perhaps a real engineer or someone who knows more about bridges than I do can look at the pictures I've added and either confirm or deny my theory.

Charles Dana Bridge (New Hampshire)
Posted September 6, 2013, by J.P. (wildcatjon2000 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I think they are saying he can still drive across it but not stop a car on it and do damage to it again. Or walk within 1 mile of the bridge.

Posted September 6, 2013, by Doug Klingerman (dougbcnu [at] gmail [dot] com)

BLM takes responsibility for replacing this bridge in two years:

http://www.chicoer.com/samplesection/ci_23763797/blm-replace...

Posted September 5, 2013, by Nathan Holth (form3 [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

I didn't think that Indiana had run out of historic bridges to relocate and reuse. Their bridge marketing website lists several AVAILABLE bridges that would have fit this crossing. Perhaps the website is in error, since I can think of no reason to not use one of the available historic bridges listed on that website for this crossing.

http://www.in.gov/indot/2532.htm

...Also is there a written agreement that the railroad bridge will be preserved? What prevents a local contractor from misleading local authorities into the concept that the abandoned railroad bridge is a waste of space and that they would be willing to scrap it out for them?

Posted September 5, 2013, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

A unique situation here.

The old rail corridor is now part of a trail system, but instead of crossing the creek on the old bridge it jogs over to a MOB span built next to it. That bridge appears to have been built for another trail that now connects here, and it allows the rail span to be preserved with the tracks still in place.

Not at all a fan of MOB's...but I actually kinda like this!

Charles Dana Bridge (New Hampshire)
Posted September 5, 2013, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

How can he stop someone within 100 yds of the bridge... If he isn't allowed within a mile of it?

Posted September 5, 2013, by Nathan Holth

Funny article. What a moron. Functionally obsolete means the bridge geometry is not equal to modern guidelines, it does not mean the bridge is deteriorated. The only thing deteriorated is this guy's brain cells.

I did find that the guy had some detail photos of the bridge showing the rust that he thinks will cause the bridge to collapse. https://plus.google.com/photos/101222802273511819990/albums/...

These photos identify isolated areas of rust and section loss. These elements do not post an imminent danger to the bridge and can be easily repaired through rehabilitation.

Posted September 5, 2013, by Dave King (DKinghawkfan [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Here's a video of the same guy who got arrested at the Charles Dana Bridge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGbQ8545Hsw&desktop_uri=%2Fwa...

Posted September 5, 2013, by Dave King (DKinghawkfan [at] hotmail [dot] com)

At a loss for words with this one.

http://steamshovel2002.blogspot.com/2013/08/bridge-protester...

From the article:

Eldridge said part of Mulligan's bail conditions mandate that he not walk within a mile of either side of the Charles Dana Bridge or stop any vehicle within 100 yards of it. The lieutenant said witnesses saw Mulligan pulling up some of the bridge's boards.

Posted September 5, 2013, by Steven W Lindsey (SteveLindsey60 [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Proper name of the bridge is the Charles Dana Bridge, as it was named by the NH Legislature and governor with the approval of Hinsdale, NH and Brattleboro, Vt. town bodies.

Charles Dana was the famed New York newspaper man and abolitionist. He was born in Hinsdale, NH.

Posted September 5, 2013, by Steve W Lindsey (SteveLindsey60 [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Proper name of the bridge is the Anna Hunt Marsh Bridge, as it was named by the NH Legislature and governor with the approval of Hinsdale, NH and Brattleboro, Vt. town bodies. AHM was a social reformer with connections to both towns and one of the few bridges named for a woman (two others, one at Maidstone, Vt crossing and a lift bridge in Portsmouth, NH)

Posted September 5, 2013, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

If anyone could talk their way outta something Jules... I bet it would be you! ;-)

Kelsey Creek Bridge (South Carolina)
Posted September 5, 2013, by Michael Miller (michael_a_miller [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I field confirmed the bridge yesterday. It has indeed been demolished & replaced with a newer concrete stringer structure. I have included a picture of the new structure.

Posted September 4, 2013, by Nathan Holth (form3 [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

I added this pair of bridges to BridgeHunter so that BridgeHunter should now have a complete list of all known Rall bascule bridges: http://bridgehunter.com/category/tag/rall-bascule-lift/ something I can't do at HistoricBridges.org because I haven't visited them all yet! I also added a brief Rall bascule description to the BridgeHunter category for the benefit of visitors.

You will however have to come over to HistoricBridges.org to see my photos of these two bridges that can only be feasibly photographed from a boat. http://www.historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowse...

Posted September 4, 2013, by Don Morrison

Changed this page to the "Dunbar Piers" bridge over the West Fork Little Hocking River, then realised that that one was already listed, so I changed it back. This must be a different bridge.

Posted September 4, 2013, by Bart (bart [dot] youngblood [at] gmail [dot] com)

As of August 2013 the bridge is still closed, but has appeared to be under repair for the past few months.

Posted September 4, 2013, by John Marvig (johnmarvig [at] chaska [dot] net)

The bridge here was actually done in four sections. Two Minnesota approaches in 2009 and 2010, then the ND approaches in 2011 and 2013. I doubt the girders are next. They aren't particularly old, and I believe they were strengthened not too long ago.

Posted September 4, 2013, by Nathan Holth (form3 [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

I hope so since this is an extremely rare and unusual historic bridge with its pipe top chord and associated connection details.

Posted September 4, 2013, by Dave King (DKinghawkfan [at] hotmail [dot] com)

I spoke with the Mahaska County Engineer today and I believe this is the bridge he said they were trying to save and move it to a bike path.

Posted September 4, 2013, by jackwooten (jackwooten37 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

this message on old HALETOWN TN BRIDGE is very important lot of MARION county HISTORY IS SONKING OF THE HORIZON, THIS SHOULD OF NEVER HAPPENED, JUST HOPE tdot of tn picks up on this e-mail, feel tdot of tn is very unproffessione; on this issue theu have the worst case of 9LOCK JAW I HAVE EVER SEEN NOT CAPTALIZED FOR REASON , MAY TDOT OF TN WILL RESPOND (SHAME ON TDOT OF TN IS THIS WAY PUBLIC SHOULD BE TREATED (E-MAIL ME LETSISCUSS THE ISSUE WAIYING IN WINGS, HAVE WAITED OVER A YEAR NO RESPONCE THIS IS anerican no communistic country, jackwooten37@yahoo.com

Rulo Bridge (Nebraska)
Posted September 4, 2013, by Lyon Wonder (lyon_wonder [at] yahoo [dot] com)

The replacement for the US-159 Rulo bridge is now open to traffic.

http://www.kmaland.com/news/article_fe0bdcbc-148b-11e3-ad68-...

Posted September 4, 2013, by Ryan Saylor (galaxy2517 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

The arch is just a few hundred feet west of route 7 behind the big Leasco building....I first noticed it several years ago and thought it had something to do with the railroad.....

Posted September 4, 2013, by Ryan Saylor (galaxy25172 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

I have an old picture of the bridge somewhere after the bridge was closed and before it was demolished.

Posted September 4, 2013, by Ryan Saylor (galaxy25172 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Bridge is now closed and partially dismantled....

Posted September 4, 2013, by Dave King (DKinghawkfan [at] hotmail [dot] com)

It's a real shame this bridge was flooded out. Was really hoping it would still be standing when I got there. From the Google images and from my photos it looks like a newer deck was on the bridge. Looked like an impressive structure.

Posted September 4, 2013, by Michael Miller (michael_a_miller [at] yahoo [dot] com)

A few interesting facts:

These two bridges are the 3rd highest bridges carrying an interstate highway in the eastern US.

On April 3rd, 2012, A Hazmat truck caught fire. This fire closed both bridges and forcing the evacuation of residents in the area.

It was reported that the truck's contents were at least 51 percent sulfuric acid.

This did damage to the eastbound road deck, causing it to be shut down for several weeks for repair. Traffic heading eastbound on I-26 was forced to take US-25 south into South Carolina where they would then take SC-11 back to I-26.

Posted September 4, 2013, by Dan Corbin (dcorbin [at] hwlochner [dot] com)

The name of this bridge was recently dedicated as the Robert N. Stewart Bridge (former Columbus, IN Mayor).

Posted September 4, 2013, by Kat Robinson (kat [at] tiedyetravels [dot] com)

Just the ferry.

Posted September 4, 2013, by Jason Smith (JDSmith77 [at] gmx [dot] net)

This bridge is in the process of being replaced. Last year the Moorhead portion of the trestle was replaced with steel and concrete trestle. The Fargo portion is being replaced this year and the main spans will most likely go after that. More information here: http://www.wday.com/event/article/id/86338/group/News/

Dixie Bridge (Arkansas)
Posted September 4, 2013, by derek warren (kuntry [dot] dw25 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Me and some cousins just went out to the old dixie bridge sept 1st 2013 went swimmin & fishin. Jumped off the bridge a few times. Theres 3-4 houses on the back side now. Still fun.

Posted September 3, 2013, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Not trivial at all, Kelly. This bridge (pair) does not belong in Clay County and should be deleted there.

Posted September 3, 2013, by Kelly McClanahan

Perhaps a nit pick here, but the Liberty Bend Bridge(s) do not cross the county line here. This portion of the Missouri River, is entirely in Jackson County. The county line, is about a mile or so to the north, over the old river channel. Should it be left as it is, or corrected, since the bridge does not cross into Clay County.

Posted September 3, 2013, by Matt Lohry

Fmiser, you raise a very valid point... And, I did say "usually" :) and, there were many Warren ponies in northern Minnesota that have battened double-angle members for both member types...an example is here:

http://bridgehunter.com/photos/16/86/168660-L.jpg

But, look closely...they actually are not identical...one has more battens spaced closer together than the other, and this would be the compression member. It basically serves the same purpose as the v-lacing does, which is prevent buckling of angle members.

An example with battened tension and laced compression members:

http://bridgehunter.com/mn/hennepin/6273/

This one is much easier to tell the difference between member types--and, I think it looks a lot better.

Re: Fire and steel
Posted September 3, 2013, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

The PE on a project is the one who gets sued if anything goes wrong. You should understand their conservatism.

Advice from an acknowledged expert could help them decide using the best information. It might be helpful to find an engineering professor who has an interest in bridge preservation willing to consult on questions like this.

Heating and cooling can change the properties of steel, so a fire hot enough to have red hot coals in contact with the metal merits some caution. Just my guess, the amount of heat a burning 2 inch plank would transfer down to a stringer wouldn't be enough to change it, but you try not to risk life on a guess.

re: fire and iron
Posted September 3, 2013, by Julie Bowers (jbowerz1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Shall post my findings. Next week is a meeting butbnewspaper called about going to see it tomorrow. Kalona has cheese curds so the store wlp be a stop.That is what I was thinking but considering nty engineer spouting off about the steel damage by fire. You cant aee it but its there. If its there you shoule be able to see signs....twisting or buckling.

Re: fire and iron
Posted September 3, 2013, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

My experience in trying to alter iron and steel using fire is a small, open burn wood fire will never be able to get hot enough to damage the structure. Once the wood has charcoaled, if it's piled together and is feed with forced air flow, it can get hot enough. Or if it's a big fire. But if it's an iron/steel bridge with timber deck it will be hard to get the fire hot enough to do much damage. I would expect the stringers to be most susceptible to damage and they should be some of the easiest to repair/replace.

fire and iron
Posted September 3, 2013, by Julie Bowers (jbowerz1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

going to look at Bunker Mill tomorrow. Arson on planks. Gasoline accelerant. Engineer says the fire must have damaged but that should have visible effects....

Any other thoughts?.

Posted September 3, 2013, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

No worries. I had to look at the map for a couple minutes before I figured out the location. Manhattan has grown quite a bit since those old maps were made, and there are lots of roads now that did not exist back then.

Posted September 3, 2013, by Russell Blackburn

Not sure if this is owned by CSX as the yard office in harbor not too far from bridge has a N.S.sign on it and the former Conrail Youngstown line is now N.S. CSX does have trackage rights on the Youngstown line from its take over of the P&LE.Will check into this and report back.

Posted September 3, 2013, by Matt Lohry

Hmm... I wonder how many Wal-marts it leads to...

Posted September 3, 2013, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Robert: I agree, it could be much, much worse. Oddly, the bridge is also designed somewhat similarly to much older bridges. From a distance, it looked old... its two-girder and floorbeam design, and arched girders are uncommon among post 1970 bridges. We had to get closer to see the welded beams that give away its age.

On a less positive note, this bridge replaced a ca. 1917 Scherzer Rolling Lift bascule, a double-leaf through truss. See attached photos from Indiana SHAARD. SHAARD Description:

Statement of Significance:

This is the only extant and intact example in Indiana of the most popular form (by 1915) of moveable bridge in the country. Designed by a prolific Chicago firm, this structure retains its original members including its latticed guardrails.

Architectural Description:

This two leaf, through, and all-riveted bascule bridge of 360' and with a sidewalk on each side was designed by the Scherzer Rolling Lift Bridge Company of Chicago on the basis of its patents. The rolling lift bascule bridge continually changes its center of rotation and shifts its load application point as its center of gravity moves in a horizontal line. The Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company fabricated and erected it for Lake County upon a concrete substructure. Three of the four spans are of 71'6"; the fourth extends 146' in six panels. The central moveable leafs are of four panels and follow a Warren truss style with the top chord angling upward toward the counterweight. The endposts and top chord were fabricated from crafted channels, the lower chord and diagonals from laced channels, and the verticals from crafted I beams. Girder floor beams and stringers carry the metal grid deck with its 39' roadway.

Posted September 3, 2013, by Nathan Holth (form3 [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

One of the largest and most complex structures ever built on this planet, and one of the most important historic bridges in the United States, has forever been severed by the opening of the Chinese constructed Eastern Spans of the Oakland Bay Bridge. Unlike the previous bridge, this new bridge has been riddled with structural problems, is way over budget, and did not use American steel. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/64b-sf-oakland-bay-bridge...

Posted September 2, 2013, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

Clark and Robert are correct. Even though I posted the lat/lon - I was looking at the wrong curve of Wildcat and was confusing two roads! Sorry for the confusion. *sheepish smile*

The road is shown at the west end of the PDF topo. And that road shows up in the historicaerials 1958 topo.

Posted September 2, 2013, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

Matt wrote: "the battened angle members are usually tension members"

Usually. *smiles* But only usually. There are cases of struts - or top chords - built with only battens. But I agree it is unusual.

And, unfortunately for those of us trying to attach labels to these bridges, a short span can be really trying 'cause there isn't space for a pattern to show.

A warren can be built with matching, OR non-matching diagonals. For me, a more decisive factor on this bridge is the vertical only in the center, so if it were a warren, only one panel is "with vertical" - which is unusual. And that there are a number of spans like this that are already labeled "half-hip pratt".

Posted September 2, 2013, by Robert Elder

This bridge has survived for now, despite being a bit narrow for modern traffic. A couple of Marsh arches in the area did not survive.

Posted September 2, 2013, by Matt Lohry

Glad I could help! :) It is a bit tricky with these short spans that can be considered either Pratt or Warren... I remember a couple of years ago, we had a good forum discussion going on this very subject, and it seems that the easy way to tell is that if both diagonals are identical in construction, it's a Pratt; and if they look different from one another, then it's a Warren. If they're different, then that means that they're designed to handle different load types, which is what a Warren is designed to do.

Julie, the battened angle members are usually tension members and are connected every so often, whereas the v-laced members are consistently and closely attached along the whole length. The reason for this is because the v-lacing prevents the actual loaded members from buckling outward from each other, which they would be subjected to being in compression. Tensioned members are being "pulled" rather than "pushed" and are not subjected to buckling, and so batten plates are sufficient.

Posted September 2, 2013, by Don Morrison

Thanks Matt;

I guess I went by configuration only, and didn't look at the construction of the diagonals. It would have been more obvious perhaps, if the bridge were more than two panels long.

Now the other question, How(e) did I post twice? I'll delete one.

Posted September 2, 2013, by Julie Bowers (jbowerz1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Well...this is in Ray Vanroekels field. By hispond. He raises mules now. I figure the county gave it away. Didn't recognize value.

I'll asps...same county engineer as Tama. Admits his predessor would have known more.

Posted September 2, 2013, by Julie Bowers (jbowerz1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Hey Matt, want to tutor me in engineering? I need to finally figure this all out. Why battens? Why lattice riveted lacing? Angles in......angles out?

Posted September 2, 2013, by Matt Lohry

This is actually neither a Howe nor a Warren, but a half-hip Pratt...the diagonal members slope downward as they go toward the middle, taking the Howe configuration out of the picture (the Howe diagonals slope up as they go toward the middle), and the best way to tell these apart from the Warrens is that the opposing diagonals are both identically built up of battens, suggesting that they both are tension members, which is indicative of a Pratt. If it were a Warren, one member would be like these, and the other would most likely be built up with V-lacing to handle compressive forces.

Posted September 2, 2013, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Was there a third bridge here between '42 and '82 or just the ferry?

Posted September 2, 2013, by Don Morrison

Howe is it not Warren? 8^p

Posted September 2, 2013, by Jodi Christman (masterofchaos [at] outlook [dot] com)

I just know it was demolished in 1942 after one of the arches collapsed. It was replaced by the open spandrel which you can see next to the more modern steel bridge on Google Streetview.

Posted September 2, 2013, by Dave King (DKinghawkfan [at] hotmail [dot] com)

This bridge has a fence on the west end stating no trespassing. Gate was open and could see tire tracks crossing the bridge. Nothing stated the bridge was closed. Looked open to private traffic on a Level B road. All photos were taken from the west side, never crossed the property line.

Posted September 2, 2013, by Kat Robinson (kat [at] tiedyetravels [dot] com)

Until 1984, a ferry ran from Panther Bay to Henderson over Lake Norfork. Here's a historic postcard:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/boston_public_library/748969101...

Now, there was a ferry that operated across the Norfork River in this general area until 1934, when a span was built across it. However, by 1943 the area was inundated from the waters filling Norfork Lake, rendering the span not only useless but submerged. Today THAT bridge lies 80 feet below the surface.

The Encyclopedia of Arkansas has an image of the old bridge as the lake inundated...

http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/media-det...

Posted September 2, 2013, by Dave (dpotiuk2gmail [dot] com)

Anyone know what happened to the "Jug"?

Posted September 2, 2013, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I think the road to the lake is still on that map, just near the western edge of it. Look to the west of the westernmost railroad bridge. I believe that railroad bridge is the one that is now visible from Seth Child Avenue.

Posted September 2, 2013, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

Err, Clark, the road and bridge are just of the west edge of that map. And I can't seem to find where that map came from so I can get then next one west.

Posted September 2, 2013, by Dave King (DKinghawkfan [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Noticed this off the highway just north of Montezuma in a field. Couldn't get any closer. Looked like a truss bridge but its tough to make out. Satellite doesn't help much either. The photos I took had to be cropped considerably to get them to where they are. Insight into this situation appreciated.

Posted September 1, 2013, by Jason Smith (JDSmith77 [at] gmx [dot] net)

My wife, daughter and I tried to visit this bridge during our Iowa/USA visit in August and despite leads that claim that the best way to get to the bridge is through the south end, that end is completely closed off to all traffic and is posted with No Trespassing on there. There is no way to get to the bridge from either end of the crossing. Apparently liability reasons and the lack of forthcoming among the property owners on the south end have prompted authorities to fence off the road leading to the bridge beginning at the farm. Still, according to the organization wanting to save this bridge, it appears that the structure will remain in tact until it's either washed away by floods or a solution can be found to relocate it somewhere else, the latter of which there is no permanent place for it as of this posting.

JS

Posted September 1, 2013, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Another beautiful restoration Nels!

Posted September 1, 2013, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

I third that motion!

Posted September 1, 2013, by Nels Raynor (Bachsteel [at] me [dot] com)

Restoring ...not rehab restored..... using original methods and craftsmanship

Posted September 1, 2013, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)
Posted September 1, 2013, by Fmiser (fmiser [at] gmail [dot] com)

That's curious, Clark. I was looking at topographical maps from historicaerials.com. No road show in 1950, 1954,or 1958. Were did you find the 1955 topo map?

Posted September 1, 2013, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

I don't see the road on a 1925 topo but it is on the 1955. I'm guessing the road was probably put in around when the guy built the fishing lake in 1935. If it was privately built then a truss might have been relocated. It seems likely that if privately built he would have chosen a simple, cheap solution.

Neither the 1941 nor 1968 county road map shows it as part of the county system and these dates bracket the 1955 topo.

Posted September 1, 2013, by Julie Bowers (jbowerz1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

in previous research I thought this bridge came up as Kansas City Bridge Co. I thought it was on here but months ago. Any ideas?

Posted September 1, 2013, by Nathan Holth (form3 [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

I agree 110% with Julie on this one. Some of these bridges have listings that to people casually visiting the website who are not bridge experts, make it look like Cambria Steel or Carnegie Steel, etc were the bridge builders which is untrue.

Perhaps people don't know this, but when you add a builder to a bridge listing, you can put additional details in parenthesis and these will not be included as part of the builder name. See this page for examples: http://bridgehunter.com/ca/san-francisco/golden-gate/

Perhaps when contributors are adding an iron/steel manufacturer to a bridge listing, they could put (Iron/Steel Manufacturer) after the name. Also, note that often iron/steel from multiple companies was used on a single bridge. Further, many iron/steel pieces lack brands, so it can often be impossible to tell whether a bridge was exclusively built using iron/steel from only a single company.

Posted September 1, 2013, by Julie Bowers (jbowerz1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Could we have a separate field for the steel companies. I wouldn't call them the fabricators. They make parts. They don't put the parts together I don't believe.

It is misleading to put them in the Builder field.

Webmaster oh webmaster, I may be wrong again but in this instance I need to know a buider is a builder and a steel company is a manufacturer.

Posted September 1, 2013, by Robert Elder

This bridge might be modern, but it is way more interesting than a concrete slab. I'm glad to see photos of it on here.

Posted September 1, 2013, by Nathan Holth (form3 [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Since this non-historic, modern bridge appears to be of interest to others on this website, I am including photos of this bridge I took whilst visiting and documenting more interesting historic bridges on this canal for HistoricBridges.org including two exceedingly rare Rall bascules! You will have to wait for a HistoricBridges.org update to see those photos! :)

Posted September 1, 2013, by Kat Robinson (kat [at] tiedyetravels [dot] com)

This page shows the old bridge and reports it as being 80 feet under the surface of Lake Norfork.

http://www.norforklakechamber.com/henderson.htm


< Previous Page 49 of 272 Next >