I've seen so many poorly written articles pertaining to historic bridges in the last few decades that nothing would surprise me Daniel!
I would think that the Bailey truss could have been installed quickly enough that a floating pontoon bridge wouldn't be necessary... So my guess is that it's error in terminology.
But without talking to someone that was there... Who can be sure.
To Clarify, I do understand they are different. When I said they used the words interchangeably I was referring to a newspaper article. Unfortunately I cannot find the exact article as I have went through dozens of articles about the bridge.
Interesting, I don't recall having heard a Bailey bridge referred to as a pontoon bridge before.
Is that common?
Daniel, it's my understanding they use Bailey and pontoon Interchangibly. From what I've read the bridge partially collapsed, had a Bailey bridge, was repaired, closed again and repaired again, then finally replaced. Start to finish the events take place in approximately 3.5 to 4 years.
Odd to see a significant editing mistake in the last paragraph of "River Bridge at Clinton Closed Again". "who appeared in City Court last" seems to have been substituted for what was supposed to be on that line.
I'm curious as to the exact timeline: it collapsed, they installed a Bailey Bridge, they found more damage, they replaced it... but there was also a pontoon bridge, was that just temporary while the permanent span was being erected?
I'm curious as to what the 150hp boiler was in use for. Were they still using portable steam equipment in 64?
Ok...I think I found something. Originally, a Pontoon Bridge was planned but in reality a Bailey Bridge was erected. Hopefully this clears things up