Recent Kansas Comments

Post a comment Contact webmaster

Posted June 25, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

That would be awesome. Thanks to Roger for doing a field check. I am glad that the collapsed span is in a pile on the south bank and not in the soup aisle at Wal-Mart.

Keep in mind that the KYLE owns a very rare and highly significant Pegram truss in Minneapolis, KS in Ottawa County:

http://bridgehunter.com/ks/ottawa/minneapolis-rr/

Posted June 25, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

It would be very cool to see the remaining span reused, perhaps as something like a fishing pier. It would be a very inexpensive and useful way to preserve something like this.

Posted June 25, 2017, by Roger Woodford (woody68 [at] nckcn [dot] com)

I went out to this bridge today. No repairs have been made. The steel structure of the north span and the rail cars have been removed from the river but are still in a pile on the river bank. South span is still intact. I know the tracks leading north from the bridge are used for a rail car "parking lot" now. Doubt it ever gets repaired or replaced!

Posted June 19, 2017, by Anonymous

Covfefe: ABBR.

Ancient bridgehunting term indicating that a bridge can be COnserVed Fairly Easily For Eternity.

EX:

Being a very small bridge, this Kingpost could be, or should have been covfefe.

Posted June 16, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Yeah, I am not holding onto hope that this one exists. My guess is that it was replaced by a culvert. Republic County still has some interesting bridges that would serve well on a trail if they must be replaced.

Posted June 16, 2017, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

I've been finding in Indiana that the ones which don't show on the NBI have been replaced with culverts.

I have also found several that show the historic bridge date along with a rehabilitation date, and I know for certain the old span is gone. It indeed is, but... they have reused the original substructure!

Posted June 16, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge appears to be a product of the Wrought Iron Bridge Co. This company was bought out in 1900, so I would say that it is definitely older than 1910. I would guess that it was built ca. 1885 - 1895.

Posted June 16, 2017, by Anonymous

If this bridge was demolished that would be a real shame. This bridge had high historical significance as a rare bridge type. On the slightest chance that this bridge was abandoned in place than it could be covfefe.

Posted June 16, 2017, by Dana and Kay Klein

Possibly earlier than 1910? Robert your view?

Posted June 16, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Based on the NBI listing, this bridge has likely been replaced.

Posted June 16, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge seems to have been dropped from the NBI. It does not appear in the 2016 edition. I really hope that it did not get replaced.

Posted June 13, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This bridge has been closed. H/T Jason Smith:

http://cjonline.com/local-government/news/local/2017-06-12/c...

Posted June 12, 2017, by Anonymous

I had heard a rumor that there used to be several truss bridges parked in a field somewhere in this area. Is there any truth to this rumor? Did they all get demolished? Is the rumor just an urban legend? I can't see any indication of a truss graveyard on google maps or bing maps, so I have my doubts that there is a bridge jackpot around here...but...one can hope...

Posted June 11, 2017, by Mike Daffron (daffronmike [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Oops! Forgot to post video as public! fixed now and can be watched.

Posted June 9, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I should add that the NBI lists it as NR Possible...

Posted June 9, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I just attached the updated KSHS PDF for this bridge. It includes a couple photographs from earlier this year. The bridge is still listed as not eligible for the NRHP, although, this decision might have been made back in the 1980s, when there were a lot more truss bridges around than today.

I would not be surprised if this bridge could be found eligible today.

Posted June 9, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

KSHS recently discovered a removed/collapsed bridge on Parallel Road at the Whitewater River. I am not sure what type of bridge it was, although it appears to have been built in 1898. I do not know if it was demolished at some point, or if it collapsed during one of the many floods on the Whitewater River.

Posted June 3, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

A couple times...but some other, ahem, "contributors", cough, cough, posted under the name, Chelsea. Our webmaster was quick to remove them...

Posted June 3, 2017, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Robert... Don't you usually disguise yourself as Chelsea the Car?

Posted June 3, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I am anonymous from below.

Posted June 3, 2017, by Anonymous

Aaron:

That "I can't believe I'm doing this feeling" is quite normal when photographing a bridge. I have gotten plenty of strange looks while documenting bridges. I look at it as a good opportunity to share my hobby with the locals. Many of them have seemed interested but I'm sure a few have concluded that I have a strange hobby.

Posted June 3, 2017, by Aaron Hall (ahall [at] vitaphone [dot] net)

I added one more photo (from the "I can't believe I'm doing this" collection), and it seems to remove any doubt that it's a tee-beam. Thanks, Robert, for the interesting question.

Posted May 29, 2017, by Aaron Hall (ahall [at] vitaphone [dot] net)

I visited the site today. The old bridge is gone and the new concrete bridge is well along into being built.

Old K-4 (Kansas)
Posted May 29, 2017, by Aaron Hall (ahall [at] vitaphone [dot] net)

This road is old K-4. The current highway was built around 1961-1962.

Posted May 29, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Aaron:

Thanks for uploading these photographs. Based on your images, it appears to me that the NBI is correct and that this is a tee-beam. As a pre-1920 bridge, it is also a relatively early example. If I was still in the area, I would definitely visit this one as well.

Posted May 28, 2017, by Aaron Hall (ahall [at] vitaphone [dot] net)

It turns out I have a few photos of this bridge, which I've uploaded. This is my neck of the woods, so hopefully I can get this direction before too long and see if I can get some good pictures of the underside of the bridge to conclusively answer Robert Elder's question of whether it's really a tee-beam bridge or a concrete through girder.

Posted May 25, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Nathan:

Thanks for the reply. I had been suspecting that those lower cord eyebars might be continuous through the hip vertical area. This bridge seems to have a few unusual features which is one reason why I'm hoping to research it when I get a chance. I'm afraid that this one might be in danger of collapse.

Posted May 25, 2017, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Some builders ran the bottom chord continuous over the end two panels (meaning the end eyebars are two panels long) and it looks like this is the case here, thus what you see is a guide, the bottom chord eyebar is not physically connected to anything at this panel point.

Posted May 25, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Am I seeing things, or do the hip verticals on this bridge connect to the lower chord via a peculiar bracket?

Posted May 24, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

So, we are really dealing with three spans. The two spans here which perhaps might have been put together in 1919, and the Osage County Bridge which appears to have been relocated in 1909.

I am wondering if the outer truss on this bridge, and the Osage County Bridge, might have been part of the same Bridge or at least on the same line somewhere.

Perhaps the inner truss on this bridge is original to the site. Again, this is purely speculation.

Posted May 24, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

According to some recent updates, this bridge was built in 1884. A similar bridge in Osage County, also has been reported as being built in 1884. Notice that these two bridges are nearly identical in appearance save for the fact that the Osage County example is not double-trussed:

http://bridgehunter.com/ks/osage/bh36224/

I suspect that these bridges follow a railroad designed standard plan.

Posted May 22, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I remember watching the news reports at the time. This was a very complex system that produced multiple tornadoes. It took me awhile to figure out what was going on.

Posted May 22, 2017, by mtygard

My Bad....My previous post was incorrect and you are correct!

Tumbleweed road was where the main Andover tornado crossed the Turnpike. The overpass tornado was an ancillary tornado from the Andover storm complex.

Posted May 22, 2017, by mtygard

My Bad....My previous post was incorrect and you are correct!

Tumbleweed road was where the main Andover tornado crossed the Turnpike. The overpass tornado was an ancillary tornado from the Andover storm complex.

Posted May 22, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Looking for bridges with identical spans that may have been relocated here in 1951, and I came across this:

http://bridgehunter.com/ia/washington/bh55841/

Thoughts?

Posted May 19, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Another possibility - perhaps the bridge might have been moved from Industry to Wakefield before 1908. That would explain the label on the postcard. This one is a mystery for now.

Posted May 19, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I am suspecting that this bridge probably crossed Chapman Creek near the town of Industry, a short distance southwest of Wakefield. Historic aerials only goes back to 1964 for Industry.

Posted May 16, 2017, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

We had a nice conference and tour up here a few years back that covered Southern Indiana Robert... But I would be open to another one featuring some Northern spans!

Posted May 16, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

That is my suspicion as well. If the towers have any structural function at all, then I would definitely call it a continuous truss, even if the spans could remain standing, albeit weakened a bit, without the towers.

As far as I can tell, the only way that the three spans could be 100% simple is if the towers are purely decorative.

This has been a really fun and enlightening discussion. I appreciate all who have participated. I think that we are starting to figure this bridge out.

Posted May 15, 2017, by Don Morrison

Also interesting is that the upper chords almost follow a catenary curve, giving it a suspension bridge look as well.

It must have been an experimental continuous truss.

Posted May 15, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Also, I deleted the essay that I wrote years ago. It was out of date as many contributors on here have done some detective work with this bridge.

Posted May 15, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

A nice problem, eh? Of course, Indiana is blessed with the same problem. I hope to make a trip there someday. Conference in Indianapolis?

Posted May 15, 2017, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

We would need a week or two... To even begin to cover Kansas!

...Eastern Kansas!

Posted May 15, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Tony, it is funny that you mention of a through truss bracketed by Pony trusses and then connected by a couple of towers. I was thinking about what could happen if you could modify the nearby Careys Ford Bridge resemble something like this. Just don't forget to flip the endposts of the pony trusses upward to meet the towers.

http://bridgehunter.com/ks/miami/careys-ford/

I have not found any evidence that the Kansas City Bridge Company ever constructed anything else like this. I suspect that it was indeed a one-off design.

Thankfully this bridge did not get demolished when it was closed. I am pretty sure it was not yet on the national register when the closure a card so the fact this thing is still standing is a miracle. Not to mention that this bridge survived a devastating flood in 2007.

Hopefully you will get to see it someday. Maybe if one of these years we have a Bridgehunter conference in Kansas City, Saint Joseph, Springfield, Topeka, or Wichita, then we could include this bridge. Wouldn't it be nice if this one was actually restored by then. Everybody check your couch cushions for cash...

Posted May 15, 2017, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Exactly Don! I have never thought this was a cantilever structure either. I almost think it could be classified as a 3-span continuous truss. Think of a through truss bracketed with a pony on each end... But make them continuous. I'm not sure exactly what the designer was trying to accomplish here, and although we are fortunate to have this rare example... But it may have been a one-off thing.

Posted May 15, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Interesting thought. Thus, if the spans are simple, and if the towers are largely decorative, those rivets I mentioned earlier would not have to bear any load stress.

Posted May 15, 2017, by Don Morrison

I guess I assumed the bridge might tend to sag slightly under a large load at center span. It is pin connected. This might put the tower top chords under tension. But overall, I think it operates as three separate spans.

Posted May 15, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

So, my comment from earlier today really did not break any new ground with respect to whether this bridge functions as a cantilever. We are all in agreement that it does not.

The only question left is whether the tower top chords relay any stresses from span to span. This will determine if the bridge is simple or continuous.

I still think that the answer lies in the tower top chords.

Posted May 15, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I have spent some time looking at photographs of this bridge lately. Granted, I am not an engineer, nor do I play one on TV, but I have two theories about this bridge.

Theory #1: This bridge has no cantilever function at all.

Theory #2: The laced top-chords that radiate out from the towers are in compression, not in tension.

I will start by addressing Theory #1. This bridge, like (almost) all pin-connected truss bridges, features a pin at every connection on the top chord of the main span. If you look at the top of the endpost of the main span, you will see that there is a pin which secures four members together: the endpost, the top chord, the hip-vertical, and the diagonal member. There is nothing unusual here, save for the fact that the top chord is inverted. (Ie, making it look like a "Reverse Parker" instead of a standard Parker). In the case of this bridge, the hip vertical is a built-up member as opposed to being a simple eyebar, but this is probably beside the point when considering cantilever function.

You will notice that the built-up top chords that radiate off of the towers do not connect to the endpost/top chord pin. In other words, I am thinking that this bridge does not have the true hinge points that you would find on a cantilever bridge.

This brings me to Theory #2. Let me repeat myself by stating that those top chords that radiate off of the towers do not connect to any pins on the main span. Instead, they are simply riveted to the endpost of the main span. This makes me suspect that these members are in compression, and not in tension. Imagine if the main span were to be subject to a heavy load. Would those rivets that connect the tower top chord to the endpost be able to withstand any tension? Could they withstand any significant forces that were not absorbed by the endposts? I would have my doubts. On the other hand, I would theorize that those rivets would be sufficient to attach the tower top chord to the endpost if in fact those tower top chords are in compression, and not in tension.

The only other option is the idea that the towers are just decorative. In other words, they serve no other purpose than being glorified plaque holders, giving the bridge a bizarre appearance, and making bridgehunters go insane looking at the bridge in a futile attempt to make sense of it.

Now, giving credit where credit is due: If you have not visited Nathan Holth's page for this bridge at HistoricBridges.org, I strongly recommend that you look through his photographs and read his discussion. http://historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=ka...

He has done a very thorough documentation of this bridge and his photographs have been extremely useful to me as I have been considering the function of this bridge.

Posted May 10, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I can't imagine they would scrap an undamaged span, especially with the lack of major money which flows through these types of shortline railroads. It would be nice to get out here sometime soon and see if there is any remains.

Posted May 10, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Well, that would be great. I have not heard anything about this bridge since the collapse.

Posted May 10, 2017, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

https://talk.newagtalk.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=600800...

Looks like one of the spans may have been salvageable?

Posted May 8, 2017, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

No its not my term, its an industry (and also brand name) term for this type of structure, used by bridge companies and DOTs. I believe Minnesota DOT had a piece on this type of bridge as it relates to historic bridges.

http://www.conteches.com/products/bridges-and-structures/pla...

https://www.armtec.com/product/multi-plate/

Posted May 8, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Also, is corrugated multi plate a trademarked term? If historicbridges.org coined the term, I want to give proper credit if I create a category on here.

Posted May 8, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Nathan:

I wondered about that. I had forgotten to comment on this one given all the attention focused on the Gilliece Bridge in Iowa and the flooding in Missouri and surrounding states. Thanks for the link.

Posted May 8, 2017, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Date of construction and photos shown suggest this is not a stone arch bridge, but instead a corrugated metal plate type arch bridge. Such bridges were built during this period often with a stone facing. http://historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=mi...

Posted May 4, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

That link also has a photograph of a lost railroad bridge at Skiddy. It had vertical endposts and bcc appeared to be made of wood.

Posted May 4, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

That was my guess. It sure looks like something that they would build. I would have to research further to know for sure, but MVB&I was my first thought.

Posted May 4, 2017, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Mo Valley Bridge & Iron span Robert?

Posted May 4, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

See the attached link for a photograph of this lost bridge. The location is approximate.

Posted April 30, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Okay, I guess that answers my question about the NBI no longer inspecting the bridge.

At least as a private bridge, it is probably safe from demolition. Hopefully this will save it from the same fate as the Fall River Marsh arch that was demolished by Greenwood County a few years ago. I am glad that the landowner allowed you to visit the bridge. That is always an appreciated gesture.

I have known many trusses in Kansas to get transferred to private ownership, but this is the first time I have seen a Marsh arch go through the process.

Posted April 30, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I have never tried camping in this area. There might be a KOA nearby. Pomona Lake has some campgrounds as does Melvern. Watch out for chiggers!

Posted April 30, 2017, by Anonymous

If you die, you get free lifetime camping at the nearby cemetery

Posted April 30, 2017, by JP Rogers (jp [dot] rogers [dot] mba [at] gmaill [dot] com)

Is there a public place to camp near here? Thank you.

Posted April 28, 2017, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

Yes indeed... Looks to be integrated from the approach span right through the pony. Pony looks to be a Wrought Iron Bridge Co. product from 1880's-1890's. Very nice little bridge that I hope doesn't get trashed!

Posted April 28, 2017, by Tony Dillon (spansaver [at] hotmail [dot] com)

That is goofy... Hope it doesn't cause a problem!

Gonna have to start carrying a sledge hammer with you Nick...Bust up potential problems like this! ;-)

Posted April 27, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Here is one of those paired angle ponies...this time in Queenpost form.

Posted April 27, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

That slippin' slab is one of the craziest superstructure failures I have seen in a long time! I am afraid that it might take out the lally columns and the whole bridge with it! I hope those lally columns are solid...

Posted April 27, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Looks like it to me.

Posted April 27, 2017, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

Hard to see in the photos. Are the stringers wood?

Posted April 27, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Well, that is too bad, but it is his right as a property owner to keep people off his land. All you can do is say, "thanks anyway".

I completely understand how some property owners might have initial suspicions about Bridgehunters like us wanting to have a look at their bridge. My family owns land and we do occasionally get requests from people wanting to hunt, fish, or just go hiking. When you have land people will ask to visit and As a landowner, you have a right to approve or deny their request.

That being said, all privately owned bridges will someday collapse without maintenance. It might be a hundred years from now or it might be next week. Either way, a collapse always results in the loss of a historic bridge and an expensive and time-consuming environmental cleanup. What do you call a bridge that just collapsed? A dam! Every unstable bridge has the potential to become an unstable dam. As far as I'm concerned, preventing this problem is a no-brainer. This is especially true as many counties have pawned off these bridges as liabilities to the landowners. To me, it would make perfectly good sense to turn these liabilities into assets.

I always welcome any opportunity to work with a landowner to prevent his or her bridge from becoming a dam. But, if the landowner is not interested then that is their choice and I will always respect it.

Posted April 27, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Sometimes, the NBI gets the location wrong. A couple years ago I imported a bridge from the NBI. Although that bridge is located in West Virginia, the NBI had the bridge located in China. I had to drag the pin halfway across the world!

On the other hand, this bridge appears to have been abandoned since at least 1990. It is truly amazing how quickly a road can go back to nature.

Posted April 27, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This is a surprisingly significant bridge. It is an uncommon example of a 2 panel Pratt Truss.

It appears to be a product of the Wrought Iron Bridge Company. The bridge features those threaded rod connections on both the top chords and bottom chords where they meet the end posts. I would suspect that this bridge was built sometime between 1880 and 1890. From what I have observed, it appears to me that the Wrought Iron Bridge Company phased out those threaded Rod connections by about 1890. Of course other people have looked at more bridges than I have so if I am wrong about this I would certainly appreciate feedback.

The possibility of this bridge being rehabbed is almost too good to be true, but if Doniphan County is in fact repairing the bridge then they certainly deserve some major accolades for doing so.

If the bridge is scheduled to be replaced however, hopefully it could be preserved in place. If not, this bridge is so small that it could be moved very easily much like the knock-off "Waddell" Truss that is currently located in Troy.

Posted April 27, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

A construction date of 1940 is possible but I would agree that this could very likely be older than 1940. Most bridges that are as lightweight as this one do tend to be older than 1940.

This is one of several pony trusses in eastern Kansas and western Missouri that are composed of paired angles. This is a really nice example. I have a suspicion that the Wayland Bridge Company in Washington, Kansas built these bridges but I have not been able to confirm that for certain. In addition, I would not be entirely shocked if a few examples were to be discovered in Nebraska or even southwestern Iowa someday. I have not found any evidence that either Kansas or Missouri used these as any sort of state standard, so there is a possibility they could be found in a neighboring state even though that has not happened yet.

Perhaps even more interesting is the fact that whoever built these Bridges used several different configurations including the Parker, the Pratt (I think), the Warren, and the Queenpost.

Posted April 27, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Contacted property owner about visiting this one, it was his thought that there is no need for anyone to ever visit or even know of its existence since it is on private property and should never be seen by others ever again...respecting his privacy of course but I bet this one is pretty special, satellite images show a neat little bridge

Posted April 27, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Lots of backroad construction going on through this spot, there is no sign of a 2nd pony truss through this small stretch, or any trace of where another may have existed

Posted April 27, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

As of the day I visited, April 26th, 2017, this one was not open - but, and I could be wrong about this, it sure looks like it is going under some sort of rehab with new looking timbers making up the deck and new abutment reinforcements on both sides by either locals or the county, the road is public and open but the bridge is bypassed in a exaggerated loop to the west right now, need to return and take a look in a few months, neat old bridge, possibly loved more than many others that get ditched so easily anymore

Posted April 27, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

The soon-to-be-famous slippin' slab....

Posted April 27, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Nice little shorty, still in good shape. Pretty spot - worth the visit.

Posted April 27, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

This one is gorgeous, sitting up very very high off the creek. Looks older than the 1940's date stated - amazing and impressive, especially underneath looking up.

Posted April 27, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Pretty one. Several bridges in the area, first of the day. 90+ year old, timbers a little shakey but otherwise a neat elevated-pony over the low-water-level Stranger Creek

Posted April 20, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

The area around this bridge is receiving international attention. A recent discovery of a ca. 1601 cannonball has practically confirmed local suspicions that Arkansas City was built roughly on the site of a major Native American city known as Etzanoa.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4426312/Etzanoa-long...

Posted April 20, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I had suspected that this was a possible location. Thanks for doing the research and getting confirmation.

This bridge is surely long gone, but I can't help but wonder if there might be some crumbling remains of the stone pylons hiding in the trees.

Posted April 19, 2017, by Anonymous

I looked at several old atlases 1885,1902,1919. The bridge was located on South 9th Street where it crosses Doyle Creek.(39.1900N,96.0799W) The creek is the old Kansas River channel. The river made a major course change between 1902 and 1919.

Posted April 16, 2017, by Kelly McClanahan

I have been tracing old rail lines, came across this one. One thing I have noticed, though there are a lot of "lost" rail road bridges out there. No since to list them all, but if I find a bridge intact, why not post it.

Posted April 16, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Ammunition plant? Okay, that explains all of the fences and no trespassing signs...

Posted April 16, 2017, by Kelly McClanahan

Taking a look at the old Quadrangle map, it shows a rail line going over the bridge. Used to be a power plant there, most likely for the old Kansas Ammunition Plat to the west of there. Also, there is evidence that the line continued into the plant as well.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

This might not be the oldest, biggest, or most ornate truss in the world, but it is an unusual example of a 1940s truss bridge. The war effort required a lot of steel, and concrete was the material of choice for small bridges by this time.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

whoop!! make that a 28 ton.....

Posted April 12, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Even if it is concrete with a stone veneer, it really does demonstrate the concept of making even a small rural bridge look attractive.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Just a bit hearty, this one can handle a 52 ton double truck.....9' tall pony monster hiding a bit in Osage County. Too many bad spray paint tags on it, orherwise a strong and cool bridge.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Not only is this a beauty, but it is also skewed. If this is a true stone arch (as opposed to a concrete bridge with done facing), then this skew factor greatly adds to its significance.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I drove over this one several years ago. I forgot about the pony approach spans. This one would seem to be a prime candidate for preservation given its location. It is also a nice representative of a riveted Pratt that was constructed towards the end of the truss era.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Another unbelievably well-maintained stone arch bridge find today. Sure looks like someone has been taking care of this one last few decades, encouraging to see it in such great shape especially at such a busy intersection.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Wo, what a monster..... driving across this open bridge is very precarious, need to go very slow.... could see boards moving underneath my car tires. A gigantic beauty in Osage County on the curve, even better.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Not sure this could be any more scenic, the bridge is over Fall River as it forms from the lake outlet on the dam and there is the state park camping area right next to the two unbelievably huge landmarks. Spent a good 40 minutes walking over the bridge and watching the water pour out of the dam, lots of campers at the park also enjoying the beautiful sites. Fantastic nearly-90 year old bridge, in fantastic shape.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Wow a very pleasant surprise with this one, except for a number of stones missing on the very top, this one is still very tight fitting and great looking, possibly some rehab work done the last few decades. A real beauty.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Cool !! Backwoods nature biker guy passing by told me water recently over top railing....wow. Neat little bridge tucked up close to lake, closed off to traffic for some time apparently.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Dang. Aggravating. Might have missed this one today by just a few weeks. Gone now.

Posted April 12, 2017, by Nick Schmiedeler

Yes I would agree this is a very neat old bridge in a very pretty spot. Rehabbed over 50 years ago it is starting to show serious signs of wear including a couple holes in the cement deck itself, regardless, a cool old survivor given a little bit more time 5 decades ago