Recent New York Comments

Post a comment Contact webmaster

Posted August 18, 2018, by justsayin

..............don't feed...….

Posted August 11, 2018, by Don Morrison

Yes that stone structure in street view is pretty neat.

My guess is that it allows the old canal to pass over Brandy Brook like a very short aquaduct.

A similar structure exists at 43.133835, -75.673702 where another small stream passes under the canal.

Those structures probably date to the construction of the canal. Looks like an interesting area to visit.

Posted August 9, 2018, by Anonymous

Nice Find Matt!

Posted August 9, 2018, by Matt Lohry

I wish I were closer to here--there is what appears to be a very old Pratt truss footbridge over the canal about a half-mile north of this location. Lat/Long coords:

43.134748° -75.674952°

Canal St. streetview shows a good view of the east end.

Posted August 9, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Thanks Don, Street view I added panned left Shows interesting Masonry Arch Culvert that could be canal era. Realize NBI pins to be off, some by continents but found it interesting pin was RIGHT on it. Does appear to be what could be the stringer in question on canal Street/and or rt46. Site visit will clarify. Ill add to list! So many bridges so little time

Posted August 9, 2018, by Don Morrison

I'm nowhere near there, but older NBI entries for the same bridge say "Old route 46", which was apparently Main Street.

I'm thinking the bridge near the intersection of Canal Street and Main Street may be the one you are looking for.

Posted August 8, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

added from NBI,any one near here to check out? Sat views don't agree with NBI description.

Posted August 8, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Mike looks like you click ed twice on add. Delete this one Ill add NBI data to other.

Posted July 30, 2018, by Allan Berlin (irt1904 [at] aol [dot] com)

The bridge may be gone but on of the stone support walls on the Bronx side is still in place. The area around it is no longer in the water as it was land-filled for the supports for the Willis Avenue Bridge.

The location is Willis Avenue & E132nd St.

Posted July 25, 2018, by webmaster (webmaster [at] portjervisny [dot] com)

Thanks for the interest in this.

Though laying claim to the title would be great, the Port Jervis turntable is not the largest that's operational in the U.S. but rather in the east. This distinction is noted by the Port Jervis Tri-States Railway Preservation Society in its National Geographic tourism page.

The total length of the Port Jervis turntable is given here as 115 ft. However, the Union Pacific Roundhouse Turntable and Machine Shop in Cheyenne, WY, reports theirs is a 126-foot diameter continuous span.

Posted July 19, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Art Columbia may be good, any other opinions>

Posted July 10, 2018, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

Dana, its definitely not just you, the county maps are unreliable for confirming if a bridge is already on this website... hopefully James Baughn can fix that problem.

I deleted the page I made, so just leave your page up. I only was trying to add the bridge cause I found the record-breaking span length to be of interest. Although I have no idea if that length REALLY was record-breaking.

Posted July 10, 2018, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

There is some weird bug on Bridgehunter in which some bridges are NOT shown on the county clickable Google map. This may be why many contributors post duplicate bridges by mistake. This bridge for example did not show up on the county map browser.

Also I have no idea where the measurements shown on this page came from. According to a local news article, this bridge was claimed to be the longest clear-span double-track through plate girder span in the USA when completed. Design: 127 foot span through plate girder, consisting of 130 foot long by 12 foot tall girders. Validity of these length claims is uncertain.

Collapse of approach span railing took place in 2018.

Posted July 7, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Thanks Luke!

Posted July 7, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

May not have RR correct, this bridge partially collapsed yesterday

Posted July 3, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

with attached 1914 postcard view

Posted July 3, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

wonder if this is Walton bridge before move? Owls head lane near there

Posted June 29, 2018, by Luke

Saratoga & North Creek, ex D&H

Posted June 29, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Delaware and Hudson RR?

Posted June 28, 2018, by Luke

No, because NKP's NY terminus was Buffalo.

Posted June 28, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Do you think it could have been the New York, Chicago and St. Louis

Posted June 27, 2018, by Luke

1943 topo from historicaerials only shows Erie on the line, so it's probably remnants of an Erie advert ca 1941, when their absorption of the Nypano Railroad gave them a route into Chicago.

Really cool when stuff like that still exists.

Posted June 27, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Yes. Do not know. Try New York State DOT

Posted June 27, 2018, by Royce (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Other RR run across this line? I can make out "New York Chicago..."


Posted June 27, 2018, by Samantha (SAMANTHA [dot] STOUTENBURG [at] COMCAST [dot] NET)

Is there still construction on the bridge ? Is there still a line closed? If so, when will the work be completed. Thank you

Posted June 16, 2018, by James (Bridgedpw [at] msn [dot] com)

Bridge is own and operated By Nassau County DPW. 2nd rehab was performed approximately 2008, leaf decking and exspansion joint replacement

Posted June 16, 2018, by Frank (fjfco66 [at] netscape [dot] com)

I remember this bridge while growing up in Washingtonville lived in the park.

left in 1978 believe about time line closed. So sad seeing it in closed. Did you happen to see the steel plate on it with bridge information was wondering year it was built? Thank you so much for taking photos.



Posted May 27, 2018, by Don Morrison

That's what puts the "hunt" in Bridgehunter. 8^)

Posted May 27, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

If any one is driving looking for Everman may be hard to find!

Posted May 27, 2018, by Don Morrison

Road sign in google streetview says Everman Road.

Google shows White Bridge Road intersects a bit west of the bridge, but Bing calls the road Applinville Road.

Take your pick, I guess.

Posted May 27, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

"Local Sources" indicated bridge removed. Confirmed!

Posted May 27, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Google, NBI,at al list this as Everman Road. Road sign from site visit Says Applinville Road.

Posted May 25, 2018, by Luke
Posted May 13, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

up stream

Posted May 11, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

wonder what was there in 1902? Thanks for the research!

Posted May 11, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

From the 1902 Wayland, NY 15' quad. The old alignment is visible just to the left of center.

Posted May 10, 2018, by Luke

At least someone learned from that ordeal, because the cause of the ordeal sure didn't learn from it. :')

Nubia Bridge (New York)
Posted May 9, 2018, by Nick Schmiedeler (nick [at] nickschmiedeler [dot] com)

That thing is incredible, thanks for posting.

Posted May 9, 2018, by Shaun LaVancher (shaunl [at] twcny [dot] rr [dot] com)

Is this nick named silver car bridge?

Posted May 5, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Looks like it wintered well.

Posted May 4, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Nice bridge! Thanks for making the journey! I notice in photos 5 and 6 that no one cleared the snow......

Posted May 2, 2018, by dana&kay

Thanks Dave, feel free to name as appropriate not sure Lock 29 Bridge is really correct.

Posted May 1, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

A stone Arch Aqueduct, a 1914 Phoenix, and an 1858 Whipple from one park point. Certainly worth a detour off the Thruway if ever in New York

Posted May 1, 2018, by MFT

It looks more like it reads "ALONZO PEASE, COM" to me. Seems like he was on a Board of Supervisors in the 1870's, probably a Commissioner at some point. At the very least he was a prominent citizen in the area.

Posted May 1, 2018, by Art S (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)


The original turntable was built in 1854. The one presently on the site was not. 1854 turntables were constructed differently and were much smaller.


Art S.

Posted April 22, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

BH Photo #376353 (number 8) is of another bridge, not on this site.

Posted April 20, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

This Bridge in danger or destruction.

Posted April 20, 2018, by Matt Lohry

Wow. If they named that monstrosity in my honor, I'd be rolling over in my grave. UCEBish is mostly correct, you just need a space between the B and the i. UCEB. Ish. That is a more apt description!

Posted April 19, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein
Posted April 18, 2018, by Luke

That's why I used the "gloat plate" comparison in the first place.

As to why, your guess is as good as mine, as John's found bridges in the middle-of-nowhere that are completely over-built and over-engineered for being in the middle-of-nowhere.

As for the " Nor did the highway Dept. "design" bridges" quip, that depends entirely on the DOT. I know Iowa designed their own, led by Marston and briefly by McCollough, and their subordinates who are unmentioned by name. Nonetheless, the designs were in-house designs by already-hired staff, not outside contractors.

And there /are/ railroads who have in-house designs, but 1) There's no clear proof of that with this plaque, much less the railroad from the scant research I've done. 2) Those departments had specific names, like "Mont Claire Shops" in the case of the B&O or "Oakland Shipyard" in the case of SP's transbay ferries, not just the railroad tossed in the builder box.

Posted April 18, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Thinking about this a little more a I am wondering, how is listing the RR really "gloating" seems listing the president or chief Eng. might actually be gloating as well, why would you post it on a bridge, at the time of completion, when there is zero expectation it will ever be seen by anyone other than a few RR employees who already know the RR built it? Gloat plate just does not ring true.

Posted April 18, 2018, by Luke

1) You demanded I post proof of builders and gloat plates using the same plaque shape.

2) My argument was, and still is, that the NYC&HR on that plaque is nothing more than the "County Name" on a dedication/gloat plate.

It's a giant "Hello! My name is:" sticker.

IF they'd built it, they'd have mentioned their own iron/steel works, a la B&O and their Mont Claire Shop, but they don't, they explicitly mention A&P Roberts Co./Pencoyd.

Posted April 17, 2018, by Luke
Posted April 16, 2018, by Luke


One of several bridges (I never specified railroad.) you can find across the site where the "dedication plates" and builder's plates are the same.

2) Warrens with verts handle loads differently than those without verts

Same with Camelback, which is a derivation of the Parker type with a polygonal top chord of exactly five slopes.

Denoting subtypes that are functionally different from the original type isn't a redundancy.

Arches have been made from: Stone, brick, iron, steel, concrete, and even plastics (Though those currently stay in test labs.)

Specifying which type of arch (Concrete arch, Brick arch, Stone-and-brick arch, etc.) it is, isn't a redundancy. It's specificity.

If you're referring to the "Concrete" category Amanda created, it's pointless.

"Railroad" as a genericism exists in case James wants to install a filter people can use to filter all railroad bridges out.

Posted April 16, 2018, by Roger Deschner (rogerdeschner [at] gmail [dot] com)

Nice review in today's New York Times of a graphic novel/comic book entitled “The Bridge: How the Roeblings Connected Brooklyn to New York.” which is about to be published. I look forward to buying a copy.

Here's the book review in NYT: "Building the Brooklyn Bridge, in Graphic Detail"

Posted April 16, 2018, by Ed Hollowell (erhollowell [at] aol [dot] com)

"6) The "free market economy" cannot exist without governmental regulation. The moment you strip that away, the moment the free market ceases to exist and we veer further towards an oligarchy."

Wow, do you have the name of the laundry which did your brain washing? Oligarchy only exists when the government supports it. The main function of a just government is to prevent stealing and to make sure no one is forced to do things against their interest or wishes. Oligarchs generally use governments to enforce policies in their interest. If the oligarchs did not have government policy on their side they would cease to exist.

Take Walmart for example. They have been, since at least the Clinton administration, working to make politics work in their favor. Tax abatements, zoning, etc. If Walmart isn't benefiting directly they work to prevent competition from springing up through regulation which act as a barrier to entry for competition.

Do you suppose Carlos Slim, the Mexican telecom billionaire has to think very long about who would be his friend in the government?

The way to make a fortune into a massive fortune is to make the government your business partner, and limit your competition.

Posted April 16, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Please provide a couple of those numerous examples of gloat plates (listing politicians or executives that look like RR builder plates).

Provide the builder plates for the RR in question.

I added it as shown on the BUILDERS PLATE, Unlike others I did not edit it to my personal specifications, to appease my sense of...?

Yes Warren is a subtype, so? It is still redundant, it is not needed, it is simply a way to further describe what you have already described. "Concrete arch" and "concrete" categories. It is made of concrete? DUH it is a concrete arch. "Norfolk Southern Railway" is a "Railroad"? Dude, I am now laughing so hard I am almost crying, are you actually defending these as not redundant?

Free Market can only be regulated? You obviously do not understand either concept. Free Market=voluntary interactions=Moral. Regulated=supported by force (ultimately death as every single law is)=Immoral. It is shocking that an adult educated person in America could confuse the two.


Yes there are shades of grey in life. However, you are mistaken if you believe every government is not "evil". All governments are run on the bases of a monopoly of force and support of laws through aggression, intimidation and coercion (immoral). The very definition of tyranny is a government the prohibits actions to its people while it, itself, retains those actions. Ask yourself this-Do you have the Right to take your neighbors money without his permission? Do you have the Right to instigate aggression against your neighbor? If you do not, which I believe any reasonable person would agree, then how can you properly delegate a Right, you do not have, to the government. The founding Fathers were very aware of this, this is why the were insistent that if we allowed a government to use force over us that we would severely limit their authority but like all governments, they simply ignored the constraints and do as they please.

With that said, the plaque is pictured in the thread, do you think it is a builders plate, intended to show NYC&HR as the builders of the bridge?

Posted April 15, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)


Please remember that the world consists of shades of grey. No system is perfect. Not all governments are evil, not everyone who works within a bad organization is bad.

I've seen lots of well intentioned people/organizations do horrible things for the 'right' reasons and I've seen evil/bad people do really good things (not necessarily for the right reason...).

On old truss bridges there are often two plaques installed by the builder: 1. the builder's plaque. 2. the plaque listing the freeholders who gave the builder the job.

Actually, on Carlton Bridge it was the freeholders plaque that allowed the build date to be corrected as there was only a narrow window when the three served together!

Just my two cents.


Art S.

Posted April 15, 2018, by Luke

1) Again, dogwhistles.

2) There are numerous examples of political gloat plates being the same pattern plaque as the manufacturers.

3) It is a redundancy, as the way you've added it, it's the same name as the railroad category, just in the oh-so-ironic reporting mark format.

4) It's a proposal for when we have actual proof of a "Railroad Bridge Department" designing/building/erecting the bridge.

We have Railway Age articles saying that MILW built their own concrete bridges.

John has made the supposition that Northern Pacific designed all their bridges, and has made cited arguments to support.

No such citation has been made here.

5) Warren w/ all verts is a subtype. Arches have been built in multiple mediums, so concrete is a valid identifier for categorization, as is "railroad".

6) The "free market economy" cannot exist without governmental regulation. The moment you strip that away, the moment the free market ceases to exist and we veer further towards an oligarchy.

Posted April 15, 2018, by Luke

1) The states did not choose the contracts, the counties did. And therein lies the source of the problem: Counties got bribed by companies to give them their lucrative annual bridge contracts (e.g. Webster County gave N.M. Stark the contract for all their concrete bridges in 1911.), and no state-level oversight led to those contracts going unchallenged.

The ISHC only mandated that bridges and roads be built to their standardized plans, and that bidding be open to all on a bridge-by-bridge/road-by-road basis instead an annual basis.

Creating an open, level bidding field is not "socialism", as you keep dogwhistling about.

2) We don't treat every builder plate the same. Hence why we omit politician names and only list the contractor and engineer/design firm from plates that feature both.

3) Redundant categories is not a deflection. It is a valid concern. You believe that the railroad should be listed as the designer. I know this won't end up being limited this to this bridge (Think "If you give a mouse a cookie."), and then we'll (Yet again.) have multiple categories for the same things.

Hence why I pitched using a singular generic "Railroad Forces/Railroad Bridge Department category (Also not a deflection. Pitching a plausible solution != deflection.) in which one can specify the railroad within parenthesis, like I went in and did with Mr. Wilgus as the chief engineer of the NYC&HR.

Posted April 15, 2018, by Luke

And to reply to your comment of "Thank you, however, for your valuable opinions, you are spot on, on many subjects.":

Thank you for actually doing fieldwork and taking numerous photographs of structures, especially remains.

John and yourself do a lot of legwork taking multiple hi-res detail shots of bridges some users wouldn't even bother visiting.

So while we may disagree a LOT, I can still appreciate your contributions as much as you seem to appreciate mine.

Posted April 15, 2018, by Luke

Not really, as those are still monopolies. Single companies still had exclusive control within those districts, making it impossible for local builders to flourish, or for another competitor to make a dent.

And the state didn't cause these monopolies to form. The problem was that prior to formation of the ISHC, the was little to no uniformity between the counties, and even less oversight. (Which I'm sure you'll somehow argue isn't a bad thing, based on the reply you posted while I was typing this up. I mean, it's not like a complete lack of oversight caused the banking crisis and fucked the world economy... ...Or unchecked lobbying (AKA legalized bribery) in our own government resulted in a government that listens to corporations more than their own constituencies or anything like that...)

And it's not deflection to correct you on your own historically inaccurate rebuttal to my point.

And my point still stands that the "NYC&HR" on the plaque doesn't actually mean anything related to the builder, and that your statement that "the railroad built the bridge" is false.

The plaque states that NYC&HR's then-chief engineer (Un-fun fact: He was ousted after an electric locomotive designed by him had a fatal derailment.) designed it, and that A&P Roberts fabricated/built it.

What the plaque doesn't actually tell us, is if railroad forces, day laborers, convict labor, or A&P Roberts themselves erected the bridge. You're purely guesstimating that they're the ones who erected it.

Posted April 15, 2018, by Luke

And your challenge is incorrect, as prior to DOTs (Then-called Highway Commissions) standardizing designs, only a few companies built bridges in a given region, snuffing out local competition.

In Iowa, the case was that the bridge companies had divided the state into districts, with certain companies having monopolies over their district.

e.g. Clinton Bridge & Iron Works in northeastern Iowa, J.E. Jayne & Sons (Re-badged Stupp Bros.) in Johnson County, the King & WIBCO duopoly in western Iowa, etc..

It wasn't until the ISHC standardized bridge designs (With multiple uncredited "underling" engineers beneath Conde McCullough and Anson Marston.) that those districts were really busted and small local contractors flourished.

Posted April 15, 2018, by Luke

It's already listed, you've just created a duplicate, superfluous category in a different box.

As for the rest of your drivel, I suggest you actually read up on the Iowa Stat Highway Commission's standardized designs and the Michigan Standardized Bridge Designs before bloviating.

Posted April 14, 2018, by Luke

That counterargument would work if and only if most state DOTs hadn't have designed their own standardized bridges in order to bust monopolies. (Iowa, Michigan, etc.)

Posted April 14, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Mystery Bridge

Posted April 14, 2018, by Luke

Now, in cases of timber trestles, and in certain railroad-specific cases (The Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, & Pacific is a glaring example of this), railroad's own bridge departments fabricated (In the cases of concrete and timber structures) and erected (In the case of pre-fabricated steel structures) bridges

I believe this preexisting "generic" category suffices for all those entries, without having to create multiple categories with the same railroad name:

Posted April 14, 2018, by Luke

Except the category for New York Central & Hudson River Railroad already exists

Having a duplicate category adds nothing, especially since the railroad's mention on the plaque serves nothing more than being the railroad equivalent of the County Gloat Plate*.

William J. Wilgus, the man who was also the architect of Grand Central Station, and A&P Roberts are the relevant builders.

(*For the reference of others, "County Gloat Plate" refers to a "builder plate" that carries the names of County XYZ commissioners and selectmen, +/- any actual mention of the engineers or contractors who actually built the structure.

The similarity here is that the "New York Central & Hudson River Railroad" serves the same function on this plate as "County XYZ" does on those plates.)

Posted April 14, 2018, by Luke

The railroad name on that plaque seems to be more of a title than anything.

In any case, I feel we should list the actual railroad company bridge engineers as such instead of making a bunch of redundant categories for every railroad.

Posted April 14, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I think its a situation where the railroad actually engineered the structure, and then contracted with A&P Roberts to actually built the structure. Assuming this is the case, they would be both a railroad and builder/engineer.

Posted April 13, 2018, by Luke

I made a webmaster request about that...

...a few years ago.

Posted April 13, 2018, by Richard Doody (rpdoody3 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Photos 1 and 2 of 8 for this listing are actually of the current Green Island Bridge and should be moved to the separate listing which now extists for that span and deleted from this one.

Posted April 12, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Fair enough, I only mentioned it because I brought up the same question a couple of years ago when I listed it as the Robert F Kennedy Bridge and the thought at the time was, It was an approach. Things change, I understand, just trying to be consistent.


Posted April 11, 2018, by Robert Elder (robertelder1 [at] gmail [dot] com)

In truth, this probably is a separate structure that should be listed separately. I was on the fence about it for a while. But, listing it separately does go against the historical precedent on this website. Thus, if somebody wants to separate a couple of bridges They should probably signal their intention to head of time. Doing so would likely prevent some backlash.

Posted April 11, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

I also agree with Matt and Amanda. Looking at bridges such as the MacArthur Bridge in Saint Louis, it consists of a number of different approaches which were built at different times. Most of these viaducts include trusses of all types and sizes. These networks of bridges are some very interesting structures.

Posted April 11, 2018, by Matt Lohry

Although I know it's not the protocol that's typically followed on this website, I wholeheartedly agree with Amanda, especially with these long bridges where there are more than one significant bridge type with long distances of non-significant concrete in between them. The reason for this is that when these are all placed into a single entry, it's easy to overlook one significant part of a bridge when a different significant part is what is shown on the front page. I think that each portion deserves its own page so that the page can focus on the details of its own type. It's very easy for bridge pages to get cluttered up with confusing information when they are all placed together. The San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge is entered as one whole bridge, but I think it would be much more effective to have the eastern truss portion and the western suspension portion entered separately, simply because they are each their own significant types that are worthy of their own entries, single bridge or not. Now the new eastern China-made span is one I couldn't care less about, but the old truss bridge was definitely significant and noteworthy on its own.

Posted April 11, 2018, by Anonymous

I am with the Haleys. This page should not have been created.

Posted April 11, 2018, by Anonymous

Lumpers and Splitters - one man's separate bridge is another man's approach span.

Posted April 11, 2018, by Luke

It lines/lined up with Livingston Avenue. First use of the name was during construction in 1901:

Very creative, I know, but there are several examples of such creative naming over the years, such as Monon's Hohman Avenue Bridge in the Chicagoland area.

Posted April 10, 2018, by David Backlin (us71 [at] cox [dot] net)

Given a choice between the two, I'll take a MOB over a UCEB just because there's some semblance of an aesthetic.

But what do I know?

Posted April 10, 2018, by Anonymous

Only added today? I am surprised that this bridge was not on here already.

Posted April 10, 2018, by Matt Lohry

Hi Amanda, I’m certainly not trying to create schism on this website, and to the bridge’s credit it is a truss, but the positives end there....this is a common, bland, Wal-mart inspired, mail-order bridge that is found in many, many parks across the country. They have used this bridge type in at least one location in my state of Wisconsin to replace an actual historic (and beautiful) truss bridge that was not in the way of anything and was in great shape, which is senseless and destructive. In this case, thankfully, they didn’t replace an historic bridge, but they could have used an actual historic bridge here instead of this, which would have enhanced this area and preserved a piece of history. With New York City’s commendable preservation record, I’m actually surprised that they went this route here.

Posted April 10, 2018, by Anonymous

Hi Amanda. You are going to find that these prefabricated mail-order bridges are very much of a sore point on this website. A lot of times, these bridges are installed on a trail where a historic bridge could have been used instead. In some instances, these bridges even replace historic bridges on trails.

Posted April 9, 2018, by Matt Lohry

I think they gave it that name because it’s so painfully ugly that when you walk across it you’d swear you were walking into hell.

Posted April 9, 2018, by Nathan Holth (webmaster [at] historicbridges [dot] org)

They call THIS modern, prefabricated, mass-produced welded MOB the "Little Hell Gate Bridge?!" That's sad. The REAL Little Hell Gate Bridge is one of the most unique bridges in the entire country, a rare inverted bowstring truss custom-designed by engineering mastermind Gustav Lindenthal as an approach to the Hell Gate Arch Bridge.

Posted April 9, 2018, by Matt Lohry

The 2015 bridge is built over Bronx Kill and is built through the arched supports for this bridge:

The Othmar Amman bridge is the blue lift footbridge that Luke referenced before.

The bridge in the photo is built over Little Hell Gate and was built in 2003. If you go to google earth to this bridge and use the clock function, you will see that the bridge appears in the August 2003 frame.

Posted April 9, 2018, by Anonymous

I think that Matt and I were posting at the same time.

Posted April 9, 2018, by Anonymous

I don't see that anything got filled in. It looks like the same river and the same two buildings in the background in both the color photo and the black and white photo. I think these photographs are documenting a mail-order bridge, not the Othmar Ammann span.

Posted April 9, 2018, by Matt Lohry

Folks, I have an explanation—the 2015 bridge is built over Bronx Kill right underneath the existing Bronx Kill Amtrak Bridge, on the northeast side of Randall’s Island. It’s not visible from the satellite view, but it’s there. The bridge in the photo was built in Summer 2003 (the caption with Photo #3 came from Pinterest and is incorrect).

Posted April 9, 2018, by Luke

Monochromatic != historic.

Posted April 9, 2018, by Luke

They're talking about

The bridge in the image is the one built in 2015.

Posted April 9, 2018, by Anonymous

Admittedly, I know absolutely zilch about New York City bridges. That being said, this does not look like a 1950s bridge to me. It looks like a very modern mob. Is this an extremely old mob or do we have a photo and Bridge mismatched here?

If it's a mismatch please don't feel bad about it. I have mismatched a few myself.

Posted April 3, 2018, by Richard Doody (rpdoody3 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Nice collection of postcard views. The Berlin Iron Bridge Company's lenticular truss bridges are works of art. Hope the one at Delhi has escaped the scrap heap. Thanks for posting.

Posted April 2, 2018, by Anonymous

Okay, I laughed out loud when I saw my car! Coffee meet keyboard!

Posted March 28, 2018, by Richard Doody (rpdoody3 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Attached detail from Beck & Pauli's 1881 Birdseye View of Troy,NY. The Rennselaer & Saratoga was the second oldest railroad in America. The bridge crossed the Hudson from Troy to Green Island passing over Starbuck Island. The Starbuck Ironworks where the towers for California's Bidwell's Bar Suspension Bridge were fabricated is clearly visible in the lower portion of the lithograph. Sparks from a locomotive passing through the covered portion of the bridge set off the Great Troy Fire of May 10, 1862 which consumed over 500 buildings in downtown Troy. The destruction extended from the river as far east as 8th Street.

Full view can be seen @

Posted March 19, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Think this one was road not RR

Posted March 16, 2018, by ArtS (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)


That was my first thought but the crossing is much too large and the road alignment doesn't work. I considered most of the other crossings; they didn't fit for one reason or another.

Also, the text on the card is vague enough that it works.


Art S.

Posted March 15, 2018, by Dana and Kay Klein

Valid observation. Going to pull till sure.

Posted March 15, 2018, by Clark Vance (cvance [at] dogmail [dot] com)

You might consider the bridge between Hornell and North Hornell over the Canisteo River. The "North Hornell" name may mean the one to North Hornell rather the one on the north side of North Hornell.

Posted March 12, 2018, by Art S. (asuckewer [at] knite [dot] com)

Closed for 5 months due to cracks; now open: