Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Max_Dombrowski t1_iv2kx2f wrote

Why crazy? It was 100 years old and hadn't been used in 40 years. At some point it would have fallen over in a stiff breeze.

9

mtnsubieboi t1_iv2nxa3 wrote

In the process of it being restored too, it sucks but it was super old at the same time.

13

vogelsyn t1_iv2sqek wrote

throw some rocks. they put all this nice new gravel at the beginning of the walkway. it sounds so cool when ya hit the metal.

−9

UncomfortablyNumb43 t1_iv2t2fd wrote

I walked across it when I was like…12 years old. They didn’t have a pedestrian walkway, so you had to walk on the railroad ties. It was fine when your line of sight was focused outward, but when I looked down between the ties, it would stop me in my tracks.

23

hypotenoos t1_iv3a0wh wrote

I think there was actually a study that involved the bolts. The bridge had been rebuilt at one point and they decided to extend the bolts instead of replace them or something.

5

smeestisaton t1_iv42p75 wrote

Really awesome place to visit - definitely worth the trip.

1

Bucks_Deleware t1_iv48502 wrote

It's pretty old yeah. Most overpasses are designed with an assumption of 50-75 hears of life. A suspension bridge like the Verrazano Narrows, Ben Franklin, or Golden Gate are designed to last forever (hence why they are so large and relatively overbuilt).

100 years is typical for a bridge, but one of this size may be actually be on the lower end.

The reason this bridge fell was because of an engineering choice regarding modifications to the anchor bolts at the base of the towers. Pretty interesting to look in to.

5

mtnsubieboi t1_iv4l6a9 wrote

Basically what bucks said. Didn't help that before that the bridge had absolutely no maintenance done for a long time before its restoration. Was really just a whammy of unfortunate events that caused its collapse.

1