Bridge Collapse

warch · 08-05-2007, 02:16 PM

From something I read/heard the piers have been ruled out, and the focus is on the steel truss. The thing shifted on the south side, dropped straight in the middle then snapped a break on the north side (the tall peak)

Money was not an issue. There was money available if deemed immediately needed. I'm sure closure of this major artery also featured in the decision. They didn't choose to add the reinforcing plates (a more expensive fix) they say, for a few reasons, not because of money, but because there was no assurance that the new holes they would drill wouldn't cause more harm than good.

I've seen some effects of the chemical deicer. It is definitely corrosive...

5 dead, over 100 injured, and 8 confirmed missing/near site. That's pretty amazing.

ps. cunt seems a bit affect-laden, from my interpretation.

08-05-2007, 02:16 PM	#11
warch lurkin old school Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Minnesota Posts: 2,796	From something I read/heard the piers have been ruled out, and the focus is on the steel truss. The thing shifted on the south side, dropped straight in the middle then snapped a break on the north side (the tall peak) Money was not an issue. There was money available if deemed immediately needed. I'm sure closure of this major artery also featured in the decision. They didn't choose to add the reinforcing plates (a more expensive fix) they say, for a few reasons, not because of money, but because there was no assurance that the new holes they would drill wouldn't cause more harm than good. I've seen some effects of the chemical deicer. It is definitely corrosive... 5 dead, over 100 injured, and 8 confirmed missing/near site. That's pretty amazing. ps. cunt seems a bit affect-laden, from my interpretation.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)