Replies

waggy, I think I would prefer this to be terrorism, rather than just some random bridge collapse. When I think of the hundreds of bridges built like this in the sixties and seventies, possibly with poor design and substandard materials, by unions rife with corruption and fraud...
that is scarier than one or two crazy mosque members with semtex.

Someone last night mentioned that a dam near this bridge failed about fifteen years ago. I AM NOT an engineer and I have never built a bridge, but I’ve been involved with building plenty of buildings and I know structural failures from stress do occur and they often have no impact because of things like redundancy and them being built stronger than they needed in the first place. However, two totally unrelated structural failures even years apart can have devestated effects.

I live in Virginia, so I didn’t even think of it until someone else mentioned it, but Minnesota has yearly temperature swings of over 100 degrees and the yearly expansion and contraction of steel is going to be much more pronounced here than in more moderate climates. And if someone taking up the old surface accidently damaged an expansion joint, it could have created a ripple effect.

As far as the idea of unions, substandard designs, etc., this is not as big a concern as people seem to think. You just don’t build a bridge and walk away. The engineers who designed it do their inspections, as do the state, Army Corps of Engineers, etc.

"When I think of the hundreds of bridges built like this in the sixties and seventies, possibly with poor design and substandard materials, by unions rife with corruption and fraud..."

There was an anecdote about an astronaut back in the '60s being asked by a reporter what his thoughts were just before lift-off. Supposedly he replied (don't know if this is apocryphal or real anecdote): "Millions of parts proved by the LOWEST BIDDER"

From now on, every time I cross a bridge I'll be thinking "this structure may have been built by corrupt unions protected by Demagogues."

Since the left already wants to politicize this tragedy, let's ask why Minn. as one of the 3-4 most liberal states, dominated by the Demagogues for 40+ years, preferred a pricey light rail boondoggle over upgrading this bridge and other infrastructure??? It's always sexier for politicians to go for fancy new projects instead of routine but crucial maintenance of existing infrastructure. Both parties are liable to this failing, but the Demagogues are usually much worse, and only the Demagogues love to rush to politicize tragedies even when THEY are likely to be more responsible (e.g., Katrina and local 'RATs who failed for decades to prepare for major hurricanes, etc.).