Why didn’t they originally make it a suspension bridge?
“Why didn’t they originally make it a suspension bridge?”
Truss bridges were popular in the 1970’s due to their relatively low cost and relatively easy construction compared to more durable suspension bridges.
They were also easier to grift and cut corners on as was seen in the I-35 bridge collapse in 2007. In that truss bridge the contractors had cut corners by using gusset plates that were too small and too thin. The bridge was also designed to what were very fine tolerances in terms of potential load.
The factors affecting the I-35 bridge will likely come up in this collapse as the bridges are of about the same vintage.
The general design of these truss bridges of the period lacks stoutness but more importantly they lack redundancy. The design is rife with single points of failure where the failure of one of these single points would cause catastrophic collapse. In this case the bridge support lacked the mass and durability to withstand a predictable impact by a large ship.
That it was not designed for such an obvious possibility was a cost saving measure.
But even without the impact of this ship the bridge may have eventually failed if it were not replaced promptly at the end of its service life. There are just too many features on such bridges that afford opportunities for failure and a lack of maintenance coupled with negligence typical in Democrat regimes would make an eventual collapse a near certainty.