Not the Portland-Vancouver one, the one in Skagit county, about 1 hour north of Seattle.
Not good. Not good at all.
Not the Portland-Vancouver one, the one in Skagit county, about 1 hour north of Seattle.
Not good. Not good at all.
Just saw a picture of it on the 10:00 news, they said there were reports of a couple cars in the water but didn't have details.
Reminiscent of when the I-35 bridge collapsed in Minneapolis several years ago.
...and the I-40 bridge in Oklahoma prior to that (barge collision)
pretty scary stuff. I go over some fairly old bridges on a daily basis. Never once gave any thought to them failing and collapsing
Yay! Infrastructure!
Yay being cut off from Seattle!
I'd much rather be cut off from Vancouver, that'd be an easy few days at work.
Will add this to my list of reasons to mistrust bridges.
Weird to be reading while watching this on the news. My folks live a few miles from this bridge and we were set to go visit them Sunday yet we live on the other side from them. Can't believe this and traffic will be CRAZY for months!!!
Holy Berk! 
Guessing the Columbia River Crossing funds will be diverted to fix that.
looks like an XV crosstrek in there! That stinks.
I guess a truck hit the bridge. Now that is a bad day!
Three injured, no deaths.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/23/washington-skagit-river-bridge-collapse/2356801/
I keep wondering when something like this happens to the I-95 bridge between PA and NJ. It's almost 50 years old and has been slated for replacement for over a decade, but it seems they can't figure out how to pay for it. Tolls have been proposed, but various land issues would make getting the space for one difficult/expensive.
Good to hear there were no serious injuries.
SnowMongoose wrote: Will add this to my list of reasons to mistrust bridges.
The bridge was struck, pretty hard, by a truck carying a wide load (Rosie O'Donnell?).
Even being struck by Rosie O'Donnell, there were other issues....
I just saw this on the news, frightening. I also heard no fatalities.
On a related note, there is a bridge on a truck route that I frequently cross, its been undergoing a rebuild for about a yearn now. It didn't look all that bad from the road surface, but the steel that they pulled out from underneath was rusted out swiss cheese!
DrBoost wrote: The bridge was struck, pretty hard, by a truck carying a wide load (Rosie O'Donnell?).
That's one of the issues I remember reading somewhere about the I-95 bridge I mentioned. The way it was designed makes it vulnerable to "catastrophic failure" should one of the supports be damaged. The bridge uses classic 2-pillar supports that have no structural redundancy compared to the minimum 3-pillar supports required now.
The problem is replacing bridges is expensive and disruptive. According to the website for the project, the estimated cost for the bridge replacement on I-95 is $322M, which they hope to pay for through electronic tolls. How they plan to collect tolls from non-EZ Pass users is not mentioned... and possibly why the whole project hasn't seemed to move an inch in 5 years...
Of course, these sorts of projects move slowly... they've been talking about a I-95 to PA Turnpike interchange forever... although I see now they plan to start construction next year through 2017. I've heard that before...
Ian F wrote: I keep wondering when something like this happens to the I-95 bridge between PA and NJ. It's almost 50 years old and has been slated for replacement for over a decade, but it seems they can't figure out how to pay for it. Tolls have been proposed, but various land issues would make getting the space for one difficult/expensive. Good to hear there were no serious injuries.
You mean the Scudder Falls bridge? I thought the replacement span was being built alongside the existing span? Been a few years since I've been over it. I avoid 95 like the plague. I go up I-81 now.
"the bridge failure that raised the question about the safety of aging spans"
Nooooo, really? You mean we have to maintain things that we built decades ago?
dculberson wrote: "the bridge failure that raised the question about the safety of aging spans" Nooooo, really? You mean we have to maintain things that we built decades ago?
I think they're waiting to make sure they don't replace spans unnecessarily before they absolutely need to. I have a feeling this one will get some attention now that it's laying in the water and not spanning it. 
They can't afford to maintain bridges like this one that tons of cars use every day but they are sure proud of the multimillion dollar pedestrian bridge they built by my house that gets maybe 100 people walking across it each day.
1988RedT2 wrote: You mean the Scudder Falls bridge? I thought the replacement span was being built alongside the existing span? Been a few years since I've been over it. I avoid 95 like the plague. I go up I-81 now.
Yep, that's the one - I cross it every day going to and from work.
Looking at the site, that appears to be the eventual plan: leave the existing bridge intact while building a new 4-6 lane southbound bridge and when that's done, switch all trafice to that bridge and replace the existing bridge with a new 5-7 lane bridge. When finished there will be two completely independant bridges with 4 SB lanes with L&R shoulders and a pedestrial/bike lane and 5 NB lanes with shoulders. All total about 3-4x the width of the existing bridge. It'll be nice... someday...
Johnboyjjb wrote: They can't afford to maintain bridges like this one that tons of cars use every day but they are sure proud of the multimillion dollar pedestrian bridge they built by my house that gets maybe 100 people walking across it each day.
Pedestrian bridges are usually funded through different sources not related to highway maintenance funding.
Word is an oversize load truck (of steel... gulp) hit the bridge span. The pilot truck wasn't far enough in front and some shiny happy person saw the pole on that hit, then watched the truck hit in his rearview mirror, and then kept driving.
2 cars into the drink, 3 people, no deaths.
And as for the CRC thing, it's a total political crock that will never get built with the light rail that Portland wants because it will make it too low for the USCG, the USCG gets what they want. It's a nightmare project up here.
Javelin wrote: Word is an oversize load truck (of steel... gulp) hit the bridge span.
Apparently the work of Canadian terrorists!
1988RedT2 wrote:dculberson wrote: "the bridge failure that raised the question about the safety of aging spans" Nooooo, really? You mean we have to maintain things that we built decades ago?I think they're waiting to make sure they don't replace spans unnecessarily before they absolutely need to. I have a feeling this one will get some attention now that it's laying in the water and not spanning it.
Ha ha!
I think we need some Dutch people in transportation management here. They know how to maintain infrastructure. Something about half their country being under sea level and needing to keep the ocean out or kill everyone made them figure that out.
dculberson wrote: "the bridge failure that raised the question about the safety of aging spans" Nooooo, really? You mean we have to maintain things that we built decades ago?
Hay, if they existed before I was born, then they existed forever and will therefore last forever, right?
You'll need to log in to post.
