In article . com,
says...
On Aug 18, 4:21 pm, MooseFET wrote:
On Aug 18, 3:22 pm, Eeyore
wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:
I tried to attach these, but apparently my newsclient or server choked on
2 MB of images. I got them from my brother, who lives in Minneapolis.

http://mysite.verizon.net/richgrise/...e/image020.jpg

One thing that struck me straight away is how flimsy the steelwork looks for the
job it's supposed to do.

The steelwork was more than strong enough for the job. It did have a
single point failure problem but that really doesn't seem to be what
really happened. The joints in the bridge froze up and didn't let
things expand and contract as they should. It is suggested that this
more or less jacked the bridge apart and over stress things causing
the failure. As with any arch, once things start ot go bad, they go
very bad very quickly.

With the lousy maintenance in this country, we shouldn't have single-
point failure bridges at all. But I guess they cost less... the same
penny-wise pound-foolish attitude that leads to neglected maintenance,
frozen expansion joints, and catastrophic failure.
A politician will attract a lot more attention by getting a brand new
bridge built to replace a rotten one, than by doing the relatively
thankless job of directing public funds into maintenance.

Your last sentence explains the situation perfectly; *WE* don't care,
so politicians don't either. We have met the enemy...

--
Keith