On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:43:37 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Jan 15, 6:27*pm, "Pete C." wrote:
JR North wrote:

I don't think I buy it. Follow the money and find where the payola is
squashing the real cause. How old was that bridge? 45-50 something?.
More likely scenario: the construction gang on the span at the time of
collapse-"Hey Boss-I done pulled thet pin yoo toll me two..."
"NOT *THAT* PIN!!!!AAAAGGGHHHHH............."
JR
Dweller in the cellar

Certainly a possibility.

More likely the bridge was engineered correctly at first, and somewhere
in the drafting to the final plans the gusset size was misapplied as
"half this thickness per side", instead of "this thickness per side" and
then the construction crew didn't mention to the engineer that the
thickness was half of what they were used to from other bridges.

Yeah..I am a bit surprised on this explanation.

Gussets are something that one does check.

TMT

May be, but if the findings are negative they get suppressed by the
pols. Case of that in today's Mnpls paper re the Hastings bridge.
Inspectors found some serious problems but the MNDOT commissioner
(and Lt. Guv) suppressed the reports. Several times.

It seems that the Dems in the legislature are reluctant to give her
the boot because she is such a visible political liablity for the GOP
Guv who is now scurrying like hell to distance himself from her
although she was his pick for the job(s).

Freakin' politicians!