Talk:I-40 bridge disaster
|WikiProject Oklahoma||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
Please don't take this as a challenge of the facts, I just think this section needs clarification. First of all, all the pictures of the bridge I've seen sure look like a single bridge to me. More information is needed to explain how this apparent single bridge is actually two bridges side-by-side. Second, is the statement that the bridges should have been farther apart a reflection of common practice (meaning the engineer in charge was negligent) or is it Tabletop's non-professional opinion (no offense, just want the facts)? Rsduhamel 22:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
The photos on this page will give some insight on the bridge's construction: I-40 Arkansas River Bridge You can clearly see, from the photos, the manner in which the bridge is built. As originally constructed, the bridge was built as a pair of deck-girder spans sharing common piers, since it is not nessisary to have the lanes widely spaced, and for economy in not having to build extra piers. In reconstructing the collapsed portions, the side span of the continuous cantilever was rebuilt, while the three approach spans were rebuilt using the modern concrete stringer span techniques. If a repeat of the accident were to occur, the rebuilt portions would be just as likely to colapse as the original.-WK-184.108.40.206 (talk) 23:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Should a section on Contributing factors be established.
I saw an article that this was a bridge without protective pilings on an operating waterway. if the bridge had those, the barge would likely have done little damage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 17:09, 9 April 2011 (UTC)