this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2024
309 points (99.4% liked)

[Dormant] moved to !historyphotos@piefed.social

7343 readers
1 users here now

COMM MOVED TO !historyphotos@piefed.social

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Spastickyle@lemmy.world 65 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I parents live within a 5-mile drive from that location. I don't think the commenters understand how windy that place is. The wood may look more sturdy but it's also a wind sail. The thin "toothpick" structure was most likely designed to allow the wind to pass through without blowing the bridge down.

[–] yetAnotherUser@feddit.de 23 points 2 years ago (1 children)

There's an easy solution to make bridges stable in windy conditions:

(That bridge was built from 1846 to 1851 and it's still used today)

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 18 points 2 years ago (1 children)

And how do you propose you get all those bricks to some remote pass in Wyoming in the late 19th century? There was 21,000 (non-native) people living in an area larger than the entire United Kingdom in 1880.

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 43 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I mean... A train?

I get you though; built with what's readily available to meet the needs of the time.

[–] BetterDev@programming.dev 14 points 2 years ago

I laughed out loud at this. Thank you.

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 4 points 2 years ago

It's not jist about what's readily available either. A giant brick viaduct would require thousands if workers, housing, food, and sanitation for them. On top of that, the army would have to dedicate a full company ti protecting the workers due to the risk of attack from natives. The logistics just make it impossible for such a remote area back then.

[–] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

Windy in Wyoming, color me shocked 😲

[–] Heliumfart@sh.itjust.works 43 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Haha, according to the article, that photo is after the reinforcements were added. No thanks

[–] CptEnder@lemmy.world 35 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Honestly the wood one looked more secure

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 26 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] Graphy@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

That’s me playing polybridge.

“Well I think triangles are strong and don’t really know any other shapes so…”

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Wood weathers incredibly fast in the sun

[–] Rolando@lemmy.world 34 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] jupyter_rain@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 2 years ago

The first one was wooden? Oh my...

[–] TomMasz@lemmy.world 29 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Civil Engineering took a while to catch on.

[–] Thrashy@lemmy.world 38 points 2 years ago

The number of rail bridge collapses covered by Well There's Your Problem where the episode opens with a retelling of how the railroad company owner designed the bridge himself because the engineers couldn't grasp the genius of his vision is too damn high.

[–] nieceandtows@programming.dev 28 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That bridge looks rickety af

[–] 1995ToyotaCorolla@lemmy.world 29 points 2 years ago

“Steel is stronger than wood, so let’s make our trestle out of metal toothpicks”

[–] grue@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago

That's the kind of bridge I'd only want to cross at 88 mph.

[–] PugJesus@kbin.social 14 points 2 years ago
[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Couldn't they have, idk... built a more substantial bridge?

[–] Schmuppes@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Time is money, brother.

[–] kokesh@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

Just send it!

[–] Seraph@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago

Maybe less weight at once? You've got two engines there after all...