A small point, but in the "recent" picture, the little yellow shack is no longer there, having been blown down some months ago in a moderate wind storm.

The latest on the Haystack Landing bridge, from NipponSharyoFan on NWPRR.net

I need to turn my 4-8-8-8-8-8-4 so I'll get it...

OK, so my first reaction is "No you couldn't, they're not designed to be turned under load!" I am pretty sure that is accurate, but then I started thinking, what if you added a ring rail, like on a regular turntable. If you did that, then it would be supported in the same manner it is when it's closed, at the ends and in the center.

In that case, wouldn't it actually work to support a locomotive? Not suggesting anyone needs a giant turntable, but just for discussion sake, would it be theoretically possible? Anyone need a quick way to turn an Electroliner?

The specs are in the BridgeHunter.com listing linked in the second post.

Update:

Bob -

When I was a kid, my Grandmother journeyed out to see us in south suburban Chicago. There was a CTA (ex-CSL) streetcar line that ran to the Chicago city limits and near the end of that line they crossed the Calumet River. My Grandmother claimed that she almost had a heart attack when the gates came down and the streetcar she was riding on, was still on the bridge! Of course, the bridge was a center pivot swing bridge and the streetcar stayed on it while the boat went by. Then the bridge was swung back in place, and the car continued on its way to the end of the line. There are those who have told me that this was impossible and that the CTA wouldn't have let this happen. But, I don't doubt my Grandmother's tale!

So, I guess it would be possible for a bridge to turn a train on it if not too heavy (a streetcar wouldn't have been, especially if parked right over the center turntable). EXCEPT that I believe that these bridges weren't made to do a complete circuit, but only to return to their original position. They might not "line up" if say, the north end circled around to the south. Can anyone confirm that they were set up for a part spin, only enough to allow a boat to pass by?


Les

Too bad about no takers, but wasn't it said that the bridge was no longer suited to be, well, a bridge?

CD

Kenneth Morrison said he'd take it now that he's finished with the Little Calumet River bridge!

I don't recall statements that the bridge is unsafe for rail traffic, although it is possible.

The Coast Guard does consider it a hazard to navigation because the channel is too narrow for modern barge traffic. There have been a few instances of barges hitting the pilings.

I think one of the news articles stated it was suited only for pedestrian (or possibly light vehicle) traffic.

Eli

My strongest suspicion--and I say this only based on photos and basic engineering knowledge--is that the bridge's dimensions mean that it cannot be used for typical HIGHWAY adaptive re-use by any government body abiding by Federal Highway Administration standards. That is, the deck would be too narrow to provide both two lanes and appropriate shoulders. This would prevent, say, a county/state government buying it to install as a bridge while getting state/Federal dollars to pay for most of its costs.

There could well be some structural degradation that means the bridge is unsuitable for adaptive reuse, but I doubt it.

Having seen a historic bridge restoration done in Chattanooga, Tennessee, I can say that in most cases, the cost to upgrade older bridges to meet current code standards is a major consideration.

The big bridge restoration in Chattanooga (at the time) was the old County Bridge (Walnut Street Bridge). The bridge was built circa 1895 and was a combination highway/railway bridge as it carried the street railway over the river. The bridge was a narrow two lane bridge with a concrete deck and was removed from service in the early 1970s due to degradation of the roadway and support structures. It stood abandoned for over twenty years until it was restored by the City of Chattanooga as part of the Tennessee Riverpark. Based upon the cost of repair and the intended use of the bridge, it was determined that it would be inappropriate to restore the bridge for use by motor vehicles. Even restoring the bridge as a pedestrian bridge cost the city some $3 million to complete.

That said, any type of reuse of any significant bridge structure will be expensive to do right. Small bridges can easily cost more than $100k to do, especially if relocation is required.