In article ,
says...

On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 08:57:34 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

Roads don't freeze in Florida. Northerners haven't figured out how to
build roads to survive the harsh winters they experience.

The "infrastructure" is not crumbling... I drive all over the place with
a trailer. The roads are fine... the bridges are fine....

===

I agree for the most part. We just got back from a road trip to the
north east and there were no issues in the NY/NJ/CT area other than
the usual heavy traffic. Some of the overpasses on the New York
State Thruway show some signs of rust and corrosion however. There's
no excuse for that since it is a highly profitable toll road but NY
has a good track record for fixing things like that.

Parts of I-81 through Virginia could use some road work and widening.
The truck traffic on the long two lane stretches is slow but part of
that is the fault of the truckers who insist on racing each other
uphill at 45 mph.

What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate traffic
were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic loads.
That is but one problem.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate traffic
were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic loads.
That is but one problem.

Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks.

Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from???

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:52:03 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate traffic
were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic loads.
That is but one problem.

Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks.

Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from???

Eisenhower said it.

John (Gun Nut) H.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:52:03 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate traffic
were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic loads.
That is but one problem.

Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks.

Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from???

Eisenhower said it.

John (Gun Nut) H.

Eisenhower said that local bridges that were re-purposed LONG after his
death when building new city interstate roads that they needed to carry
tanks??????

"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate
traffic
were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic
loads.
That is but one problem.

Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks.


Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from???

-------------------------

One of the many purposes and reasons for Eisenhower's Interstate
Highway project which started in 1956, was to provide a means for
efficient movements of military assets, the requirements of which
contributed to the highway design. Another was for civil defense and
mass evacuations of areas hit by natural disasters. It's the reason
the design consists of lanes separated by a barrier. In the event of
an emergency, traffic can travel in the same direction, using both
sides of the highway.

In article ,
says...

"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate
traffic
were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic
loads.
That is but one problem.

Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks.


Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from???

-------------------------

One of the many purposes and reasons for Eisenhower's Interstate
Highway project which started in 1956, was to provide a means for
efficient movements of military assets, the requirements of which
contributed to the highway design. Another was for civil defense and
mass evacuations of areas hit by natural disasters. It's the reason
the design consists of lanes separated by a barrier. In the event of
an emergency, traffic can travel in the same direction, using both
sides of the highway.



But LONG after his death, more and more interstate highways were built.
When the built these in cities, many bridges got re-purposed as
interstate bridges and weren't intended nor designed for that kind of
traffic.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:52:03 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate traffic
were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic loads.
That is but one problem.

Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks.

Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from???

The original purpose of the interstate highway system and the original
design guidelines

In many cities, the interstate highways are being added and have been
added. The original guidelines no longer stand, and the fact is that
city bridges have been re-purposed to use for interstate traffic that
they were never intended nor designed to hold.

"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:52:03 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate
traffic
were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic
loads.
That is but one problem.

Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks.

Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from???

The original purpose of the interstate highway system and the
original
design guidelines

In many cities, the interstate highways are being added and have been
added. The original guidelines no longer stand, and the fact is that
city bridges have been re-purposed to use for interstate traffic that
they were never intended nor designed to hold.

-----------------------------------

An example would be .......... ??

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:08:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:



"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 11:52:03 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 09:49:34 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

What you don't realize is that many bridges carrying interstate
traffic
were never engineered for that weight and frequency of traffic
loads.
That is but one problem.

Why not? They were originally designed for trucks carrying tanks.

Now where on earth do you get THAT idea from???

The original purpose of the interstate highway system and the
original
design guidelines

In many cities, the interstate highways are being added and have been
added. The original guidelines no longer stand, and the fact is that
city bridges have been re-purposed to use for interstate traffic that
they were never intended nor designed to hold.

-----------------------------------

An example would be .......... ??

Shame on you. We know you're asking for a 'cite'.

John (Gun Nut) H.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

"John H" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:08:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



"iBoaterer" wrote in message

In many cities, the interstate highways are being added and have been
added. The original guidelines no longer stand, and the fact is that
city bridges have been re-purposed to use for interstate traffic that
they were never intended nor designed to hold.

-----------------------------------

An example would be .......... ??

Shame on you. We know you're asking for a 'cite'.

John (Gun Nut) H.

-----------------------

I was trying to be original.

I don't know much about building bridges or "re-purposing" them, but
it seems to me that any existing highway or bridge that is taken over
by the state and made part of the federal interstate highway system
would have to meet current construction requirements and criteria
established by the Federal Highway Administration (under the
Department of Transportation).

I also suspect that the design criteria and requirements today are
superior to those used in the 1950s.