Cause of I-35W Bridge Collapse?
Jonathan Grobe
the collapse?
--
Jonathan Grobe Books
Browse our inventory of thousands of used books at:
http://www.grobebooks.com
US 71
"Jonathan Grobe" <gr...@netins.net> wrote in message
news:slrnfgr9ho...@worf.netins.net...
> Is there any new information about exactly what caused
> the collapse?
>
There may be conjecture/"educated guesses", but I'd be surprised if the
investigation took less than 6 months or possibly a year.
Jason Pawloski
And, more importantly, everyone has forgotten/doesn't care about it
now so it'll never make the mainstream news outlets.
Scott M. Kozel
>
> Is there any new information about exactly what caused
> the collapse?
The last National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) news release was
5 weeks ago. They said that much of the bridge superstructure was still
underwater and there was still considerable work remaining to determine
why it collapsed.
http://www.ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2007/070905b.html
NTSB Advisory
National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594
September 5, 2007
THIRD UPDATE ON THE MINNESOTA BRIDGE COLLAPSE
'The following is an update on the National Transportation Safety
Board's investigation of the I-35W bridge collapse in Minneapolis,
Minnesota on August 1, 2007.'
'The I-35W bridge was 40 years old and it was considered "structurally
deficient" because of a relatively low rating of its superstructure.'
'"The Safety Board seldom rules out any potential causes of an accident
during the initial stages of an investigation until we have had the
opportunity to thoroughly investigate all potential causes," NTSB
Chairman Mark V. Rosenker said. "Much of the bridge superstructure is
still underwater and there is still considerable work remaining to
determine why it collapsed."'
'The deck truss bridge design is now considered obsolete and newer
bridges no longer use this design because of the inherent lack of
redundancy in the structure. The bridge is composed of steel beams held
together by flat gusset plates and a failure in one of the gusset plates
could have catastrophic consequences. The Safety Board has not
recovered all of the gusset plates yet, but investigators have observed
damage in some gusset plate locations that warrants further
investigation.'
'Bridge work was taking place at the time of the accident and 287 tons
of construction materials and equipment were on the span. The Safety
Board is interested in this additional loading and will conduct a very
detailed finite element analysis of the structure and the loading of
each component.'
[end]
--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Capital Beltway Projects http://www.capital-beltway.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com
k_f...@lycos.com
Hardly. It will be news. There's just nothing to report at the moment.
Jason Pawloski
Oh God, a sucker really is born every minute. Want to bet? When the
"final" report comes along, I'll bet you that it's not even on the
front page of CNN.com.
The bet is $1,000.
kh...@jersey.net
Think about all the big news stories that occurred earlier this year
and late last year. Think about all the occasions where they said
investigations would take 6 months to a year. Do you ever hear the
conclusion to these investigations?
When the investigation is complete, this will be nothing but a general
story tucked deep into the newspapers and news broadcasts. If J-Lo's
baby is born the same day the investgation results are released, the
baby will grab more attention than this story.
Arif Khokar
> When the investigation is complete, this will be nothing but a general
> story tucked deep into the newspapers and news broadcasts. If J-Lo's
> baby is born the same day the investgation results are released, the
> baby will grab more attention than this story.
It will probably make local news there. For instance, I don't recall
there being much mention of the results of the investigation of the
Virginia Tech shootings in mainstream media, but it was definitely in
local news.
rsh...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Umm, the NTSB has a website with all of the reports. Feel free to
have at it.
Randy
k_f...@lycos.com
> On Oct 11, 9:04 pm, "k_fl...@lycos.com" <k_fl...@lycos.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 11, 6:04 pm, Jason Pawloski <jpawlo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 10, 10:19 pm, "US 71" <u...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > > > "Jonathan Grobe" <gr...@netins.net> wrote in message
>
> > > >news:slrnfgr9ho...@worf.netins.net...
>
> > > > > Is there any new information about exactly what caused
> > > > > the collapse?
>
> > > > There may be conjecture/"educated guesses", but I'd be surprised if the
> > > > investigation took less than 6 months or possibly a year.
>
> > > And, more importantly, everyone has forgotten/doesn't care about it
> > > now so it'll never make the mainstream news outlets.
>
> > Hardly. It will be news. There's just nothing to report at the moment.
>
> Oh God, a sucker really is born every minute.
Really? When was your birthday?
> Want to bet?
Sure.
> When the
> "final" report comes along, I'll bet you that it's not even on the
> front page of CNN.com.
>
> The bet is $1,000
OK
You really don't understand media or how this works.
k_f...@lycos.com
> On Oct 12, 12:04 am, "k_fl...@lycos.com" <k_fl...@lycos.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 11, 6:04 pm, Jason Pawloski <jpawlo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 10, 10:19 pm, "US 71" <u...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > > > "Jonathan Grobe" <gr...@netins.net> wrote in message
>
> > > >news:slrnfgr9ho...@worf.netins.net...
>
> > > > > Is there any new information about exactly what caused
> > > > > the collapse?
>
> > > > There may be conjecture/"educated guesses", but I'd be surprised if the
> > > > investigation took less than 6 months or possibly a year.
>
> > > And, more importantly, everyone has forgotten/doesn't care about it
> > > now so it'll never make the mainstream news outlets.
>
> > Hardly. It will be news. There's just nothing to report at the moment.
>
> Think about all the big news stories that occurred earlier this year
> and late last year. Think about all the occasions where they said
> investigations would take 6 months to a year. Do you ever hear the
> conclusion to these investigations?
Yes. Can you cite some of what you're talking about?
> When the investigation is complete, this will be nothing but a general
> story tucked deep into the newspapers and news broadcasts. If J-Lo's
> baby is born the same day the investgation results are released, the
> baby will grab more attention than this story.
You don' t understand how significant this was. There is no way this
will not be followed.
Scott M. Kozel
The results of the investigation got more than just local coverage, as
there was plenty in the major local media in Richmond, Norfolk, and
Washington, D.C.
Scott M. Kozel
>
> "k...@jersey.net" <k...@jersey.net> wrote:
>
> > Think about all the big news stories that occurred earlier this year
> > and late last year. Think about all the occasions where they said
> > investigations would take 6 months to a year. Do you ever hear the
> > conclusion to these investigations?
>
> Yes. Can you cite some of what you're talking about?
NTSB accident investigations typically take 6 months to a year. I have
been using some of their reports since the 1960s, mostly aviation
accidents, and that has always been the case. Some of the really
mysterious ones, such as UAL 427 in 1994, can take several years.
> > When the investigation is complete, this will be nothing but a general
> > story tucked deep into the newspapers and news broadcasts. If J-Lo's
> > baby is born the same day the investgation results are released, the
> > baby will grab more attention than this story.
>
> You don't understand how significant this was. There is no way this
> will not be followed.
True, as many people want to know whether it was a one-time event, or
something endemic. I tend to suspect the former.
k_f...@lycos.com
Arif, CNN covered the issuance of the report with full story on its
website, video and links to the document itself. It was covered in the
NY Times. It was in the local papers here in Denver. I can't imagine
that it wasn't covered in nearly every newspaper and TV newscast in
the land.
Monte Castleman
"Arif Khokar" <akhok...@wvu.edu> wrote in message
news:SVLPi.18863$ya1....@news02.roc.ny...
The bridge is still in the news here- seems there's at least one story a
week in the Strib, sometimes several. There's been a lot of recent stories
with the new contract being opened, mainly about the controversy involving
A) How Mn/DOT picked the most expensive bid with the longest build time
(because Flatiron had good "public relations??!!") and the resulting
designs. They've been criticized as uninspiring and ugly, but the one they
picked, a concrete box girder with pretty lights on it is the best of the
bunch- the concrete and soft lines will blend in with the masonry on the
adjacent Cedar, Stone Arch, and 3rd Ave Bridge. And this is not the
situation or place for a signature span.
I was there a few weeks ago taking pictures of the bridge and the roads
around the area. They had just about got the river cleared, but there was
substantial steel still to be removed on the north side.
Jonathan Grobe
>
> NTSB accident investigations typically take 6 months to a year. I have
> been using some of their reports since the 1960s, mostly aviation
> accidents, and that has always been the case. Some of the really
> mysterious ones, such as UAL 427 in 1994, can take several years.
>
I would expect one reason these take so long is because
of legal/liability issues associated with these accidents so
the NTSB doesn't want to release anything until all the details
have been exhaustively looked at and the report exhaustively
analyzed by lawyers.... However I would expect the NTSB would be
99% sure of what they were going to say long, long before then.
I was under the impression that there are several MTR
regulars who have close connections with the various
transportation agencies. But not with the NTSB or
Minnesota DOT?
I would have thought the old bridge would have been removed
from the river by now (because of the rush to build the new
one). But it hasn't?
Scott M. Kozel
>
> Scott M. Kozel <koz...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > NTSB accident investigations typically take 6 months to a year. I have
> > been using some of their reports since the 1960s, mostly aviation
> > accidents, and that has always been the case. Some of the really
> > mysterious ones, such as UAL 427 in 1994, can take several years.
>
> I would expect one reason these take so long is because
> of legal/liability issues associated with these accidents so
> the NTSB doesn't want to release anything until all the details
> have been exhaustively looked at and the report exhaustively
> analyzed by lawyers.... However I would expect the NTSB would be
> 99% sure of what they were going to say long, long before then.
NTSB accident investigation reports are for safety recommendations, and
they are not admissible as evidence in a court of law.
The reason why they take so long, is because of the complexity of the
accidents that they investigate. While they investigate all U.S. civil
aviation accidents, with highways they only investigate unusually major
highway accidents.
> I would have thought the old bridge would have been removed
> from the river by now (because of the rush to build the new
> one). But it hasn't?
Not yet. There were thousands of tons of debris to remove.
Arif Khokar
I don't have cable. In any case, I do admit my recollection is faulty
(at least when I made that post :) ) because I now do seem to remember
reading something about it on CNN's website. I don't remember if it was
the main story or not at the time.
k_f...@lycos.com
> Jonathan Grobe <gr...@netins.net> wrote:
>
>
> > > NTSB accident investigations typically take 6 months to a year. I have
> > > been using some of their reports since the 1960s, mostly aviation
> > > accidents, and that has always been the case. Some of the really
> > > mysterious ones, such as UAL 427 in 1994, can take several years.
>
> > I would expect one reason these take so long is because
> > of legal/liability issues associated with these accidents so
> > the NTSB doesn't want to release anything until all the details
> > have been exhaustively looked at and the report exhaustively
> > analyzed by lawyers.... However I would expect the NTSB would be
> > 99% sure of what they were going to say long, long before then.
>
> NTSB accident investigation reports are for safety recommendations, and
> they are not admissible as evidence in a court of law.
>
> The reason why they take so long, is because of the complexity of the
> accidents that they investigate. While they investigate all U.S. civil
> aviation accidents, with highways they only investigate unusually major
> highway accidents.
I looked at the length of time NTSB takes doing highay accidents, and
the ones I checked seemed to take longer than aviation in the main.
The terrible one here in Denver, where a girder collapsed from a
bridge widening project at C-470 onto I-70 on a Saturday morning and
killed a family of three driving down the highway, took more than two
years even though the basics of the event were fairly obvious early
on. And as you say, the length of time had nothing to do with any
legal liability issues as the families involved had reached a
settlement with the state and contractors well before.
Scott M. Kozel
>
> "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > NTSB accident investigation reports are for safety recommendations, and
> > they are not admissible as evidence in a court of law.
> >
> > The reason why they take so long, is because of the complexity of the
> > accidents that they investigate. While they investigate all U.S. civil
> > aviation accidents, with highways they only investigate unusually major
> > highway accidents.
>
> the ones I checked seemed to take longer than aviation in the main.
> The terrible one here in Denver, where a girder collapsed from a
> bridge widening project at C-470 onto I-70 on a Saturday morning and
> killed a family of three driving down the highway, took more than two
> years even though the basics of the event were fairly obvious early
> on. And as you say, the length of time had nothing to do with any
> legal liability issues as the families involved had reached a
> settlement with the state and contractors well before.
The six to 12 month period seems fairly typical with highway accidents,
though, in the case of major multiple fatality freeway pileups, major
fatal bus accidents, release of flammable cargo and fire, etc.
kh...@jersey.net
>
> - Show quoted text -
And have you heard much about this particular accident on your local
news since the collaspe? There's been a lot about individual states
rechecking their bridges, but as signficant as this is, local news
stations broadcast what's going on in their coverage area.
k_f...@lycos.com
Yes. Why are you even questioning this?
> There's been a lot about individual states
> rechecking their bridges, but as signficant as this is, local news
> stations broadcast what's going on in their coverage area.
That's hardly surprising since local news sources generally try to
ferret out the news in their particular coverage areas. But we also
run major national and international news as well, and of course, we
also receive network broadcasts and national newspapers even out here
in the sticks. ;-)
Look, it's just a fact that the I-35W bridge collapse is and was a
major major story. There is simply no way it is forgotten. Certainly
we don't cover each day's developments in Minnesota here in the Denver
media like they would in the Star Tribune, but milestones such as the
issuance of the final report on the cause will most certainly be
covered nationwide.
Joseph Houk
1192336689....@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com, "kh...@jersey.net"
<kh...@jersey.net> wrote:
> And have you heard much about this particular accident on your local
> news since the collaspe? There's been a lot about individual states
> rechecking their bridges, but as signficant as this is, local news
> stations broadcast what's going on in their coverage area.
That's how the media works: get the local angle on a major story. If there's
any issue about a bridge, it's top of the heap in the news headlines.
-----
"Character is what you are in the dark." - D.L. Moody
My Homepage: http://tinyurl.com/ytc34l - Admirals: http://tinyurl.com/2f54by
Images: http://tinyurl.com/28br6g - MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/jwhouk
Rick Powell
> What's scarier is the thing just fell down, THEY DON'T YET KNOW THE
> CAUSE, but they're rushing to put a replacement up. Seems to me this
> new design AT A MINIMUM should include a fix for the flaws that
> brought the old one down, and you can't do that if you don't know what
> those flaws were.
1. This is a main artery through Mpls-St. Paul. I'd be concerned if
they were NOT in a hurry to put up another bridge.
2. The new bridge will not be a deck truss or anything similar to the
old bridge, therefore stopping the design and construction of the new
bridge to find the cause of the old bridge failure would almost
certainly not yield any meaningful results that could be applied to
the new bridge. I noticed that *all* bridge design and construction
in the world did not come to a standstill when I-35W collapsed, nor
should it have. The results of the investigation *will* be useful in
preventing similar failures of similar bridges.
RP
Free Lunch
Scott in SoCal <scotte...@yahoo.com> wrote in
<mo95h3ph8o264gtpn...@4ax.com>:
>Mark Roberts <markrob...@gmail.com> said in misc.transport.road:
>
>>Yesterday's New York Times included an article about the design for
>>the replacement bridge. This would seem to provide some evidence
>>that the story is still of national interest.
>>
>>URL (this may pitch you over to an advertisement first):
>>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/13/us/13bridge.html?ex=1193025600&en=7c73f25f3e8a77cc&ei=5070&emc=eta1
>
>[QUOTE]
>Anita Bealer, the head librarian at the Minneapolis Public Library,
>questioned the wisdom of building a bridge wider than the one it is
>replacing. “The thing just fell down and now they’re going to widen it
>to 10 lanes?” she asked. “That sounds ridiculous.”
>[/QUOTE]
>
>What's scarier is the thing just fell down, THEY DON'T YET KNOW THE
>CAUSE, but they're rushing to put a replacement up. Seems to me this
>new design AT A MINIMUM should include a fix for the flaws that
>brought the old one down, and you can't do that if you don't know what
>those flaws were.
The old one used a design that is obsolete. The new one does not.
kh...@jersey.net
>
> - Show quoted text -
If you review my original message, I never said it wouldn't be
covered...I simply mentioned that it won't be the lead story, but
rather just mentioned deeper into the broadcast.
k_f...@lycos.com
> If you review my original message, I never said it wouldn't be
> covered...I simply mentioned that it won't be the lead story, but
> rather just mentioned deeper into the broadcast.
Not to quibble, but what you actually said was:
"Think about all the big news stories that occurred earlier this year
and late last year. Think about all the occasions where they said
investigations would take 6 months to a year. Do you ever hear the
conclusion to these investigations?"
We most often DO hear about them. I take issue with your claim there.
Then you said:
"When the investigation is complete, this will be nothing but a
general
story tucked deep into the newspapers and news broadcasts. If J-Lo's
baby is born the same day the investgation results are released, the
baby will grab more attention than this story."
This is a broad and sweeping generalization that sounded more like
blowing off steam at the media than an accurate analysis. If you read
mainstream media, you really aren't going to find JLo's baby
dominating anything. If you watch "Entertainment Tonight" or the
Enquirer, your view will be different but illegitimate.
I can guarantee you that JLo's baby would never be a more dominant
news story in my newspaper over the final report on the Minnesota
bridge collapse. Don't let your biases lead you to unwarranted
conclusions.
Finally, of course anything can happen from day to day to affect story
placement. It may be that the day the NTSB releases a final report on
the bridge collapse, the other more immediate news of the day will
play higher in non-Minnesota local and regional papers, especially if
there is local news of importance.I don't know why you would find this
strange or out of kilter in any way. Seems perfectly reasonable. But
on national newscasts and papers that aim at a more general audience
and that avoid strictly local stuff, the report on the bridge collapse
will carry great weight. And again, that's reasonable and normal. A
Denver paper is unlikely to lead page one with the NTSB report on
Minneapolis when it comes out, especially since things are happening
in Denver all the time. And of course, the day the bridge collapsed it
was front page everywhere, because of the enormity of the event.
Nothing strange about that at all.
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com
> > It will probably make local news there. For instance, I don't recall
> > there being much mention of the results of the investigation of the
> > Virginia Tech shootings in mainstream media, but it was definitely in
> > local news.
>
> The results of the investigation got more than just local coverage, as
> there was plenty in the major local media in Richmond, Norfolk, and
> Washington, D.C.
Those cities are in or close enough to Virginia to be part of the
'local' coverage for the event.
The results were covered in other local papers, but not very
prominently.
When the bridge results are in it will get frontpage coverage in the
twin cities area and in major papers like the New York Times. Local
and regional newspapers elsewhere will give much less space to it.
Unless one is actively looking for the results, it will be easy to
miss.
For the rest of the country, it's already ancient history.
An exception might be if the cause is found to be something very
dramatic, such as from terrorist or gross neglect.
Froggie
>
> I was under the impression that there are several MTR
> regulars who have close connections with the various
> transportation agencies. But not with the NTSB or
> Minnesota DOT?
I have a few connections to MnDOT, but mainly in planning and
design...nothing really with the bridge unit.
Froggie | Minneapolis, MN native | http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/