Washington's bridge disasters

pwalker · August 3rd, 2007, 04:07 AM

In watching media reports of the MSP bridge collapse, I see a lot of old video of the 1940 Tacoma Narrows (Galloping Gertie) going down. NBC called it the most spectacular bridge collapse in our history, and the only casualty was a dog left in an abandoned vehicle.

Then there was the I-90 floating bridge sinking...in retrospect, a positive event that speeded up building a replacement. (Remember, the original plan was to use that old span for eastbound traffic). And if memory serves, wasn't that span closed at the time for repairs? A stroke of luck there.

And who can forget the Hood Canal disaster?

Let's just hope the next bridge disaster doesn't happen here. But I am not certain it won't.

mhays · August 3rd, 2007, 05:15 AM

Tacoma Narrows was too experimental. The design didn't take wind or various resonance issues enough into account.

I-90 was closed and being worked on. Workers were supposed to seal the floatation chambers i the non-work hours. They failed to do this. Normally that wouldn't have killed the bridge, but we had a huge storm. Some chambers filled with water and that's what caused the initial section(s) to fail, which in turn caused the sections to break apart and doomed additional sections. In fact, I think some was due to sinking sections snapping some of the anchor cables for the healthy sections. It was Thanksgiving Day in 1988 or 1989 I believe. I was working with a Mercer Island resident at the time and he was rather annoyed.

Hood Canal I haven't read as much about. Just the Reader's Digest version (literally) at my grandmother's, or something like that. The surprising part is half the bridge is still there, being replaced now decades later. Anyway it was a "100 year" storm. The bridge didn't let water through easily enough to there was some accumulated pressure, plus it was overtopped by waves.

mhays · August 3rd, 2007, 05:18 AM

Let's not forget the ship that hit the Spokane Street Bridge, causing severe damage though not total failure. I forget, but it might have been in the days when there was only one bridge. Were both the high and low bridges built after, at least one in a very big hurry?

pwalker · August 3rd, 2007, 05:28 AM

mhays, you are close. November 1990 for the demise of the "Lacey B. Murrow" (I-90) floating bridge.

As for the West Seattle Bridge, the high bridge was built quickly after the problems developed with the old bridge. (Think of it, there was actually a time in Seattle where officials reacted quickly, in both these instances). I have said it before, but in Seattle sometimes it takes a disaster to get things moving.

mhays · August 3rd, 2007, 05:34 AM

Amazing. All this time I thought that job ended 12/31/89, and it actually ended 12/31/90! That's when the Mirabeau, where I cooked along with the Swiss guy from Mercer Island, closed on top of the old Seafirst Building. I guess that makes sense, because I spent about two years at Italia before joining the Commons organization. Just in case you wanted my life story.

mhays · August 3rd, 2007, 05:38 AM

In I-90's case, there was a massive and immediate infusion of federal dollars, without the typical several years of applications and decision-making. Also, there wasn't the typical public process. And both design and construction were expedited at tremendous extra cost. None of those measures would be possible outside of a disaster scenario, and all would be severely controversial even if they were.

pwalker · August 3rd, 2007, 05:59 AM

Yes, this is an area where the feds really can help. You are on-spot about I-90 because it is a federal highway. Many don't remember, but the feds paid for most of the Interstate system, and the new I-90 probably would never have been built without this funding. Also explains why SR 520 is such a problem.

I-35W will also get rebuilt quickly, for exactly the same reasons. I'm not a big fan of federal spending, but certainly enjoy, as most of us should, the dollars that have been spent on our Interstate Highways. (In fact, when I look at my paystub, I always try to think about our Interstate Highway System.) The fed tax bites seem much less invasive.

BoulderGrad · August 3rd, 2007, 07:00 AM

We could be more general and just call this the Washington Disasters? That ads in the Nisqually Quake, Mount Saint Helens, and the Great Seattle fire. 2 of those greatly changed the way we talk about infrastructure in the city. Anyone notice we haven't had any "great" fires of an accidental nature for quite a while? Yay fire codes!

August 3rd, 2007, 04:07 AM	#1
pwalker Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Native Seattleite Posts: 1,257 Likes (Received): 3	Washington's bridge disasters In watching media reports of the MSP bridge collapse, I see a lot of old video of the 1940 Tacoma Narrows (Galloping Gertie) going down. NBC called it the most spectacular bridge collapse in our history, and the only casualty was a dog left in an abandoned vehicle. Then there was the I-90 floating bridge sinking...in retrospect, a positive event that speeded up building a replacement. (Remember, the original plan was to use that old span for eastbound traffic). And if memory serves, wasn't that span closed at the time for repairs? A stroke of luck there. And who can forget the Hood Canal disaster? Let's just hope the next bridge disaster doesn't happen here. But I am not certain it won't. Last edited by pwalker; August 3rd, 2007 at 04:20 AM.

August 3rd, 2007, 07:00 AM	#8
BoulderGrad Registered User Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 3,365 Likes (Received): 42	We could be more general and just call this the Washington Disasters? That ads in the Nisqually Quake, Mount Saint Helens, and the Great Seattle fire. 2 of those greatly changed the way we talk about infrastructure in the city. Anyone notice we haven't had any "great" fires of an accidental nature for quite a while? Yay fire codes! __________________ My shrink once said to me: "Maybe life isn't for everyone..."

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

August 3rd, 2007, 05:15 AM	#2
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,394 Likes (Received): 119	Tacoma Narrows was too experimental. The design didn't take wind or various resonance issues enough into account. I-90 was closed and being worked on. Workers were supposed to seal the floatation chambers i the non-work hours. They failed to do this. Normally that wouldn't have killed the bridge, but we had a huge storm. Some chambers filled with water and that's what caused the initial section(s) to fail, which in turn caused the sections to break apart and doomed additional sections. In fact, I think some was due to sinking sections snapping some of the anchor cables for the healthy sections. It was Thanksgiving Day in 1988 or 1989 I believe. I was working with a Mercer Island resident at the time and he was rather annoyed. Hood Canal I haven't read as much about. Just the Reader's Digest version (literally) at my grandmother's, or something like that. The surprising part is half the bridge is still there, being replaced now decades later. Anyway it was a "100 year" storm. The bridge didn't let water through easily enough to there was some accumulated pressure, plus it was overtopped by waves.

August 3rd, 2007, 05:18 AM	#3
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,394 Likes (Received): 119	Let's not forget the ship that hit the Spokane Street Bridge, causing severe damage though not total failure. I forget, but it might have been in the days when there was only one bridge. Were both the high and low bridges built after, at least one in a very big hurry?

August 3rd, 2007, 05:28 AM	#4
pwalker Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Native Seattleite Posts: 1,257 Likes (Received): 3	mhays, you are close. November 1990 for the demise of the "Lacey B. Murrow" (I-90) floating bridge. As for the West Seattle Bridge, the high bridge was built quickly after the problems developed with the old bridge. (Think of it, there was actually a time in Seattle where officials reacted quickly, in both these instances). I have said it before, but in Seattle sometimes it takes a disaster to get things moving.

August 3rd, 2007, 05:34 AM	#5
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,394 Likes (Received): 119	Amazing. All this time I thought that job ended 12/31/89, and it actually ended 12/31/90! That's when the Mirabeau, where I cooked along with the Swiss guy from Mercer Island, closed on top of the old Seafirst Building. I guess that makes sense, because I spent about two years at Italia before joining the Commons organization. Just in case you wanted my life story.

August 3rd, 2007, 05:38 AM	#6
mhays Journeyman Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Seattle Posts: 8,394 Likes (Received): 119	In I-90's case, there was a massive and immediate infusion of federal dollars, without the typical several years of applications and decision-making. Also, there wasn't the typical public process. And both design and construction were expedited at tremendous extra cost. None of those measures would be possible outside of a disaster scenario, and all would be severely controversial even if they were.

August 3rd, 2007, 05:59 AM	#7
pwalker Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Native Seattleite Posts: 1,257 Likes (Received): 3	Yes, this is an area where the feds really can help. You are on-spot about I-90 because it is a federal highway. Many don't remember, but the feds paid for most of the Interstate system, and the new I-90 probably would never have been built without this funding. Also explains why SR 520 is such a problem. I-35W will also get rebuilt quickly, for exactly the same reasons. I'm not a big fan of federal spending, but certainly enjoy, as most of us should, the dollars that have been spent on our Interstate Highways. (In fact, when I look at my paystub, I always try to think about our Interstate Highway System.) The fed tax bites seem much less invasive.