Not all trestles were torn down on abandon RRs. I am not aware of any
of the trestles on the Rio Grande Southern that were torn down. They
have all just slowly decayed over time. There is a Milwaukee Road
wooden through truss bridge that still serves a prairie path on the
west side of Sequim, WA. The RR was abandon about 1980. Many abandon
steel bridges still exist. The Q bridge across Interstate 35 at
Cameron, MO is still in place, complete with BN emblem. (The bridge
may have been built after the Q.) There is also an abandon steel RR
bridge across 350 highway in south Kansas City. (I don't know what RR
crossed it.) I know there are other examples.
By the way, if the bents are left up, the top stringers are also
probably left. There usually were six of them spaced parallel to each
other. The ties were laid on top of them. With a minimal deck, they
would easily support a semi truck, let alone a standard automobile or
pick up as long as the wheel were on top of the stringers. They were
huge timbers designed to support a locomotive. In most case, it is my
experience that scrap companies didn't bother with timber trestles
unless they were specifically contracted to do so. All they wanted
was the steel. If they took them down, they would most likely burn
them in rural areas.
Bill Barber
Gravois Mills, MO
On Aug 5, 2009, at 8:33 AM, CBQ@yahoogroups.com wrote:
> Re: Abandoned railroad trestles
> Posted by: "Bob Webber" cz17@comcast.net rsgrzw
> Tue Aug 4, 2009 11:19 am (PDT)
>
>
>
> It even goes further. If you leave pilings up, someone *WILL* put
> plywood down and assume they can drive across on their bikes. The
> next person sees the plywood (or old ties, or?) and assumes he can
> drive his motorcycle across. The next one sees the "bridge" and
> leaps to the conclusion that since this appears to be a road - it is
> graded, after all - then the bridge should be perfectly fine for his
> 4 wheeler (ATV). The next person sees the 4 wheeler cross, figures
> his 4x4 Ford 350 can cross. There sits a 2 and a half ton vehicle
> impaled on piles.
>
> Better to remove all doubt. If the railroad leaves the pilings, and
> someone "builds" a bridge, it is assumed to be a viable
> crossing. And, given the "deep pockets" laws on the books for
> liability, that means the railroad is responsible. A pile trestle
> abandoned, and not bridged becomes an attractive nuisance. That
> attraction breeds lawsuits.
>
> If you think this is ludicrous, you are, in many ways, right. But -
> the originating railroad (C&NW) and successors (UP) have been held
> accountable for using rubber tiling (which becomes slippery when wet)
> in 50 year old gallery cars. So, the railroad tends to make things
> unusable once they no longer use them.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:CBQ-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:CBQ-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|