Throughout the countryside, one of the most tell-tale and lasting signs of an abandoned rail line are huge metal bridges spanning some creek or roadway, yet, sadly, no longer supporting tracks.
This raises a few questions:
(1) In the discussions to extend a push-pull Metra-like rail passenger operation in Indianapolis, they are talking about extending the Indiana transportation museum line downtown via the now abandoned Monon. One of the problems/expenses is the need to re-bridge I-70. Someone who claimed to know what they were talking about said that this isn’t a big deal, as there are 14 abandoned rail bridges in Indianapolis, and it is simply a matter of chosing the one that works best. He also indicated that this is the reason why they leave such bridges intact–so they will be ready to replace another bridge when the time comes.
Is this true? Are abandoned rail bridges regularly used for this purpose? How often does this happen?
(2) When the price of scrap metal is through the roof, it always surprises me that so many very large bridges like these do not get introduced to the cutter’s torch. Is this because the bridge has more long-term value as a replacement?
(3) How do they remove these bridges? Some of them are very large, perhaps too large for any single crane to move–especially so, when it is considered that there is no longer a rail line or roadway to deliver the crane. (FYI, I think there is a difference between removing for scrap and removing for reuse. Maybe I am wrong, but I suspect the former is much easier).
(4) Is it ever the case that soem of these bridges are simply abandoned altogether? Does anyone own them/can anyone–who can do so without tresspassing–go cut them for scrap? Don’t laugh at this question, I realize the answer is probably/usually
Throughout the countryside, one of the most tell-tale and lasting signs of an abandoned rail line are huge metal bridges spanning some creek or roadway, yet, sadly, no longer supporting tracks.
This raises a few questions:
(1) In the discussions to extend a push-pull Metra-like rail passenger operation in Indianapolis, they are talking about extending the Indiana transportation museum line downtown via the now abandoned Monon. One of the problems/expenses is the need to re-bridge I-70. Someone who claimed to know what they were talking about said that this isn’t a big deal, as there are 14 abandoned rail bridges in Indianapolis, and it is simply a matter of chosing the one that works best. He also indicated that this is the reason why they leave such bridges intact–so they will be ready to replace another bridge when the time comes.
Is this true? Are abandoned rail bridges regularly used for this purpose? How often does this happen?
(2) When the price of scrap metal is through the roof, it always surprises me that so many very large bridges like these do not get introduced to the cutter’s torch. Is this because the bridge has more long-term value as a replacement?
(3) How do they remove these bridges? Some of them are very large, perhaps too large for any single crane to move–especially so, when it is considered that there is no longer a rail line or roadway to deliver the crane. (FYI, I think there is a difference between removing for scrap and removing for reuse. Maybe I am wrong, but I suspect the former is much easier).
(4) Is it ever the case that soem of these bridges are simply abandoned altogether? Does anyone own them/can anyone–who can do so without tresspassing–go cut them for scrap? Don’t laugh at this question, I realize the answer is probably/usually no. But, it would seem like some hopelessly abandoned bridg
. No, they are not regularly reused if larger than about an 80-foot through plate girder, which won’t be long enough to clear-span even one-half of a modern multi-lane interstate highway. For anything larger the cost of dismantling, transportation, cleaning, repair, rework, re-erection, and engineering almost always considerably exceeds the cost of building new. This is assuming the bridge in question even has a sufficient load rating (E-60 would be the minimum for a passenger-only operation), is in good condition (most are not), isn’t coated with something hazardous such as lead-based or asbestos-containing paint, and the bridge has the correct length and clearances. Most old bridges are rivet-connected, not bolt-connected, and any connections that are unmade for disassembly have to be re-engineered with high-strength bolts. The pins usually have to be replaced on pin-connected bridges, along with the bars.
I know of RR bridges right here in Muncie, thru truss…2 {end to end}, that have been abandoned at least…35 plus years. Big heavy steel units that appear like they will stay there for a hundred years if the concrete / stone pillars stay in place.
Also know of one girder bridge at least 2 sections end to end, back in Pennsylvania that have been abandoned at least 50 years and still in place. Road bed severed long ago. It’s a shame the two in Muncie can’t be put to use where a need exists as they sure do look like they could hold massive weight. Steam engines use to ply this route and they were built to support them.
And Gabe if you read this…Those two are just north of the depot {now trail head}, about a quarter of a mile. The Trail bridge {girder}, crosses White River just parallel to them.
There was a recent article on Trains News Wire about the bridge on the old Milwaukee Road line to Rapid City, SD. It’s now in the middle of a farmers field and in danger of collapse. Seems it was more cost effective to repair/stabilize it than remove it. Many of the abandoned Milwaukee trestles and bridges are still in place.
Another example is a former MILW bridge in Minneapolis right near the Metrodome that is now used by the Minneapolis LRT. It was part of the lead heading to the MILW’s depot on Washington Ave. I used to park over by Dome Souveniers for Twins games (until they jacked-up the parking costs) and there were still some of the old rail visible that hadn’t been completely paved-over. When they put the LRT in all those remnants were ripped-out, but the MILW bridge was re-used (I don’t know if they did any structural upgrades to it).
Here in downstate Illinois, I know there’s several overpasses from the former north-south C&NW tracks that UP abandoned in the late 1990s and are still in place, over NS’s Hannibal sub tracks and old US-36 at Curran, over I-72 and over a county road called the “Old State-Old Jacksonville” road. In Springfield, when the NS and KCS (former Wabash and GM&O) tracks in the southwest part of town were relocated from the city limits to just north of I-72 in 1994, much of the former NS tracks and it’s overpasses were converted into a pedestrian walkway.
Ditto on much of what RWM had to say. I wouldn’t say that moving and reusing a railroad bridge for another rail line is impossible or never done - one of the southeastern US railroads reused a long (like 300 ft. ?) lift bridge by moving it from 1 river to another within the last 10 years or so - but it is extremely rare. Further, even if the bridge is in perfect shape, the modern heavier freight car gross weight ranges of 263,000 to 286,000 to 315,000 lbs. may render them obsolete for anything other than industrial siding or light-duty branchline service. Also, while I’ve seen some “standard designs” to facilitate such relocation and reuse, most bridges were really built to suit their specific location, particularly if there are any angles in the stream/ road/ track/ etc. below, or if it is curved (really a series of angled bridges). Unless you’re extremely lucky to have an exact match or a narrower crossing needed, there’s usually not enough extra strength built in to them to reconfigure them for the same distance as a straight span at a 90-degree angle.
Another aspect is that years of dust and dirt accumulations - esp. coal and cement dust, but there are others equally bad - in the joints and connections, when soaked by rainwater, become pretty corrosive. The result is that very often the section thickness is reduced considerably - by half is not uncommon, the rivet or bolt holes become enlarged to irregular shapes and paper thin, and I also understand (but can’t confirm) that the metallurgy changes in ways that make it more brittle.
Also, if it’s a ballast-deck type structure, the lower portions may have been encased in concrete. There too corrosion will occur, and it is practically impossible to clean concrete off the members sufficiently to reuse them, again especially at the joints.
That said, it’s more common that the old railroad bridges are reused
The moment the bridge removal costs exceed the salvage value the bridge stays - unless the STB/ICC dictated that the bridge be removed (usually for drainage reasons) in it’s environmental decisions…
Recently UP and the Missouri Rails/Trails (Katy Trail) bubbas got into a ruckus over the old Missouri River MKT span near Boonville that UP wanted to salvage and move elsewhere.
Closer to Gabe: Look at the Wabash River bridge of the former CSX/B&O/CH&D/CI&W between Hillsdale and Montezuma near the IL/IN state line (Parke County, IN)
The USCG may have a list for some of the bridges. I hope they get inspected sometime to be sure they don’t pose a navigation risk. Some bridges are moved & reused somewhere else. They must be floatted on barges and sent to the new site.
There’s the former C&NW bridge across the Mississippi at Keithsburg IL that was abandoned in the early 1970s. The bridge is mostly still there, except for the lift span and another section.
On June 30, 1981, a group of youth decided that the bridge would make a good launching point for their private fireworks display. A shell entered the bridge tenders shack and exploded. That set the shack on fire, which then set the grease on the bridge mechanism on fire. The fire eventually caused the lift span to fail and drop into the Mississippi River. The accident blocked river traffic for several days until the US Army Corps of Engineers could remove the collapsed bridge section. Later, a second bridge section and the piers were removed to make a very wide navigation channel. The rest of the bridge survives some 25 years later. There is some track on the Iowa side. The track has been removed from the Illinois side, and the right of way has been removed in places to facilitate water flow in the back water areas.
. No, they are not regularly reused if larger than about an 80-foot through plate girder, which won’t be long enough to clear-span even one-half of a modern multi-lane interstate highway. For anything larger the cost of dismantling, transportation, cleaning, repair, rework, re-erection, and engineering almost always considerably exceeds the cost of building new. This is assuming the bridge in question even has a sufficient load rating (E-60 would be the minimum for a passenger-only operation), is in good condition (most are not), isn’t coated with something hazardous such as lead-based or asbestos-containing paint, and the bridge has the correct length and clearances. Most old bridges are rivet-connected, not bolt-connected, and any connections that are unmade for disassembly have to be re-engineered with high-strength bolts. The pins usually have to be replaced on pin-connected bridges, alon
The difference between stability and demolition was $50,000, paid by the state of South Dakota. SD bought hundreds of miles of Milwaukee track to keep it from disappearing 30 years ago. BNSF leased what they wanted to use for 25 years before they finally bought it. The bridge in question is between Rapid City and Kadoka, and the last train was a Milwaukee. They are building a bike trail on the ROW between RC and Farmingdale, and they want to extend it all the way to Kadoka eventually, about 50 miles. The old ROW runs through some beautiful scenery. East of Kadoka, to Mitchell, the line is used by Dakota Southern and it still owned by the state. It connects to BNSF at Mitchell, but DS has trackage rights to Sioux City, IA on the BNSF, so DS is no longer a captive of BNSF. Now they can ship with UP and CN (or CP?) out of Sioux City. That was part of the deal when the state sold BNSF the track they had been leasing. For the last few years DS hasn’t been able to ship grain off of the Mitchell to Kadoka line because the BNSF was charging them so much it was cheaper for the elevators on the line to truck their grain north to the DM&E.
Ditto on much of what RWM had to say. I wouldn’t say that moving and reusing a railroad bridge for another rail line is impossible or never done - one of the southeastern US railroads reused a long (like 300 ft. ?) lift bridge by moving it from 1 river to another within the last 10 years or so - but it is extremely rare. Further, even if the bridge is in perfect shape, the modern heavier freight car gross weight ranges of 263,000 to 286,000 to 315,000 lbs. may render them obsolete for anything other than industrial siding or light-duty branchline service. Also, while I’ve seen some “standard designs” to facilitate such relocation and reuse, most bridges were really built to suit their specific location, particularly if there are any angles in the stream/ road/ track/ etc. below, or if it is curved (really a series of angled bridges). Unless you’re extremely lucky to have an exact match or a narrower crossing needed, there’s usually not enough extra strength built in to them to reconfigure them for the same distance as a straight span at a 90-degree angle.
Another aspect is that years of dust and dirt accumulations - esp. coal and cement dust, but there are others equally bad - in the joints and connections, when soaked by rainwater, become pretty corrosive. The result is that very often the section thickness is reduced considerably - by half is not uncommon, the rivet or bolt holes become enlarged to irregular shapes and paper thin, and I also understand (but can’t confirm) that the metallurgy changes in ways that make it more brittle.
Also, if it’s a ballast-deck type structure, the lower portions may have been encased in concrete. There too corrosion will occur, and it is practically impossible to clean concrete off the members sufficiently to reuse them, again especially at the joints.
That said, it’s more common that the old railroad bridges are reused or "repurpos
That’s pretty funny - and so true. How many of them are still around today and carrying much larger loads than ever contemplated when they were built - Thomas Viaduct, Starrucca Viaduct, Tunkhannock Viaduct, James J. Hill (?) Bridge across the Miss. in Minn. - St. Paul, Rockville Bridge - these are all stone or concrete, but also the Hell Gate Bridge, and many, many others of all kinds. John G. Kneiling once observed - aside from the technical uncertainties of the times necessitating pretty large factors of safety to provide for and overcome a lot of the unknowns - that Chief Engineers of railroads were important men in their communities, knew they were building important projects, and were not to be trifled with - their word and judgment governed ! (I think we’ve all heard the line from our mentors about the Chief Engineers of the day coming down the line being more important than an act of God or Jesus Christ, etc., so there’s truth to that.) It shows in how long these structures have lasted.
My tendency to make stupid typos has struck again - yes, it should have been “aging”. I’m the world’s worst proofreader - I see exactly what I expect to see.
One major thing that helps the longevity of railroad bridges is that they don’t use salt on them.
I wonder how resilient a modern river rail crossing would be if one were built today? Probably box girder or concrete with few if any truss spans with enough height to avoid the need for a vertical lift span. Most highway river crossings built in the last 40 years have been box girder, concrete or tied arch, with cable stayed spans becoming popular in the last 20.
Movable bridges are still the logical choice for rail in locations where high-level relocation is not feasible, e.g., almost all urbanized locations. Modern rail bridges (built in the last 20 years) include several truss bridges (e.g., Sioux City, Iowa, over the Missouri) and are designed for 100-year lifespans. The likelihood of most of today’s rail bridges exceeding the lifespan of most of the bridges of a century ago is pretty good - we know a lot more now than we did then. The idea that “all railroad bridges designed and erected a century ago are wonderful” is ahistorical. There were some real turkeys, too, that are now either long gone, or we wish they were long gone.
Even with a design for a 100 year life, does any part of the design figure in the steps for removal when the time comes, either at the planned replacement date, or earlier if conditions require?