I’ve always liked night photography and this time of year is great for using the night to makeup for what little and frequently lousy, daylight we have here in the Puget Sound area.
Here’s a link to my most recent efforts. Comments appreciated.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=262156
Steve Carter
…I certainly appreciate it…I too, happen to like the results of night photography. That lift bridge seems familiar…Wasn’t that {maybe one like it}, pictured on here recently in another post…I wonder.
I would trade you one trainset (BNSF) for a bridge like that!
Very nice as usual!
Mook
I was going to suggest that a big bridge needs something other than a Nebraska cornfield to bridge over. But, then I remembered. Isn’t the London Bridge in Arizona, or somewhere?
Yeah, but I’m pretty sure there’s water involved.
We seem to be developing another resident photographer. All the more reason to include the occasional “guest photographer” in the competitions…
Nice shot!
…Lake Havasu and they had to dig a channel to get water under it after it was assembled. Roughly 1970.
Excellent shot Steve !!! [tup][tup]
Oooooooooooh! Nice!
I don’t think there are many bridges like that–and SJ, I think they need that one out there! If you offer the right price, UP might sell you a surplus mainline bridge in Iowa in a year or so.
Speaking of our “resident photographer”, has anyone heard from Chris lately? He was supposed to come this way for Thanksgiving weekend with his family, but I never heard a peep from him.
Thanks for the comments!
That bridge has certainly captivated me (look for a shot of it in one of your favorite magazines soon) and I take some flak from my fellow photographers in the area. They give me a bad time about how often I manage to include the bridge in my photos. Oh well, I like it, it’s unique and it provides a focal point in a very scenic area.
Steve Carter
…I visited the holding site at Lake Havasu where the marked and numbered stones were “stored” before it was assembled to the already poured concrete structure. The stones were stored inside a fenced in holding site. Have some photos someplace here but of course they were long before digital.
I also went up and back on the river {in the UK}, right after it’s {the bridge}, demise {1971}, on a site seeing boat…{London}.
WOW! Stunning pictures. Thanks for sharing.[:D]
I agree ! Really stunning ! Thanks for sharing…
Really, really nice photo.
That type of movable bridge is unusual. Only 2 or 3 of that type in North America, I think.
RWM
Yes, it does seem an odd design. Why not a simpler (to this layman, anyway) drawbridge?
I’ll have to grab the textbook at work on Monday and read “why” again. I did a year ago but have forgotten what it said. Send me a PM if I forget, please.
RWM
What a great shot.
I would give my eye teeth to get a shot half as good as those.
Great composition and clarity.
How many did you take to get the shutter time just right.
Did you have the camera hooked up to a computer to get a larger view over the camera monitor?
Lets just say I am in AWWWW.
Steve,
Lovely shot. Thanks for sharing!
Kevin – this bridge is a vertical-lift bridge of the Strauss and Rall (or Strobel) type, which as I mentioned early is rare. I can find reference to only 3 examples in North America: this one over Chambers Creek, a highway bridge over the Ohio River at Louisville, Kentucky (now gone), and a CB&Q bridge over the Illinois River at La Salle, Illinois (also now gone). I am under the impression this is a rebuild of the original bridge.
The idea behind the Strauss and Rall design (the patents later acquired by the Strobel Bridge Co.) was to dispense with the usual wire ropes, sheaves, and counterweights of a vertical lift bridge by using a hinged counterweight attached to a tower at each end, using a mechanical linkage to lift the bridge, in an effort to reduce maintenance costs. However, this alternative design only substituted its own peculiar maintenance problems due to complexity and non-linear pathway of the moving parts during the opening/closing operation.
Lift bridges are desirable in sites such as this just above water level on a small-boat channel due to their unobstructed channel opening (as opposed to a swing bridge) and because all of the mechanism is above track level (as opposed to some types of bascule bridges). Swing bridges introduce difficult problems with alignment, operation during high winds, and rail locks.
There’s nothing very simple about any movable bridge, every one of which is a potential career-wrecker for the unwary engineering or operating department official. This particular design displays its mechanical foibles for all to see, but a swing bridge, wire-rope lift bridge, or bascule bridge each has its own lurking gremlins though obscured from view they might be.
RWM
I found this site http://www.davehonan.com/2006/02/02-18-06.html with pictures of the bridge in both the raised and lowered position. Interesting to see how the bridge works.