Truss Bridge Category up for Peer Review

[+trekinldy59]

Hi y'all. I've created a category for Truss Bridges. I have two in the area I live in that I would like to waymark but they don't fit into any of the existing categories.

 

Could i please impose upon everyone to review the category here: http://www.Waymarking.com/groups/peer_revi...de-e44affba1c04 and if you agree that I have met the qualifications for the new category and feel that it has merit, please vote affimatively!

 

I would also appreciate any feedback as this is my first try at creating a category and all advice is appreciated!

 

Thanks,

Trekinldy59

[+Jake39]

Sounds complicated.

How about a couple examples to illustrate the design of the bridges you are looking for us to post. Personally I can't tell one bridge from another but I am willing to learn

[+Miragee]

Cool . . . there is one of these not too far from me.

 

 

I voted "Yea."

 

Truss Bridges

[+TheBeanTeam]

 

I voted "Yea."

 

 

Well I will admit I voted no.... reluctantly. I like the idea but it is a bit to broad for me. Here is why. The railroad bridge category already has a variable for truss bridges. Are all truss style railroad bridges now to be listed in two spots? This category didn't pash the redundancy test with me on this account. I suggested that maybe a roadway bridge categry that focuses on truss bridges or perhaps a magnificent roadway bridge category might be more appropriate with different variables for each type. Just my thoughts and reasoning for what it's worth.

 

If a category like this was implemnted a link to Structurae would be a great addition to the category page.

 

Edit to add link.

Edited August 25, 2006 by TheBeanTeam

[+Miragee]

The truss bridge near me used to be a roadway bridge. Because of how narrow and unsafe it ultimately became as traffic on the highway increased, a new concrete bridge was erected next to it. It is now used by hikers, horseback riders, and bikers to get to nearby trails.

 

So . . . technically, this bridge isn't a "roadway" bridge anymore, and it was never a railway bridge . . .

[+trekinldy59]

Thank you Miragee for adding the picture. I had not thought of that. There are many of the Truss type bridges that are not railroad bridges. I looked all throughout the available categories under Bridges to add a new waymark and could not find a category that was the "right" place for this type of bridge. Most of them are roadway bridges or are used for hiking, biking, golf carts, etc.

 

I appreciate your comments and responses! Thank you.

[+8Nuts MotherGoose]

Now that I know what a truss bridge looks like. What do I do with the old truss bridge that got to weak for cars. They build a pedestrian covered bridge inside of the truss frame.

[+trekinldy59]

I would like to see that one. Can you still see the trusses or just the covered bridge?

[+8Nuts MotherGoose]

I would like to see that one. Can you still see the trusses or just the covered bridge?

 

Visit this Covered Bridge waymark:

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/details...0f-71cbcc663e7e

 

I'm web page illiterate, so you'll have to take it from here.

[+Jake39]

Visit this Covered Bridge waymark:

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/details...0f-71cbcc663e7e

 

I'm web page illiterate, so you'll have to take it from here.

Sorry, but I see no value in that picture you posted as being able to identify the type of bridge this is. Take another picture from underneath.

Edit: I realize it's a covered bridge photo.

Edited August 27, 2006 by Jake39

[+trekinldy59]

Cool pictures. It's a truss bridge that they put a roof and wall inside of to make it a covered bridge. That's pretty neat!

[+8Nuts MotherGoose]

Visit this Covered Bridge waymark:

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/details...0f-71cbcc663e7e

 

I'm web page illiterate, so you'll have to take it from here.

Sorry, but I see no value in that picture you posted as being able to identify the type of bridge this is. Take another picture from underneath.

Edit: I realize it's a covered bridge photo.

 

I'm not sure which bridge you mean. The photo was for the covered bridge, but the old bridge was there also. If you mean that the photo was poor for a "Truss Bridge" waymark, I have to agree. It was not photographed for that purpose.

For a Truss Bridge waymark, I will take a new photo of the "Truss" bridge, to show it better. Then the covered bridge will have "no value in that picture..." Although I may also include this photo to show the unique quality of this particular "Double" bridge.