windy day here was browsing the libary of congress and found a lift bridge that will fit the smallest of layouts, its over a old C&O canal dont look like its moved in a long time and the canal is a swamp but it is just the right size for a small layout or a branch line on larger layout.
jim
It looks to me that it's on some kind of pulley system where the entire bridge lifts up as opposed to just one end. Very interesting pic!
Matt
The reason I ask is that there are no railroad tracks associated with the bridge. Was there a branch line at one time?
MountainMan Wrote:The reason I ask is that there are no railroad tracks associated with the bridge. Was there a branch line at one time?
here is a drawing of the lift opperating mechanisim as you can see there a winch in the house atop and the counter weights were a effictive stop for the rr,and if i rember it was the RF&P rr.
jim
I thought the railroads pretty much killed the canals' business. Why the need for a lift bridge over a canal that appears to run parallel to the tracks? I would think by the time the bridge was built, the canal was obsolete.
because it was consered a navagatable water way whather it was used or not and if owened by the C&O it was a compedator to the RF&P. hence the same old bull.
jim
What kind of traffic would have used that puny "canal" - canoes???
Here in Texas we would call that a creek.....Seems like a lot of bridge for a little water
Probably a decent branch canal in it's day.
scubadude Wrote:What kind of traffic would have used that puny "canal" - canoes??? Here in Texas we would call that a creek.....Seems like a lot of bridge for a little water
Any waterway, capable of watercraft traffic, or used for watercraft traffic, is considered a "navigable waterway", and any bridge across it must be capable of allowing unrestricted passage of the aforementioned watercraft traffic. In many cases, it's the type and height of the "usual" ships and boats, that determine the type of bridge used.
MountainMan Wrote:The reason I ask is that there are no railroad tracks associated with the bridge. Was there a branch line at one time?
If you look carefully at the right hand side of the picture, there is just the hint of old tracks, still in place.
Jim, That is another great little bridge...................................now where can I use one of those..?
That's one cool bridge. Great find on that one...
Sumpter250 Wrote:Any waterway, capable of watercraft traffic, or used for watercraft traffic, is considered a "navigable waterway"
In Arizona the definition seems to go further - we tend to consider any waterway formerly capable of carrying watercraft traffic acceptable. This includes dammed or diverted streams that are now dry. We have creeks barely deep enough for a canoe navigable, but irrigation canals arent. It is actually a legal pain in the rear end here in Arizona - the type of stuff I worked on when I worked for the state:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.azstreambeds.com/">http://www.azstreambeds.com/</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.yumasun.com/news/salt-60432-arizona-claim.html">http://www.yumasun.com/news/salt-60432- ... claim.html</a><!-- m -->
These types of legal definitions eat up plenty of time and resources. Unfortunately, my state has fewer resources and competent people to deal with these issues now
. My guess is the railroad bridge was built after the canal business was mostly done, but they were required by law to allow for passage of canal boats. The thing may have only been raised once a month or less. For recreational canoers, it would have been easier to just portage rather than lift the bridge. Any serious business on a canal that small would have been replaced by other transport.
scubadude Wrote:What kind of traffic would have used that puny "canal" - canoes??? Here in Texas we would call that a creek.....Seems like a lot of bridge for a little water
Yeah, I know ... all thing are bigger in Texas. But when the pictured canal was in use, there were only "Original People" and those from south of the Rio Grande in Texas! (And the great Rio Grand River is a wide, but very shallow stream in some places)
Having grown up near all that early American history, and visited the banks of the Delaware Canal (which parallels the Delaware River) for the occasional Saturday family picnic outing, permit me to enlighten you, ScubaDude. The canal in the photo is obviously overgrown with weeds, etc. and was undoubtable much wider when it was in use. Most canals of the day permitted navigation in each direction, with a mule path on either side. In the case of the Delaware Canal, when I last lived in the area in the mid-1970's there was a tourist outfit that ran an attraction of scheduled rides up the canal from New Hope, PA in authentic canal barges pulled by two-mule teams every weekend in the summer.
They probably don't teach this song to young second or third graders anymore in this day of revisionist history, but I can recall, as a kid that age, singing, "I've got an old mule and her name is Sall, Sixteen miles on the Erie Canal." North/South freight travel was handled by river boat where large rivers were navigable and by barges on canals where rivers were too shallow to navigate. East/West frieght travel was primarily by wagaon ... and took "forever."
O.K., that's today's history lesson. Now, your homework for tomorrow is read chapters ...
Hey guys....Look what I found!
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.iceandcoal.org/co/aqueducts/aqueducts.html">http://www.iceandcoal.org/co/aqueducts/aqueducts.html</a><!-- m -->
Fourteen or fifteen pictures from the top.
