Tomorrow afternoon we learn . . . [Ambassador Brige Inspection Report]

. . . what Matty doesn't want us to see in a bridge inspection report that exceeds 700 pages.

Bill Shea is the first [[again) to report:

Quote:

---

John Dingell is making a copy of a 2007 Ambassador Bridge inspection report available for media review at his Dearborn office on Thursday morning.

. . . “Congressman Dingell believes that this report and other inspection reports for privately-owned bridges should be available to the public in the same manner as reports for publicly-owned bridges.�

---

Reporters, who'll get a 17-page digest of "the most important information contained in the report� and can look at the whole thing, are asked to honor an embargo until 3 p.m.

Laura Berman today welcomes the sunshine on at least one bridge inspection report.

Quote:

---

For three decades, as trucks rumbled across the bridge carrying megatons of cargo, the motto might as well have been: In Matty We Trust.

Really, now: Why would we?

Whatever political chicanery is under way, the private Moroun empire is getting a momentary unshrouding.

---

Hey RealityCheck, are you still announcing your Rickdickulous Remark of the Month? Am I in the running? I hope so. I deserve it. It would be a sweep for me.

Synopsis from WDET report: Bridge is in "fair" condition, which apparently is a the way of saying just barely good enough to use. [Second lowest rating a bridge can get.]

The Freep is reporting that it is old, but not in terrible shape. Some corrosion. Wow who would have thought a steel bridge that old and in the water would have some corrosion!

At least it got a spiffy new paint job!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lowell

Synopsis from WDET report: Bridge is in "fair" condition, which apparently is a the way of saying just barely good enough to use. [Second lowest rating a bridge can get.]

---

Not really, it means the bridge is in fair condition. If it was 'just barely good enough to use,' it would have received a rating that reflected that condition.

NBI coding:
9 EXCELLENT CONDITION
8 VERY GOOD CONDITION - no problems noted.
7 GOOD CONDITION - some minor problems.
6 SATISFACTORY CONDITION - structural elements show some minor
deterioration.
5 FAIR CONDITION - all primary structural elements are sound but
may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling or scour.
4 POOR CONDITION - advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling
or scour.
3 SERIOUS CONDITION - loss of section, deterioration, spalling or
scour have seriously affected primary structural components.
Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear
cracks in concrete may be present.
2 CRITICAL CONDITION - advanced deterioration of primary structural
elements. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in
concrete may be present or scour may have removed substructure
support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close
the bridge until corrective action is taken.
1 "IMMINENT" FAILURE CONDITION - major deterioration or section
loss present in critical structural components or obvious
vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure
stability. Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action
may put back in light service.
0 FAILED CONDITION - out of service - beyond corrective action.

"MINOR SECTION LOSS"..... :eek:


That doesn't sound very good to me, regardless of the bridge condition status....

I'd still hate to be on the bridge 150 ft. above the water if this occurred. :[[

RO Resident, you seem in the know on bridges, ... it was reported yesterday by both NPR and WJR that the bridge had the second lowest rating. Now, is this just another example of bad reporting, or is there some other scale the radio stations consulted that conflicts with yours?

Also, if you work for Dan and Matty, let us know.

I don't work for Dan or Matty. I have no special knowledge of their operations or maintenance schedule of their bridge.

I've seen the NBI rating aggregated in various ways. The state's annual report has bridge conditions aggregated into 'good', 'fair', and 'poor'. See page 15.

It would be more concerneding if the inspector found problems that caused the bridge to be classified as structurally deficient that caused some sort of weight restrictions for traffic crossing the bridge.

The staterecently published a list of all MDOT owned bridges. Pay attention to the three rating categories for major bridge elements deck, superstructure, and substructures. Note the number of bridges that are found to be structurally deficient. Being structurally deficient does not necessarily mean the bridge is unsafe--it just means that the state has to pay attention to the elements that require attention so the bridge does not fall down.

Are there similar inspections and reports for tunnels?

The excellent gossip site www.tollroadsnews.com has its own summary of the summary released by Rep. Dingell, and a link the the report itself. My summary of the summary of the summary: the main cables and towers are in good shape, minor members not so hot, expecially the deck.

The Toll Roads News editor expects this to generate a lot of media attention. I have my doubts; the next thing we'll have to wait and see about is whether this generates any pressure for the new bridge at the downriver location.

[[Incidentally, "minor loss of section" means some of the steel beams have gotten thinner in spots due to corrosion.) This refers only to steel angles and beams, not the wire cables.

lol excellent gossip site toll road news???