Talk:Submersible bridge
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Advantage?
editWhat's the advantage of a submersible bridge over a traditional lift bridge? In short, why do they exist? It's clear somebody put some effort into providing the wonderful illustrating photos; it'd be great to get some input on the bridge's purpose, too. 216.52.69.217 17:22, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know if you felt the article as it now reads answers your question, but the short version is that lift bridges limit passing boats by height above water, (maximum mast height, basically), while submersible ones limit by draft. Also, the submersible & table bridges are less visibly imposing, which makes them better neighbours to ppl who like unobstructed views. Mdotley 17:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
- The edit is appreciated, but I'm not certain I understand. The lift bridges we have in my region (Northeast coast of the United States) are drawbridges--they hinge open at each end and the centre portion lifts "up and out". There seems to _be_ no limit on the mast height of passing ships. As the submersible bridge seems as if it'd be many times more difficult and expensive to build, I imagine it must have a significant advantage. 20:00, 23 October 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.52.69.217 (talk • contribs)
- I agree that "no limit on height of passing ships" is true of both types of bridges. But I would guess (contrary to the prior comment) that submersible bridges are less expensive; if so, that explanation should go in the article. John Broughton | Talk 18:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- The edit is appreciated, but I'm not certain I understand. The lift bridges we have in my region (Northeast coast of the United States) are drawbridges--they hinge open at each end and the centre portion lifts "up and out". There seems to _be_ no limit on the mast height of passing ships. As the submersible bridge seems as if it'd be many times more difficult and expensive to build, I imagine it must have a significant advantage. 20:00, 23 October 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.52.69.217 (talk • contribs)
Bravo!
editWell done, Leonard & Klaus!! Very informative, excellent pix. Mdotley 17:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Reference to bascule bridges
editAdditionally, the lack of an above-deck structure is considered aesthetically pleasing, a similarity shared with the Chicago-style bascule bridge.
Perhaps this criticism is of the bascule bridge article more than of the mention here, but I see no explanation of this style of bridge, beyond a link at the bottom to the general index of a bridge-related site. Perhaps more clarification is in order, either in this article or in the other. --IntrigueBlue 18:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Are there any other notable submersible bridges? I'm unable to find any others. ThomasAndrewNimmo (talk) 17:09, 16 November 2012 (UTC)