Slashdot Mirror

How many people died in the construction of the Golden Gate Bridge?

Eleven, although until February 17, 1937, there had been only one fatality, setting a new all-time record in a field where one man killed for every million dollars spent had been the norm. On February 17, ten more men lost their lives when a section of scaffold carrying twelve men fell through the safety net.

http://goldengatebridge.org/re...

In other Googling I found an average of 120 people commit suicide annually on that bridge.

Should the bridge go away now?

Now that's one way to look at the question of whether or not a space tourism endeavor is worthwhile. Personally I think the environmental impact, vs. For Who and For What Purpose is a major issue. To me those are just incredibly wealthy people looking for fun ways to spend their money. This isn't like trans-Atlantic air travel in the 20th Century, which actually had a clearly demonstrable economic and societal purpose.

On the other hand, I can well believe nothing would have stopped those gentlemen under similar conditions from trying again. This is what they did as a career for-life, and economically speaking, they had a good employer and seeming economic benefit to do what they did.

Full disclosure: I am only a software guy. I try to do backups, but am only so-so there.

Perhaps you should update the Wikipedia article on the Golden Gate Bridge:

The Golden Gate Bridge and Highway District, authorized by an act of the California Legislature, was incorporated in 1928 as the official entity to design, construct, and finance the Golden Gate Bridge. However, after the Wall Street Crash of 1929, the District was unable to raise the construction funds, so it lobbied for a $30 million bond measure. The bonds were approved in November 1930, by votes in the counties affected by the bridge. The construction budget at the time of approval was $27 million. However, the District was unable to sell the bonds until 1932, when Amadeo Giannini, the founder of San Francisco–based Bank of America, agreed on behalf of his bank to buy the entire issue in order to help the local economy.

And while you're at it, goldengatebridge.org.

According to some I saw documentary a while back as soon as the painters finish they have to start over again due to where and tear.

http://www.goldengatebridge.org/research/caretakers.php

The Golden Gate Bridge (Bridge) is one of three operating divisions of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District (District). The operating divisions include: Golden Gate Bridge, Golden Gate Transit and Golden Gate Ferry. The Bridge Division employs about 200 employees that operate and maintain the Bridge under the direction of the Deputy General Manager, Bridge Division. The Bridge Division captures the true meaning of the words "team effort", with all of the skilled crafts and trades working together to accomplish the job at hand.

A revered and rugged group of ironworkers and painters battle wind, sea air and fog, often suspended high above the Golden Gate Strait, to repair corroding steel. Ironworkers replace corroding steel and rivets, make small fabrications for use on the Bridge, and assist painters with their rigging. Ironworkers also remove plates and bars to provide access for painters to the interiors of the columns and chords that make up the Bridge. Painters prepare all Bridge surfaces and repaint corroded areas.

You do realize that the tolls on the Golden Gate bridge go to pay for maintenance of the bridge, right?

Normally, I'd agree with you, but the people who manage the Golden Gate Bridge are either incompetent or corrupt. Now I realize that maintenance on a bridge that receives constant sea breezes can be expensive and that tolls also cover maintenance on the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, but with that many people paying $5-$6 to cross the bridge, there's no way in hell they should be running an ~$80m/year deficit.

One huge mistake they made is to purchase a huge insurance policy on the bridge after 9/11. It's costing tens of millions of dollars each year and yet will only cover around 10% of the replacement cost of the bridget in the event of a terrorist attack. If the state of California is large enough to cover 90% of the cost of rebuilding the bridge, it's large enough to cover the whole thing...there's absolutely no reason why we should be wasting money on an over-priced insurance policy.

According to their own figures, they're taking in just over $100m/mo in tolls...it seems perfectly reasonable to me that people would question why that amount of money is necessary to upkeep the bridge and why tolls need to be as high as they are.

Currently, 50 percent of bus and ferry operations are funded by Bridge tolls,...

Yes, smartass, I do remember my high school physics. I reckon with our modern engineering genius we might be able to design a bridge to take advantage of a material with enormous tensile strength but mediocre compressive strength. Like, say, http://goldengatebridge.org/photos/">this well-known example.

For one thing - this is strong stuff we're talking about - incineration is garuanteed. If it breaks up that might sound like an imporovement - but the it's like being shot with a shotgun. It may be loaded with pellets, or it may be loaded with solid rounds. You may spead the impact a little, but its the kinetic energy that'll kill you - and you still get all of that.

Not scared yet? Let's put this in perspective.

according to its website the Golden Gate bridge weighs 380,800,000 kg and spans 1966m. That's probably comparable to the weight/length ratio for a space elevator. It uses hi-tech materials, but it has to support its own weight across its entire length, and its going to be long! According to Nasa (google cache) the elevator is likely reach 36,000,000m. That's 18,311 times the length of the GGB

So taking the golden gate bridge as a guide, we can estimate the total weight of the cable at 18,311 x 380,800,000kg = 6.97 x 10^12. Seven gigatonnes - lighter than I expected.

How hard is it going to hit? Well, at least terminal velocity. I say "at least because the upper reaches will be going faster and have to be slowed by the atmosphere. Also the cable will be considerably denser than a human, so we can reckon it's terminal v as being rather more than a human's. Human terminal v is about 50m/s so let's go with that for the time being. We're being conservative..

Kinetic energy = 0,5 x mass x velocity x velocity
= 6.97294 x 10^12 x 50 x 50 / 2
= 8.716175 x 10^15 joules

And to put that in perspective, one megaton comes to about 4.184 x 10^15 Joules.

So if the cable came crashing down it'd release about 2 Megatons of kinetic energy - either as heat as it burnt up, or as shockwaves on impact.

Doesn't sound like much? Well, the Hiroshima bomb is reckoned as being 20 killotonnes yeild. So 200 hundred hiroshima bombs going off in a ring around the equator in fairly rapid succession.

and it it hits faster than that... well that's a square term. 100m/s give you 4 time the energy or 800 hiroshima bombs. 200m/s (not unreasonable) gives 16 times - 3,200 x hiroshima.

Don't get me wrong - I'd love to see a space elevator. Just let's bear in mind that this is dangerous