Slashdot Mirror


Highest Bridge in the World Nearing Completion

An anonymous reader writes "A weekend cookie for all engineering geeks out here. The central span of the Millau bridge (270 meters or 886 ft) has been completed!" The photo is awesome.

425 comments

  1. Two Words by toygeek · · Score: 4, Funny

    Base Jump!

    1. Re:Two Words by JohnDifool · · Score: 2, Informative

      two friends of mine did it last week-end, 6 am.
      Awesome jump. They loved it.
      this bridge is gonna see a lot of base jumpers....

    2. Re:Two Words by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Informative
      Base Jump!

      Back in my more fearless days I went camping in West Virginia (behind the Red Dog Saloon, near Fayetteville) for a week and some rafting on the New River. Life behind a bar seemed to begin and end days with a beer in hand and fuzzy sense of things. The sleep deprivation, brought on by thundering (and I really do mean thundering, like 150db or louder) coal trucks dashing down into the gorge every night, didn't help matters much. Eventually my bud Roger suggests we do bridge laps, in reference to the New River Gorge bridge. So what are those? Oh, we'll see. It invovled drinking about six beers then walking along an I beam for about 20 feet then skulking along the cat walk to about halfway out into the gorge where a little access ladder on either side of the bridge allows on to climb up, scramble across and down the other side. Certainly it's one of the highest bridges I've ever been on, or under. A set of train track deep in the gorge, with a tiny spotlight shining on it from near a service shed, looked like N-guage. It was slightly comforting to note that aside from seeing the light on the track there was little other indication of how far below the bottom of the gorge was.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:Two Words by Dr+Reducto · · Score: 1

      I think it may be a new suicide spot, and thus have a lot of police/countermeasures to make sure no one jups off it, parachutes or not.

    4. Re:Two Words by caeldeus · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have jumped the New River Bridge numerous times. Back when I was BASE jumping, BASE is an acronym, more heavily than now I'm sure I'd try to check this place out.

      For info check out http://www.blincmagazine.com

      Building Antenna Span Earth.

    5. Re:Two Words by stud9920 · · Score: 1

      While I am not sure about BASE jumping, I don't know what to think about the future of paragliding in Millau. Millau seems to be one of the most rewarding places in France to fly. Imagine 10 miles of valley where you just can soar by stay close enough to the mountain. I hope the bridge does not cut the valley in two.

    6. Re:Two Words by letxa2000 · · Score: 1
      Can somebody define "highest bridge?" The Royal Gorge Bridge in Colorado is 1053 feet high, which is apparently 167 feet higher than this bridge in France. It may be the highest paved bridge or maybe the longest high bridge but I certainly don't see under what criteria it can be called simply the "highest bridge."

      Whatever. Still looks cool.

    7. Re:Two Words by brianmf · · Score: 1

      I guess it is the highest bridge from the lowest point of support to the highest point of the structure, not from bridge deck to ground as you are probably thinking.

      The Royal Gorge is "just" a regular bridge which happens to be built across a very big hole in the ground, but this new bridge actually has supporting columns going all the way to the ground in the middle of the span.

      The heights of the seven pillars and the distances between them are listed on the bridge's website.

  2. heights? scary! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ..great, something i can stand on and pee my pants lookin off of...

    im scared of heights, you insensitive clod!

    1. Re:heights? scary! by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      ..great, something i can stand on and pee my pants lookin off of...

      On the subject of pissing your pants, imagine the great honor bestowed to the first dog to mark this structure as it's territory.

      And on another fine note, here's something else to view on a friday.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:heights? scary! by MikeFM · · Score: 1

      I'm not scared of heights but I can't imagine wanting to be on such a bridge as some crazy drunk bastard comes weaving down the road in my direction. IMO the problem with many bridges is that they are to narrow and lack room to move out of the way should there be a problem. Also, many lack a sidewalk or bicycle lane which annoys me as these would be simple to add and beneficial to many people. Expecting pedestrians to go around is stupid.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
    3. Re:heights? scary! by BigglesZX · · Score: 1

      ..great, something i can stand on and pee my pants lookin off of...

      On that note, imagine the fun of peeing from the top of that magnificent structure. (Cue Tom Hanks, Apollo XIII, "Say hello to Constellation Urine").

      --

      $ mv *.sig >/dev/null
    4. Re:heights? scary! by four12 · · Score: 1

      That was Bill Paxton as Fred Haise.

    5. Re:heights? scary! by bshellenberg · · Score: 1

      Actually, it was Bill Paxton's line. I only wonder if a piss from that height on a hot day would even make it to the water.

      --
      Karma: Neutered
    6. Re:heights? scary! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most French superhighways (of which the A75 is one) have a maximum speed limit of 130km/h during dry weather and 110km/h in wet weather. Very few vehicles drive slower than 90km/h on them and its therefore not safe for pedestrians or bicycles. Do you see many pedestrians on the Jersey Turnpike?

    7. Re:heights? scary! by tmyklebu · · Score: 1

      I get the idea that walking the length of this bridge is somewhat impractical (not to mention hazardous to the health; imagine the kind of pollution that might settle atop that bridge on a busy day with calm weather.)

    8. Re:heights? scary! by BigglesZX · · Score: 1

      Heh, thanks for the correction. I haven't seen the film in too long.

      --

      $ mv *.sig >/dev/null
    9. Re:heights? scary! by MikeFM · · Score: 1

      I walk 20 miles at a time fairly often so I doubt it'd be to long for me. If it's longer than 20 miles.. then wow. :)

      Yum, pollution. You just convinced me to ban motor vehicles from the bridge.

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
  3. Vista? by ericspinder · · Score: 1

    Now that's one way to take over a seanic vista! I can't really tell from the photo, but that must have been one great view from up the valley. The constuction site has some good photos, but the server will die soon.

    --
    The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
    1. Re:Vista? by Tony+Freakin+Twist · · Score: 1

      wow, mr. positivity.

    2. Re:Vista? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      it's only seanic if there's an ocean nearby...

    3. Re:Vista? by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 1

      Depending on what the bridge looks like, the view might be better. I certainly think the Marin County hills look better with the Golden Gate Bridge all up in them.

      The Berkeley hills are beautiful because of, not in spite of, the houses and freeways built around them. Yeah, even the freeways.

      --

      There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    4. Re:Vista? by H310iSe · · Score: 1

      And excactly why did they build it so high? I was expecting something spanning a huge gorge or other apocolyptic gash in the earth, but this thing seems to just be running over a valley. WTF? Why exactly did they build a bridge here? what's it ... well, bridging? that is, couldn't say, a 20m hight bridge, or even a plain old roadway have done just fine?

      --
      closed minded is as closed minded does
    5. Re:Vista? by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      I'm sure the entrance to San Francisco Bay was pretty before the Golden Gate Bridge was built, but frankly I think that bridge is a hell of an improvement!

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    6. Re:Vista? by nursedave · · Score: 0, Troll
      Because they're French. They don't have to pay for a military, so they may as well blow money on meaningless shit like this.

      Go ahead, Pierre, mod me down, I know you want to.

      --

      The Democratic Party: We've been pussies since 1968!

    7. Re:Vista? by gaijin99 · · Score: 2, Informative
      I was asking myself the same question. Then I looked at this page (linked by werdnapk in another thread here) and the reason suddenly became apparent. The first photo (Flash just to keep up the use of pointless Flash), answered around 80% of my "why the heck do this" question.

      According to the English articles due to the steep sides of the valley cause massive traffic bottlenecks. Though if I'd owned a convenience store or gas station that was profiting from the bottlenecks I'd be irked ^_^

      --
      "Mission Accomplished" -- George W. Bush May 1, 2003
    8. Re:Vista? by gsdali · · Score: 1

      I can vouch for the traffic bottleknecks. This Bridge means my occasional London-Perignan Trips are now possible in a day by road.Roll on finishing the Montpellier-Perpignan LGV rail line though.

  4. Timmmmmberrrr... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bet that would look interesting on it's side. Strong gust of wind anyone?

    1. Re:Timmmmmberrrr... by fluce · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, in fact, they are the same folks... 2E airport terminal was built by Vinci and Eiffage. Millau viaduc is built by Eiffage alone.

    2. Re:Timmmmmberrrr... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if the bridge collapsed? Ha ha! That would be hilarious.

    3. Re:Timmmmmberrrr... by carlos_benj · · Score: 2, Funny

      Let's hope that Vinci is the chintzy and fewer corners were cut on the bridge then.

      And if not, look at it this way, you have a better chance of flying off their bridge than out of their airport.....

      --

      --

      As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.

    4. Re:Timmmmmberrrr... by gabacho · · Score: 1

      Possibly built by the same people that did the terminal that just collapsed at CDG in Paris?

      --
      (This sig has been removed at the request of the patent holder for Sigs.)
    5. Re:Timmmmmberrrr... by big+tex · · Score: 1

      The bridge should be set now.

      Bridges with a cantilever / segmental type of construction typically see the highest stresses during construction, before everything is locked together. Since they _just_ locked it together, it's probably ok.

      --
      I think I need a new sig here.
    6. Re:Timmmmmberrrr... by chadm1967 · · Score: 1

      What would be so funny about that?

    7. Re:Timmmmmberrrr... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, there are exceptions.

    8. Re:Timmmmmberrrr... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And if not, look at it this way, you have a better chance of flying off their bridge than out of their airport....

      ROTFLMAO! (although no disrepect meant to those that died at the airport).

    9. Re:Timmmmmberrrr... by netsharc · · Score: 1

      He probably thinks it'd be funny because he's american and has small penis syndrome, he like a lot of americans can't be happy if another country is better than them or is right when they're wrong.

      I wonder if Bin Laden thought this, "Hey, why don't we attack America. If they then turned to be the next Soviet Russia, Ha Ha! Wouldn't that be hilarious!"

      The grand-parent poster can go suck Dubya's dick, the rest of you, go mod me down.

      --
      What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
    10. Re:Timmmmmberrrr... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (although no disrepect meant to those that died at the airport).

      ... and neither to those that will die flying off the bridge. Well, at least they'll have beat Moller to the punch!

    11. Re:Timmmmmberrrr... by big+tex · · Score: 1

      No, Tacoma Narrows is a suspension bridge, which is not constructed in a cantilever fashion. Apples and oranges for construction method.
      For a suspension bridge, the cables are strung and deck sections are then lifted - no free cantilevers anywhere.

      For the cantilever bridge that failed, try the Quebec bridge.

      --
      I think I need a new sig here.
  5. bungee!!! by jred · · Score: 3, Funny

    I've never bungee jumped before, but that pic sure made me think about it. Damn! But I'm scared of heights...

    --

    jred
    I'm not a mechanic but I play one in my garage...
    1. Re:bungee!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ropes are for pussies, I'll give you ten dollars to do it without one.

    2. Re:bungee!!! by KoriaDesevis · · Score: 1

      You can't tell from the photo if there is a decent safety rail up there, to keep people from doing something they shouldn't... If the railing isn't high enough, I would be willing to bet a box of doughnuts that someone will earn a Darwin Award by the end of 2005 on that bridge (or, rather, under it in a 2-mile radius). Heck, they might get one in spite of the railing...

  6. Re:Highest? by deniea · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes, I was on the news this afternoon overhere (Netherlands). It's higher than the Eifel tower (Paris, France)

  7. Lowest Bidder by TheOldFart · · Score: 4, Funny

    Are these the same people who built the new terminal at Charles De Gaulle?

    1. Re:Lowest Bidder by phsdv · · Score: 1

      For sure they build the bridge faster than planned.... Was that not also the case with the airport?

    2. Re:Lowest Bidder by rilister · · Score: 5, Informative

      no, but the architect is Sir Norman Foster of Foster and Partners, responsible for the Millenium Footbridge in London that had to be closed after it was found to be dangerous... ...I'll follow you over...

      --
      'This writing business. Pencils and what-not. Over-rated if you ask me. Silly stuff. Nothing in it' - Eeyore
    3. Re:Lowest Bidder by jrumney · · Score: 1

      The Millenium footbridge was not found to be dangerous, it was found to sway more than it was designed to, which might give people motion sickness.

    4. Re:Lowest Bidder by misterpies · · Score: 5, Informative


      Double inaccuracy... first of all, the millenium bridge was by Lord Foster, not Sir Foster (if you think such details are irrelevant, try talking about Congressman Kerry and Prime Minister Bush). And secondly, it was never found to be dangerous. It was closed temporarily when it was found to sway several feet from side to side under heavy foot traffic due to an unforeseen resonance at around the frequency of human walking. (Frankly, this was the falt of the engineers more than the architect.) This was fixed by adding a few dampers and now it's perfectly steady.

      --
      The author of this post asserts his moral rights.
    5. Re:Lowest Bidder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      People walk slightly in step, and on the millenium bridge this caused a minor sway, and then everybody walked in step with the sway - which made it sway even more.

      The "fault" was that the engineers didnt expect this human behaviour, and the extent of the sway made people uncomfortable. I beleive they fixed the sway by adding fairly simple dampers to it, not beacause there was any danger but because people found it uncomfortable (and probably more to the point, news coverage was embarrasing for the engineering firm).

      Google came up with this FMI.

    6. Re:Lowest Bidder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A bit about Sir Norman (Lord) Foster: http://www.open2.net/modernity/4_9.htm

    7. Re:Lowest Bidder by rilister · · Score: 2

      er, he's commonly referred to as both, mainly because he was Sir Norman Foster before he was made a Lord.

      Bush was never a Prime Minister, AFAK...

      --
      'This writing business. Pencils and what-not. Over-rated if you ask me. Silly stuff. Nothing in it' - Eeyore
    8. Re:Lowest Bidder by kfg · · Score: 3, Informative

      Bush was never a Prime Minister, AFAK...

      But if he were it would be improper to call him President Bush in anything other than the past tense.

      Jimmy Carter is "President" Carter only when refering to a time when he was the actual sitting President, and contemporaneously he may be properly refered to as "Former President" Carter or addressed as "Mr." Carter.

      Nevermind the fact that "President" and "Prime Misister" are actually the names of the offices, not a title, and the forms are different. To take something of an extreme example it would be improper to address Wendy Carlos as "Mr.".

      If one did address Ms. Carlos as Mr. or "The former Mr. Carlos" it would likely be taken as a delibate slight at his current status.

      So too, for addressing Lord Norman Foster as the "Former Sir." Without contextual qualifications it implies an impuning of his right to be a Lord.

      misterpies made a double error of his own, however. There is not, and never was either a Sir or Lord Foster. The title attaches to the name of the recipient, not the recipient's father.

      Thus it is Sir/Lord Norman, or Sir/Lord Norman Foster, but never Sir/Lord Foster (Just as Churchill was Lord Randolph).

      KFG

    9. Re:Lowest Bidder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you think such details are irrelevant, try talking about Congressman Kerry and Prime Minister Bush.

      Um, Kerry, one of the Senators from Massachusetts, is a Congressman.

    10. Re:Lowest Bidder by slickwillie · · Score: 1

      In France they take the highest bid.

      Go figure.

    11. Re:Lowest Bidder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF??

    12. Re:Lowest Bidder by SQL+Error · · Score: 1

      That would be Sir Foster Norman, right? Whoever he is...

      The honorific "Sir" is always followed by the first name (and then optionally the last name, if you are referring to him rather than addressing him directly). So upon receiving his knighthood, Robert Hewington-Smythe becomes Sir Robert, or Sir Robert Hewington-Smythe.

    13. Re:Lowest Bidder by kfg · · Score: 1

      WTF??

      It is wrong to call Lord Norman Sir Foster.

      KFG

    14. Re:Lowest Bidder by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 1

      Um, Kerry, one of the Senators from Massachusetts, is a Congressman.

      Dude that's like calling a square a rectangle. We know it's a rectangle, but it's more precisely known as a square... dude.

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
    15. Re:Lowest Bidder by KnightStalker · · Score: 1

      I was about to disagree with you, but fortunately at the last minute I actually checked instead of vomiting my raw opinions upon the intarweb as fact. I thought former presidents were normally still referred to *directly* as "Mr. President". They're not. But, oddly, apparently Carter and Clinton can still be referred to as "Governor".

      --
      * And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
    16. Re:Lowest Bidder by kfg · · Score: 1

      . . .but fortunately at the last minute I actually checked. . .

      Ah, if only I scrupulously followed that simple dictum I'd have a few less assholes myself.

      In colonial times, before all the shooting and declarations and stuff, "Lord Governor" was actually a title, and thus through historical usage is still considered usable (as is Mayor).

      Personally I hold that such usage is not correct under the Republic, for exactly the same reasons that it is not correct for "President", the title is that of the office, not the man, but I'm not going to make a big stink about it or anything, and on those occasions when I've had dealings with ex-governors or mayors I've always used "Mr.", which is not only always correct, but has never given offense.

      KFG

    17. Re:Lowest Bidder by bishop32x · · Score: 1

      Theoreticly, that sway would eventually rip the bridge up. Ever wonder why military marchs "break step" on bridges?

    18. Re:Lowest Bidder by letxa2000 · · Score: 1
      Someone I know was recently considering inviting President Clinton to speak at an event here in Mexico. I was asked to translate the invitation. I was under the impression, too, that former presidents were still addressed as "President." I found that that was NOT the case. "Mr." is appropriate and we referred to Clinton as such in the invitation.

      They got a response from Clinton's PR firm in which they referred to him as "President Clinton." I advised them to follow in-kind and go ahead and refer to him as "President" so as not to offend them in subsequent exchanges even though I had to wonder if the PR firm thinks really high of Clinton or are just uninformed of the proper title of their client. Either way, it's pretty sad.

    19. Re:Lowest Bidder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Bush was never a Prime Minister, AFAK..."

      Well, he was kinda appointed, not elected, so I can certainly understand the confusion.

    20. Re:Lowest Bidder by Durindana · · Score: 1

      You make a good point about getting the local details right.

      But Sen .John Kerry, D-Mass., is indeed a Congressman.

      So are his colleagues from Massachusetts who sit in the U.S. House of Representatives.

      "Congressman" = "MP"

    21. Re:Lowest Bidder by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Theoreticly, that sway would eventually rip the bridge up. Ever wonder why military marchs "break step" on bridges?

      Indeed. Unfortunately, wind doesn't bbreak step

  8. Highest Bridge by larry2k · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Get your bungie jumping ropes and take a plane to france!!!

    --

    The package said "Windows XP or better. Pentium Class Processor or better"... So I got a Mac with OS X

    1. Re:Highest Bridge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny


      Get your bungie jumping ropes and take a plane to france!!!


      Just make sure you don't land at the new International Terminal. That would be dangerous

    2. Re:Highest Bridge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess that joke is only good twice!

  9. Terminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Hopefully it wasn't designed by the same folks who brought France the new terminal 2E at Charles de Gaulle Airport.

    Don't mod this up.

    1. Re:Terminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it is white, perfect for hanging big white flags.

    2. Re:Terminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trust the French. They also built the inpenatrable Maginot Line.

    3. Re:Terminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Well, the germans didnt break the Maginot Line. they went around.

    4. Re:Terminal by ThisIsFred · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      So much for the coward characterization. They didn't surrender, they were surprised. They weren't the last to be surprised by Rommel either. I don't see anyone characterizing the Brits as cowards just because they ran from a bluff by the Desert Fox.

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    5. Re:Terminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least the French haven't launched any illegal wars recently.

    6. Re:Terminal by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      I'm really curious where this stereotype of French surrenders comes from?

      I'd like to see a list of the surrenders that have given them the reputation.

      I find it strange that people in a country with only a few hundred years of history, who have never seen an invading army on their shores seem to think it's appropriate to critise a country with thousands of years of history involving hundreds of wars for deciding that living to fight another day is a better option a couple of times.

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    7. Re:Terminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Search on google for 'french military victories'. Take the first link, then the link that leads to a list of defeats instead. That'll put you here. Granted, that's a list of defeats rather than of surrenders.

    8. Re:Terminal by tsotha · · Score: 1
      Not true at all. Everybody knew the Germans were going to attack, even the French. They were planning to fight the war in Holland, and when the Dutch declined they were ill prepared to fight in France.

      However, they had a bigger army than the Germans, plus higher quality, more numerous tanks. They simply didn't fight as well as the Germans, both at the command level and the individual soldier level.

    9. Re:Terminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Omnia Gallia est divisa in tres partes..."

  10. Pylons... by th1ckasabr1ck · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder how wide those pylons are? They look like they are a decent width, but of course it's tough to tell with that perspective.

    1. Re:Pylons... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      Pylons? You probably mean the pillars. There are seven, each with a different height, owing to ground elevation differences:
      1. P1 : 94,50 m
      2. P2 : 244,96 m
      3. P3 : 221,05 m
      4. P4 : 144,21 m
      5. P5 : 136,42 m
      6. P6 : 111,94 m
      7. P7 : 77,56 m

      There are also seven temporary pillars, soon to be removed. The central core, north, is 717m, and wings are about 670m. At south, the central core is 1744m, with wings 1573m.

      The motorway is two lanes wide in each direction with a three-metre wide hard shoulder on each side and a one-metre wide bande dérasée next to the central crash barrier.

      And for all you Americans joking about the terminal collapse, consider that in France, bridges are built. In America, bridges are burned--figuratively, of course, since the terrorists have not (yet) taken down your tallest bridges. Give them time, or peace be with you.
    2. Re:Pylons... by th1ckasabr1ck · · Score: 1

      I thought it would be pillars also, but the article says: "These will take the total height at the highest point to 343 metres. One of the main supporting pylons beneath the platform, known as pylon 2, stands 245 metres high, making it the tallest pylon in the world." Am I correct, reading this wrong, being an idiot?

    3. Re:Pylons... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You know your right...
      And on behave of all Americans we are so sorry we kept you from your destiny with your Nazi overlords.....

    4. Re:Pylons... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In 2001 the world cried for the US, but now the world despises America. OPEN YOUR EYES.

    5. Re:Pylons... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't want your tears. We don't want
      your sympathy. Sympathy does not stop
      terrorists who want to kill Americans (and
      have killed THOUSANDS already).

      That "truce" that Al Queada offered to
      Europe for pulling out of Iraq (and
      taken up by Spain)... it's not available
      to the U.S. No matter what we do, Al
      Quaeda will attack us.

      So, since the most you can offer us is
      "tears" and "sympathy", we don't care.

      We want the world to FEAR us, not merely
      hate us. If Bush wins a second term, you
      haven't seen anything yet. Iran, N. Korea,
      Syria-- they're all next. And we won't
      be coming to help set up a new government.
      We will be coming to DESTROY.

    6. Re:Pylons... by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      7 to 9 metres? Just a guess from the photo.

      --
      What?
    7. Re:Pylons... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a wonderful summary of the Bush administration's mentality. America was not attacked because they believe in freedom and democracy (or at least used to), but because they have attacked so many countries over the last 50 years. For example, Iran used to be democratic until their democratically elected leader wanted to nationalise the oil. Then the Americans invaded and installed the Shah. The Americans have supported Israeli aggression against the native Palestinians, and have vetoed many UN resolutions that have tried to solve the conflict peacably.

      There are many more examples.

      The argument during the cold war used to be that these actions were okay because the US was supporing its allies against the communists. Unfortunately, Americas behaviour in the last 14 years has not changed.

    8. Re:Pylons... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a troll surely? - No-one can really think like this.

    9. Re:Pylons... by tsotha · · Score: 1
      Yeah, they'll have to settle for bridges here, since we don't have a reasonable train system for them to blow up like France does.


      What's that you say, you're not involoved in Iraq? And they're still attacking? Hmmm... maybe it's the head-scarf thing. Or maybe time hasn't completely washed the Algerian blood from French hands. Or maybe they respond to weakness by attacking.


      Who cares?

    10. Re:Pylons... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, it was a troll. I just cut and pasted some stats from a french web page I googled up, so I would get the mod. And then I added the Iraq zinger at the end in odd-sounding English to make it look like I was from frogland. Hehe. Hook line and sinker, boys. YOU'VE BEEN PUNKED.

    11. Re:Pylons... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      N. Korea,

      Dream on! Unlike Iraq, North Korea has weapons of mass destruction, and the coward would never dare to attack them.

  11. try this website by werdnapk · · Score: 5, Informative
    The posted site seems to be /.'ed already, try this one out instead.

    That sure is some bridge, but must be a real eyesore to those who have to live near it.

    1. Re:try this website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I drove through Millau a few weeks ago, and it is one mother-hubbard of a bridge. I didn't know it was the tallest. Millau is a really bad bottleneck and the existing road is strangled by the lorries which must use it.

      Yes it does rather look "stuck-on" to the scenery. I'm not sure why they couldn't just build a by-pass folowing the contours rather than the whopping bridge. That's my tax money paying for that.

    2. Re:try this website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, you Frenchmen are taxed enough, might as well use the money for something useful!

    3. Re:try this website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Desole, mon grand. Le pont est finance par eiffage sur fonds propres.

      En un mot: c'est pas sur nos impots.

      Par contre, ca va douiller sec pour le traverser...

    4. Re:try this website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I'm an English european. We still pay money to the EU. Just like the big Houdeng ship lift in Belgium. Built for fun and employment - serves no functional purpose really.

    5. Re:try this website by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      We Americans are taxed a lot too (at least those of us in the middle class are; the rich get a big tax break). Unfortunately, our taxes are spent financing wars instead of engineering megaprojects.

      Besides, according to the article, the bridge was financed by the construction firm, and will be operated as a toll road by them for the next 75 years to pay for it.

    6. Re:try this website by lp-habu · · Score: 1

      Do the math. The "Rich" pay for most of what government does. There are really two groups of people in the US: those who pay more than their share, and those who pay less. You can call them "providers" and "parasites" for short. In 2003 the dividing line was $16780 (in Federal taxes only). If you paid more than that in taxes, then you're a provider; otherwise a parasite.

    7. Re:try this website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Inserts babelfish in ear ... Desole, my large. The bridge is financed by eiffage on own capital stocks. In a word: c'est not on our taxes. On the other hand, Ca douiller dry will cross it

    8. Re:try this website by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      The posted site seems to be /.'ed already, try this one out instead.

      Just let's hope that they're better at bridge design than at web page design, or I'll continue using the Rhône Valley, thank you.

    9. Re:try this website by ComandanteTapiola · · Score: 1

      So what? Would you rather have your tax money *rebuilding* Irak?

    10. Re:try this website by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure why they couldn't just build a by-pass folowing the contours rather than the whopping bridge. That's my tax money paying for that.

      They'll recoup the cost by selling the video footage of its spectacular collapse... [SCNR].

    11. Re:try this website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Desole, mon grand. Le pont est finance par eiffage sur fonds propres.

      Sorry, old man. The bridge is paid by eiffage with its own money.

      > En un mot: c'est pas sur nos impots.

      In one word, this ain't our taxes.

      > Par contre, ca va douiller sec pour le traverser...

      Nonetheless, it'll cost a leg and an arm to cross it...

  12. What about traffic noise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do they have to build one of those noise-canceling walls so local neighbors won't complain?

    1. Re:What about traffic noise? by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      The local neighbors are like, 400 feet below the bridge.

      I don't think noise will be a big issue, certianly less then living near an expressway.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
  13. obligatory cheap shot by captaineo · · Score: 0, Redundant

    One would hope the French are a little better at building bridges than airports...

  14. Re:What's the use? by PHP+Wolf · · Score: 5, Funny
    What's the use of having a bridge that is that high? Just seems like a serious waste of resources just for bragging rights.

    They get serious flooding in that valley.

    --

    Double Compile

  15. Geronimoooooo! by Seumas · · Score: 1

    I can't wait until we get news of the first suicide jumper from that bridge. Hopefully someone will catch it on video. Talk about "news that hurts"!

    High bridges freak me out. Where I live, we have a lot of bridges - even just downtown (over the Willamette River). The Burnside Bridge is fine. It's very wide and low. But then we have bridges like the Freemont which are very high suspension bridges that make my heart catch in my throat.

    I'm not even normally afraid of hights... but stick me in a car with a thousand other cars on the bridge and I get vertigo.

    1. Re:Geronimoooooo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not even normally afraid of hights... but stick me in a car with a thousand other cars on the bridge and I get vertigo.

      Just watch out not to go vertical in that situation.
    2. Re:Geronimoooooo! by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      "News that Hurts"

      You must be a Rick Emerson Listener.

      Tim Riley rocks.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    3. Re:Geronimoooooo! by Xlipse · · Score: 1

      Uhh.. that's why they call Portland "Bridgetown"! Yeah, Freemont bridge is definately freaky.. so is the Markum.. mainly because people are coming around those curves at 60+, merging and driving like crazy assholes.. :| For those that don't know, Portland has.. like 7 or 8 bridges that connect East to West across the Willamette river- all in the span of about 3-4 miles, with the majority of them about 2 miles apart or less.

    4. Re:Geronimoooooo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the thing is, those morons take no notice when the wind starts whipping down the gorge and hits the air ramming it's way up the harbor and into the gorge. It's insane. It's extra-specialpfun for a 16 year old rookie driver.

    5. Re:Geronimoooooo! by eu4ik · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Fremont bridge in Portland is not a suspension bridge, but rather "the longest tied-arch bridge in the world"

    6. Re:Geronimoooooo! by Dmala · · Score: 1

      I'm not even normally afraid of hights... but stick me in a car with a thousand other cars on the bridge and I get vertigo.

      I get the same thing, but only if I'm driving. It's weird, I can dodge across four lanes of traffic on the Southeast Expressway in Boston at 85mph during rush hour without even blinking. But heading up the approach to a high bridge, I have to grit my teeth and stare at the white line to make it across.

    7. Re:Geronimoooooo! by Seumas · · Score: 1

      The Hawthorne bridge is trippy, too. When I was 17, I went down there to watch fireworks with my girlfriend and I had to muster everything I had not to instinctually freeze as I walked and stood over the mesh-steel road beneath my feet. With the river rolling past beneath it really screws with your head and your balance. I couldn't get off that damn bridge quick enough.

      I'm a South Easter, but as bad as driving is around here and downtown, nothing in the metro-area beats the crappy driving of the Beaverton area. There's always a handfull of assholes who has to keep going across the intersection even though traffic on the other side isn't moving, so they end up blocking the entire intersection through other people's green lights. Jackasses...

    8. Re:Geronimoooooo! by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you're right. I haven't been over it in years but for some reason I remembered it as a suspension bridge. If I recall, Suicide-Bridge is Saint Johns, right?

  16. Er... why? by FFFish · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why did they build this bridge? That looks like a perfectly nice valley down there, easy to push a road through, and at 1/100th the cost and no where near the danger.

    Is this a penis boast ("I've got the biggest bridge!"), an environment issue ("No automobiles in this valley!"), an ownership issue, what??

    --

    --
    Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    1. Re:Er... why? by Starji · · Score: 1

      This is exactly what I thought when I saw the picture. I can't even see a river going through there.

      If it's about preserving the picturesque valley down there they really botched the job then cause I can't imagine having a giant grey bridge ruining the scenery. I guess they did say the same thing about the eiffel tower once upon a time...

    2. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      and the flood water reaches that high? amazing.

    3. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      They built it because every summer thousands of cars get stuck in Millau while traveling from north to south.

    4. Re:Er... why? by ThisIsFred · · Score: 3, Informative

      Mod parent up!

      From the site:

      "Eiffage was selected to carry out this project combining the techniques of concrete with those of steel.

      Constituting the last stretch of the A75 motorway, once opened it will enable Clermont-Ferrand to be reached directly from Béziers, so getting rid of the infamous Millau traffic bottleneck."

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    5. Re:Er... why? by Chairboy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Because the german army hates to march up and down hills, of course.

    6. Re:Er... why? by bobbyque · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For the same reason people build smokestacks...to lift pollution out of a valley. That's the Rhone Valley down there: "Millau's 20,000 residents can also breathe easier--literally--since the bridge opening will put an end to decades of environmental damage caused by the endless lines of vehicles and traffic jams." (http://www.pobonline.com/CDA/ArticleInformation/c overstory/BNPCoverStoryItem/0,2340,108886,00.html)

    7. Re:Er... why? by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2, Funny

      Obivously, they built the bridge to protect french culture from the cancer that is americanism. Too many people over there drive american-made cars rather than the home-grown Renault. As such, the prime minister made it a priority to get a law passed to protect people from the site of Fords and chevys. No foreign made cars are allowed below an altitude of 656 ft. 20% of the revenue from tolls will be used to firebomb McDonald's and to petition the UN to pass a resolution forbidding california vintners to call their brew "champagne".

      There is a nice cobblestone road in the valley, for which people riding in horse-drawn carriages are welcome.

      But let's talk about some of the other technical marvels of this bridge. Did you know that it has the most sensitive microphones ever built, placed every 20 feet of roadway. A supercomputer monitors them, filtering out road noise and wind, and doing speech recognition. It can detect someone saying "le weekend" with their windows rolled up while they're driving 80kph, and report them to the police instantly! Or how about the anti-gravity conveyors on the westbound lane, that will allow french citizens to retreat at over 500kph, should there ever be a need. These are the kinds of things yahoo just fails to mention.

    8. Re:Er... why? by k98sven · · Score: 5, Funny

      But doesn't it seem more fitting to computer geeks if the road to Béziers is curved?

    9. Re:Er... why? by jalet · · Score: 1

      They constructed it this way because this is an highway and there's no other way to make a decent highway in this place, since the mountains are really abrupt and the existing highway is at the top, on each side of the valley.

      --
      Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
    10. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      That still doesn't explain the apparently unnecessary height. Or are higher bridgers faster?

    11. Re:Er... why? by orzetto · · Score: 2, Informative
      Is this a penis boast ("I've got the biggest bridge!")

      It's called grandeur and it's the psychological hideout where the French still pretend they're a nation that makes the its enemies tremble in a world where French is the world language. As a (former) neighbour of France, I can say this is the attitude that generally mostly pisses off the rest of Europe. Luckily most Frenchmen are alright persons, but the fact that chauvinism* comes from a certain Chauvin should indicate that the French culture has a long line of nutty patriotic crap to digest.

      an environment issue ("No automobiles in this valley!")

      Hardly... this bridge is among the ugliest I've ever seen, I think it's enough to trigger a heart attack in any environmentalist's chest. It reminds me of a bridge I had seen in Abruzzo, Italy, in a very similar situation; not as high I guess, but definitely equally ugly. In that case, the most likely reason was to start an expensive series of public works, so that a lot of money would have been sent from Rome, so that politicians could "shave off" their fat share. Wonder what was the drive in France.

      * Chauvinism is the exhaltation of the Motherland beyond any reason. The project for a new American century is, for example, chauvinistic. It has nothing to do with discrimination of women, even though some hundred millions English speakers got it totally wrong.

      --
      Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
    12. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't want to flame, but Champagne is some kind of local trademark, it has nothing to do with anti-americanism.

    13. Re:Er... why? by Crizp · · Score: 1
      ...and to petition the UN to pass a resolution forbidding california vintners to call their brew "champagne".

      I kinda like the French for this... Champagne is made from grapes in the Champagne district. Cognaq is made - where? You got it. Roquefort is one in the cheese department, and to be patriotic I have to say Jarlsberg also (I hear it's quite popular over there). That cheese got its name from a place ten miles from where I live.

      The French farmers and vineyards are obviously very proud of their product. Look at it as trademark protection. I'm not French, but I wouldn't like to see the aforementioned "brand names" become as withered as... "Thermos" or "Xerox".
    14. Re:Er... why? by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1

      Yes, because a straight line from one point to the other is shorter than following the contours of the land.

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    15. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice one! :)

    16. Re:Er... why? by Negadecimal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They built it because every summer thousands of cars get stuck in Millau while traveling from north to south.

      Did they really need a bridge, though? Why not just build a long highway with no onramp/exit ramps. Easily the same footprint as a bridge, and without a concrete eyesore over the French countryside.

    17. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In that case, the most likely reason was to start an expensive series of public works, so that a lot of money would have been sent from Rome, so that politicians could "shave off" their fat share.

      That happens in the U.S. too but we just start a war somewhere and blow up other peoples public works.

    18. Re:Er... why? by homer_ca · · Score: 1

      "Or are higher bridgers faster?"

      If it reduces the elevation change in the roadway, yes. Have you seen how a fully loaded truck struggles up a mountain pass?

    19. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many of the contours it's avoiding are 880 feet high? Also, at that height I'd think the less oxygen content and likely higher winds would counteract some of that dubious but expensive benefit. They're petrol won't burn as well up there than it would with, say, a 80 foot high bridge, which I suspect would avoid most of the superfluous travel caused by most the "contours" and cost much less (or, if not 80, then 100 foot or 200 foot or whatever). Without more details this still sounds like an utterly ridiculous waste of money. And I say that being part frog (or Freedom or whatever we're called).

    20. Re:Er... why? by Spudley · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They built it because every summer thousands of cars get stuck in Millau while traveling from north to south.

      Which leads to the next question, which is why did they only make it two lanes wide each way? Three lanes would have allowed for an increase in traffic flows later on. As it is, I dread to think how easily the traffic could get backed up even with this new bridge. And I would *not* want to be stuck in a queue on a bridge like that! (man, I get vertigo just looking at that photograph!)

      --
      (Spudley Strikes Again!)
    21. Re:Er... why? by ElGanzoLoco · · Score: 5, Informative

      IIRC, a LOT of trucks take that road every year, so building a road around Millau still solves just part of the problem: it will be a lot easier and faster for everyone to just take a straight line rather than going down in the valley, through the valley, and up again. IIRC, they claim the trips will be 1 to 2 hours shorter thanks to the bridge -that's less time on the road, therefore safer overall, less pollution etc...

      This is an entirely private project, the french govt didn't want to pay for it. That's bad for the drivers though, who will have to pay a lot of money to cross the bridge.

      --
      Hello! I'm a disaster waiting to happen!
    22. Re:Er... why? by SengirV · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I'm sure some tree huggers will claim it's sooooooo much better for the enviornment or some such crap. Like the exhaust isn't going to linger around and get pushed down to ground level when a slight wind blows or it rains. What garbage. Sure the valley gets flooded there, but I'd guess a bridge that is a lot lower to the ground would have fit the bill, and for a TON of $$$$$$$$ less.

      --

      Prof. Farnsworth - "Oh a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!"

    23. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are the cars let loose come fall?

    24. Re:Er... why? by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

      It's a region in france, if I'm not mistaken. The french even proposed a new EU intellectual propery law, where it would be illegal for anyone not in a particular town in UK to make "cheddar" cheese. All sorts of foodstuff, no lagers not from germany, etc. No idea on the status of this, but it's scary and stupid.

    25. Re:Er... why? by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


      Hmmmm....perhaps we now know the real reason behind the "Freedom Fries" debacle ;-)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    26. Re:Er... why? by stud9920 · · Score: 1

      Technically, all french wine is from the US anyway, there was a terrible vinyard disease some 100 years ago that had all trees extinguished. They had to get the plants back from California

    27. Re:Er... why? by ignatus · · Score: 1

      well, the picture doesn't quite give a realistic view on the scenery. It's actually a vast landscape without large hills that pose obstacles for the road. There is one main river in the area the Tarn. It's not a large river, but it has cut itself into the chalk soil for centuries. The "nice valley" is actually a rather broad canion. You can't just push a road through it, because the borders of the canion are far to steep to cross right downwards. And you can't just build a small bridge in the middle, because the soil isn't stable enough for such a large construction.
      On the other hand, this bridge is quite an overdoer actually :)

      --
      - Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.
    28. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is an entirely private project, the french govt didn't want to pay for it. That's bad for the drivers though, who will have to pay a lot of money to cross the bridge.

      True, but as a tourist attraction, it'll be worth the money. And knowing the French, they'll stop halfway across for a quick picnic, so it'll be worth every penny.

    29. Re:Er... why? by stephanruby · · Score: 1
      Is this a penis boast?

      Sadly, that's usually the case. I've seen both the US and France do projects for that reason.

    30. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do you recycle all your lame jokes everytime you see "france" turd worlder?
      fuck you and all piece of shit americunts

    31. Re:Er... why? by CanSpice · · Score: 1
      As a (former) neighbour of France
      You used to be Spain, Andorra, Monaco, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, or Germany?
    32. Re:Er... why? by Sique · · Score: 1

      This is not correct. Modern vine plants consists of two different parts. The root is from american wild vines, which are resistant agains the vine louse. The vine louse is an insect of american origin which lives on vine roots. The european vine species aren't resistant against this insect, so when the vine louse came with some infected vines from America, it caused a catastrophe. Talk about monocultures...

      The part of the plant which is above the earth is still the old, traditional european vine. The noble vine gets transplanted onto its cousin's roots, its own roots are cut off and similar the twigs of the base vine. If you plant such a two part vine, you have to take care. If you put it to high in the earth, the base vine may grow its own twigs, which don't carry the right grapes. And if you plant it too deep, the noble vine may grow roots, which can be attacked by the vine louse.

      So european law demands that all vine plants are two part, with a vine louse resistant base vine, to avoid a second attack by the vine louse.
      Next time you have chance to visit a vineyard, pay a look to the vines. Where they grow out of the earth, they have a thicker, round part. This is, where base vine and noble vine are transplanted together.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    33. Re:Er... why? by phrasebook · · Score: 1

      protect people from the site of Fords and chevys

      If only! American cars mostly look awful, just awful. Here are some:

      http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=ugly_cars (actually there's a jap car in there too)

    34. Re:Er... why? by ozbird · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's eight lanes wide - two lanes between the "prongs" of the tower, three lanes on either side.

    35. Re:Er... why? by fxer · · Score: 0, Troll

      HAHAHA, that is awesome, I nearly crapped myself, honestly I have a loose stool, guess that other guy couldn't take a joke...

    36. Re:Er... why? by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Japanese cars, not American cars. Get your facts straight.

    37. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know, but on Geraldo once I saw a guy who was as big as Monaco. They paid for him to get a gastric bypass!

    38. Re:Er... why? by KnightStalker · · Score: 1

      I think it's good for the drivers. I'd certainly pay five bucks to shorten my trip by two hours, decrease wear and tear on my engine and brakes, increase my fuel efficiency and not worry about collisions on twisty mountain roads. So it ain't free, so what. I'm sure the old road will still be open. People in the valley gotta get out.

      --
      * And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
    39. Re:Er... why? by l-ascorbic · · Score: 1

      Chevys? I don't think those things are exported. Never seen one in Europe myself.

    40. Re:Er... why? by kidgenius · · Score: 1

      umm...Actually there are TWO jap cars and two American cars. Subaru is a Japanese car company.

    41. Re:Er... why? by Paul+Jakma · · Score: 1

      That went through I believe. There was something on the business recently about the brewers of Newcastle Brown ale consider moving out of newcastle to Gateshead (iirc) and that one of the risks was that they might have to change the name of the beer because of this EU directive, eg to Gateshead Brown ale.

      --
      I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
    42. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are exported, but not many are bought. Probably something to do with the fuel prices in Europe.

    43. Re:Er... why? by utexaspunk · · Score: 1

      i thought champagne got its name from the cork's mushroom (champagnon? sp?) shape, which keeps it from popping out due to the pressure from the carbonation... perhaps the region was named afterward?

    44. Re:Er... why? by Chilles · · Score: 1

      That law was implemented a long time ago already. Ham can only be named Prosciuto di Parma (ham from parma in Italy) if it is made in Parma, Champagne can only be called champagne if it is made in the champagne region (and adheres to a pile of other standards of production) Port wine can only come from the Douro valley in Portugal, Gouda cheese van only come from the region around Gouda (the Netherlands) etc. etc. etc.

      It's more of a brand protection law than an intellectual property law.

      That's why we now have danish blue. The danes were making roquefort cheese untill this law came around and they had to name it something else. Now danish blue is just as strong a brand name as Roquefort.

      The idea behind the law is that even though it is not one entity producing something (i.e. coca cola) but a region where something is produced the brand is still vitally important to the local producers. Typically the local producers watch each other (either informally or through some government body) to maintain a certain quality of product. If someone not in the region could just start selling shitty product under their precious brand name their brand name would be destroyed. This law just recognises that the name of a region can be a brand name, and the law only applies to a set of typical local products. You can still call something champagne, as long as it's not bubbly wine, and you can still produce and sell all the crappy bubbly wine from China you want, you just can't call it Champagne. Just as you can produce and sell a sweet brown bubbly drink as long as you don't call it coca cola.

    45. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Jarlsberg is Norwegian. It's their most (only) famous cheese. I mean, look at the name -- that's not a French word. Also, fwiw, I tried jarlsberg cheese (from Norway) for the first time last week. I didn't really care for it. I was really hoping I'd like it. I guess I'll have to taste some different "brands" to see if I can find one I like.

    46. Re:Er... why? by tuber · · Score: 1

      Where did he in the post say it was french? If you recall, he said he would have to mention it to be patriotic... and if you check his email address, he's from the ".no" domain. Try reading before correcting people.

    47. Re:Er... why? by idiotnot · · Score: 1

      GM's European division is Opel -- many of the cars badged Chevy and Pontiac in the US are Opels in Europe.

    48. Re:Er... why? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Is this a penis boast ("I've got the biggest bridge!"),

      Yes, indeed, the French like their punaise, and look what is does to them!

    49. Re:Er... why? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Or are higher bridgers faster?

      No, they just collapse faster.

    50. Re:Er... why? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Gateshead? Eww! They would lose their most dedicated customers!

    51. Re:Er... why? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Ham can only be named Prosciuto di Parma (ham from parma in Italy) if it is made in Parma

      Actually, only the last step needs to happen in Parma. The pigs are raised in the Netherlands, then carted all the way through Belgium, Luxembourg, France to Italy, where they are slaughtered and made into ham.

      The nice thing is that if there are more pigs in the truck than is allowed by the Luxembourgish legislation, they may be forced to have their pigs slaughtered right on the spot. This is not only an appropriate punishment for the evildoers (by destroying the resale value of the meat, which can no longer legally become Parma ham), but it also helps the local butchery industry. Sigh, I guess that's what we get when we make a butcher's son the Minister of Transportation.

      And as Minister of Economy, he fares far worse.

    52. Re:Er... why? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      That's why we now have danish blue.

      Shouldn't that be Danish yellow?.

      The danes were making roquefort cheese untill this law came around and they had to name it something else.

      Probably they even voted "yes" themselves for that directive...hehe

    53. Re:Er... why? by Kaoslord · · Score: 1

      gas prices being what they are, considering extra mileage and wear and tear on vehicles i think this will SAVE drivers money.. not to mention time, and since time is money saving 2 hours and ~ 2 gallons of gas will really really worth it for drivers.. the site says most drivers will be taking a trip 100km shorter.. thats 62 miles, figuring 30mpg (and thats generous) thats 2 gallons of gas.. figure they probably pay (at least) the equivalent of $3 per gallon (probably way more) and then all of a sudden the bridge doesnt become too much of a bad deal for drivers. i guessed the gas price.. when I lived in barcelona gas was ridiculously expensive.. so i figured $3 was about right

      --
      Kaoslord [quote goes here] define("slashdot purity","67.5");
    54. Re:Er... why? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      Would the text be clearer after s/base/inferior American/?

      The part of the plant which is above the earth is still the old, traditional european vine. The noble vine gets transplanted onto the inferior American variety's roots, its own roots are cut off and similar the twigs of the inferior American vine. If you plant such a two part vine, you have to take care. If you put it to high in the earth, the inferior American vine may grow its own twigs, and take over your vineyard, like the Americans usually do. And if you plant it too deep, the noble vine may grow roots, which can be attacked by the vine louse.

      So european law demands that all vine plants are two part, with a vine louse resistant inferior American vine, to avoid a second attack by the vine louse. Next time you have chance to visit a vineyard, pay a look to the vines. Where they grow out of the earth, they have a thicker, round part. This is, where the inferior American vine and the noble French vine are transplanted together.

    55. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Chevys? I don't think those things are exported. Never seen one in Europe myself.

      Indeed. Europeans value quality.

    56. Re:Er... why? by ces · · Score: 1

      That happens in the U.S. too but we just start a war somewhere and blow up other peoples public works.

      The us has its Pork barrel public works projects too.

      BTW I seem to recall that there was a high bridge/viaduct built in the US recently to protect a senic valley from auto traffic. I think it was in Shenandoah National Park but I could be wrong.

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    57. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mmmm, illegal pig...

    58. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Indeed. Europeans value quality.

      Like well built airport terminals!

    59. Re:Er... why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How's the weather in Delaware?

    60. Re:Er... why? by phrasebook · · Score: 1

      True, but the Baja has nothing to do with Subaru Japan. "designed and built exclusively for the North American market". It shows ;-)

  17. Titanium guardrails? by lothar97 · · Score: 0, Redundant
    I sure hope they make the guardrails really strong. It would really suck to fall over into the valley like these poor saps in Seattle.

    I imagine this will be a new target of French suicide showoffs, bored with jumping off the Eiffel Tower.

    --

    1. Re:Titanium guardrails? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, from the photo it really looks like there are NO guardrails.... I'm not driving on that thing!!! WTF?!?!

  18. eccentric? by quelrods · · Score: 0, Troll

    Is there an engineering reason for it being this tall? Based on the photos it would appear not. Someone correct me if I'm wrong in thinking this is just the French being eccentric.

    --
    :(){ :|:&};:
    1. Re:eccentric? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is there an engineering reason for it being this tall?

      Because heights are the only thing the French aren't afraid of.

    2. Re:eccentric? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that was a great pre-holiday weekend laugh. Thanks!

    3. Re:eccentric? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Goes well with smoldering buildings huh ? :)

    4. Re:eccentric? by lazy_arabica · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Is there an engineering reason for it being this tall? Based on the photos it would appear not.
      Hum... you mean, based on a very small photo with no topographic information, you can't find a reason for this bridge to be that tall ? :)
      Someone correct me if I'm wrong in thinking this is just the French being eccentric.
      Hugh. I'm french. And I didn't decide to build that bridge.
    5. Re:eccentric? by Buzz_Litebeer · · Score: 1

      If its a deep valley, and their are already two connecting roads, then going down the side of the vally and up the other side of the valey could add a great deal of mileage to the drive, uphill and downhill.

      So there would be a lot of people who do break work who are angry, and a lot of people who rely on the high gas usage of climbing the side of a valley who are very angry about the bridge im sure (or they should be after they start losing business).

      The bridge is saving road mileage.

      --
      If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion
    6. Re:eccentric? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't make any sense.

      Just cut through the mountains on each side, no?

    7. Re:eccentric? by fatmanone · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      yeah, actually seems to be too tall and too ugly for that beautiful valley; i mean, c'mon!

    8. Re:eccentric? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't you bored with your stupid racist and xenophobic jokes?

    9. Re:eccentric? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't you getting tired of being a loser?

  19. Humans rule. by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    (See subject.)

    --

    There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
    1. Re:Humans rule. by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1
      --
      "I only speak the truth"
      Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    2. Re:Humans rule. by KnightStalker · · Score: 1

      I wonder if the architect /knew/ about the Tacoma Narrows Bridge... You should write him and make sure.

      --
      * And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
    3. Re:Humans rule. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No offense, Mister Dowd, but how the hell your post got modded insightful.... well, no. I understand completely how your post got modded insightful.

  20. so is in nearly done or done? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    title: nearing completion
    body: has been completed

    -Joe 2 Keg, the nit picker that kan't spell

    1. Re:so is in nearly done or done? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bridge is nearing completion. span is now completed, so the ends are linked, but the bridge is not yet ready to use.

      try inference. it's not that hard.

  21. Re:Surrender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HAHAHA I thought they would before it finished!

  22. Man... by xenostar · · Score: 2, Funny

    ..I can just see the headlines. "World's tallest bridge collapses! Engineers: 'What were we thinking?'"

    1. Re:Man... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can just see the headlines. "World's tallest twin towers collapse! Politicians: 'What were we thinking?'"

  23. Re:Highest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    s/I/it/

  24. Re:Highest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How come all of my posts have a score of zero?

    Because you've been modded down so much that Slashdot has decided that most people won't want to read your posts.

    At this point most people just create a new account... you might be able to build up your karma again, but it'll take some doing.

  25. Engineering Geeks? by pipingguy · · Score: 3, Funny


    Does it run Linux?

    1. Re:Engineering Geeks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it was built by Engineers, not computer scientists.

    2. Re:Engineering Geeks? by tloh · · Score: 1

      Does it run Linux?

      I'm sure once it's open, linux will be running *on* it. How many embedded devices do cars have nowadays?

      --
      Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
    3. Re:Engineering Geeks? by rsadelle · · Score: 1

      Imagine a Beowolf cluster...

    4. Re:Engineering Geeks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly these are just used as high speed interconnects.

  26. read the FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    on the left side of the browser...

    you made a post about a peace train that was judged to be offtopic, and was modded down twice, you have only been modded up once, so you have what they call bad karma...

  27. Screw that.... by Zugot · · Score: 0, Redundant

    That Deleware Memorial Bridge is high enough.

    --
    -- Bryan
  28. Re:Surrender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    French are (CESM) Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys. I bet an american firm built that bridge.

  29. Don't look Down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Atleast that is what they always say when up high.

  30. Re:What's the use? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    What's the use of having a bridge that is that high? Just seems like a serious waste of resources just for bragging rights.

    It advances the state of engineering and materials science, by testing structures that would otherwise never have been built.

    Think of it as like going to the moon, with fewer scientific benefits but less waste to match.

  31. That is my question too. by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    It does appear there is a perfectly good valley where you could run a road much cheaper.

    My guess, it appears they wanted to keep a central theme all the way along the roadway as this portion connects to a section crossing a river.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  32. My favorite bridge is in Indiana by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the bridge that goes over the lower calumet river and is also used by the chicago-south bend "vomit comet" transit line; the ugliest all metal bridge that has to be so high because of all the danger signs posted around that river. Of course, I don't believe the lower calumet has caught fire since the 60's, but I would not suggest rolling down the windows when your using this bridge, either.

    1. Re:My favorite bridge is in Indiana by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      kind of reminds me of the dirty metal bridge the 7 train runs on (over the Grand Central Parkway).. but hey.. no worries.. takes you to the greatest stadium, to watch THE greatest baseball team.. LETS GO METS GO!

  33. Holy Mother of ... by alphapartic1e · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What if that thing tilts? :-o

  34. Re:Highest? by way2trivial · · Score: 1
    Do you know how many hours/days it would take to drive that distance?

    russia to the tip of alaska might be doable.. at the closest point, russia and alaska are 3 miles apart

    'course, that's an island to an island, but still...

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  35. Major Heebeegeebees by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    I see a lot of white knuckled drivers going over this bridge. Imagine driving over it in bad weather, the wind pushing your car around. *shivers*

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    1. Re:Major Heebeegeebees by Seumas · · Score: 1

      What's frightening is that it doesn't look like the bridge has much for side-railing other than standard waist-high burms. Major pants-wetting factor. But if a lot of people would get the creeps driving over it, imagine what it would have been like to be one of the guys building it!

      The bridge they're planning on building that crosses from Alaska to Russia (or whatever - I forget) would affect me the same way. It's not high up, but it's not far off of the water-line, either.

    2. Re:Major Heebeegeebees by The-Dalai-LLama · · Score: 1

      Hope that area's not earthquake prone.

      The Dalai LLama
      ...talk about heebeegeebees...

    3. Re:Major Heebeegeebees by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      If it was, do you think the company would have spent almost 400 million on the thing to say "Oops. we forgot about earthquakes. Darn."?

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
  36. Funding? by PHP+Wolf · · Score: 5, Funny

    There's probably a sign before you drive onto the bridge that reads: "World's tallest bridge! World's highest toll!"

    --

    Double Compile

    1. Re:Funding? by ThisIsFred · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well at least you get to see a unique engineering masterpiece for your money. Think of what you get to see for a $2 toll on the Jersey Turnpike. And what's worse when the trip is over, you're in New Jersey.

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    2. Re:Funding? by mehgul · · Score: 1

      I realize you want to be funny but the toll is definitely extremely reasonable. Compare it to the Mt-Blanc tunnel for which you pay 28.80 (http://www.label.it/GEIETMB/version1/tmb_french/t arifs_fr.htm), or the Normandy bridge : 5.80 (http://ma-cci.com/ponts/Tarifs1.asp).

    3. Re:Funding? by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      Unless of course, you're traveling in the correct direction.

      Then you're out of Jersey.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    4. Re:Funding? by 4minus0 · · Score: 1

      I'll contribute a George Carlinism (which are becoming quite common here)

      Kiss her where it smells...take her to New Jersey!

      --
      You've got an easy breezy wind at your back...most of the time.
    5. Re:Funding? by The-Bus · · Score: 1

      The toll on the bridge crossing the Verrazano Narrows in NY is $7. And Outer Bridge Crossing is (or at least was) about $6, and that only drives you by a landfill.

      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

  37. Re:Highest? by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1

    Because some moderators forget change their personal settings when they have mod points, and dig below 1.

    --
    Fred

    "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
    -RMS
  38. What about the Royal Gorge Bridge in Colorado by arieh · · Score: 1

    http://www.engineergirl.org/nae/cwe/egmain.nsf/(we blinks)/ESER-5JBKQD?opendocument

    This URL indicates that the Royal Gorge bridge,
    outside Canon City, Colorado, USA is
    higher than the one mentioned

    --
    -- We have been doing so much with so little for so long, we are now qualified to do anything with nothing.
    1. Re:What about the Royal Gorge Bridge in Colorado by CerebusUS · · Score: 1

      Higher, but not taller. The French one has enormous... um... pillars.

    2. Re:What about the Royal Gorge Bridge in Colorado by snellgrove2 · · Score: 1

      wow, you protected that server from a /.-ing by putting some brakcets and a space in the URL. I still hit it, and made sure it got a few ctrl+F5's though, just in case ;)

      now if only all /. articles could be done like that, eh? only those who deserve to get in (i.e. those who can work out the URL) would be able to, and many a webserver would still be alive, rather than a smoking heap of silicon, or what used to be a zeon

      not that I mind an intel chip dying, being a /.-er im INCREDIBLY biased ;)

    3. Re:What about the Royal Gorge Bridge in Colorado by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > http://www.engineergirl.org/nae/cwe/egmain.nsf/(we blinks)/ESER-5JBKQD?opendocument

      For a monent, I thought that 'we blinks' meant that this was a link to a website that uses the dreaded BLINK tag :-O

      Then I realised that it was really 'weblinks' and had been corrupted by Slashdot's funky URL upfucker >-P

  39. My favorite part by bobbabemagnet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the project site: "As a truly emblematic signature of the town whose name it carries, it will, just by its very existence, lead to economic and cultural growth."

    Is it just me, or does completely bypassing a town actually hurt its economic and cultural growth?

    1. Re:My favorite part by lkratz · · Score: 1

      There will be less trafic jams because this bridge has been built to avoid a bottleneck on the highway from Clermond-Ferrand to Béziers. So Millau will no more be considered as a driver nightmare.

      It will generate tourism. Like other recent constructions, it will generate a lot of tourism for Millau. At least before it becomes the second highest bridge in the world ;)

    2. Re:My favorite part by bobbabemagnet · · Score: 3, Informative

      The pictures may be misleading, but there aren't exactly offramps into the town. So:

      1.) There is less traffic going through the town, less of a need to stop in the town, and it is harder to stop in town.

      2.) It has never been about tourism for Millau. the town is in the way, and the bridge serves to get people from one big city to the coast, circumventing Millau.

      In a nutshell "We're Millau. We built a huge freaking bridge that goes around our city so people don't have to drive through here any more. Come visit us!"

    3. Re:My favorite part by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      At least before it becomes the second highest bridge in the world ;)

      Or before the previous highest bridge in the world becomes again the highest bridge...

  40. Re:What's the use? by Grey+Ninja · · Score: 1

    and... building a huge bridge with a bunch of supports in the valley... solves this how?

  41. One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "Beefcake" - in that one particular South Park episode.

    What the hell does it mean?

    1. Re: One Word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One word: Vichy. Better to fight and possibly die against the Nazis (which some French certainly did) than become their obedient servants.

  42. Highest Bridge? by lpangelrob2 · · Score: 3, Informative
    Does this one not count? That one's 1,053 ft.

    Maybe it's a suspension vs. non-suspension thing.

    1. Re:Highest Bridge? by rilister · · Score: 1

      looks like it's a 'height of the deck' vs. the height of the freestanding structure (i.e. towers) to me...

      --
      'This writing business. Pencils and what-not. Over-rated if you ask me. Silly stuff. Nothing in it' - Eeyore
    2. Re:Highest Bridge? by prockcore · · Score: 3, Informative

      This one is taller, from the article:

      with suspension cables added will be 343 metres (1,132 feet) above ground at its highest point

    3. Re:Highest Bridge? by mrm677 · · Score: 1

      MOD parent up.

      Yes, the supports aren't as high but the bridge is still the highest in the world. And its made out of wood!

    4. Re:Highest Bridge? by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think the point is not the depth of the hole under the roadway, but the height of the piers.

    5. Re:Highest Bridge? by Nutria · · Score: 0

      The RG span is higher, but only 400m long, whereas the (gag) French bridge is 2,460m, which, in my mind, makes it a much more difficult engineering chalenge.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    6. Re:Highest Bridge? by FFFish · · Score: 1

      I dunno that a bridge over a narrow gorge really counts. Didn't actually have to make any effort on that, y'know? The French one is up on stilts, which really is quite impressive. The Colorado one just sort of... hangs there.

      Kind of like the difference between throwing a football 300' straight up, versus dropping a football 400' straight down. Up is definitely more impressive.

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    7. Re:Highest Bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>Kind of like the difference between throwing a football 300' straight up, versus dropping a football 400' straight down. Up is definitely more impressive.

      Yeah unless you've had 75 years to work on developing a solution to the problem of throwing the ball straight up.

    8. Re:Highest Bridge? by Dictator+For+Life · · Score: 1
      According to this, the main span of the Royal Gorge Bridge is several hundred feet wide.

      In my book, I'd say that there would have to be some pretty impressive "effort" exerted to build that bridge.

      I've been there, and it's breathtaking. They actually have a sign in the exact middle that says "No Fishing From Bridge"!

      --

      DFL

      Never send a human to do a machine's job.

    9. Re:Highest Bridge? by sharkdba · · Score: 1

      Until the definition of "highest" remains fuzzy, both will now claim to be one.

      --
      The purpose of life is to find the purpose of life.
    10. Re:Highest Bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical French. Claiming something that's not true.

  43. Re:What's the use? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    What's the use of having a bridge that is that high? Just seems like a serious waste of resources just for bragging rights.

    Bragging? Hardly. Remember, it was designed by ENGLISH architech Lord Norman Foster. The French can't really brag about the thing. If anything, it's likely many French citizens are ashamed that the French weren't able to design it themselves. History has shown that national pride and xenophobia have traditionally been much stronger among the French than most other Western-European countries; sadly, this bridge will probably be one of the first things destroyed when the next French Revolution comes.

  44. Is it a draw bridge? by pergamon · · Score: 4, Funny

    I mean, did they even bother to future-proof this thing so that when we reach the age of 300m high boats that it won't have to be torn down?

    1. Re:Is it a draw bridge? by DeltaSigma · · Score: 1

      I'm more concerned about its ability to bare the load of 300m high SUVs.

    2. Re:Is it a draw bridge? by k4rm4_p0l7c3 · · Score: 1

      not in France ;)

  45. Not the highest by xs650 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The height of the road surface above the water or ground below is what counts, not the fru-fru above the road surface.

    This old 1929 bridge in Colorado still has the Fench bridge beat, as do a few others.

    http://www.micron.com/k12/lessonplans/bridges/ro ya l.html

    1. Re:Not the highest by Ozwald · · Score: 1

      Comparing photos, the Colorado bridge crosses something not drivable too!

    2. Re:Not the highest by tmyklebu · · Score: 1

      We are measuring the height of the bridge, not the maximum vertical distance between any point on the bridge and the ground beneath. The Royal Gorge Bridge appears to be a relatively short structure suspending a surface; certainly nothing on the order of hundreds of feet in height.

    3. Re:Not the highest by xs650 · · Score: 1

      Real man measure from the water end to the where it's attached.

    4. Re:Not the highest by tmyklebu · · Score: 1

      I can't parse that, so I'll assume you mean that "real men" measure the distance from the water beneath the bridge to one end of the bridge. It seems to me that these same "real men" would consider the Millau bridge to be taller than the Royal Gorge Bridge as well; the bridge has a length of 2.5km, and a nonnegative height in metres. Thus, the farthest end of the bridge from the river Tarn is at least 1.25km, so the distance from the Tarn to this farthest end of the bridge is at least 1.25km. Which beats the hell out of the Royal Gorge Bridge.

  46. Royal Gorge Bridge, Canon City, CO by barista · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Having lived in Colorado, I would like to point out this bit of information. I guess it would depend on how the bridge is measured.

    Since it looks like the site is Slashdotted, I can't see all of the info. If you judge by the main span, then it looks like this new bridge may have it (886 ft compared to 880 ft). However, the Royal Gorge Bridge is 1053 ft above the Arkansas river that passes underneath it (No threat of flooding...knocks on wood).

    My guess is figuring out the world's highest bridge is something akin to figuring out the world's tallest building...different opinions yeild different results. Anyway, Royal Gorge only claims the "Wolrd's Highest Suspension Bridge".

    Yeah, I know... shoulda RTFA

    1. Re:Royal Gorge Bridge, Canon City, CO by xs650 · · Score: 1

      The Royal Gorge bridge is too far from Paris to be considered as being in the world.

  47. Nothing wrong with the Maginot Line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Which, of course, remained inpenetrable in WW2.

    If you knew any history you'd know that the nazis just went around the line by smashing through the defences in Belgium and Luxemburg.

    There was nothing wrong with the Maginot line, mind you.

  48. Biggest/Tallest/Most/Best Terror Targets by AFairlyNormalPerson · · Score: 1

    Are we looking at yet another awe inspiring structure to be on a terrorists list of possible targets? Or maybe France has disagreed with the US to somewhat "shield" them from the threat?

    1. Re:Biggest/Tallest/Most/Best Terror Targets by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Are we looking at yet another awe inspiring structure to be on a terrorists list of possible targets?
      Quite right. Let's stop building bridges, tall buildings (the Pentagon wasn't tall, but hey) and other big things that might be hit by terrorists. In fact let's just stay indoors, lock the door and don't move.
      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    2. Re:Biggest/Tallest/Most/Best Terror Targets by dumdeedum · · Score: 4, Funny
      In fact let's just stay indoors, lock the door and don't move.
      Your rhetoric has no power on Slashdot.
    3. Re:Biggest/Tallest/Most/Best Terror Targets by k4rm4_p0l7c3 · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked, France had a large Muslim population so the odds of a terrorist group finding them worthy of attacking are probably low. Plus, they have a lot of financial interests in Iraq among other middle-eastern countries.. why hate the French? they're nice people. They don't drop bombs on people in the name of liberation.

      and, man do they have good food. except for the stuff that looks like snot

    4. Re:Biggest/Tallest/Most/Best Terror Targets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You better make it to 5 with that one. That was damn funny.

    5. Re:Biggest/Tallest/Most/Best Terror Targets by easter1916 · · Score: 1

      France has been the target of Islamic fundamentalist terrorists numerous times... there was a spate of Paris Metro system bombings in the early 1990s, for example. It's true that France has the largest Muslim community in Europe (the largest Jewish community too) but the Muslims are frequently living in the horrible "banlieus" (projects) on the edges of cities, disaffected, feel like outsiders and are prime material for fanatics looking for new recruits.

    6. Re:Biggest/Tallest/Most/Best Terror Targets by The+Wicked+Priest · · Score: 1

      The Pentagon isn't tall, but it's still huge -- by some accounts the world's largest office building.

      Its squat structure (as compared to the WTC) turned out to be a great boon on Sept. 11, 2001.

      --
      Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  49. Highest? Royal Gorge? by betis70 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Sorry but last I checked the Royal Gorge Bridge (in Colorado, USA) is still higher. Built in 1929 too.

    1053 feet. Roughly 320.95 meters. Or 50 meters higher.

    info here

    --
    I forget...are we at war with Eurasia or East Asia?
    1. Re:Highest? Royal Gorge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the difference is that that bridge does not have pillars going all the way down to the bottom of that gorge, whereas the millau bridge on its own is 270m high.

      Besides, the highest bridge is probably a piece of wood on mount everest somewhere that bridges a little crack in the mountain.

    2. Re:Highest? Royal Gorge? by Rune+Berge · · Score: 1

      Depends on how you define highest...
      They were probably using the height of the pylons as a measure of bridge's height.

    3. Re:Highest? Royal Gorge? by oneiron · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Royal Gorge is a suspension bridge. Suspension bridges are a completely seperate animal.

    4. Re:Highest? Royal Gorge? by betis70 · · Score: 1

      Yeah I guess so. I would think of measuring the pylons as being the 'tallest' bridge, but maybe it was a translation problem?

      --
      I forget...are we at war with Eurasia or East Asia?
    5. Re:Highest? Royal Gorge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends how you count 'highest': The highest bridge above sealevel is somewhere in the himalaya; The bridge with the highest clearing under it is the Royal Gorge Bridge; The bidge with the tallest structural system is going to be the Millau bridge.

      Personally I find the tallest structural system to be the most impressive. If you look at the Royal Gorge bridge it's just a small bridge with a large hole under it. Although this is quite impressive, from a constructive point of view, it wouldn't be any different if there would be a 10000 ft hole under it. This is quite different if you want to build a bridge with a 10000 ft structural system.

      Just my 0.02

  50. Even more awesomer by blair1q · · Score: 3, Informative

    Major writeup of the project:

    http://www.a75.com/viaducengl.html

    1. Re:Even more awesomer by Andorion · · Score: 1

      That site's great, thanks.

      Makes me wonder why they couldn't have found some way for the road to descend into the valley via S turns, cross the Tarn with a bridge, then up the other side w/ more S turns?

      ~Berj

    2. Re:Even more awesomer by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Just guessing:

      Look at the color picture with "Le Larzac" on the right side.

      Looks more like a canyon wall than a valley. You need at least some reasonable slope on either extreme of an S-curve to make the turn. And if they'd just gone over a ways and done a single grade along the wall, it would have had to deal with those deep side-canyons and the jutting butte in the middle, probably leading to tunnels or rabbets.

      At that point, they realize they might have to cantilever straight out from that wall. And once they're out into space, they're hanging over yet another drop to the river. So there's nowhere to go but across to the other side.

      Or maybe Wile E. Coyote was on the design team and impressed them with the wisdom of always having something under you if you reach the edge of a precipice.

  51. BASE Jumpers Have a New Toy by geomon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How long until the first one takes a shot at this structure?

    --
    "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    1. Re:BASE Jumpers Have a New Toy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're planning our trip now.

  52. Re:Star Wars... by carlos_benj · · Score: 4, Funny

    So now the US Navy pilots have a slalom course in Europe. Sweet!

    --

    --

    As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.

  53. More info on the bridge and Valley by King_Pickle · · Score: 3, Interesting
  54. Oh, good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A new vacation spot for suicidal people.

  55. Re:What's the use? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, a 800-ft high flood would be serious, wouldn't it?

  56. Economics by Hobbex · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They are charging about $6 per car for crossing the viaduct. If enough cars are willing to pay this rather than crawling through the valley that it pays for the project (which wasn't actually that expensive, compare USD $400 million with what some bridges over water cost) then it makes economic sense to build it. What else is needed?

  57. It's quite a sight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been at Milau last summer, and I must say that bridge is quite spectacular, also the way it was built. During the dozen days I was there, you could see the daily progress they made as the cranes moved and the whole bridge was pushed across the pillars little by little. Amazing bridgebuilding technology, really.

    And maybe it's not evident from the pictures, but the bridge does make some sense when you look at the landscape close-up.

    And it's really big. Standing under the pillars makes it look very, very intimidating.

  58. How do they get the ends to meet? by mveloso · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you look at the picture, it looks as if there's a bit of a dip from where the camera is to the next span.

    Did they screw up the alignment a bit then hack it to get it to work? How do they do that anyway?

    1. Re:How do they get the ends to meet? by King_Pickle · · Score: 5, Informative

      The road will have two lanes (3.50m each) on each side and will run at about 270m above the river Tarn. The Millau Viaduct will not be straight. A straight road could induce a sensation of floating for drivers. A slight curve will remedy that. The curve will be of 20km in range. Moreover, the road will have a light hill of 3% to improve the visibility and reassure the driver. A 3m wide emergency lane will bring increased security. It will, in particular, prevent drivers from seeing the valley from the viaduct. As the bridge will be exposed to winds of up to 151km/h, side screens will reduce the effects of the wind by 50%. The speed of the wind at the level of the road will therefore reflect to speed of the wind found at ground level around Larzac and Sauveterre.

      From http://www.roadtraffic-technology.com/projects/mil lau_viaduct/

  59. Re:Highest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One word: Bitchslap.

  60. Two More Words by SoSueMe · · Score: 2, Funny
  61. Re:What's the use? by timeOday · · Score: 1
    Give me a break, it's 880 feet high! Are you telling me that quaint little village is flooded under 800 feet of water every spring!? If it were just for flooding 10 feet off the ground would have done it.

    This will have the benefits of not causing noise pollution (I doubt the noise will reach ground level), and not cutting the town in two (as the supports are quite far apart).

  62. I sure that the bridge will handle loads ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... better than their server.

  63. In other news... by 955301 · · Score: 1

    A Frenchman from Millau recently tossed his hat in for the Summar 2004 Darwin Awards competition. Breaking ranks with the other contestents, the 25 year old amateur bungee jumper announced his entry pre-mortem along with his decision to resign from a janitorial/IT position at Eiffage, a French construction group, to pursue his hobby for a living.

    Rumors abound, but no details were available about his upcoming performance.

    --
    You are checking your backups, aren't you?
  64. Re:Highest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    at the closest point, russia and alaska are 3 miles apart

    not even close. The shortest distance between mainland russia and mainland alaska is 55 miles.
    I think you're mistakenly thinking of the Diomede islands, which are much closer together, however they are about 100 miles from shore in either direction and there aren't any cars there anyway, so a bridge wouldn't help you much.

  65. Motorcyle lane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope they put in a motorcycle lane.

  66. Re:What's the use? by carlos_benj · · Score: 1

    It advances the state of engineering and materials science, by testing structures that would otherwise never have been built.

    Think of it as like going to the moon, with fewer scientific benefits but less waste to match.


    Dude! We need to build a bridge to the moon then. Lots of up-front costs, but once it's in we could drive there anytime we want.....

    --

    --

    As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.

  67. Not even close. by Eevee · · Score: 1

    At around $5.50 US (depending on the exchange rate from Euros) a crossing, it's just a bit more than half as expensive as the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel's $10 US one-way charge for a passanger car.

  68. C'mon mods, learn the diff between Funny and Infor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They get serious flooding in that valley.

    This is "4, Informative"? It's 880 feet high!

    Correct mod is "5, Funny".

  69. Re:C'mon mods, learn the diff between Funny and In by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Survey just in. 2 out of 3 mods are on crack!

  70. french engineering safe? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

    in light of the recent collapse at the Charles de Gaulle airport in france, I'm not gonna risk my butt being the first to across it. I'll wait at least 2 years after completion (the airport collapsed less than 2 yrs after its completion).

    1. Re:french engineering safe? by 0xA · · Score: 1

      Don't worry the engineering was done by a British firm. The bridge won't collapse but it will leak oil.

    2. Re:french engineering safe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One building collapses. Something that can happen everywhere, everytime. French engineers are not better or worse than other engineers.

      I'm sorry to say, but your remark is short-sighted, if not stupid.

    3. Re:french engineering safe? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      so says an AC.

      A building collapsing just doesn't happen everywhere, everytime, nor just out of the blue.
      If it were to happen everywhere and everytime, we would all be living under rubble.
      Typically, buildings that are old or in poor condition (whether that is due to wear & tear, old age, or artificially done with explosives or acts of terrorism), they tend NOT to collapse everytime or everywhere.

      Now go enroll in a reason and logical thinking class at your local community college so you can comprehend why it can't be everywhere, everytime.

  71. GHAAAA!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good Lord! I clicked the link, saw the picture, and 15 minutes later one of my colleages noticed my motionless terrified stare and white-knuckled grip of my desktop. A call to our MERT team (Medical Emergency Response Team) to pry me off and hose my eyes with saline took care of me. I changed into my running clothes and my chair is out on the shipping bay being hosed off as I type this.

    I could never actually drive over that bridge but you could hog tie me and drag me across with a big truck and a rope. Once we got going the snot, tears, and drool would provide lubrication that would ease the pull.

  72. Remember... by twoslice · · Score: 0

    The bridge is 886 ft high - so if you are 6' tall then the bungee cord should be 880 ft long. Unless my math is way off...

    --

    From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
    1. Re:Remember... by Rosonowski · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but in the chance you aren't, you'd want the cord to be shorter than the fall.

      --
      01101001 01100001 01101101 01101110 01101111 01110100 01100001 01101100 01100001 01110111 01111001 01100101 01110010
    2. Re:Remember... by the_bard17 · · Score: 1

      Yeah... a bit shorter. Remember, bungee cords stretch :o).

    3. Re:Remember... by jred · · Score: 1

      Thx for that info! 5'10" is close enough. I'll brb & let you know how it went...

      --

      jred
      I'm not a mechanic but I play one in my garage...
  73. Re:Highest? by MikeFM · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The road (bridges) through the Florida Keys is pretty impressive as far as length. It's not entirely a single span but overall it has that effect.

    --
    At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
  74. More pictures by rufey · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can see some more pictures of this project, along with some of the artist renderings of what the thing will look like when done, here.

  75. Re:Star Wars... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, there are no US Navy pilot flying over France. The French kicked out the US military bases when they left NATO command in the late 50's.

    I guess the hotshot Navy pilots will have to stick with cutting cables of mountain trams in Italy.

  76. More information on the Millau Viaduct (Bridge) by Tandoori+Haggis · · Score: 2, Informative


    I thought this meritted a search on Ixquick Metasearch http://www.ixquick.com

    Here are my choice results on the Millau Viaduct or Bridge depending on what report you read.

    http://www.bridgepros.com/projects/Millau_Viaduc t/

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3237329. st m

    http://www.viaducdemillaueiffage.com/
    N.B. This site is in heavy demand so by all means make a note of the URL to try another time / at a later date.

    http://www.construction.com/NewsCenter/Headlines /E NR/20040315d.asp

    http://www.enerpac.com/html/press_releases/Beric ht en/30014_ENG_EU.html

    Interesting to note that Sir Norman Foster was involved in this. For more info on his work try: http://www.greatbuildings.com/architects/Norman_Fo ster.html

    --
    My hyperlinks aren't worth the paper they're printed on.
  77. Re:Star Wars... by carlos_benj · · Score: 1

    I guess the hotshot Navy pilots will have to stick with cutting cables of mountain trams in Italy.

    Sooo close. You got the implied reference but seem to have missed the joke....

    --

    --

    As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.

  78. Re:Highest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Starting Score: 0 points
    Moderation -1
    100% Offtopic
    Extra 'Offtopic' Modifier 0 (Edit)
    New User Modifier -1 (Edit)
    Total Score: -1

  79. Re:What's the use? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    Bragging? Hardly. Remember, it was designed by ENGLISH architech Lord Norman Foster.

    Well, yeah, but doesn't the architect just decide what colour it's going to be? The important part of the work is done by engineers. I don't think the site says whether they're french or English, but I would expect a firm named after France's most famous structural engineer to be French.

  80. Length of bridge by Barumpus · · Score: 2, Informative

    The length of this bridge is quite impressive. The longest suspension bridge on record is the Dames Point (Napoleon Bonaparte Broward Bridge)in Jacksonville Florida that is about 2 miles long. It's span consisting of cables is only about 1/3 of the overall length (not sure how the whole bridge is considered suspension). This one apeears to be roughly 60% of the length of the Dames Point but is suspended cables the whole length. Seeing the Dames Point on a quite regular basis, I must say that one is very impressive.

    Just for height comparisons, the Dames Point is about 425 feet (130m) high with the highest point over water being 175 feet (about 54m). Quite an accomplishment considering what it took to build this little thing.

    1. Re:Length of bridge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. The longest suspension bridge in the world is
      in Japan (Akashi Kaikyo bridge from Kobe to Awaji island).

    2. Re:Length of bridge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In case you are interested, here is a link for this bridge.

      Dames Point

      If you like bridges, Jacksonville is a cool place. It has 6 bridges over the St Johns River, and three over the Intracoastal Waterway.

    3. Re:Length of bridge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since we seem to be in the business of linking to information about these bridges, here is what PBS has to say about the Akashi Kaikyo: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/buildingbig/wonder/structu re/akashi_kaikyo.html

    4. Re:Length of bridge by k4rm4_p0l7c3 · · Score: 1

      mmm, no. sorry about that buddy.

      Skyway Bridge over the mouth of Tampa Bay here in south Florida is about 20 thousand feet long. AFAIK that's the longest suspension bridge in the world, according to wikipedia. The last one over that area was struck by a ship named Summit Venture and it created quite a spectacular and nasty accident. I remember seeing this eery reminder any time we took a trip north.

      A lot of people go there to commit suicide.

      I do think Jacksonville owns the record for most rednecks within an incorporated city. Not making fun of you all, it's just the landmass is so ridiculously massive.. heh

    5. Re:Length of bridge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mmm, no. sorry about that buddy.

      Wikipedia says: longest cable-stayed concrete bridge. That's
      not the same as suspension bridge. Akashi Kaikyo is
      currently the longest (with a single span of 1991 meters).
      Italy is planning a bridge across the straights of Messina
      which will have a single span of over 3km.

    6. Re:Length of bridge by k4rm4_p0l7c3 · · Score: 1

      well, consider me corrected then, buddy

    7. Re:Length of bridge by Barumpus · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected. It is cable-stayed for the Dames Point. But either way, both are rather impressive.

      As for Jacksonville containing the most rednecks.. I can confirm that is wrong. Go a little ways outside of Jacksonville to places such as Hilliard and Callahan. Both are incorporated cities (I think, normally try to avoid these 2) that are 100% redneck and 1% the size of Jax. ;)

    8. Re:Length of bridge by k4rm4_p0l7c3 · · Score: 1

      hehehehe that's the thing about Florida most people don't get. if you can't see the ocean, odds are you're surrounded by rednecks. :)

  81. It's a French Terrorism Honeypot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    Why did they build this bridge? That looks like a perfectly nice valley down there, easy to push a road through, and at 1/100th the cost and no where near the danger.

    That's true. But the French are masters of deception. For example, the Maginot Line could not really be a defensive bulwark against Germany since Hitler could so obviously just drive around it. It was actually a party crib for the militizzle nizzles. A thousand mile long tube, it was the quintessential "penis boast".

    Similarly this is not really a bridge. It is a French Terrorism Honeypot. It is just screaming to be blown up by one of those Arab terrorist cells and when they do... the french police will have it all on videotape and will put their top man on it, Inspector Clouseau. I wouldn't want to be one of those terrorists. I can tell you that.

  82. Check out bridge day by The+Tyro · · Score: 4, Interesting

    at the New River Gorge bridge in West Virginia, USA. It's legal to jump off that bridge exactly one day per year (known, appropriately enough, as bridge day). It's not a bad way to introduce yourself to base jumping legally... jail time sucks.

    Incidently, it's only ten feet shorter than the bridge mentioned in the article (but has a much smaller landing area... people jumping the New River Gorge bridge should have good canopy control skills... it might be tough for a rookie parachutist). The only more-difficult famous base jump landing I know of is Angel Falls... there's a tiny clearing in the jungle you have to hit, or you're in the trees.

    I got invited to do my first base jump when I was a low-time skydiver (only had 13 jumps under my belt) it involved breaking-and-entering, climbing an antenna at night, jumping from said antenna, and avoiding the guy wires... needless to say, I declined. I like adrenaline as much as the next guy, but there's something to be said for living to jump another day...

    Jump smart... you'll live longer.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    1. Re:Check out bridge day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I did. It's here , complete with carzy-fool video of some fella going for it.

    2. Re:Check out bridge day by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 3, Funny

      Jump smart... you'll live longer.

      Don't jump.

      You'll live even longer.

      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
    3. Re:Check out bridge day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, around there, do you jail people for jaywalking as well?

  83. Re:Surrender by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surrender it to who? France isn't at war with anyone.

  84. OT: Project for a New American Century by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this really chauvinism? All they are proposing is that America (who cares about the rest of the continent?) must accept their (they forgot the phrase "God given" here) responsibility to keep all the dirty foreigners in line. This is clearly along the lines of the divinely inspired "Manifest Destiny". Clearly these great leaders answer to a higher power (cash).

  85. The bridge doubles as ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a space elevator.

  86. French by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This freedom bridge, sure looks French to me.

  87. Toor Day France by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    Now that's one way to take over a seanic vista! I can't really tell from the photo, but that must have been one great view from up the valley. The constuction site has some good photos, but the server will die soon.

    I wonder how long before this bridge features in a TdF stage. I'm sure it'll look awesome with a peloton going along it and will figure into several pictures by Graham Watson.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  88. In future news... by leondrb · · Score: 2, Funny

    A spectacular crash has just accured on the newly opened Millau bridge. Witnesses report that a small car collided with a truck causing the car to flip over the side rail. The driver of the car was seen climbing out of the falling car...

    --
    --The best thing about working at home... Homebrew!
  89. read for comprehension? by way2trivial · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I specified, island to island.., I knew that. yet, people do want to connect russia and alaska, and the islands do figure in to the plans. and looky here

    The intensity of use of this railroad corridor, and its effect on overall economic productivity of North American and Eurasian nations, changes entirely when it crosses the Bering Strait--as is now definitely technologically feasible by tunnel (Figure 2), using the two islands, (Little Diomede and Big Diomede) which lie along the Strait crossing in order to break up its total length. The long-awaited Alaska-Canada railroad corridor then becomes an extension of the northern Eurasian Land-Bridge--involving the Trans-Siberian and Baikal-Amur lines, and the Chinese northern rail line construction extending to them--and part of the "world land-bridge."

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  90. Delicate? by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 2, Informative

    From here:
    The bridge has the optimum span between cable-stayed columns. It is delicate, transparent, and uses the minimum material, which makes it less costly to construct.

    Why does this talk of "delicate" bridges not have me rushing to cross it? I realise there's more than one definition of the word delicate, but still.

  91. Holy Cow! by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 1

    Can you say "five miles per hour"!

    I think I peed my pants when I saw that picture.

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
  92. Is it a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or is it a framework for displaying the world's largest white flag?

  93. But the question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will it collapse as well?

  94. /. strikes agin by cstream_chris · · Score: 2, Funny

    Warning: mysql_connect(): Too many connections in /home/millau/public_html/pnadodb/drivers/adodb-mys ql.inc.php on line 170 mysql://millau1_us:@localhost/millau1_db failed to connectToo many connections Better post this as funny :)

  95. 42 by lguldur · · Score: 1

    There was another way: Yellow... A human problem, a human solution.

  96. Er.. by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1
    in light of the recent collapse at the Charles de Gaulle airport in france, I'm not gonna risk my butt being the first to across it. I'll wait at least 2 years after completion (the airport collapsed less than 2 yrs after its completion).
    Tacoma Narrows? Anyone?
    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
  97. Have that here in georgia by zogger · · Score: 1

    They grow a very sweet and tasty onion down in south georgia, around the town of "vidalia" hence the onions of that name. You can use the same seed, grown elsewhere, but it is illegal to call it a "vidalia" for sales purposes.

    just a FWIW

    good stuff, BTW, yummy

  98. Your dose of Pessimism by Soong · · Score: 1
    1. A new and scenic place to jump to your death.
    2. How big of a plane/bomb does it take to knock out one of those pylons?
    3. I'd just like to compare this to the Maginot Line, a huge construction on the French countryside that wound up being useless.
    --
    Start Running Better Polls
    1. Re:Your dose of Pessimism by Pelops · · Score: 1

      Well, pessimism is a very nice value. but again if you really want to be pessimist, you should think about suicide right now.

      1 Yes it looks like a right place to dive and jump. Doesn't it occur to you that people might have thought about it when designing a bridge.

      2 Hitting a pylon with a plane is harder to hit a tower. Now regarding a bomb, i am pretty sure that when there will be terrorists alerts it will be one of the first place to be checked. Not to sound too optimistic, but i think we got some lessons from what happened 9/11

      3 ah my favorite. Comparing the Maginot line to this bridge is really a clueless comment. The Maginot line was a military line that was supposed to stop the germans from invading. It was really stupid and useless. Had the germans attacked that way, they would have been stopped. But, again in general world armies are not reputed to be smart.
      This bridge was built to remove the bottleneck at Millau. I can tell you from having taken that road that Millau is really hell, pollution, getting stuck, and so on. There are some economical reasons behind this bridge as you can save from 1 to 2 hours on your trip by taking it. And as you probably know, time is money. Plus replace the bridge in the context of the highway being built crossing the Massif Central.Overall, it will allow when completed to shave several hours of trip to go south of France, and cataluna for example. The whole thing makes economical sense :)

      Now Murphy says that there is a disaster in the waiting :)

  99. why did they build it this way? by pedantic+bore · · Score: 0, Redundant
    One thing that's not explained in the article is why they built this bridge so high in the first place. From the photo it looks like the bridge spans a fairly flat valley. Why not go down and then back up? I mean it's pretty cool and all that, but 310M euros is a lot of money to spend on coolness. Can someone in the know explain why it make sense to build the tallest bridge in the world over a valley in France?

    --
    Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
    1. Re:why did they build it this way? by debest · · Score: 3, Informative

      It may be a flat valley, but the drop-offs into the valley are quite steep.

      Thanks to another poster above, check out this page, particularly the photo right at the bottom. You can see how difficult it would be to get an expressway down into the valley and then back up. The page also shows the various options considered, as well as the reasons for accepting the tall viaduct.

      --
      Look at the tomato! Isn't it sad? He can't dance! Poor tomato!
  100. Suggested upcoming Fark headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Highest bridge built in France. USA and England surrender.

  101. Two Words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the use of having a bridge that is that high? Just seems like a serious waste of resources just for bragging rights

    Your post didn't deserve to be downmodded because you're right. Such a bridge testifies to nothing as much as it does engineering hubris and municipal vanity.

    Oh, yeah, I promised two words: Terrorist Magnet

  102. Re:W00T! by kevcol · · Score: 1

    labotomy

    Hmm. a labotomy might be a lip removal of some sort.. however, you may want to respell that as 'lobotomy' in your .sig.

  103. Good spot for the terrorists though! by vensub · · Score: 1

    To hangout for some time.

  104. The BBC has a much better article here by gnunick · · Score: 1
    More pictures, and more technical details (click the 'Find out more/At-a-glance' link for a pop-up with several pages of info here:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3759307.stm

    This article is a bit different (more up-to-date) than the only other BBC article I've seen anyone post here.

    --
    I have no special gift, I am only passionately curious. --Albert Einstein
  105. And the sign in the middle warns... by emcdermid · · Score: 2, Funny

    "No Fishing From Bridge"

    (seriously!)

  106. As bad as the Huey P. Long? by localroger · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The Huey P. Long bridge over the Mississippi River just north of New Orleans is actually a railroad bridge. As an afterthought, the architects added vehicular lanes which are bolted on to the superstructure to either side of the actual train lane. Originally in the 1930's these vehicular lanes were single-lane with a generous clearance and sidewalk for pedestrians.

    Since long before I was born they have been two ten-foot-wide lanes and pedestrians are not allowed on the bridge because of the danger. Neither are trucks allowed to pass one another because there isn't enough clearance.

    The nominal height of this bridge is 130 feet above the river, give or take. It's not nearly as high as the A75 but we get our share of suicide jumpers both off it and the newer, swankier, and busier Greater New Orleans Mississippi River Bridge a few miles to the south (or, as it was renamed after a contest in the 80's, the "Crescent City [not drug] Connection").

    You do not get the full thrill of the Huey Long unless you're on it when a TRAIN is also on it. And you really don't get the full thrill unless you are STOPPED IN TRAFFIC while a TRAIN is passing. You see, the H.P.Long is entirely riveted together. There isn't a weld to be found in the entire structure. This means it moves -- a lot. You normally can't tell in a moving vehicle, but people have been known to get seasick in stalled traffic. Especially when a train is passing.

    I'm sure the A75 will be no picnic in bad weather, but being that high in bad weather you probably won't even be able to see the ground. What I wonder about is how much the thing will move around with only seven supports and all that wind-catching area.

    Being stopped on traffic might be a lot more fun than just having your car slapped around by a gale.

    --
    Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
    1. Re:As bad as the Huey P. Long? by Seumas · · Score: 1

      This sounds like Galloping Girdy that was in Tacoma Washington. You've seen video of it before (and it's the bridge in Kuro5hin.org's logo). It's the bridge that wobbled in the wind like a long piece of paper and finally collapsed.

    2. Re:As bad as the Huey P. Long? by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      Well, as far as I know, the movement of the Huey P isn't quite as bad as the Galloping Girdy, but it can still be a little scary from what I hear. Although, even in moving traffic the bridge is still no picnic. There's actually one spot when going easbound where the lanes suddenly shift left about a foot or so, my guess is from some kind of miscalculation when building the bridge. And this is with 10 foot wide lanes. I've travelled on very few roads that narrow, let alone bridges. In fact, for the longest time after moving down here I wouldn't even drive over the bridge, but I would instead go out of my way to take the Crescent City Connecion since it was so much nicer.

      In fact, I can't think of a single bridge that I hate to drive over more than the Huey P.

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

  107. I give it two weeks, then a year. by thelizman · · Score: 1

    Two weeks before some smelly frenchman BASE jumps this thing.

    A year before a section mysteriously falls, killing a couple from Prague, a travelling salesman from China, and several grazing sheep.

  108. That bridge is impressive and all... by eRacer1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...but they missed the perfect opportunity to build the "world's tallest cloverleaf interchange".

  109. Correction? by fuqqer · · Score: 1

    The Royal Gorge Bridge in Colorado is 1053 feet off the deck. How are they measuring the Millau bridge to be a record breaker?

    non sig - My slashdot UID sux but my Slashnot.com UID is in the 100's.

    1. Re:Correction? by anno1602 · · Score: 1

      They are measuring the clearance of the bridge at the pylons, I think.

  110. Re:HAW HAW DIDJA HEAR THAT ONE JIMMY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    lame cheese-eating surrender-monkeys who can't take a joke =P

  111. NOT your tax dollars.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

    No. It was paid for independently and they have the rights to charge people for crossing it for 75 years. I think 75 years is a little much but it wasn't your tax money paying for it.

    It's not cheap to cross, either. But, you always have the option of going the old way, if you want to save the money.

    --
    - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
  112. FROG DROP!!!! WOOOHOOOOO!!!! by crypto1969fl · · Score: 1

    Looks like a great place for a game of FROG DROP. 1. Take a number of disguntled frogs and carry them onto center span of bridge 2. Drop frogs over side! SPLAT less frogs in the world! SWEET!!!!

    --
    --"It is insufficient to protect ourselves with laws; we need to protect ourselves with mathematics."--
  113. holy shit... by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    no fucking way I'm ever going on that thing...

  114. Triplets of Belleville by yroJJory · · Score: 1

    It sorta reminds me of the train bridge that passes Champion's home in Triplets of Belleville.

    --
    Jory
  115. is it a bridge at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is it a bridge at all?
    Isn't it just an elevated drive?

  116. Retard? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1
    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Retard? by letxa2000 · · Score: 1
      France paid $29.5B in 2002, while the US paid $399B. Who's safer?

      Probably the French because they tend to cower rather than stand tall in the face of threats (both past and present), and because part of that $399B that we spent protects them

      .

    2. Re:Retard? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Protect from what?

    3. Re:Retard? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Cower? Let's have an example, other than in WWII, when France was defeated along with half of the world. As part of NATO, part of their $29.5B protects us. And again, who's safer?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    4. Re:Retard? by letxa2000 · · Score: 1
      Cower? Let's have an example, other than in WWII, when France was defeated along with half of the world.

      As provided elsewhere in this thread, check this link.

      As part of NATO, part of their $29.5B protects us. And again, who's safer?

      Oh wow, France contributed $77.6 million to the NATO budget in 1998 compared to $453 million by the U.S. Canada contributed more than France even though it has a population almost half its size, Germany contributed almost 4 times more than France even though its population is only about 30% larger, Italy contributed more. Heck, Bill Gates could have contributed more to NATO than France. I'm so glad the French are out there helping with the common defense. :)

    5. Re:Retard? by nursedave · · Score: 1
      Not sure about your qualifier there (along with half the world?), but irregardless of France's defeats (which are legion), the point is this: They are a worthless part of NATO. The US and UK have been NATO's backbone since its inception. France's monetary contributions were basically paying (too little, I might add) for their own defence. The US contribution to NATO is not just in money, and you know it. The US maintained bases all over Europe which gave the Soviets pause, and kept them from rolling across western Europe. That NATO did shit to help then-Czechoslovakia and Poland is a crying shame (blame mostly on their ruling governments at the time), but the Soviet machine would have kept rolling West. Stalin knew he faced a hell of a fight if he tried; plus, he was busy killing off 20 million of his own citizens.

      As for your "who's safer" remark, I'm not sure what you mean. If you refer to the 9/11 incident, I hardly believe that is relevent.

      --

      The Democratic Party: We've been pussies since 1968!

    6. Re:Retard? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      That French military history link was amusing. Kind of a stretch to mock the "French" Gauls for their defeat by the "Italian" Julius Caesar. And of course it omits the centuries of wars in which the French invented so much of modern military language, by winning. And of course the French conquest of Britain, and in the Americas, like in Mexico and Louisiana, while also trivializing Napoleon's victories across Europe. Not very historical, but an amusingly warped trip through the history of killing.

      The French domestic military budget supports their NATO committment, which protects us. Are you more secure with so much of your taxes paying for a ridiculous antimissile system, to use but one example of US military overexpenditure on insecurity?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    7. Re:Retard? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Half the world was defeated by the Axis in WWII. Much more than half, by population and area. The Germans were ultimately defeated by the Allies, but that doesn't impugn their modern military. Nor do people impugn the rest of Europe's militaries for their defeat by the Nazis, or Asia's by the Japanese, etc.

      We're not arguing about whether the US has the most formidible military in the world - although guerillas regularly defeat it, in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq... We're talking about relative military expenses and safety. France is pretty safe, and their NATO contribution reflects that priority. The American military budget both defends us, and creates threats. Like funding Iraq's military in the 1980s, pursuing tactical nukes and a propagandistic antimissile shield fraud, biological weapons, endless foreign misadventures like in Iran. Even the public budget of $400B is bigger (if you omit Japan's $65B) than the entire world's military budgets combined. All these bombs and bullets are designed to threaten, not protect. And we're less safe for buying so many.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    8. Re:Retard? by letxa2000 · · Score: 1
      That French military history link was amusing. Kind of a stretch to mock the "French" Gauls for their defeat by the "Italian" Julius Caesar. And of course it omits the centuries of wars in which the French invented so much of modern military language, by winning. And of course the French conquest of Britain, and in the Americas, like in Mexico and Louisiana, while also trivializing Napoleon's victories across Europe. Not very historical, but an amusingly warped trip through the history of killing.

      Don't feel like getting further into French history, but the French got their butts kicked in Mexico. That's what the Mexicans celebrate every May 5th (Cinco de Mayo).

      The French domestic military budget supports their NATO committment, which protects us.

      Both their contribution to NATO ($77.6 million) and their completely domestic military budget ($29.5 billion) are quite trivial considering their population and certainly recent history in the last century or show indicates they are either unwilling or unable to use their limited military effectively even to defend their own interests, let alone ours. So, no, I'm not convinced that they protect us in any meaningful way.

      Are you more secure with so much of your taxes paying for a ridiculous antimissile system, to use but one example of US military overexpenditure on insecurity?

      A working antimissile system is a good idea, especially in this age where a nuclear attack of just a few missiles is far more likely than an all-out war with thousands of ICMBs. It may have been rediculous to think we could stop thousands of ICBMs from the USSR, but it's not rediculous to think we could stop some or all of, say, a couple dozen missiles that could someday be launched by North Korea. I'd rather the military develop ways to prevent the killing of people than on missiles to kill people.

    9. Re:Retard? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The Mexican defeat of the French of course followed their defeat by the French. When you look at the current state of world governments, very few countries are controlled by a foreign state, though most were at one time, usually very often. So subsequent defeats do not demonstrate invalidity of prior victories. Throwing out the conquerors usually depends on political weakness following the conquest, not military weakness in conquest. And in none of these cases did France "cower", except possibly in WWII, along with the rest of mainland Europe.

      France's role in American protection lies in NATO. As NATO has never been defensively tested, its value in deterrence is open to debate. But I have yet to hear a convincing argument against it. And France itself seems quite safe, even given its $500 per capita annual defense budget. Compared with the US $2000 per capita annual defense budget ($400B Pentagon + $200B wars), not to mention Homeland Security and National Security budgets, CIA, FBI, it's probably over $3000 per capita. And we're not as safe. Sure, as the top dog we're more of a target, but throwing money on the fire isn't making it smaller. We might not apply France's approach, but we need to do something else appropriate to us. As they do for them. With cooperation, recognizing that security is a mutual affair.

      The antimissile system makes us less safe. It won't even protect us from a few missiles, from Pakistan, China, or Iran, much less all of them. Or a trucknuke, or a shipping container. Or a hijacked plane. Or any of the actual threats we must address. What it does accomplish is to escalate nuclear production in China, Russia, North Korea, every other "small" nuclear threat, in order to rise above the threshold of perceived deterrence. And those extra nukes find their way into the hands of others even less manageable. So once again, it's spending more on escalation that increases the threat.

      I'd rather the military develop ways to prevent killing. Like working with the State Department. Like keeping guerilla and terrorist threats on the radar, before they attack. Like working with the foreign militaries they support to convert them to the rule of law, in places like Columbia and Indonesia. Instead of working to support their contractors with gigantic budgets for weapons that only threaten us all more.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    10. Re:Retard? by letxa2000 · · Score: 1
      And in none of these cases did France "cower", except possibly in WWII, along with the rest of mainland Europe.

      As I said originally, "cower" or failed. Their military history is marked by failure even if there are also sporadic wins. Especially if you just focus on France's military history in the last 100 years which is probably more relevant than their "glory days" of being a world power centuries ago.

      France's role in American protection lies in NATO. As NATO has never been defensively tested, its value in deterrence is open to debate. But I have yet to hear a convincing argument against it.

      I have no problem with NATO, I just disagree that France contributes economically or militarily in any meaningful way to NATO such that I should be greatful to France for contributing to our defense. Quite frankly, if France announced it was resigning from NATO I could care less and would feel no less secure. In fact, I'd tend to believe that France resigning from NATO would cause the remaining alliance to actually be stronger since military effectiveness is based greatly on political will--something France has shown it has no stomach for in the last century.

      And France itself seems quite safe, even given its $500 per capita annual defense budget. Compared with the US $2000 per capita annual defense budget ($400B Pentagon + $200B wars), not to mention Homeland Security and National Security budgets, CIA, FBI, it's probably over $3000 per capita. And we're not as safe.

      It depends if you're talking about safe from a military or terrorist standpoint. Militarily I feel that we are much safer than France. Our military is such that I do not have any concern that we will be militarily attacked by anyone, period.

      If we're talking about terrorism then no-one is safe. They found bombs along French rail lines, they just got lucky. And when it comes to terrorism, I don't think NATO is doing anything that significantly reduces the risk of terrorism here or abroad so talking about the $29.5 billion French defense budget or their $77 million contribution in a terrorism context is irrelevant. We're talking about military defense.

      The antimissile system makes us less safe. It won't even protect us from a few missiles, from Pakistan, China, or Iran, much less all of them. Or a trucknuke, or a shipping container. Or a hijacked plane. Or any of the actual threats we must address.

      We do have to address truck nukes, shipping containers, planes, etc. Of course. But that doesn't mean old-fashioned military aggression will never occur again. That's silly. We haven't entered into a time of international peace with terrorism being the only problem. We have same international problems we already had PLUS terrorism. We must deal with both.

      Your opinion that a functioning antimissile system couldn't protect us from a few missiles from Pakistan, China, or Iran is rediculous. That's what we're working on. And while I agree it would be doubtful we could deploy a system to defend us from thousands of simultaneous missiles from the Soviet Union, dealing with two orders of magnitude fewer missiles from one of the above-mentioned countries is a lot more realistic. And since that magnitude of attack is far more likely than an all-out exchange with the Soviet Union or China, I think it's worth making an effort to defend against.

      What it does accomplish is to escalate nuclear production in China, Russia, North Korea, every other "small" nuclear threat, in order to rise above the threshold of perceived deterrence. And those extra nukes find their way into the hands of others even less manageable. So once again, it's spending more on escalation that increases the threat.

      That's your opinion. There is no evidence that China or North Korea will produce any fewer weapons whether we have a defense or not. I'm also not concerned about China attacking... it's countries with just a few nukes, like North Korea, that I'm worried about. And that's exactly where it's not technologically absurd to believe we can create a working defense against attacks of that magnitude.

    11. Re:Retard? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      France contributed to the US-led NATO action in Yugoslavia. By preventing the flight of Muslims from genocide, we cooperated in reducing the sources of Islamic terrorism. Working together early is better than fighting each other later. It saves lives and money, and creates opportunities for growth, rather than destruction. The degree to which everyone is armed, and in opposition, is making these orientations crucial.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    12. Re:Retard? by letxa2000 · · Score: 1
      France contributed to the US-led NATO action in Yugoslavia. By preventing the flight of Muslims from genocide, we cooperated in reducing the sources of Islamic terrorism. Working together early is better than fighting each other later. It saves lives and money, and creates opportunities for growth, rather than destruction. The degree to which everyone is armed, and in opposition, is making these orientations crucial.

      Yugoslavia? Whatever... I still believe I am correct when I say (and have previously cited information that confirms) that France contributes a significantly small amount to NATO based on its relative population, and their recent military history in the last 100 years is a history of failure--especially on those where they had to stand alone. When they had help from someone (NATO, us, others) they obviously did better. But, overall, France is basically of no use to our defense and our defense would be no weaker without them.

  117. lying murderers by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    We want their cooperation. We don't want your fearmongering. Go back to mommy and tell her you love her. She'll tell you everything will be OK. Meanwhile, let the adults talk to the foreigners - you're just making things worse.

    For the adults, I remind you that the Spanish people threw out their corrupt government after Al Qaeda bombed the Madrid train, and that corrupt government blamed their favorite targets, the Basque, to justify an unprovoked invasion of the Basque country. The Spaniards refused to let their corrupt government (which was the first, and one of the few, in Europe to follow Bush into Iraq) copy Bush's criminal strategy of using an Al Qaeda attack to trick his people into attacking his personal target (in Iraq) instead of Al Qaeda. The Al Qaeda bombs went off a few days before the Spanish election, the incumbent government lied about it being Basque, then right before the election the truth easily came out. The Spaniards threw out their corrupt government, and installed the government which promised to get out from under the Iraq fraud. And switch over to pursuing Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, where they have recovered while Bush has been busy losing the war in Iraq. If we're truly free in America, we *will* follow the Spanish lead: fire Bush, stop the atrocious abuse of Iraq, and just get Al Qaeda, instead of this insane, lying escalation that only threatens what little global stability has survived the onslaught of Bush and his legions of zombies, which include the Anonymous asshole Coward to which this message replies.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:lying murderers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's good to see Baghdad Bob landed on his feet and is not posting to Slashdot. I was worried there for a while.

    2. Re:lying murderers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't (didn't) lose the war. They are losing the peace.

      The war was a relatively simple matter.

    3. Re:lying murderers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PS - if America is truly free, it will do what its people tell it to, not what you want it to.

    4. Re:lying murderers by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Anonymous traitor Coward, show some facts to counter my truth. Or shut up.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    5. Re:lying murderers by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Another lie: the war isn't over just because Bush says its over, just because a battle was won. That "losing the peace" crap is another rightwing hijack of an old "liberal" expression for the actual aftermath of a war - when fighting is over, and talking politics is in control. But Iraq is at war now more than ever, whether you recognize it by the Pentagon playbook or not. And we're losing.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    6. Re:lying murderers by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      As of this week, Kerry is beating Bush by at least 53% to 39%. Unless the Traitor in Chief stages his October Surprise, it's a cinch that Americans will be cancelling this nightmarish Bush war in Iraq in November. As an American, I tell America what to do, along with my compatriots.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  118. oversimplifications by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Al Qaeda attacked America both because of our government's attacks on foreign coutries in the last 50 (really 200) years, and because our people believe in freedom and democracy. All those abuses you cited are accurate, but incomplete: Americans have also supported the terrorist Arafat for too long, as well as his soulmate, Sharon. Note that the US government covers its murderous tracks to keep the American people ignorant of how its government acts against its interests, values and will whenever it can get away with it, and sometimes when it can't quite. We all do well to note that engaging American people and calmly educating them is a good way to protect all of us from its government.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  119. French fries did not come from France! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It comes from my ignorant countrymen, listening to conservative talk radio.

    Since France decided to have their own opinion on Iraq, France has become an easy target.

    Their secular nature also pisses off the religious element in the conservative movement, which, sad to say, is now a prominent player.

    WW2 made many nations do regrettable stuff, lets not forget some neutral countries that dealt with Nazi money in their banks, some MAJOR religions which supported the Nazi's against the Jews and some other countries which sat by as Europe started to fall, including the USA - we weren't really concerned until WE started dying.

    Further, French "defeats" were under various governments - certainly you can't count any losses during Feudal times, for example, different society, different government, etc.

    American conservatives are the minority among the educated, so they fluff their numbers by speaking in simple terms to the stupid masses: French=BAD, lets rename French fries (even though they didn't actually come from France).

    I assume you are French - I bow my head in shame for the utterly stupid simpleton sheep that I call my neighbors...God Bless the USA [other countries be damned]!

  120. Re:Geronimoooooo! [OT] by Seumas · · Score: 1

    Hell yeah. Full time listener. Nice to meet you. :)

  121. Better photos.. by dont_stand_so_close_ · · Score: 1
    --
    Silence Bossy Meat Creatures!
  122. Aaaaeeeeeaaagh! Eeeeeaaaeeee! Aaieeeeeeee..SPLAT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine what you might hear if someone jumps or falls of the bridge:

    Aaaaiiiiaaaaaaaaeeeeaaaaaooooaaaaaaaa...*gasp*

    Eeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaeeeaaaaaaaaaaaeeee...*wheeze*

    Aaaaeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaeeeeeeaaaaa...*SPLAT!*

    It might take quite a while.

    A suicide jumper might discover the cure for cancer, or a new mathematical proof that would open a whole new world of prosperity in that time, and, if lucky, enough time to quickly sew a parachute and make the landing a bit more softly.

    P.S. Um, no, I'm not talking about base jumpers.

  123. Marching over a bridge by core+plexus · · Score: 1
    It was closed temporarily when it was found to sway several feet from side to side under heavy foot traffic due to an unforeseen resonance at around the frequency of human walking.

    One time in basic training we were marching along and we came to a bridge, where we were told to stop marching in step. They said it would cause the bridge to collapse. I thought it was BS until I read about this.

    -cp-

    President Bush to Liberate Alaska

    1. Re:Marching over a bridge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      One time in basic training we were marching along and we came to a bridge, where we were told to stop marching in step. They said it would cause the bridge to collapse. I thought it was BS until I read about this.

      Goes to show you how uneducated our men wielding the big guns are.

  124. Please learn how to make links. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Please learn how to make links.
    <a href="http://www.blincmagazine.com">BASE jumping</a>
    yields: BASE jumping
  125. Very good pictures by hemabe · · Score: 1

    The BBC has a very good online coverage with 5 impressive pictures.

    Link follows: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3759307.stm

  126. OH...it's in France.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That should make both retreats and invasions more convenient....

  127. Spoils to the victor.... by idiotnot · · Score: 1

    The Germans can't call their sparkling whites Champagne due to the Treaty of Versailles. Article.

  128. Re:Pylons... --- (and lateral stability) by Morgaine · · Score: 1

    The poster raises an interesting question (without actually stating it explicitly), since pillar width determines lateral stability.

    The engineer in me would want to provide such a high bridge with a huge safety margin in lateral stability by adding pillar support stays perpendicular to the bridge span. It's not just for sheer massive bolstering either, but can be used as part of a frequency-tuned sway damping system.

    I sure hope that they over-spec'ed the pillar widths to provide distributed lateral bolstering. Bridges have been known to collapse in adverse conditions.

    --
    "The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
  129. Re:What's the use? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Agreed, people really need to learn to use sarcasm tags when posting to sites frequented by Americans.

  130. Only engineers build things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing is ever built by computer scientists, only by engineers. If they are computer scientists by profession yet still build something significant, they've put on their engineer's hat to do so. That's OK, the same is true in reverse, as a lot of engineers put on scientist caps at some point in their careers. Most of us are more than one thing at a time in all walks of life.

  131. Thank you Al Qaeda! by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
    I remind you that the Spanish people threw out their corrupt government after Al Qaeda bombed the Madrid train, and that corrupt government blamed their favorite targets, the Basque,...
    ... The Al Qaeda bombs went off a few days before the Spanish election [... with quite obvious results ...]
    Incidentally, the Spanish were the only country to vote a straight no on the recent European software patent directive (there were a couple countries more who abstained. Abstention is equivalent to a no as far as the count goes, but a no sends a clearer political message)

    Thanks Al Qaeda for your help against software oppression!

  132. More like 1000 feet (nt) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NT

  133. Re:yaya I meant meters.. by cbreaker · · Score: 1

    nt

    --
    - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
  134. Re:What's the use? by sharkdba · · Score: 1

    Agreed, people really need to learn to use sarcasm tags when posting to sites frequented by Americans.

    I don't think this feature is specific to Americans. It's rather typical to techno-geeks, who spend way too much time in front of a computer, and way to little in a real life scenarios. Sarcasm skills are picked up through "live" contacts by watching face expressions, tone fluctuations, etc. In front of a computer things have a tendency to look kind of dry, and things are taken very literally quite often.

    --
    The purpose of life is to find the purpose of life.
  135. Fuck you Al Qaeda! by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    What the hell are you thanking Al Qaeda for? Thank the Spanish Socialist government. Thank the Spaniards for dumping a rightwing government that would have supported mandatory profit. Or even thank the dumped rightwing government, which was stupid enough to try to bushit their constituents with phony Basque blame for the Al Qaeda attack. But thank Al Qaeda for its vile role in replacing the Spanish government with one that is switching its military from the non-Qaeda Iraqmire to attack their Afghani playground in the Pakistani foothills? Do you thank the fire that burns your house for the firemen who saved you? Come on over here to NYC, and try thanking Al Qaeda for the spiffy new subway station where the World Trade Center used to be. And I'll kick your ass.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  136. Breakdowns and accidents by yulek · · Score: 1

    I wonder how they're going to take care of bridge breakdowns or worse... accidents. It not only looks tall, but long. one breakdown/accident and not only are you stuck, you're stuck and you can't get off. ambulances are gonna have a tough time getting through. etc.

    but hey, you know what? this goes pretty well with a recent story.

    --
    in this age of communication i'm just not getting through
  137. Highest bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, I still think that the highest bridge is the Royal Gorge Bridge, in Canon City, CO.

    Of course, it is not really open to car traffic anymore these days, so maybe that is a disqualifier.