• Nomecks@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    To construct it they would have had to build a support structure nearly a thousand feet long, across a river, that could take the weight of a masonry arch bridge nearly a thousand feet long until the keystones could be put in. Not hard to imagine why it got rejected.

    • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 days ago

      That was basically just the process of creating bridges back then, it’s not far off from how it works today…

      I don’t think that was an avoidable issue, you need to build temporary support structures while bridge building is in progress. In other words, if an extensive support structure is a deal breaker for you, it turns out you’re not building a bridge today.

      • Nomecks@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Sure, but think of the scale of what they would need and the technology they had. 1000 feet long and as tall as a ship, carrying a stone structure that would weigh probably hundreds or thousands of tons, across what I’d imagine was a pretty busy waterway.