Talk:Simple suspension bridge

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of bridges and tunnels on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Bridges and TunnelsWikipedia:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsTemplate:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsBridge and Tunnel articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Suspended deck?

If someone can find a reliable source re the handrails on the Capilano Suspension Bridge supporting the deck, I will add that article to Category:Suspended deck bridges. Perhaps there are others as well? --Una Smith (talk) 02:28, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiable reference needed

I have reviewed the references given in the article and most do not match the description given for a simple suspension bridge. Chisolm and Morely clearly define a "simple suspension bridge" as "unstiffened". They give diagrams which show the deck as suspended beneath the main cables. They describe stiffening systems. The only source that describes a bridge with the deck resting on the main cables is Bell; that book is written about trails and how to build simple bridges. I think that there must be a better reference out there. If there is not, this article is probably "original research". - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 01:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

REDIRECT Suspension Bridge

There is some ambiguity in the term "simple suspension bridge" in the literature, but I see no problem with the article using one particular definition, given that the other varieties of suspension bridge all have their own articles. -- 202.124.73.186 (talk) 12:21, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Simple suspension bridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081223073518/http://www.enviscope.com:80/15419-Monteynard-Drac-passerelles-himalayennes.html to http://www.enviscope.com/15419-Monteynard-Drac-passerelles-himalayennes.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:55, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MaxLoad

The article had this sentence; "Owing to practical limitation in the grade (i.e. the deck being an arc, not flat) and the response to dynamic loads of the bridge deck, this type is quite restricted in its load-carrying capacity relative to its span." But I do not think this is correct. The low load-carrying capacity is due to the limited construction budget. If I used the same cables that suspend the Akashi Kaikyō Bridge then the load-carrying capacity would be huge relative to the span. Do you have a reference for the assertion I deleted? Nick Beeson (talk) 12:52, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]