Beška bridge open for traffic

Which 295m section of the original bridge was later considered surplus to requirements - beginning, middle or end?

@trizo

Because one of my mates built a bridge over the Mekong river in Cambodia a few years ago, and now the authorities want it about 200m longer in the middle. I thought he might make an offer for the spare bit.

why do you ask?

Trizo,

Sorry for the confusion, but it was just my attempt (which failed miserably it would seem!) to make a joke. The article mentioned that the bridge was originally 2500m long, but later shortened to 2205m. I just couldn't see how one can chop 295m out of a bridge already built, as in my mind there would now be a big gap in it somewhere, through which cars would fall into the river. As I say, just my failed attempt at humour. Please forgive.

Trizo, I guess that guy asked because he is FREE to ask....isn't he?

Oh ok. Interesting.

Of course he is FREE to ask, Gino

I was just curious as to what would make him curious about which particular part of the bridge was important.

Stop jumping the gun.

Thanks Gino!

@TC,

if the bridge has turns or if it goes around 360 degrees forming a loop as in a spiral, before continuing forward again, you can probably cut 295 meters from a bridge by applying the famous geometric axiom "the shortest path between two points is a straight line". So question is, what was the original shape of the old bridge?

Or, maybe the river is not what it used to be. Its width may have shrunk of 295 meters, and they may have built buildings around the bridge and transformed that 295 m portion of the bridge into a normal road.
I do not think we will ever solve this mystery.

why do you ask?

Trizo, I guess that guy asked because he is FREE to ask....isn't he?

Which 295m section of the original bridge was later considered surplus to requirements - beginning, middle or end?

@trizo

Because one of my mates built a bridge over the Mekong river in Cambodia a few years ago, and now the authorities want it about 200m longer in the middle. I thought he might make an offer for the spare bit.

Oh ok. Interesting.

Of course he is FREE to ask, Gino

I was just curious as to what would make him curious about which particular part of the bridge was important.

Stop jumping the gun.

Thanks Gino!

Trizo,

Sorry for the confusion, but it was just my attempt (which failed miserably it would seem!) to make a joke. The article mentioned that the bridge was originally 2500m long, but later shortened to 2205m. I just couldn't see how one can chop 295m out of a bridge already built, as in my mind there would now be a big gap in it somewhere, through which cars would fall into the river. As I say, just my failed attempt at humour. Please forgive.

@TC,

if the bridge has turns or if it goes around 360 degrees forming a loop as in a spiral, before continuing forward again, you can probably cut 295 meters from a bridge by applying the famous geometric axiom "the shortest path between two points is a straight line". So question is, what was the original shape of the old bridge?

Or, maybe the river is not what it used to be. Its width may have shrunk of 295 meters, and they may have built buildings around the bridge and transformed that 295 m portion of the bridge into a normal road.
I do not think we will ever solve this mystery.