Railroad Forums 

  • Subway or Bridge

  • General discussion about railroad operations, related facilities, maps, and other resources.
General discussion about railroad operations, related facilities, maps, and other resources.

Moderator: Robert Paniagua

 #973694  by terry03
 
This is probably a stupid question. I've been looking at articles about the track elevations in the Chicago area back in the 1910's and 1920's. Sometimes they call a crossing a subway and sometimes they call it a bridge. They all are bridges too me. What is the difference?

My grandfather worked for a construction company called "Bates & Rogers Construction Corporation" from Chicago. In their brochure they state that they built all of the bridges and most of the subways for 50 miles into Chicago. I can't see what the difference is. Anybody out there know what the difference is?
 #973930  by Ken V
 
I don't know if this is the real answer but my feeling is if you build it over something that's already there, it's a bridge, and if you dig (tunnel) under something that's there, it's a subway. Does that make sense?
 #974000  by terry03
 
Ken V wrote:I don't know if this is the real answer but my feeling is if you build it over something that's already there, it's a bridge, and if you dig (tunnel) under something that's there, it's a subway. Does that make sense?
When the Illinois Central raised their tracks in the Chicago area they built a fill. When they came to a street they built a bridge across the street. Almost in every case they didn't call it a bridge. They called it a subway. I worked in construction for 50 years. I call it a bridge. I think maybe that translation has gotten lost through the years.