Jump to content

Somerleyton Bridge Not Operational


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, SteveDuk said:

What is the difference between the railway bridges on the Broads and Tower Bridge in London other than the fact that Tower Bridge gets maintained. As Jenny Morgan said the parts to build the bridges were hardly 'off the shelf'.

When the bridges were built I'm sure the railway companies had a choice between opening spans and higher fixed spans. They made their choice and now it's up to Railtrack to live with it. Had they maintained the bridges over the years we wouldn't be seeing this problem now. I can't believe they didn't have sunshine in Edwardian times.

I can't believe they didn't have sunshine in Edwardian times.

Something else to blame on Global Warming :default_biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

I can't believe they didn't have sunshine in Edwardian times.

Something else to blame on Global Warming :default_biggrin:

I think they did take sunshine into account though, hence the summer rails. Something that Dr P allowed Railtrack to fob him off about.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SteveDuk said:

I think they did take sunshine into account though, hence the summer rails. Something that Dr P allowed Railtrack to fob him off about.

You've cracked it!!!

if you read the earlier post it states that "summer rails" was not a term that the engineers recogise so maybe if they were to look for "higher ambient temperature operating condition substitution rails" them maybe they would find them.

They were there all along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, SteveDuk said:

Had they maintained the bridges over the years we wouldn't be seeing this problem now

Who says that they haven't been maintained? do you know this for certain? The answer is plain and simple. Weld all bridges straight line track running. Then there is no longer a bridge opening problem. Or get a craft that is broads friendly design for passing under railway bridges. All these super dooper boats have only appeared in  recent times, even wherry's had masts that were tabernackled for passing under bridges.  This is like the couple who bought a cheap house next to a bust pub, then try n get the pub shut as its devaluing their cheap house.

Thats the last i'll say on this subject with my mods hat off.

Charlie

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bound2Please said:

Who says that they haven't been maintained? do you know this for certain? The answer is plain and simple. Weld all bridges straight line track running. Then there is no longer a bridge opening problem. Or get a craft that is broads friendly design for passing under railway bridges. All these super dooper boats have only appeared in  recent times, even wherry's had masts that were tabernackled for passing under bridges.  This is like the couple who bought a cheap house next to a bust pub, then try n get the pub shut as its devaluing their cheap house.

Thats the last i'll say on this subject with my mods hat off.

Charlie

Please read a recent post where I did say that they were maintaining the bridges but sadly they are being maintained in a condition where they are continually inoperative.

Somerleyton bridge for example has a declared clearance of 8' 6"  boats boats of around this size requiring a swing are hardly "super dooper"

Sorry but I don't understand your analogy about the pub; the bridge was opened in 1905, well before most boats were built and probably before most of us were born,  so it is not case of people wanting to get something shut down or closed, it is very much a case of wanting to keep them operational as they have been since Edwardian times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, trambo said:

Anyone who has used a replacement bus service during railway maintenance will know that the service is far inferior both in comfort and time taken. No service should be withdrawn. Beeching taught us (in hindsight) that it just does not work on many levels. I might suggest the problem at the crossing may be  caused by one person in one car instead of car sharing or even using public transport.

Fred

 

The railway certainly has its place and without the mainline services where would we be.

When Network Rail are eventually faced with the cost of replacing one or both swing bridges at 25 passengers per train I think that may be the “light bulb” moment.

Car sharing might work for commuting but what about the car users just going about their daily business, supporting the local economy, or are we saying one should wait till we can fill our car with people to justify going to the shops!!

When i go out I might have 4 spare seats in my car but how many spare seats are on that twin unit train with 25 people on it!! 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bound2Please said:

Who says that they haven't been maintained? do you know this for certain? The answer is plain and simple. Weld all bridges straight line track running. Then there is no longer a bridge opening problem. Or get a craft that is broads friendly design for passing under railway bridges. All these super dooper boats have only appeared in  recent times, even wherry's had masts that were tabernackled for passing under bridges.  This is like the couple who bought a cheap house next to a bust pub, then try n get the pub shut as its devaluing their cheap house.

Thats the last i'll say on this subject with my mods hat off.

Charlie

Charlie, supa-doopa gin palaces in the numbers that we see to-day might be a relatively new phenomenom but the coasters and colliers that used to trade up to Norwich via Oulton Broad were hardly minimalist!

Yare Shipping.JPG

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lowestoft and Great Yarmouth are sizeable towns - and they deserve a railway. I have noticed in recent months  just how many people use the trains from Norwich to commute to be it to local stations along the line (like Brundall) or to the likes of Great Yarmouth. You've also got a lot of school children use the line during the week as well, this is a real overall community need.

The problem is not so much the bridges, it is the overall franchise for the region. These lines have always lacked investment even under British Rail it was the 'hand me down' stock that filtered onto it be it local or main line trains and it is only in the next year new trains will come on stream - imagine that actual new trains for the region.

What I think would make a ideal and innovative model is a bit of copying what happened down in London with what were a miss match of lines and services which are now known as 'London Overground' which was brought into the cusp of Transport for London. With improved stations, trains with a higher frequency of service and a simple fare structure (being included also into the Oyster payment system) passenger numbers sky rocketed.

I would prepose a part public/private partnership where Central Government along with Norwich, Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft Council's, Network Rail and Abellio invested into the connecting of three major areas more seamlessly. New rolling stock be introduced which provided longitudinal seating so there was more space for cyclists, luggage and other users who require ease of access, a simple fare structure be utilised - possibly with a 'tap and go' style of payment, that services were more intensive - even if this meant that a single carriage train was the norm but running at twice the current frequency of a two car unit - and with less seating overall more capacity would result. That services run longer into the night both on weekdays and weekends providing easier connections for workers between to three areas and bringing more cross 'socialisation' where people are able to travel between Norwich and Great Yarmouth for example for an evening out and return later and easier than currently you can.

As more people use the lines and revenue from such is allowed to be invested into the actual line rather than the overall pockets of the parties involved you can then help address things like the bridges. It needs a real push to get people who may drive between places to use the trainknowing they will be frequent, reliable and cheap - you can't have increased demand without increased investment.

Now I know we are talking about jobs here and all that goes with that but, really having out dated situations like several signal boxes and as with Brundall a crossing keeper along with guards on each train is just not viable these days. A line has to be drawn at some point to say 'that is it' these trains will now be one person operated just like so so many are without issues - this is not just about this region there are masses of services that have Guards left over from bygone days who really do very little other than open and close train doors (especially in London where they are not required to check or issue tickets even). Such changes would have enormous opposition from Unions and effect many but it is another stream of money going out currently that you get very little back from.

The same issues would come in terms of business and jobs if the bridges were changed to fixed types - people like me would need to relocate their boats - possible off the Broads system while that is easy the loss of these boats being moored would caused big big problems for the sudden losses in Toll income to the Broads Authority to Marina's having less boats in them and less income - since even if they let the moorings out it would be to shorter boats bringing in less revenues, local businesses, brokers and service agents would likewise begin to loose out with experienced staff used to dealing with large engines and complicated marine electronics now earning their bread and butter on small river boats with basic systems.  One change has a big knock on effect to another industry down the line.

It is one thing being delayed by a bridge that cannot open in hot weather, but what happens when something big breaks and very large amounts of money are needed to keep it working? It seems to me as if everyone is putting off that thought and thinking someone else one day will have to worry about it but not us here and now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, LondonRascal said:

Lowestoft and Great Yarmouth are sizeable towns - and they deserve a railway. I have noticed in recent months  just how many people use the trains from Norwich to commute to be it to local stations along the line (like Brundall) or to the likes of Great Yarmouth. You've also got a lot of school children use the line during the week as well, this is a real overall community need.

The problem is not so much the bridges, it is the overall franchise for the region. These lines have always lacked investment even under British Rail it was the 'hand me down' stock that filtered onto it be it local or main line trains and it is only in the next year new trains will come on stream - imagine that actual new trains for the region.

What I think would make a ideal and innovative model is a bit of copying what happened down in London with what were a miss match of lines and services which are now known as 'London Overground' which was brought into the cusp of Transport for London. With improved stations, trains with a higher frequency of service and a simple fare structure (being included also into the Oyster payment system) passenger numbers sky rocketed.

I would prepose a part public/private partnership where Central Government along with Norwich, Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft Council's, Network Rail and Abellio invested into the connecting of three major areas more seamlessly. New rolling stock be introduced which provided longitudinal seating so there was more space for cyclists, luggage and other users who require ease of access, a simple fare structure be utilised - possibly with a 'tap and go' style of payment, that services were more intensive - even if this meant that a single carriage train was the norm but running at twice the current frequency of a two car unit - and with less seating overall more capacity would result. That services run longer into the night both on weekdays and weekends providing easier connections for workers between to three areas and bringing more cross 'socialisation' where people are able to travel between Norwich and Great Yarmouth for example for an evening out and return later and easier than currently you can.

As more people use the lines and revenue from such is allowed to be invested into the actual line rather than the overall pockets of the parties involved you can then help address things like the bridges. It needs a real push to get people who may drive between places to use the trainknowing they will be frequent, reliable and cheap - you can't have increased demand without increased investment.

Now I know we are talking about jobs here and all that goes with that but, really having out dated situations like several signal boxes and as with Brundall a crossing keeper along with guards on each train is just not viable these days. A line has to be drawn at some point to say 'that is it' these trains will now be one person operated just like so so many are without issues - this is not just about this region there are masses of services that have Guards left over from bygone days who really do very little other than open and close train doors (especially in London where they are not required to check or issue tickets even). Such changes would have enormous opposition from Unions and effect many but it is another stream of money going out currently that you get very little back from.

The same issues would come in terms of business and jobs if the bridges were changed to fixed types - people like me would need to relocate their boats - possible off the Broads system while that is easy the loss of these boats being moored would caused big big problems for the sudden losses in Toll income to the Broads Authority to Marina's having less boats in them and less income - since even if they let the moorings out it would be to shorter boats bringing in less revenues, local businesses, brokers and service agents would likewise begin to loose out with experienced staff used to dealing with large engines and complicated marine electronics now earning their bread and butter on small river boats with basic systems.  One change has a big knock on effect to another industry down the line.

It is one thing being delayed by a bridge that cannot open in hot weather, but what happens when something big breaks and very large amounts of money are needed to keep it working? It seems to me as if everyone is putting off that thought and thinking someone else one day will have to worry about it but not us here and now.

if the bridges were changed to fixed types - people like me would need to relocate their boats - possible off the Broads system 

From what I have seen posted on this and other forums I believe that there is quite a large following in support of the bridges being welded shut so that large craft move away from the broads..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

if the bridges were changed to fixed types - people like me would need to relocate their boats - possible off the Broads system 

From what I have seen posted on this and other forums I believe that there is quite a large following in support of the bridges being welded shut so that large craft move away from the broads..

To what would be the benefit? 

It makes me wonder why people rely on the “if you cant get under the bridges your boat isnt suitable for the broads” argument.

Times move on but as JM has shown large vessels were using the rivers requiring bridges to swing long before the Gin Palaces turned up.  But lets face it many boats need more clearance it ISNT only GP’s.

If they are welded shut you are giving up the right to navigate, it would never happen. 

Whats a Thurne suitable boat these days, a canoe? 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

To what would be the benefit? 

It makes me wonder why people rely on the “if you cant get under the bridges your boat isnt suitable for the broads” argument.

Times move on but as JM has shown large vessels were using the rivers requiring bridges to swing long before the Gin Palaces turned up.  But lets face it many boats need more clearance it ISNT only GP’s.

If they are welded shut you are giving up the right to navigate, it would never happen. 

Whats a Thurne suitable boat these days, a canoe? 

I don't have any answers, sorry. I was simply making a comment following some recent posts.

In case you are in any doubt; I am not a follower of the "weld the bridges shut brigade" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look back through the history of this forum, the initial membership was largely made up of people with boats that needed the bridges to swing and were more often than not of the sea going variety. They came here away from another forum that was not so tolerant of that style of boat.

Strange how things ebb and flow over the years. I still think though that primarily this forum's members are of the view that they would like to see the bridges operate as they were intended, and are not of the weld it shut brigade. As with everything there will be exceptions.

There was some quite vocal threads back in the day with regards to non functioning swing bridges.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LondonRascal said:

Lowestoft and Great Yarmouth are sizeable towns - and they deserve a railway. I have noticed in recent months  just how many people use the trains from Norwich to commute to be it to local stations along the line (like Brundall) or to the likes of Great Yarmouth. You've also got a lot of school children use the line during the week as well, this is a real overall community need.

The problem is not so much the bridges, it is the overall franchise for the region. These lines have always lacked investment even under British Rail it was the 'hand me down' stock that filtered onto it be it local or main line trains and it is only in the next year new trains will come on stream - imagine that actual new trains for the region.

What I think would make a ideal and innovative model is a bit of copying what happened down in London with what were a miss match of lines and services which are now known as 'London Overground' which was brought into the cusp of Transport for London. With improved stations, trains with a higher frequency of service and a simple fare structure (being included also into the Oyster payment system) passenger numbers sky rocketed.

I would prepose a part public/private partnership where Central Government along with Norwich, Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft Council's, Network Rail and Abellio invested into the connecting of three major areas more seamlessly. New rolling stock be introduced which provided longitudinal seating so there was more space for cyclists, luggage and other users who require ease of access, a simple fare structure be utilised - possibly with a 'tap and go' style of payment, that services were more intensive - even if this meant that a single carriage train was the norm but running at twice the current frequency of a two car unit - and with less seating overall more capacity would result. That services run longer into the night both on weekdays and weekends providing easier connections for workers between to three areas and bringing more cross 'socialisation' where people are able to travel between Norwich and Great Yarmouth for example for an evening out and return later and easier than currently you can.

As more people use the lines and revenue from such is allowed to be invested into the actual line rather than the overall pockets of the parties involved you can then help address things like the bridges. It needs a real push to get people who may drive between places to use the trainknowing they will be frequent, reliable and cheap - you can't have increased demand without increased investment.

Now I know we are talking about jobs here and all that goes with that but, really having out dated situations like several signal boxes and as with Brundall a crossing keeper along with guards on each train is just not viable these days. A line has to be drawn at some point to say 'that is it' these trains will now be one person operated just like so so many are without issues - this is not just about this region there are masses of services that have Guards left over from bygone days who really do very little other than open and close train doors (especially in London where they are not required to check or issue tickets even). Such changes would have enormous opposition from Unions and effect many but it is another stream of money going out currently that you get very little back from.

The same issues would come in terms of business and jobs if the bridges were changed to fixed types - people like me would need to relocate their boats - possible off the Broads system while that is easy the loss of these boats being moored would caused big big problems for the sudden losses in Toll income to the Broads Authority to Marina's having less boats in them and less income - since even if they let the moorings out it would be to shorter boats bringing in less revenues, local businesses, brokers and service agents would likewise begin to loose out with experienced staff used to dealing with large engines and complicated marine electronics now earning their bread and butter on small river boats with basic systems.  One change has a big knock on effect to another industry down the line.

It is one thing being delayed by a bridge that cannot open in hot weather, but what happens when something big breaks and very large amounts of money are needed to keep it working? It seems to me as if everyone is putting off that thought and thinking someone else one day will have to worry about it but not us here and now.

What is I'm sure you know  the guards on Norfolk trains do gar more than shut doors, half the stations you can't buy a  ticket from , as for the whole infrastructure collapsing it tolls increases due to boats having to move and the knock on effects of that when many left brooms only s few years back it had no affect on tolls n I don't see any marine engineers or such like struggling , sure 1 say 50' boat goes then 2x 25' ones could replace it in the marinas around brundall that's extra revenue not less , tolls wise it could be less but also less wear n tear on the rivers etc and more boats can moor for the same linear length of mooring .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here I'm approaching somerleyton bridge , yes of cause I'm on an ebbing tide it makes sense , do I need the bridge to swing no I don't for the simple fact iv a boat that suits the environment , OK there are yachts but the can de mast and at toll payers expense been given places to do just that , places where other's cannot moor yachts only etc , I'm not  in the weld  them shut camp but if you choose an oversized boat for the area thenim sorry occasionally problems occur .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

Charlie, supa-doopa gin palaces in the numbers that we see to-day might be a relatively new phenomenom but the coasters and colliers that used to trade up to Norwich via Oulton Broad were hardly minimalist!

Yare Shipping.JPG

JM yes i regularly encountered them in the 60's 70's and 80's when in hire boats.  But the Yare let alone the Waveney is hardly a commercial water way these days, i cant also see that getting through mutford lock either, so somerleyton swing bridge is irrelevant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, marshman said:

How on earth did that coaster get through Mutford?

I believe most came in through Yarmouth - PW will probably tell us what actually came through Mutford and in reality in the latter years it was probably not a lot!!

In receny years the sailing trawler Excelsior has come through Mutford Lock. This picture shows the sort of ship that the lock was built for. Since that time the width of the lock has been reduced by over two feet or so. 

Oulton Broad shipping.JPG

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been some very interesting point raised here expressing the need for the rail service to continue for the foreseeable and for river traffic to continue to travel without impediment. I don't think anyone is asking for something new or even something improved, simply a return to how it was for a long time. which I believe would satisfy everyone who has contributed to this thread.

The solution is maybe painful for Railtrack who did somewhat inherit a problem (however due diligence at the time of transition from BR?? should have identified flagged this potential expense), but they need to spend some money on the bridges. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

If they only expected narrow width vessels at Somerleyton when it was built they wouldnt have built it with a 50 odd foot gap for boats to pass through

Er why , can't 2 vessels pass going in opposite directions? Me I was 15' wide towing the dinghy along side tonight n easy room for say a big broom to  come the other way , they might have lost the superstructure though as I don't need the bridge to move for me even on the very high tide on Saturday I would have got under with the canopy up , in the past iv seen some who could easily get under demand the bridge to open because their vhf antenna was too tall to , that is ridiculous ! As its a very simple job and should be a matter of cause when approaching a bridge after all they would to clear a fixed structure . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like they even managed to paint it.

I wonder how they get on with similar swing bridges in countries that really do get the heat. 

Heres an idea, a twin track bridge is needed for Trowse.  If the Norwich - Lowestoft line was discontinued they would have two to choose from, just float one up stream......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the boats from the Brundall navy  can still get under the bridges up to approx low to approx. half flood tide if the bridges are unable to open.

With the canopy removed and the radar arch  down and the upper helm windows folded down then most of the craft then have an air draft of under ten feet with the highest point on the craft being at the height of the compass forward of the aft steering position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robin's post is most relevant and interesting in its proposals. I would heartily agree with them although I would exclude Abellio. Remove the need to pay dividends to shareholders. Its no accident that  Europe's succcessful and modern railways are all state owned. Its also interesting to note that the government successfully ran the East coast line for six years before Virgin and Stagecoach greedily grabbed it in 2015 and have had to hand it back because of the costs. So even Branson and Brian Souter couldn't manage it! Apologies for going off on a political bender but it is something I do feel a tad strongly about and is the best way to find money to repair ageing bridges.

Just a footnote .........   please don't throw that old chestnut "Don't you remember British Railways of old???" Playing with trains has changed beyong any recognition.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DaveRolaves said:

Most of the boats from the Brundall navy  can still get under the bridges up to approx low to approx. half flood tide if the bridges are unable to open.

With the canopy removed and the radar arch  down and the upper helm windows folded down then most of the craft then have an air draft of under ten feet with the highest point on the craft being at the height of the compass forward of the aft steering position.

Ah but that makes demands on the owners to drop canopy's etc as opposed to picking up the vhf an requesting the bridge opens. Now which is easiest ? And which is never going to happen , they might get into the horrible situation of breaking a finger nail heaven forbid .

These bridges swing for a reason ,navigational law due to commercial traffic on the waterways , since that ceased owners of oversized craft have used it to their advantage , had there not been commercial traffic and the bridges a fixed structure then none would be hear just as there are none in many other places on the inland waterway's , anyone bringing an oversized boat to the broads needs to realise the restrictions and more importantly that some times they won't have access .

Selby is a different animal its not tidal at that point and extremely low , a narrow boat will not go under it , only after Selby lock a little further up stream does it become tidal or the river Ouse and trust me that would surprise quite a few on the broads its  much faster than say Yarmouth etc and on return from York you turn a narrow boat on an ebbing tide and hold station until your called into the lock , that's not easy with a 57" boat n if your unlucky ( like I was) then you not only have the sand bank outside the lock to take care off but the lock wall and someone else's pride and joy , tricky to say the least In that level of flow .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.