Jump to content

Somerleyton Bridge Not Operational


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, grendel said:

It strikes me that forum members have forgotten that the sugar factory at Cantley still relies on being able to deliver new equipment to their factory by sea / river, most of these deliveries will exceed any air draft under the bridges, so at the very least Haven Bridge and Reedham will have to be kept operational, lets not get hung up on shutting the bridges for navigation, to my mind this is not an option, shipping may at present no longer trade up to Norwich and Beccles, but with the new green legislations being brought in - shipping by small coaster may well become a viable option again in the future.

As they did only a few yrs ago in a  huge barge 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

Fine they won't be taking me to court so why should i care , of others wish to make a statement then do be it it will not affect me but it will including court costs etc affect them ! 

Just because it doesnt affect you at the moment doesnt mean that reliable functioning of the opening bridges isnt in your interests to, you never know you might decide you need a taller boat one day! 

I admit not paying Tolls en mass would be an extreme method but other than private legal action (which I imagine would be very costly and the BA would probably find a way to squirm free anyway) what other options are left? 

But not paying Tolls probably wouldn't work.  There might be Owners who would say they would do it but only a few would actually have the nerve to see it through so the effects would be minimal and the costs of it just passed back to Toll Payers.  The BA have us all well sewn up thats certain.

They are to busy living in fantasy land at Acle Bridge to do any work on anything that actually matters....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

Just because it doesnt affect you at the moment doesnt mean that reliable functioning of the opening bridges isnt in your interests to, you never know you might decide you need a taller boat one day! 

I admit not paying Tolls en mass would be an extreme method but other than private legal action (which I imagine would be very costly and the BA would probably find a way to squirm free anyway) what other options are left? 

But not paying Tolls wouldnt work anyway.  There might be Owners who would say they would do it but only a few would actually have the nerve to see it through so the effects would be minimal and the costs of it just passed back to Toll Payers.  The BA have us all well sewn up thats certain.

They are to busy living in fantasy land at Acle Bridge to do any work on anything that actually matters....

Be serious please if yiu knew,anything about me yiu would already know I had a boat with limitations in Norfolk and got rid of it for that very reason n that's my point it was not for me I don't like to be dependent on others in any way , there is no way in hell I would have a boat any taller that say 7 feet , why do yiu think narrow boats are narrow? And broads boat low air draft ? An more to the point gin palaces for want of a better phrase tall ? If you want to push those boundaries then fine but accept the limitations and that things break , if your not happy then take it up with those causing the problem and in this case that is not BA .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, grendel said:

the difference is during the winter when the river is frozen the bridge doesnt swing

Ha n the temperature over tger is similar to here is it ? , -45 to +45 that's Canada n trust me I know enough Canadians to know thats a fact from west to east 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, grendel said:

Except over recent years the frequency is hardly occasionally, its more like every other week in the summer, sometimes every day

Both Reedham and Somerleyton swing bridges are well over a hundred years old. The poor old dears have probably been starved of T.L.C. in recent years. It's no wonder they're feeling their age and complaining bitterly at their workload. I reckon both the government and 'Network Rail' have their eyes pretty firmly fixed on 'HS2' and other more exciting projects. So, parochial old Norfolk and Suffolk aren't going to get much of a look in, when the money tree is shaken. I wouldn't bet on any change in the near future, the bridges will be kept alive (barely) and that is probably the most we can expect...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

Be serious I and others only stated that those that had larger craft had to accept that they placed their boat on an in appropriate river system as it requires various infrastructure complying with their movement's , as for a chip on my shoulder n this assumption based on no knowledge of who I'm etc well that's up to you who cares I certainly don't n incidentally I don't .

I find it quite amusing that those with yachts who also require bridge's to open don't complain as they work round it , seriously if yiu really think those that can pas under the said bridge's including me are complaining you need to give your head a shake all that's been pointed out n should have been blinding obvious to them putting a boat that big on the broads is occasionally things breakdown , personally it makes no difference to me at all but I'm dammed of I'm going to pay more for their benefit after all they would do it for me that I do know ! 

If I'm allowed to copy paste, this is what the BA has to say about bridges and it it was certainly the main document when I researched putting my boat at Brundall in respect of bridges, for those not familiar with this document it then follows with a list of bridges and clearances. Sadly whilst it does state that there are operational issues with Trowse bridge it does not mention anything about Reedham/Somerleyton/Oulton swing bridges being closed without notice on a frequent basis during the summer.

My point being that had I been aware of these issues with the aforementioned bridges then my decision to select Brundall would have been made with all the relevant limitations in respect of bridge passages.  

image.png.07816c4322ab40a033dff70d44720cf5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

if your not happy then take it up with those causing the problem and in this case that is not BA .

It Used to be

The General Manager , Eastern Region, Harwich House, Liverpool Street, London EC2.

Sadly my father is long retired, about 35 years, and deceased 15 years, so he can no longer help out here.

So that used to be the contact person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

My point being that had I been aware of these issues with the aforementioned bridges then my decision to select Brundall would have been made with all the relevant limitations in respect of bridge passages.  

Theres always Ipswich as an alternative then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bound2Please said:

Theres always Ipswich as an alternative then.

I thought you said that you'd made your last contribution to this thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dnks34 said:

What I find tiresome is this subject of debate continually coming back to how big your boat is.  Its as if anyone lucky enough to be able to have such a nice big vessel has commited some sort of cardinal sin by using it on the broads! Or is it the old familiar green eyed monster at work. 

Im with psychicsurveyor, its nowt to do with the size of your boat its Network rail choosing when and if to open the bloody bridge, especially when hot incase it wont shut again......the latter not actually being the Toll Payers problem!

Incidentally it wouldn't make a scrap of difference to be he named forum member he would pass under all bridge's on the yare without them opening .

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.