Somerleyton Bridge Not Operational

[dnks34]

44 minutes ago, 40something said:

450000 passengers used Lowestoft train station in 2017

Interesting, where did you get the figures? 

[Guest]

Article here:

http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/east-anglian-rail-passenger-numbers-increase-1-5403819

Lowestoft 1.2% down on previous year

[Vaughan]

Those are figures for Lowestoft station. How many of those went to Ipswich and London, via Beccles?

[Hylander]

As I say the local population has to get to work.  The.priorities are far from some ruddy tall boat being held up.  Sorry folks but I am talking normal folk here.

[BroadAmbition]

Normal folk and the local population get to work just fine on the trains.  Normal folk, local population and tourists that that bring in a fortune to the local economy cruise under bridges just fine.  Both coexist with out any issues and have done so for decades but only if railtrack fulfil their legal obligations with regards to the bridges, maintenance and operation.  They have been far too lackadaisical for far too long and the Ba have allowed them to get away with it so the situation has now become accepted as the norm.    Therefore imho the Ba should use the power of the statute books / laws etc to force them to hold their end up.  Then there will be no inconvenience to both rail commuters or the boat fraternity.  If there is while repairs / upgrades are carried out, then Railtrack only have themselves to blame.  We all know if you leave a small problem too long it soon manifests itsen as a major problem down the river.  As has been stated before if a problem with a bridge stopped the trains running they would have it fixed in a jiffy which states just what railtrack think of the boating fraternity - Says it all really

Griff

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Vaughan said:

Those are figures for Lowestoft station. How many of those went to Ipswich and London, via Beccles?

Don't know but it wont be more than half, so still hundreds of thousands of passengers per year on the Norwich line.

7 minutes ago, Hylander said:

As I say the local population has to get to work.  The.priorities are far from some ruddy tall boat being held up.  Sorry folks but I am talking normal folk here.

Don't worry, there is zero chance of the line being closed.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, dnks34 said:

What all 4 of them? 

No you are wrong there; it maybe 8

[JennyMorgan]

14 minutes ago, 40something said:

Don't know but it wont be more than half, so still hundreds of thousands of passengers per year on the Norwich line.

Don't worry, there is zero chance of the line being closed.

I wouldn't be too sure. Two very expensive bridges on a short thus low fare route might not stack up well when the costings are done. However, don't blame us boaters, Rail Track have ignored their investment for far too long.

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, 40something said:

Don't know but it wont be more than half, so still hundreds of thousands of passengers per year on the Norwich line.

Don't worry, there is zero chance of the line being closed.

How can you say "Don't know" and then say "it won't be more than half"?

[StillCruising]

To my mind the responsibility entirely lay with Railtrack. Like many structures of similar vintage the bridges were massively over engineered and took a lot more and heavier loads than they do today. The problem is that because they were so well built in the first place they have not had sufficient maintenance  and we have now ended up with the problems that require large amounts of money to fix and provide a reliable service to both train and river users as they did in the past.

[Guest]

57 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

How can you say "Don't know" and then say "it won't be more than half"?

An educated guess from studying this site

http://orr.gov.uk/statistics/published-stats/station-usage-estimates

 

[dnks34]

So if theres no chance of the line being closed either Network Rail will pay for new swing bridges or in years to come the bridges will surely have to remain closed, they wont last forever.

If we are saying half then roughly 225000 folk a year are using the norwich-lowestoft line which works out to around 616 passengers per day or with 24 trains a days (save for sundays) its about 25 passengers per train.....viable really? 

So most of the time 100s of people per crossing closure numbering millions over the year are being inconvenienced for 25 folk on a train who could just as easily get a bus. 

I see it closing and the sooner the better for me. 

[Vaughan]

18 minutes ago, 40something said:

An educated guess from studying this site

I admit I haven't waded through all of that before replying but I can only see statistics for the top 10 stations (not Lowestoft) and even then the figures are only for the number of people going through the station. It doesn't say where they are going to or coming from.

My "educated guess" would be that an awful lot more people using Lowestoft station are commuters going to Ipswich and on to London - or Stanstead - or Stratford (for Eurostar) - than there are towards Norwich.

[Baitrunner]

Hold on that train from Lowestoft is definitely needed by the boating fraternity. 

Having had to go out via Lowestoft this morning thanks to the haven bridge problems (to watch the airshow) my friends have had to overnight at rnsyc because the lock shuts at 5 so we either moored up or missed half the airshow. I had to be home tonight so had to leave them and jump on the train. On time and no hold ups at all. It was great not having to wait for reedham or Somerleton to work!!!!

and at £7:50 for an off peak single to brundall  not that cheap. There was less than 25 of us on it though  

ok so I'm being sarcastic. 

I wonder, and this is a bit of subject creep, I can claim for 2 lock passages at £13 each way and an overnight mooring at rnsyc at about £36 from peel ports? I'm happy to pick up the tab for our overnight meal and bar bill!!

shame the BA didn't get the guys at Mutford to do some overtime with haven out and airshow weekend? Nothing is joined up at all. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, 40something said:

An educated guess from studying this site

http://orr.gov.uk/statistics/published-stats/station-usage-estimates

 

Is an educated guess any more accurate than a wild ar5e guess?  

[Guest]

43 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

Is an educated guess any more accurate than a wild ar5e guess?  

Well I think so, but don't worry I'm not going to be commenting any more

[Guest]

4 hours ago, BroadAmbition said:

Normal folk and the local population get to work just fine on the trains.  Normal folk, local population and tourists that that bring in a fortune to the local economy cruise under bridges just fine.  Both coexist with out any issues and have done so for decades but only if railtrack fulfil their legal obligations with regards to the bridges, maintenance and operation.  They have been far too lackadaisical for far too long and the Ba have allowed them to get away with it so the situation has now become accepted as the norm.    Therefore imho the Ba should use the power of the statute books / laws etc to force them to hold their end up.  Then there will be no inconvenience to both rail commuters or the boat fraternity.  If there is while repairs / upgrades are carried out, then Railtrack only have themselves to blame.  We all know if you leave a small problem too long it soon manifests itsen as a major problem down the river.  As has been stated before if a problem with a bridge stopped the trains running they would have it fixed in a jiffy which states just what railtrack think of the boating fraternity - Says it all really

Griff

Just out of interest exactly who is supposed to pick up the bill cos you can be sure Railtrack won't be doing that , if be go heavy with Railtrack that costs money so are all toll payers expected to pick up that bill ? , not entirely fair considering most don't need the bridge swinging anyway , in essence I agree with you post but I'm dammed if my tolls were to escalate for a minority and I can see a lot of others would feel the same way , the lock at Lowestoft is pay per use so why can't the rail bridges be , yes there's a right to navigation but BA stop it at Lowestoft and charge you for that so why not the rail bridges ? After all yachts have been gifted demasting Pontoon's as have power boats lay by Pontoon's at other tolls pays expense not that they ever need to use them  .

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

Just out of interest exactly who is supposed to pick up the bill cos you can be sure Railtrack won't be doing that , if be go heavy with Railtrack that costs money so are all toll payers expected to pick up that bill ? , not entirely fair considering most don't need the bridge swinging anyway , in essence I agree with you post but I'm dammed if my tolls were to escalate for a minority and I can see a lot of others would feel the same way , the lock at Lowestoft is pay per use so why can't the rail bridges be , yes there's a right to navigation but BA stop it at Lowestoft and charge you for that so why not the rail bridges ? After all yachts have been gifted demasting Pontoon's as have power boats lay by Pontoon's at other tolls pays expense not that they ever need to use them  .

I think the question is: why has Railtrack failed to maintain the swing bridges that have been an integral part of the "local Norfolk rail service" since Edwardian times? 

[Hylander]

7 hours ago, Philosophical said:

I think the question is: why has Railtrack failed to maintain the swing bridges that have been an integral part of the "local Norfolk rail service" since Edwardian times? 

Simple really, if it is not in Berkshire or the like they are  not interested.

[trambo]

11 hours ago, dnks34 said:

 

So most of the time 100s of people per crossing closure numbering millions over the year are being inconvenienced for 25 folk on a train who could just as easily get a bus. 

I see it closing and the sooner the better for me. 

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

 

[Bound2Please]

9 hours ago, Philosophical said:

I think the question is: why has Railtrack failed to maintain the swing bridges that have been an integral part of the "local Norfolk rail service" since Edwardian times? 

Who says they dont maintain them?

[keifsmate]

Who says they dont maintain them?

You only have to look at the state of the iron work associated with Somerleyton Bridge.Delays due to parts having to be made. They have had since 1905 to source the spare required to ensure reliable operation.

[Guest]

43 minutes ago, Bound2Please said:

Who says they dont maintain them?

I am sure there is a maintenance regime whereby for instance the bridge will be regularly greased etc  The issue is that despite this regime, the bridge cannot be relied on to swing on demand due to either a failure or a risk of failure/damage resulting from a swing.  Therefore it is not being maintained to the same condition as it was when first installed.

I fully accept that things wear out and if the bridge cannot be continuously maintained to keep it in original condition and working order, a'la Trigger's Broom , then there should be a scheduled replacement plan in place where adequate funding has already been "set aside". 

[JennyMorgan]

Re maintenance, it always appears to be absolutely minimal  and then only as a very last resort at Somerleyton. I always expect rusticals to descend onto my deck and cabin roof as I pass under Somerleyton Bridge.

As for charging to open the Broads bridges, no way! The Waveney & Yare are largely natural, tidal, navigable rivers whereas Lowestoft harbour is a man-made, commercial enterprise. Remember too that us WAFI's also appreciate the convenience of an open bridge,  they are not just there for three decker gin palaces and bling boats.  

As for spares at Somerleyton, I doubt that the original was built with off the shelf componants. If the bits could be made a hundred years ago then surely they can be made now.

Excuses, excuses, excuses.

[Cockatoo]

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.