Survey No1

[JennyMorgan]

Thank you, Tom, informative and interesting. A couple of questions though, why not work at night? There is a well known saying, 'time and tide waiteth for no man', namely work with the tide rather than hang around until the tide is right. Beyond that river traffic will be minimal to non existent during the hours of darkness. With modern navigation equipment and bright lights this should provide absolutely no problems. As a matter of interest, since the Yarmouth river bridges will limit the size of vessel able to do this job, has water injection been considered? Smaller tugs are used as high pressure water rather than muscle is used to dislodge the silt. Poppy's link shows what was used down at Felixstowe and whilst such a ship could make mince meat of Breydon I don't see it heading up the Bure anytime soon! It will be interesting to see this at work.

[marshman]

Two things occur to me - cannot see any reason not to pedestrianise the bridge.

And PW, your memory must be slipping in that plough dredging has already been tried on the Bure, a number of years ago.Working at night? For double/ triple  time?? There are enough holes in the nav account, without giving them the excuse to find  more - even contractors will charge more I suspect!

[ranworthbreeze]

Because of the bypass there is no need for the bridge other than pedestrians and of course these could be catered for by a newer pedestrian bridge similar to the one at the Herbert Woods marina entrance. 

[floydraser]

5 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

Thank you, Tom, informative and interesting. A couple of questions though, why not work at night? 

 Is that four letter word allowed on here? 

I can just about remember it. As Marshman says the anti-social working hours payments would make the costs astronimical on their own but you could also add in the extra costs of health and safety, like lights, generators etc. And I don't want that lot going off outside Brundall Gardens in June thank you very much!

European working directive rules limit the hours that can be worked at night as well, adding to the problems. There may be other spokes that have been shoved in the wheel since I had to be aware of it.

[JennyMorgan]

1 hour ago, marshman said:

And PW, your memory must be slipping in that plough dredging has already been tried on the Bure

Slipping, or knocked sideways, not sure which, 'tis a dotage thing!

My recollection is that it was water injection that was trialed, hence my question to Tom. Grovelling apologies if I got that wrong!

Re night work, both Rail Track and local highways departments do it, hence my question to Tom. Time and tide would appear to be the governing factor here , especially if specialized equipment is otherwise standing idle and especially if it is rented.

[unclemike]

3 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:

Re night work, both Rail Track and local highways departments do it,

with a massively larger budget, do you want tolls to rise to fund it?

[JennyMorgan]

20 minutes ago, chameleon said:

with a massively larger budget, do you want tolls to rise to fund it?

No, but dredging plant, especially if specialised and on hire, can itself be costly. Reducing the hire period might go a long way to offsetting the operating costs. I don't have the costings so can only guess as to what option might offer the best value, hence, once again, my question to Tom.

[Smoggy]

Would people be much more willing to accept the blockage to navigation getting in their way if the BA just fitted a mast and sail to the bridge? It would move just as quick as some sail boats and may even sink completely.