Somerleyton Bridge Unable To Operate.

[ranworthbreeze]

Dear all,

We have been informed by Network Rail that Somerleyton Swing Bridge is currently not operational.

Best,

Tom

Tom Waterfall

Senior Communications Officer

Direct dial 01603 756034

 

Broads Authority 

Yare House, 62-64 Thorpe Road, Norwich NR1 1RY

 

Please note that my normal working hours are 9am – 5pm Monday to Friday.

 No doubt it is too warm again.

[BroadAmbition]

No doubt it is too warm again.

No doubt for the first time this year it is indeed.

Tks for letting us lot know all the same

Griff

[Mouldy]

Isn’t it amazing that it’s never open when it’s ‘unable to operate’!!!

[YnysMon]

They probably mean there’s a good chance that it might get stuck...so we’re not going to risk it. Which is fair enough. Imagine all the disgruntled fare paying passengers if it did get stuck open. 

[Guest]

It was closed when we passed through at around 1:30pm today....but we are only 6ft 8in.

[Fredrick]

Is it because of the hot weather or something else

[YnysMon]

It's quite common for it to be out of action during hot weather.

[ranworthbreeze]

Why is it that this never used to be an issue when they used to fit the summer rails? I believe that the summer rails are still near the bridge.

 

[Helian]

Still not opening. 2 red flags and what appears to be a number of large craft waiting to pass.

[Fredrick]

It’s quite disgraceful that both exits from the boards are out of action

[Helian]

Finally open.....

[Bellatrix27]

Ruined our planned two day trip. We are at Somerleyton Marina, right next door and can only go through the swing bridge due to our mast. Stepping it is a major undertaking. 
The bridge was closed in the morning, it was not that hot. We've had much hotter days midsummer when the bridge was OK.
We went out on Monday before this, luckily just a day trip. I dread to think what would have happened if we had stayed overnight on Monday. We would have been trapped on the Oulton side for two days. 
We don't get any compensation for this. If we were rail passengers we could at least claim our money back. 
The signage is a joke, a "melting X" with random letters under it. Maybe it was code for "we don't care".
 

[Turnoar]

I wonder what the future holds for investment in rail infrastructure broads wide locally. My guess, based on the past years foot(rail)fall, is probably not a lot... realistically the summer rails swap is probably at the higher end of the investment spectrum! Has an outright bridge replacement like this happened successfully previously, I think the closest to it would be the rail bridge at Norwich in the late 80s or early 90s perhaps and may be that was just a refurb/ sundry component replacement?

[grendel]

does anyone know of the terms that the bridges run under with regard to restricting the navigation, I seem to recall there is a requirement to open for vessels navigating the rivers, but is there a penalty for the railway for failing to do so?

[ChrisB]

As I pointed out in another post:- Network Rail, as an entity is due to be replaced by 2023 in what is tantamount to a return to a British Rail type of business model. I can't see much happenig until then.

[ChrisB]

[grendel]

In reality that should make no difference as they will still legally be bound to maintain the navigation, what I was trying to ascertain was the conditions of the agreement that they are bound under to do this, and whether there was a penalty clause for failure to maintain said navigation by being unable to open the bridges in a timely manner.

[ChrisB]

I think if it went to court and their actions were presented in such a manner as to the opening putting the rail service in jeopardy because the bridge may not close properly after an opening?

Then they would find in favour of Network Rail. The rail service continuity must be deemed more important than a few leisure boaters.

 

[grendel]

it was my understanding that the original agreement drawn up included a penalty clause for obstructing the navigation, in reality this probably hasnt been updated so a punitive fine back when the licence was drawn up is probably a mere pittance in todays terms, by what i see in other legal documents from that era a 5s fine per boat unable to navigate back in the early 1900's is a mere 25p nowadays (random made up figures as i dont know the details) but nowadays the cost to administer those payments would in itself present an expense, thus i was trying to ascertain to whom the Railway network are responsible to pay any such fines and the amount that can be claimed, would they pay the broads authority, or the boat owners affected. was there any such clause imposed on the railways, to my mind there must have been.

As for the decision in court, you must remember the agreement was put in place when there was regular cargo traffic on those rivers, and a court would be required to study those agreements to maintain the navigation before making a judgement. i dont think its as cut and dried as rail service continuity, as there is also the navigation continuity to consider.

[ChrisB]

With regards to The BA. Is Network Rail responsible to the Dept of Transport like BA is to DEFRA? Because I am pretty sure one Gov Dept cannot take damages from another.

[Helian]

I was rather surprised to see two red flags flying at Somerleyton yesterday by 10:30 am. Seemed a bit presumptive 

[grendel]

maybe it is some other mechanical issue rather than heat expansion?

 

[scdickens]

Both Reedham and Somerleyton Bridges are having major upgrades from Feb next year, they are replacing or updating all the operating systems, it appears the bridges will stay in the open position for a good few months during this period, buses will replace trains.. https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/swing-bridges-upgrade-suffolk-norfolk-7980538

[Fredrick]

Sound like it would be a good idea to replace them with buses permanently would save thousands

[Fredrick]

It also makes me think they cannot stop river traffic over rail perhaps they have been pulling the wool over our eyes for some time