Jump to content

Twin Sails


Brian
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm afraid we will never regain  the reliability and longevity of the engineering of the Victorian age (there were a few exceptions I admit) when it seems that projects based on tendering to achieve the lowest price and quickest delivery win the day.

 

I am sad to say that in my experience many  Companies that win these projects have no idea of what they are getting into as they are basically shell companies reliant upon a previous old school reputation and now have minimal resources  so that once they win the job then panic sets in and they try to recruit "staff" to complete it relying on managing the contract to save or make  even  money .

 

The Victorians generally provided a realistic  fixed price for the job and selection was based on the preferred design solution

 

The quality of the available mechanical/electrical equipment available in today's throw away society is price driven and is selected to meet the warranty period which is generally 13 months from customer takeover by which time it has served its purpose and is generally worn out and gets replaced by the customer (or left to rot) with an identical 2 year lifespan unit and so the cycle continues.

 

Granted the Victorian engineers way over designed their projects but they were also maintainable unlike those of today as the necessary skill sets have been purposely removed from the marketplace  by the Government sacrificing the  Manufacturing for the Financial markets.

 

If the bearing set needs replacing on the twin sails bridge I suspect that it will be replaced with exactly the same  type that has failed. There will be no money available or interest it getting the fault properly analysed and an improved design implemented .

 

It will come back to bite them mark my words

 

Just my three penne'th😎

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone must know that we should have gone for a higher bridge that ;

1. Does not open/close

2. Does not therefore fail open or closed, bringing traffic to a stop.

3 Does not cost a fortune in maintenance over its lifetime

4 Does not need a team of 32 people and a dedicated VHF channel just to get it opening and closing to schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I'm not "Local"  I don't know the history of the bridge construction but I can see that construction had begun on an alternative design across the bay.

The 90 degree dogleg access on the Hamworthy side shows a piece of road heading for the bay.

 

When was the design changed to the twin sails route and other than being a shorter route why was it chosen (other than I assume those in charge assumed it would be cheaper because it was shorter)

 

Surely they would have considered all issues before changing the route?

Or am I not understanding the Poole Council mentality.😎

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

I spoke with the Mayor at the time. He had all the plans for a fixed span bridge, but was overruled because the rest wanted something for the Millenium. 

London had the O2, Portsmouth the Spinaker Tower and we got the Booby Prize.

 

I've edited Bobby to read Booby. 😎

 

Thanks for the clarification Brian.

 

I couldn't get my head around a viable alternative engineering solution to the original scheme.

 

Now I understand viable engineering wasn't part of the decision making process it clarifies things:angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The initial scheme for harbour included the extension of the A31-the existing Dorset way , as it is known- across open country at Canford heath to Wimborne bypass. It would effectively become the Poole bridge link. This was all going on into 1997 when Labour got in. The new Parliamentary Under - Secretary of State for Environment ,Transport and the Regions (Ms Glenda Jackson) Ex film Star. The rest is History. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/19/2018 at 11:47 AM, great white said:

Everyone must know that we should have gone for a higher bridge that ;

1. Does not open/close

2. Does not therefore fail open or closed, bringing traffic to a stop.

3 Does not cost a fortune in maintenance over its lifetime

4 Does not need a team of 32 people and a dedicated VHF channel just to get it opening and closing to schedule.

Look Charlie,  it is no good talking sense , no one will ever listen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

I'd vote for a tunnel....

 

Seems to be a practical solution at first sight ...however ...with todays construction environment I guarantee it would end up as a high maintenance operation with plenty of closures.

 

It would not be wide enough to take maintenace or emergency vehicles ,the ventilation and lighting  systems would be unreliable or innadequate, and it would probably have a toll to cover maintenance costs(or budget overruns).

Oh yeah ..it would probably LEAK.

 

Why have I become so cynical in my old age .I wasn't like this in my youth?:astonished:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...