Port River Bridge

bingley hall · Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 5:21 pm

xr554 · Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 6:21 pm

Guys, settle down there is no need for this!

Andrew McGregor
Some of my pictures can be found at http://andrew777.fotopic.net/ updated 29/11/08.

bingley hall · Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 7:34 pm

Alco_Haulic · Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 1:54 pm

Pressman · Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 4:13 pm

David Peters · Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 4:24 pm

I was talking to an engineer about the bridges and he said they both could have been tunnels with virtually the same grades etc, except it would never have to be opened or machinery maintained.

He is right though, if they can lay a road tunnel under Sydney Harbour then surely they should be able to lay a prefabricated tunnel/s under a couple of hundred metres of open waterway. That would then not have to worry about opening it. The rail tunnel could be made to clear double stack containers etc and the very top of the concrete tunnel could lie a few centimetres below the River bed as it is now!

With sufficent pumps etc to keep it and the approaches dry it would have worked out cheaper in the long run! Cool

National Railway Museum member.
The opinions expressed by my me in these posts is not the opinion of the N.R.M. and should not be construed as such.
Ferroequinologist and Microferroequinologist.
Photosite http://davidpeters950.fotopic.net

normangerman · Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 4:36 pm

fabricator · Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 5:36 pm

Aaron · Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 12:17 am

David where did you find this engineer? Tunnels are incredibly expensive to build and maintain, ESPECIALLY those that go under water. As for grades, how long did he think the tunnel was going to be?

It is most unlikely that the bridge opening or closing will ever present an issue to operations. I for one would happily drive the train across the bridge at track speed straight after it has closed.

Opening bridges pose no extensive challenges, they been made for ages.

Aaron
Chief trouble shooter and resident myth buster NMRI Inc.

My NEW gallery! Finally online again

No trams, more dams!
TA, in charge of less now than before...

David Peters · Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 2:40 pm

And nearly all opening bridges have had problems a some stage in their lives particularly as they age, parts start to get hard to get etc, at least with a tunnel everything can be replaced, like fans and pumps with minimal inconvenience.

Aaron if they are so expensive to maintain and build why do they continue building them then, because there is probably no other way of doing it, or else hang the expense, it is needed.

A tunnel under the river would not have impeded the access of the river at all, only during construction and surely it would be less of a blight on the river in years to come. Who is going to pay to replace the lifting machinery if something does go wrong in the future, which it could!

The Birkenhead Bridge is a classic example as it has been kaput a lot in the last twenty years and is in dire need of replacement, only no one can afford it, so they slap on a couple of ban-aids and tell you it is good for another twenty or so years. No one learns from their mistakes any more.

Also one other issue about the bridges has come to light lately, the Rann Government at the next election can have a very nice photo of this infrastructure included in their spiel sheet and say look what we have done for you, where a tunnel would be out of sight and out of mind! Cool

National Railway Museum member.
The opinions expressed by my me in these posts is not the opinion of the N.R.M. and should not be construed as such.
Ferroequinologist and Microferroequinologist.
Photosite http://davidpeters950.fotopic.net

Aaron · Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 7:51 pm

Parts for a bridge hard to get? WTF? I doubt there are two alike bridges in th World, the mechanics of them are custom designed and made, they will be always be available made to spec and order. Just like now.

Aaron
Chief trouble shooter and resident myth buster NMRI Inc.

My NEW gallery! Finally online again

No trams, more dams!
TA, in charge of less now than before...

leighkay · Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 8:09 pm

I really cannot see how a bridge would cost more than a tunnel.

Maintanance/security/installation of a tunnel would far exceed that of a bridge, surely.

Also the approach and departure grades would have to be huge... pumping out of the water...

I'm with you aaron.

baytram366 · Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 1:47 pm

Have a look at the Port Side Messenger this week - great cover photo of the first train over the bridge...

Long Live The Jumbos!!!

Alco_Haulic · Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 11:47 am

David Peters · Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 2:14 pm

Not to mention that the ability today to make the custom parts is dwindling daily, as no one wants to do a trade any more. This was reported in the Advertiser or Sunday Mail a while back. So as the older ones retire, they do not get replaced and this expertism is then lost in the future! Cool

National Railway Museum member.
The opinions expressed by my me in these posts is not the opinion of the N.R.M. and should not be construed as such.
Ferroequinologist and Microferroequinologist.
Photosite http://davidpeters950.fotopic.net