|
Post by naughtyfox on Apr 2, 2019 15:33:49 GMT
Well if it fails completely as has been pointed out in TD's post the counter weight would fall back in an arc and actually completely block the road. So if CRT are thinking they are giving road traffic priority they are mistaken. It would be one hell of a job to raise it once it had fallen back. Imagine the impact of the counter weight falling back free fall. This is the one at Sykehouse Rd. You wouldn't want that counter weight landing on your head... Why not?
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 2, 2019 15:34:30 GMT
From here: www.iims.org.uk/what-future-for-freight-on-the-uk-canal-network/"Potential traffics: As CRT’s Jon Horsfall points out to Canal Boat, the A&C Main Line runs for something like 40 miles parallel to the congested M62 and overloaded railway lines. There is sea freight from the Humber in both directions." "So when will we see actual cargo carried? Jon Horsfall tells Canal Boat that the first new traffic could be no more than 12 months away. Time will tell if this is the start of a revival of freight on the north eastern waterways." Ask Tony about this foxy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2019 15:34:43 GMT
I think if a counter weight of that size fell freely the whole structure would be destroyed, is its not designed or built to withstand the forces that would be involved. That's why I think the original designer would have specified regular replacement of the (apparently sealed) bearings rather than just rely on greasing. The consequences of failure are too serious to risk for the sake of a few quid a year. I also think there may be a braking mechanism somewhere in there which would prevent uncontrolled movement of the counterweight.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 2, 2019 15:35:38 GMT
You wouldn't want that counter weight landing on your head... Why not? Well there are a few people who wouldn't mind if it was your head foxy.
|
|
|
Post by wellyftw on Apr 2, 2019 15:36:21 GMT
You wouldn't want that counter weight landing on your head... Why not? It'd give you a sore head.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 2, 2019 15:37:24 GMT
I think if a counter weight of that size fell freely the whole structure would be destroyed, is its not designed or built to withstand the forces that would be involved. That's why I think the original designer would have specified regular replacement of the (apparently sealed) bearings rather than just rely on greasing. The consequences of failure are too serious to risk for the sake of a few quid a year. I also think there may be a braking mechanism somewhere in there which would prevent uncontrolled movement of the counterweight. You might be right. They need to sort it out though because there are quite a few similar bridges in that area.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Apr 2, 2019 15:37:32 GMT
If there has been no proper maintenance, would this be considered criminal neglect?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2019 15:39:41 GMT
If there has been no proper maintenance, would this be considered criminal neglect? If someone was killed or injured in the event of a failure almost certainly yes. Manslaughter by gross negligence springs to mind. (Nigel Moore best to comment though.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2019 15:40:45 GMT
How many up and down cycles did the bridge perform per year?
Still seems to be a fairly strong possibility of it being caused by vibration due to vehicle movements.
I blame eBay. And amazon.
Is there a vehicle weight limit and is it enforced.
Even if a vehicle only causes a minute deflection or vibration it could cause the quoted fretting when multiplied out by the volume of traffic specially if overweight vehicles were using it.
Those hanger bars are flexible. The probably rattle about when the bridge is down. Could be nothing to do with boats.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 2, 2019 15:42:23 GMT
How many up and down cycles did the bridge perform per year? Still seems to be a fairly strong possibility of it being caused by vibration due to vehicle movements. I blame eBay. And amazon. What about Facebook?
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Apr 2, 2019 15:43:32 GMT
Is it a similar topic to railway level crossings perhaps. Rail v Road is quite a level playing field. Road v canal isn't. In commercial carrying days on that section it would have been a different matter of course, they would have had to get their finger out but nowadays in the overall scheme of things it will be 'only' leisure boaters put to the trouble/danger of trying to avoid that bit. The issue which demands priority and immediate attention is the potential, and as yet unknown, danger to road traffic using the other lift bridges of the same design at Barnby Dun and along the New Junction, all of which should be closed to both road and canal traffic until they've been given the OK with regard to at least the condition of the end fittings on the counterweight beam hanger bars.
|
|
|
Post by IainS on Apr 2, 2019 15:45:11 GMT
(snip) I wonder if there will be moves to eliminate moveable bridges in areas with high traffic density. Times change. I always wondered if it would be worth putting in some sort of caisson where you drop the boat down then motor to the other end then raise water again. With safety interlocks. Would slow the journey down but might make it more interesting Not sure about the feasibility. Check out Dalmuir Drop Lock Really slow operation, especially now that it is now set up so that the lock must be emptied to its lowest level, rather than the original set up when the level was only lowered sufficiently to allow the boat(s) to pass under the bridge.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2019 15:46:07 GMT
How many up and down cycles did the bridge perform per year? Still seems to be a fairly strong possibility of it being caused by vibration due to vehicle movements. I blame eBay. And amazon. What about Facebook? Do fb have a lot of vans running around ?
|
|
|
Post by kris on Apr 2, 2019 15:48:00 GMT
Do fb have a lot of vans running around ? No but it seems in fashion to blame them for all the ills of the world at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Apr 2, 2019 15:49:22 GMT
If there has been no proper maintenance, would this be considered criminal neglect? If someone was killed or injured in the event of a failure almost certainly yes. Manslaughter by gross negligence springs to mind. Bit bleedin' late then, eh? I can get prosecuted for driving without a tachograph in my bus, even though I haven't actually killed or injured anybody. So why can't a wilful lack of maintenance be regarded as 'criminal'?
|
|