http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Forth Road Bridge corrosion is being slowed down en Tue, 19 May 2026 15:49:35 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538&page=2#post-302450 Sat, 02 Mar 2019 19:30:33 +0000 chdot 302450@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/scotland/831826/head-for-heights-the-courier-goes-behind-the-scenes-with-forth-road-bridge-expansion-joint-engineers/" rel="nofollow">https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/scotland/831826/head-for-heights-the-courier-goes-behind-the-scenes-with-forth-road-bridge-expansion-joint-engineers/</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538&page=2#post-145051 Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:48:21 +0000 minus six 145051@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@morningsider</p> <p>i was musing on the way home there on what the likelihood was that the bridgemaster had been badly misquoted by the media...</p> <p>its a relief to find that to be true </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538&page=2#post-145037 Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:10:32 +0000 EddieD 145037@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ah well, just imagine all the extra exercise we'll get diverting via Kincardine...</p> <p>I don't think it will happen though, at least not for a while - and I've just seen that the bridgemaster has criticised the EEN - "I write to put the record straight following the highly misleading article that appeared in Scotland on Sunday on 9 March 2014"...yada yada...</p> <p>I also don't think that there's enough money to pay for it...unless they shelve a lot of other transport projects.</p> <p>Ah. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538&page=2#post-145036 Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:07:06 +0000 Morningsider 145036@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>No need to panic - Letter from the Bridgemaster to the editor of Scotland on Sunday:</p> <p>"Sir,</p> <p>I write to put the record straight following the highly misleading article that appeared in Scotland on Sunday on 9 March 2014 (Call to Rebuild Forth Road Bridge to Carry More Traffic).</p> <p>The article states that “plans have been revealed” to replace the deck of the Forth Road Bridge, however this is simply not true.</p> <p>A rolling 15-year programme of major projects to strengthen and improve the bridge's structure and replace major components is set out in the Bridge Authority's long-term Capital Plan. No project to replace the deck of the Forth Road Bridge has ever appeared in this plan and nobody is proposing that such a project be undertaken now or in the future.</p> <p>The story is very loosely based on a second-hand account of remarks made at a lecture at which the journalist who wrote the article was not even present.</p> <p>My comments on the possibility of replacing the deck were entirely hypothetical. This was stressed at the meeting, so it is regrettable that the article suggested otherwise.</p> <p>Yours faithfully</p> <p>Barry R Colford<br /> Chief Engineer and Bridgemaster"</p> <p><a href="http://www.feta.gov.uk/news/chief-engineers-response-scotland-sunday-article" rel="nofollow">http://www.feta.gov.uk/news/chief-engineers-response-scotland-sunday-article</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538&page=2#post-145035 Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:55:53 +0000 cb 145035@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Does it follow that replacing the main deck would require closing both bike paths?</p> <p>(For some reason I think it would be very scary cycling across if the car deck wasn't there). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538&page=2#post-145034 Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:43:12 +0000 chdot 145034@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"</p> <p>Spokes CycleCampaign (@SpokesLothian)<br /> 10/03/2014 10:04<br /> If @forthroadbridge closed 3 years, no ped/cycle crossing of #ForthEstuary <a href="http://www.spokes.org.uk/wordpress/documents/members-campaigning/edinburgh/a90-forth-bridge/#s4" rel="nofollow">http://www.spokes.org.uk/wordpress/documents/members-campaigning/edinburgh/a90-forth-bridge/#s4</a> @CyclingEdin @keithirving1 @AlastairDalton</p> <p>" </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538&page=2#post-145033 Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:37:01 +0000 minus six 145033@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The bridgemaster has his motorised blinkers firmly in place, then </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-144963 Sun, 09 Mar 2014 23:33:41 +0000 chdot 144963@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"</p> <p>It could mean closing the bridge for three years but would enable it to carry more traffic than just buses and taxis after the adjacent Queensferry Crossing opens in two years’ time. </p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/road-bridge-chief-says-deck-should-be-replaced-1-3333990" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/road-bridge-chief-says-deck-should-be-replaced-1-3333990</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-143361 Sun, 23 Feb 2014 13:14:32 +0000 chdot 143361@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"</p> <p>The spectacular new Queensferry Bridge spanning the Firth of Forth is unlikely to be finished in time for its scheduled opening in 2016, civil engineering experts have told the Sunday Herald. </p> <p>The probable delay to the road bridge, which will have no cost implications to the Scottish taxpayer, comes after a 15-month hiatus caused by difficulties in setting the foundations of the fixed-price £1.5 billion structure.</p> <p>...</p> <p>Construction of the Forth Road Bridge from 1958 to 1964 was delayed for the best part of a year due to bad weather. The decision to press ahead in poor conditions led to corrosion problems that shortened the life of the bridge.</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/business/company-news/deep-trouble.23509317" rel="nofollow">http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/business/company-news/deep-trouble.23509317</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-109544 Fri, 03 May 2013 14:36:25 +0000 crowriver 109544@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>3 May 2013 </p> <p>REPORT SHOWS EXTRA FORTH CROSSING IS SALMOND'S FOLLY</p> <p>Scottish Greens say a report by the chief engineer of the Forth Road Bridge, showing that the anchorages of the structure are "in good condition with no real evidence of corrosion", proves that the SNP, supported by Labour, Libdems and Tories, were reckless to blow over a billion pounds on an additional crossing.</p> <p>The Scottish Greens were the only party that argued in favour of repairing the existing bridge as this would have saved millions and not required its closure. </p> <p>A report in February of this year showed that dehumidification of the main cables has worked. </p> <p>Patrick Harvie, Green MSP for Glasgow and transport spokesperson for the Scottish Greens, said:</p> <p>"It is now crystal clear that over a billion pounds of public funds were squandered on an ego-trip for ministers, with other parties simply following the herd. The latest findings prove how scandalous it was to plough ahead with the additional crossing without knowing whether there was actually a problem that needed fixed.</p> <p>"Back in February we challenged the First Minister to explain what would prevent future governments going back on his pledge that the existing road bridge would only be used for buses and bikes but he failed to do so. The government should accept its reasoning was flawed and explain how it intends to prevent such situations from happening again."</p> <p>(Ends)</p> <p>Chief Engineer's report:<br /> <a href="http://www.forthroadbridge.org/sites/default/files/documents/Item%2004%20-%20Anchorage%20Investigation%20Update.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.forthroadbridge.org/sites/default/files/documents/Item%2004%20-%20Anchorage%20Investigation%20Update.pdf</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101438 Thu, 21 Feb 2013 17:58:04 +0000 crowriver 101438@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Scot Gov has however, pretty much promised not to levy tolls on any bridges. Ever. Assuming the SNP remains in office, of course. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101436 Thu, 21 Feb 2013 17:45:52 +0000 Cyclingmollie 101436@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Morningsider: <em>"the Scottish Government has NEVER promised that the FRB will always remain off limits to cars, vans etc."</em> </p> <p>Which begs the question how is the provision for bikes on the existing bridge going to any better than it is now? Less noisy and smelly? Is that it? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101433 Thu, 21 Feb 2013 17:26:18 +0000 DaveC 101433@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The Fife half of the share of Toll money was used to build cycle path infrastructure in Fife. Now we have no tolls we have limited new money for cycle path provision. Money from tolls was used to make the coastal path between Inverkeithing and Dalgety Bay. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101423 Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:01:53 +0000 Morningsider 101423@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Just as the 10% of all trips by bike by 2020 is officially a "vision", the use of the FRB by bikes, pedestrians, taxis and buses is simply part of a "managed crossing strategy" - the Scottish Government has NEVER promised that the FRB will always remain off limits to cars, vans etc. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101407 Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:24:37 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 101407@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Agree 100%.</p> <p>Now that <em>is</em> depressing! ;) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101392 Thu, 21 Feb 2013 13:23:08 +0000 crowriver 101392@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Really do have to wonder at them cracking on with the new bridge before knowing the outcome of the attempts at defying the corrosion.</em></p> <p>I think there are various factors at work there, all political rather than pragmatic decision making. </p> <p>- The government needed to be seen to "do something".<br /> - Presenting the situation as a crisis meant cross-party support was ensured (except the Greens)<br /> - The atmosphere of crisis, plus cross-party support, meant the UK government bowedf to pressure to release capital funds earlier to help build the bridge: a "victory" over Westminster for the SNP.<br /> - It's a big willy waving exercise in national virility symbols, allowing grandstanding, ribbon cutting ceremonies, etc.<br /> - The bridge is "toll free": a victory for "the common man/common sense".<br /> - Spending so much on roads placates the big civil engineering firms, <em>and</em> means that less glamorous public transport and active travel schemes can't get their hands on the cash. Another victory for "the common man/common sense/hard pressed otherwise law abiding family motorists".</p> <p>Conversely, if they had waited for the outcome of the tests before deciding to build, all that money would have been allocated somewhere else. All the plans, surveys, architects' fees, etc. would be seen as a "waste of money". The scepticism and criticism would have set in, cross-party support might have been lost; it would have come across as yet another failed grandiose pipe dream that came to naught... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101384 Thu, 21 Feb 2013 12:49:20 +0000 minus six 101384@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>The Scottish Government must keep their promise to restrict use of the existing bridge to buses, bikes and pedestrians</em></p> <p>fat chance... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101361 Thu, 21 Feb 2013 10:48:52 +0000 Morningsider 101361@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>PS - not even that. FETA had already extended the earliest date that the bridge may have had to close by two years well before the Scottish Government decided to go ahead with the new bridge. A decision could have been made later this year with no risk to cross Forth traffic. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101359 Thu, 21 Feb 2013 10:43:32 +0000 PS 101359@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>"Really do have to wonder at them cracking on with the new bridge before knowing the outcome of the attempts at defying the corrosion."</em></p> <p>Ah, but if they hadn't cracked on with the new bridge procurement before the results came in there was a real risk that the old bridge would have to be closed before the new one was opened, causing all sorts of carmageddon and the collapse of society as we know it...</p> <p>That's well worth £1.6bn of anyone's money... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101305 Wed, 20 Feb 2013 19:36:45 +0000 crowriver 101305@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>We might be small, but we Scots drive above our weight (the latter increasing the more we do so). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101302 Wed, 20 Feb 2013 19:30:08 +0000 kaputnik 101302@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>But it IS ridiculous that Scotland's cities don't have motorways linking them.</em></p> <p>Sometimes our journalists forget just how small our cities really are. Even our biggest pair aren't that big in the grand scheme of things. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101299 Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:39:02 +0000 crowriver 101299@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>MEDIA RELEASE<br /> SCOTTISH GREEN MSPs</p> <p>20 February 2013 </p> <p>FORTH BRIDGE REPORT BLOWS SNP'S REASON FOR NEW CROSSING</p> <p>Responding to a report by the chief engineer of the Forth Road Bridge, showing that "the safety of the main cables will not diminish significantly in the future as long as the dehumidification system continues to function", Alison Johnstone, Green MSP for Lothian, said:</p> <p>“This report removes the central justification that the SNP made for blowing over a billion pounds on a new bridge. The Scottish Greens were the only party arguing strongly that repairing the existing bridge, even if the cables had to be replaced, would have cost a tiny fraction of the price and with no closure of the bridge. </p> <p>"Those who wanted to see if the repairs worked before blowing billions on a new bridge were the responsible ones, while other parties charged recklessly ahead. </p> <p>Alison added:</p> <p>“The Scottish Government must keep their promise to restrict use of the existing bridge to buses, bikes and pedestrians, otherwise they will simply have created an eight-lane motorway over the Forth, encouraging ever more traffic and congestion coming into Edinburgh.”</p> <p>(Ends)</p> <p>Chief Engineer's report:<br /> <a href="http://www.feta.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Item%2006%20-%20Third%20Main%20Cable%20Inspection%20Report.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.feta.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Item%2006%20-%20Third%20Main%20Cable%20Inspection%20Report.pdf</a></p> <p>Jason Rose<br /> Head of Media<br /> Scottish Green Party<br /> The Scottish Parliament </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101291 Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:08:45 +0000 crowriver 101291@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@WC, I doubt it. There's a certain wing of nationalism which still sees everything through the lens of the Highland Clearances, Cullodden, etc. Seeing the central belt, and Glasgow in particular, as Brit loyalists/redcoats suppressing the plucky Highlanders. To a certain extent they have a point, but the A9 is a different issue. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101290 Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:07:08 +0000 cc 101290@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I expect the war crime comment refers to the A9's safety record. </p> <p>But, you know, maybe they could drive more slowly. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101286 Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:02:54 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 101286@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Really do have to wonder at them cracking on with the new bridge <em>before</em> knowing the outcome of the attempts at defying the corrosion.</p> <p>To paraphrase Alan Douglas, £1.6bn would have been quite useful to schools or hospitals. But it IS ridiculous that Scotland's cities don't have motorways linking them. Oh yes. No really. It's like we're in the third world or something.</p> <p>That war crime comment is, hopefully, tongue in cheek surely! A rather extreme Godwin's Law parallel if not. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101279 Wed, 20 Feb 2013 17:45:13 +0000 crowriver 101279@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Morningsider, aye but if they brought back tolls imagine the hoo-ha from the Alan Douglases of the east coast. "What!!! £4 just to drive across a bridge? Daylight robbery, etc. etc."</p> <p>I also note that a commenter on this story on the news site has likened the non-dualling of the A9 to a "war crime". </p> <p>To misuse a turn of phrase, it is rarely difficult to tell the difference between a ray of sunshine and a motorist with a grievance. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101276 Wed, 20 Feb 2013 17:39:14 +0000 Morningsider 101276@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>crowriver - the FRB tolls had paid off the loans for the construction of the FRB and contributed significant amounts to the on-going maintenance of the bridge. </p> <p>If the tolls on the FRB had been kept then tolls could have been introduced on the second bridge (obviously they would have had to rise considerably, but FETA had planned to introduce variable tolls in 2005 of up to £4 for single occupancy peak time car trips, but the idea was rejected by the Scottish Government). </p> <p>This is significant as the second bridge could also have been paid for at no cost to the taxpayer - with costs being met by bridge users. To give an idea of how this can happen you just have to look at the second Severn crossing. This will have been paid off through around £1bn of bridge tolls within about 21 years - and that was effectively a PFI! The Scottish Government could have done this - but didn't want to levy a toll, so everyone in Scotland has to pay instead. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101268 Wed, 20 Feb 2013 17:27:49 +0000 chdot 101268@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"</p> <p>BUILDING a new jam-busting bridge across the Dee in Aberdeen could cost as much as £100 million, the Evening Express can reveal today. </p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/Article.aspx/3131062" rel="nofollow">http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/Article.aspx/3131062</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101267 Wed, 20 Feb 2013 17:21:55 +0000 crowriver 101267@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>In his maiden speech at Holyrood in 2007, Mr Brown admitted he had been convicted of not paying the toll. He told the parliament: "Indeed, I was convicted for refusing to pay the Skye bridge toll back in the mid-1990s. The Skye bridge toll campaign was another successful campaign to get rid of unjust tolls."</p> <p>"It would be nice if the Lord Advocate were to consider quashing my conviction and those of others who opposed that disgraceful toll, but I suppose that she could just as easily come after me for the £50 fine that I have not paid in 12 years."</em></p> <p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11987571" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11987571</a></p> <p>15 years now... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9538#post-101258 Wed, 20 Feb 2013 17:10:13 +0000 cc 101258@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Great! So we can keep cars and lorries on the old bridge <em>and</em> the new one! </p>