Another Forth rail bridge

[Gordon Connell]

I had to check that this wasn't an old story from April...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-37506251

 

[Michael Delamar]

Maybe they thought the original was nearing the end of its life and couldnt be maintained?

[Joseph_Pestell]

Certainly the heading on that drawing mentions reconstruction rather than being an additional crossing to give more capacity.

[Mad McCann]

The consensus seems to be that it was a contingency design done in anticipation of the original structure being irreparably damaged through enemy action during the war years.

Fortunately it never had to be built.

[LMS2968]

Admiral David Beatty, who replaced John Jellicoe as C-in-C of the Grand Fleet in 1917, hated that Bridge: his fear was that enemy action would bring it down, trapping the British fleet in Rosyth. For much of WWI the main fleet base was Scapa Flow, but the Battlecruiser squadrons were at Rosyth for much of the war.

 

To be fair, someone should have thought of this before the Rosyth base was started.

[Derekstuart]

"Although they date from 1945, that was the time the V bombs were landing in London and there was a possibility that they were thinking it might be replaced."

Someone should really tell this "expert" that the V1 sites capable of hitting London were under Allied control October 1944 ( I can't recall the dates of the first and last sites to fall, but can look it up if anyone gives a damn).

 

In 1945 the Luftwaffe was effectively grounded and if they could get into the air then it was in defence of Germany. The V1s were still used in Europe in 1945 but only to try and stop the advancing Armies, not to hit Britain. So I'm not sure that the bridge was considered under threat at that point- at least not from war.

 

As for building it due to the anticipated demand- Britain was effectively knackered in 1945 and there was no sudden upsurge in demand for rail travel- at least not the the extent that a new bridge would be commissioned.

[Bernard Lamb]

Admiral David Beatty, who replaced John Jellicoe as C-in-C of the Grand Fleet in 1917, hated that Bridge: his fear was that enemy action would bring it down, trapping the British fleet in Rosyth. For much of WWI the main fleet base was Scapa Flow, but the Battlecruiser squadrons were at Rosyth for much of the war.

 

To be fair, someone should have thought of this before the Rosyth base was started.

But then they would not have had the opportunity to play their favourite game..

Get your ship under the bridge while a train passes above it.

I an told that this game is very much not the favourite of the authorities and that serious money has been known to change hands when the feat is achieved.

Bernard

[scotcent]

in  1990  I  was  able  to  achieve  the  ultimate  ambition  of  driving  my  ship  under  a  steam  hauled  train  crossing  the  bridge.  No  money  changed  hands;  not  mine  anyway!

 

Allan  F

[pete_mcfarlane]

"Although they date from 1945, that was the time the V bombs were landing in London and there was a possibility that they were thinking it might be replaced."

 

Someone should really tell this "expert" that the V1 sites capable of hitting London were under Allied control October 1944 ( I can't recall the dates of the first and last sites to fall, but can look it up if anyone gives a damn).

The Germans had the ability to air launch V1s - they used some ineffectively against Manchester at the end of 1944.

http://aircrashsites.co.uk/air-raids-bomb-sites/luftwaffe-v1-attack-on-manchester-christmas-eve-1944/

 

If you can't hit something the size of Manchester, then the chances of hitting a bridge with one are almost nil.

[Derekstuart]

A good point, Pete.

 

Either way, the risk from the V1s was pretty low by then and the Luftwaffe didn't really haven enough fuel or serviceable aircraft to pose much of a threat in 1945.

[LMS2968]

The V1 was a strategic rather than a tactical weapon. Basically it was pointed in about the right direction with fuel enough to go about the right distance. When the fuel ran out, down it came, and it was a matter of luck if it was over an armaments factory, the Forth Bridge or an open field. Given the preponderance of open fields to Forth Bridges, it was pretty safe.

[jjb1970]

In all probability the V weapons were a net gain for the Allies. Their development required vast resources of technical expertise, money, labour and materials and their impact on the course of the war was limited. The resources devoted to wonder weapons would probably have achieved a better return if given to other parts of the war economy such as aero engines, tanks and flak weapons.

[Derekstuart]

Of course during design, the Germans did not intend that to be the case and they made substantial efforts to make it more reliable. Had it not been due to mis-information from a false agent in Portugal which caused the Germans to distrust their agents in Britain then they might well have made it a (for the era) 'precision' weapon.

 

The V1 was a strategic rather than a tactical weapon. Basically it was pointed in about the right direction with fuel enough to go about the right distance. When the fuel ran out, down it came, and it was a matter of luck if it was over an armaments factory, the Forth Bridge or an open field. Given the preponderance of open fields to Forth Bridges, it was pretty safe.

[Danim]

Anyway Hitler liked the forth bridge and had given orders for it to be avoided at all cost

[Derekstuart]

Danim, there are many examples of 'hitler ordered....' but is there any evidence of it in this case? I don't mean that as an argument as it would not surprise me, but never seen any documentary evidence.

[Danim]

I heard it from multiple people including an ex raf pilot who flew during ww2 and a network rail executive that is why the bridge even though it was a major link to rosyth navel base, the air station at crail, leuchars and scapa flow it was never hit but the ships right next to it were

[duncan]

given the accuracy of bombing, I doubt they would have been able to hit it, also, I don't think they had a suitable bomb to do much damage, unless they achieved a direct hit.

 

would have been different if they had had something like the Tallboy or Grand Slam bombs, which could drop a bridge or viaduct 

[keefer]

You wouldn't need to down the bridge to be effective, just take out one of the viaducts at either end

[pete_mcfarlane]

given the accuracy of bombing, I doubt they would have been able to hit it, also, I don't think they had a suitable bomb to do much damage, unless they achieved a direct hit.

 

would have been different if they had had something like the Tallboy or Grand Slam bombs, which could drop a bridge or viaduct 

They did have some suitable guided anti-ship weapons, which were capable of hitting moving warships (they managed sink the Italian flagship 'Roma' with 2 or 3 of them). But I don't think they ever used them against fixed targets like bridges, and the carrier aircraft would have struggled attacking at medium altitude without fighter escort. 

 

The only precision weapons they ever used against bridges had pilots in them......

[jjb1970]

The Luftwaffe had air launched V1s but they suffered the same problem as the IJNAF did when trying to deliver the Ohka suicide missile, namely that by the later stages of the war Allied air superiority was so complete that trying to fly obsolete carrier aircraft like the He111 or G4M into enemy air space to bring the weapons within launch range was almost a suicide mission for the bomber crew.

[Edwin_m]

You wouldn't need to down the bridge to be effective, just take out one of the viaducts at either end

If you brought down the main spans you would also bottle up anything that happened to be in Rosyth at the time. 

[Reorte]

If you brought down the main spans you would also bottle up anything that happened to be in Rosyth at the time. 

Could a few tugs drag the wreckage clear enough quickly?

[Ian Smeeton]

No

[Chameleon]

It's intriguing that no one knew of the existence of these plans until they came to light recently. You'd think there would be records of some sort about a potential project as huge as building another forth bridge.

[Dungrange]

It's intriguing that no one knew of the existence of these plans until they came to light recently. You'd think there would be records of some sort about a potential project as huge as building another forth bridge.

 

I think that's the point.  When the plans were drawn up, they were probably on a need to know basis, as many wartime secrets would have been.  Whilst the plans may be dated 1945, the original instruction to prepare the plans would have predated this probably with an instruction to involve as few people as possible.  The less people that knew about such a plan, the less likelihood there would have been of the enemy learning anything about such plans. Those who were senior enough to know possibly retired shortly thereafter and took those secrets with them.  After the war, subsequent staff obviously didn't have an opportunity to look through the box that they were in and now we have a situation where those who were involved in preparing the plans are probably no longer with us.