Bridge bashing

[caradoc]

10 hours ago, corneliuslundie said:

I lived in Kosovo for six years. I came to the conclusion that the local version of the Highway Code must say that cyclists should behave like pedestrians and face oncoming traffic. Also horses and carts were obviously exempt from one way streets  etc, and it was normal to park on the pavement and walk on the road. Mind you that was in the early days after the war when there were few pavements anyway that hadn't been destroyed so the road was safer.

And in the UK I haven't yet seen a waiter riding a bike while carrying a tray of coffees to deliver to a nearby customer.

Jonathan

PS I hope that the diversion of the thread means that there have been no bridge bashes lately - or is it just that we are going the wrong way down a one way street?

 

There are bridge bashes somewhere in the UK nearly, if not every, day, just not with such awful results as the one at Swansea.

I once had three on the same shift in one Network Rail area (Scotland). The majority of bridge strikes are lorries hitting underbridges but cars, vans and buses make their mark as well.

 

[sir douglas]

there is a bridge near me that is so regularly hit by HGV's for years that thick steel beams covered in wasp stripe were put infront of it

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.6652856,-1.4436935,3a,75y,272.33h,96.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s__iOmjL33IsaVXp9gHHIvQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

 

[Wickham Green]

1 hour ago, sir douglas said:

there is a bridge near me that is so regularly hit by HGV's for years that thick steel beams covered in wasp stripe were put infront of it

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.6652856,-1.4436935,3a,75y,272.33h,96.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s__iOmjL33IsaVXp9gHHIvQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

 

Could've given the bridge a lick of paint at the same time - but it looks like a nice substantial beam. Personally, I'd have put the beam off the bridge - maybe even at the first road junction - but I guess you'd need permission from too many other parties to do that.

[bimble]

8 hours ago, Wickham Green said:

Could've given the bridge a lick of paint at the same time - but it looks like a nice substantial beam. Personally, I'd have put the beam off the bridge - maybe even at the first road junction - but I guess you'd need permission from too many other parties to do that.

 

it would also depend if there were places between the junction and the bridge that might need access from a HGV. With the beam at the bridge it's only the bridge that can't be accessed.

[sir douglas]

theres no point since this is THE main road in the area, all roads that join are lesser to some extent and theres no quick divertion for HGV's from the East, its either under here or a long way around on the M62 and M1. very few of the other roads in the area are suitable for HGV's

[JZ]

When I drove through Junee,NSW back in 2018, there is a low bridge, 4.5m, on the Olympic Highway. On either side there is a gantry with flaps hanging off it, about 100m short of the bridge on either side. It must have been fairly recent as it isn't on Google Street View.

This is a similar one at Woy Woy, on the line from Sydney to Newcastle. The one at Junee is set much further back from the road.

Edited January 8, 2020 by JZ
Photo added.

[phil-b259]

18 hours ago, Wickham Green said:

Personally, I'd have put the beam off the bridge - maybe even at the first road junction - but I guess you'd need permission from too many other parties to do that.

 

If you do that you have to ensure it’s sufficiently braced that it won’t topple over when hit!

 

It is illegal to put a structure over UK roads that when hit (and that’s what these protective beams are there for) has the potential to fail and cause injury.

 

Thats why we have the rules that new build structures must be over 16ft 6” (and thus do not require their height to be signed).

 

If you solidly fix protection beam to the bridge abutments then they cannot be ‘pushed over’ by over height vehicles and injure people.

[PhilJ W]

Haven't heard much about the 11' 8" (now 12' 4") bridge in the USA recently. Is it still being hit?

 

[bimble]

1 hour ago, PhilJ W said:

Haven't heard much about the 11' 8" (now 12' 4") bridge in the USA recently. Is it still being hit?

 

 

yes, though most of the recent ones have been more "grazed", so stripping paint work as opposed to taking the roof off. 

[melmerby]

4 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

If you do that you have to ensure it’s sufficiently braced that it won’t topple over when hit!

 

It is illegal to put a structure over UK roads that when hit (and that’s what these protective beams are there for) has the potential to fail and cause injury.

 

 

Pity that didn't apply to the M6 in Lancashire where a lorry hit the support for an overhead sign and brought the structure down into the road.

 

There has been lot's of buttressing of supports on the motorway network in the last few years to stop this sort of thing happening.

Edited January 8, 2020 by melmerby

[Wickham Green]

2 hours ago, melmerby said:

Pity that didn't apply to the M6 in Lancashire where a lorry hit the support for an overhead sign and brought the structure down into the road. ......

..... and that footbridge on the M25 - or was it 26 ?

[eastglosmog]

8 hours ago, bimble said:

 

yes, though most of the recent ones have been more "grazed", so stripping paint work as opposed to taking the roof off. 

Latest one on 3rd Jan http://11foot8.com/partial-penske-peel-at-the-11foot88-bridge/ seems to have done more damage than just taking the paint off.

Edited January 8, 2020 by eastglosmog

[phil-b259]

7 hours ago, melmerby said:

Pity that didn't apply to the M6 in Lancashire where a lorry hit the support for an overhead sign and brought the structure down into the road.

 

There has been lot's of buttressing of supports on the motorway network in the last few years to stop this sort of thing happening.

 

4 hours ago, Wickham Green said:

..... and that footbridge on the M25 - or was it 26 ?

 

In both cases the structures involved were above the 16ft 6" below which height restriction signs are required.

 

The UK road network works on the assumption that ANYTHING (be it a footbridge, Railway bridge or gantry sign) that is over this minimum will not be hit as vehicles higher than this count as an 'abnormal load' and enhanced procedures are mandated by law when such vehicles move over the road network.

 

Anything below 16ft 6" does NOT fall under the 'abnormal load' categorisation and as such the chances of it being hit increase dramatically. As such the law demands the structure is much more resistant to falling apart / being pushed over when hit - particularly newly built structures (as opposed to an old railway bridge).

 

Also, in planning terms, adding a collision protection beam to an existing structure does not require special planning approval (unless the bridge is listed) where as putting a sufficiently robust portal structure a separate distance away requires a whole new set of planning approvals - and will no doubt attract complaints as regards visual intrusion etc. (e.g. gantry signs at major interchanges are not generally put up outside peoples houses or in AONB)

[melmerby]

The M6 accident nothing to do with overheight vehicles.

For whatever reason the lorry hit one of the two roadside supports which were under protected.

 

[Fat Controller]

6 hours ago, Wickham Green said:

..... and that footbridge on the M25 - or was it 26 ?

Either M20 or M26.

[Trog]

There used to be a low bridge on the Harpenden - Hemel Hempstead branch with a light weight deck that was hit so often that it had permanent lifting eyes fitted to allow it to be lifted back into place.

[TheSignalEngineer]

The protection on this recently rebuilt bridge near Disley is obviously 'Design Clever'. It's on a slight hill so less clearance on the side nearest the camera. The protection an the far side is set below the bridge deck at the same height above the road as the closer side.

 

[corneliuslundie]

They needed to do that on Station Road bridge, Harpenden, which used to get vehicles stuck going up because they were going up hill. Eventually they installed a sacrificial beam. Fortunately they could usually back out. I have a feeling that the camber was also a factor. You can still see the yellow markings on the bridge itself. Oddly, I don't remember any incidents with downhill traffic. As can be seen the abutments had to be extended to support the beam.

Jonathan

[Reorte]

A former four track but now two track stretch near me has several bridges with height restrictions. Many of the bridges are two next to each other, with the disused one on the uphill side - so that has the lower height, and so overheight vehicles coming downhill will at least hit the disused bridge.

[ejstubbs]

On 20/12/2019 at 13:05, RJS1977 said:

 

 

I'm not sure that that's the same bus.  Unfortunately the numberplate of the bus in the latest incident is unreadable in all the photos I've managed to find online, but I think the headlight clusters look different (although they might have been changed as part of the repair following the first incident, it seems a little unlikely given that they are near ground level and the damage is at roof level).

 

As to what the bus in the second incident was doing there, it says "Contract" on the destination board so it could have been hired for a special trip, which could mean that the driver unfamiliar with the area and didn't know about the canopy.  In the first incident, though, it looks like a normal service bus which suggests that the driver should have been familiar with the area - though on the other hand it seems unlikely that a normal service bus would be routed past the entrance to A&E.

 

A couple of years ago there was this rather nasty incident at one of Edinburgh's hospitals:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-41301405

 

My understanding is that the driver took a left turn one junction before he should have done.  He was widely reported to have been charged with dangerous driving but I've not found any report of the outcome of that.

 

More recently, a Lothian Country bus failed to turn in to its terminus at Fauldhouse railway station and carried on along the main road...which goes under the railway with just 12ft of headroom:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-49166689

[Wickham Green]

37 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

 

..........

 

A couple of years ago there was this rather nasty incident at one of Edinburgh's hospitals:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-41301405

 

..............

Seems a little unnecessary for eight casualties to need taking away from the scene by a waiting ambulance .......... how far did they have to be taken ?

[RJS1977]

7 hours ago, ejstubbs said:

 

I'm not sure that that's the same bus.  Unfortunately the numberplate of the bus in the latest incident is unreadable in all the photos I've managed to find online, but I think the headlight clusters look different (although they might have been changed as part of the repair following the first incident, it seems a little unlikely given that they are near ground level and the damage is at roof level).

 

 

 

AU53 HKM in both photos

 

[RJS1977]

7 hours ago, Wickham Green said:

Seems a little unnecessary for eight casualties to need taking away from the scene by a waiting ambulance .......... how far did they have to be taken ?

 

And by a waiting ambulance? Does this happen so often they keep an ambulance there waiting for it to happen?

[Talltim]

10 hours ago, corneliuslundie said:

They needed to do that on Station Road bridge, Harpenden, which used to get vehicles stuck going up because they were going up hill. Eventually they installed a sacrificial beam. Fortunately they could usually back out. I have a feeling that the camber was also a factor. You can still see the yellow markings on the bridge itself. Oddly, I don't remember any incidents with downhill traffic. As can be seen the abutments had to be extended to support the beam.

Jonathan

Did they put the beams in before they extended the platform across the bridge?

[melmerby]

53 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

 

And by a waiting ambulance? Does this happen so often they keep an ambulance there waiting for it to happen?

It is a hospital after all.

Ambulances do sometimes hang around.