A wee branchline to Ireland

[Silver Sidelines]

A fixed link between Scotland and Northern Ireland really does sound like one of IKB's exciting and expensive projects!  I realise that the drawings show only a road but adding a rail line would be the icing on the cake.  I have shared the pictue below from today's Daily Mail  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7982525/Boris-Johnson-revives-20billion-plan-bridge-Scotland-Northern-Ireland.html

 

 

A bridge and tunnel would of course have to be paired with the earlier vision championed I believe by North West Energy Squared (NWE2).  A coastal route could extend northwards from HS2 in Manchester and would avoid the operating and construction problems of crossing Shap.  It might even provide a spring board for a fast link to Glasgow avoiding Beattock.

 

 

Fascinating - might be cheaper than HS2 simply because the land and compensation costs would be so much cheaper.

Edited February 9, 2020 by Silver Sidelines

[Reorte]

I'm afraid I find all of these rather ridiculous.

 

[JohnR]

Doesnt seem to talk about the million tons of munitions which have been dumped in Beauforts Dyke which would have to be cross by any bridge...

[Silver Sidelines]

22 minutes ago, JohnR said:

Doesnt seem to talk about the million tons of munitions which have been dumped in Beauforts Dyke which would have to be cross by any bridge...

 

Hello John. I have added a link to today's Mail Online article. 

 

The bridge would be most likely to run between Portpatrick in Scotland and Larne in County Antrim, and engineers are understood to have come up with the idea of a bridge-tunnel split as a way of dealing with Beaufort's Dyke, the UK's largest offshore dump site for conventional and chemical munitions after the Second World War.

It lies seven miles off Portpatrick and the Ministry of Defence estimates there are a million tons of munitions at the bottom of the deep trench, including 14,500 tons of 5in artillery rockets filled with phosgene gas, in addition to two tons of concrete-encased metal drums filled with radioactive waste which was dumped there during the 1950s.

 

There are two bridges to specifically avoid Beauforts Dyke and the munitions.

 

[John-Miles]

If you think HS2 is expensive ….

[The Stationmaster]

The bridge idea - notwithstanding the stated practical difficulties such as building it through the middle of a massive dump of obsolete explosives including poison gas - would seem to present a significant hazard to navigation with the tunnelled sections looking very short and in the wrong place (i.e. not where the major shipping lanes are sited).  The idea of putting a railway over this link is probably the soundest part of the whole thing - until you recall a slight difference in gauge between the railway network on this side and what's left of the railway network on the Northern Irish side.  I have a suspicion that converting the circuitous Larne - Belfast route to dual gauge would likely not be the best investment in Northern Ireland but equally where else would any putative Glasgow - NI passenger trains go to (or want to go to) and where would any freight traffic most likely originate or terminate on rail?

[TheSignalEngineer]

26 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

notwithstanding the stated practical difficulties such as building it through the middle of a massive dump of obsolete explosives including poison gas -

Mind the asbestos-filled DMUs under there as well. 

[LMS2968]

28 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

The bridge idea - notwithstanding the stated practical difficulties such as building it through the middle of a massive dump of obsolete explosives including poison gas - would seem to present a significant hazard to navigation with the tunnelled sections looking very short and in the wrong place (i.e. not where the major shipping lanes are sited).  The idea of putting a railway over this link is probably the soundest part of the whole thing - until you recall a slight difference in gauge between the railway network on this side and what's left of the railway network on the Northern Irish side.  I have a suspicion that converting the circuitous Larne - Belfast route to dual gauge would likely not be the best investment in Northern Ireland but equally where else would any putative Glasgow - NI passenger trains go to (or want to go to) and where would any freight traffic most likely originate or terminate on rail?

Do you think that Boris is aware that Ireland uses a different gauge to rest of the UK?

[Metr0Land]

No problem, make NIR dual gauge,

[The Stationmaster]

6 minutes ago, LMS2968 said:

Do you think that Boris is aware that Ireland uses a different gauge to rest of the UK?

I doubt if Boris has the faintest idea.  Far more worrying is whether or not the promoters of this plan know

 

Reminds me of some of the dafter suggested schemes in the contest to design and build the Channel Tunnel.  Apart from the downright lunatic idea of running trains and motor vehicles in the same tunnel - at the same time  - the biggest laugh of all came from the one that proposed the two railway running tunnels would thread under/over each other at about the mid point to convert from left hand running on the English side to right hand running on the French side.  Needless to say with such a brilliant example of careful research by its promoters and planners that one was one of the first to be thrown out.

[luckymucklebackit]

The crossing would only be part of the costs, to connect any bridge or tunnel with any meaningful part of a road/rail network would require billions of pounds being spent on the A77 and A75, or reinstating the port road rail routes in this area are appalling, mostly single track winding roads, notorious for accidents.

 

Jim

[Silver Sidelines]

2 hours ago, luckymucklebackit said:

The crossing would only be part of the costs, to connect any bridge or tunnel with any meaningful part of a road/rail network would require billions of pounds being spent on the A77 and A75, or reinstating the port road rail routes in this area are appalling, mostly single track winding roads, notorious for accidents.

 

Jim

 

Thanks Jim

 

I did include the reference to the 2015 BBC news item.

 

There would be a new coastal route sweeping across the Solway and down the side of Cumbria.  Forget the A75 with its 40mph speed limit for HGVs.  Forget the M6 over Shap.  Quite exciting........

 

Cheers Ray

[pH]

9 minutes ago, Silver Sidelines said:

There would be a new coastal route sweeping across the Solway and down the side of Cumbria.  Forget the A75 with its 40mph speed limit for HGVs.  Forget the M6 over Shap.  Quite exciting.....

 

Yes, but ... you'd still have to use the A75 from north of Kirkcudbright to Portpatrick. And if the new route was to replace the M6 into Scotland, you'd have to build a new road from Kirkcudbright over to Annandale.

 

Anyway, I don't think any of this is likely to come about.

[Joseph_Pestell]

I had not put together the St George's Channel Bridge with a possible road over the Solway Firth.

 

Taking lorries round the Cumbrian Coast, even with much improved roads, does not look like a sensible project - even with another barrage across the Kent Estuary.

[Colin_McLeod]

In a scheme of this magnitude the gauge difference is a relatively minor and solvable obstacle.

 

Also nothing circuitous in the Larne to Belfast route. 

[Silver Sidelines]

21 minutes ago, pH said:

 

Yes, but ... you'd still have to use the A75 from north of Kirkcudbright to Portpatrick. And if the new route was to replace the M6 into Scotland, you'd have to build a new road from Kirkcudbright over to Annandale.

 

Anyway, I don't think any of this is likely to come about.

 

Hi ph I think you are confused - whole new route across the Solway and then westwards along the edge of the coast and across the Machars heading to Portpatrick.  Nothing to do with Annandale and Eskdale.

 

Cost wise there are embankments and viaducts to construct - financed by tidal power and wind turbine schemes.  There would be minimal land purchase costs.  Just compare the route to HS2.

 

Definitely an IKB scheme - up with the Great Eastern - never mind the Great Western.

 

Cheers Ray

[pH]

7 minutes ago, Silver Sidelines said:

Hi ph I think you are confused - whole new route across the Solway and then westwards along the edge of the coast and across the Machars heading to Portpatrick.  Nothing to do with Annandale and Eskdale.

 

Cost wise there are embankments and viaducts to construct - financed by tidal power and wind turbine schemes.  There would be minimal land purchase costs.  Just compare the route to HS2.

 

Hi, Ray. 

 

I was commenting based on the content of the BBC item you linked to in your original post. It referred only to a route across the Solway connecting Workington with Kirkcudbright. It didn't say anything about a new road onwards to Portpatrick, so I assumed traffic would have to continue to use the A75 for that part of the journey.

 

I did assume that a new water-level road would replace the existing route over Shap (more fuel-efficient, less stress on engines and brakes), and so would have to be connected into the existing route north of the border. 

[Foulounoux]

3 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

I doubt if Boris has the faintest idea.  Far more worrying is whether or not the promoters of this plan know

 

Reminds me of some of the dafter suggested schemes in the contest to design and build the Channel Tunnel.  Apart from the downright lunatic idea of running trains and motor vehicles in the same tunnel - at the same time  - the biggest laugh of all came from the one that proposed the two railway running tunnels would thread under/over each other at about the mid point to convert from left hand running on the English side to right hand running on the French side.  Needless to say with such a brilliant example of careful research by its promoters and planners that one was one of the first to be thrown out.

 

 

Which of of course they do on the French side as whilst the loops on the uk side are clock wise on the Calais side they are anti-clockwise 

 

presumably this is to accommodate the road layout either side 

 

 

 

and slightly unfair to question if boris understands about the gauge issue given the proposal is a road bridge 

[Colin_McLeod]

6 minutes ago, Foulounoux said:

and slightly unfair to question if boris understands about the gauge issue given the proposal is a road bridge 

 

Post of the day.

[Dava]

If you had tried to cross the North Channel by ferry today you would realise how intense the weather conditions can be in this area of the Irish Sea and how totally unsuitable it is for constructing and operating a fixed link. A crazy idea and the economic case would not stand up.

 

Dava 

[Colin_McLeod]

That's that then.

[LMS2968]

8 hours ago, Dava said:

A crazy idea and the economic case would not stand up.

 

Dava 

Well yes, but what's that got to do with it?

[Reorte]

2 hours ago, LMS2968 said:

Well yes, but what's that got to do with it?

To be fair I strongly believe that economics shouldn't be the only consideration, although they're a necessary one to deal with.

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, Foulounoux said:

 

 

Which of of course they do on the French side as whilst the loops on the uk side are clock wise on the Calais side they are anti-clockwise 

 

presumably this is to accommodate the road layout either side 

 

 

 

and slightly unfair to question if boris understands about the gauge issue given the proposal is a road bridge 

Hmm.

 

The drawing of the proposal - which it directly compares with the road/rail Oresund Link - shows both motor vehicles and trains in the tunnelled section.  Ipso facto it is presented as a combined road and rail link.  (Maybe there won't be trains on the bridges but only in the tunnels? )

 

Similarly I could suggest you take a trip on SNCF where - as surely you know? - with the exception parts  of Alsace-Lorraine trains run on the left.  Exactly as they do in normal operation through the Tunnel and between it and the connection into the Eurotunnel terminal - what they do inside the terminal is terminal matter and not much to do with the national rail networks which connect into the Tunnel at each end.  the if diots who drew a plan showing a changeover obviously didn't know that SNCF trains run on the left!

 

Oh and it wasn't me who asked about Boris anyway!!!

 

13 hours ago, Dava said:

If you had tried to cross the North Channel by ferry today you would realise how intense the weather conditions can be in this area of the Irish Sea and how totally unsuitable it is for constructing and operating a fixed link. A crazy idea and the economic case would not stand up.

 

Dava 

Mind you if you'd tried to cross the English Channel by ferry from Dover yesterday you couldn't have because teh weather was lot worse than it usually is in the North Channel.  Yes the whole of the Irish Sea - not just the North Channel because St George's Channel is known for rough seas - can get rough but so have other seas which have been bridged.  All that will happen - if the bridge is ever built - would be a restriction on vehicular traffic in conditions of extreme wind, as happens elsewhere such as the Oresund Bridge.

 

Personally I doubt it will be built unless it is privately financed.  I seriously wonder if the UK Govt is going to be keen on financing a link between the two parts of the UK which are most likely to leave the Union when there are plenty of other schemes needed within parts which will remain in the shrunken Union.

[Wickham Green]

Well ...... IF a rail bridge/tunnel DID ever materialise, Irish Rail are ready to inter-operate with Europe as they've already adorned everything with UIC numbering !

( We Brits aren't quite there yet ! )