It is difficult to believe that this bridge has been up over forty years. I remember watching them build it, and still remember the ferry trips it replaced.

Yet another story about the bridge, someone really must want that contract :)

Scottwebb

Yup!! We are going to be bombarded by all of this "you (we) need a new bridge" tripe over the next year or so.....lobbying will be carried out by all who have vested interests.....the vested interests of the people of Fife and Lothian will come second best in all of these arguments....the vested interests of those in the highlands to the north west will come last of all.......

That the stretch of the A82 on Loch Lomondside from Tarbert to the Falls of Falloch is little more than a goat track is of no concern to those charged with the fundamentals of our transport system....the 'temporary' traffic lights installed 40 years ago are still there....!!!! Ye Gods..

1 Billion plus for a new bridge.......nothing for the upgrade of the main road artery on the west coast....but not to worry (you, us, we) will be remembered come May 2007

they knew all this. but they still waste money on new booths. what a waste. someone should pay.

#3
Carlo, I have evry sympathy for you, unfortunately the economic blow to all of Scotland, should the Scottish Executive fail to act in time, is so immense that we would cease to be the best wee country in the world, to paraphrase one of the main architects of Scotlands downfall - a certain Jack McConnell.

What has to be examined is why the SE has been so slow to act over the last 9 years in regard to improving the transport infrasrtucture throughout Scotland. It is also necessary to have a look at where the money raised fron RFL, Fuel Tax, has gone. (We know where it has not gone!)

Crabbit Grabbit Gordon, our exiled, or is it reviled hero, who takes in the money (and of course disproportionately more from the Highlands and Islands due to more VAT from your high fuel prices) is of course responsible for funding many of his friend Tony's extravagances without so much as a murmur, just so he can selfishly hang on in there and get a wee shot at the wheel himself, (but only for a short term until the UK follows the trait in Scotland and bins the whole parcel of rogues at the earliest opportunity) so more power to your elbow in May, and please remember to repeat the dose later in the UK elections.

P.S. I originally hailed from D&G and I can tell you that some of the roads there are still as bad as those in the Western Highlands!

Angus Whitton

The cash raised by gathering tolls is a drop in the ocean compared to the potential cost of repairs to the bridge. Holyrood should dip it's hand in it's pocket and finance the repairs to this vital road link.

The budget for the next ten years for the bridge is £250m and that does not include any reconstruction costs when it eventually closes, those could be at least the same again.

There is no guarantee that another one would not go the same way, the Forth is a very inhospitable environment in which to build and maintain a bridge.
This should not be a surprise to anyone who lives in this area, winds of 60mph are common place.
Is FETA going to guarantee that we will not get another hurricane during the 7 year construction of another one.

No bridge, no economy, no independence - thats the labour way! Still Scotland will make a good wind farm for keeping London lit up!!. Sorry Lunden.

Maybe they should try a tunnel this time.

This "campaign" is a feckless waste of print and photons. The Scotsman should admit its connections with this, whatever they are. Is Johnson Press part-owned by FETA? Or one of the big construction firms?

Why not run a campaign against actual injustices or inequalities?

#3. Carlo, Fort William
>>>
Yup!! We are going to be bombarded by all of this "you (we) need a new bridge" tripe over the next year or so
<<<
The bridge is knackered.
'Luckily' for the Welsh, concrete cancer meant that the original Severn Crossing was replaced, with the Second Severn Crossing, before their cable problem was discovered, but now two lanes have had to be closed there to HGVs.

This is not a 'made up issue', to get a new bridge for contractors, as you appear to be implying.

Just out of interest, where do you reckon the detour for the 24,000,000 vehicles is going to go, every year, when the bridge is closed for the three years recabling takes place?

The Highlands will be hit worst of all by the increased charges for diverting lorries and buses.

Can you imagine the bottle necks at the Loch Lomondside and Crianlarich roads, M73 through Cumbernauld, as well as at the Kincardine bridge?

In some respects it will manage itself as tourism collapses and less journeys need to be made North of the Forth and Clyde.

#11 Newspaper campaigns used to be about tackling major issues of public concern. Now they are just about finding something that's a dead cert, and getting in position to claim credit for it.

This is a shambles of the government's own making.
And until Labour think they are safe in the elections, they wont do much more that talk about it. They now say they'll scrap the tolls after threatening to put them up a few short months ago!!! How much did the shiny new toll booths cost?

If the bridge was in Essex, dont you think it would have been built a decade ago?
LABOUR OUT!

TUNNELS!!!!! Tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels tunnels!!!

Am I getting through to anyone yet.

Bridges = bad

Tunnels = Good

The Humber Bridge was given the go ahead in order to win a by-election for labour. It is a very underused bridge. Do you think that our wonderful masters will try to win the SE election by promising a new bridge? Why not a tunnel for this inhospitable location ?

Why have a campaign?

Well, how long ago were these issues first discovered?

The Golden Gate Bridge was the first to discover the cable issue.
It has since been just about completely rebuilt to also cope with earthquakes.

Here we still have people in denial that there is a problem.

It has been left so long that it does not look likely that a relief bridge can be built before the critical bridge H&S closure date.

Is the plan just to hang a sign
"dangerous bridge, cross at your own risk!"
wait for it to fall down, and then find someone else to blame?

We really, really need to get the finger out, yesterday, or we WILL be the laughing stock of the world.

Or is THAT the plan?

This is a total mess of an article - poor propaganda in fact. Traffic is still unrestricted on this bridge and at least as far as can be seen will be. If there's to be another Nth. - Sth. Q'ferry crossing it ought to be a tunnel - that's the logic (such as there is) from this article because who can say that the same thing as is alleged in the article - corrosion of key elements - would not happen in a future bridge crossing if the brains who engineered the current road bridge did not realise that salt, rain, wind, traffic and vibration were likely to cause problems with the current structure.
Personally I would like to see a really big campaign to restrict regular passenger traffic on this bridge; there is a viable alternative in the railway if only the wretched thing was run properly with an adequate service. Meanwhile it would be a good idea to look at the feasability of building a tunnel - one thing surely is that another bridge will run into the same problems as the current structure unless it is massively engineered and, hence, very expensive.

Tolls colected £210million - bridge + roads £20million. Ehhhh where did the rest go.

And why are people moaning about this campaign - fact is a new bridge or alternative is needed, who cares if the Scotsman claims som ecredit, I live in Fife and the commute to Edinburgh is a nightmare as it is, I certainly don't want it to get ny worse which it certainly will if something isn't done

P.S. #13 this is an issue of major public concern in Fife and has been for years

#19 Have you ever ever got the train from Fife to Edinburgh? Obviously not if you think it is a viable alternative! I had been taking a mix of car and train for a year but this month have moved to getting the train daily from Inverkeithing to Haymarket and back during rush hours. In the last 3 weeks I have never had a seat once and have had to put up with uncomfortable cramped conditions which cannot be safe if there were an incident.

Livilion, blimmey, i have to say i agree with you, ahh the pain...
Those of you who make these ridiculour statements that if it was in England...whinge...it would have been built already... rubbish. Look how long it took to get the likes of Newbury Bypass (i think that's the name), years and years. M25 widening, been banging on about that for years and years.

#3 Carlo and #12 Livilion

Point taken Carlo but I think the bottom line is that the bridge is knackered so I agree with Livilion - someone has got to act!

Changing the subject slightly, I remember Englishman Ted Heath PM offered to set up a fund to help rebuild Scotland's infrastruture from the oil revenue (not the taxpayers) and the leader of the Scottish Tories, can't remember his name, turned the offer down! This was in the early seventies.

You will notice that some of the exiled Scots commenting recently on the Forth Road Bridge are working in construction abroad where the infrastructure projects are full on.

Many of the governments in Asia and the Middle East plough huge amounts of money into projects to help make the country attractive to foreign investors and tourists. Once you have the infrastructure buillt up then foreign investors, hopefully, come in to invest in tourism, residential properties etc.

There is a mistaken beleif in Scotland that its the oil revenue thats created the hotel, tourism and property boom in Dubai.

Thats not entirely correct - its certainly not the case in Singapore as they don't have any oil!

Generally speaking,these governments spend on the infrastructure (airports, seaports, roads, sewer, metro, etc) and private investors take care of the hotels, casinos, Disneyland style theme parks, luxury apartments.

Just a pity that for over the last 30 years our Scottish politicians just don't seem get it!

The phrase 'chickens coming home to roost' comes to mind.

19. The problem with the cables is due to moisture getting into the cable strands through the protective coating. It's not a single big fat cable btw, it's made up of multiple strands. The moisture gets in, rust develops, individual strands snap. The problem is it is an hopeless task to easily identify these locations without manually stripping them. This issue was first raised when test were carried out on a similar bridge in the US and found it to be heavily corroded. Engineers of suspension bridges around the world (older bridges) carried out inspections and the same was found on our bridge. They are looking to instal microphones on the wires to detect cable failures amongst other things. This isn't an IF...it is ultimately doomed, the cost and implication to the comms in scotland and the econnomy as a result of the massive work and lane closure full repair and upgrading would involve make it essential that we stop farting about and start planning a new crossing. NOW! Tunnels are often good options. I have worked on some in the past, they also don't need to be 'tunnelled' as it were with a TBM as you can on a river crossing use prefabricated sections that are raised to the riverbed effectively. Bear in mind of course that there is a pretty significant elevation change on the banks of the forth to the river bed, so some massive work will be required. Nothing extrodinary however...tunnels and bridges in far tougher conditions in many locations around the world.

Yeah, #21, I have used the train to Fife and I agree with your point but I did post that the service needed to be run properly, didn't I? All credit to you for using the railway though, and more would and could with a bit of investment. The point is what is the most rational choice across the board? For my money (and Scotland's) a tunnel is a better bet and is likely to last longer. What'll happen, of course, is that Brown will appear and order a bridge for his and the labour party's electoral purposes rather than look in the round at a better long term solution!

Trams , Airport Links , Bridges.

We cant afford it, ask the executive Scotsman. Thats a good headline for you.

24. spot on

dyon, a suitably designed and executed bridge is a perfectly good long term solution, as is a tunnel.

""...alleged in the article - corrosion of key elements - would not happen in a future bridge crossing if the brains who engineered the current road bridge did not realise that salt, rain, wind, traffic and vibration were likely to cause problems with the current structure....""

Designing is one thing, but what influence do you think the Designers had on the people handling the purse strings to get it done as cheaply as possible?

Shoddy workmanship is usually down to contractors being told to cut costs.

A dropped segment tunnel would be a darned site faster built than a bridge and one heck of a lot cheaper!
This should have been done a long time ago - however monies were probably spent elsewhere - ie - the horrendous Scottish parliament building.

The ghost of Thomas Bouch stalks the land even though nothing like the Tay Bridge collapse has happened yet! If the problems at the Q'ferry crossing are the result of poor workmanship and cost-cutting as #30 post reports then the same thing can happen in any project so what price quality control? It still doesn't answer my point which is that a tunnel is a better and more reliable long term solution.

yawn ... keep with the Waverley project and the bridge can fall down if it is so bad ... has anyone thought to propose an anti Fifer's immigration policy for the inevitable issues and hand ringing apologies of the governments when the all want to move to the beautiful Scottish Borders ...

#33
Interesting suggestion Reiver, I take it Londoners are falling over themselves to fund this relocation project?

btw hows the Eastern Area Renewal Project coming along?

I am not buying The Scotsman until they give up this crazy, scaremongering, Clarksonist campaign to attract more cars across the Forth. It's outdated lunacy that belongs in the last century.

Here we go again Campaign Mickey and his non-stop articles about the Forth Bridges.

lol livilion

There already is a tunnel under the Forth and it pre-dates the Road Bridge by just over four months.

April 30th 1964, Kinneil Colliery, the most advanced in the country, (closed in 1981, demolished 1983) linked up with Low Valleyfield (closed in 1978), at a depth of 1800 feet at 10.33a.m. Kinneil manager David Archibald shook hand with his opposite number Norman Wallace reportedly saying "I hope you have plenty of coal for me." The 1 1/4 mile link between the two colliery workings took 27 men 18 months to complete at a cost of £500,000.

The Rt Hon. Baroness Thatcher's war on trade unions did more damage than we know.

As to bridges, a design has already been proven for the Forth crossing. The Forth Rail Bridge! Adapt the design for road use and build a near twin. Sadly this time we will have to import the steel and probably the labour to build it because of Westminster policies over the last half century.

By the time all the discussion is over, there will be no fuel for cars anyway.
I wonder how much a solid solution like the Railway Bridge would cost compared to a suspension bridge?
Government money is spent where it is politically needed or regarding roads, where land is cheap so they can claim more miles of motorway built.

Anyone want to join my campaign against newspaper bandwagon campaigning?

40. Russell: Thatcher destruction of the unions was one of the best things any PM did for this country, our car industry, shipbuilding etc etc were all buggered by unions. on strike every 5 mins... who the hell wants to commission a ship lets say in the uk when you knew it would be delayed due to strikes and the likes. Coal industry was living in the past too. I have worked in many countries around the world in engineering roles. My friends in these places, especially the likes of Germany/Japan would also partly blame the UK unions for the demise of certain industries. Well done Maggie

what are you talking about the bridge issue as some kind of conspiracy for? Ask any bridge engineer in the world that knows what he's talking about and they would say the same thing. we need a new crossing solution for the forth and it needs to start now. Fact!

I still see no reason why reroping the current bridge with stronger cables not available 40 years ago (possibly carbon ones) & if that much strengthened, double decking it wouldn't work.

I see one reason given above is that the road needs regular resurfacing, as if that won't happen elsewhere. I get the feeling FETA may be trying to sell us a new car on the grounds that the ashtray is full.

Hey, engineers.
Is galvanising any good whatsoever for wires in this bridge?

For a few years I used to inspect instruments sited outside. The copper ones were indestructable as far as corrosion was concerned. However, the much cheaper galvanised ones were rusting away after perhaps receiving only a scratch at some time.

In a windy, salty humid environment 1960s basic physics tells me that galvanised wires are not for the long term. (Not suggesting they should have been of copper, though!)

# 43 Agreed
Car workers with Nissan (NE England) seem to be reasonably happy with their lot, none of this 'one-out-all-out' claptrap.

Japanese companies wouldn't put up with it anyway-they would just leave!

Anyway, back to the new crossing. Where's Mong Basher today?

Remember History,The Tay rail bridge disaster.
If the Scottish Executive in there new well over budget parliament dont get there fingers out of the gravy train, well, 208 feet is a long way down
to the sea,be it on there heads if you had another bridge disaster "THE FORTH ROAD BRIDGE DISASTER"no one would ever want to read those headlines in any paper any where in the world, so do the right thing make available the money NOW
not when it`s to late.
The longer you take to make your minds up the more exorbitant the final building price will be and
the more you will keep putting of the project.
whow the people of Scotland how much backbone you lot have and do the right thing NOW ,NOT WHEN IT`S TO LATE.
JOCK.

#40
If the auld Forth Brig haed been built oot o steel it micht no be here the day. It wis built wi Swedish grey iron an awbody kens that steel corrodes faster than iron.
The galvanised steel wires in a marine environment cannae be seen tae be giein ony mair than a temporary defence agin corrosion. The zinc coatin only protects the steel bi sacrificin itsel as the cathodic current gauns in throu the steel an oot throu the zinc cairryin tottie wee pairticles o the zinc oot wi it till sic a time that there nae mair zinc left an the steel sterts tae corrode. Whit wis wrang wi stainless steel apairt frae the cost?

#15 Absolutley agree, it should be a case of getting on with it. I find it amazing the amount of moaning about costs, about wether there should be a new crossing.
As pointed by #8, it is all about infrastructure, without it you dont have an economy. If Scotland is to compete in the 21st century, it dam well needs 21st century thinking and a can do attitude, as aposed to what I read here, tunnel or bridge who cares, as long as its the best and, unlike the Forth Bridge which opened in September 1964 (I was there), it will have a decent motorway connection at either end (forth bridge 1964 stulee opened with a bit of crap 'A' class dual carraigeway at either end!)
Scots should have more vision than a 'make do' one, it has to be the best, if your proud of your country, then you should always aim for the best

#31 Have you actually been inside the Scottish Parliament building and taken a tour round it????
By your comment I would guess not

It sounds very similar to the Old Severn Bridge which although still being used, has effectively been replaced by the second Severn Bridge Crossing.
By now the building of a second crossing of the Forth should be in progress along with proper motorway links on either side. A tunnel on the East side of the city with a 6 lane A1M linking into it would relieve the ring road as well. As for the problems with the heavy weight lorries with upto 6 axles and at the moment upto 44 tonnes (which it is proposed to increase to 60 tonnes) they should be charged at least £20 per crossing and limited to night time usage of the present bridge with at the most of three of these lorries on the bridge at one time. Why not use the railway bridge to transport these heavies as well at a cost of £20 a time or even pave the railway bridge as a tramway so that the heavies could also use it under the control of the railway authorities

#45
It would work, but it would mean shutting the bridge down, possibly for years, to do it.
Look at the sepia print at the head of this article.
The cables were run first then the deck was slung under them.
Take away the cable and there is nothing to support the deck.

#51. Edward
I'm with you on the Parliament.

I'm proud of it.

In time it will become a symbol for the Scottish Independant State, built and delivered for the People of Scotland, even inspite of every obstacle put in it's way.

I expect that the tourist revenues generated by visits to the complex might even recover the cost of building it in the first place.

Turns out the tourists love it, even if some of the natives remain to be convinced.

Suggest looking at this :
http://www.tylersterritory.com/travel/europe/portugal/lis...
This is the river crossing at Lisbon, portugal
Very similar bridge, similar age, it was opened in 1966 (2 years later than the Forth Bridge), has 6 lanes for cars, volume is a lot more than the Forth. To cap it all they added 2 rail tracks under it in 1999
which carries both freight and commuters to the south. Same conditions regarding moisture, in fact its slightly nearer to the sea as the mouth of the river is a few miles to the west (the Atlantic)
So what did they get right, that the Forth Bridge didnt? , this bridge cost US$ 32 million, the Forth Bridge cost £ 19 million (about $ 50 million at the roe at the time).
The Portugues built a second crossing opened 1998 and cost of the bridge came at zero to the State, as it was built in the BOT (build-operate-transfer) system by Lusoponte, a private consortium which got a 40-year concession on the tolls of both Lisbon bridges. Lusoponte's capital is 50,4% from Portuguese companies, 24.8% French and 24.8% British and has life expectancy of 120 years (can see this bridge at http://www.solo-photography.com/vascobrdg.htm)
Im not promoting these bridges, but illustrating what has and can be done as a comparison

Livillion #45
Surely you can string the new cables across & put them in place before removing the old ones?That shouldn't much interfere at ground level. I agree doubledecking would cause problems, certainly restricting the bridge to one carriageway at a time but motorways get that regularly.

#54 I visited it about a year ago and was gob smacked by it, after hearing all the negative press coverage and comments , I wanted to see for myself what it was all about, so didnt go with rose tinted specs, but with a critical mind and was taken aback at what I saw. I felt really proud that it had been built and was being used. I have spoken to many freinds and family that were at the start sceptic about it, but they came back equally proud of what had been done. One thing I learned is that the press can manipulate people in to beleiving anything, in order to sell newspapers. which is why I now treat the news media with a bit of contempt, and will always look for myself.

#4 deek006 Somebody is paying - guess who.
#14 Steve - doubtful, but if it was in Londonistan we'd have two by now. Look at the Thames barrage - the East coast can be washed away, but the capital mustn't get wet - after all its economically vital to the country because of farming, industry, mining etc. ooops -no, Civil Service and Money lenders and no doubt other things important to a civilised society

Aye Sue The parliament is quite fine inside apart from the squeaky chairs and duff ceiling bolts, It's the outside that's a Spanish mikey take.

#59 ok so the outside is a bit, shall we say 'Avant Garde', but this is the 21st century after all , we must embrace internationalism after all
The design has won awards and is well liked overseas, as with most new things it may take time for those 'traditionalists' to get used to it, but its something that Scots should be proud off

Yes the media is a bit problematic.

We get loads of English comments wondering about what all the fuss is about and why do we hate them, etc.

The truth is we only get the news and views that the local press thinks we will buy.

I am fortunate in that I have worked in the Palace of Westminster, which close up I think is ugly, and inside is hopelessly outdated.
Millbank and Portcullis House are just offices.
The Signet Library and Old Parliament Chamber is beautiful but share Westminster's faults in that it would be rubbish as a home for a modern democracy.
The same goes for the CoS General Assembley rooms.

I have never visited the Old High School so can' t really comment on that, but the New Scottish Parliament building is what Westminster would have built if it was rehousing itself.

At least when the Scottish contingent of MPs vacate the Commons it will make accommodation a wee bit more commodious for the remainder.

Rob Stainless isnae that much mair these days
it's no as flexible an thats the proablem here ma wee
pal, are ye no the lang toon as weel, or is that sumwhaur else.

#61 livilion
I think that the Palace of Westminster is lovely - all that Gothic architecture. It is an impressive structure - I haven't been inside it but would like a look around someday. I'm sure the facilities will be outdated and cramped (they could always reduce the number of MPs they have and give the rest more space!!) Don't like the monstrosity at Holyrood though.

The Forth Road Bridge was always going to be heavily used - it's the most direct route from the north to Edinburgh, and it's a bit short-sighted for those in power not to have foreseen these problems.

I love the Forth Bridge and I spent a lot of pennies crossing it.
Is the lang toon Laurencekirk?

Rob
Stainless is a misnomer in salt air it'll rust just like any other steel.

Just look at your fancy new 'stainless' buildings corroding away and looking sad so soon after being built.

You do have a point about the sacrificial cathodes.
i recall the submarine hoist at Coulport was originally built without this and rusted away like mad.
All your North Sea Oil Installations are protected by sacrificial cathodes dotted all over at and under the waterline.

Not sure how much protection it would provide to the cables, with the steel of the bridge structure and that of the cables also being of dissimilar metals and therefore prone to corrosion.

As would copper btw.

Swedish grey iron doesn't really rate as a material for suspension cables and of course that is where the corrosion is being felt.

Here's the obvious answer:

(1) Finish upgrading the A80 and the A8 sections east of Glasgow to full motorways.

(2) Replace the existing Kincardine Bridge with a full six-lane motorway bridge and a new section of motorway from Kincardine to the M90, about Kinross.

(3) Allow Edinburgh to revert to its proper status, as a suburb of Glasgow.

(In case you were wondering, "I belong to Glasgow....")

JG
I'm not convinced that the problem wasn't so much myopia as political expediency.
"Put it off until I'm not around to take the blame"
Sell the family silver on something else, a Millenium Dome perhaps? that'll be popular.

Sorry Sir Bill, everyone knows Edinburgh is one of Livingston's more popular 'burbs.

#63 Have you actully been inside and taken a tour of the Scottish Parliament??

#61 Very true, departure of 45 mps plus staff etc, should make a lot more room for them in Westminster

jg
Westminster is impressive but only from a distance, like across the river, where the building looks lower and longer and more elegant.

Most folk just look at the clock tower and are impressed by 'Big Ben'.

For the rest of it, the proportions are not right, like an 80's Volvo, and the suedo-gothic, close up, is just too much, like furry dice in a Bentley.

#70. Edward
45 Scottish MPs?

There are 'almost' double that (72) how many are there at any given time I'll give you is another matter.

Can only save on MP's expenses though, right?

No Edward, I haven't been inside Holyrood - I actually was so incensed by the outrageous cost of it all that I effectively took the huff (OK, it's not the adult approach, but I hate wasting money!!).

#71 livilion
Big Ben is really impressive-looking too, and I suppose you are right about it looking better from a distance. I still like it though, it's quirky and obviously unique!!!

We'll listen to all their lobbying and spin, and still vote against it like we did with congestion charging in Edinburgh. The money for a new bridge and for an underground rail link from Edinburgh Airport can be better spent on more important things 1st. Why not ask us what we want and then do it, instead of spending millions trying to get us to support what YOU want. Roll on May 2007!

Neil .56. You could do as you propose. The weight would exceed the rating of the towers.

Hard to believe this dialouge when one considers other suspension bridges i.e. Golden Gate in San Fransisco , And Verazanno in New York both are over salt water both are longer and both have more traffic and ???/surprise seems to be little or no problems , have I missed something

Has anyone read of the extra money already needed for the Olympic Games in London in 2012. It is far greater than that needed for a new Forth Road Bridge. And what is it for? Just so a few muscle-bound morons can run round and round!!

JG, true, very short sighted by the powers that be to not look at the likely demand on the bridge at the end of its life. Having lived in Oman for 2 years I was amazed at the infrastructure there, lovely motorways, dead as a dodo but they are thinking about the country 50 years from now or so. Often the problem with the UK, poor forward planning, or just ignore cos 'they' won't be in power when it becomes a big problem.

#74 That is such a negative atitutude, how on earth do you expect Scotland to get on with thinking like that, its so small minded. The Edinburgh Airport rail link is a very good idea, it gives access to many people accross fife and Dundee to the airport, taken cars of the road, its better to have a good infrastructure than to have none at all, is that what you want, or do you just want a small minded inward looking country!, come May 2007 , I hope the people of Scotland do vote for a future that places Scotland well in the world, not some inward thinking, lacky state of Westminsters

#73 well if you havent been in it, how can you criticise? After all you did pay for it, perhaps you should go an visit and see exactly what you got for your money, you never know...

77. that is nonsense. The Olympic village will become affordable housing for what is one of the most deprived areas of the UK. Take a trip to this area, it's a serious dump. How sad life would be if we never embarked on anything if it didn't make economic sense. the london olympics will inspire kids in scotland to pursue sport as well as england.

Livilion, I suppose that makes Edinburgh a suburb of a suburb. Fine by me. After all, what has the place to offer except a castle, a half-finished main street (when are they going to build along the south side of Princes Street anyway?) and a half-finished Parthenon?

In the interests of accuracy, the whole of the Central Belt should be called 'Greater Glasgow', of course.

----

Meanwhile, to be more serious, building up the Kincardine crossing actually makes a lot of sense. How much traffic over the Forth Road Bridge is acually just local: Fife-to-Edinburgh and back? All the rest, the longer distance stuff, from England, from the West, and from the North, would find little difference going via Kincardine compared with using the Forth Road Bridge.

Am I right in thinking that it is not the New Scottish Parliament Complex itself but the ideas of the cost of it that rankles?

Personally I am no fan of bare concrete panels with the construction marks still showing but hey, my walls are still all magnolia.

The Parliament complex was set up to fail by Westminster, that it was finished at all reflects enormous credit on the team who saw it through to completion

Thanks ECHELON_X #75 that makes sense. OK so double decking is out but reroping ok. This doesn't mean we shouldn't do a tunnel as well but does suggest the panic is overblown.

I wouldn't really agree with you about the desireability of always planning construction 50 years ahead - things change. Hitler rebuilt Linz to be the architectuarl capital of Europe for 1,000 years & we were told the Scottish Parliament was good value if you amortised the cost over 500 years.

On the other hand BAA are getting stick from the Luddites for extrapolating 25 years ahead when they expand Edinburgh airport so I suppose I would rather err on your side.

#82. Sit William Arrol

Feel I have to disagree with you there.

Have you ever taken the Kincardine Bridge to Perth?

From Livi, on a good day, and no Polis, I can get to Perth in 45 minutes, 15 to the bridge and 30 up the Motorway.

It takes me 45 minutes just to get to the Kincardine bridge even when the road isn't already backed up to the M9.

Coming up via the M73 I never take that route if I can avoid it.

I would agree that a crossing midway between the Kincardine and Forth Road Bridges, just east of Bo'ness, makes a lot more logistical sense.

#72
Loss of Scottish MPs travelling to London would kill Sleeper service and British Airways flights! Make the buggars fly Ryanair to Prestwick!

<em>Have you ever taken the Kincardine Bridge to Perth? From Livi, on a good day....</em>

Livilion, I think I can state without fear of contradiction that I have never had occassion to travel from Livingston to Perth. And from the Centre of the Universe (Glasgow, if you're not sure yet) one goes via Dunblane.

But it sounds like most of the delay with your Kincardine journey to Perth is exactly because the Kincardine route and bridge have not been propely 'motorwayed', which is what I propose.

----

By the way, are you sure the towers and foundations of the Forth Road Bridge really could not support a second deck? (Especially if of modern light-weight design? A modern box-grider-like double-decker should not really weigh much if any more than the existing single deck.)

You may be right, but was there really so little over-designing almost half a century ago when there were no high-powered computers around to finess the design? I find it hard to believe. (I am a civil engineer, as it happens.)

In the early 1800's the Earl of Hopetoun proposed the building of a tunnel under the river Forth and his idea is now more valid than ever.

I live in Culross, Fife and travel to Edinburgh each day by Public Transport and I am fully in support of a tunnel.

As part of the climate changes which we are all beginning to suffer from, the bridge will be affected more regularly by gale force winds. This will lead to closures and have a detrimental effect on traffic trying to crossing the Forth by bridge.

A tunnel would not be subject to the weather.

These days there are many examples of tunnels under river estuaries or belts of water to be found all over the world, viz. the Lincoln Tunnel into New York; the combination of tunnels and high bridges of The Store Belt in Denmark; Channel Tunnel; and the River Schelde Tunnel in the Netherlands.

If a tunnel was simply excavated through the river bed then there might be the danger from seepage of coal gas but a prefabricated tunnel simply laid in a trench would not be affected. The river bed could be investigated as it was being dug.

The enormous and redundant dry-dock at Rosyth Dockyard would be an ideal site for fabrication of the tube which would become the tunnel. The major part of the project could be manufactured on dry land and be less hazardous than a high and extremely exposed bridge. The construction should therefore be faster and more easily mechanised and would not interfere with the flow of shipping on the river.

Additionally the bridge or tunnel should be of a size to cope with the ever expanding traffic capacity. It can easily be seen that the existing bridge was far too small for the purpose intended. Any crossing of the Forth is not just a conduit from Fife to Edinburgh but it is truly a main artery for transport for the whole of Scotland north and south as well as east and west of that crossing. The size should be commensurate with the perceived future need.
Note

Born in Rotten Row maternity and transferred to Ross Hall, the center of the known universe, I know all the roads to Perth, my car is 3 years old and I've put 100,000 miles on it.
I drive a lot.

If you were given a blank map of Scotland would you make your main East/West- North/South link at Kincardine or Queensferry?

I'd go for Bo'ness, Blackness to Charlestown.

Kincardine is where it is because it was the narrowest point to bridge and clear shipping.

The Forth Bridges because the ferry crossed there and it was the furthest East that a bridge could be build without emptying the piggy bank completely.

As I've said elsewhere traffic on the A1, A68 and A7's series mostly would go via Queensferry given the choice.

Being at the center of the universe does bring certain drawbacks ,like everyone trying to get where you're going when you're going there.

Can't see how a tunnel makes any sense. Look at the height to climb on either side and the entry points would have to be about 2 miles inland on either side.

For those suggesting a prefab tunnel on the river bed, remember there are ships of not too shallow a draught which go up and down to Grangemouth and Rosyth.

Time is not with us for fixed links - bridges or tunnels. Let's talk ferries and emulate San Francisco, Lisbon, Istanbul, New York, Rio, Sydney, Brisbane.............in fact anywhere with a waterfront and a dependence on exhausted bridges and roads/railways.

Try www.watertransit.org to see how!

#91 your right about draft, but I remember seeing something about a road tunnel crossing some bay in the states, same problem, but they dredged and sunk the sections, so the top was flush with the seabed, what we need her is an engeer to give us the low down on possabilties

#94 I heard that to, also read that here online, talk about bribery and corruption, labour are corrupt of ideas and they hope to bribe there way
Its laughable
Hope that the Scottish voting public see the light and kick these idiots out

Surely it makes sense now for all new suspension bridges to have built into the design a provision for replacing cables.

On Tunnels:

Anyone who thinks a tunnel would be cheaper or quicker to build than a bridge must be visiting us from some other planet.

A tunnel is NEVER the way to go of there's a choice because it's ALWAYS more expensive than virtually any other way--which is why it's only done when there is no practical alternative.

As for a submerged tube: well, I just don't know how deep the Forth is at about the existing crossings, but I bet it's not deep enough for this PLUS shipping. Then as for a submerged tube in a trench: maybe, but certainly not cheap--or quick to build. A bridge, I'm certain, would be cheaper and quicker. Finally, a 'conventional' bored tunnel would cost yet more and take longer.

And if you really believe tunnels are safer than bridges, you really must be from some other planet. Both are pretty safe, designed and built properly, but there's no advantage to tunnels. And in the (unlikely) event of a disaster, rescue is a lot easier from a bridge...

Finally, "the dry-dock at Rosyth Dockyard would be an ideal site for fabrication of the tube which would become the tunnel" but is would be equally ideal (or perhaps not ideal for either--I don't have enough info) for the fabrication work needed for a bridge.

---

By the way:

"As part of the climate changes which we are all beginning to suffer from, the bridge will be affected more regularly by gale force winds."

No, it won't.

In the first place, the global warming scaremongers have gone quiet about storms becaue it's now clear that there is no link; it's a myth. Apart from anything else, gales and storms happen in COLD weather around here--or have you not noticed?--and if warming happens there will be LESS of that.

And in the second place, if there were to be more gale force winds, you just build that into the design.

And in the third place, if sea levels rise it's the tunnel that would face risk, not the bridge.

#83 livilion
I was totally disgusted by the waste of money involved in the building of the parliament (especially when there was the old high school as an alternative). I have obviously seen lots of photographs and thought part of the exterior looked "Gaudiesque" and consequently quite nice. I really have no reason to visit that part of the city and am not sure if I would make the effort to go in. If I was in London again I may well take the trouble to visit the Palace of Westminster!

#100 Why on earth would you want to visit Westminster and not the Parliament in Edinburgh??
Perhaps if you actually wnet over to Edinburgh and have a look around the Parliament you would see that irt was not a waste of money

This is all fascinating! From my place of retirement on a ridge of the Sierra Nevada mountains, I will point out that the exercise of blame-casting is a futile and wasteful one. I sense that in the "motherland" as here and elsewhere, the liberalist view of "nannystatism" taking care of everything and what can't respond to or profit the nanny can be ignored, has dulled the Scottish spirit of enterprise. Bridge? Tunnel? #93 you are right. What is needed are competing proposals showing what, how and how much. But here we have a curious problem. In one of the Soverign States of the US, a government entity was seduced by thedesign of a new, artistic, advanced structure bridge being approved before anyone figured out whether there was a reason for it that a cheaper, mundane, conventional design couldn't satisfy.
Bureaucracy rules supreme. The Book of Regulations supercedes even dogma!

Edward, Westminster has centuries of history, is a marvellous example of Gothic architecture, is situated in the centre of the city with stunning aspects (not sure what the views are like from the inside) and is a structure well known and admired by people from all over the world.

Holyrood isn't!!!

#99 please have a look at our web site <www.forthtag.co.uk>; I hope it will give you a strong argument for a tunnel, incidentally the water west of Rosyth is 15m deep, the imersed tube is placed into a prepared trench and the sea bed would be reinstated to maintain the shipping lane to Grangemouth.

Sydney, Hong Kong and New York have immersed tube tunnels so does the crossing from Denmark to Sweden, all have major shipping lanes over the buried tunnel sections. Newcastle also proposes an immersed tube for their next crossing of the Tyne.

#52 Very good idea,heavy weight lorries must use the railway bridge. Supporting cables could be replaced by new ones precoated with PP cover to avoid corrosion similar to oil pipes at a very affordable cost

#103 Weel how can you say such stupid remarks if you havent actually been inside it, how crass can you get!!!
News for you, The Scottish Parliament is also admired by overseas visitors, who actulally take the time to visit!
I never thought it possible to come accross people like you with such a miopic view of things
There are far more buildings in the world that are better the the Palace of Westminster, but from your very parochial viewpoint, dont expect you to knoiw that

Comment@106 Edward. Hi mate, heres a wee thought, why is it throughout history, the best, the biggest, the costliest, the most impressive looking buildings are usually paid for by the people.......yet they generally get the least say in their construction and the least access :)

Edward Post 106 Calm down !! It is quite easy to obtain a view from inside the "Mother of Parliaments". Your local MP to Westminster will show you around I am sure if you were down here, MPs usually delight in showing it all off.

Wordsworth wrote a very famous poem about Westminster Bridge, the view from there at night is awesome, my joint favourite, the other being Loch Sunart from my parents home in Adnamurchan.

The Scottish Parliament building...... not too sure !!.

#106 Edward
There are, indeed far more impressive buildings than the Palace of Westminster (The Kremlin, Winter Palace, Sacre Coeur to name but a few). I have seen the Holyrood building from the outside and it looks decidedly average. I fail to see how you can call someone actually looking outside their own country as being "parochial". I assume from your comments that you have ventured inside Holyrood? Have you also been to The Houses of Parliament?

Let's wait and see how well this new building lasts in the Scottish weather!!!

Forthtag, I've looked at your site.

You are not comparing apples and apples. If the tunnel is to be built to 'emulate' the existing road bridge at about the same location, what I said earlier is exactly correct: the tunnel is far costlier and would take longer, and an immersed tube is ruled out because it would not be deep enough.

On the other hand, if your tunnel is significanltly west of Rosyth, then a bridge at the same location would not necessarily have to be a suspension bridge: think of something more like the Tay Road Bridge, which is FAR cheaper than a suspension bridge, and assuredly cheaper -- and faster to get in place -- than a tunnel.

Incidentally, to build a tunnel system that had the capacity needed, would require two 3-lane tunnels or three 2-lane tunnels, not the two 2-lane ones you show. There's a 50% (or more) price jump right off.

Forthtag - I have had a look at your website and have to dispute some of your claims about the advantages of a tunnel.

1. More environmentally friendly. Please explain how this can be when a tunnel will require constantly using electricity for lighting and ventilation. Also there will be pollution concentrations at the locations where exhaust gases from the tunnel will be vented an effect local communities.

2. Better traffic management. A bit vague this one. Please explain how this will work.

3. Quicker to plan and construct. How? A tunnel and its approach roads will have to go through the same planning procedures as a bridge.

4. Saves large areas of land. Not necessarily. Yo still have to construct approach roads, etc.

5. Could use existing or proposed roads more economically. With a proposed location, as I understand it to the west of Rosyth, I would think that there will be a requirement for major works to link to the M9/M90 on either side of the river.

6. Could be through legislation, designed and built in 6 years. An amazing statement. Can I have a look through your crystal ball please.

7. How is a bridge necessarily more environmentally more damaging than a tunnel?

8. A tunnel will not necessarily be constructed by a British firm with British labour. It could be a foreign firm with British labour, or even a British firm with foreign labour. For example, the British contractor on the current M9 Spur contract has a large number of foreign workers employed on the project.

Tunnels can leak. Repairing a leaking tunnel can be a VERY expensive and difficult operation.

For aw thaim that disnae ken, the Lang Toun is Kirkcaldy an the Honest Toun is Musselburgh.

I am shocked that such a young bridge should need replacing. The Golden Gate bridge was put into service in 1936 and remains in good condition with no plans to replace it.

John Roebling,

I think Forthtag has let his enthusaism for tunnels run away with him.

Anyone who imagines that a large under water tunnel across a 1 to 1.5 mile river crossing is cheaper or easier or quicker to build than a bridge is living in cloud cuckoo land.

A tunnel is about the hardest and most dangerous thing to build, takes the longest and usually is the most expensive, You only choose it when there is no viable alternative.

And I've still to hear why the existing deck on the existing bridge can't be replaced with a modern light-weight double-decker, in any case.

#106 - "News for you, The Scottish Parliament is also admired by overseas visitors, who actulally take the time to visit!"

News for you, the Scottish Parliament is unfortunately located in the far east of Scotland, the wrong site, in the wrong town and in the wrong part of Scotland, remote from much of the country.

Now maybe if it was located (where it should be) in Bannockburn, Stirling or Perth, we would have a proper parliament and somewhere all of Scotland can claim as its own, not just despised little Edinburgh.

114: Not sure where you get your facts from but it is not the case that tunnels are only a last resort and the most expensive option over a bridge. Two approaches for a tunnel in the forth would be the more conventional excavation using a tunnel boring machine (TBM) or probably more lilkely for the forth, also cheaper and faster and without the complications of unforseen problems with the rock would be an immersed tube. This is sealed end prefabricated sections lowered and fixed to the sea/river bed. One issue with the location in question is the elevation change with the land on either side. The immersed tube obviously only works within the river. you would then need to use the excavated tunnel to rise from the river bed out and up elevation to a suitable exit. At Queensferry this would be a fair distance. Due to the topography at the prospective [queensferry] site I would imagine the decision would be for a bridge.
I've seen some suggestion here for replacing the deck on the current bridge with a double deck but that would not be a solution as the bridge would need to be closed to traffic throughout not to mention the piers were not designed for that kind of load. A new bridge is required!

Gordon, was your last a serious comment? Parliament should have been built in Bannockburn or Stirling and not despised Edinburgh?

Edward. I'll tell you why AJ can say that, there again I don't need to tell you, you already know based on this "very parochial viewpoint" Yes, that's AJ...he's a total arse.

Gordon Banks. Your comment "News for you, the Scottish Parliament is unfortunately located in the far east of Scotland, the wrong site, in the wrong town and in the wrong part of Scotland, remote from much of the country." What a load of claptrap. (1) Get yourself an atlas mate, firstly Edinburgh is not in the far east of Scotland, I think you'll find that is more like Peterhead which is some 100 miles further east than Edinburgh. (2) Wrong site? Edinburgh is the Capital of the country, that's where it should be...as in most countries around the world. (3) Wrong site? Duh! (4) Remote from most of the country. Of course, they should have put it in Kenmore! The idiots!

Your final paragraph at 115 is just total BS mate, absolute nonsense.

ECHELON_X
Post# 78
Lived in Oman for 4 years till 2005. Can't think of any motorways worth talking about. Plenty of dual carriageways, but poorly maintained. Now the Emirates are a different matter. Miles and miles of beautifully smooth, well constructed 6-lane motorways which actually speed up your journey. They also manage to build them at least twice as fast as in Britain, and as far as I can see about 10 times faster than over here in Oz.

ECHELON_X
"Getting my facts" may have something to do with being a civil engineer.

If you don't know that apples for apples (in terms of location and performance) a tunnel is (rule of thumb) about twice as expensive, twice as long to build and more environmentally disruptive than a bridge, I suggest you go and do your homework again.

Tunnels only come into their own when (a) the crossing is exceptionally wide (eg the Channel Tunnel) or (b) there is no realistic alternative. Otherwise, they are to be avoided like the plague, for the reasons I have stated.

If you still think you're right about tunnels, then ask yourself why in that case anyone ever bothers with these expensive and slow-to-build (as you suppose) bridges in the first place? If you were right, it would be tunnels everywhere. Funny how it ain't.

A tunnel replacement for the Forth Road Bridge is, frankly, daft.

---

As for double-decking the existing bridge:

How do you know the piers & towers are not able to take a modern light-weight double-decker roadway that would probably not weigh any more than the existing single deck? I've seen no evidence for this (highly unlikely) assertion.

ECHELON_X, of course "the Scottish Parliament is unfortunately located in the far east of Scotland"

It should have been located in the Scottish Metropolis, the Centre of the Universe, the Greatest City on Earth: Glasgow. (Not that I'm biased of course)

To most people in Scotland (which is to say, in and around Glasgow) Edinburgh IS in the far east.

113. odessaguy, Florida, USA

Golden Gate Bridge, is that not a bit like Robert the Bruce's 'genuine' battleaxe used at the Battle of Bannockburn?

Only three new heads and twelve new handles.

Was the GGB not recently overhauled to replace corroding cables and upgraded to cope with earth quakes.

Where do you suppose the initiative to check these cables came from, 50 years since completion?

#115. Gordon Banks, Livingston

Scotland is only wee.

'Far East of Scotland' is a relative term.
How about Dunbar or Eyemouth as candidates for also being further east?

Edinburgh is only 45 minutes from 'the center of the Universe' and no more than about three hours from about 90% of the population.

The New Parliament is however only 5 minutes from all of the important offices of State.

If you will a wee bit like arguing to relocate The House Of Commons, in the 'Far South', to say, Leicester.

Personally I am tickled by politicians being housed in a complex on the site of a former brewey.

Carriageway resurfacing is now a regular chore
Have a read at The Shell Bitumen Book they can give the client any design life they want up to 40 years but there is a price to pay
The new high pressure lorry tyres? Have not come across them yet only diffrence is they are radial construction against old xply and the TRRL has set new less damaging tyre specs, axle weights and suspension systems for the lorries the bridge was originally designed for.

121. If you read my comment properly I state clearly that in conclusion the best solution for the forth is a bridge. I was making the point that immersed tunnels can be cheaper than bridges and have many benefits over a bridge, although there are many influencing factors that govern this. The topo at this site we discuss is far from suitable for a tunnel option over a bridge, as i stated already.
As for the costs, I have been involved in 6 tunnel projects in Germany & Holland, tunnels were chosen over bridges. immersed tunnels can be fast and economical. For the forth though bridge is the way.
Your objection to my statement on a double deck replacement... Sure, perhaps you could construct a double deck replacement within the load capacity of the existing piers, however I doubt that very much, not just on the weight issue, but for flexibility. I am not a bridge engineer but i would put money on it that for the span and existing pier and elevation change across the bridge a double deck replacement is not an option. But assume as you propose the deck can be built within weight...all very well, but what about the double traffic loading...that will definitely go way beyond the limits. Next.

103. JG, Fife
>>>
Westminster has centuries of history, is a marvellous example of Gothic architecture
<<<
Edinburgh has centuries of history.

The Palace of Westminster is similar to that of the Great Hall in Stirling Castle, rather plain and not Gothic.

The 'Gothic' part of the Houses of Lords and Commons is what replaced the Old Westminster Parliament buildings largely destroyed by fire in 1836.

All that remains of the old building is the Palace (a big empty hall) and the old mint across the road, where they do the interviews on the grass.

The present Parliament buildings and the tower of Big Ben were put up in the late 1850's and are as Gothic as those 'Oak Beamed' suburban houses are Tudor or Ship's Timber.

First time I saw it I was impressed, but working there, the gaudy Victorian decor is repetitive, over done and, frankly, boring.

The New scottish Parliament is the opposite. first time I saw it I was not at all sure if I liked the external motifs.

They have now grown on me.

Inside, the large areas of unadorned concrete leave me unimpressed, but as the place gets 'lived in' these are softening.

As I said, I like it.

livilion,

Scotland is only wee on the map, but it's still the greatest country in the world despite the best (worst) efforts of our despicable politicians and so forth.

Think of Edinburgh in relation to Glagow like Windsor in relation to London. Edinburgh and Windsor have both got picturesque castles. And that's about it.

Even that other great symbol of the whole eastern area, the original Forth Bridge, was built by a Glasgow man, my 'namesake'.

Meanwhile the finest sight in the city of fur coats and nae drawers is still to be found in Waverley Station: the train to Queen Street. (Which does not stop at Livingston. Sorry.)

(And the problem with Robert the Bruce's battleaxe was, of course, that it was clearly not Clyde Built.)

126. ECHELON_X

No wonder your tunnels were so expensive if you kept putting them over bridges!!.

Seriously though, Double Loading?

Does no-one remember the issues that dogged the new Erskine Bridge for years after it was first opened?

More recently the Kingston Bridge through Glasgow had to undergo life saving surgery to stop it sinking into the Clyde due to the same issues of traffic overloading.

btw Where's Forthtag?
There appears to be some difference of opinion as to which is the quicker and also the cheaper option.

To me the cost is of secondary importance.

500 miles further south and money does not seem to be a factor, rhymes off Home Counties civil engineering projects each costing a king's ransom.

Most guys will spend a wee bit more if they believe they are getting value for their money.

The main consideration, I believe, is to get the correct specification and to do the project properly.

Leave it too late, it'll get done as a rush make-do-and-mend, leaving our kids down the line to look at us the way we are now looking and judging those who commissioned and built this Forth Road Bridge.

Forthtag insist that a tunnel can be operational far quicker and more cost effectively than a bridge but provide no supporting data.

If they can show definitive supporting proofs then by all means, we have an agreement of need, let's get this show on the road.

The longer the delay, the greater the likelyhood of shortcuts, and ending right back where we started and £millions down the Forth.

127 Livilion. I have only seen the parliament in pictures so far unfortunately, but I agree with you Livilion, I think it is an impressive building and in years to come when all the fuss about the admittedly poor cost control has blown over the country will have a wonderful building to be proud of.

129. I'll give you that one Livilion... kerching

131. Agreed. Within reason it should not be led by budget, rather lasting effective solution well into the future, by which time if the doommongers on global warming are right we'll be able to either drive across a dry river bed or drive across the ice, depending which bearded wonder we beleive.

Global warming? And? Climate change is a known naturally occuring cycle of this planet. Ban the cows, not cars.

Never mind banning the cows or cars did you get this article on CCS power at Peterhead Power Station?
One station can recover the equivalent co2 produced by 400,000 cars, a field of cows or one of those battery chicken sheds that stink up East Calder and Broxburn.

http://www.peterheadhydrogenpower.com/go/doc/1141/116400/

haven't read it yet, but i'll take a look at the link later.

#128. Sit William Arrol, Camlachie
Edinburgh Castle is much more picturesque especialy from over by the Botanic gardens.

You have to take your hat off to the council for putting it right in front of Princes Street.

For years I drove along the Motorway to Slough and thought that Windsor castle was a cement factory, honest.

It is nicer close up, but I heard that they'd struck oil in Windsor Great Park.

How they ever got permission to drill?

Can't see any rush to exploit it though.

Gaudi's Sagrada Familia was extremely controversial throughout his lifetime [struggling] to build it. It remains unfinished yet it is without doubt one of the most stunning buildings anywhere in the world, probably my personal favourite. I like to think that although not on the same level, Scotland new parliament building will be looked on with pride by everyone within a couple of generations.

livilion:

"I heard that they'd struck oil in Windsor Great Park. How they ever got permission to drill?"

Does one need permission from anyone when one is Queen or Prince of Wales?

Do you think it might be worth a few exploratory drills for oil in Princes Street Gardens? Imagine the joy of seeing a gusher - black gold - shooting up into the air higher than the Scott Monument and then covering the whole surrounding area in black, slippery, smelly, flamable goo!

Get the freight onto the railways where it should be if we are to keep global climate from chaos, and use the much painted "big red sister" for heavy goods transport; get those fuel guzzling road breaking pollution generating lorries off the road and leave the Forth Road Bridge for hybrid cars and bicycles

A bicycle is, compared to its axle width, a high sided vehicle. I wouldn't try it.

141. Neil,
For years I found the bouncing of the bridge in high winds, pretty much all the time, quite unsettling driving across.

What would cycling across it feel like?

Getting the creeps just imagining it.

141 Neil. Indeed.
142 Livilion. Used to cycle of the bridge regularly as part of a training route. Firstly it's a lot steeper than it appears when you drive over and if you stop on the joins you can see them moving as the bridge deflects.

Echelon said .." Having lived in Oman for 2 years I was amazed at the infrastructure there, lovely motorways, dead as a dodo but they are thinking about the country 50 years from now or so. "
Not really. More a case of large oil wealth funds & USUK contractor$ selling abilities .
There will be no oil left in 50 years to run on these empty roads.

deinftly a tunnel.
ban HGV on the current bridge, make them cross on a ferry. (can catch up on sleep at same time)
save the bridge
build a tunnel
save the bridge
build a tunnel

save the bridge
build a tunnel

there might not be oil in fifty years, by when it runs out. wheres the design and consulting engineering expertise going to come from? scotland! or maybe china depening on how stupid corprate management /polictical polices are.