Jump to content

Thames closed to navigation at Hammersmith


magnetman
 Share

Featured Posts

27 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Did the Italians put such a notice on this bridge (https://edition.cnn.com/europe/live-news/genoa-bridge-collapse/index.html)?

 

If the bridge is unsafe passing over, or under, it is what an idiot would do, isn't it?

Should have added a smiley to demonstrate sarcasm. Unfortunately there isnt one.

 

That was indeed a monumental cock up though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slightly different as the Morandi bridge had traffic on it meaning the structure was loaded. Failure under load is predictable if the thing is nackered. 

 

It didn't just fall apart with nothing else happening or a few boats going under it. 

 

One thing about boats going under bridges is that they have no effect on the structure of the bridge assuming they don't collide with part of it. 

 

The film about the silver bridge earlier was also a bridge that was being used by road traffic and therefore subject to loading and stresses on the various parts, causing a failure which was probably ultimately predictable. 

 

If Hammersmith bridge is really that bad that it might collapse if a bird lands on it then it's probably best demolished asap. 

Edited by magnetman
  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, magnetman said:

Slightly different as the Morandi bridge had traffic on it meaning the structure was loaded. Failure under load is predictable if the thing is nackered. 

 

It didn't just fall apart with nothing else happening or a few boats going under it. 

 

One thing about boats going under bridges is that they have no effect on the structure of the bridge assuming they don't collide with part of it. 

 

The film about the silver bridge earlier was also a bridge that was being used by road traffic and therefore subject to loading and stresses on the various parts, causing a failure which was probably ultimately predictable. 

 

If Hammersmith bridge is really that bad that it might collapse if a bird lands on it then it's probably best demolished asap. 

You can't do that it's a listed building - which means more paperwork - and that will slow matters down.

 

As an aside - having been a resident not too far away fro Castlenau  and used it quite often - the bridge has always bounced even with one or two cars on it (that's why its got a woodblock carriageway) ans that will have to be converted into modern materials, all adding to it not being a quick fix. 

 

FWIW on another forum it's been reported that PLA are now patrolling the area and have turned several boats away. They have more powers than EA or CaRT and will use them.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, magnetman said:

Slightly different as the Morandi bridge had traffic on it meaning the structure was loaded. Failure under load is predictable if the thing is nackered. 

 

The load on suspension anchors from bridge deadweight is pretty large. It's not like the thing just hangs there in sky when there are no vehicles on it: it has to hold itself up.

 

MP.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MoominPapa said:

The load on suspension anchors from bridge deadweight is pretty large. It's not like the thing just hangs there in sky when there are no vehicles on it: it has to hold itself up.

 

MP.

 

It also appears that there are cracks all over the structure, which must make a repair more difficult.

I am reminded (PLA bridges book) that the central pier on Albert Bridge (below) was only added in 1973. So I suppose there is a modification where the old bridge is (in effect) held up by a new structure. Doing that without impinging on the visual aspect, or reducing the (already low) headroom, would be fun.  Albert looks to be a mix of cantilever and suspension supports.

dsc_5245.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, MoominPapa said:

The load on suspension anchors from bridge deadweight is pretty large. It's not like the thing just hangs there in sky when there are no vehicles on it: it has to hold itself up.

 

MP.

 

Yes but it is movement that will cause failures. 

 

Of course this could just be the wind or birds landing on it but more likely it would be varying loads on the bridge itself. Like vehicle traffic. 

 

It's a live structure and yes it is heavy but unless it is incredibly nackered why would it just suddenly fall down with nothing else happening?

 

If that's a real risk then why is it still there?? 

 

Its impossible to know if the Morandi bridge would have fallen down without any vehicles on it because it fell down with loads of vehicles on it. 

 

Maybe it would have eventually fallen down with nothing on it but it does seem to be a pretty obvious cause of failure in that particular example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, magnetman said:

 

It's a live structure and yes it is heavy but unless it is incredibly nackered why would it just suddenly fall down with nothing else happening?

Because other things are happening. In this case the very hot weather we have been having. The bridge was already being hosed down with water to keep it cooler. The regular inspectios have revealed that cracks in one of the cast iron pedestals supporting the main suspension chains at the abutments had grown significantly, and that there is an increased risk of catastrophic failure of the pedestal. Hence the closure, while mitigating measures and/or repairs are developed.

 

1 hour ago, magnetman said:

 

Its impossible to know if the Morandi bridge would have fallen down without any vehicles on it because it fell down with loads of vehicles on it. 

It might not have fallen when it did without the vehicles on it, but the post-accident investigation revealed serious deterioration of the concrete-encased stay cables, meaning the bridge was seriously weakened, and so was much more vulnerable to collapse than was known previously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting to watch the video on the LBHF page David Mack put up in page 1. From 5:00 where a LBHF man confidently explains that the millions needed to fix the bridge will NOT be coming from residents of the borough. Despite the fact the asset is owned by the council.  

 

 

 

If it is TFL/gov funding then surely they would be interested in putting in a 21st century bridge capable of dealing with buses, cyclists and pedesteians instead of this ancient structure which is too small and should be a film prop. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Here's a recent announcement from LBHF for the benefit of boats stuck the wrong side of the bridge.  

 

 

Hammersmith Bridge  - Information received from Hammersmith & Fulham Council:

Hammersmith Bridge is closed to pedestrians and cyclists as well as to river traffic as it is unsafe for people to be underneath it. On Thursday 13 August 2020, specialist engineers concluded that the fractures they had been continuously monitoring in critical parts of the 19th Century suspension bridge structure had become a serious threat to public safety. The fractures had significantly increased in size due to the recent heatwave despite the range of measures they had taken to halt that from happening.
The Council’s engineering consultants have highlighted any passage under or over the bridge is unsafe as the bridge is in a vulnerable condition for navigational channels as well as highway use.
The navigational channels on either side of the bridge could be closed for at least 6 weeks. We are making every effort to find a solution to stabilise the bridge as quickly as possible.
We are also in discussions with PLA and our consultants to establish if a one-off passage under the bridge is possible and if a safe passage can be accommodated
PLA will be policing any such passage using the traffic control team. Currently we are in discussion with PLA and our consultants developing a procedure for controlled safe one off passage under the bridge. 
Please note in view of the condition of the bridge, the one-off passage can be aborted just before transition under the bridge takes place as we are relying on data from monitoring equipment and if the sensors are triggered on the day of passage the operation will be aborted.
You will be notified of any one-off controlled passage and in the meanwhile a log of stranded vehicles is being collected and I would appreciate of you could provide the following information held to inform PLA about your vessel to assess the manner of passage under the bridge in a safe way.
Vessel Name
•    Length
•    Beam
•    Draught
•    Air Draft
•    Contact details of the Master
•    Where are they coming from and going to?
•    How long it will take to reach Hammersmith Bridge
Yours sincerely
Anvar Alizadeh
Highway Structure’s Manager
Email: anvar.alizadeh@lbhf.gov.uk
Transport and Highways
Hammersmith & Fulham Council
Tel. 020 87533303
Mobile 07968859310


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

The latest arrangements for limited transits (Sundays only) are explained here.

 

http://pla.co.uk/assets/u19of2020-barnelmsreach-hammersmithbridge-closedtonavigationexclusionzonecontrolledtransits.pdf

 

This was discussed at some length at the PLA's upper river open meeting last week, but there wasn't much to add, other than a pretty clear message that it is likely to be some time before LBHF will be able to change their assessment of the level of risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite amazing that UK PLC can't afford to fix this when we are burning through 100BN plus for HS2, 18-20BN for Crossrail ..... a national embarrassment involving a beautiful bridge sadly no longer fit for purpose in terms of safety or capacity for that part of London.  The government can afford to pay for replacement of duff cladding on privately owned buildings but not for a part of the infrastructure of the capital city. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, CV32 said:

Quite amazing that UK PLC can't afford to fix this when we are burning through 100BN plus for HS2, 18-20BN for Crossrail ..... a national embarrassment involving a beautiful bridge sadly no longer fit for purpose in terms of safety or capacity for that part of London.  The government can afford to pay for replacement of duff cladding on privately owned buildings but not for a part of the infrastructure of the capital city. 

There is certainly a three-way row (Hammersmith & Fulham, TfL and HMG) over who should pay, which is not particularly edifying but also not surprising.  But I think there is also quite a wide range of views on what the solution should be, ranging from building the third bridge on this site to complete restoration. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

During WWII three or four Bailey bridges capable of carrying road traffic  were erected across the Thames in Central London as a precaution in case the existing bridges were damaged by enemy action. In the event they were never needed. The only one that seems to have been used in earnest (for pedestrians only)  was one next to Charing Cross railway bridge (on the opposite side from the Hungerford foot bridge), although I am not sure if this was only erected post-war for the 1951 Festival of Britain. The caption to the illustration of it in the book about the festival "A Tonic To The Nation" states

 

"The river piling was designed by the chief engineer of the London County Council, and the bridge was built by the War Office. "

 

 If they could manage that in the 1940's, why not today? There are several "temporary"  wartime Baily Bridges still carrying road traffic in mainland Europe, and one is still in use over the River Chelmer in Chelmsford, Essex.  It formerly provided access to a car park but is now only used by cyclists and pedestrians.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

20210325_203415_002-1.jpg

Edited by Ronaldo47
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since 2010, Transport for London has spent £43m on maintaining the 25 River Thames crossings for which it has some responsibility (shared with the London Boroughs). In the same period it spent £13m developing proposals for a river crossing between Canary Wharf and Rotherhithe, which was axed in 2019, and £53m for developing the abandoned Garden Bridge project.

Remind me who, as Mayor of London, was responsible for the latter wasted expenditure.

 

And worry about when the next Hammersmith happens.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of years ago I saw a public notice in the London newspapers  about a consultation regarding a proposed new road tunnel at Canning Town.   It would be Toll, and the Blackwall Tunnel, presently free, would also be made toll. Rotherhythe, not now useable by heavy commercial vehicles, would remain free. I haven't heard any more about it recently. Any bets on the replacement Hammersmith Bridge being toll?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ronaldo47 said:

A couple of years ago I saw a public notice in the London newspapers  about a consultation regarding a proposed new road tunnel at Canning Town.   It would be Toll, and the Blackwall Tunnel, presently free, would also be made toll. Rotherhythe, not now useable by heavy commercial vehicles, would remain free. I haven't heard any more about it recently. Any bets on the replacement Hammersmith Bridge being toll?

Silvertown Tunnel. Plenty about it online. For example:

 

https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-information/improvements-and-projects/silvertown-tunnel

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvertown_Tunnel

Edited by David Mack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

It is. I would think it's quite likely a toll will be part of any funding deal!

 

I don't doubt that, but just wondering why people are talking about replacement? I think there are proposals for a temporary structure within the bridge but that's still not a replacement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.