Another bridge strike

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
Conekicker
Member
Posts: 3754
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
Location: South Yorks

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by Conekicker »

Of course, if the bridge deck is replaced, it's probably not the best of ideas to reduce the headroom:

Before
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4373986 ... 312!8i6656

After
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4373222 ... 312!8i6656

Before
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4528533 ... 312!8i6656

After
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4528636 ... 312!8i6656

Unless the "After" signs aren't accurate and are deliberately understating the actual headroom, but that would go against the guidance in TSM. Surely no one would do that and unnecessarily restrict the passage of high vehicles.
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
2 Sheds
Member
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2017 19:32

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by 2 Sheds »

the cheesecake man wrote: Mon Nov 09, 2020 18:16 Perhaps we should have more of these, at least as an experiment at some locations to see if they make a difference.
There are a few of these in Notts. I’m sure they help to a point but unless they strike the lorry cab (and not just the higher trailer on the back) an HGV driver might not even twig he/ she had struck the hanging chains. Some bridges sit over a double bend, and the simple tilt of a lorry as it corners can make it sufficiently higher to strike the bridge, even when it’s under the signed height when level. So speed can be a factor too.
User avatar
Big L
Deputy Site Manager
Posts: 7517
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 20:36
Location: B5012

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by Big L »

linuxrocks wrote: Mon Nov 09, 2020 14:52 Midlands home to most-bashed bridges
Litchfield and Dudley are numbers 2 & 3 on the list. I wonder where the number 1 candidate is?
Litchfield is a village in Hampshire. You must mean Lichfield.

(It's a very popular misspelling)
Make poetry history.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Help with maps using the new online calibrator.
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki.
mikehindsonevans
Member
Posts: 1359
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 11:44
Location: Cheshire, but working week time in Cambridge

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by mikehindsonevans »

Big L wrote: Mon Nov 09, 2020 19:54
linuxrocks wrote: Mon Nov 09, 2020 14:52 Midlands home to most-bashed bridges
Litchfield and Dudley are numbers 2 & 3 on the list. I wonder where the number 1 candidate is?
Litchfield is a village in Hampshire. You must mean Lichfield.

(It's a very popular misspelling)
It also lost its railway in the 1960s, which is now under the A34 Whitchurch bypass for most of its length.
Mike Hindson-Evans.
Never argue with a conspiracy theorist.
They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Al__S
Member
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:56

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by Al__S »

The Network Rail page for the data is here.

This of course does only show strikes against Network Rail bridges. Sticking just to "underline" bridges (ie ones where the railway goes over the road), the 2019/2020 rate is down a bit on previous years, but is still an average of 4.6 PER DAY. Given there are canal bridges, road bridges etc that can be low, I'd estimate that five incidents per day is realistic.

Even with the bypass and the turn-about traffic light controlled single lane through it, the bridge at Ely is still at #4. The road should have been shut to motor traffic entirely.
linuxrocks
Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 15:31

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by linuxrocks »

Chris Bertram wrote: Mon Nov 09, 2020 15:14 For clarity, the Bromford Road bridge in "Dudley" is actually the bridge next to Sandwell and Dudley Station, so really in Oldbury. The error is in NR's press release.
Yes, it's very close to where I live. You would think by now they would have put up some signs and maybe even a photoelectric cell controlled warning sign. Oh wait.... https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.50864 ... 312!8i6656

Sorry about the misspelling of Lichfield. I've actually never noticed that it doesn't have a "t". Maybe I've worn my glasses out by looking through them too much.
User avatar
Chris Bertram
Member
Posts: 15744
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by Chris Bertram »

linuxrocks wrote: Tue Nov 10, 2020 11:03 Sorry about the misspelling of Lichfield. I've actually never noticed that it doesn't have a "t". Maybe I've worn my glasses out by looking through them too much.
There is actually a place called Litchfield - it's a small village just off A34 between Newbury and Winchester.
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
PhilC
Member
Posts: 468
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2018 21:18
Location: West Midlands

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by PhilC »

Al__S wrote: Tue Nov 10, 2020 06:42 The Network Rail page for the data is here.

This of course does only show strikes against Network Rail bridges. Sticking just to "underline" bridges (ie ones where the railway goes over the road), the 2019/2020 rate is down a bit on previous years, but is still an average of 4.6 PER DAY. Given there are canal bridges, road bridges etc that can be low, I'd estimate that five incidents per day is realistic.

Even with the bypass and the turn-about traffic light controlled single lane through it, the bridge at Ely is still at #4. The road should have been shut to motor traffic entirely.
According to the Network Rail data then, this is the most struck bridge.

https://goo.gl/maps/358VLc7nkN5VrMwa7
User avatar
M4 Cardiff
Member
Posts: 2401
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 15:12
Location: Leamington Spa

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by M4 Cardiff »

It certainly looks a bit scuffed. Probably in better shape than the lorries that hit it though.
Driving thrombosis caused this accident......a clot behind the wheel.
User avatar
Pendlemac
Member
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 12:58
Location: Pendle, Lancashire

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by Pendlemac »

2 Sheds wrote: Mon Nov 09, 2020 17:38
aj444 wrote: Fri Oct 23, 2020 19:59 This is why I was asking if anyone out there produced custom printed maps with bridge heights on - I eventually had to go with a printed map from Collins and a set of pins / labels :?
Various map producers used to publish a Truckers’ Atlas. The AA version for instance showed 3600 bridge headrooms. I used to sit on a national bridge committee which attempted to tackle this problem over many years. Having retired from that several years ago I don’t know whether truckers’ satnavs have been developed.
TomTom have 4 models available, not sure about the others.

https://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/sat-nav/tr ... ductLineup

( Please note that I have no connection with TomTom, I've just used their products since Citymaps came out for the Psion 5mx in the late 90's! )
User avatar
Pendlemac
Member
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 12:58
Location: Pendle, Lancashire

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by Pendlemac »

Conekicker wrote: Mon Nov 09, 2020 18:57 Of course, if the bridge deck is replaced, it's probably not the best of ideas to reduce the headroom:

Before
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4373986 ... 312!8i6656

After
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4373222 ... 312!8i6656

Before
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4528533 ... 312!8i6656

After
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4528636 ... 312!8i6656

Unless the "After" signs aren't accurate and are deliberately understating the actual headroom, but that would go against the guidance in TSM. Surely no one would do that and unnecessarily restrict the passage of high vehicles.
Comparing the bottom edge of the deck with the coping on the wing walls shows that the clearance is the same.

While I would think that shaving a bit off the value would be useful to deter the 'chancers' who think 'Well there must be some error, so I'll get under.' the real reason for the change is rather boring.

I would expect any measurement to be in mm, if it's still the same height then the value will be 4.267mm

The height will then be truncated to the nearest decimetre for the 4.2m part of the sign. The imperial part will have been found by converting 4.2m to feet and inches and truncating the inches part giving 13 foot 9 inches. :D
2 Sheds
Member
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2017 19:32

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by 2 Sheds »

What sometimes happens is that road resurfacing reduces the headroom gradually over the years. Even surface dressing has some effect. Then a bridge redecking prompts a new survey and hey presto - the signed height needs to be reduced. When I was doing this in the eighties and nineties the measured height was rounded down to the nearest 3”, then another 3” was taken off for a safety margin. Also at one time many height restriction signs were advisory only and there was no legal order to prohibit any higher vehicle from taking a chance.
Phil
Member
Posts: 2271
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2002 18:03
Location: Burgess Hill,W Sussex, UK

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by Phil »

Conekicker wrote: Mon Nov 09, 2020 18:57 Of course, if the bridge deck is replaced, it's probably not the best of ideas to reduce the headroom:

Before
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4373986 ... 312!8i6656

After
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4373222 ... 312!8i6656

Before
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4528533 ... 312!8i6656

After
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4528636 ... 312!8i6656

Unless the "After" signs aren't accurate and are deliberately understating the actual headroom, but that would go against the guidance in TSM. Surely no one would do that and unnecessarily restrict the passage of high vehicles.
Yes they would!

Please remember that the primary purpose of the bridge is to carry an operational railway - not as an exercise in indulging stupid motorists.

The bridges in the 'before' view are actually fairly flimsy and probably required the use of weigh timbers to carry the track. These are a nuisance to look after and can make obtaining decent track geometry problematic.

The replacement bridge is an altogether more study design which can take normal ballasted track and thus far less of a maintenance headache for railway engineers, plus its sturdy design means it can put up with a lot more abuse and stay safe.
User avatar
Vierwielen
Member
Posts: 5676
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 21:21
Location: Hampshire

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by Vierwielen »

Pendlemac wrote: Tue Nov 10, 2020 13:16
... snip

The height will then be truncated to the nearest decimetre for the 4.2m part of the sign. The imperial part will have been found by converting 4.2m to feet and inches and truncating the inches part giving 13 foot 9 inches. :D
This algorithm means that some multiples of 3" will never be seen. For example 3.8 metres will yield 11'6" while 3.9 metres will yield 12'0".
B1040
Member
Posts: 2284
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 15:51
Location: fenland

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by B1040 »

Looks like a double decker has gone into the Hills Road bridge on the Cambridge busway.
Fortunately only the driver and one passenger and no injuries.
They are using their nice but probably expensive new double deckers on the northern bits of busway. This looked like one of them.
The bit from Cambridge station to Trumpington is single deckers only.
mikehindsonevans
Member
Posts: 1359
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 11:44
Location: Cheshire, but working week time in Cambridge

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by mikehindsonevans »

B1040 wrote: Fri Nov 13, 2020 22:21 Looks like a double decker has gone into the Hills Road bridge on the Cambridge busway.
Fortunately only the driver and one passenger and no injuries.
They are using their nice but probably expensive new double deckers on the northern bits of busway. This looked like one of them.
The bit from Cambridge station to Trumpington is single deckers only.
The parallel foot/cycle path alongside that bit was my pre-lockdown walk to work. There are MORE than enough height warnings - and I have to pay tribute to the discipline of the single-decker drivers who use that southern section of the Busway to/ from Trumpington.

In fairness, their speed discipline does follow a few, earlier and spectacular, crashes caused by overspeed or inattention.
Mike Hindson-Evans.
Never argue with a conspiracy theorist.
They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Runwell
Member
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 00:16

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by Runwell »

Quite a messy one on the A13 at the One Tree Hill Bridge last month, just as you head eastbound towards the first Basildon exit. https://twitter.com/thurrockcouncil/sta ... 90977?s=09
Al__S
Member
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:56

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by Al__S »

B1040 wrote: Fri Nov 13, 2020 22:21 Looks like a double decker has gone into the Hills Road bridge on the Cambridge busway.
Fortunately only the driver and one passenger and no injuries.
They are using their nice but probably expensive new double deckers on the northern bits of busway. This looked like one of them.
The bit from Cambridge station to Trumpington is single deckers only.
Yes, the wreck is one of the 10 E400XLBs they got (ordered before COVID) to boost capacity on the routes from Huntingdon & St Ives that terminated in the city centre (and have therefore been handy for distanced seating)

So there's not just the driver to blame here, but also the fleet control that allocated one to a service headed to Trumpington
User avatar
Ruperts Trooper
Member
Posts: 12031
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 13:43
Location: Huntingdonshire originally, but now Staffordshire

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by Ruperts Trooper »

Local authority is reducing the height to reduce collisions https://www.sandwell.gov.uk/news/articl ... ury_bridge

Effective 1st December 2020 so any truckers relying on satnav will still hit it!
Lifelong motorhead
aj444
Member
Posts: 1401
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 22:38
Location: Derbys

Re: Another bridge strike

Post by aj444 »

Random question - if the signed height for a bridge is 14'5'' and you know your vehicle although being 14'6'' will fit underneath it are you breaking the law?
Post Reply