GWSR Broadway Developments

You have to be very careful using cameras in public places. When we have them installed to catch trespassers and graffiti artists on the infrastructures, signs have to be erected and other loopholes have to be overcome else whatever is recorded cannot be used as evidence. Crazy? You bet it is!

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

Would it not be possible to lower the road as the basic problem is that the bridge just isn't high enough to cope with modern lorries and even with beams that will still be the same. Motorway Bridges never seem to get hit and they are built at 16ft 6" height. Apparently below that height is when you are required to have warning signs but it is obvious that many drivers just ignore them and often don't even know what height their vehicle is.
Broadway Bridge seems to be according to the sign on it 14' 3" so that means they would need to lower the road just 2' 3" to be the same height.

The railway could at least look at what costs might be involved compared with beams and visually it would look better anyway. The only other thing to consider is are there services like Electric, Water, gas etc under the road as that would make it more difficult ?

As one of the videos Breva posted showed even when the lorry on one strike scrapped the bridge he just slowed and continued until he was through and this might happen with a beam, where they just carry on knowing full well they are damaging the underside. This bridge in Swindon which is still used was lowered about hundred years ago to provide enough height for double deck trams to get underneath The pavements I believe are the original road level.

 

And yet we were told some years ago that our faces are recorded hundreds of times a day as we go about our business. It later turned out that the figure was grossly exaggerated, having been based on a dodgy calculation, but AFAIK no-one has denied that there are some cameras recording us. In the present instance it would anyway not be anyone's face that would be captured but only an image of each vehicle that passes or, if there is a detector, only over-height vehicles; and there are existing restrictions on connecting a vehicle to a person.

 

I guess a problem with lowering the road might be flooding in wet weather unless there is somewhere for water to drain to.

 

And how far either side of the bridge do you ramp in / out?

 

As previously suggested, the cameras should be provided and paid for by the local Safety Camera Partnership, the organisation that runs the speed cameras, and paid for out of their fine revenue. All overheight vehicles detected would then be recorded and a fixed penalty could automatically be issued. These camera would then provide evidence required to sue for damages to the bridge.

 

Then perhaps this is exactly what needs to be changed and NR should take the lead on this. The whole ethos of the Safety Camera Partnerships is to promote road safety so they shouldn’t be too quick to reject a change. This would also be a useful new revenue stream for them.

 

That often happens, but it is not that frequent, There is just a delay to traffic and usually no bridge damage. The only ones to suffer are the drivers who insist on driving through floodwater, frequently, deeper than the envisaged.

 

An extaordinarily cynical take on possible motivations .... and quite likely a very accurate one.

 

Will such a thing happen?

 

We were covered in snow only 3 months ago! Quite a few of our bridges have water marks by them, I think @Breva's seen a few 4x4s drown under them.

 

For more, see my previous post #1866 of 19th Jan this year. Page 94.

 

Broadway bridge is already at the bottom of two slopes, and there are few gullies along station road, so that a lot of water from further away ends up under the bridge. The result is a puddle 3-4 ins deep and a big splash sideways from each passing vehicle, which soaks the abutments.

In fact the road surface is already 2ft under the original level of the land, according to a plan I saw at the Worcester Hive.

 

That's the answer then.

Raise the road two feet or so.

Stop the damage caused by continued soaking of the brickwork, and even the densest muppet should spot that their high vehicle won't fit if there is a couple of foot less clearance

 

I've found a photograph I took in 2012 illustrating this splash. The van has moved over to the centre of the road to try and avoid the puddle. It's very difficult to keep the gully under the bridge clean, as water running along down the road behind the camera brings fresh debris with it every time.



Note the big bolted on patch on the LH side of the bridge. That was a 1975 BR repair of a crash that nearly cut the bridge in half. It was a big 360 digger on a low loader, and its arm (-elbow) stuck out above. I heard that truck, trailer, and the 360 were all over the road, and the back wheels of trailer rolled on to the forecourt of the garage where the blue car is parked.
That was in the day when this was the main A44. Now we have the bypass, but traffic levels are rising again with houses being built in every village in the area.

 

Was in the GWR Steam Museum and in the mocked up works stores part saw this which I thought would be of interest regards the plastic leaflet holders for Broadway (see photo below, taken with my phone). It at least gives you the basic dimension of how original leaflet racks were made. Might even be able to get a full drawing of it if you contact the NRM. Why not give it to some of your volunteers the task of making one.

 

Thanks for that. I came across a similar one in the house of a local collector recently:



These are a bit big, but our C&W people have volunteered to make one of the smaller ones, posted here earlier, so there is progress.