Boris Bridge across channel
Discussion
TooMany2cvs said:
djc206 said:
The reason is we’ve already done it.
Exactly. There's nothing innovative about building a very long bridge. It's just a question of adding more (and more and more) middle spans until you get bored or reach the other side. Nobody's saying it's particularly hard.djc206 said:
We built the channel tunnel
By "we", you mean a consortium of two British and three French banks, and five construction companies from each country. Total cost was 80% over budget - £4.65bn in 1985, £14.25bn now.And that's cheap compared to a bridge...
paul789 said:
We still do ambitious things though - Crossrail, the Olympics? It’s not all bad.
Cross rail isn't ambitious, and is constantly being sniped. The Olympics I hoped would shift our perspective a tad, but that hasn't appeared to have been it's legacy.I get that we already have a tunnel. It's great for a lot of reasons, however there's still an argument to prepare even more capacity for the future. We seem to be locked into 'it's a twenty year project, but we're not going to need it for ten years - what a waste of cash' mindset.
Where's the creation of capacity in advance? The forward thinking, optimistic nation that builds now for the nation we plan to be?
djc206 said:
TooMany2cvs said:
djc206 said:
We built the channel tunnel
By "we", you mean a consortium of two British and three French banks, and five construction companies from each country. Total cost was 80% over budget - £4.65bn in 1985, £14.25bn now.And that's cheap compared to a bridge...
(I do also gently wonder if the UK has sufficient "indigenous" engineering capacity to hold "our" end up...)
djc206 said:
My point is a bridge is just not needed. Much like Boris island it’s one of Boris’ pipe dreams and should be put to bed.
Could not agree more...Sway said:
It really is depressing to see the shift in mindset in this country.
We used to demonstrate to the world what could be done with civil engineering.
We still export a staggering amount of the best civil engineers in the world to the nations that do have the optimism to still do stuff like this.
Now, we're watching and helping nations across the globe further the civil environment with efficient, high capacity roads, bridges and tunnels. Raising islands to stick noisy, smelly planes out of the way - conveniently. Replacing multitudes of ferries with linked road and bridge networks across archipelagos, improving the lives and economies of the areas involved.
And coming up with every single reason why we shouldn't be doing anything of the sort.
I think you overstate the ability of British engineers. Many countries have well developed education systems which produce good engineers. The UK is not special. British engineers may be more inclined to work overseas, because outside of O&G, engineering pays so poorly in the UK. It's been a long time since the UK lead the world with big engineering projects. We used to demonstrate to the world what could be done with civil engineering.
We still export a staggering amount of the best civil engineers in the world to the nations that do have the optimism to still do stuff like this.
Now, we're watching and helping nations across the globe further the civil environment with efficient, high capacity roads, bridges and tunnels. Raising islands to stick noisy, smelly planes out of the way - conveniently. Replacing multitudes of ferries with linked road and bridge networks across archipelagos, improving the lives and economies of the areas involved.
And coming up with every single reason why we shouldn't be doing anything of the sort.
TooMany2cvs said:
Exactly. There's nothing innovative about building a very long bridge. It's just a question of adding more (and more and more) middle spans until you get bored or reach the other side. Nobody's saying it's particularly hard.
The middle spans need to be held up by something and the water depth is significant. If a bridge was built, it would be a major engineering feat. It would also be majorly expensive, which is why it won't happen. DurianIceCream said:
TooMany2cvs said:
Exactly. There's nothing innovative about building a very long bridge. It's just a question of adding more (and more and more) middle spans until you get bored or reach the other side. Nobody's saying it's particularly hard.
The middle spans need to be held up by something and the water depth is significant. If a bridge was built, it would be a major engineering feat. It would also be majorly expensive, which is why it won't happen. The Channel's only about 40m deep at the tunnel area. Oresund is about 50% deeper, IIRC.
Sway said:
It really is depressing to see the shift in mindset in this country.
We used to demonstrate to the world what could be done with civil engineering.
We still export a staggering amount of the best civil engineers in the world to the nations that do have the optimism to still do stuff like this.
Now, we're watching and helping nations across the globe further the civil environment with efficient, high capacity roads, bridges and tunnels. Raising islands to stick noisy, smelly planes out of the way - conveniently. Replacing multitudes of ferries with linked road and bridge networks across archipelagos, improving the lives and economies of the areas involved.
And coming up with every single reason why we shouldn't be doing anything of the sort.
I thought the Country was broke. Do you actually believe we need a road link across the Channel?We used to demonstrate to the world what could be done with civil engineering.
We still export a staggering amount of the best civil engineers in the world to the nations that do have the optimism to still do stuff like this.
Now, we're watching and helping nations across the globe further the civil environment with efficient, high capacity roads, bridges and tunnels. Raising islands to stick noisy, smelly planes out of the way - conveniently. Replacing multitudes of ferries with linked road and bridge networks across archipelagos, improving the lives and economies of the areas involved.
And coming up with every single reason why we shouldn't be doing anything of the sort.
Too Drunk to Funk said:
I thought the Country was broke. Do you actually believe we need a road link across the Channel?
No, we are doing quite well considering the s
t state Labour left us in. We still need utmost care but investing in good projects that make business easier is always a good idea.Sway said:
Cross rail isn't ambitious, and is constantly being sniped. The Olympics I hoped would shift our perspective a tad, but that hasn't appeared to have been it's legacy.
I get that we already have a tunnel. It's great for a lot of reasons, however there's still an argument to prepare even more capacity for the future. We seem to be locked into 'it's a twenty year project, but we're not going to need it for ten years - what a waste of cash' mindset.
Where's the creation of capacity in advance? The forward thinking, optimistic nation that builds now for the nation we plan to be?
Crossrail not ambitious?I get that we already have a tunnel. It's great for a lot of reasons, however there's still an argument to prepare even more capacity for the future. We seem to be locked into 'it's a twenty year project, but we're not going to need it for ten years - what a waste of cash' mindset.
Where's the creation of capacity in advance? The forward thinking, optimistic nation that builds now for the nation we plan to be?
It's one of the biggest construction projects in Europe! Granted it took waaaaay too long to get started (typical of large projects in the uk though) but it's on time (ish) and on budget and is an amazing feat of engineering. Although I agree with you about thinking ahead to what we need in the future but not necessarily now - we do seem terribly shortsighted sometimes when it comes to infrastructure projects.
Quoted in the Evening (sub)Standard that it would cost somewhere in the order of £100bn to build so it probably be life expired and in need of replacement before it starts to pay for itself.
But it won't happen though, will it? Boris is doing what he did when he was mayor - make grand announcements first to get headlines and quietly drop it later when it proves to be not feasible.
Jockman said:
valiant said:
But it won't happen though, will it? Boris is doing what he did when he was mayor - make grand announcements first to get headlines and quietly drop it later when it proves to be not feasible.
Boris is looking for a legacy, not being happy with 'Boris Bikes'.
He made his bed... etc
valiant said:
But it won't happen though, will it? Boris is doing what he did when he was mayor - make grand announcements first to get headlines and quietly drop it later when it proves to be not feasible.
Since MXRod started this thread this morning there have been 150+ posts, many raising valid engineering points; many raising practical points over whether or not it is needed, how much it would cost, and/or what else could be done with that sort of money. But very few are looking at the story behind the story. Valiant quoted above is one of the exceptionsThe story behind the story is Boris Johnson. This is all about Mop Head getting his name in the papers again, and yet again the media and PH correspondents are falling for it hook line and sinker.
No matter whether or not it is feasible; no matter whether or not it is affordable; no matter whether or not we actually need it, this bridge has about as much chance of being built in my grandchildren’s lifetime, let alone mine, as I have of spraining my ankle whilst walking on the moon leading a dangerous elk... The government have already rubbished the idea.
Mop Head’s big ideas are usually destined to be on a list of things that aren’t going to get done, and the BBC has conveniently listed a few of them in their covering of the story: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42743909
• Boris Island airport – ditched in 2014
• Boris garden bridge over the Thames – ditched in 2017
• Boris buses – TfL have said they are not buying any more
Face it chaps and chapesses – the bloke is a self-serving political weasel with no particular interest in anything except his own political advancement. Things have not gone particularly well for him since, as an EU remainer, he came out on the leave side with the idea that that would be the best route to get himself the PM job as the darling of the defeated Eurosceptics. When that didn’t happen he bottled out of the race for PM because he saw what a poison chalice it was going to be as Brexit developed. That would have done his career prospects and his ego no good at all.
Then earlier this week we had him regurgitating the red bus lie and once again the media were falling over themselves discussing it. The world, his wife and their pet budgie knows that it was bullshyte but – never mind – it’s Boris saying it so it must be newsworthy. Apparently...
If a bloke were to stand in the middle of your High Street spouting away like Boris does you’d be chucking pennies at him.
Perhaps if we ignore the self-obsessed barsteward he’ll go away. Unlikely but it must be worth a try...
mx5nut said:
The Dangerous Elk said:
Too Drunk to Funk said:
I thought the Country was broke. Do you actually believe we need a road link across the Channel?
Another TDE post blaming the opposition for the establishment's shortcomings 
Try again TrollBoyMX5
Maybe make a contrubution to a thread for once ?
The Dangerous Elk said:
Too Drunk to Funk said:
I thought the Country was broke. Do you actually believe we need a road link across the Channel?
No, we are doing quite well considering the st state Labour left us in. We still need utmost care but investing in good projects that make business easier is always a good idea.Hardly anyone is asking for true investment, that might actually be useful in the future. Throw in Skylon (as mentioned on this thread), thorium salt reactor research, stupidly quick broadband across the country, and a tonne of other stuff. Instead we f
k about with a fairly humdrum railine a couple of hundred miles long like it's armageddon.Some of it could even be cool, just because. Have this as a bridge/tunnel/bridge, with the entrance islands respectively a cockerell and a huge union flag visible from space. Have the terminus/crossover point look suspiciously like a longbow firing an arrow between the nations. s
t like that - just to have people talking about us. I, like many on here, decry Dubai as an utter s
thole. However it is to the modern world what London and Paris was a century ago - a place of wonders that people dream of visiting, and potentially living and working. I wonder where we will be in a century, with our current outlook of gloom. Jockman said:
valiant said:
But it won't happen though, will it? Boris is doing what he did when he was mayor - make grand announcements first to get headlines and quietly drop it later when it proves to be not feasible.
Boris is looking for a legacy, not being happy with 'Boris Bikes'.
valiant said:
Sway said:
Cross rail isn't ambitious, and is constantly being sniped. The Olympics I hoped would shift our perspective a tad, but that hasn't appeared to have been it's legacy.
I get that we already have a tunnel. It's great for a lot of reasons, however there's still an argument to prepare even more capacity for the future. We seem to be locked into 'it's a twenty year project, but we're not going to need it for ten years - what a waste of cash' mindset.
Where's the creation of capacity in advance? The forward thinking, optimistic nation that builds now for the nation we plan to be?
Crossrail not ambitious?I get that we already have a tunnel. It's great for a lot of reasons, however there's still an argument to prepare even more capacity for the future. We seem to be locked into 'it's a twenty year project, but we're not going to need it for ten years - what a waste of cash' mindset.
Where's the creation of capacity in advance? The forward thinking, optimistic nation that builds now for the nation we plan to be?
It's one of the biggest construction projects in Europe! Granted it took waaaaay too long to get started (typical of large projects in the uk though) but it's on time (ish) and on budget and is an amazing feat of engineering. Although I agree with you about thinking ahead to what we need in the future but not necessarily now - we do seem terribly shortsighted sometimes when it comes to infrastructure projects.
Quoted in the Evening (sub)Standard that it would cost somewhere in the order of £100bn to build so it probably be life expired and in need of replacement before it starts to pay for itself.
But it won't happen though, will it? Boris is doing what he did when he was mayor - make grand announcements first to get headlines and quietly drop it later when it proves to be not feasible.
Completely agree wrt Boris. My point is perhaps more a philosophical one rather than a comment on this specific proposal.
Sway said:
I wonder where we will be in a century, with our current outlook of gloom.
Many have become very inward looking in recent years, trying to cut themselves off from an increasingly outward looking world.Scared to try new things - and trying instead to recapture the country's rose tinted "glory years".
Talking to youngsters today gives me hope for the future.
They don't seem to suffer from the same affliction.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff