Ghostrider Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 http://www.jumpstartoutdoors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/feature-450x300.jpg brian.smith 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcullen Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Give it ago, what is there to lose? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lapse Rate Posted October 21, 2014 Report Share Posted October 21, 2014 "It may be a need to lessen crews, due to the staggeringly high wage SIC are paying ferry crew members, they have left and taken far poorer paid jobs in the private sector. How very dare they." Shetlandpeat I'm on my phone so can't quote directly. I would like to know how what a "staggeringly high" wage is? Also where you got your information from? Or actually I can't be bothered. You seem like one of these people who has a vast knowledge of everything and has to comment on every thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgonzola Butt-cheese Posted October 21, 2014 Report Share Posted October 21, 2014 I reckon most of the large oil related traffic uses the sooth mooth at least 95% of the time and that it is safe to enter the sooth mooth 95% of the time. If big boats don't get in afore really severe weather the safest option is to dodge until the weather is suitable to berth safely. It would be entirely valid to fill in the north mooth we a causeway either entirely or with a 15 - 20 metre gap for pleasure and fishing vessels. Stick a tide generator in to satisfy the green minded.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgonzola Butt-cheese Posted October 21, 2014 Report Share Posted October 21, 2014 LHT Could relocate der VTS man so he is in an office upon causeway with finger ready to operate swing bridge......., better view of harbour from that vantage point as an added bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted October 21, 2014 Report Share Posted October 21, 2014 You'll recall that one of the main points of disagreement during the Bressay Bridge saga was whether a 40m airdraft was enough (SIC) or if it should be 50m (LPA)...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgonzola Butt-cheese Posted October 21, 2014 Report Share Posted October 21, 2014 With the correct design of opening bridge you would have unlimited air draft , Most skippers of big vessel's will take one look at the chart and go for the sooth mooth regardless of the extra distance to steam or weather.It would be interesting if somebody from harbour would publish the figures of what passes through each mooth .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgonzola Butt-cheese Posted October 21, 2014 Report Share Posted October 21, 2014 I was meaning breadth when mentioning the gap ( in the case of partial causeway) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheelsup Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 If most of the oil traffic comes in from south, would,nt have to go under the bridge to get to Greenhead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgonzola Butt-cheese Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 It would be sensible to build a bridge or causeway where the gap is narrowest , and that is at the north end of the Green Head base , a large area has already been reclaimed in that area, causeway certainly the cheapest option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suuusssiiieee Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 (edited) I don't have figures myself, but there is an awful lot of oil related movements out the Nort Channel. To be honest it's as much if not more than using the sooth mooth. A bridge in that area may be the obvious choice but unless the LPA are satisfied by the type and position, i think it's unlikely ever to get built. With high winds etc i still think a tunnel is the way to go. Edited October 22, 2014 by suuusssiiieee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heimdal Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 The tide in the north mouth can be pretty strong as it is, a causeway would make it much faster, possibly to the extent that it would be difficult for smaller boats to enter or leave against it. A bridge is the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kavi Ugl Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 I can't see a bridge ever happening due to the movement and size of shipping now. See that huge oil ship at Holmsgarth?. It came in the north mooth so you'll need a height that is safely above such vessels. A bridge would need to be so horrendously high that even a stiff wind would feel like a mini-gale. A tunnel, yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suuusssiiieee Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 And another point, would the LPA really have spent millions on dredging the north channel just so a bridge could be plonked right across the said channel? I don't think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuckleJoannie Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Out of interest I googled Bressay Bridge and came across this short video that visualises the bridge the SIC proposed. http://vimeo.com/2311241 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.