Fixed links

[The bear]

If the council don't approve fixed links to the Isles we will be in the same situation in 5 or 10 years time and the price will be higher.

Had they approved them back in 2010 they would have all been finished and the isles would be repopulating not depopulating

[Ghostrider]

Is it not a bit more complicated than that?

 

The impression I'm getting, as an outsider looking in, is that there's two sizeable, but polar opposite camps in some of the isles for which a fixed link might be feasible. Those who support fixed links, and those who support keeping the ferries, and both are large enough it doesn't look like making a judgement call on who is the majority without some kind of referendum is realistic.

 

Secondly, is it not the case that choosing either isn't a really viable option anymore anyway. Some of the boats and piers are now of an age the chances of them lasting long enough for a fixed link to be ready aren't great, and in any case, a ferry and all the shoreside facilities will need to still be provided and maintained even if a fixed link exists, as they're needed for backup for when the fixed link isn't usable.

[crofter]

 in any case, a ferry and all the shoreside facilities will need to still be provided and maintained even if a fixed link exists, as they're needed for backup for when the fixed link isn't usable.

Really?  If that is the case, why is there no backup ferry between Lerwick and Scalloway for when they are painting lines on the road at the brig o fitch?

[Wheelsup]

There would presumably still have ferries for Fetlar, Skerries. Papa Stour, Foula and Fair Isle, so there would probably be some back-up/ contingency.  anyway.

[Ghostrider]

 

 in any case, a ferry and all the shoreside facilities will need to still be provided and maintained even if a fixed link exists, as they're needed for backup for when the fixed link isn't usable.

Really?  If that is the case, why is there no backup ferry between Lerwick and Scalloway for when they are painting lines on the road at the brig o fitch?

 

 

I have been told this is what "has to happen" for "resilience", according to some "report" or other on the subject. Perhaps its only a figment of the ferry supporters' imagination, but I can see the sense in it. A bridge is likely to have a good bit of down time in Shetland's weather that won't always prevent a boat, etc, and tunnels by the very fact of what they are are going to have issues unique to themselves that keeping them open in any way while those are attended to is not really feasible. I suppose its a choice whether the folk on an isle would prefer to be isolated during periods where fixed links are out of service, or the extra is paid to have a ferry on stand-by to step in at such times.

 

With a road, even if there is no alternative route available, its extremely few places that either by filling in or excavating around whatever the problem is, a temporary road can't be achieved relatively quickly, there's no such option if your tunnel has three feet of standing water in it needing pumped out, or your bridge needs a road surface supporting girder replaced.

[crofter]

Yes, that is likely true enough.  So savings would be fuel, maybe some wages? Would agree with you about a bridge having to shut occasionally with the wind but  I wonder how likely it is that a tunnel would flood?  

[Ghostrider]

^ I suppose you could get by with fewer/smaller boats than now, which might last a bit longer and be cheaper to maintain (or not, depends whether climate or wer and tear are the biggest issue) as it would only a temporary cover service they'd be used for, and not the all singing all dancing version. But, yeah, it seems to be pretty much down to reduced diesel and salaries bills thats the significant "savings".

 

I was just using flooding as an example, as just about any kind of maintenance/repair is going to be difficult to do without closure, especially if they only put in some kind of single lane, traffic light controlled tunnel, which you can't discount happening if the budget is tight. But, with Shetland's rainfall, and a road sloping down in to it from each end, there's going to have to be a foolproof designed and maintained drainage system in place, or flooding to some degree is going to be a frequent issue, without even allowing for any "permissable seepage" coming in through walls/roof.

[Suffererof1crankymofo]

I bet some of this lot is applicable and how much will apply after BREXIT is anyone's guess:

 

http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/dmrb/vol2/section2/bd7899.pdf

 

I wonder how much of the above came about after the Mont Blanc tunnel disaster.

 

Edit:  There's more Regs. knocking around the web tying in with further EU Directives.

Edited September 23, 2016 by Suffererof1crankymofo

[shetlander]

Had they approved them back in 2010 they would have all been finished and the isles would be repopulating not depopulating

Even if there had been an unlimited pot of cash available back in 2010, I'd very much doubt that would be possible.

 

We're speaking about major infrastructure projects here that will take years of planning, surveying, procurement etc before construction even starts. I'd doubt that it would either be desirable or practical to have four on the go at once, let alone just one.

 

Even if we believe that tunnels can be biggit at the cheaper rates being quoted by the Faroese/Norwegians we're speaking about money the council doesn't have. We can shortly wave cheerio to any prospect of European funding. And if the SIC is going to Holyrood with a begging bowl, why should Bressay, Yell or Whalsay be any more worthy of a fixed link than Arran, Mull or Iona?

 

I'm with Ghostie on this wan. Get thinking about providing new, bigger ferries for Unst, Bressa and Whalsa (the latter being the priority) now and fixed links when they need replacing.

[George.]

 

Had they approved them back in 2010 they would have all been finished and the isles would be repopulating not depopulating

Even if there had been an unlimited pot of cash available back in 2010, I'd very much doubt that would be possible.

 

We're speaking about major infrastructure projects here that will take years of planning, surveying, procurement etc before construction even starts. I'd doubt that it would either be desirable or practical to have four on the go at once, let alone just one.

 

Even if we believe that tunnels can be biggit at the cheaper rates being quoted by the Faroese/Norwegians we're speaking about money the council doesn't have. We can shortly wave cheerio to any prospect of European funding. And if the SIC is going to Holyrood with a begging bowl, why should Bressay, Yell or Whalsay be any more worthy of a fixed link than Arran, Mull or Iona?

 

I'm with Ghostie on this wan. Get thinking about providing new, bigger ferries for Unst, Bressa and Whalsa (the latter being the priority) now and fixed links when they need replacing.

 

 

Aye, your ferries are great - during working hours. Outside of that, it all goes t*ts up, unlike tunnels and bridges that are available 24/7 and should have ben put in thirty or forty years ago.

 

Now which is it? The boys on the ferries know the boys in the council, or the boys in the council know the boys on the ferries?

[shetlander]

^Where did I say l was opposed to the idea of tunnels? My post was purely about what I see as being the practical and financial limitations of getting them any time soon. Whether they should have gone in 30-40 years ago is irrelevant. The fact is they weren't and here we are now.

 

The notion that the top brass in the SIC are opposed to fixed links to protect their own jobs is almost laughable. The likelihood is that most of them will long be retired by the time a programme of fixed links is fully delivered. And just wait to see the number of new officials and/or consultants that'd be needed to deliver such a huge project before we even get there.

[breeksy]

Quoted text:"If that is the case, why is there no backup ferry between Lerwick and Scalloway for when they are painting lines on the road at the brig o fitch?"

 

Because there are two other 'fixed' ways of going between Lerwick and Scalloway... Because there is no need for a ferrry link that would take forever when there are perfectly good roads... What an odd idea

[bodhii71]

Yer tunnels

Edited September 25, 2016 by jollyboy1

[9walker]

From information provided at a Community Council meeting in Whalsay on Thursday 22nd. Firstly, our council have no funds to finance such projects, so funding must be sought from central Government.

 

Among other information from this same meeting:

The Norwegian Government have a policy to supply tunnels to outlying areas.

The Finland Government support its communities requiring sea transport by providing free ferry fares.

The UK Government has none of these policies.

So the first obstacle of a tunnel quest would be to change Government policy, which will be time consuming, as is any political process, and may not be successful.

At a Council meeting in 2010 a clear message was received from Norwegian and UK tunnel experts. If the funds were on the table in front of them, no one would be driving though any tunnels for 10 years.

The 10 years of course would start when the funding becomes available.

So it will be a very long time to wait for this pipe dream.

[George.]

So it will be a very long time to wait for this pipe dream.

 

Yes, it will be a long time to wait for this little pipe dream. A disgustingly long time when you consider how many tunnels have been built, or will be built in the near future, by those around us. But of course, they don't have to hand their wages to the S. I. C.

 

Norway

Sweden

Faroes

 

The places above don't let the huge sense that the ferry crews relations that control the S. I. C have, and inflict upon us, regardless of whether we agree or not.

Edited September 26, 2016 by George.