swe62 334 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Why did NET demolish the brick built bridge and replace it with the cheap nasty new.one ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Scriv 168 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 I am not in any way a civil engineer; but my guess would be that it was considerably cheaper to demolish it and build a new one, than to rebuild the existing bridge to the acceptable standard. Remember that it had received no structural maintenance for the thick end of half a century. Despite those structures looking incredibly solid, like anything else they need looking after or else they deteriorate beyond economical repair. Doesn't mean I think the new bridge is better though. You're right, it does look cheap and nasty. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cliff Ton 10,457 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Not just the bridge over Canal Street, the whole GC viaduct system through Broad Marsh was demolished, to be replaced by a new viaduct system - in the same place - for the NET. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TBI 2,351 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 I see there is still a bit of the old viaduct in use. Six arches still span from the canal to Station St. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cliff Ton 10,457 Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 There were two railway bridges crossing Canal Street; the GC mainline near what is now the Crown Court, and one further along which was the line towards London Road and Seninton. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TBI 2,351 Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 That's interesting Cliff Ton, I've simply no recollection of the Fitchett & Woolacott Bridge. Although I do remember where the two bridges were side by side at the end of Cliff Rd. Actually, now looking at the bridge relating to the thread, I reckon I prefer the new one. Just looking at the picture further, I see the old Midland Magneto garage just to the left under the bridge. Spent much money there having regular repairs to the electrics of my two Triumph Vitesses in the early seventies. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
swe62 334 Posted January 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 ok lets assume it was not worth repair where did the millions of blue bricks worth about 40pence each second hand go to ,and who had the money ,nobody would believe they went to landfill Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Merthyr Imp 729 Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 According to a note on the following website the new viaduct needed to be higher: http://www.nettrams.net/PictureGallery/PGDriverView/DVPages/STWSP02F.htm Quote Link to post Share on other sites
swe62 334 Posted January 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 tbi #4 some of the arches have been reused ,so the others can,t have been that much too low Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TBI 2,351 Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 I said the some of the arches were left in place, nothing about them being too low. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TBI 2,351 Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 #9 With you now swe62, I didn't notice the #8 post, duh. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bilbraborn 1,594 Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 Maybe the powers that be didn't like the old bridges. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cliff Ton 10,457 Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 A lot of photos and info on the subject in this thread. http://nottstalgia.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=13027&hl Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Merthyr Imp 729 Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 A bit more information, from 'The Rise & Fall of Nottingham's Railway Network Vol. 3 - Off the Beaten Track' by Hayden J. Reed, published by Book Law. '[The] short section of the old GCR structure [crossing the Nottingham Canal] was incorporated into the NET Line One...The additional width required for platforms necessitated the construction of a reinforced concrete cantilever deck above the original structure.' 'The first half kilometre of route follows the line and level of the Great Central's London Extension. The steel bridges that carried the GCR had disappeared long before the NET project evolved, but six spans of the old GC viaduct to the north of Station Street, including the crossing of the Beeston Canal were reused with new cantilevered parapets to carry the platforms of the terminus. Initial designs had planned to use more of the GCR structure to the north of Canal Street, but the desire for clear space beneath the structure to permit development, and the complexity of providing a [tramway] connection access to Middle Hill led to the old arches being abandoned in favour of a new purpose built structure.' 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
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.