MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Means the old one is so quiet!
[img] 
?oh=47638e9b391597151f1bb5560d973302&oe=5A57AFFA[/img]
Quite tempted to cycle down the carriageway on the way home, though wonder if there will be flashing orange lights waiting for me!
I think that there probably would be,still tempting though 🙂
edit{ was there nae busses using it then?} edit
Pull a wheelie all the way across...
Am I correct in remembering that the new crossing doesn't have any cycle or pedestrian facilities on it?
Seems a bit of a step backwards that, compared to the old one with a pretty decent (for the UK) pedestrian/cycleway on each side.
I realise the old one isn't going anywhere just yet, but still... 🙁
fasthaggis - Member
I think that there probably would be,still tempting thoughedit{ was there nae busses using it then?} edit
Think that happens later. Initially closed to all traffic except bike and foot.
New bridge is a motorway, cant have cyclists or pedestrians on it, old one isn't.
Seems a bit of a step backwards that, compared to the old one with a pretty decent (for the UK) pedestrian/cycleway on each side.
yep and it still will and will be open for use for exactly those purposes !
the new one has been classified a motorway so they don't have to make ped/cycle provision, rather than vice versa. There is no intrinsic requirement for motorwaying it. Hrmph
New bridge is a motorway, cant have cyclists or pedestrians on it, old one isn't.
The old one is dual carriageway A(M)-style, the pedestrian/cycle provision is entirely separate from the roadway, as it [i]could[/i] have been on the new one if they'd cared to plan for it.
the new one has been classified a motorway so they don't have to make ped/cycle provision, rather than vice versa. There is no intrinsic requirement for motorwaying it. Hrmph
Hrmmph indeed, imagine having a separate bridge (which was already there) for cyclists and pedestrians. Should have spent millions on knocking the old bridge down and adding more cost to the new bridge by adding dedicated cycling/pedestrian access in a position where they can take full advantage of the health-giving benefits of diesel and petrol fumes.
EDIT - my mistake, the old bridge will become a "public transport corridor" so buses, bikes and pedestrians still use it. So still some diesel fumes to deal with
BBSB: that's fine as long as they commit to keeping the old bridge open and in a state of good repair.
How many years before it becomes "uneconomical" to have a bridge that size just for buses and bike/foot traffic?
Why would they pay extra when there is a perfectly good bridge right next to it that cyclists and pedestrians can use? What next, modify the rail bridge?The old one is dual carriageway A(M)-style, the pedestrian/cycle provision is entirely separate from the roadway, as it could have been on the new one if they'd cared to plan for it.
The old one is also being kept so that it can be used when there is maintenance on the new one.
That's what I thought - old bridge to be bike+bus etc. bridge until it rusts too much.
Odd about the opening of the new one too. Open it, close it so they can do a walk on the new bridge, close it again for an opening ceremony, open it again, close it again. Then open it properly.
Can't they just have the sponsored walks and opening ceremonies on the same day, and then open it to traffic? Or was the beeb story a bit misleading?
I'm sure the old one will get used when there are crashes/accidents/incidents on the new one
Why would they pay extra when there is a perfectly good bridge right next to it that cyclists and pedestrians can use?
Because, as anyone who has had the "road tax" argument knows, we ALL pay for roads (and bridges), including cyclists and pedestrians.
The current situation is fine, but fast-forward a decade or two and people will be questioning why they are paying so much money keeping an ageing second bridge open and maintained just for buses and cyclist/pedestrians.
I always thought this with Second Severn Crossing (the old one even though also a motorway has a segregated pedestrian/bike path but the new one doesn't). For the SSC I can only assume that it's because after the bridge (Welsh side) there's still only motorway for quite a way so they wouldn't have had a simple connection - maybe that's the case for the new Forth bridge? If not then it's a stupid design decision not to have a bike/pedestrian path.
...and the prize for the first breakdown goes to..
[url= https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/local/fife/500292/queensferry-crossing-lorry-breakdown-leaves-drivers-queuing-back-halbeath/ ]An HGV[/url]
🙄
and as contingency for closures on the new bridge.an ageing second bridge open and maintained just for buses and cyclist/pedestrians.
I'm sure I read it originally had pedestrian and cycling provision, but was cut to save money. When I first saw that walk the bridge thing I was surprised they were making such a big deal that this is your one and only chance to cross on foot, like it was a good thing they left paths at the side out. As above, if they keep the other bridge open then fine, but bridges don't last forever.
contingency for closures on the new bridge
I wonder how many other places keep a spare bridge handy just in case 😆
IME a good percentage of the closures of the old bridge were due to high winds and bad weather anyway.
That's what I thought - old bridge to be bike+bus etc. bridge until it rusts too much.
Actually, this means they can repair the old bridge properly, instead of a rushed bodge (a very good bodge, mind) because it had to be reopened ASAP.
The new bridge has no cycling/ped infrastructure cause it doesn't go anywhere near towns, villages, inhabited or anything else type areas.
FRB - links two towns South and North Q'Ferry.
QFXing - takes a spur off the M90 and links to the M9. Why would you want to walk or cycle there?
Isn't it the case the new one has side wind protection so speeds can be higher.
Love the moan about the breakdown 🙄
I wonder what'll happen to a high sided vehicle in crosswinds.
Would it be foolish to assume the new bridge will outlast the old bridge?
Actually, this means they can repair the old bridge properly, instead of a rushed bodge (a very good bodge, mind) because it had to be reopened ASAP.
..and they plan to increase the life of the old bridge by removing all those padlocks 😉
Also the old bridge's lifespan's increased massively by reducing the load on it, one of the reasons it needed replacement was that it was way way over its planned capacity (the cable corrosion I think has actually been solved?).
The new bridge should outlast the old though so there's still going to be a gap in the future. Or maybe we'll all just teleport over by then.
Heh, just made the mistake of reading the Scotsman comments section on this 🙂
Can I just be the first to say "bloody SNP!" I am sure it will appear at some point. Rumour is that they are keeping two bridges to facilitate the return of Fifers before dark as smoothly as possible.
[b]The Return Of Fifers Before Dark[/b]
Good movie title right there 😛
There's a bridge from Denmark to Sweeden where cyclists have to take the train as there is no cycleway.
The maintenance costs for the exisiting bridge will reduce dramatically once there is limited traffic on it. It will be the same maintenance staff/operating company covering both road bridges so probably not much of an overall increase in costs between running one massively overused bridge and two within capacity.The current situation is fine, but fast-forward a decade or two and people will be questioning why they are paying so much money keeping an ageing second bridge open and maintained just for buses and cyclist/pedestrians.
Edukator - Reformed TrollThere's a bridge from Denmark to Sweeden where cyclists have to take the train as there is no cycleway.
And tbh, that could make a lot of sense here too- a shuttle from civilisation to civilisation, rather than a huge loop through nowhere.
Isn't it the case the new one has side wind protection so speeds can be higher.
So won't need [url= 
]this NSFW warning sign[/url] so often 😀
they just don't build them like they used to, 127 years since the Forth rail bridge was completed
There were high hopes in Kirkliston that the opening of the new bridge and associated infrastructure might ease the chronic congestion we seem to experience as all of Fife uses the village as a rat run to West Lothian.
Traffic conditions as of 3pm this afternoon - Backed up as far as the eye can see... 🙄
Aye,but it gives the kids of Cheesetoon something to watch at the crossroads. 😉
If the new one is a motorway, how do learner drivers cross the Forth?
Traffic conditions as of 3pm this afternoon - Backed up as far as the eye can see...
Induced demand... make it easier for people to travel by car and more will.
yourguitarhero - Member
If the new one is a motorway, how do learner drivers cross the Forth?
From some time in 2018, learner drivers (in dual control cars with a qualified instructor present) will be able to drive on motorways. [url= https://www.gov.uk/government/news/learner-drivers-will-be-allowed-on-motorways-from-2018 ]Source.[/url]
I don't know about other learners and other vehicles prohibited from driving on motorways. Perhaps mopeds and people being taught to drive by their parents will be allowed onto the old bridge?
No reason for a learner in a car to cross the bridge really... Should let ptws onto the old road bridge.
If the new one is a motorway, how do learner drivers cross the Forth?
[img] 
[/img]
Clackmannanshire bridge or the Kincardine bridge.If the new one is a motorway, how do learner drivers cross the Forth?
The old bridge is/will be open to non motorway traffic atleast that was the plan?
So...
Tractors local traffic non learners etc bikes peds busses etc on the old bridge.
If the new one is a motorway, how do learner drivers cross the Forth?
Why would we want the next generation of Fifers learning how to escape?
The old bridge is/will be open to non motorway traffic atleast that was the plan?So...
Tractors local traffic non learners etc bikes peds busses etc on the old bridge.
And every wise guy from Fife with a passenger and L plates fitted even though they have a license 😀
Busses, taxis, pedestrians and cyclists only I'm sure.The old bridge is/will be open to non motorway traffic atleast that was the plan?So...
Tractors local traffic non learners etc bikes peds busses etc on the old bridge.
What about horses?
From [url] https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/35785/forth-replacement-crossing-q-and-a-30-mar-2017.pdf [/url]:
What provision has been made for motorcycles?
As a consequence of the motorway status of the bridge, motorcycles with an engine capacity less than 50cc will not be permitted on the Queensferry Crossing. Learner riders with a Compulsory Basic Training certificate will be allowed to use the existing Forth Road Bridge on motorcycles, displaying €œL-plates" with an engine capacity of less than 50cc. Those wishing to cross the Forth Replacement Bridge on a motorcycle with an engine capacity of 50cc or greater will have to ensure that they are in possession of a full licence.
So buses and taxis aren't the only motorised traffic that will continue to use the old road bridge.
Hate to say it, but using both bridges for different vehicle types sounds terribly sensible...and well thought out.
Whoda funk it.
The new bridge has no cycling/ped infrastructure cause it doesn't go anywhere near towns, villages, inhabited or anything else type areas.
With a design life >100 years, I'd be prepared to bet (somewhat pointlessly, as I'll be dead) that at some point in it's lifespan the bridge will connect more populous areas.
On top of that, the north side hits land at just a few hundred metres apart, and the south side maybe a kilometre. Hardly entering the wilderness! (Ignoring the whole Fife thing)
Did they really build pedestrian access into the old bridge to give the folk of North and South Queensferry a nice but noisy walk? Sounds like bllx to me.
I crossed it late last night to pick up my mother from the airport naively thinking it would be quiet. Every Fifer and his dug was doing a loop of the bridge too. The traffic jam extended from the slip road roundabout on the south side all the way back to the Admiralty flyover. We still point at planes on this side 😀
I think one of the reasons for lack of pedestrian access to the new bridge is to make it harder for people to jump off.
We still point at planes on this side
....and buses.
"Look! A hoose wi' wheels !"
I think one of the reasons for lack of pedestrian access to the new bridge is to make it harder for people to jump off.
Does jumping off the old bridge not have the same effect?
No, it's Scotland the further east in the central belt you go the more soft and effete everything gets.
I can't think of any decent reason for not including pedestrian access in the new bridge other than budgetary constraints.
Seems you won't be cycling on any bridge on Monday
The bridge will be closed to both pedestrians and cyclists on Monday for the Queen’s visit. The east footway re-opens for use by both from Tuesday.Read more at: http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/transport/drivers-cause-traffic-chaos-on-queensferry-crossing-first-day-1-4546978
GrahamS - yes I believe it does. It just means that they don't have two bridges to monitor round the clock.
If only there were other, cheaper, and more effective ways to prevent people jumping off the bridges.
[img] 
[/img]
Nice and dry inside too. And no wind concerns.
ACH...bloody photobucket...
I can't think of any decent reason for not including pedestrian access in the new bridge other than budgetary constraints.
I think anything that keeps people from ending up in Rosyth is a good thing 😉
Leaving work at 8.15pm last night I thought I'd take a detour over the new bridge - nope! backed up for about 3 miles. Ended up cutting through Newgate and home via the usual M9.
Graham S - The numerous fire escape doors required from a 1.6 mile long enclosed walkway may give somewhat easy access to the outside.
Okay, but wouldn't such fire escapes open onto the roadside rather than a hundred foot fall to the sea??
Point is, such things [i]can[/i] be designed and exist in other countries, it just requires the public and political will.
I expect they might well open onto the roadway, which in turn would mean you need safe zones at the escapes, with no access to possible jumping areas.... and so it goes on. Suicides from the existing bridge are a big problem. They aren't publicised any more.
Yes I see your point of view, but I suppose like most things it comes down to money and political issues.
Other countries also seem to be able to build nice new houses. We don't seem to be able to do that in the UK.
Odd about the opening of the new one too. Open it, close it so they can do a walk on the new bridge, close it again for an opening ceremony, open it again, close it again. Then open it properly.
The contract with the developer was based on the bridge being open to traffic by a deadline. If the Scottish Govt had refused, they would have been in breach.
So it opens to allow the developer to meet their contractual requirements. Then closes again so that there can be the grand opening, walking across, etc. Had it been ready further in advance, they probably would have waited to put traffic on it instead.
There's a bridge from Denmark to Sweeden where cyclists have to take the train as there is no cycleway.
I'd imagine that has something to do with the overall crossing being 16km long, including 3.5km that isn't a bridge but a fume filled tunnel....
I'd imagine that has something to do with the overall crossing being 16km long, including 3.5km that isn't a bridge but a fume filled tunnel....
Not to mention the risks of finding a dead politician at the border mark?
The new bridge has no cycling/ped infrastructure cause it doesn't go anywhere near towns, villages, inhabited or anything else type areas.
No, as pointed out above, the north landing is right next to the existing bridge, and the south landing and feeder road runs right past the west boundary of South Queensferry.
They dropped cycling and pedestrian access to save money. I think it's a disgrace that they would even consider building major transport infrastructure without such access nowadays.
I commuted by bike over the existing bridge for a couple of years, and I don't think there was a single week where there wasn't sections of the path obstructed with repair vehicles or barriers. I rode over on Monday, and only one side was open, sections were still blocked for repair work, and a works truck was driving along the cycle path. The north exit was a mess of temporary coned paths and works access. I'll be surprised if it changes much in the future, and of course the old bridge will still be subject to high wind closures. Of course, cycling commuters don't need all weather access.
I think they also lost the opportunity for a ready made tourist attraction; a cycle route that looped around both bridges would have been really popular with visitors.
It's just really short sighted and shows how cycling and pedestrian access is still an afterthought, not an integral part of Scottish transport planning (see also tram routes...)
contingency for closures on the new bridge
I wonder how many other places keep a spare bridge handy just in caseIME a good percentage of the closures of the old bridge were due to high winds and bad weather anyway.
[cough]Severn Bridges[/cough]
The original bridge built in 1963 or thereabouts, is a two-lane motorway, originally the M4, now M48, and has all normal motorway regulations, despite only being two lanes, it also has a footpath and cycle-path on each side.
It functions in parallel with the new bridge, which doesn't have a path either side, and is particularly handy when someone puts a van on its side on one carriageway, like the other day when I had to drop a car off in Newport, then
come back to get home, so we just turned off onto the M48 and used the old bridge, looking across I could see stationary trucks in the middle of the new bridge.
Hint: look upstream.contingency for closures on the new bridge
I wonder how many other places keep a spare bridge handy just in case