Scotland-Ireland bridge

Original post by Napp

That sounds like one of the most moronic ideas i've ever heard of. And i thought the bridge to france idea was hairbrained.

Any expansion. A few nations make aim to connect parts of their countries with bridges. Is China stupid for having a bridge to Hong Kong?

Original post by artful_lounger

One might want to consider whether either Scotland or Northern Ireland even want such a bridge imposed upon them by England, in the first instance...

The Unionists in NI would love it, the SNP would find a way to complain at the evil English even if the Scottish people were being offered silver and gold.

Reply 43

Original post by Bang Outta Order

That ...

is a physical impossibility

Utterly useless

Impractical as bridges are meant for regular commuting and no one is going on a quest from Scotland to Ireland regularly via some endless bridge 😂

And a national security disaster

Is this the case? It's definitely technically possible even if expensive and 30 miles long probably only means a 30 minute drive or less on a train. As has been alluded to a lot of freight and passenger usage did transfer from air to Chunnel. Done correctly this could be of benefit, especially to Glasgow, Edinburgh and Newcastle.

It will be interesting to see what Sinn Fein and it's I'll make of this.

Reply 44

Original post by Rakas21

Is this the case? It's definitely technically possible even if expensive and 30 miles long probably only means a 30 minute drive or less on a train. As has been alluded to a lot of freight and passenger usage did transfer from air to Chunnel. Done correctly this could be of benefit, especially to Glasgow, Edinburgh and Newcastle.

It will be interesting to see what Sinn Fein and it's I'll make of this.

How would it be a benefit, directly annexing Ireland to UK mainland....thats like saying it would benefit United States to build a bridge to Puerto Rico! This would only benefit Ireland, excluding the cost, and the onslaught and influx of frivolous migration and trafficking. Again.

Reply 45

Original post by Rakas21

Is this the case? It's definitely technically possible even if expensive and 30 miles long probably only means a 30 minute drive or less on a train. As has been alluded to a lot of freight and passenger usage did transfer from air to Chunnel. Done correctly this could be of benefit, especially to Glasgow, Edinburgh and Newcastle.

It will be interesting to see what Sinn Fein and it's I'll make of this.

I'm not an engineer but I can't help feeling sceptical about floating bridges given the storm conditions that often arise on Britain's north-west coasts - are these worse than the ones that affect other super-long floating bridges globally?

Johnson/Cummings have simply brought this up as a distraction from various issues, but mainly to draw attention away from Johnson's serial lying about the customs posts between Britain and Northern Ireland, which are most definitely needed under the withdrawal agreement and which Bojo just persists in denial after denial about in the teeth of all the facts. It's hard to see a bridge doing much good if you have to enter a long customs queue when you reach the other side.

There is about as much chance of this bridge being built as there is of Brexit being a stunning success. :rolleyes:

Original post by Bang Outta Order

That ...

is a physical impossibility

Utterly useless

Impractical as bridges are meant for regular commuting and no one is going on a quest from Scotland to Ireland regularly via some endless bridge 😂

And a national security disaster

The bridge is almost certainly technically possibly - lots of things are if you throw enough money at them. The question is how much money would it actually cost? He's just made up the £20 billion figure as there is no design to actually cost. And given how minor the benefits will be, I'm struggling to see how it'll be in any way worth it.

Reply 47

Original post by Smack

The bridge is almost certainly technically possibly - lots of things are if you throw enough money at them. The question is how much money would it actually cost? He's just made up the £20 billion figure as there is no design to actually cost. And given how minor the benefits will be, I'm struggling to see how it'll be in any way worth it.

Well in today's money the Chunnel would in theory cost about 12bn and tunnel should be more expensive than a bridge.

The fact it's only 30 miles long does limit the cost somewhat.

Reply 48

Napp

22

Original post by Rakas21

Any expansion. A few nations make aim to connect parts of their countries with bridges. Is China stupid for having a bridge to Hong Kong?

1. China has the money
2. China and Hong Kong are already hyper connected and thus it makes relative sense there
3. The South China Sea is somewhat calmer than the Irish Sea.

Reply 49

Joinedup

Original post by Fullofsurprises

I'm not an engineer but I can't help feeling sceptical about floating bridges given the storm conditions that often arise on Britain's north-west coasts - are these worse than the ones that affect other super-long floating bridges globally?

Johnson/Cummings have simply brought this up as a distraction from various issues, but mainly to draw attention away from Johnson's serial lying about the customs posts between Britain and Northern Ireland, which are most definitely needed under the withdrawal agreement and which Bojo just persists in denial after denial about in the teeth of all the facts. It's hard to see a bridge doing much good if you have to enter a long customs queue when you reach the other side.

There is about as much chance of this bridge being built as there is of Brexit being a stunning success. :rolleyes:

Well a bridge being completed or not is a matter of fact, Brexit being a stunning success or not is just a matter of opinion... I think the current prime minister will have finished the final volume of 'Brexit: My role in it's stunning success' before the bridge is opened.
(and everyone knows that book is going to get written even if half the population are living in cardboard boxes)

Reply 50

Original post by Napp

1. China has the money
2. China and Hong Kong are already hyper connected and thus it makes relative sense there
3. The South China Sea is somewhat calmer than the Irish Sea.

that was the dumbest question I ever heard lmfao can't believe the distance between Hong Kong and China much like the relationship between Mexico and Arizona or Florida and Cuba has been compared to the vast space between Ireland and UK mainland :teehee:

or like comparing it to the distance between London and France to new Zealand and Australia. 😁

Reply 51

So I checked a map. Something many of you didn't do.

One of the closest points between Irish mainland and Scottish mainland...is Larne, Ireland to Portpatrick, Scotland by the looks of it...

First of all, neither of these places are points of interest lol yet most likely the places from where there would stretch a bridge...
Meaning you'd have to travel there first. Through remote hamlets and villages by car or irregular bus routes I can imagine for towns like them..You don't certainly think the bridge will connect from Glasgow or Edinburgh to Dublin or Belfast do you LMAO that's not how bridges work...lol they connect two edges of land right before a body of water...

yet departing and arriving to either of these places would be a long deserted car travel from your locations, first of all...total travel time between the two points currently is several hours and dozens of kilometres... Sure crossing the bridge will be a simple commute i guess, but once you're off the bridge in either territory...youve still got dozens of more kilometres before you even touch any useful part of the nations at all! Unless they also plan on disturbing nature loving villages with ultra urban development to make these places and their outskirts useful at all to the proposed bridge commuters??

How bloody stupid lol

At least Shenzhen to Hong Kong are two massive points of interests....

Reply 52

Original post by Napp

3. The South China Sea is somewhat calmer than the Irish Sea.

They have tropical storms (typhoons = hurricanes in the Pacific) from time to time - they sound as bad, or worse than the storms we get. The Hong Kong - Zuhai isn't a floater, it's a viaduct with columns into the sea bed and some suspension bridged sections that allow shipping through. It's a longer version of some similar bridges in the US.

Reply 53

Napp

22

Original post by Fullofsurprises

They have tropical storms (typhoons = hurricanes in the Pacific) from time to time - they sound as bad, or worse than the storms we get. The Hong Kong - Zuhai isn't a floater, it's a viaduct with columns into the sea bed and some suspension bridged sections that allow shipping through. It's a longer version of some similar bridges in the US.

Err the pacific isnt quite the same as the south china sea... I live on the coast of the pacific and i'm 14hrs by jet from HK..
I am aware of what the bridge there is though.

Reply 54

Original post by Napp

Err the pacific isnt quite the same as the south china sea... I live on the coast of the pacific and i'm 14hrs by jet from HK..
I am aware of what the bridge there is though.

Yeah, sorry, I didn't mean to say that the SCS is part of the Pacific, just on that 'side' of the world, ie, the big circulatory storms are not called hurricanes there.

Reply 55

Drewski

19

Original post by Bang Outta Order

So I checked a map. Something many of you didn't do.

One of the closest points between Irish mainland and Scottish mainland...is Larne, Ireland to Portpatrick, Scotland by the looks of it...

First of all, neither of these places are points of interest lol yet most likely the places from where there would stretch a bridge...
Meaning you'd have to travel there first. Through remote hamlets and villages by car or irregular bus routes I can imagine for towns like them..You don't certainly think the bridge will connect from Glasgow or Edinburgh to Dublin or Belfast do you LMAO that's not how bridges work...lol they connect two edges of land right before a body of water...

yet departing and arriving to either of these places would be a long deserted car travel from your locations, first of all...total travel time between the two points currently is several hours and dozens of kilometres... Sure crossing the bridge will be a simple commute i guess, but once you're off the bridge in either territory...youve still got dozens of more kilometres before you even touch any useful part of the nations at all! Unless they also plan on disturbing nature loving villages with ultra urban development to make these places and their outskirts useful at all to the proposed bridge commuters??

How bloody stupid lol

At least Shenzhen to Hong Kong are two massive points of interests....

The Humber bridge connects two ****holes, but that works pretty well...

I like the ambition of it. I like big civil engineering projects. It would be a significant boon for employment in the areas.

Whether it would really help much, I don't know.

Reply 56

Original post by Drewski

The Humber bridge connects two ****holes, but that works pretty well...

I like the ambition of it. I like big civil engineering projects. It would be a significant boon for employment in the areas.

Whether it would really help much, I don't know.

I think they should develop the areas the bridge will connect. Before they make a bridge leading nothing to nothing.

Also...humber is 2km....it works fine because it's a basic commuting bridge. Idk what the hell the Ire-Scot bridge will be..i think ferries and lorry docks should be the end. I don't mean to be so passionate about this haha but I struggle to see the benefit. I do feel it's a plea bargain to remainers to believe in UK's economy post brexit ...and what bothers me about that is wasting time on a ****e bridge when it needs to develop its cities first...

Reply 57

Original post by Bang Outta Order

So I checked a map. Something many of you didn't do.

One of the closest points between Irish mainland and Scottish mainland...is Larne, Ireland to Portpatrick, Scotland by the looks of it...

First of all, neither of these places are points of interest lol yet most likely the places from where there would stretch a bridge...
Meaning you'd have to travel there first. Through remote hamlets and villages by car or irregular bus routes I can imagine for towns like them..You don't certainly think the bridge will connect from Glasgow or Edinburgh to Dublin or Belfast do you LMAO that's not how bridges work...lol they connect two edges of land right before a body of water...

yet departing and arriving to either of these places would be a long deserted car travel from your locations, first of all...total travel time between the two points currently is several hours and dozens of kilometres... Sure crossing the bridge will be a simple commute i guess, but once you're off the bridge in either territory...youve still got dozens of more kilometres before you even touch any useful part of the nations at all! Unless they also plan on disturbing nature loving villages with ultra urban development to make these places and their outskirts useful at all to the proposed bridge commuters??

How bloody stupid lol

At least Shenzhen to Hong Kong are two massive points of interests....

On the Larne side it’s already connected to Belfast by about 20 miles of road, the A/M77 also gets you to Glasgow (not sure how much of it is duel carriage so you may need to upgrade to allow HGV travel to Glasgow in about an hour). Same on the A75 which exists and goes to the start of the M6.

So road wise you may need to build bypasses and new lanes but that’s not especially expensive or unfeasable.

The main cost will be the new railway connections (there’s no point building just a road bridge, it would never have a chance of justifying the cost). You would pretty much have to build new railways from Kilmarnock and Dumfries just to connect to existing lines to Glasgow and Newcastle.

Reply 58