A Bridge too far? Scotland - Ireland Bridge proposals

Soldato
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Posts
3,619
Glasgow to mull of kintyre is just over 3 hours over a busy enough single carriageway as it is, the rest and be thankful road was closed for awhile due to a major landslide.

port Patrick is roughly 2 hours down mostly motorway and duel carriageway, while passing through east (i think) and south Ayrshire council controlled areas where the roads are actually pretty decent.

South of Ayr there’s 60 odd miles of some of the worst A roads in Scotland before you get to Portpatrick. None of it is motorway or dual carriageway. This would all have to upgraded.
 
Soldato
Joined
26 Aug 2010
Posts
3,516
Location
glasgow
The a77 South of Ayr is by far the best maintained a road network in Scotland. It has to be with the amount of freight headed to and from Cairnryan. There is also the new by pass being built passed Maybole to add to the network. It is a far better road than having to endure the Loch lomond road followed by the rest and be thankful.
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Posts
3,619
That doesn’t say much about Scotland’s A road network then. The A77 is an awful road that’s full of potholes and has been for years now. The Maybole bypass is typical of the lack of ambition shown by road planners in that it’s not dual carriageway and will just have passing lanes. If this bridge ever goes ahead then a huge overhaul will be required.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
20,997
Location
Just to the left of my PC
actually makes more sense than HS2 as a project and with the initial costing of £20 billion :rolleyes: a lot more bang for buck [..]

So it will cost at least £50 billion and probably more.

still think tunnelling would be a far better option for something like this though

So do I, unless there are good geological reasons why not. A 21 mile bridge over rough seas is going to require an awful lot of maintainence and would be sketchy in bad weather. There's a lot less harsh weather underground and long underground tunnels are pretty well tested by now. It would be shorter than the channel tunnel.

But is the permanent link worth that much money? If the money is available, could it be spent more effectively on other infrastructure? Port improvements, road improvements...how much trade flows between Scotland and Ireland anyway? Is this just a political "we're not only considering southeast England" thing?

I like bold construction projects, but is this worth the cost? It wouldn't even be much use as a boast. "The UK is building the 20th longest bridge!" Er, OK, very good. "Yes, but it's over open sea!" OK, that's quite impressive engineering but why are you doing it? "Erm, reasons?"
 

RxR

RxR

Soldato
Joined
16 Aug 2019
Posts
3,296
Location
Australia
Would it enable a bit easier or faster, more economical shipping of exports? Say to the US or elsewhere?

Apart from it obviously raising real estate values on either side (the usual), I can forsee some other benefits.
 
Last edited:

233

233

Soldato
OP
Joined
21 Nov 2004
Posts
13,500
Location
Wishaw
would be interesting to see the thoughts on whether it would be a free bridge or a toll bridge

considering that an artic is something like £250 each way for the ferry

how many trucks travel a day each way?
 
Man of Honour
Joined
30 Oct 2003
Posts
13,228
Location
Essex
Just like it did with the Dartford crossing :)

Damn right now they just bend you over without you actually handing over a penny. Even worse a few weeks back I forgot to pay (didn't occur to me that not all my cars were registered) and had been over it 4 times that day... Got 4 separate fines all in one nice little pack. 4x35 so long as I paid within 14 days, very kind of them indeed.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
20,997
Location
Just to the left of my PC
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-politics-42223732

Not sure why you say Scotland done it will feed all of uk but between Ireland and UK quite a lot.

Because the proposed bridge is between Scotland and Ireland.

But OK, let's assume that this bridge exists and is the primary trade route between Britain and Ireland. If there's a lot of physical stuff being traded between Britain and Ireland, how wide would the bridge have to be to carry it all? How much new road would have to be built in Britain and in Ireland to handle the massive increase in HGVs to and through a single location in Ireland and a single location in Scotland? How much would all that cost? How much would the destruction of the existing ports and shipping cost? How much would maintaining a gargantuan bridge over rough seas cost? It certainly won't be as little as £20 billion.

Is the current system for that trade so bad that it's worth the cost to replace it?

Is there no more effective way of spending many billions of pounds?
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Dec 2006
Posts
5,129
They won't build it.
A tunnel makes more sense.
UK would at most pay half the cost of that.
But ultimately the ROI isn't enough to make it worthwhile.
 
Permabanned
Joined
26 Sep 2019
Posts
494
The Republic is one of the UKs biggest trading partners. In 2018, exports to Ireland were over 35 billion, imports from Ireland were over 21 billion. The UK has had a trade surplus with the Republic for the last 20 years.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Mar 2008
Posts
32,741
It should also be added that when the full-fat 'friction' trade continues and the Irish sea border becomes permanent, lets assume this bridge is built... what then? How ******* far is the tailback going to be either side for passport/customs checks?

On top of a toll that's just so much hassle.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
21,355
Location
Cambridge, UK
From OP BBC article

"Some experts have suggested £15bn might be required for the project but others have said that £20bn would be a "conservative estimate"."

So that will be approx £100bn by the time it actually got built, what I don't understand is why the Government keeps backing these kinds of schemes (HS2).

The A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon Improvement Scheme cost about £1.5bn and is actually going to be brought in early (started in 2017, 21 miles of road), it going to save approximately 20 minutes a day for the 85,000 that use it. To me that is the kind of thing that the Government needs to be doing more of/backing. Re-opening old railway lines which will benefit 100,000's of people a day, not these "vanity" projects.

Currently it cost approx £140 for a ticket from London to Crewe, how much is it going to cost on the new line, less, can't see that!
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Posts
3,619
It could be rail only which would make much more sense especially on the Scotland side where the pre Beeching route still exists in many places minus the rails. That would tie in with a new route from Dumfries to Stranraer. There’s an existing line from Glasgow to Stranraer. Makes much more sense than upgrading hundreds of miles of roads.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Apr 2009
Posts
3,973
Location
Warrington
I'd agree about it being a rail link - would be a lot safer & greener & possibly faster than having cars driving out all that way, and could have drive-on trains like eurotunnel so lorries and cars can get across if they want (maybe with a terminal near Glasgow and also at Stranraer (maybe Carlisle too?) so the road network wouldn't need rebuilding) . The railway would need significant upgrades (including electrification) to support increased traffic. To be honest might be cheaper & better to build a new continental gauge high speed railway line to the bridge anyway though.

However like most others I'm pretty sceptical that this will get anywhere nearer reality than Thames Estuary Airport did.
 
Back
Top Bottom