Manchester to Sheffield road tunnel plans

[1978 14]

Much of the work to build a long tunnel has been done before, although the longest carry trains or water. The 15 mile Laerdal Tunnel in Norway has many of the features needed, see; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A6rdal_Tunnel The Norwegians are tunneling everywhere, although traffic volumes are very much lower than ours.

 

Call in the Swiss and Norwegian engineers. They know how it's done.

[Cyclone 10]

The reduction of road traffic pollution would probably have some effects.

 

From my understanding of the technicalities of such a scheme. This tunnel would have to be extremely deep and have features that we have never seen in a tunnel before, such as rest stops and safety refuges as well as redundancy to cope with incidents and maintenance.

I wonder about the stability of some of the terrain at this deep level and I expect that the tunnel would encounter many underground rivers and caves that are currently unknown.

 

The surveys and core sampling of such as scheme is likely to last for years before they could estimate a timeline of construction and what techniques to use in which places.

 

When large schemes have been done before in the region and they have found coal or other mineral deposits, all that has to be brought out and filled with concrete for safety reasons.

they will probably also find hundreds of unmapped mines going back centuries which will have to all be sealed up.

 

Is it longer than the Mont Blanc tunnel?

I suppose it would be, but that has refuge's at least.

[truman 10]

Is it longer than the Mont Blanc tunnel?

I suppose it would be, but that has refuge's at least.

 

The Norwegian tunnel is twice as long as the Mont Blanc..

[geared 320]

The Swiss have just finished a tunnel through the alps haven't they?

The Chinese have built a few themselves.

 

The knowledge is out there and in practise, but if you sit around flapping gums about how difficult it will be nothing will ever get done.

 

Realistically it'll be sub 20 miles, which compared to others isn't massively big, the Swiss one is two 35 mile tunnels I think.

Edited August 24, 2016 by geared

[alchresearch 215]

We need a return to the Victorian philosophy of tunneling for railways and canals. They just got stuff done! When did the British spirit and drive become so "wet"?

 

When the Woodhead tunnels were dug they were driven through mostly Millstone Grit, interspersed in places by patches of argillaceous shale and softer sandstone (ta Wikipedia).

Edited August 24, 2016 by alchresearch

[truman 10]

We need a return to the Victorian philosophy of tunneling for railways and canals. They just got stuff done! When did the British spirit and drive become so "wet"?

 

.

 

Fortunately,for them,there weren't as many groups all with an axe to grind against any environmental issues..how many public hearings/consultaions would have carried out in the 1800's? I'm not sure it's a technical issue ..........

 

---------- Post added 24-08-2016 at 10:17 ----------

 

Realistically it'll be sub 20 miles, which compared to others isn't massively big, the Swiss one is two 35 mile tunnels I think.

 

A road tunnel?

[geared 320]

A road tunnel?

 

Rail isn't it?

[vincentb 10]

We need a return to the Victorian philosophy of tunneling for railways and canals. They just got stuff done!

 

They also got stuff wrong quite often, caused lots of environmental damage, and went bankrupt with costs they hadn't planned for. To take one example, the Standedge canal tunnel:

 

1. 1793: planned
   
2. 1794: approved by parliament, work starts
   
3. 1795: new engineer appointed
   
4. 1797: water problems causing delays and expense
   
5. 1799: new sub-contractor replaces the first
   
6. 1801: chief engineer leaves the project
   
7. 1804: new sub-committee looking into how to complete the tunnel
   
8. 1806: new act of parliament to raise additional finance
   
9. 1807: new chief engineer appointed
   
10. 1809: two ends of the tunnel meet
    
11. 1811: tunnel completed and starts taking traffic
    

 

The civil engineering profession has learned from its mistakes, thankfully!

Edited August 24, 2016 by vincentb
correction

[truman 10]

They also got stuff wrong quite often, caused lots of environmental damage, and went bankrupt with costs they hadn't planned for. To take one example, the Standedge canal tunnel:

 

1. 1793: planned
   
2. 1794: approved by parliament, work starts
   
3. 1795: new engineer appointed
   
4. 1797: water problems causing delays and expense
   
5. 1799: new sub-contractor replaces the first
   
6. 1801: chief engineer leaves the project
   
7. 1804: new sub-committee looking into how to complete the tunnel
   
8. 1806: new act of parliament to raise additional finance
   
9. 1807: new chief engineer appointed
   
10. 1809: two ends of the tunnel meet
    
11. 1811: tunnel completed and starts taking traffic
    

 

The civil engineering profession has learned from its mistakes, thankfully!

 

A lot of delay was caused by them hitting a band of milly grit which they hadn't anticipated..

[hicksy3 10]

We need a return to the Victorian philosophy of tunneling for railways and canals. They just got stuff done! When did the British spirit and drive become so "wet"?

 

When the Woodhead tunnels were dug they were driven through mostly Millstone Grit, interspersed in places by patches of argillaceous shale and softer sandstone (ta Wikipedia).

 

The British spirit and drive became so 'wet' when companies governed by shareholders and boards, rather than run by individuals became the norm. For every one Victorian who had to take a decision, we now have to reach consensus with about a hundred times that many individuals. Moneyholders like insurers and pension funds also bankroll a lot of big projects now and they're incredibly risk averse.

It's not just the British, look up the Wikipedia entry for Berlin Brandenburg airport for a good dose of Schadenfreude.

 

 

Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android

[truman 10]

The British spirit and drive became so 'wet' when companies governed by shareholders and boards, rather than run by individuals became the norm. For every one Victorian who had to take a decision, we now have to reach consensus with about a hundred times that many individuals. Moneyholders like insurers and pension funds also bankroll a lot of big projects now and they're incredibly risk averse.

It's not just the British, look up the Wikipedia entry for Berlin Brandenburg airport for a good dose of Schadenfreude.

 

 

Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android

 

I suppose another difference is that "back in the day" the railways were built by private companies rather than a government department..

[alchresearch 215]

I suppose another difference is that "back in the day" the railways were built by private companies rather than a government department..

 

And workers wages and living conditions were pretty awful. I was recently reading about life for workers at the Ribblehead viaduct.

 

http://blog.nrm.org.uk/ribblehead-viaduct-jericho/