D6130
Established Member
No it's not the same bridge. It's a new one built on the site of the old one....which, being single track, was unfortunately not wide enough for a two lane road.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Long or high railway bridges you can walk over
- Thread starter aavm
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
The Connel Bridge over the Falls of Lora was a combined bridge until the Ballahulish branch was closed. Though now road only, it originally opened as a rail only bridge, but offered a car carrying service (one car at a time) until the roadway was added just before WW1. A fun experience for those enjoying motoring holidays in the Highlands c1910!
No it's not the same bridge. It's a new one built on the site of the old one....which, being single track, was unfortunately not wide enough for a two lane road.
EDIT: Had a think, presumably although not wide enough for two lanes of road traffic, the Connel bridge was wide enough for one and the Cregan bridge wasn't? It certainly was a surprise the first time I drove FW to Oban and discovered it! I was living in Leeds so hadn't heard about it.
There must be another reason the bridge was built. The road at Falls of Lora is on the original bridge, is single track and has traffic lights.
BTW the bridge at Cregan saves a long slow trip around the top of Loch Creran which was especially entertaining if there was a very high tide as the normal road floods and the alternative has to be used. Terrific gardens there as well if anyone is of a horticultural bent.
Last edited:
DelW
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 5,934
The Creagan road bridge is a modern deck on the original railway bridge piers. The four spans are relatively short and use a normal composite deck (concrete slab on steel plate girders). That would be a relatively cheap rebuild.
The Connel bridge has to be a long single span because of the depth and fast flow of the channel it crosses. Providing a new deck would need a completely new truss to be fabricated, or its replacement by a suspension or cable stay structure. Any of those would be a far more expensive job.
In summary: the cost/benefit ratio for the two would be very different.
(Added: the Connel bridge would still have been maintained after the Ballachulish line closed, because of the road use. Creagan bridge was left unused for over 30 years, so its trusses may well have deteriorated in that time).
Last edited:
why would it be needed? When we were there (admittedly quite a few years ago) there was hardly any road traffic and it seemed perfectly adequate.
I'm remembering the - alleged - Dept of Transport rules: if there is ever any [road] traffic congestion we need to look at a scheme to ease it... but if a railway line is ever quiet, then that probably justifies closing it!"
DelW
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 5,934
It's at least a decade since I last went over it, on a West Coast Motors bus from Oban to Fort William, so I don't really know how busy it may be now either.
I think that the first time would have been in my parents' car in August 1965, when we had a family holiday nearby. The railway was still open then, and I have a dim memory of seeing the track, and my mother (who would have been driving) being a bit concerned at sharing a narrow bridge with a railway. I've no recollection of having seen a train on it though.
The Creagan bridge? Take a look at how far round the Loch it is without the bridge, and take a look on Google earth. It's a narrow road. And I imagine there is a lot more traffic between FW & Oban than back in the 1990s. There certainly is in FW itself!
To add:
From:
I mentioned the flooding above.
no, the Connel bridge. I was replying to @DelW who said
and I was saying that it seems to be fit for purpose as it is...
DelW
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 5,934
I wasn't advancing the idea that Connel should be rebuilt, which I fully agree isn't justified - I was just suggesting some reasons why Creagan had been rebuilt with a two lane deck, but Connel hadn't.
Connel is also a listed structure. Apart from the Forth Bridge, when it was built it was the longest cantilever bridge in Europe.
I walked a bike across the Creagan bridge in 1996. Getting onto the south end was a tricky scramble up the embankment, while the north end was more straightforward. It was showing signs of 30 years of disuse, and didn't look capable of taking road traffic.
When I next went to to the area in 2002, the road bridge had been built and I nearly didn't recognise the place. It made a huge difference to travel from the Appin coast towards Oban. I can't see any particular reason to replace the bridge at Connel if it's still in decent nick - and I doubt that the short section of single carriageway is a major traffic issue in the area. On the other hand, as it would more than double the distance between Connel and Ballachulish if you had to divert via Glencoe, the case for replacement would then be quite robust.
As you say, the alternative was a drive round the head of the sea loch, which is 6 miles further round on single carriageway roads (I didn't know about the tidal stuff). The A828's not the best, and that was by the worst section.
weepingwillowb
Member
I knew of kids who had walked along Crimple Viaduct, between Harrogate and Pannal, in the late 1960s. On the outer side of both viaduct walls runs a ledge, about a foot wide, that they'd walk along in the dark.
The nearby but disused Crmple Low Viaduct (which we knew as the Little Crimple viaduct) is fenced off, but at times there would be gaps in the fencing. One time I was on it I saw what appeared to be where someone had been rough sleeping.
The nearby but disused Crmple Low Viaduct (which we knew as the Little Crimple viaduct) is fenced off, but at times there would be gaps in the fencing. One time I was on it I saw what appeared to be where someone had been rough sleeping.
That would (probably) be Stromeferry, on the Kyle line and just off the A890. Road and railway pass through an avalanche shelter nearby but that doesn't fit this thread as it's a railway tunnel you can walk through (although the road is narrow and I wouldn't chance it).
There is a good shared bridge on the Inlandsbanan in Sweden: https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attract...38261839:p/?albumid=-160&type=0&category=-160 pic 39 and 62 &63 of 186 show it.
It's not exceptionally long or high, but it is shared: Barriers close across the access road at each end, passengers stroll over the bridge if they want to stretch their legs then rejoin the train which has followed them over, the barriers were raised and away we went again!
It's not exceptionally long or high, but it is shared: Barriers close across the access road at each end, passengers stroll over the bridge if they want to stretch their legs then rejoin the train which has followed them over, the barriers were raised and away we went again!
Also reported in Branch Line News, along with the somewhat less happy news that all slots had been taken