On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:44:54 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010, wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 23:24:52 +0100, Neil Williams
wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:57:44 +0100, Bruce
wrote:
Even if there was an intention to close the line to Shanklin, there
would still need to be a shuttle train service from the Pier Head to
and from Ryde Esplanade, and probably to Ryde St John's Road, to
connect with the ferries.
Why? Many people would walk (it isn't *that* far, and most people seem
to use trolley luggage these days), many are collected by car, and a
minibus shuttle could be run between the ferry and the bus station for
anyone who couldn't or didn't want to walk. Far cheaper than
maintaining the infrastructure.
Walking along the pier on a nice sunny day might be pleasant.
In November with a strong North Easterly gale it would be awful so
you need something along the Pier.
Like a perspex tunnel, you mean?
A perspex tunnel would need a strong structural frame to support the
weight of the perspex and also resist the much greater loads imposed
on the perspex structure by the weather. You would then need to carry
out a major strengthening of the pier structure to support the perspex
tunnel and the loads it would impose on the pier structure, mostly
from the weather.
That would not be a trivial undertaking, nor a cheap one. Victorian
piers were built light and spindly, and not covered in, for a reason -
it massively reduced the loads on the structure.
Also, the walk from the landing stage to the kerb at the Esplanade is
slightly over 400 metres - it is longer than the train journey because
the train cuts off a corner at the pier head. So those who think "it
isn't *that* far" are somewhat wide of the mark. As I already stated,
a shuttle service of some kind would definitely be needed.