London Banter

London Banter (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/forum.php)
-   London Transport (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/)
-   -   Another squashed bus (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/7005-another-squashed-bus.html)

Paul Scott August 12th 08 12:05 PM

Another squashed bus
 

wrote in message
...
On 5 Aug, 14:16, David Cantrell wrote:

Possibly not over a street which is a regular bus route used by
double-deckers, but I'd not be at all surprised to see a low bridge go
up over a road that doesn't normally carry any buses at all. This would
then catch out any database system (not just those that use GPS!) when it
gets used as a diversion, or even worse by a tourist bus.


What exactly is a 'Low bridge'? i.e. what is the minimum height which
will be available under a bridge which does not have a height
restriction marked on it? I would be surprised if you would be
allowed to build a low bridge over any road now, except possibly under
very exceptional circumstances, is that not the case?

A 'low bridge' has less than 16'6" (5.03m) clearance.

http://tinyurl.com/6zfz49

Anything less should be marked.

Paul S



MIG August 12th 08 12:12 PM

Another squashed bus
 
On 12 Aug, 13:05, "Paul Scott" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On 5 Aug, 14:16, David Cantrell wrote:

Possibly not over a street which is a regular bus route used by
double-deckers, but I'd not be at all surprised to see a low bridge go
up over a road that doesn't normally carry any buses at all. This would
then catch out any database system (not just those that use GPS!) when it
gets used as a diversion, or even worse by a tourist bus.


What exactly is a 'Low bridge'? *i.e. what is the minimum height which
will be available under a bridge which does not have a height
restriction marked on it? *I would be surprised if you would be
allowed to build a low bridge over any road now, except possibly under
very exceptional circumstances, is that not the case?

A 'low bridge' has less than 16'6" (5.03m) clearance.

http://tinyurl.com/6zfz49

Anything less should be marked.

Paul S


I think full height double-deckers are about 14' 6", so I should think
that there are plenty of low bridges that they could still get under.

Colin Rosenstiel August 12th 08 06:46 PM

Another squashed bus
 
In article
,
(MIG) wrote:

On 12 Aug, 13:05, "Paul Scott" wrote:

A 'low bridge' has less than 16'6" (5.03m) clearance.

http://tinyurl.com/6zfz49

Anything less should be marked.


I think full height double-deckers are about 14' 6", so I should think
that there are plenty of low bridges that they could still get under.


Well, at least the signs will make it clear.

--
Colin Rosenstiel


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk