From the Kearney Files
Sydney Australia September 1921
PROPOSED TUBE
A SUPPLEMENT TO THE BRIDGE
Engineers Criticism.
While the project to construct a tube has been favourably received by laymen, inquiry amongst engineers discloses considerable hostility. It is contended that the difficulties and expense of constructing such a tube as is proposed are under estimated, and that the unstable nature of the sandstone harbour bottom has not been fully taken into consideration. The air pressure at 100ft below low water mark, it is pointed out, would be so exacting upon the health of the workmen that it would only be partly compensated by the receipt of very high wages. The question of building a bridge or a tunnel, it is contended was fought out some years ago, and Mr.Hay, the tunnel andiand subway expert,was brought out some years ago by the government to investigate the traffic problems of Sydney, recommended the bridge as the only solution for the North Shore crossing. This recommendation was endorsed by the report of the Parliamentary Committee of 1913, after reviewing all proposals, including Mr. Hay's report. No previous committee had such data before it as to traffic conditions, and after thorough investigation found in favour of a bridge.
Expert opinion is also against a tube scheme on the ground that, in order to provide for longer and deeper vessels entering the harbour it might be necessary, before many years, to dredge the harbour to a minimum depth of 45, or even 60ft. Subways in Sydney Harbour would, it is contended, limit the size of vessels to those drawing 50ft or under.
Sydney Australia September 1921
PROPOSED TUBE
A SUPPLEMENT TO THE BRIDGE
Engineers Criticism.
While the project to construct a tube has been favourably received by laymen, inquiry amongst engineers discloses considerable hostility. It is contended that the difficulties and expense of constructing such a tube as is proposed are under estimated, and that the unstable nature of the sandstone harbour bottom has not been fully taken into consideration. The air pressure at 100ft below low water mark, it is pointed out, would be so exacting upon the health of the workmen that it would only be partly compensated by the receipt of very high wages. The question of building a bridge or a tunnel, it is contended was fought out some years ago, and Mr.Hay, the tunnel andiand subway expert,was brought out some years ago by the government to investigate the traffic problems of Sydney, recommended the bridge as the only solution for the North Shore crossing. This recommendation was endorsed by the report of the Parliamentary Committee of 1913, after reviewing all proposals, including Mr. Hay's report. No previous committee had such data before it as to traffic conditions, and after thorough investigation found in favour of a bridge.
Expert opinion is also against a tube scheme on the ground that, in order to provide for longer and deeper vessels entering the harbour it might be necessary, before many years, to dredge the harbour to a minimum depth of 45, or even 60ft. Subways in Sydney Harbour would, it is contended, limit the size of vessels to those drawing 50ft or under.
Comments
Post a Comment