Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Well it's like this string. You, and Labour and now saying that the FRB should've been shut for several weeks, before the defect actually appeared. Now Transport Scotland and the SNP are good at many things... but psychic predictions isn't one of them.

http://news.stv.tv/east-central/1335819-calls-for-all-forth-road-bridge-safety-documents-to-be-released/

Apart from that, I'm at a bit of a loss as to what you actually think McKay and Sturgeon should be resigning for ? It's all just leaping on anything, anything at all. Like I said the bigger picture is to stop the SNP getting a majority in May. The media seems to have gone into full SNP hysterics mode already ( which I know you enjoy ) reminiscent of the referendum campaign.

Swinney's budget will be out on Wednesday. Cue further hysterics. When Westminster makes difficult decisions it's the 'right thing to do' though. The SNP will be monstered in the media whatever they do. Wearing and it doesn't work anymore. For all that the Yes campaign at the time was labeled an echo chamber. I think there are large swathes of news outlets that have become even worse these days. Same on this forum. Labour's recent win in Oldham being a similar example of media bias and commentary, getting things on the ground completely wrong.

First of all, check my post #8064 and see my remark on resigning.

I get the impression that you are not technical, so please understand this, preventive maintenance is part of maintenance and is tasked with monitoring, with keeping equipment, in a good state of repair and critical blemish-free, and with anticipating when and whee failures can occur. Failure to maintain always runs the risk of unexpected failures.

This time there seems not to have been any safety-related issue but if I was in charge of that contract I would have certainly order an immediate emergency review of the whole of the bridge to see if there other areas which need to be repaired at this time, and especially if there are any safety issues, while the bridge is out of operation and maybe other areas which might need future attention in the near future.

As for psychic powers, you don't need that to do predictive maintenance. I've no idea what processes were in place to to predict the likelihood of failures, but I cannot believe there were none. There are software tools to do this based on risk, reliability or safety analysis there are technical monitoring techniques available and there is the good old-fashioned eyeball. At the very least there would be a maintenance Plan. Since the maintenance budget was cut I would be (slightly) interested to know if such things were curtailed.

I say "slightly" because the issue I am discussing is the sordid business of the SNP being unable to admit when it goes wrong and the vainglorious attitude which seems to pervade it.

Do the SNP feel responsible for anything? Anything at all?

But carry on regardless.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

First of all, check my post #8064 and see my remark on resigning.

I get the impression that you are not technical, so please understand this, preventive maintenance is part of maintenance and is tasked with monitoring, with keeping equipment, in a good state of repair and critical blemish-free, and with anticipating when and whee failures can occur. Failure to maintain always runs the risk of unexpected failures.

This time there seems not to have been any safety-related issue but if I was in charge of that contract I would have certainly order an immediate emergency review of the whole of the bridge to see if there other areas which need to be repaired at this time, and especially if there are any safety issues, while the bridge is out of operation and maybe other areas which might need future attention in the near future.

As for psychic powers, you don't need that to do predictive maintenance. I've no idea what processes were in place to to predict the likelihood of failures, but I cannot believe there were none. There are software tools to do this based on risk, reliability or safety analysis there are technical monitoring techniques available and there is the good old-fashioned eyeball. At the very least there would be a maintenance Plan. Since the maintenance budget was cut I would be (slightly) interested to know if such things were curtailed.

I say "slightly" because the issue I am discussing is the sordid business of the SNP being unable to admit when it goes wrong and the vainglorious attitude which seems to pervade it.

Do the SNP feel responsible for anything? Anything at all?

But carry on regardless.

One doesn't need to be 'technical' in order to understand that the SNP have poured millions ( a billion ? ) into building a new bridge, because of repeated warnings ( unheeded by any other party ).. that FR bridge repairs at some point would become prohibitive, and would mean extensive shut downs for periods of time. They've been proved right.

That this structure failed at this point in time, before the new bridge has been completed is very unfortunate. But, like Transport Scotland says, the defect was only spotted a few weeks ago. It was both unexpected and unpredictable. It really is as simple as that.

No-one was underhand, or malicious, or 'cut maintenance budgets' just to be evil or to heaven forbid willingly put lives at risk. So again, I'm at a loss as to what exactly it is you, Hamish and the Scottish media are after here. But Scottish Labour are throwing the kitchen sink at this. And no doubt everything else for the next few months. I guess they're just desperate, and feel they have nothing left to lose. But this sort of well OTT inaccurate reporting of basic facts got them nowhere in May.

The Scottish public also are getting more than a little tired of it. You can see even people who don't like the SNP commenting now in media outlets. Absolutely sick to the back teeth of it all. If they believed even a quarter of what is written Scottish Labour would be back on top for the next election. It's fair to say that there's little sign of that happening at the moment.

As for what the SNP are responsible for. Even when they do mess up, cries of 'wolf' far, far too often in the last few years have diluted any effects. Since we never hear anything else anyway. As mentioned it was complete horror 'the SNP MUST answer'.. about people not having a seat on trains this morning. Ridiculous.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

a new bridge,

So what?

You keep trying to avoid the topic with that statement.

The SNP are not being accused of failing to build a new bridge, they're being accused (rightly) of cutting the bridge maintenance budget for the old one.

One of the projects deferred by those cuts was the replacement of the truss links.

You know, the bits that failed.;)

Like it or not Shakey the SNP gambled and lost with the maintenance cuts.

Had those truss links on the bridge lasted just another year they'd have got away with it.

But they didn't.

And here we are.

But, like Transport Scotland says, the defect was only spotted a few weeks ago. It was both unexpected and unpredictable. It really is as simple as that.
.

Nonsense.

The truss links that failed were identified as being in need of replacement back in 2010.

The SNP cut the budget and so the work was not done.

the bridge being shut down for several weeks in 2010, as opposed to several weeks in 2015. Would there be any difference ?

A huge difference.

The preventative maintenance closure would not have been as long, as the solution would already be worked out and created for installation in advance instead of keeping the bridge closed while that was going on, and quite likely done in stages to minimise closures.

And it could also have been scheduled for a better time of year with less economic impact.

Closing the bridge in the biggest shopping period of the year is catastrophic for many retail businesses.

.string.

I really didn't want to be bothered with this because the issue of maintenance is so obviously a problem that only the most inept would have chosen to reduce the maintenance budget.

There is a brief history of the work on the new bridge, initiated in 2006, here
The troubles of the Forth Road Bridge
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-34983063

The bridge has had a history of concern over maintenance problems, initially with the integrity of the steel cables, and since 2006 these have been monitored by acoustic methods (detecting snapping of some of the.11,618 elemental wires). The monitoring system should have been smart enough to have done that before. In 1968 an acoustic method for monitoring the structural decay of composites was being developed, and in early 1971 I myself visited a Ball Bearing manufacturer in Europe which had developed a similar technique to monitor, and anticipate iminent ball bearing failures- the target application was Paper or Steel Mills if I remember correctly, and the objective was to have planned shut-downs, not in the middle of a production That technique was useful in later monitoring of satellite born tape decoders and Solar Array Drives in the 1980/90s). It has been a well known technique for years.

Currently there are other issues
Forth Bridge operator: 7 other points 'monitored' but engineers hampered by weather
https://commonspace.scot/articles/3091/forth-bridge-operator-7-other-points-monitored-but-engineers-hampered-by-weather

Structural monitoring systems (I don't know what type - maybe strain gauges) are now being installed on these other potential failure sites. So it's not over yet.

I see that the matter is coming up at the infrastructure and capital investment committee (whatever that is).

So there are methods of monitoring things which can give information; no psychic powers are needed. No system is perfect but to deliberately allow the maintenance to be diminished when it has been known for a long time that the Forth Road Bridge was decaying quicker than expected was folly.

As for people sexing up the problem, this is something Stugeon has brought upon herself by denying any responsibility at all. As I've said before, I not a fan of token resignations but I think some sort of admission & apology is appropriate.


But that's the SNP.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Why does no-one ever talk about oil running out any more ?

Because it's not going to be a problem. Most of the oil that is left won't be burned.

.string.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

.... The preventative maintenance closure would not have been as long, as the solution would already be worked out and created for installation in advance instead of keeping the bridge closed while that was going on, and quite likely done in stages to minimise closures.

And it could also have been scheduled for a better time of year with less economic impact.

Closing the bridge in the biggest shopping period of the year is catastrophic for many retail businesses.

That's absolutely correct Hamish - good post - this is the benefit of being able to assess that failure is close. See my remarks above on the ball bearing example making exactly the same point.

Leanne1812

Transport Scotland have stated that the defect identified in the last few weeks was 'unexpected & not predicted' by previous analysis carried out by FETA. The work that was being considered in 2010 was prompted by concern about another part of the truss end link, not the part that is now cracked.

I've scanned through this article about bridge maintenance and it says repair work could be carried out in 2016 once the new bridge was open to lessen disruption and economic impact.

No doubt this decision was made with the advice & expertise of engineers. So, what should have been done differently, given this unforeseen defect?

http://www.atkinsglobal.com/~/media/Files/A/Atkins-Global/Attachments/sectors/roads/library-docs/technical-journal-3/the-maintenance-of-the-main-expansion-joints-onthe-forth-road-bridge.pdf

Generali

Hahaha.

The SNP really can do no wrong in some people's eyes even when they have clearly screwed things up.

elantan

Ha ha ha ha


The SNP can really never do right in some people eyes even when they do it consistently

.string.

Transport Scotland -The national transport agency for Scotland, delivering the Scottish Government's vision for transport

Hmmmm

Leanne - 2010 was a time ago and in the meantime the relevant budget was cut. To be effective monitoring has to be frequent enough to keep pace with what is being measured.