• 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!

Besses O' Th' Barn concrete wall

Status
Not open for further replies.

GWVillager

Member
Joined
2 May 2022
Messages
833
Location
Wales & Western
Does anyone know the purpose of the giant concrete wall that sits between the tracks on the bridge over the M60 just South of Besses O' Th' Barn Metrolink stop? It's always puzzled me, I presume it's for structural stability but why it needed to be so hefty I don't know.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

John Webb

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Messages
3,458
Location
St Albans
Does anyone know the purpose of the giant concrete wall that sits between the tracks on the bridge over the M60 just South of Besses O' Th' Barn Metrolink stop? It's always puzzled me, I presume it's for structural stability but why it needed to be so hefty I don't know.
Looking at photos on the Geograph website, my guess is that this bridge is an inverted T girder, possibly to give maximum headroom over the various roads it crosses. So the central 'wall' is the main structural member of the bridge supporting a 'shelf' each side on which the Metro tracks run, if you follow me.
 

Peter Mugridge

Veteran Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
16,103
Location
Epsom
Does anyone know the purpose of the giant concrete wall that sits between the tracks on the bridge over the M60 just South of Besses O' Th' Barn Metrolink stop? It's always puzzled me, I presume it's for structural stability but why it needed to be so hefty I don't know.
If you look at it on Google Maps in satellite view mode, it becomes obvious - it's an extremely long single span, so the size of the structure will be necessary to provide the strength and rigidity to keep it intact.

The length is the reason it needs the inverted T structure referred to in post #2 above.

 

Ash Bridge

Established Member
Joined
17 Mar 2014
Messages
4,141
Location
Stockport
I’m no engineer; but presumably a much lighter structure could have been constructed to carry a light rail system such as Metrolink, but this bridge was put in place for what was then (1970) still a heavy rail route.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
26,640
Location
Nottingham
The "finback" bridge where Metrolink passes over the Rochdale line between Monsall and Newton Heath also has a central structural member between the tracks, for similar reasons of long span and limited headroom. Ironic that these are only a few miles apart on the same tram network (though the one at Besses was built for heavy rail) but I don't believe there's anything else similar in the UK.
 

GWVillager

Member
Joined
2 May 2022
Messages
833
Location
Wales & Western
If you look at it on Google Maps in satellite view mode, it becomes obvious - it's an extremely long single span, so the size of the structure will be necessary to provide the strength and rigidity to keep it intact.

The length is the reason it needs the inverted T structure referred to in post #2 above.

I see, thank you all. Would such a design be built now or has design moved on?
 

Backroom_boy

Member
Joined
28 Dec 2019
Messages
454
Location
London
Just to add to the above; I think I remember reading there is/was an issue with subsidence in the area (from mining?) Hence the massively engineered structure for the original heavy rail line.
 

Trackman

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2013
Messages
3,569
Location
Lewisham
I remember the story and have a pic of when they ran a class 40 over it to test it.
The driver wasn't very happy about doing it, but had the engineer on board.
The engineer told him stop half way across and then left the loco and proceeded to jump up and down in front of the loco shouting 'I told you it was safe!'.
I think the local press and locals thought it would collapse.
 

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,293
I remember the story and have a pic of when they ran a class 40 over it to test it.
The driver wasn't very happy about doing it, but had the engineer on board.
The engineer told him stop half way across and then left the loco and proceeded to jump up and down in front of the loco shouting 'I told you it was safe!'.
I think the local press and locals thought it would collapse.
There is an article here celebrating it's 50th birthday. The original article also has pictures.

LOOKING BACK: Besses o'th' Barn railway bridge celebrates 50th anniversary

IN the pouring November rain master engineer John Davies stood in quiet confidence as he prepared for his newest creation to face its ultimate test.

Despite its unromantic name, Bridge 26, which carries the Manchester to Bury line over the M62 at Besses o’th’ Barn,holds a special place in the engineer’s heart. And on November 9, 1969, the first train edged its way towards the structure.

Throughout its construction leading engineers warned that the project was a white elephant which would never stand nor carry a single train

But they were proven spectacularly wrong and since that date countless thousands of people have been ferried across the concrete and steel connection which next month celebrates its 50th anniversary.

At the time Welsh-born Mr Davies was one of British Rail’s youngest chartered civil engineers, and the conception of his design marked a milestone in his career, assuring either a bright future or crestfallen ignominy.

Construction of the bridge put Besses on the civil engineering map, in part thanks to Mr Davies’ unusual and ground breaking design, but primarily because of the huge difficulties British Rail surmounted to ensure its completion.

A myriad of obstacles confronted engineers and construction workers on the bumpy road to the project’s realisation, from technical quibbles over concrete strengths and mixing, to a crack in the titanic support blocks.

Such was the mounting headache that as work progressed British Rail summoned a conference of experts to Derby to solve their problems.

Amidst the head scratching technical magazines from as far away as Europe and the USA marvelled at the the scale of materials needed - 7,500 tons of concrete, 500 tons of high tensile steel reinforcements, and 60 miles of prestressing rods and strands for the rail bridge alone.

At the same time the simultaneous construction of the road bridge saw some 4,000 cubic yards of earth removed for 3,000 tons worth of concrete foundations. While the main structure weighed more than 1,000 tons.

Whereas this staggering assembly of material gave the road bridge a bearing capacity of 150 to 300 tons, its gigantic railway sister boasted a whopping 3,600 tonnage.

But, in spite of the challenges, one by one they were overcome and the bridge took shape.

By November, 1969, it was up. But questions remained about whether it would stay up.

As Armistice Day dawned the answer would be found, just 12 hours before the first passenger service was scheduled to cross.

Not untypical Lancashire rain fell as Mr Davies oversaw permanent way gangs relay the tracks while a ballast train waited all day just out of sight.

As the gloom of autumnal dusk fell Mr Davies signalled the driver. The locomotive trundled to the very brink of the crossing before lurching to an anxious halt.

“Is it safe?” the apprehensive driver called.

“Of course it is,” Mr Davies assured him.

Then striding to the middle of the vast structure he jumped up and down to reassure him even further.

His fears were soothed. And with that the driver began to creep his train forward and Bridge 26 was in business.

Speaking to the Bury Times, Mr Davies said: “In light of the prediction by many well known engineers that the bridge would not stand up let alone carry trains, you can imagine my pleasure as its 50th birthday approaches

“I have just celebrated my 80th birthday and I am grateful for the opportunity I had to contribute to the creation of the infrastructure that it so vital to us all.”

Besses, however, was not the end of the line for Mr Davies who left British Rail on its completion to to supervise construction of on the bridge over the River Thames at Marlow.

In 1982 he was then appointed the director of engineering for the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and was responsible for a number of further bridges over the Thames, including the Albert Bridge which has featured in the Stanley Kubrick film A Clockwork Orange and musical Absolute Beginners, among others.

However, Mr Davies sentimental connection to Bridge 26 extends even further as his wife Judith was born and lived in Prestwich for over 20 years, and he says the Besses rail bridge is “not far from our minds” when visiting relatives in Lancashire.
Including this one.

1669577588419.png
The first train tentatively crosses the newly finished Besses o'th' Barn railway bridge on November 9, 1969.
 
Last edited:

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
18,556
I wonder about the apparent visual impact of such a bridge versus a more "conventional" design with the fin on the bottom.

Would this be less obstrusive by virtue of being apparently "shallower" once things like overhead wiring are taken into account?

Also I suppose you can consider the running lines isolated for trackside work purposes!
 

GWVillager

Member
Joined
2 May 2022
Messages
833
Location
Wales & Western
I wonder about the apparent visual impact of such a bridge versus a more "conventional" design with the fin on the bottom.

Would this be less obstrusive by virtue of being apparently "shallower" once things like overhead wiring are taken into account?

Also I suppose you can consider the running lines isolated for trackside work purposes!
Well it's obviously not a very pretty construction, but there's hardly a view to ruin. The M60 itself does far more damage with regards to visual impact.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
I wonder about the apparent visual impact of such a bridge versus a more "conventional" design with the fin on the bottom.

Would this be less obstrusive by virtue of being apparently "shallower" once things like overhead wiring are taken into account?

Also I suppose you can consider the running lines isolated for trackside work purposes!

Yes they are much less visually intrusive if supported from below however the beauty of the finback design is you can have clearances below the running rails of only a foot which is perfect when you need to rise over and then dive under something in quick succession, the alternative is a cable suspension bridge with a much taller height. However when you need to include an S bend and clearance wasnt an issue you would rather choose a traditional span bridge over a cable bridge anyway as they wouldnt handle the twisting force too well.
 

DanNCL

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2017
Messages
5,002
Location
County Durham
The bridge that carries Metrolink over the Calder Valley Line at Newton Heath is also of this design isn’t it? That’s a much newer build than the one at Besses O’ Th’ Barn.
 

stuu

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2011
Messages
3,404
Would the presence of the high voltage lines nearby have influenced the choice of structure?
 

plugwash

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2015
Messages
1,793
I wonder about the apparent visual impact of such a bridge
I would think, generally lower than the alternatives.

If you put a fin on the bottom of the bridge, you have the fin below, and OHLE, fences/parapets, etc above, so as you suggest the overall visual height of the bridge will be taller. The rail level being higher will also require building larger ramps to carry the rail up to the higher deck.

Suspension or cable stayed designs have the advantage of not being solid, but would probablly be taller, so less intrusive close-up but visible from further away.
 

Geeves

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2009
Messages
2,330
Location
Rochdale
While the idea is the same, I think concrete design and technology has obviously moved on as the finback bridge at Newton Heath is hollow with a walk way through it, where as the Besses bridge is solid concrete sections but with interconnecting segments as you can see through to the other side as you pass along at certain points
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
11,110
When this bridge was opened there was an account in a rail magazine that a local resident had watched the earlier construction stages, and said to a passing engineer that it was gong to be "a hell of a climb" for a train to get over it.

Rather like someone from Edinburgh I knew, who said as a small child they had seen the Forth Bridge from ground level, then been told they were going to travel by train over it, and were terrified at the prospect, as they thought the train went over the top, like a Big Dipper!
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
8,111
Location
Leeds
I wonder about the apparent visual impact of such a bridge versus a more "conventional" design with the fin on the bottom.

Would this be less obstrusive by virtue of being apparently "shallower" once things like overhead wiring are taken into account?

Also I suppose you can consider the running lines isolated for trackside work purposes!
The bridge goes over the A665 and M60 (M62 when first built) just where the A665 goes over the motorway and the eastern slip roads from the motorway to the A56. A fin on the bottom would have required either permanently closing the A665 to prevent traffic hitting the fin (thus nullifying half the purpose of the bridge) or raising the railway to provide clearance. This would have required raising the railway (already on embankment) over a long distance in an urban area, and rebuilding at least one existing bridge and Besses station. The fin on the bottom would have been less visible from the railway but more visible from the A665 and the motorway.

A more conventional solution might have been lattice girders above track level on each side of the line instead of the concrete fin in the middle. This would have been a less unfamiliar layout.

When the bridge was designed and built the railway was third-rail electrified.

The bridge was presumably designed for heavy rail loadings unlike the more recent Metrolink-only bridge mentioned in previous posts.
 
Last edited:

507 001

Established Member
Joined
3 Dec 2008
Messages
2,034
Location
Huyton
The bridge goes over the A665 and M60 (M62 when first built) just where the A665 goes over the motorway and the eastern slip roads from the motorway to the A56. A fin on the bottom would have required either permanently closing the A665 to prevent traffic hitting the fin (thus nullifying half the purpose of the bridge) or raising the railway to provide clearance. This would have required raising the railway (already on embankment) over a long distance in an urban area, and rebuilding at least one existing bridge and Besses station. The fin on the bottom would have been less visible from the railway but more visible from the A665 and the motorway.

A more conventional solution might have been lattice girders above track level on each side of the line instead of the concrete fin in the middle. This would have been a less unfamiliar layout.

When the bridge was designed and built the railway was third-rail electrified.

The bridge was presumably designed for heavy rail loadings unlike the more recent Metrolink-only bridge mentioned in previous posts.

It’s worth noting that raising the track bed here would have been extremely difficult. Besses is pretty much the summit of the line, and the gradients on both sides are very steep.
 

buryblackpud

New Member
Joined
21 Apr 2023
Messages
4
Location
high peak
Well it's obviously not a very pretty construction, but there's hardly a view to ruin. The M60 itself does far more damage with regards to visual impact.
Back in early 1960s I used to play in the fields below that bridge, many a bonfire night there, before the compulsory purchase order. My parents house was/still is on Balmoral ave, cut off from the view/noise by that wooden fencing ! We moved house to Marple, but family still lived there so can just about remember the bridge being built. The shiny new concrete structure looked MASSIVE, and the area around Besses changed rapidly from fields to a very noisy junction of cars, trams, and trains.
So over 50yo, it still stands strong. But having watched a programme re those millionaire apartment blocks in Turkey crumbling with cheap concrete, you have to wonder what is actually going on inside the structure...was the pre-stretched steel up to the job ? That building in Germany where the roofline collapsed due to steel corrosion, now rebuilt, also had me wondering.No doubt the structure works, but will time be its downfall ??Now in my mid 60s, I hope it outlives me by a long time !!
 

sprunt

Established Member
Joined
22 Jul 2017
Messages
1,375
What was there before the motorway was built? Was there a shorter bridge, or was the track on an embankment?
 

jp4712

Member
Joined
1 May 2009
Messages
502
There was a stone bridge over the A665 Bury Old Road. Photos of this bridge are exceedingly rare but it appears in the background of a rather grainy 1934 aerial view of the Prestwich and Besses area at https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EPW046172

There is also the ‘timepix’ site which shows a rather lovely library of photos of datum points taken by the Ordnance Survey mainly in the early postwar years. Tantalisingly, the abutment of this bridge appears in a shot on that site looking north along Bury Old Road: https://www.timepix.uk/Collection-g...1950s-Swinton-and-Bury/Whitefield/i-RPPTdhq/A (I hope the link works…)
 

sprunt

Established Member
Joined
22 Jul 2017
Messages
1,375
There was a stone bridge over the A665 Bury Old Road. Photos of this bridge are exceedingly rare but it appears in the background of a rather grainy 1934 aerial view of the Prestwich and Besses area at https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EPW046172

There is also the ‘timepix’ site which shows a rather lovely library of photos of datum points taken by the Ordnance Survey mainly in the early postwar years. Tantalisingly, the abutment of this bridge appears in a shot on that site looking north along Bury Old Road: https://www.timepix.uk/Collection-g...1950s-Swinton-and-Bury/Whitefield/i-RPPTdhq/A (I hope the link works…)
Ooh, those are great photos, thanks.
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
8,111
Location
Leeds
What type of bridge construction carries the Manchester Metrolink over the National Rail tracks from the tram stop at Rochdale railway station to the commencement of the line leading to the route to Oldham?
A steel girder bridge, with girders of weathering steel at each side of the Metrolink line. I seem to remember seeing pictures of it on Skyscrapercity when it was first built, but pictures of it seem hard to find by web search today.

Here it is seen from directly above on Google satellite view, showing its pentagonal shape:


(The line seen below it has been thought by some to be a connection between Network Rail and Metrolink, but does not connect at the Metrolink end.)

Here are three pictures of it when it was under construction:


No doubt views of it can be found by searching for cab videos taken on the Calder Valley line.

***Edit: see 12 minutes into this one:


Meanwhile here is a view of the Besses bridge which is the original subject of this thread, seen from the motorway under construction, with the A665 in the middle:

 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top