Which ships can sail under the Harbour Bridge?

[cjm66]

I hope they are right. It might be worth going down to watch. 2m is not allot of clearence considering the ship is likely to be high in the water due to all the fuel it will consume on the way over. I wonder if Vista ships can suck in ballast water to bring their hull lower in the water.

 

.

 

I forgot to mention that the faster the ship goes the lower she will be in the water. The Captain and Third Officer did explain this phenomenon but I did not take it in. I was also not sure we were not being treated to Dutch humour.

[Sutho]

I forgot to mention that the faster the ship goes the lower she will be in the water. The Captain and Third Officer did explain this phenomenon but I did not take it in. I was also not sure we were not being treated to Dutch humour.

 

That is correct the faster it goes the deeper it sits in the water. Ships have made it under bridges in the Great Belt near Denmark when they are technically too high to fit under a bridge. They just go at it at full speed and hope for the best.

[cassamanda]

That is correct the faster it goes the deeper it sits in the water. Ships have made it under bridges in the Great Belt near Denmark when they are technically too high to fit under a bridge. They just go at it at full speed and hope for the best.

Whoa - Loook out Cockatoo Island:eek:

[Bella cruiser]

Hmm, just going flat out so the ship sits low in the water and waiting for low tide and the crossing of fingers doesn't sound a very professional approach, wonder why they would take these kind of risks?:eek:

[Sutho]

Its called the squat effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squat_effect

 

The Oasis of the Seas a 72m tall ship managed to fit under a 65m bridge in that manner: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Oasis_of_the_Seas

[Australian family]

Hmm, just going flat out so the ship sits low in the water and waiting for low tide and the crossing of fingers doesn't sound a very professional approach, wonder why they would take these kind of risks?:eek:

 

All good and well going flat out, then they have to hit the brakes. I wonder if we will notice it easing up in a hurry.:eek:

[Bentleg]

So much speculation and BS in this thread. HAL Vista class shops fit under the SH bridge at low tide. I have done it once on Oosterdam and twice on Noordam, the second time today (which was done at 0400 because of the tide). HAL only takes ships under the bridge when there is a large ship, that cannot fit under the bridge, at the OPT.

 

The proposal to go fast to reduce ship height has no application here as there is a sharp left hand turn immediately after the bridge, both for the former Barangaroo and for the current White Bay terminals.

[vozzie]

I've just thought of an idea that would solve all Sydney's Cruise Ship space issues.....raise the Bridge...then all the upstream wharves can be used !!! How difficult can it be ?

[SinbadThePorter]

I've just thought of an idea that would solve all Sydney's Cruise Ship space issues.....raise the Bridge...then all the upstream wharves can be used !!! How difficult can it be ?

 

The NSW government was going to knock down two stadiums and rebuild them for 2.5 billion. If they hold off they could do same for the Bridge.;p

[GUT2407]

I've just thought of an idea that would solve all Sydney's Cruise Ship space issues.....raise the Bridge...then all the upstream wharves can be used !!! How difficult can it be ?

No

No

No

 

Lower the water level in the harbour.

 

I nutted that out yonks ago.

[Kiwi Kruzer]

No

No

No

 

Lower the water level in the harbour.

I nutted that out yonks ago.

 

 

Now thats a great idea. A gigantic lock at the Heads . Not only would it allow ships to go under the bridge but think of how much extra water frontage property there would be.

With the way Sydney property prices are , they could sell off enough to probably pay for it all..:D

[GUT2407]

Now thats a great idea. A gigantic lock at the Heads . Not only would it allow ships to go under the bridge but think of how much extra water frontage property there would be.

With the way Sydney property prices are , they could sell off enough to probably pay for it all..:D

 

 

Yeah it’s why they call me a nutter, cause I can not stuff like this out.

[MicCanberra]

I've just thought of an idea that would solve all Sydney's Cruise Ship space issues.....raise the Bridge...then all the upstream wharves can be used !!! How difficult can it be ?

This was surmised some time ago but with sea levels rising it would need to be very significant rise and this would mean very steep ramps at both ends of the bridge.

[MicCanberra]

Now thats a great idea. A gigantic lock at the Heads . Not only would it allow ships to go under the bridge but think of how much extra water frontage property there would be.

With the way Sydney property prices are , they could sell off enough to probably pay for it all..:D

Wouldn't work as the very upright people from Lady Jane would be too exposed in the end.

[Expat Cruise]

The answer is really simple the bridge has a 49 meter clearance, any ship less than 49 meters from the waterline to top can pass under. The captain and harbor master do make the final ruling here. Even if a ship can clear they can decline at any time. Even if the same ship has past under the bridge before.

[vozzie]

Okay....so it's a bit difficult raising the whole bridge....

 

...what about a bit of it ?...

[MicCanberra]

Okay....so it's a bit difficult raising the whole bridge....

 

...what about a bit of it ?...

If they put a swivel bit in the middle that may work or even make a bit that rises like the spit bridge.

[Brisbane41]

Who decided to resurrect this threat at the ironic time of Easter??? They are several years too late.

[MicCanberra]

Who decided to resurrect this threat at the ironic time of Easter??? They are several years too late.

I agree it was somewhat interesting to find the thread had been revived but why is it ironic due to easter? Did something happen?

[NoWhiners]

I agree it was somewhat interesting to find the thread had been revived but why is it ironic due to easter? Did something happen?

 

I think Brisbane was being clever--resurrect/Easter. Get it? :D

[MicCanberra]

I think Brisbane was being clever--resurrect/Easter. Get it? :D

Is it a bunny trick, like the magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat?

[banzaii]

I think it's a life of Brian reference! :p

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[MicCanberra]

I think it's a life of Brian reference! :p

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Okay, now I get it. This is just a very naughty thread.