Page 1 of 1

Clyde Quayside Collapse

Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:03 pm
by Clydebuilt1971 ... ow-1736015

Just up river from the Paddlers old berth by the looks of it.


Re: Clyde Quayside Collapse

Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:22 pm
by duncanwilson
That's what I thought. I was wondering if the wash from the paddles had been scouring away the river bed causing unseen damage leading to a weakness in the quay wall.

Re: Clyde Quayside Collapse

Posted: Sat Mar 02, 2013 7:11 pm
by SCameron
The walls in this part of the river were founded on wood piles - further downriver they used concrete pillars. Hard to believe its almost 9 years since Waverley left Anderston Quay for the last time.

Re: Clyde Quayside Collapse

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:58 am
by bobrobert
The Waverley used to turn around in the vicinity. If memory serves me right then a mooring rope would be attached to bollards and it would be winched round. Perhaps this caused damage/

Re: Clyde Quayside Collapse

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:05 pm
by SCameron
The bollard on which Waverley's canting rope was secured was on the other side of the berth i.e. at the intersection Anderston Quay and Lancefield Quay. The arguement is following a similar course to the one that has required her to cant from her present berth with the aid of a tug because the bollards on the knuckle of Plantation Quay / Princes Dock are no longer safe - argument being that a 6 foot draught light weight paddle steamer has exerted so much load on the bollard it has become unstable. The argument seems to miss the point that the pulling forces loaded onto these bollards in the past by much larger vessels entering and leaving the dock and the graving docks were several times greater than waverley at her full power could exert. These are (or at least were) port facilities and were always subject to wear and tear. The missing component nowadays is adequate repair and maintenance. The old Clyde Trust used to have a vast army of maintenace workers keeping the quay walls, bollards, the few cranes that they owned, light towers, the now almost totally collapsed Lang Dyke, etc, etc in good shape. Clydeport's maintenance efforts nowadays are minimalist or so it would seem. There are other parts of the harbour walls showing signs of distress so I doubt if Anderston Quay will be the last collapse that we will see. When Peel Ports (Clydeport's parent company) transfer ownerships of parts of the harbour they no longer need to Glasgow City Council or other owners they make sure that the responsibilities for maintenance goes with the property. That is to be expected but I feel that the Council and the residents of the nre residential developments may have walked into these commitments with their eyes closed, not realising the possible costs involved.

I wonder if the collapse at Anderston Quay will be taken as an opportunity to narrow the river along this stretch (which was in future development plans anyway, I believe). If so this would not be unprecedented. When a significant stretch of Plantation Quay (and I think Mavisbank Quay) collapsed many many years ago the new quay wall was built a considerable distance out in the river from the old wall. The new wall was anchored back onto the old wall with large steel tie bars, the ends of which can still be seen on the existing quay face. Interesting that the new Plantation Quay was built of brick rather than the huge ashlar blocks used elsewhere. Anyone know if they had to move the large 70-ton lift Clyde Villa crane that used to be there (Berth No 81 I think?) - if so that must have been quite a task. Anyway the space between the new and old Plantation Quay walls was backfilled and the dockside shedd were built on the 'reclaimed' quayside. So the old quay wall is presumably still there buried below ground - I suppose its line can be judged from the one part that is still visible - No 85 Plantation Quay, the berth outside the No 2 (middle) Govan Graving Dock which got divorced from the rest of it when Princes Dock was built.