daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old July 29th, 2016, 06:16 PM   #4101
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

As mentioned yesterday, I did a road trip this week. Here's my trip report for day one, sadly without pictures as yet...

My original intention was to drive through Telemark along a different route than the E134, either to the south (Bø-Kviteseid-Vrådal in some way or another) or the north (Rjukan-Rauland-Arabygdi), but when I got to Kongsberg, I realized I'd left my wallet at home, so I had to go back... That meant time became an issue, so I followed the E134. I've driven it on numerous occations over the years, and the most obvious aspect of it is that it is virtually consistantly substandard all the way until west Telemark. It hasn't been improved all that much, apart from between Drammen and Kongsberg. The problem there is that it's still two-lane (or 2+1 divided), and when the traffic is just a little bit busy, two lanes doesn't cut it. It's even worse between Kongsberg and Notodden: the road is still busy, but narrow, twisty with a 70 km/h speed limit and no places to overtake. Further west the traffic was lighter, of course, but it's still not exactly a fast road... The main reason is probably that - opposed to most other main roads in eastern Norway - the E134 does not follow a main valley, but jumps across from one valley to the next. Up and down the hillsides curves and steep hills are aplenty, and it has been rather difficult to improve the road without major construction works. On the plus side, it's a pleasant drive with many interesting things to see, natural and man-made.

As mentioned, the road gets somewhat better further west, and the road across the Haukeli plateau is decent apart from the fairly old and narrow tunnels. I did, however, decide to avoid the tunnels the best I could, instead I would follow the old road. That is a worthwhile thing to do if you have the time and a normal-sized car. The road is paved, one-lane and the views are quite good. I was a little bit underwhelmed, though, as I did expect something slightly more spectacular. Nonetheless, that's being pedantic and Norwegian and a road geek combined, the views are actually great...

Reaching Røldal, it was almost seven o'clock. Luckily, I only had about 40 more kms to go to Sauda. I reached Sauda well after eight... The fv 520 is something else. It's a part of the National Tourist Route Ryfylke, and it's fantastic. It's a one-plus-lane road, paved, but increadibly twisty. It's closed in winter even though it doesn't reach 1000 metrea above sea level - but for good reason. First, it runs along the hillside a few hundred metres above lake Røldal - spectacular views, but enough to spook me (I'm a little bit afraid of heights...). Further along, it crosses a really interesting mountain landscape before descending into a narrow and beautiful valley. Eventually, I arrived in Sauda, an industrial town by the fjord. Quite pretty, but the weather didn't really support any major excursions. I went for food and two beers instead...
__________________

Stafangr, Mathias Olsen, Bjørne liked this post
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old July 29th, 2016, 10:04 PM   #4102
Mathias Olsen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 125
Likes (Received): 149

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
the views are quite good. I was a little bit underwhelmed, though, as I did expect something slightly more spectacular. Nonetheless, that's being pedantic and Norwegian and a road geek combined, the views are actually great...
Nice that you shared this experience. Good that you have attention and appreciation for more than roads and construction works. It can give a relaxed feeling and even a little bit unity with the beauty of nature.
__________________

coolstuff, ElviS77 liked this post
Mathias Olsen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 29th, 2016, 10:52 PM   #4103
satanism
Registered User
 
satanism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sofia/Bratislava
Posts: 4,825
Likes (Received): 5489

a bit more on the crazy e39 project and the floating bridge, with some time and cost projection. in danish.
http://ekstrabladet.dk/ferie/se-norg...iarder/6204640
__________________
Чл. 140. Водачът на велосипед е длъжен да се движи възможно най-близо до дясната граница на платното за движение.
Чл. 141. На водача на велосипед е забранено:1. да се движи успоредно до друг велосипедист;
3. да се движи в непосредствена близост до пътно превозно средство или да се държи за него;
6. да управлява велосипед по площите, предназначени за движение само на пешеходци. Тази забрана не се отнася за децата велосипедисти.
satanism no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 29th, 2016, 11:06 PM   #4104
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,559
Likes (Received): 19352

I've seen that report in a lot of media, in all kinds of languages.

However, they did not seem to do any fact checking, just copying each other.

The floating submerged tunnel is just one of several options explored for the Sognefjord Crossing. As far as I know it's not set in stone that they will choose the floating tunnel as the solution.

They also seem to get the cost wrong, it appears that they apply the cost of the entire E39 ferry-free project, which includes several very large fjord crossings, to this single tunnel. They are really not going to spend € 20 - 25 billion (200+ billion NOK) (!) on a single crossing.
__________________

my clinched highways / travel mapping • highway photography @ Flickr and Youtube

Bjørne, coolstuff liked this post
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2016, 02:20 PM   #4105
coolstuff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 38
Likes (Received): 46

High-speed motorway tunnels

Some older tunnels have reduced speed limit in the tunnel.



However, new Norwegian motorway tunnels are designed with a T10,5 profile. They make possible to drive with 110 km/h without concession to safety. That is a difference with many other countries. Germany has a speed limit of 80 km/h, Netherlands 100 km/h. http://www.vegvesen.no/fag/Publikasj...torvegtunneler.

The T10,5 profile is also one of the options on the second tube of E134 in Drammen. On the new Rogfast E39 Stavanger-Haugesund, there is a 2 x T10,5 profile.



__________________

berlinwroclaw, Mathias Olsen liked this post
coolstuff no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2016, 02:30 PM   #4106
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,559
Likes (Received): 19352

I like the fact that there aren't reduced speed limits in Norwegian motorway tunnels. Germany is very annoying with their 80 km/h speed limits which are increasingly common due to new artificial tunnels to reduce noise being built in a lot of places. Some German Autobahn tunnels are limited at 100 km/h though, it appears to vary by state. Swiss motorway tunnels also tend to have low speed limits.

The Netherlands doesn't have fixed speed limits for motorway tunnels. As a large amount of motorway tunnels are in the Randstad region, they have a 100 km/h speed limit because most of the Randstad region is limited to 100 km/h. However, speed limits up to 130 km/h can also be found. Italian motorway tunnels also frequently feature 130 km/h speed limits.
__________________

my clinched highways / travel mapping • highway photography @ Flickr and Youtube

berlinwroclaw liked this post

Last edited by ChrisZwolle; July 30th, 2016 at 02:55 PM.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2016, 02:43 PM   #4107
berlinwroclaw
Kamienna
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 139
Likes (Received): 46

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
The Netherlands doesn't have fixed speed limits for motorway tunnels. As a large amount of motorway tunnels are in the Randstad region, they have a 100 km/h speed limit because most of the Randstad region is limited to 100 km/h. However, speed limits up to 130 km/h can also be found.
Motorway tunnels in the Netherlands with 130 km/h? Aren't you confused with "ecoducts"? Can you give me an example of such a tunnel with a length of at least 250 m?
__________________
Have a safe trip!
berlinwroclaw no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2016, 02:46 PM   #4108
keokiracer
Roadgeek from NL
 
keokiracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Halsteren (NL)
Posts: 3,672
Likes (Received): 2628

Quote:
Originally Posted by berlinwroclaw View Post
Motorway tunnels in the Netherlands with 130 km/h? Aren't you confused with "ecoducts"? Can you give me an example of such a tunnel with a length of at least 250 m?
Vlaketunnel (A58 in Zeeland, 327 meters), Wijkertunnel (A9 at Beverwijk, 680 meters). The latter is currently 90km/h due to an extra lane where the hard shoulder used to be because the nearby Velsertunnel is closed for renvoation. But that will revert to 130km/h once the renovation is done and the extra lane is removed.
keokiracer no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2016, 10:20 PM   #4109
berlinwroclaw
Kamienna
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 139
Likes (Received): 46

Quote:
Originally Posted by keokiracer View Post
Vlaketunnel (A58 in Zeeland, 327 meters), Wijkertunnel (A9 at Beverwijk, 680 meters). The latter is currently 90km/h due to an extra lane where the hard shoulder used to be because the nearby Velsertunnel is closed for renvoation. But that will revert to 130km/h once the renovation is done and the extra lane is removed.
I have replied this Netherlands specific QA in the Netherlands thread: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpo...ostcount=13725
__________________
Have a safe trip!
berlinwroclaw no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2016, 10:53 AM   #4110
Mathias Olsen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 125
Likes (Received): 149

Progress motorway E6 Oslo – Lillehammer



Many sections on motorway E6 Oslo – Kolomoen have been added last years, such as this one near Kolomoen:



Coming years new extensions will be added:

1. E6 Kolomoen - Biri



Four lane E6 motorway from Gardermoen to the north has been completed till Kolomoen (64 km) on 25 June 2015. Next upgrade of the E6 will be Kolomoen-Biri (56 km). Again an expansion of the E6 from a 2+1 road to a 4-lane motorway. The further development of this section will be managed by the state-owned corporation New Roads AS. Kolomoen-Moelv is a stretch of 43 kilometers and E6 have alternately two and three lanes. NPRA is plans to expand to 4-lane motorway. Construction will start not earlier than in 2018. http://www.vegvesen.no/Europaveg/e6b...ts=15312f0f2b0

2. E6 Biri – Lillehammer

In February 2016, there has been approval to widen the E6 about 7 kilometers along Hamar to 4-lane motorway. between Kåterud in Stange municipality and Arnkvern the municipal boundary between Hamar and Ringsaker. The expansion is scheduled be included in a future four-lane route Biri-Lillehammer.



For now, there are no plans for an upgrade to a motorway to Otta. This section will be only upgraded with 2-lane and 2+1 sections. Between Elstad (just south of Ringebu) and Frya a new section is planned with possible construction in 2017.
__________________

Agent 006, MichiH, berlinwroclaw liked this post
Mathias Olsen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2016, 02:24 PM   #4111
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,791
Likes (Received): 612

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
As mentioned yesterday, I did a road trip this week. Here's my trip report for day one, sadly without pictures as yet...
I have an road atlas from 1970, covering Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. It was published by Reader's Digest. I made scans of two areas, hopefully having some interest:

The first one, stitched across two pages, shows that the current road 13 on Suldalsvatn does not exist yet. The road 13 has a branch to Sauda. The current E134 carries the number 10, and the current 13 towards Odda is 47.

No tunnels. Descent to Røldal from east over the hairpins of Austmannli.



The second one shows the old routing of the Rv13. Rv13 had a gap (perhaps to be filled by a new road NW of Sauda). After the gap, it followed the route of the current 48 to Tysse to join 7/E68. (At Trengereid, it continued to Voss over Bergsdalen.)

__________________

ElviS77 liked this post
MattiG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2016, 02:44 PM   #4112
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,791
Likes (Received): 612

But Where Is Sandsfjordsbrua?

There is an interesting error in Google Maps. The new bridge over Sandsfjord is drawn where the ferry connection between Sand and Ropeid was located. In fact, the bridge is located about 11 km SW.

__________________
MattiG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2016, 03:31 PM   #4113
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,538

It's interesting in that the correct location is also shown as a road. Google Maps' background data isn't that reliable when obtained via means other than a Streetview car and the (ever-increasingly) terrible cartography* means that StreetView is the only reason I use it.

*I'm surprised we can even see the less important roads there - thankfully it's a wooded area so the green provides some contrast between grey roads without borders and slightly-different grey background!
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2016, 03:44 PM   #4114
italystf
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 6,447
Likes (Received): 2183

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattiG View Post
There is an interesting error in Google Maps. The new bridge over Sandsfjord is drawn where the ferry connection between Sand and Ropeid was located. In fact, the bridge is located about 11 km SW.
Wow, that seems a pretty gross mistake, I've never found anything like this on Google Maps.
__________________
“The transponder’s personalised signal would be picked up when the car passed through an intersection, and then relayed to a central computer which would calculate the charge according to the intersection and the time of day and add it to the car’s bill” - Nobel Economics Prize winner William Vickrey, proposing a system of electronic tolling for the Washington metropolitan area, 1959
In real life, electronic toll collection was first introduced in Bergen, Norway in 1986, and well into the 21th century many countries still struggle to implement it.
italystf no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2016, 03:48 PM   #4115
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattiG View Post
The first one, stitched across two pages, shows that the current road 13 on Suldalsvatn does not exist yet. The road 13 has a branch to Sauda. The current E134 carries the number 10, and the current 13 towards Odda is 47.

No tunnels. Descent to Røldal from east over the hairpins of Austmannli.

The second one shows the old routing of the Rv13. Rv13 had a gap (perhaps to be filled by a new road NW of Sauda). After the gap, it followed the route of the current 48 to Tysse to join 7/E68. (At Trengereid, it continued to Voss over Bergsdalen.)
We have changed our road numbers considerably over the years, the E134 was rv 10, then E76, then rv 11... The realignment of the rv 13 and the current E16 (then E68) had more to do with new roads being built and new thhinking regarding where main and regional road corridors should be. For instance, the gap on the 1970 rv 13 has been proposed closed for decades, but a tunnel northwards from Sauda hasn't become a reality as yet. Bergsdalen was and is even worse for heavy traffic than the questionable Granvin-Nordheimsund road (current fv 7), so before the new Dale-Voss opened, it made sense to direct traffic to the then E68.

When it comes to Røldal and Haukeli, the tunnels on the mountain were there already in 1970 - opening in 1964 and 1968 repectively. The road alignments on the map also suggests that the tunnels were taken into consideration, but for some reason not marked.
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2016, 04:05 PM   #4116
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,791
Likes (Received): 612

Quote:
Originally Posted by italystf View Post
Wow, that seems a pretty gross mistake, I've never found anything like this on Google Maps.
They have made some hilarious errors earlier. A few years ago, the Google Maps showed the Munich International Airport in the woods of the Southern Finland, to the west of the town of Hyvinkää.

__________________

OAQP liked this post
MattiG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2016, 06:07 PM   #4117
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

Here comes day two of my trip, probably the most exciting part. First, I had to decide whether to double back over the Sauda Mountains to Røldal or to "go around", through Suldal. It's a far longer drive, but since I hadn't driven those roads before, I decided to opt for that route. I wasn't to be disappointed...

The first part, fv 520 Suldal-Ropeid, isn't very spectacular. A decent 2-lane highway along the fjord, some interesting views, but quite modest by western Norwegian standards. Thus, a 70-80 km/h average speed is also possible, even though there are a few twisty parts. Obviously, this road is far better than the northern section of fv 520, since it is the main connection between the industrial town of Sauda and the outside world. It doesn't change all that much at Ropeid (I did not try to follow Google's instructions...), but the fv 520/46 intersection is actually somewhat interesting - it's the only H-shaped road junction I know in Norway. Why they didn't build a roundabout beats me... The fv 46 from there to the rv 13 intersection is mainly the same as the Sauda road, decent 2-lane standard. However, the Sandsfjord crossing is brand New, meaning that the road is also of a much better quality - wider, with shoulders, and the curves are designed with an 80 km/h driving speed in mind. The views are also good.

From there, I took the rv 13. One would perhaps expect a national road to be better than a regional one, but this being Norway, it's not that simple. The road is basically the same as the one you see in the above map, some sections might have been paved since 1970, though. The road is fairly narrow, twisty and steep to Sand, the views are alright, but not extraordinary. The Suldal is nice up to lake Suldal, the road remains twisty and narrow (1+ to 2- lanes). From there, it gets really cool. The road - built in the 70s along the north shore of the lake - runs through a landscape with almost vertical cliff faces all around. Of course, there are a few tunnels, but it rapidly turned into one of my favourite Norwegian drives. The lake itself is worth mentioning, it seems quite small, but it's still one of the deepest in Norway (and, thus, Europe...) - max depth 376 m...

From there, the valley towards Røldal is really nice even though the road isn't. The view of lake Røldal is also very different, rv 13 runs along it's shore, fv 520 is several hundred meters higher up the hillside... When I got to Røldal, I took the old road across the mountains towards Odda, and that's really something. The road is from the 1880s, I think, and not much have changed, apart from the pavement - but even that is old... It's not really a scary road, even though the Seljestad gorge might be a little bit brutal to some, but it's really beautiful up there - even in poor weather. The road is single lane, but there's not much traffic, so you won't care. Do not bring a caravan, though!

From there, I followed the decent E134/rv 13 to where the rv 13 turns off towards Odda. That road isn't much different from the 1970 map either, and it's crowded with tourists. Understandably so, it's a nice place to be, but when most of the road has less than two proper lanes and there are tourist buses, HGVs, caravans etc, the drive is fairly slow. I was prepared for this, though, I've driven there fairly recently. However, last time I drove there, I came down the fv 550 on the west side of Sørfjorden. That is a decent modernized road, not too busy and mainly two lanes. I hadn't driven the rv 13 on the east side of the fjord for 20+ years, so I expected a similar state of affairs there. Not so. With the exception of a couple of tunnels, the road through fantastically beautiful Hardanger is much like it's always been, a road where it's difficult to impossible for two buses or HGVs to meet. With a very different traffic load than back in the day, the drive to the Hardanger bridge was painfully slow (and the rain was pouring down, so I didn't really feel like stopping either...). But it's beautiful, so focusing on the nature rather than the Croatian lorry and the German bus ahead of me, made sense. And the lack of speed meant it wasn't really dangerous either...

The Hardanger bridge is really good. Pretty, but not in any way taking focus away from the surroundings. Nice piece of engineering, really. From there, I again had a choice - see the mountains from the inside and take the 7.5 km Vallavik tunnel or go through Ulvik along the fv 572. I chose the latter. The road to Ulvik is quite ok, still great views along the fjord, but the road over the mountain is very good. Much narrower, twisty, but - again - not in any way scary or extreme. A nice drive, absolutely recommended. Eventually, I hit the rv 13 again, and up to Voss the road has been improved recently and is a fairly good two-laner. Much the same with the E16 towards Dale, although that improvement is some years older (and there's a fairly significant landslide/rockfall hazard). The road is often quite busy, but I was lucky - the rocks fell further north and the road was reasonably quiet...

From Dale I took what I consider to be one of the most spectacular tourist routes there is - the fv 569. It runs along a fjord, the views are breathtaking, and the road is amazing: 30 kms of single-lane traffic, with narrow tunnels where you sometimes just have to assume no-one comes in the other direction... Amazing. Eventually, you get to the bottom of the fjord and start climbing a pretty valley to a 3 km tunnel which takes you to Modalen. From there, the road improves and the views are slightly less spectacular. Eventually, the road meets the E39 at Romarheim.

The final stretch of my day was 40 kms from there to the ferry at Oppedal which took me across the Sognefjord to Lavik. That road isn't really very interesting, simply because it has been improved significantly over the past couple of decades, meaning there are several tunnels and restricted views. It is a decent-to-good two-lane highway where one easily averages 80 km/h - unless there are too many lorries or caravans to deal with... The ferry ride was a bit interesting, though, since I was on the first battery-powered ferry in Norway.
__________________

ChrisZwolle, Sentilj, Stafangr liked this post
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2016, 09:07 PM   #4118
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

One of the most interesting things to look at when trying to understand the current state of Norway's main roads, is to see how they have been improved over the years. I've linked to http://www.riksvei.no/ before, but then mainly because it's an interesting source to the olden days. However, it also tells us quite a bit about how things have changed...

We can clearly see where it all began. When we started numberng our national highway grid in 1931, it was basically based on old rural roads and a few national roads built from the mid-1800s and onwards. When car sales were made open to everyone in 1960, not all that much had changed, apart from around the towns and cities. Road transport hadn't been for everyone, and it was certainly not considered very important. Things changed in the 60s, but it moved fairly slowly in real life. Plans were made (Norsk Vegplan of 1965, I think, suggested the construction of hundreds of km of motorways by 1980), but politics made a centralized development centered around Oslo very difficult. So, what came instead was gradual improvements everywhere - starting with pavement, moving on to widening of some important routes, then some realignment, and finally the construction of brand new roads.

Looking at the Oslo-Svinesund road, we actually see all these stages: The Svinesund bridge opened just after the war. Then, unpaved pieces of road were paved in the 50s, before some moderate realignments happened beween then and the 80s, actually. Of course, some sections were completely realigned already in the 60s (south of Oslo, north of Moss), but this wasn't the norm. Eventually, the road was developed into a 2-lane expressway (partially motorway) between the 60s and the 90s, but then they realized that high-speed busy 2-lane roads weren't particularly safe or effective, so they dualled the remaining part over the next decade.

All of this meant that several sections of this 100-km stretch of road have been reconstructed or realigned three, four, perhaps even five times over the past 60 years or so, and this is not a unique situation. Many readers are familiar with this, but I still think it's worth mentioning... I've also been looking - unsuccessfully, I might add... - for a complete survey of the pre-1965 numbering system. The following one, from Norwegian Wikipedia, is the best I've found: https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_...amle_riksveier
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2016, 09:57 PM   #4119
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,791
Likes (Received): 612

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
We can clearly see where it all began. When we started numbering our national highway grid in 1931, it was basically based on old rural roads and a few national roads built from the mid-1800s and onwards.
It is interesting to see how different an approach the neighboring countries have taken what comes to road numbering.

Finland introduced the first road numbering scheme in 1938, and most of that system is still in place. The initial system listed primary routes 1-21 and secondary routes 51-82. With the exception of the areas lost after the WW II, the grid created in 1938 matches very well with the existing network. Of course, a lot of new routes have been built, and some major reroutings have been done.

The only major numbering reform in Finland took place in mid-1990's. That one introduced a number of new primary and secondary routes, but only one original primary route (19) lost its status and was downgraded to 88. (Most of the reform was about making a more clear separation into three grades of the lower network.)

Meanwhile, Norway has changed the system several times, and renumbering seems to be a continual process in Sweden.

Last edited by MattiG; August 1st, 2016 at 10:55 PM. Reason: Grammar
MattiG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2016, 10:41 PM   #4120
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,559
Likes (Received): 19352

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
The lake itself is worth mentioning, it seems quite small, but it's still one of the deepest in Norway (and, thus, Europe...) - max depth 376 m...
I sometimes found it difficult to differentiate between lakes and fjords, especially in the Nordfjord area near Stryn where there are numerous lakes slightly above sea level that look like extensions of the Nordfjord.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
norway

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium