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 November 8th, 2007, 10:49 PM   #161
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

(disregard)

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; December 7th, 2007 at 04:15 PM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 8th, 2007, 11:05 PM   #162
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriszwolle View Post
There is a road to the Nordkapp yes. But don't expect motorway-like roads. The roads are very quiet, Norway is large and has only a population of 4.3 million. Especially north of Trondheim.

But the usual road from Europe to the Nordkapp is through Sweden and Finland, because that's shorter.
I hope I am not offending any more people here, but driving through the huge forests Northern Finland and Sweden is not my kind of fun, and Nordkapp (North Cape) is a tourist trap. I mean, the cliff is nice enough, but it's not that special compared with many other places in Norway, and you have to pay a large sum to share the view with loads of German and Japanes tourist buses. And on top of it all: It's not even the northernmost point in Norway!

If I was coming from continental Europe on my one and only great trip of the northern Scandinavia I would certainly take it easy and follow the Norwegian coast as long as my money and time last, then use the excellent Finnish and Swedish highways back home. I would rather spend time in southern Sweden than in Lappland.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxxPower View Post
Ein Neu-Drontheim für Neuropa. I guess they should've stayed on a bit longer to build some proper roads..
Well, the problem was of course the "slightly" unethical way the nazis excersized their construction projects. Even the much less ambitious (but still substantial) projects they did complete cost the life of at least 15 000 POWs from Eastern Europe, mostly Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, in comparison "only" 10 000 Norwegians (including Norwegian Jews) died during the occupation.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 11:27 PM   #163
Verso
Islander
 
Verso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ljubljana
Posts: 22,087
Likes (Received): 4749

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriszwolle View Post
But the usual road from Europe to the Nordkapp is through Sweden and Finland, because that's shorter.
Really? IIRC, Slovenian agencies offer it driving in Norway all the time in one direction, and visiting Santa Claus in Rovaniemi (Finland) in the other. But I don't like the gap by Tyssfjorden; will it ever get bridged or bypassed?
Verso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 11:31 PM   #164
snupix
Registered User
 
snupix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Zagreb
Posts: 4,910
Likes (Received): 36

Quote:
Originally Posted by Verso View Post
Really? IIRC, Slovenian agencies offer it driving in Norway all the time in one direction, and visiting Santa Claus in Rovaniemi (Finland) in the other. But I don't like the gap by Tyssfjorden; will it ever get bridged or bypassed?
If I remember correctly, it was a relatively long ride with a small ferry. This sentence explains it all. Long ride - very expensive to bypass; small ferry - low traffic.
snupix no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2007, 03:54 PM   #165
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by Verso View Post
Really? IIRC, Slovenian agencies offer it driving in Norway all the time in one direction, and visiting Santa Claus in Rovaniemi (Finland) in the other. But I don't like the gap by Tyssfjorden; will it ever get bridged or bypassed?
There are as still many fjord-crossings left to do in Norway, many places the problem is that fjords are deep (typically 300-1000 m) and that they could be several km wide, making bridging impossible and tunnels quite expensive. I might come back to some of the bigger proposed projects later on. What I can say about Tyssfjord is that it currently is not on top of the list. Although it would symbolically finally connect the road network of the northernmost counties to the rest of the country, the traffic is quite low, and most traffic from northernmost to south Norway will still drive through Finland and Sweden because it is both shorter and faster (remember that Kirkenes is further east than Instanbul!). However, a project that is more likely to be built in a few years is a bridge across Rombakfjorden a few km longer north:
Video: mms://showtime.modulnet.com/haalogal...rtual_Tour.wmv



The bridge will be the 7th longest suspension bridge in the world, with a total length of 1550 m and largest span of 1345 m. However, by separating the lanes, I guess, and thus making it stiffer, they manage to keep the cost down to 2 billion kroner. I am not convinced it is worth paying that much for shorting the E6 up there with only 20 km, though...

As a Norwegian I resist the idea of Santa Claus being Finnish. St. Nicholas belongs in Turkey, however the Yule-"nisse" (as we call the guy in red outfit) belongs in Norway as all other "nisser"
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2007, 04:24 PM   #166
Verso
Islander
 
Verso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ljubljana
Posts: 22,087
Likes (Received): 4749

^ Actually, they visit Norwegian Santa.

I've just had a small calculation: from the Norwegian-Swedish border between Göteborg and Oslo to the Norwegian-Russian border between Kirkenes and Murmansk (if you drive only in Norway) it's exactly 2,555 km.
Verso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2007, 05:57 PM   #167
Þróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Þróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2268

Also, don't forget Hardangerbrua, unless its already posted somewhere in this thread.

Here is a outtake from the Norwegian Project and Construction thread in Scandinavian & Baltic sunforum.

>> Hardangerbrua
Location: County|Hordaland > City|Ulvik/Eidfjord

The longest suspension bridge in Norway, and one of the 10 longest in the world by span. Hardangerbrua was approved in 2006, ten years after it was cancelled the first time. Construction of the bridge will start in April/May 2008, while the construction of the tunnels leading to the bridge was started in March 2007. When the bridge is completed in early 2011 it will be 1380m long, with the main span been 1 310m long (30m longer than the main span of Golden Gate in San Francisco. With the longest span in Norway, and one of the tallest towers, two 186m tall bridge tower this project is not going to be cheap. Total cost is estimated to around 1.9 billion kroner, thats without the 2.4km of tunnel leading out to the bridge and another 0.8km of road needed to be built.



More renderings, click to enlarge!
Þróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2007, 09:09 PM   #168
Maxx☢Power
BANNED
 
Maxx☢Power's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 387
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
As a Norwegian I resist the idea of Santa Claus being Finnish. St. Nicholas belongs in Turkey, however the Yule-"nisse" (as we call the guy in red outfit) belongs in Norway as all other "nisser"
The nisse is a shared element in Scandinavian folklore.
Maxx☢Power no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2007, 12:50 AM   #169
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by Qazaq View Post
Also, don't forget Hardangerbrua, unless its already posted somewhere in this thread.
Thanks for the cool renderings.

One important difference between Hardangerbrua and the proposed Hålogalandsbrua (the Rombakfjord bridge) I mentioned above is that the Hardangerbrua project is actually under construction, whereas there is no decision regarding Hålogalandsbrua yet, although the people up there usually get what they ask for...

I only mentioned bridge because it is in the same region, and on the same highway (E6) as the Tyssfjord ferry.

BTW, from other posts I see that you come from the Fosen peninsula at the north shor of the Trondheimfjord right across from Trondheim. What is your view on the recent (renewed) discussion on various tunnels solutions under "your" fjord?
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2007, 02:06 AM   #170
Þróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Þróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2268

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
Thanks for the cool renderings.

One important difference between Hardangerbrua and the proposed Hålogalandsbrua (the Rombakfjord bridge) I mentioned above is that the Hardangerbrua project is actually under construction, whereas there is no decision regarding Hålogalandsbrua yet, although the people up there usually get what they ask for...

I only mentioned bridge because it is in the same region, and on the same highway (E6) as the Tyssfjord ferry.

BTW, from other posts I see that you come from the Fosen peninsula at the north shor of the Trondheimfjord right across from Trondheim. What is your view on the recent (renewed) discussion on various tunnels solutions under "your" fjord?
My guess is that Hålogalandsbrua will for sure be built it we actually go for the Olympics in Tromsø in 2018.

Surprised over your knowledge of Fosen, a forgotten corner of Norway!
Tunnel across Trondheimsfjorden would of course be the most perfect solution for us living here, especially for the industry here in Vanvikan and Leksvik which has a major potensial as its already doing really well (the biggest issue they face is the fjord-crossing!). So a tunnel would save us, especially now as it looks like Ørland Hovedflystasjon moves away, which will be a doomsday for both Ørlandet and Bjugn.

But a tunnel beneath Trondheimsfjorden, or a floating tunnel as many sais is the only option (as the fjord is probably too deep to go beneath with a tunnel), it will become so expencive that we will have to drive through tolls for the rest of our lifes, and considering our population on 25 000, where both Roan, Osen and Mosvik pluss many in Leksvik uses Namsos/Steinkjer, and im not sure if we would get that much support from many bigger investors, and there is no way Fosen alone can finance it, as we're just about to start spending a billion Kroner on upgrading the roads here.

So a floating tunnel will remind as the dream for the future, now i hope we actaually manage to get the new ferries in order, and on the new location between Vanvikan and Trondheim (instead of Flakk-Rørvik). See a video about that project here:



By the way, a few pics taken today from highways south of Trondheim. Pretty snowy though.










Þróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2007, 11:31 PM   #171
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by Qazaq View Post
My guess is that Hålogalandsbrua will for sure be built it we actually go for the Olympics in Tromsø in 2018.
This bridge could very well be built, and Tromsø sure needs infrastructure upgrades (as well as heavy investments in almost everything else) in order to cope with winter olympic games. However, I don't see how shortening the trip from Tromsø to Narvik from 250 to 230 km would be of any help for a WOG.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qazaq View Post
Surprised over your knowledge of Fosen, a forgotten corner of Norway!
Tunnel across Trondheimsfjorden would of course be the most perfect solution for us living here, especially for the industry here in Vanvikan and Leksvik which has a major potensial as its already doing really well (the biggest issue they face is the fjord-crossing!). So a tunnel would save us, especially now as it looks like Ørland Hovedflystasjon moves away, which will be a doomsday for both Ørlandet and Bjugn.

But a tunnel beneath Trondheimsfjorden, or a floating tunnel as many sais is the only option (as the fjord is probably too deep to go beneath with a tunnel), it will become so expencive that we will have to drive through tolls for the rest of our lifes, and considering our population on 25 000, where both Roan, Osen and Mosvik pluss many in Leksvik uses Namsos/Steinkjer, and im not sure if we would get that much support from many bigger investors, and there is no way Fosen alone can finance it, as we're just about to start spending a billion Kroner on upgrading the roads here.
It is true that a tunnel straight over across from Trondheim would have to be a floating tunnel because the fjord is too deep here. The problem is however that the cost of such a project is an unknown, as not even a small scale tunnel of this type has been attempted yet, and I believe the Trondheim fjord would be quite demanding, as the current is quite strong and you probably cannot anchor the bridge at the bottom very well since there is a thick layer of gravel/sand/clay at the bottom.

What I was referring to was however the two projects that have been proposed recently. One is a tunnel at the mouth of the Trondheim fjord (Agdenes-(possibly Bjugn)-Brekstad), that seems to be supported by the local politicians of those places. I do not believe much in this project, as the traffic would probably be quite low, but still the tunnel would be quite long (15 km?) and record deep (500 m).

The other suggestion is from the conservatives in Trondheim (Brox), to pick up a plan from 1988 for a Trondheim-Frosta-Fosen-tunnel, with a landing somewhere between Leksvik and Vanvikan. I got the following crappy copy from a newspaper from a friend:

The drawing is not very accurate because:
1. The fjord depths (but not the tunnel depths) have probably been multiplied by a factor of two.
2. The costs are just a guess. A 2+2 project with similar length (around 25 km) and depth in south-western Norway (Rogfast) has been estimated to 4,8-6,8 billion NOK. The Fosen tunnel probably won't have to be built with four lanes all the way, though.

Now, why is this project worthwhile even thinking about? Because, this tunnel will potentially have higher traffic than any other long tunnel in Norway. Firstly, the southern leg (Trondheim-Frosta) can be a part of a rerouting of the E6, shortening the distance between Trondheim and the towns of northern Trøndelag (central Norway) with 20 km. Even with the road authorities' moderate plan shown above, the E6 between Trondheim to Steinkjer is to be expanded to a 4 lane motorway, which surely will cost billions anyway. The tunnel continuing to Fosen will not have that much traffic, but despite Fosen's low population, the Flakk-Rørvik-ferry which this tunnel may substitute, already is the third busiest ferry in Norway, and there is a great push to substitute the two busiest ferry routes (Oslofjorden Moss-Horten and Boknafjord MORTAVIKA-ARSVÅGEN), as well as some significantly less trafficated ferries (Rygfast, for instance) with similar huge tunnel projects.

For reference, here is the 2006 traffic numbers for the busiest ferries routes in Norway:
1. MOSS-HORTEN (Oslofjorden) 10.5 km AADT: 3598
2. MORTAVIKA-ARSVÅGEN (Boknafjorden) 8.0 km AADT: 2588
3. FLAKK-RØRVIK (Trondheimsfjorden) 7.2 km AADT: 1982
(in addition the high speed passenger ferries of the Fjord have several hundred thousand passengers each year)
..
..
yy. BRURAVIK - BRIMNES (being eliminated by the 2 billion NOK Hardanger bridge) 2.4 km AADT: 1001
..
..
xx. BOGNES-SKARBERGET (Tyssfjord) 8.3 AADT: 386 (as I said, eliminating the ferry here would largely be a symbolic task)

Relevant AADT:
E6 Åsen (relevant for (3 billion NOK?) Trondheim-Frosta-tunnel): > 7000
E6 Rombakfjorden (relevant for 2 billion NOK Hålogaland bridge): < 2000
E16 Lærdalstunnelen (longest road tunnel in the world, 24.5 km): AADT: 1600

If you just add the AADT of today (all of which increases by 6-10 % each year), the Fosen tunnel will have a traffic of 9 000 AADT (i.e. 6 times the traffic of Lærdal) on the 15 km Trondheim-Frosta leg, and roughly 2 000 (a bit mor than Lærdal) on the 10 km Frosta-Fosen leg, not including the transfer of traffic from today's high speed passanger ferries, and possibly transfer of traffic from other routes across the fjord. There is no chance that any other long submarine tunnel project in Norway will come close to such traffic numbers as the Trondheim-Frosta tunnel, and this will help finance as well as possibly getting political support for the project.

However, I think a tunnel will open up the eyes of the roughly 250 000 people living in Trondheim and surrounding municipalities for the potential of Fosen as a weekend/holiday home destination as well. In addition, the attractive and sunny areas around tunnel openings both in Frosta and Fosen will become popular "suburbs" of Trondheim, which surely will boost the traffic a lot.

BTW: I have lived in Trondheim several years in the past, and I still visit the city a couple of times each year. However, like for most "Trondhjemmers", Fosen makes a nice view from the city, but is otherwise a largely unknown territory. A tunnel will probably change that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qazaq View Post
So a floating tunnel will remind as the dream for the future, now i hope we actaually manage to get the new ferries in order, and on the new location between Vanvikan and Trondheim (instead of Flakk-Rørvik). See a video about that project here:
It seems like this idea is killed by Trondheim municipaly, they simply don't want all the cars injected into the already congested roads of central Trondheim.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qazaq View Post
By the way, a few pics taken today from highways south of Trondheim. Pretty snowy though.
I am very envious, no snow here!

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; November 13th, 2007 at 12:48 AM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 12:32 AM   #172
Þróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Þróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2268

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
It is true that a tunnel straight over across from Trondheim would have to be a floating tunnel because the fjord is too deep here. The problem is however that the cost of such a project is an unknown, as not even a small scale tunnel of this type has been attempted yet, and I believe the Trondheim fjord would be quite demanding, as the current is quite strong and you probably cannot anchor the bridge at the bottom very well since there is a thick layer of gravel/sand/clay at the bottom.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
What I was referring to was however the two projects that have been proposed recently. One is a tunnel at the mouth of the Trondheim fjord (Agdenes-(possibly Bjugn)-Brekstad), that seems to be supported by the local politicians of those places. I do not believe much in this project, as the traffic would probably be quite low, but still the tunnel would be quite long (15 km?) and record deep (500 m).

The other suggestion is from the conservatives in Trondheim (Brox), to pick up a plan from 1988 for a Trondheim-Frosta-Fosen-tunnel, with a landing somewhere between Leksvik and Vanvikan. I got the following crappy copy from a newspaper from a friend:

http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/5...tunnel2bt5.jpg

The drawing is not very accurate because:
1. The fjord depths (but not the tunnel depths) have probably been multiplied with a factor of two.
2. The costs are just a guess. A 2+2 project with similar length (around 25 km) and depth in south-western Norway (Rogfast) has been estimated to 4,8-6,8 billion NOK. The Fosen tunnel probably won't have to be built with four lanes all the way, though.

Now, why is this project worthwhile even thinking about? Because, this tunnel will potentially have higher traffic than any other long tunnel in Norway. Firstly, the southern leg (Trondheim-Frosta) can be a part of a rerouting of the E6, shortening the distance between Trondheim and the towns of North Trøndelag with 20 km. Even with the road authorities' modes plan shown above, the E6 between Trondheim to Steinkjer is scheduled to be expanded to a 4 lane motorway, which surely will cost billions anyway. The tunnel continuing to Fosen will not have that much traffic, but despite Fosen's low population, the Flakk-Rørvik-ferry which this tunnel may substitute, already is the third busiest ferry in Norway, and there is a great push to substitute the two most busiest ferries (Oslofjorden Moss-Horten and Boknafjord MORTAVIKA-ARSVÅGEN), as well as some significantly less trafficated ferries (Rygfast, for instance) with similar tunnel projects.

For reference, here is the 2006 traffic numbers for the busiest ferries routes in Norway:
1. MOSS-HORTEN (Oslofjorden) 10.5 km AADT: 3598
2. MORTAVIKA-ARSVÅGEN (Boknafjorden) 8.0 km AADT: 2588
3. FLAKK-RØRVIK (Trondheimsfjorden) 7.2 km AADT: 1982
(in addition the high speed passenger ferries of the Fjord have several hundred thousand passengers each year)
..
..
yy. BRURAVIK - BRIMNES (being eliminated by the 2 billion NOK Hardanger bridge) 2.4 km AADT: 1001
..
..
xx. BOGNES-SKARBERGET (Tyssfjord) 8.3 AADT: 386 (as I said, eliminating the ferry here would largely be a symbolic task)

Relevant AADT:
E6 Åsen (relevant for (3 billion?) Trondheim-Frosta-tunnel): > 7000
E6 Rombakfjorden (relevant for 2 billion Hålogaland bridge): < 2000
E16 Lærdalstunnelen (longest road tunnel in the world, 24.5 km): AADT: 1600

If you just add the AADT of today (all of which increases by 6-10 % each year), the long Fosen tunnel will have a traffic of 9 000 AADT (i.e. 6 times the traffic of Lærdal) on the 15 km Trondheim-Frosta leg, and roughly 2 000 on the 10 km Frosta-Fosen(a bit mor than Lærdal), not including the transfer of traffic from the passanger ferries, and possibly transfer of traffic from other routes across the fjord. . There is no chance that any other long submarine tunnel project in Norway will come close to such traffic numbers as the Trondheim-Frosta tunnel, and this will help finance as well as possibly getting political support for the project.

However, I think a tunnel will open up the eyes of the roughly 250 000 people living in Trondheim and surrounding municipalities for the potential of Fosen as a weekend/holiday home destination as well. In addition, the attractive and sunny areas around tunnel openings both in Frosta and Fosen will become popular "suburbs" of Trondheim, which surely will boost the traffic a lot.

BTW: I have lived in Trondheim several years, and still visits the city a couple of times each year. However, like for most "Trondhjemmers", Fosen makes a nice view from the city, but is otherwise largely unknown territory. A tunnel will probably change that.

It seems like this idea is killed by Trondheim municipaly, they simply don't want all the cars injected into the already congested roads of central Trondheim.
The link Trondheim - Frosta - Fosen is maybe the best proposal if we were to build a floating tunnel. With E6's traffic between Trondheim and Frosta in a 4 lane highway, then a 2 lane road the last 10km-12km over to Fosen if could be the most affortable than other proposals. To Leksvik this would be perfect too, as the tunnel entrance would be from Hoven, about 10km west of the village of Leksvik and 20km east of Vanvikan. But for the rest of Fosen it would mean a detour, and as the majority of Fosen's population live in Rissa, Bjugn and Ørlandet. But that detour is minimal, as they have to drive to Vanvikan, then 10km west to Rørvik to take the ferry.

A tunnel from Ørlandet to Rissa is also a possibility, as it shortens the road a lot, but the cost compared the population and potensial there is too small, and certainly if Ørlandet looses the military base. But as they say, if would be possible and affortable with a tunnel connection there between Ørland-Rissa-Agdenes. Yes, a tunnel on about 15km going down to at least 500m, unless its more. If so i expect that much of the traffic will run to Trondheim by the roads on the southern side of Trondheimsfjorden which will be a faster way to get there. If those planns go ahead it will be a big lose for Leksvik, Mosvik, Åfjord Osen and Roan which is the smallest and least populated Fosen municipalities and will benefit most from a tunnel from Trondheim to Vanvikan. And if Bjugn and Ørlandet goes away there is less chance for a affortable tunnel.

A quick quick map of the fjord and its roads, and future tunnels?


There is also some 190 000 passangers each year taking the expressboat between Vanvikan-Trondheim, a floating tunnel will make these go by busses through the tunnel, which increases the traffic by more.

And with Trondheim working against all planns as of now (even the ferry plan Vanvikan - Trondheim which all of Fosen is in favour of) we have a lot of difficult tasks to discuss and do research on if we actually do want to build a floating tunnel.

Last edited by Þróndeimr; November 13th, 2007 at 01:00 AM.
Þróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 12:56 AM   #173
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

The proposed Trondheim-Frosta-Fosen is planned under the sea bottom (i.e. underground), as the fjord is not very deep following this route. A floating 25 km tube tunnel would probably have an astronomic construction as well as maintenance budget. The road from Hoven (or whereever the tunnel would see the daylight) to Bjugn/Ørlandet could probably be shortened a lot by building a new road across the peninsula. Of course for those living close to the current ferry jetty, it would be a detour, but as most employers of Trondheim is in the eastern part of the city, they will probably still save considerable time compared with todays solution (I would estimate 30 minutes at least in each direction).
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2007, 12:37 AM   #174
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Some bad news and some good news from the Norwegian transportation sector this week.

Bad news: The transport minister (Navarsete) announced that, despite the Road Authorities advice, she would not increase the speed limit from 100 to 110 km/h on the best motorways, instead she wanted to DECREASE the speed limit in certain areas/at certain times Talk about living on a different planet, very few people obey the 100 km/h limit, and even the police have earlier said that they don't stop cars as long as they drive below 120. Setting speed limits unaturally law simply makes people lose respect of the law, which is very bad in places/situations where the speed limit actually makes sense.

Good news (at least for those living nearby): Lofoten in Northern Norway is finally connected to the Norwegian mainland by road. Some images/renderings from the project:







Some recent pictures from the completed project (they do not have during this period of the year):



54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2007, 12:17 AM   #175
Sander-
21st century citizen
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bergen / London/ San Francisco
Posts: 364
Likes (Received): 3

Beutiful pictures. I haven't seen the Nordhordaland bridge anywhere. Not immensily beutiful, but original




Another night photo i thought was nice


On a side note; to the discussion regarding toll. In most larger cities an automated system collecting toll charges from various junctions such as bridges or city entrances have been put in place. Automaticly reading the car number and sending a bill at the end of each month.
Sander- no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 21st, 2007, 08:06 PM   #176
Dan
Registered User
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Scotland / Ireland
Posts: 1,244
Likes (Received): 3

Why in the world is not a motorway on the E18 to the Swedish border included in the 30-year plan? If I understood it correctly a small motorway will be built during a big part (to connect with the bit that has already been built) but right at the border area it will still be non-motorway... considering how important of a connection this is (and how much traffic I've seen on it), a wide motorway the whole way seems ideal.

There are several developments on the Swedish side of the E18 at least, which will really help to cut driving times between Oslo and Stockholm within a few years (several decent-sized stretches will already end next year, at least a good 25km I think). Värmland is also looking into the possibility of giving extra money to get it all motorway from Karlstad to the Värmland border a bit east of Kristinehamn by 2020, as well as upgrading significantly the road to the Norwegian border. (Not sure exactly what there though, I'm guessing 2+1 with divider.)

It's nice at least that within a few years development both in Sweden and in Norway will be done on the E6 so you will be able to go Copenhagen-Oslo on all motorways (and thus it will be quite a bit faster too). I just wish that more focus was being put on the E18 too!
Dan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 25th, 2007, 12:36 PM   #177
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

I think the map is based on projected traffic numbers only,using an unrealistically (i.e. politically wish-thinking) low expected traffic growth. . The whole E-18 south/east of Oslo is under upgrade (check Østfold county under the "prosjekt" flag in www.vegvesen.no if you understand Norwegian), and I believe it will be 4 lanes until Mysen. The traffic east of Mysen is however quite low, only 3700 AADT at the border, and most of this traffic are Norwegian locals doing their shopping in Sweden, so the traffic is probably even lower further inland in Sweden. I think we have to accept that the Stockholm-Oslo transport corridor is not terribly important for either country. For Norway, Oslo-Gothenburg and Oslo-Kristiansand-Stavanger-Bergen-Trondheim, Oslo-Bergen and Oslo-Trondheim are far more important, with much higher through-traffic both by air, car, and train, cargo and persons. However, if the Swedes decide to upgrade their road to motorway standard all the way to the border, there will perhaps be motivation enough also for the Norwegians to make a 4-lane road the few kms Mysen-Ørje (the border).....i.e. pretty much the same attitude the Norwegians have to the "Atlantbanan" HST project further north
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 25th, 2007, 01:52 PM   #178
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,572
Likes (Received): 19366

Traffic volumes are not the only reason for motorway construction.

> Traffic volumes
> Traffic safety
> Economic development
> Driving time reducing
> Pollution reduction
> Livability of streets/towns
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 26th, 2007, 12:09 AM   #179
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155


True, and all these aspects are not very prevalent in the Norwegian agenda currently. Also, I might add, the mix of AADT varies a lot, and not enough attention is placed in Norway I think on the longer transit routes with a lot of truck traffic compared with private cars.

Three of your reasons (traffic volumes, traffic safety (in absolute numbers), and pollution reduction) are however dependent on each other. Also time reduction is of course more valuable when the traffic is higher. For the road in question (E-18 (Oslo)-Mysen (N)-Karlstad (S)-(Stockholm), of which only 30 km of the Mysen-Karlstad road is in Norway, there are almost no towns, and the time reduction will be very small (2-5 minutes with the current Norwegian speed limits), probably on the order of (if the road on the Swedish side would be developed it would be another story). Of course, one can hope for some economic development, but in reality the mobility between Norway and Sweden is much lower than internally in both countries, and the Stockholm-Oslo probably never will be a terribly important cargo route. A new road could potentially lead to some increase in cross border shopping, but this would not be to much benefit for Norway, and is environmental undesirable. So, although I see you point, and I think that Stockholm-Oslo at some point in the future should be a motorway, I think it is correct that there are a lot of projects on the priority list before this particular road.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 17th, 2008, 05:07 PM   #180
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Norwegian transport plan 2010-2019

The official proposal for the Norwegian transport plan for the next 10 years was published today. Seldom have I seen a less ambitious document.....

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; January 17th, 2008 at 05:08 PM. Reason: link
54°26′S 3°24′E 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 04:03 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