Talk:Tyne Bridge

Comment

Hello the Tyne bridge being based on the Sydney Harbour Bridge, it was actually the other way round. The Tyne Bridge was built in 1928 and was opened officially in 1929, whereas the Sydney Harbour Bridge was built in 1931 and opened in 1932, so the Sydney Harbour bridge was in fact based on the Tyne bridgedj_paul84 23:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense. The Sydney Harbour Bridge was designed by John Bradfield in 1916 - the same year the Hell Gate Bridge opened - although actual construction was delayed due to WW1, commencing in 1922. The Hell Gate Bridge was a major international engineering achievement, and Brafieled would certainly have known of it. The Tyne Bridge was designed in 1924, and was probably influenced by both the Hell Gate and Sydney designs - although it actually looks more like the Bayonne Bridge than either of them. --Centauri 00:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

in local info, especially tourist information centres in newcastle, it does indeed tell you that it was the other way round, Sydney Harbour Bridge was based on the design of the Tyne bridge. --Geordiejon 11:14, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Well actual historical reality is rather different. It should be self-evident that a structure designed in 1924 cannot possibly be the inspiration for a structure designed 8 years before, in 1916. --Centauri 12:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

what's your source for this? The NSW archives, cited in the SHB article, says that Bradfield designed a cantilever bridge in 1916, not an arch bridge, and that the SHB was designed in 1924, the same year as the Tyne Bridge. Where is the evidence that the Tyne Bridge was based on the Sydney Harbour Bridge? BearAllen (talk) 08:12, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

The Sydney Harbour Bridge entry asserts that the design was carried out by Sir Douglas Fox Partners not Mott, Hay and Anderson. The SHB entry also asserts that whilst Bradfield had considered an arch bridge by 1922 (and gives reference to the NSW state records), he did not necessarily design it himself, but contracted it our to the engineering firm Dorman Long and Co who hired Sir Douglas Fox Partners. The upshot is that the entry on the Tyne bridge should not assert that the SHB was designed by Mott, Hay and Anderson or even inspired by their design. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.220.136.97 (talk) 18:49, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Colour

I am a little unsure why the article says several times that it is green. It says it was green when constructed, and is certainly green now. Was it ever any other colour? Bob 19:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

During a time in the 1980's it was blue

I agree that the article is very emphatic about the colour. I am particularly confused by this sentence: "The same colours were used to paint the bridge for its Millennium year". The bridge is not quite as old as all that! Should it be "the millennium year", or "its (something) anniversary year" or what? Perhaps just giving the year would be best. Telsa (talk) 11:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Photo Gallery

Do we really need it there? I mean sure the pictures are nice and all but we have 3 other pictures situated around the article, plus several links to more photographs lower down in the article. Is it actually necessary to have it there? -Painezor ^TC 00:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't say any of the pictures in the gallery are particularly helpful. I seem to remember that I removed it a while back when I distributed some of the images around the article, but it seems to have returned again. Having said that, I suppose it's not doing any harm - the one of it behind the Millenium Bridge could be useful in showing its position, perhaps. The night-time one and the "from the North" one aren't particularly brilliant, though. I've also removed one that appears to be a repeat. Bob talk 00:47, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• There are now no pictures in the Image gallery they have all gone. Also I think this article should be nominated for featured article status, it is of a high standard, set out neatly, properly referenced etc. Please post any comments either here or on my Talk page, either way I don't mind. Tellyaddict 13:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I can still see several pictures there... -Painezor ^TC 13:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Sydney Harbour Bridge

I've removed (for now) the claim that the design of the Tyne Bridge was based on the SHB. It's unsupported by a source, and contradicted by the sources cited in the SHB article. Please only reinstate the claim if you can support it with a reliable source. BearAllen (talk) 06:06, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Tyne Bridge/CommentsTalk:Tyne Bridge/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Strengths: Rich information Good supporting pictures Weaknesses: No in-line references Questionable licence on one historical photo John the mackem 00:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 00:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 09:24, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tyne Bridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140913082559/http://www.twmuseums.org.uk/discovery/buildingbridges/the-roman-tyne-bridge/ to http://www.twmuseums.org.uk/discovery/buildingbridges/the-roman-tyne-bridge/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151207171144/http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/venues/st-james-park to http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/venues/st-james-park
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120404195418/http://www.engineering-timelines.com/scripts/engineeringItem.asp?id=28 to http://www.engineering-timelines.com/scripts/engineeringItem.asp?id=28

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:19, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tyne Bridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151210212720/http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/cities/newcastle/ to http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/cities/newcastle/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:34, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Tyne bridge 1928.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Should old stone bridges over the Tyne really be mentioned in this article?

The old stone bridges over the Tyne (the Roman Pons Aelius, the medieval bridge, and the bridge built from 1775 to 1779) had nothing in common with the modern Tyne Bridge that is the subject of this article.

If those old bridges don't merit an article of their own, would information about them be more appropriately found at the Swing Bridge article, as the Swing Bridge was the direct modern replacement for those bridges? GCarty (talk) 14:50, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

I suspect the way it's worded might need amending, rather than complete removal - having some context of previous road crossings is probably useful, although as you say in the context of the article it's a bit confusing at the moment as it implies the Tyne Bridge was the direct successor to the other bridges - I wonder if what's missing is some context of what the main driver behind its construction was (i.e. in X year the traffic using the Swing Bridge and High Level Bridge road deck had increased to X levels that a new bridge was required) - something like this Our Gateshead article, or the Historic England listing entry has some useful info. --Bob talk 08:53, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

I've made some preliminary changes on this section, but it has brought to light some other anomalies. The image of the bridge under construction says "The bridge on the 2 February 1928." Given it was completed on 25 February 1928 that date seems unlikely. Also, there's a mention of one death during construction, but Historic England say it was three, so I'd be inclined to amend that. --Bob talk 11:16, 20 April 2026 (UTC)