My Great Grandfather, William Waite was a senior engineer, who worked on the construction of this viaduct in 1873-4. He later went on to build the Kowloon to Canton railway in China in 1907-9. He spent so long in China, that he was made an Honorary Mandarin by the local workforce. I am sure that he would have been saddened to see his work wasted in this act of vandalism.
Interesting fact about Lydbrook viaduct: the three main spans were all of slightly different lengths, due to the piers having to be squeezed in amongst the existing buildings of the village.
I agree with the sentiments of others, what a terrible act of industrial vandalism, but that is what it was like in those days, it would probably have been the cost of maintenance and the risk of liability. So much fine railway architecture and structures have been destroyed in the name of progress.
Eirug Sion Griffiths I bet you would not be willing to have paid from your own funds for the maintenance of this redundant eyesore, so why should anyone else?
@@FowlorTheRooster1990 This line closed long before the Beeching report (and it never really made any money when it was open). Passenger services stopped running on the line in 1929 and the last traffic over the viaduct was in the late 1940s. By the time it was demolished in 1965, it had received minimal maintenance for at least fifteen years, and probably closer to 20. Nice as it would have been to preserve the viaduct, it would have cost whoever took it on an absolute fortune in restoration costs, not to mention the ongoing costs of maintenance.
![Best Drummer Ever [HD]](/img/n.gif)
My Great Grandfather, William Waite was a senior engineer, who worked on the construction of this viaduct in 1873-4. He later went on to build the Kowloon to Canton railway in China in 1907-9. He spent so long in China, that he was made an Honorary Mandarin by the local workforce. I am sure that he would have been saddened to see his work wasted in this act of vandalism.
Why do we destroy our history such a work of art, beautiful.
Interesting fact about Lydbrook viaduct: the three main spans were all of slightly different lengths, due to the piers having to be squeezed in amongst the existing buildings of the village.
I agree with the sentiments of others, what a terrible act of industrial vandalism, but that is what it was like in those days, it would probably have been the cost of maintenance and the risk of liability. So much fine railway architecture and structures have been destroyed in the name of progress.
Those responsible should be ashamed for removing an icon. Its a disgrace.
Definitely, but times move on. At least I hav
e this lovely record of the "event".
@@sandrawalding3097 Yes, its stunning for sure.
Why destroy a good railway viaduct built by the Victorian engineer's which should have been preserved. Absolute vandalism.
Eirug Sion Griffiths I bet you would not be willing to have paid from your own funds for the maintenance of this redundant eyesore, so why should anyone else?
Just a tiny fraction of the money wasted on "foreign aid" would preserve such rare items of beauty and British engineering.
@@spencerhardy8667 Forget the racist angle, but the UK should be preserving it's heritage rather better than it is.
@@pmonkeygeezer6212 Redundant maybe, eyesore? Never.
@@calmster You didn't address his point of who should pay for its upkeep and maintenance.
Heartbreaking...
Scandalous waste! This could’ve been converted into a walkway and cycle track! Nothing more than legalised vandalism! 😡
Why ? why ? why ?
redundant, redundant, redundant.
Currently live at Radnors and would welcome opportunity to talk to you about demolition of the viaduct and the cottages?
OK, what is your telephone number please
😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
when was this
1965 yay during the winter
The viaduct was demolished in 1965/66.
The same time around when Crumlin viaduct was demolished. What a shame the railway wasn't have remained open or preserved
@@FowlorTheRooster1990 He did. His backers wanted rail freight to go by road.
@@FowlorTheRooster1990 This line closed long before the Beeching report (and it never really made any money when it was open). Passenger services stopped running on the line in 1929 and the last traffic over the viaduct was in the late 1940s. By the time it was demolished in 1965, it had received minimal maintenance for at least fifteen years, and probably closer to 20. Nice as it would have been to preserve the viaduct, it would have cost whoever took it on an absolute fortune in restoration costs, not to mention the ongoing costs of maintenance.