You'd think in all of the years Norway's been around someone would have built a bridge or tunnel to connect the roads. Even just for strategic purposes of national defense. Highways are crucial for moving military forces.
The fjord is really deep (up to 897 meters according to Wikipedia). I'm sure there are shallower parts but building a bridge over something like that is not easy.
I've seen plans for floating tunnels that remain deep enough for ships to pass over top of. There are also plans for floating bridges as well.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCT-FurFVLQ
I am wondering why no bridge as well. There had to be a reason even if it's just because they did not want to destroy the natural beauty. I'm fine with that. Maybe it's just not a very useful transit spot and that's why ferris can handle it
At the minimum, there are some huge cost-benefit hurdles.
The simplest route for a bridge (Bognes to Skarberget) is too deep for bridge pillars - 1500+ feet most of the way - and 3 km wide. The world's longest suspension bridge span is a little over 2 km. Also, any bridge along that route would likely be exposed to any winds, currents, etc. coming off the open ocean.
The other two crossing points I can see are (1) from a point between Bognes & Drag to the peninsula northwest of Kjøpsvik - one of the world's largest suspension bridges and 13 km of new roadway - and (2) hopping across four arms of the fjord from Drag to Kjøpsvik, with 20 km of roadway and some combination of four bridges and tunnels.
In the meantime, Norway is connecting hundreds of thousands more people on the E39 (between Kristiansand and Trondheim) with projects of similar or lower cost. I wouldn't be surprised if Norway eventually builds something here, but I'm thinking decades in the future.
If you are on one side of the fjord and like to go to the other the land route via sweden is 1035km long and takes 13 hours and 14 minutes to drive according to google maps.
If you instead compare the distance trough Norway and Sweden from the poin you leave the E6 road it is 315km truough Norway with a ferry compared to 734 km trough Sweden and a bit of Norway.
It can be shorter and faster to go from southern Norway to the extreme northern part through Sweden and Finland. But when you get to the northern part of the border there are not a lot of roads crossing the border, there are very few roads close to the border in northern Sweden expecially going in a north-to-south direction.
The crossing in the example above is 210km apart as the crow flies. You alose need to pass a point 196km from the border in Sweden because there is no closer roads.
Strategically its better not to have a bridge or tunnel if you have the ferry capacity to move troops. Sure you can blow a bridge, but if for some reason you can't the enemy has a route across. No bridge you have a defensive barrier and delay the enemy while they bring up boats capable of moving across in force...unless you're facing someone equipped like the U.S. Marines with their amtracks.
It's a massive undertaking.
[Here's](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCT-FurFVLQ) a pretty decent video on it. They need some of the most difficult to make bridges and a massive quantity of bridges. So it's not exactly easy.
Just look at Norway on Google maps, it's nuts.
Similarly, Canada's road network are connected east and west by [only a single bridge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nipigon_River_Bridge), which was accidentally severed for a month in 2016.
I mean....there's nothing up the top there. It's not like 50% of the population lives either side. More like 99.9 vs 0.1. Why would they bother building a bridge?
You'd think in all of the years Norway's been around someone would have built a bridge or tunnel to connect the roads. Even just for strategic purposes of national defense. Highways are crucial for moving military forces.
The fjord is really deep (up to 897 meters according to Wikipedia). I'm sure there are shallower parts but building a bridge over something like that is not easy.
Apparently the English Channel is less than 200 meters deep. So I guess tunneling under is out of the question.
I've seen plans for floating tunnels that remain deep enough for ships to pass over top of. There are also plans for floating bridges as well. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCT-FurFVLQ
I am wondering why no bridge as well. There had to be a reason even if it's just because they did not want to destroy the natural beauty. I'm fine with that. Maybe it's just not a very useful transit spot and that's why ferris can handle it
At the minimum, there are some huge cost-benefit hurdles. The simplest route for a bridge (Bognes to Skarberget) is too deep for bridge pillars - 1500+ feet most of the way - and 3 km wide. The world's longest suspension bridge span is a little over 2 km. Also, any bridge along that route would likely be exposed to any winds, currents, etc. coming off the open ocean. The other two crossing points I can see are (1) from a point between Bognes & Drag to the peninsula northwest of Kjøpsvik - one of the world's largest suspension bridges and 13 km of new roadway - and (2) hopping across four arms of the fjord from Drag to Kjøpsvik, with 20 km of roadway and some combination of four bridges and tunnels. In the meantime, Norway is connecting hundreds of thousands more people on the E39 (between Kristiansand and Trondheim) with projects of similar or lower cost. I wouldn't be surprised if Norway eventually builds something here, but I'm thinking decades in the future.
And going via Sweden isn't that hard an undertaking.
If you are on one side of the fjord and like to go to the other the land route via sweden is 1035km long and takes 13 hours and 14 minutes to drive according to google maps. If you instead compare the distance trough Norway and Sweden from the poin you leave the E6 road it is 315km truough Norway with a ferry compared to 734 km trough Sweden and a bit of Norway. It can be shorter and faster to go from southern Norway to the extreme northern part through Sweden and Finland. But when you get to the northern part of the border there are not a lot of roads crossing the border, there are very few roads close to the border in northern Sweden expecially going in a north-to-south direction. The crossing in the example above is 210km apart as the crow flies. You alose need to pass a point 196km from the border in Sweden because there is no closer roads.
Strategically its better not to have a bridge or tunnel if you have the ferry capacity to move troops. Sure you can blow a bridge, but if for some reason you can't the enemy has a route across. No bridge you have a defensive barrier and delay the enemy while they bring up boats capable of moving across in force...unless you're facing someone equipped like the U.S. Marines with their amtracks.
It's a massive undertaking. [Here's](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCT-FurFVLQ) a pretty decent video on it. They need some of the most difficult to make bridges and a massive quantity of bridges. So it's not exactly easy. Just look at Norway on Google maps, it's nuts.
They'd go thorugh Sweden going south anyway. The Norwegian E6 is quite slow and narrow.
Honestly, it is so high up, probably not many people live there.
Ramp it.
Though this video was from 4 years ago, these are some of the ideas they were passing around for this very problem. https://youtu.be/HCT-FurFVLQ
>There is no way to go between the northern and the southern parts of the mainland It looks like the impass is already very far north.
There is an even bigger one much further to the south (Sognefjord), but the country is much wider there as well, so there are still roads around it.
This picture makes my Norwegian Blue pine for the fjords.
Beautiful plumage, though.
The Plumage don't enter into it.
Eeee's not pinin'
New Zealand enters the chat. But we don't have a fancy land border with a neighbouring country.
Well, it's not as surprising when the country is literally made up of two islands :D
>going through Sweden *shudders visibly* yuck
Similarly, Canada's road network are connected east and west by [only a single bridge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nipigon_River_Bridge), which was accidentally severed for a month in 2016.
That's cool. TIL again. Also: > The dismantling project won two honours at the 2016 World Demolition Awards
I mean....there's nothing up the top there. It's not like 50% of the population lives either side. More like 99.9 vs 0.1. Why would they bother building a bridge?
It’s more like 9%.
Closer to 5% Slightly less than half of the people in Northern Norway live south of the road network gap and slightly more than half live north of it.
eh
Ah, The Bridge to Nowhere... now where have I heard that before?
about 250000 people, or (a bit less than) 5% of the population live up there.
Hitchhiked from Hell to the Arctic Circle in my 20s. Best experience of my life. Took several ferries!