Re: Silbury's structural integrity | Forum

L

Littlestone Aug 7, 2007 12:02:49

Replying to nigelswift

nigelswift wrote:

Well, Update 12 is out.

Entirely about discoveries in the trench. Not a word about the structural problems or the removal of the polystyrene from the centre.
I guess they judge that's of secondary importance to the peasantry, eh?

Absolutely bloody outrageous.

Absolutely, no mention of structural problems at all, and that is of primary concern. There's an announcement of a supplementary engineering update for later this week - it better be detailed and upfront.

R

Rockrich Aug 7, 2007 14:03:22

Replying to nigelswift

Just a thought, but maybe the information contained in the updates is a good few weeks old by the time it comes out, so we’ll be forever weeks behind in updates. They also could also be using avoidance tactics in an attempt to minimise panic. Worrying times for the old girl.

P

Pilgrim Aug 8, 2007 02:18:23

Replying to nigelswift

nigelswift wrote:

Well, Update 12 is out.

Entirely about discoveries in the trench. Not a word about the structural problems or the removal of the polystyrene from the centre.
I guess they judge that's of secondary importance to the peasantry, eh?

Absolutely bloody outrageous.

I'm a bit concerned about this from the STATEMENT – New schedule for Silbury Hill conservation project found here:

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/upload/pdf/New_schedule_statement_aug_07.pdf

" The project will then be completed with the removal of as much of the loose backfill left after the 1960s excavation as possible, before engineers re-pack the tunnel with chalk to stabilise the Hill for the long term."

Are we compromising here? As much as possible? It all sounds very muddy to me (no pun intended); who exactly decides when enough backfill removal is enough? Someone on site, or an accountant?

Peace

Pilgrim

X