"Flying bridges?" Topic

Anyone know what a flying bridge is. They are calling pontoons a bridge of boats and they are also talking about flying bridges, any ideas?

I've only ever seen it as a naval term:

A flying bridge is an open area on top of a surface ship which provides unobstructed views of the fore, aft, and the sides of a vessel, and which serves as an operating station for the ship's officers, such as the captain or officer of the watch.

link

'They are calling …': who are you referring to as 'they'?

The author of the account…
It was in relation to the battle of Famars.

When I was in the Royal Engineers, we used the term "Flying Bridge". To refer to an unpowered ferry, attached to the downstream of a rope or cable stretched across a river. The ferry had two lines (ropes), one from the front and one from the rear (bow and stern) of the ferry, both joined together in a free running block (pulley) when they met the rope or cable stretched over the river. If you then shorten one of the bow and stern lines and lengthen the other, it changes the angle of the ferry to the main cable. This then allows the force of the current in the river to push the ferry across the river. Shorten and lengthen the lines the other way, and the ferry goes back across the river. A lot less hard work than rowing or hauling the ferry across, since you are letting the river do all the work for you.

Rod

It might be three types of bridge.

First Type, it could be a Transporter Bridge (also known as a Flying Bridge)
link

Second Type, what Rod described (Reaction Ferry). In German a reaction ferry is called a "fliegende Brücke" or Flying Bridge. Do a Google Search on fliegende Brücke and you'll see what I mean.

In Europe the cable is often attached to anchored small boats so it doesn't stretch across the river blocking it. The ferry moves more like a pendulum. Like this image.
link

Third Type, is a more modern one where the bridge has a single arch stretching from one side of the cutting to another.

I suspect your bridge in the second type since that was very common on many European Rivers that were used for navigation.

The only time I ever heard of a flying bridge was in a book on the 1809 Wagram campaign. The French on Lobau built pontoon bridges which they parked in the river along their shore parallel to their bank duly camouflaged. When the day came they were able to swing this prefabricated bridge out at 90 degrees until it hit the far bank where it was anchored. The measurements had to be precise.

Don't ask me what book I read this in.

Thanks folks – Broglie's sounds the most likely for the 18th century, though the ferry sounds possible I couldn't see that be installed under fire?

Here is a link to a photo of a modern "Flying Bridge" or "Flying Ferry" at Bodenweder on the Weser, just south of Hameln where I was stationed.

Building bridges under fire is something which military engineers do. You take casualties, but get the job done. That was as true in the 18th century as now. Look at the famous 2nd World War picture of "Crossing the Rapido", where they built a Bailey Bridge under fire.

Rod

I'm not entirely sure, but encouraged by the above image of the fine British bridging material seen here in 1943 Italy, I'd dare to bring in another suggestion. "Flying bridge" could also refer to "light" bridging material found with 18th century armies in distinction to the "heavy" pontoon train bridging material.
With my studies of Ferdinand's campaigns I learned such material was usually found heading each column with a conventional march, while the pontoons were usually found with the artillery park column more to the rear. Sources at times entitle them "flying bridges" (don't pin me down on the book I came across this term – I think it was the 1759 correspondence Ferdinand-Erbprinz at around 1759 battle of Minden period) and at other times also called [German] "Modderbrücken" [lit. something like morass bridges]. I.e. some sort of light prefabricated sections of bridges (carried on wagons?) to cover smallish sections of little streams incl. its marshy banks, sunken roads and the like, not so much "real rivers". I have no idea how they would look like.
Also the term [German] "Bock-Brücke" I found. No idea what this meant in 18th C. "Bock" is a rather general term that could mean anything. You have Bock beer and Bock sausage, etc. My English translator has Bock=support. Might give a direction.
Also the ambulant pasting table set up when doing ones wallpapers anew includes two or so supporting racks that are called "Böcke" [pl.] in German.

In any case – having seen here suggestions of "flying bridges" – or ferries – of German origin with such a name, I should note that the term "flying" in German often has been used in in connection with fast or light things, then. Not so much floating or even airborne things.

Hope this is of any help.
Cheers,
Christian
crogges7ywarmies.blogspot.com

A "flying bridge" was some kind of ferry operated by a long cable. You can see a picture of one at this site:
link
Here is another one:
link

I found another picture which shows the principle of a "flying bridge" quite well, the cable being anchored in the middle of the river (here between Bonn and Beuel).

Thanks Christian, that sounds extremely feasible, basically its an 18th century version of Rod's Bailey bridge.
Not so sure about the very idea, just don't see that you could get enough troops across on it.

And once more, this time the pattern of the flying bridge.
This type of ferry was invented by a Dutchman in 1676.
link

Today with motor, flying bridges (in Dutch: gierpont) are still used today
link

The Transporter Bridge over the River Tees is the best bridge in the world

Cheers
Ian

Green Tiger,

The idea of a ferry in a river crossing operation is normally to get enough troops across to hold a bridgehead, whilst a bridge is constructed to let large bodies of troops and heavy equipment cross.

The Bailey Bridge over the Rapido in Italy in WW2 was not a flying bridge, but I just wanted to show an example of Royal Engineers constructing a bridge under fire. An even more modern one was constructed under fire in Afghanistan a couple of years ago.

Rod

Judging by accounts of the flying bridge across the Waal used by the allies at Nijmegen in November 1794, as the Duke of York's army retreated through southern Holland, the victory at Famars and elsewhere but a memory, I would say that Rod Macarthur's model would be the most likely candidate.

In November 1794, while the allies attempted to retain Nijmegen on the south shore of the Waal, communications with the north shore were maintained via a bridge of boats until it was decided to abandon the city:

"Nimeguen was entirely abandoned on Friday night, the 7th of November. The British and Hanoverians having effected their retreat, burnt the bridge of boats down to the water's edge. About 600 Dutch were left to pass over on a temporary flying bridge. — They had nearly effected a safe landing, when a chance shot from a French battery on the
opposite side of the river, carried away the mast to which the hawser (or chain) was attached, on which the flying bridge depended, and it consequently swung round, and was hurried by the mercy of the current towards the town. The troops upon it suffered severely from the incessant fire brought to bear upon them, ere they could by any means, obtain a parley."

(Vol II, pp.99)

An Accurate And Impartial Narrative Of The War, By An Officer Of The Guards.
In Two Volumes.
Comprising The Campaigns Of 1793, 1794,
And The Retreat Through Holland
To Westphalia, In 1795-
(1796)

The crossing at Nijmegen consisted of partly of a bridge of boats. The rest of the river had to be crossed by a flying bridge.
In the summer of 1794 the flying bridge was renewed and the bridge of boats at last received a railing.
Later in october 1794, according to the memories of Mr. Wicherlinck, secretary to the Staten van Overijssel, the part shipbridge was extended accross the whole river but just for military traffic. A new flying bridge was created further downstream (of maybe the old flying bridge at Nijmegen was used?).
The new bridge is portrayed:
link

A Dutch diary gives the moment of the burning of the bridge at betwwe 1 and 2 in the night:

De Engelsche over de brug zijnde wierden door de Hollandsche
Regimenten gevolgt, zodra de algemeene ordre tot 't verlaaten der stad gegeeven was, dan zij kwaamen te laat, want de wreede Engelsche, ( tusschen 1 á 2 uuren :) zoodra zij onder 't gesnor der Houwitzers de brug waaren overgetrokken, eene de scheepen, met brandstofen gevuld, in de brand gestooken heb­bende, ver­brande de geheele brug, en benaamen hunne geallieer­de de gelee­genheid om over te kunnen koomen. Deese brand der brug was ijselijk om te zien doch gaf bij nagt op 't water eene
magesteuese vertooning.

This is translated as:
when the English traversed the bridge they were followed by Dutch regiments as the order of evacuation of the city was given but they came to late as the cruel English (between 1 and 2 had, under hailing of howitzer fire, crossed the bridge and had set fire to one of the boats filled with fuel and because of this prevented their allies to cross also. This fire was terrible to see but in the night gave a great Majestic spectacle.

There was no love lost between the Dutch in southern Holland and the British forces stationed along the Waal. Many Dutch were waiting to be 'liberated' by the French and became exasperated by the depredations of allied camp followers and demoralised soldiery, particularly French emigré auxiliaries, as discipline began to break down.

The fact that the Dutch denied shelter to their supposed allies during a miserable autumn and bitter winter, did not deliver provisions and fuel as agreed and murdered stragglers (or, arguably, were defending themselves) plainly exasperated elements of the allied forces including those who might not have behaved so reprehensibly towards their hosts under other circumstances. However, when the logistics of the army collapsed and desperation began to take over, scruples went to the wind.

To the army in general, it was galling to be risking life and limb to defend a country whose armed forces, as they saw it, were not prepared to defend their own borders and instead surrendered key fortresses withut a fight.

That is why, for example, Corporal Robert Brown of the Coldstream Guards was moved to write that, during the evacuation of Nijmegen: "the enemy having brought some guns to bear on the bridge, a random shot cut a rope by which part of the bridge swung round to the enemy's side and about 800 Dutch were taken prisoners. The loss would not be great if they were all taken."

By the way, Brown bear, what a great image of the retreat over the Waal. Thanks for posting it

thanks,
here is the same but bigger: link

It gets better.

Thanks