In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
09:30:44 on Sat, 25 Nov 2017, remarked:
Littleport station crossing!

With an underpass like at Ely!

Don't mention Ely! (You'll annoy Basil).

But the underpass is even lower. So a van like this probably too
high: https://goo.gl/maps/3LiuoCLXQZm

2.51m at Littleport compared to 2.7m at Ely. That van would just about
get under

You reckon there's 20cm extra clearance here - really??

https://goo.gl/maps/hso9PDgdviT2

I see now. I was going by the van body and reckoning that the view showed
the minimum bridge height. I didn't notice the things on the roof, so no,
there isn't another 19cm there.

judging by the amount of clearance visible there. Although judging by
what's on Google Streetview, their car probably couldn't get under it.

The best I can find is that the streetview cameras are "at 8.2ft".
It's not clear if that's the height of the lens, or perhaps the
lenses are at 8ft and the top of the camera housing at 8.2ft.

That's so close to 2.5m it's not obvious which measuring system they
were designed for.

But when this last came up I mentioned that same view above, which is
pretty much along the line of the roof of the white van, so I'm
inclined to think the 8.2ft/2.5m is the lens (despite being designed
in imperial-measuring USA), and hence the top of the housing is more
like 8.4ft = 2.6m

2.5m = 8'2½". It's the maximum width of buses (or was). I suppose the 2.51m
on the sign would be 8'3", what the other sign on the bridge shows.

--
Colin Rosenstiel