Editing Tay Bridge (section)

===Proposals===
Almost immediately following the Tay Bridge failure, the North British Railway company began to develop plans for its reconstruction or replacement.<ref name = "fife pictor"/> During 1880, barely six months after the accident, the North British Railway (Tay Bridge) Bill for a construction of a new bridge was submitted to Parliament. The bill was reviewed by a special committee, chaired by [[Massey Lopes|Sir Lopes Massey Lopes, 3rd Baronet]]; Lopes drew attention to the substantial pressure for safety factors to be considered in light of the loss of the earlier bridge, including the need to examine the suitability of the location.<ref name = "fife pictor"/> In response to this inquiry, Mr Walker, the general manager of the North British Railway, stated his opinion that there was no more suitable site than what had been chosen, emphasising the relatively large interchange of traffic in the area and the importance of making the line as direct as practically possible. Additionally, a number of local witnesses, who included several leading merchants from Dundee, spoke favourably of the proposed location.<ref name = "fife pictor">[http://www.newportarchive.co.uk/Texts/millar_bridges.php "Fife Pictorial & Historical: Vol. II, A H Millar, 1895: pp. 287–295."] ''newportarchive.co.uk'', retrieved: 9 May 2018.</ref>

Plans for the reconstructed bridge were submitted by civil engineer [[James Brunlees|Sir James Brunlees]].<ref name = "fife pictor"/> His proposed design would have involved doubling the piers of the first bridge by installing the new columns on the east side of each of the existing piers, while arched brickwork would have been used to join the old and new elements alike. On top of these foundations, a brick decking would be laid that was wide enough to carry two sets of girders as well as a double-track layout.<ref name = "fife pictor"/> Brunlees proposed that the permanent way should be laid on the upper booms of the girders. The addition of bowstring girders, positioned {{convert|20|ft|m|abbr=}} high over the fairway, was considered to have much less exposure to the wind and greater lateral stiffness than the girders of the first bridge.<ref name = "fife pictor"/> The girders would also have been doubled, to be capable of resisting {{convert|200|lb|kg|abbr=}} to the square foot of wind pressure, while the piers as designed were to be capable of resisting a pressure of 900 lb per square foot. Overall, Brunlees' proposed structure would have possessed greater strength for resisting lateral pressure over the original.<ref name = "fife pictor"/> This proposal had an estimated total cost of £356,323. While it was carefully considered, the Board of Trade regarded the practice of connecting the old bridge to a new design to be dangerous. It rejected both the proposed design and the overall bill.<ref name = "fife pictor"/>

{{Infobox UK legislation
| short_title           = North British Railway (New Tay Viaduct) Act 1881
| type                  = Act
| parliament            = Parliament of the United Kingdom
| long_title            = An Act to provide for the restoration of the Railway communication across the Tay, near Dundee; and for other purposes.
| year                  = 1881
| citation              = [[44 & 45 Vict.]] c. cxxxvii
| introduced_commons    = 
| introduced_lords      = 
| territorial_extent    = 
| royal_assent          = 18 July 1881
| commencement          = 
| expiry_date           = 
| repeal_date           = 
| amends                = 
| replaces              = 
| amendments            = 
| repealing_legislation = 
| related_legislation   = 
| status                = 
| legislation_history   = 
| theyworkforyou        = 
| millbankhansard       = 
| original_text         = https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/Vict/44-45/137/pdfs/ukla_18810137_en.pdf
| revised_text          = 
| use_new_UK-LEG        = 
| UK-LEG_title          = 
| collapsed             = yes
}}
The North British Railway, placing great importance on the connection between Fife and Forfarshire, was committed to developing a viable design.<ref name = "fife pictor"/> During August 1880, the noted railway engineer [[William Henry Barlow]], of Barlow & Sons, London, was consulted on the matter. Following experiments upon the first bridge's remains, Barlow gave his opinion that the intact portions should be abandoned in favour of a new structure spanning between the two shores.<ref name = "fife pictor"/> Adopting this as the basis of their next submission, a new bill was raised and put before a select committee of the [[House of Commons]] on 10 May 1881. With little alteration or suggestions issued, this was soon passed,<ref name = "fife pictor"/> becoming the '''{{visible anchor|North British Railway (New Tay Viaduct) Act 1881}}''' ([[44 & 45 Vict.]] c. cxxxvii). During November 1881, a contract for the new bridge's construction was awarded to [[Sir William Arrol & Co.|Messrs William Arrol & Co]] of Glasgow. For the new bridge's design, Messrs Barlow elected to refrain from using any untested engineering principles, instead choosing to strictly adhere to established methodology.<ref name = "fife pictor"/>