Sorry, I meant to write a ban on new signs with imperial only measurements.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Bridge Strikes
- Thread starter jopsuk
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
I would agree with this 100%.
As I pointed out near the start of this thread, the number of recorded bridge strikes has fallen by 20 percent in the past 12 years, at a time when I suspect you would find the number of HGV drivers from the continent on UK roads has been increasing, so I doubt your theory holds much water, indeed they might be more careful drivers, given the mishmash of signs that are fitted on low bridges, with some just showing only feet and inches, others only metres and some both measurements.
And as noted above, the signs aren't necessarily accurate anyway - and not just because of resurfacing. There was a case earlier this year in North Wales where a (yes, it was Polish) lorry got stuck under a bridge where the sign said clearance was 13ft or 4.1m, but 13ft is actually 3.96m, which could make all the difference, especially given the 4m trailer height rule also noted above. Network Rail and the councils couldn't agree at first on who had put up the sign, which doesn't exactly inspire confidence. Flintshire council later admitted it was its responsibility.
http://www.commercialmotor.com/latest-news/confusion-over-incorrect-road-sign-causes-bridge-bash
It's not even as if signs at some key locations for bridge-bashing have metres on anyway, Botley Road in Oxford being one example where feet and inches are the only measurement shown - this despite imperial measurements last being taught in this country's schools more than 40 years ago. And i've never been impressed by the lack of prominence of warning signs on the approaches to it from the A34 either.
The kind of metal barriers you mention are in use in some places, as are electronic warning signs, and all manner of other devices, such as vehicle deflectors fitted just proud of bridges but as I also said at the top of the thread, given the sheer number of bridges, set against actual incidents, doing this on a large scale would be hard to justify - and that's assuming the rail industry, councils and Government could agree whose job it was and find the money. Even just getting a constant style of height signs fitted to bridges would cost a small fortune.
Loughborough University has done research into the factors behind bridge-bashing, which are summarised here
http://www.lboro.ac.uk/microsites/research/applied-vision/projects/bridge-bashing/index.htm
Last edited:
I don't disagree with your that signage is inconsistent, but I'd think that metric only signs would be few and far between, certainly less common than imperial only?
Last edited:
Neither figure is a conversion of the other. The sign is saying that there is sufficient clearance for a 13ft high vehicle. Also that there is sufficient clearance for a 4.1m high vehicle.
(Whether the sign is correct is whole different issue.)
Llanigraham
On Moderation
Quite.
From what I have seen a lot of these vehicles have a sign, often above the drivers windscreen, stating the height of the vehicle in imperial and metric, especially where the vehicle is used by more than one driver.
And the responses from the "professional" driver on here does seem to show a total disregard to signage. A professional driver acquaintance says he would never risk it, no matter what. As he says, a different load and a new set of tyres can make a big difference to the height of his truck.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
UK-based trucks will have the imperial measurements... But would, for example, a truck belonging to a Bavarian company that has only recently begun working to the UK? It does make sense to move towards signage with both measurements rather than expecting every Thom, Dirk and Heinrich to understand our archaic and illogical ways!
One for the truck drivers there was a train driver who hit a bridge I think in the Leeds area, as far as I no the only one to do. He never hit the underneath but hit the side.
I don't no the name of the machine he was driving but he should off narrowed it before setting off but forgot
I don't no the name of the machine he was driving but he should off narrowed it before setting off but forgot
deltic1989
Established Member
It is worth remembering as well that if you passed a driving test for a car prior to 1996, you will have a category C1 licence as well. Allowing you to drive a 7.5 tonne truck. And anyone with a car licence can drive a 3.5 tonne Luton Van. These vehicles, whilst not quite in the same league as a 44 tonne Artic height wise, are still tall enough to be scalped by the lower end of the low bridge scale.
The point I am trying to make here, is that it may not necessarily be the case that all bridge strikes are cause by professional drivers.
Anyone with a car licence can go down to a hire place and pick up a fairly tall vehicle and drive away, having never driven such a vehicle before.
It would be interesting to see the a breakdown of how many strikes were caused by inexperienced drivers in hire vehicles.
I would be interested to know that as well, as I would tend to agree that a foreign driver will probably have never heard of Feet and Inches, before coming to the UK, as we are I believe (but stand to be corrected), the last stronghold of the Imperial measurement in Europe.
As an aside it can be rather inconvenient to be behind a continental wagon, travelling at 30 or 40 kph, when the speed limit is 30 or 40 mph.
I think that maybe presenting a continental driver with a simple conversion chart, or something like that at Dover, or wherever they enter could help here.
There are some bridges (mostly ones that have had the s*** knocked out of them in the past), that have some form of prior warning before them.
There is the electronic warnings mentioned before, but as GJ alluded to, these aren't always entirely reliable.
I have seen some with bash bars set a few feet away from the bridge, and some with a string of bells suspended across the road (although this is more common in the case of low hanging electrical wires, they are sometimes used at bridges)
In the USA I have noted that some low bridges have a hinged sign a few hundred yards before proclaiming "IF YOU HIT THIS SIGN, YOU WILL HIT THAT BRIDGE".
The issue with loading gauges, a good idea though they may seem, is that in common with signage, they are vulnerable to being damaged, removed or set at the wrong height.
The simple fact is, these things happen, it's inconvenient I accept, however there will probably never be a solution to it as long as humans are able to make mistakes.
I fixed the link to the report in my previous post (here it is again) - the majority of strikes occur on bridges in excess of 13 feet tall which would be taller than the average 7.5 ton truck or Luton Van.
Interesting document. Not entirely sure about the title of "national bridge strike champion" though.
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
This one https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3...4!1sMbnz8BfvM8UMu0QPZQFQeQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 could do with prior warning; it gets hit about 3 or 4 times each year. It has in recent years carried out the free conversion of at least two double deck buses into sightseeing open toppers and resulted in numerous italic lorries. On one occasion a couple of years ago an articulated lorry actually ended up on its side after hitting it. If you look just in front of where Google has put the road number in you can just see traces of the damage that was caused to the road surface on that occasion.
At the other end of town, just south of the railway station, is this bridge which also needs prior warning https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3...4!1sSCvipbmfxQX3-_2N1shzPQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 which is also hit about 3 or 4 times a year; a fairly common cause in this case is a very long vehicle being caught out by the dip in the road under the bridge.
Llanigraham
On Moderation
This one (Llanidloes Rd, Newtown)
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.5...&yaw=9.0071259&pitch=0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
has plenty of warning, including this on the roundabout before it
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.5...qbtQ59ShcDyQSdfskw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
but still it gets regularly hit!!
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.5...&yaw=9.0071259&pitch=0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
has plenty of warning, including this on the roundabout before it
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.5...qbtQ59ShcDyQSdfskw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
but still it gets regularly hit!!
This guide for vehicle drivers has some interesting stats:
Interesting in that drivers themselves put much higher weighting for strikes on drivers not knowing either the vehicle or the route, and much less to to inadequate or confusing signage.
90019
Established Member
Any vehicle over 3m in height must have a sign visible in the cab with writing at least 4cm tall.
Which is why so many 7.5 tonne horseboxes are driven so badly - because they're being piloted by people with little or no training or skill in driving large vehicles.
GearJammer
Member
Which also have unsecure/unpredictable loads inside them.
Llanigraham
On Moderation
Thank you. That does confirm that some drivers are obviously unobservant in 2 fields!! Not very professional!!
You must have followed Princess Ann a few times then.
There is a Bridge near me that isn't on the excel sheet but has been hit several times this year.
The police measured the last lorry that hit, and word of mouth is the lorry was 1 inch lower than the height on the sign. The signs have now been changed to 3 inches lower.
The police measured the last lorry that hit, and word of mouth is the lorry was 1 inch lower than the height on the sign. The signs have now been changed to 3 inches lower.
Whilst I agree with what many posters have said which is that owing to the risk to their job and livelihood there aren't any truck drivers out there who would purposefully drive their truck into a low bridge . But how many would be willing to hedge their bets and take a risk . Its to do with attitudes towards risk and taking the risks not intentionally doing it . And then how many just dont read signs or find out the height of their vehicle which is another form careless driving .
Just because someone hasn't intentionally done something doesn't mean that they still aren't responsible for the outcome .
If a train driver decided to ignore a single yellow signal and continue at linespeed because he "knows" the red signal would clear in time and as a result of this had a spad(because the red didnt clear) and actually stated this as his reasoning and explanation of his actions he would be in a lot of trouble and may never drive a train again . Not to mention the possibility of getting prosecuted under Health and Safety legislation
This is only the same as Gearjammer passing a sign warning him his truck is over height but because he "knows" better he continues anyway because it always fits . But at some point he would have had to have taken that risk to find out it did fit and for me someone who is a professional driver in charge of potentially 44 tons shouldn't be prepared to take risks like that . A few signs on a few bridges underestimating the height of the bridge does not mean truck drivers should be playing height lottery and assuming every sign is wrong .
As for the drivers who dont know the size of their truck , they also should be banned , that is like a driver of a DOO train not checking if he has 4 or 8 or 12 carriages , just assuming he has 4 when actually he has 8 , stopping at the 4 car board releasing the doors and then everyone in the end 4 breaks their legs getting off . Would that driver get fined , or be banned from driving do you think ?
Its attitudes to risk like that which is why you drive a truck and not a train , I know you now know your truck fits but at some point you must have knowingly driven your truck past a sign warning you that the bridge ahead was too low which is an unacceptable level of risk to take . Would you take such a risk with signs warning you of a weight restriction on a certain road ?
Just because the signs on this bridge are useless does not mean they all are . dont fall into the trap of assuming that thy will all be wrong thats probably one of the way incidents like this occur .
Just because someone hasn't intentionally done something doesn't mean that they still aren't responsible for the outcome .
If a train driver decided to ignore a single yellow signal and continue at linespeed because he "knows" the red signal would clear in time and as a result of this had a spad(because the red didnt clear) and actually stated this as his reasoning and explanation of his actions he would be in a lot of trouble and may never drive a train again . Not to mention the possibility of getting prosecuted under Health and Safety legislation
This is only the same as Gearjammer passing a sign warning him his truck is over height but because he "knows" better he continues anyway because it always fits . But at some point he would have had to have taken that risk to find out it did fit and for me someone who is a professional driver in charge of potentially 44 tons shouldn't be prepared to take risks like that . A few signs on a few bridges underestimating the height of the bridge does not mean truck drivers should be playing height lottery and assuming every sign is wrong .
As for the drivers who dont know the size of their truck , they also should be banned , that is like a driver of a DOO train not checking if he has 4 or 8 or 12 carriages , just assuming he has 4 when actually he has 8 , stopping at the 4 car board releasing the doors and then everyone in the end 4 breaks their legs getting off . Would that driver get fined , or be banned from driving do you think ?
Its attitudes to risk like that which is why you drive a truck and not a train , I know you now know your truck fits but at some point you must have knowingly driven your truck past a sign warning you that the bridge ahead was too low which is an unacceptable level of risk to take . Would you take such a risk with signs warning you of a weight restriction on a certain road ?
Just because the signs on this bridge are useless does not mean they all are . dont fall into the trap of assuming that thy will all be wrong thats probably one of the way incidents like this occur .
GearJammer
Member
Yes, happens on a frequent basis. Even more so than bridges.
Feel free to start frothing over that to.
And heres something else for you to get ya little brains round.....
Ever seen a sign that says '7.5t Except for access'?
Go on, go and have a real good long hard think about that one!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
All this froth over what is expected from 'professional' HGV drivers, none of you know what is expected, because A, you've never done the job, B, your not proffessionals, C, you don't know the industry.
So quite how you can tell me or any other Bus/HGV driver what they should be doing is totally beyond me.
Its laughable, you take one test in a car, never take a retest or additional training, but look at you all, all expects in an industry you never been trained or work in!
Llanigraham
On Moderation
A/ How do you know that?
B/ How do you know that? Are you one?
C/ How do you know that?
Have you realised that NR own HGV vehicles and employ HGV drivers?
I know of several signallers who also drive HGV's in their time off.
And you certainly don't know what I have done in the past or what vehicles I am trained to drive or how often I get retested on them.
Why do you come on a railway forum?
I thought the definition was now LARGE Goods Vehicles, not HGV's?
Last edited:
90019
Established Member
Quite.
Personally, I'd like to see the automatic C1 entitlement removed from all licence holders. If you need it, you can go do the test. Since you can't work for hire or reward without doing the test anyway, you can probably afford to take the test if you're already driving them.
They're supposed to, but not all do have them.
You must have followed Princess Ann a few times then.
My first encounter with a 7.5 tonne horse wagon was on my first day learning to drive HGVs - it cut me up coming off a roundabout onto a motorway, then proceeded to do 40mph, I pulled out to overtake and once I was alongside, they sped up to their limiter, so we were both stuck there doing 56mph. My instructor's response was great, but I'm not posting it on a public forum.
It is, but HGV is still widely used, and im my experience more likely to be understood than LGV.
ian959
Member
Sorry Gearjammer, but the attitudes you display are incredibly arrogant and anything but responsible or professional. I may never have driven a truck but it does not take a genius to work out that signs are there for a reason and they should be obeyed. Just because you "think" you know that bridge is not as low as they say, or that bridge can take a heavier load than it says or that street can be accessed does not mean that you can just cheerfully ignore them. No I have never driven a truck but I have worked in the road transport industry and you sound exactly like the type of driver that we strove to keep away from our trucks.
An instruction that the road is only to be used by HGVs accessing a location on that road/street for delivery or pick up and that it is not to be used as a through route. Restriction is not because the infrastructure cannot support the weight, but because the route is unsuitable for large volumes of heavy traffic and a suitable, if longer, route exists.
Trog
Established Member
Could also perhaps be a bridge that is getting old and weak, that can take a few large vehicles that have to cross it to get to places with no reasonable alternative access. But the added fatigue stresses of too many such vehicles would shorten the bridges life to an extent that it would soon need closing or a restriction to all heavy traffic.
Indeed, but this arrogant lorry driver why brags about ignoring height and weight limit signs on the roads feels able to comment on driving trains despite never having done it!
Talk about double standards.
Oh I used to have both a HGV and a PSV licence (didn't use the HGV licence much though) but let them go when I got to 45 and needed the medical, something I regret at times.
Ash Bridge
Established Member
Is it possible that the road has been resurfaced and unintentionally raised slightly at some point since the original sign was fitted, if so then this is certainly going to catch out HGV drivers with attitudes as displayed above, then again what would I know, as I let my HGV class 1 ticket expire a few years back also.
- Status