If you think fining the driver is the way forward then you’re wrong. In my experience, drivers simply don’t care. They’re getting fined for all sorts and they’ve lost all reasoning. You need to punish the employer. Agency drivers just won’t care. I won’t get in to too much detail as I’ll go wildly off topic, but fining the employer is the only way forward.
-
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!
Lorry strikes bridge - What more could be done to prevent it?
- Thread starter bangor-toad
- 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
Llanigraham
On Moderation
VOSA can and have removed Operator Licences from persistant offenders, both for bridge strike and level crossing offences.
A good start would be changing the CPS guidelines to suggest prosecution for careless driving in every single case of bridge strike, and modification of the road traffic laws to permit disqualification in cases of flagrantly poor driving eg driving into a sodding great low bridge
This.
Do lorry companies have any comeback from bridge bashes?
Together with some loud (as in, missile) alarm.
Wonder if there's some sort of electrical contact you could use on the sign so if it's hit, it somehow sends a mini EMP or whatever that kills the lorry engine.
However, yes, fining the employer is the only way.
You say you can't educate an idiot. You can. If the employer gets a huge fine (thinking delay minutes, cost of repairs, cost of checks), I'm certain the driver will loose their job.
I would take just ONE "sacrifice" for the rest at their depot to understand.
Last edited:
steverailer
Member
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 169
Personal view as a 23 years experience HGV driver who's never hit a bridge, is that they should have their license taken off them. There is no excuse for hitting any bridge. Yes, I have been through some tight ones and still do mainly arch ones. I always had a tape measure in my bag when I was driving full time, and always checked. The best firm I worked for had the actual measurement from the underside of the trailer to the top, you just measured down from there when you had coupled up (all artic trucks ride at a different height, even same models).
plannerman
Member
To defend truck drivers, there's a regularly-struck bridge by Penyffordd station which is marked as 4.1 metres / 13.0 feet. The last couple of bridge bashes have been by continental trucks running at 4 metres.....
https://goo.gl/maps/xJkMYGC684u
https://goo.gl/maps/xJkMYGC684u
DelW
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 3,865
Possibly not helped by a discrepancy between the two limits shown - 13' is 3.96m, not 4.1m. 4.1m would be 13' 5.4". Maybe it's the imperial value that's correct?
Maurice3000
Member
There have been longstanding complaints about the DfT’s policy regarding restricted height signs. Shoddy policy making about Imperial / Metric signage means that many signs are confusing with two systems or, worse, are still imperial only.
Most lorry drivers will be of an age that they’ve never had to learn Imperial measures at school and international lorry drivers will definitely have no clue what 13' 5.4" means. I believe that legal requirements actually state that the height of a lorry should be displayed in Metric in cabs.
Sadly I don’t see the DfT sort this out any time soon as some people in parliament and newspapers erroneously think that Metric is some EU related thing (despite the EU not even existing yet when the UK switched to Metric in 1965). We may need to get through the current Brexit chaos before some sense can be brought to that topic.
Kingston Flyer
Member
The lorries in my work are marked up imperial (12' 3), including the 67 plate vehicles. There may be a few shamed faces if this is correct.
Just so you are aware, I am not a HGV driver, just work within the offices and closely with the drivers.
DelW
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 3,865
I was surprised to read that, as I'd assumed that many height restriction signs these days would be in metres only. However a quick (and unscientific) trip around some low bridges near my house, courtesy of Google Streetview, suggests that the majority of signs, whether in advance or on the bridge itself, are in imperial only, with the remainder showing both feet and metres. Maybe it's not so surprising that we end up too often with foreign lorries stuck under them (as well as some local ones to be fair).
plannerman
Member
Exactly... after the first of the recent hits the police tweeted something fairly accusatory aimed at the driver, and I believe a corporate lawyer made them take it down again tout suite. But that bridge has been struck twice in quick succession now by foreign plated 4m trucks, so it's clear that the metric measurement is incorrect. The council have been made aware but still haven't changed the sign..
Maurice3000
Member
Oh, you seem to be closer to the world of HGVs than I am, I just recall someone mentioning this, that's why I said "I believe..." Not confident that it is correct as this is not my world either.
That said, it wouldn't surprise me either if it's a legal requirement yet companies only list it in Imperial. Trading standards require estate agents to list the size of properties in square metres yet many of them only state square feet (probably because listing it in sq. ft. makes it look bigger, they are estate agents after all).
Last edited:
shredder1
Established Member
Could he read, was he foreign, had he just changed trailers/vehicles to something higher and forgotten about it, (it happens a lot), bus drivers who regularly drive single deckers covering for someone on a double decker?
That's a good point, the photo does make the driver look like a fool but there are any number of reasons why he did what he did.
shredder1
Established Member
Thanks, I drove Class 1 for 8 years and hit 2 bridges, one had a large piece of metal hanging down in the middle, I think the guy I was driving for at the time claimed against the council, or railway? the other one was the road had been resurfaced and the original bridge height had been left up, it let me under from one side but I got stuck in the middle, I let some air out of the tyres and I was away, no damage done, but things happen, these things are never clear cut, and in driving generally concentration plans can be short, depending on the individual. The law with regards to driving without due care and attention can be a bit severe when you take human nature into account, the sooner me have driverless vehicles the better.
This.
Do lorry companies have any comeback from bridge bashes?
Together with some loud (as in, missile) alarm.
Wonder if there's some sort of electrical contact you could use on the sign so if it's hit, it somehow sends a mini EMP or whatever that kills the lorry engine.
However, yes, fining the employer is the only way.
You say you can't educate an idiot. You can. If the employer gets a huge fine (thinking delay minutes, cost of repairs, cost of checks), I'm certain the driver will loose their job.
I would take just ONE "sacrifice" for the rest at their depot to understand.
I just don't understand the logic of fining the employer, they don't want their lorries hitting low bridges anymore than NR do.
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,575
Perhaps the haulage company should be "encouraged" to fit proper HGV quality sat nav?
Is there such a thing? Personally I don't like sat navs, I find them an unnecessary distraction and I'm sure many drivers feel the same and nobody can seriously blame a satnav for hitting a low bridge.
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,575
I have never needed one, but I understand HGV satnavs give warning of low bridges.
They are more expensive, so many HGV drivers use standard car satnavs.
Last edited:
CarlSilva
Member
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2016
- Messages
- 144
Make lorries a bit shorter ?
Nah, but sereiously folks. Why not have drop down barriers liek the ones on level crossings. When they are down, you cant' drive past without it being totoally obvious. Then stick some camareas on it and hey presto, points mean a ban etc.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
I think the logic would be to hit them in the pocket and try to focus their minds on managing the problem rather than just blaming the drivers and/or accepting it as an occupational hazard. Having said that I don't think you could fine the employer unless they were in breach of some law, for example so unconcerned that they were failing to exercise duty of care under Health and Safety at Work. That could be tricky to prove given that the driver is responsible for the safe handling of a vehicle. More realistic would be to go after them for costs, as it was reported upthread that NR are now doing. They could claim from their insurers but if the same thing happened repeatedly their premiums would rise. The other tactic would be for NR to go after a haulier in a slam-dunk case and ensure maximum publicity in the trade press.
But it is the driver that is to blame. I don't understand how you expect the employer to manage a problem that they have no control over?
Last edited by a moderator:
The employer can provide the driver with accurate height information (adjusting for whatever trailer is attached etc), better tools (front facing cameras that read the signs and alarm, perhaps some kind of radar or lidar) and more training. Maybe a second operator to act as a spotter. Perhaps pre-defined routes. Ditch HGVs almost completely, everything gets delivered in many transit vans with anything too big requiring an escort man with a red flag and measuring pole.
Some of those are unworkable but to shrug and say nothing can be done is a bit defeatist.
Chris M
Member
TfL have a system like this on their buses, I think GPS based, but in some cases it apparently gives spurious warnings - for example for bridges over side roads or after a junction where the bus turns. As with anything that cries wolf too often, the warnings get tuned out as background noise. Any system would have to avoid that, and I'm not sure that's possible with current technology.
I've got a friend who lives on a very narrow lane accessed from a road with a weight restriction (except for access). Every time they get something delivered they instruct the company to deliver it using the smallest van in their fleet, explaining why. Very few times do the companies listen, one company (I can't remember which) event sent an artic!
At the south end of the Blackwall Tunnel they have actively monitored cameras and turn traffic lights to red when an overheight vehicle approaches. There are signs miles in advance, danglers, police warnings, and still streetview from September 2017 shows a sign saying the tunnel was stopped for overheight vehicles 30 times the previous month
. This truckers forum post from 2010 talks of a £60 fine and 3 points. He'd measured the front of his load and found it under the 13' limit, but the back of the load was higher. I can't find what the current fine is, but running out of fuel is £100 + 3 points so I presume it's that.I suspect a basic requirement of a truck driver is to be able to read simple signs...
If in doubt - stop.
The driver clearly had no doubt and thus carried on.
I suspect the driver didn't really know how tall their vehicle was.
The employer will find a way to let them go.
The driver would hopefully learn that if they strike a bridge, they risk their job... ergo don't take the risk in the future.
Plus, I highly suspect the driver wouldn't have the hundreds of thousands of pounds to pay as an individual.
I don't know if you are being entirely serious, a second operator to act as a spotter? Reality is they would probably be asleep.
Well what can be done? If the correct height is on the lorry the employer has done all they can reasonably do.
I don't follow, whether the driver is sacked is a matter for them and their employer.
Hmm.
If you drive a lorry that might hit a bridge, knowing you might be sacked if you hit it would make you be more careful, surely?
If the haulage company is fined £1 million for all the delays, cost of repairs, whatever, then it's likely the driver involved would be got rid of.
Fining a lorry driver £1 million would (most likely) take an age for it to be paid and completely destroy their life no doubt.
Hence, fining the employer of the driver is the ONLY way.
Clearly, many drivers don't take it upon themselves to work out if their lorry will fit, so a little insentive to do so might reduce the number of bashes.
shredder1
Established Member
Very embarressing, especially because at the time I didnt know why, you wouldnt think for one moment that the bridge height signs would be wrong
- Status