Bridge Strikes

[mac]

HGVs shouldn't hit bridges but when you think training to become one is about 20 hours and the pay is around the miniumum wage the working week can be up 84 hours and up to 144 hours away from home every week before only 45 hour off they drive to different places every day they don't do to bad

Train drivers should not go though red signals when you consider they train for 18 months get paid 4 times the HGV driver for an average 35 hour week learn a route never go anywhere not trained for but yesterday two still went though red signals.

 

[455driver]

HGVs shouldn't hit bridges but when you think training to become one is about 20 hours and the pay is around the miniumum wage the working week can be up 84 hours and up to 144 hours away from home every week before only 45 hour off they drive to different places every day they don't do to bad

Train drivers should not go though red signals when you consider they train for 18 months get paid 4 times the HGV driver for an average 35 hour week learn a route never go anywhere not trained for but yesterday two still went though red signals.

So one of you're excuses for bridge strikes is because the pay is poor, that sounds to me that as the pay is poor they shouldnt have to bother reading and complying with the signs and generally have a 'oh F##k it attitude', not very 'professional' is it!

How many of those those lorries hitting bridges did so because they couldn't grip the road?
How many because the bridge suddenly lowered in front of them?

We're the 2 signals passed yesterday because the train drivers assumed the signal would clear or were the drivers definitely at fault in any other way?

 

[muz379]

HGVs shouldn't hit bridges but when you think training to become one is about 20 hours and the pay is around the miniumum wage the working week can be up 84 hours and up to 144 hours away from home every week before only 45 hour off they drive to different places every day they don't do to bad

Train drivers should not go though red signals when you consider they train for 18 months get paid 4 times the HGV driver for an average 35 hour week learn a route never go anywhere not trained for but yesterday two still went though red signals.

What about bus drivers , pay and conditions in that industry have decreased massively but i'm sure if a bus driver drove his double decker into a low bridge killing your wife and kids you wouldn't be arguing that poor pay and conditions mean its inevitable

As 445 has said above just because 2 drivers went through red signals yesterday does not mean that those 2 drivers actually did anything wrong . It is of course possible it was the drivers fault there are SPADS where the driver is at fault but as has been pointed out these drivers would face disciplinary action . But without in depth knowledge of 2 particular spads it is unfair to suggest they are at fault . There are numerous reasons why a SPAD occurs and some of them are not the drivers fault

As far as I can see there are only 2 reasons why a bridge strike would occur
1) The sign is wrong and indicating that the bridge is taller than it is , in this case the driver is not at fault

2)The sign is right but the driver drives past it thinking he knows better or not knowing his dimensions , in this case the driver is completely at fault

Now do you think that the majority of bridge strikes with tall vehicles are because of reason 1 or 2 ?

 

[mac]

What i'm saying about pay is low pay and long hours equal mistakes would you be okay to drive after working 15 hours trying to sleep in a layby for for 9 hours then doing it all again.

As before how many are from abroad, how many following diversions i no they shut the M1 and sent HGVs under a low bridge.

Yesterdays 2 drivers though red where reading the wrong signal not very professional is it for a driver who learns the route like the back of his hand

 

[Robertj21a]

Many are actually likely to be

3) - driver wasn't paying sufficient attention (and can be HGV or train)

 

[mac]

Many are actually likely to be

3) - driver wasn't paying sufficient attention (and can be HGV or train)

How true

 

[Minilad]

What i'm saying about pay is low pay and long hours equal mistakes would you be okay to drive after working 15 hours trying to sleep in a layby for for 9 hours then doing it all again.

As before how many are from abroad, how many following diversions i no they shut the M1 and sent HGVs under a low bridge.

Yesterdays 2 drivers though red where reading the wrong signal not very professional is it for a driver who learns the route like the back of his hand

You know this how exactly?

 

[Antman]

HGVs shouldn't hit bridges but when you think training to become one is about 20 hours and the pay is around the miniumum wage the working week can be up 84 hours and up to 144 hours away from home every week before only 45 hour off they drive to different places every day they don't do to bad

Train drivers should not go though red signals when you consider they train for 18 months get paid 4 times the HGV driver for an average 35 hour week learn a route never go anywhere not trained for but yesterday two still went though red signals.

Pay is a bit more than the minimum wage and the training is however long it takes any individual to pass the test.

However drivers are human and mistakes are inevitable

 

[455driver]

Yesterdays 2 drivers though red where reading the wrong signal not very professional is it for a driver who learns the route like the back of his hand

Could you tell us where you got this information please, we don't get that sort of nfo until the investigation is finished!
You must have friends in high places.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

HGVs shouldn't hit bridges but when you think training to become one is about 20 hours and the pay is around the miniumum wage the working week can be up 84 hours and up to 144 hours away from home every week before only 45 hour off they drive to different places every day they don't do to bad

Train drivers should not go though red signals when you consider they train for 18 months get paid 4 times the HGV driver for an average 35 hour week learn a route never go anywhere not trained for but yesterday two still went though red signals.

With regard to experience of LGV drivers, I read recently about how most haulage firms wouldn't employ anyone without at least 5 years experience, so I'd expect most drivers to know better than to chance it!

 

[AndyNLondon]

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!

The road I live on (& surrounding ones) has exactly that restriction, and my "little brain" can cope with the reason for it: the roads are physically capable of supporting heavy vehicles but are narrow residential roads, and the restriction was put in place to prevent them being used as short-cuts to & from the North Circular Road (A406.) The "except for access" means that deliveries, bin lorries, local bus routes, etc. can operate, while preventing the problem rat-running.

 

[455driver]

The road I live on (& surrounding ones) has exactly that restriction, and my "little brain" can cope with the reason for it: the roads are physically capable of supporting heavy vehicles but are narrow residential roads, and the restriction was put in place to prevent them being used as short-cuts to & from the North Circular Road (A406.) The "except for access" means that deliveries, bin lorries, local bus routes, Gearjammer coz e iz speshul etc. can operate, while preventing the problem rat-running.

If a 44 tonne lorry passes the sign and isn't using it for a legitimate reason (PS a short cut isn't a legitimate reason) they can be fined although the chances of anyone bothering to catch them is rather remote, so basically it is one of those 'I got away with it last time so will do it again' situations.

 

[richw]

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.

I've just driven along the road in question and it certainly looks like a new surface

 

[Saint66]

How topical... A bridge Strike at Harlington has blocked the MML for at least an hour this evening, with buses being ordered between Luton and Bedford.

 

[AndyNLondon]

If a 44 tonne lorry passes the sign and isn't using it for a legitimate reason (PS a short cut isn't a legitimate reason) they can be fined although the chances of anyone bothering to catch them is rather remote, so basically it is one of those 'I got away with it last time so will do it again' situations.

Yep, with the one near me enforcement is essentially non-existent, but if sat navs know about the restriction and don't suggest the rat run then that deals with a lot of the problem. We also have some junctions that, while do-able, are awkward enough in large vehicles to counter the "I got away with it last time" effect. (In any case, when the problem is rat-running, a solution doesn't have to remove all of the through traffic, it just needs to remove enough of it.)

 

[455driver]

A lot of lorry drivers use a car sat nav as they are a lot cheaper than a proper truck one.

 

[Antman]

With regard to experience of LGV drivers, I read recently about how most haulage firms wouldn't employ anyone without at least 5 years experience, so I'd expect most drivers to know better than to chance it!

That's rarely the case now if indeed it ever was other than at well paid jobs.

Mind you all the experience in the world isn't going to turn a bad driver into a good one
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A lot of lorry drivers use a car sat nav as they are a lot cheaper than a proper truck one.

Sat navs are more trouble than they're worth if you ask me

 

[mac]

With regard to experience of LGV drivers, I read recently about how most haulage firms wouldn't employ anyone without at least 5 years experience, so I'd expect most drivers to know better than to chance it!

For new drivers a lot of insurance companies won't cover them until they have had there license for 2 years even if they have never used it.

 

[fusionblue]

How topical... A bridge Strike at Harlington has blocked the MML for at least an hour this evening, with buses being ordered between Luton and Bedford.

This is a silly question but i am curious. What counts as a bridge strike - or more specifically, what counts as a strike that requires reporting?

If i reversed into a bridge or other railway structure at <5mph in a car, or rode a motorbike/bicycle into it at high speed (lets ignore human injury in this scenario), what would count (if any) as "too slow" to be of any real concern?

 

[najaB]

This is a silly question but i am curious. What counts as a bridge strike - or more specifically, what counts as a strike that requires reporting?

If i reversed into a bridge or other railway structure at <5mph in a car, or rode a motorbike/bicycle into it at high speed (lets ignore human injury in this scenario), what would count (if any) as "too slow" to be of any real concern?

One of the documents I read (might be the one linked above) says that strikes involving cars (and I assume motorbikes) don't need to be reported to Network Rail. Strikes involving larger vehicles - especially if it hits the bridge deck - do need to be reported no matter what the speed.

 

[jopsuk]

How topical... A bridge Strike at Harlington has blocked the MML for at least an hour this evening, with buses being ordered between Luton and Bedford.

As I said at the top of the thread- on average slightly more than four happen every day! Just not always on the busy main lines.

 

[Llanigraham]

This is a silly question but i am curious. What counts as a bridge strike - or more specifically, what counts as a strike that requires reporting?

If i reversed into a bridge or other railway structure at <5mph in a car, or rode a motorbike/bicycle into it at high speed (lets ignore human injury in this scenario), what would count (if any) as "too slow" to be of any real concern?

Cars, motorbikes or small vans don't need reporting, unless there is obvious damage.
Anything over and including a Transit size needs reporting, and it doesn't matter where they hit the bridge, so does include side walls.
Bridges over the railway, then anything hitting the sides should be reported.

 

[90019]

That's rarely the case now if indeed it ever was other than at well paid jobs.

A lot of them still require 2 years.
I drive buses rather than HGVs because nobody would employ me due to lack of experience driving them.
Even if I tried now, most companies wouldn't employ me, because my 3½ years experience are driving the wrong sort of large vehicle.

Sat navs are more trouble than they're worth if you ask me

Used properly as an aid to navigation, they're fine.
The problem is people who are totally reliant on the satnav, going anywhere it tells them to, ignoring rather important things like road signs.

 

[David]

Hmm, I must of missed the seminar that states you only know whats professional if you do the job:roll:

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.

Normally, I'm loath to get involved in a dispute on here, but ....

The amount of hypocrisy in this thread is almost beyond belief! Several people on the forum (and yes, 455driver, I'm looking at you here), get very aggresive whenever someone from the rail industry is questioned in anyway, shape or form, and try shouting down those who are asking the questions. Yet it the same people here having a go at the road haulage industry, with what appears to be a certain amount of satisfaction....

What's good for the goose, isn't necessarily good for the gander ....

HGVs shouldn't hit bridges but when you think training to become one is about 20 hours and the pay is around the miniumum wage the working week can be up 84 hours and up to 144 hours away from home every week before only 45 hour off they drive to different places every day they don't do to bad.

What i'm saying about pay is low pay and long hours equal mistakes would you be okay to drive after working 15 hours trying to sleep in a layby for for 9 hours then doing it all again.

Slighlty mis-informed, but hey-ho, par for the course when people on this forum are talking about something they know very little about :roll:

Firstly it's slightly more that 20 hours. as to drive a HGV with a trailer, first you have to take and pass the rigid vehicle (class C) theory* and practical tests. You then have to do the same for a HGV and trailer (class C+E). after you pass the practical test, you still can't walk into a job, as you then have to do the CPC course, which is a minimum of 35 hours. Granted, it's no where near as long as it takes to become a train driver, but it's not as quick or easy as you make out. The other part to this, unless your in the armed forces, then you have to pay for all the HGV training (medical(s), driving instruction, theory tests, practical test and CPC). Depending on how long you take to learn, then this could reach a hefty sum of money. then double it, but take of the cost of the CPC course if your want to become a C+E driver ....

*There's 2 parts to the theory test. You have to pass both parts in order to get a pass number to supply the driving instructor with before you can take the practical test.

Secondly. if the pay was minimum wage, then there would be a severe shortage of drivers, as know one would want to shell out (potentially) several thousand pounds to try and get a job that pays peanuts. I don't know what sort of wage/salary GearJammer gets, but I suspect it's a fair bit more than I get as a semi-skilled factory/warehouse operative (for information purposes, including bank holiday payments, I earn ~£17.5k a year).

Thirdly, hours. Again your mis-informed or, more likely, ignorent of the facts. If a driver is away from home for 6 days a week (or over a week if it's a long continental run), then more often than not, it's through choice. IE. They have chosen to drive for a particular company knowing that they often have long UK runs and/or continental routes. Also, there are stingent laws and rules as to how many hours they can drive each week, fortnight, and even out to 13 weeks. There are enforced rest breaks, the penalties for which, if a driver breaks them is a criminal conviction. If a drivers average hours are getting too high in a rolling 2/4/13 week period, then they have to have a number of enforced days off in order to get the average down, something employers want to avoid, as in the long run, it costs them more.

 

[90019]

The other part to this, unless your in the armed forces, then you have to pay for all the HGV training (medical(s), driving instruction, theory tests, practical test and CPC). Depending on how long you take to learn, then this could reach a hefty sum of money.

Now that training HGVs are laden, you're usually looking at roughly £1500 for the training and one test for each.
If you don't already have your HGV licence you don't do the periodic training to start, but the Initial CPC, which involves actual tests.
The cost of just the tests for both will come to £389 (2x theory. 2x hazard perception, 2x practical, 1x CPC case studies and 1x CPC practical)
CPC periodic training varies in price depending on where you go and what you do.


So, to get your class 1 out of your own pocket, you're currently looking around the sharp end of £3k, if not more, and that's not taking into accout any retests required.
I got my class 2 prior to the rule about training lorries being laden coming in, and because I had a retest, it cost just under £1500 all in.

 

[Antman]

A lot of them still require 2 years.
I drive buses rather than HGVs because nobody would employ me due to lack of experience driving them.
Even if I tried now, most companies wouldn't employ me, because my 3½ years experience are driving the wrong sort of large vehicle.



Used properly as an aid to navigation, they're fine.
The problem is people who are totally reliant on the satnav, going anywhere it tells them to, ignoring rather important things like road signs.

Companies I know will take on pretty much anybody with the necessary license and CPC, needs must as there is such a shortage of drivers as few people are willing to shell out.

I really don't like sat navs at all but each to their own opinion.

 

[mac]

Normally, I'm loath to get involved in a dispute on here, but ....

The amount of hypocrisy in this thread is almost beyond belief! Several people on the forum (and yes, 455driver, I'm looking at you here), get very aggresive whenever someone from the rail industry is questioned in anyway, shape or form, and try shouting down those who are asking the questions. Yet it the same people here having a go at the road haulage industry, with what appears to be a certain amount of satisfaction....

What's good for the goose, isn't necessarily good for the gander ....





Slighlty mis-informed, but hey-ho, par for the course when people on this forum are talking about something they know very little about :roll:

Firstly it's slightly more that 20 hours. as to drive a HGV with a trailer, first you have to take and pass the rigid vehicle (class C) theory* and practical tests. You then have to do the same for a HGV and trailer (class C+E). after you pass the practical test, you still can't walk into a job, as you then have to do the CPC course, which is a minimum of 35 hours. Granted, it's no where near as long as it takes to become a train driver, but it's not as quick or easy as you make out. The other part to this, unless your in the armed forces, then you have to pay for all the HGV training (medical(s), driving instruction, theory tests, practical test and CPC). Depending on how long you take to learn, then this could reach a hefty sum of money. then double it, but take of the cost of the CPC course if your want to become a C+E driver ....



*There's 2 parts to the theory test. You have to pass both parts in order to get a pass number to supply the driving instructor with before you can take the practical test.

Secondly. if the pay was minimum wage, then there would be a severe shortage of drivers, as know one would want to shell out (potentially) several thousand pounds to try and get a job that pays peanuts. I don't know what sort of wage/salary GearJammer gets, but I suspect it's a fair bit more than I get as a semi-skilled factory/warehouse operative (for information purposes, including bank holiday payments, I earn ~£17.5k a year).


Thirdly, hours. Again your mis-informed or, more likely, ignorent of the facts. If a driver is away from home for 6 days a week (or over a week if it's a long continental run), then more often than not, it's through choice. IE. They have chosen to drive for a particular company knowing that they often have long UK runs and/or continental routes. Also, there are stingent laws and rules as to how many hours they can drive each week, fortnight, and even out to 13 weeks. There are enforced rest breaks, the penalties for which, if a driver breaks them is a criminal conviction. If a drivers average hours are getting too high in a rolling 2/4/13 week period, then they have to have a number of enforced days off in order to get the average down, something employers want to avoid, as in the long run, it costs them more.

Training behind the wheel can be done in 20 hours if you pass 1st time, CPC as any driver will tell you is the biggest waste of time going teaches you nothing to do with driving

Depending where you live you will be on £7 per hour thats why there is a shortage of new drivers, why pay £3000 to earn that when you can earn more in Tesco


Now hours and how wrong you are yes if a driver is away all week its though choice such as the need to do enough hours to earn enough money.
The laws on breaks say you must have a weekly rest off 45 hours but this can be reduced to 24 but paid back within 3 week.
The laws on hours (to keep it simple) say you can drive for 45 per week but you can work for upto 15 per day 3 times per week (there are ways you can week 15 hours 6 days per week) it is legal to work 82 hours every week and still travel home every day.
The goverment brought in the WTD that said only 48 hours can be worked but they allso broght in POA which means if you are not driving but getting paid your hours do not count so quite possible to be waiting for a container to be unloaded all day and no hours have been worked.

 

[Antman]

Training behind the wheel can be done in 20 hours if you pass 1st time, CPC as any driver will tell you is the biggest waste of time going teaches you nothing to do with driving

Depending where you live you will be on £7 per hour thats why there is a shortage of new drivers, why pay £3000 to earn that when you can earn more in Tesco


Now hours and how wrong you are yes if a driver is away all week its though choice such as the need to do enough hours to earn enough money.
The laws on breaks say you must have a weekly rest off 45 hours but this can be reduced to 24 but paid back within 3 week.
The laws on hours (to keep it simple) say you can drive for 45 per week but you can work for upto 15 per day 3 times per week (there are ways you can week 15 hours 6 days per week) it is legal to work 82 hours every week and still travel home every day.
The goverment brought in the WTD that said only 48 hours can be worked but they allso broght in POA which means if you are not driving but getting paid your hours do not count so quite possible to be waiting for a container to be unloaded all day and no hours have been worked.

£9-10 an hour upwards is the going rate around this way

 

[455driver]

David,
If you actually look back through my posts you will see that I have been critical of rail staff several times when it's warranted, just click on my username and then other posts and they are easy to find


But here we have a (supposed) professional lorry driver bragging about ignoring height and weight signs because he knows better.
Simple question, do you think that is acceptable yes or no?

Just because somebody has shelled out some cash (most of which is simply so the Government can get some more money out of them) to get a licence doesn't make them a professional driver, being professional is a mindset and no amount of training will change that, I know quite a few people who class themselves as professional but I don't, once a fool always a fool!

Just because somebody gets paid to do something doesn't make them a professional despite what the dictionary says.

 

[najaB]

Just because somebody gets paid to do something doesn't make them a professional despite what the dictionary says.

It's the difference between being a professional and displaying professionalism.