That was a reference to a past thread...I'm not sure that anybody takes the risk, more a case of human error, we all make mistakes.
Tried it, 14ft 9 truck under a 14ft bridge........ nothing happened!
That was a reference to a past thread...I'm not sure that anybody takes the risk, more a case of human error, we all make mistakes.
Tried it, 14ft 9 truck under a 14ft bridge........ nothing happened!
And people will continue to try it.
Personally I can't think of a reason why driving a vehicle past a height restriction sign displaying a lower height than the height of a vehicle should not be an automatic fine and 3 points on your license - regardless of physical consequences.
A height in a red triangle is a warning rather than a restriction, so is more like "you may be able to fit a 15'10" vehicle through here, but this sign says you shouldn't"; the height in a red circle (as you posted) is a restriction which is "you may be able to fit a 15'10" vehicle through here, but it's illegal for you to do so".Attached image snipped from
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/traffic-signs
You can interpret that as "you may be able to fit a 15'10" vehicle through here, but this sign says that you're not supposed to". Pretty much like the speed limit signs, really - of course you can drive down the M3 at midnight at 100mph*, but the "70" inside a red circle means that you're not supposed to.
A height in a red triangle is a warning rather than a restriction, so is more like "you may be able to fit a 15'10" vehicle through here, but this sign says you shouldn't"; the height in a red circle (as you posted) is a restriction which is "you may be able to fit a 15'10" vehicle through here, but it's illegal for you to do so".
As I see it, one reason would be when there isn't a reasonable alternate route. By using the warning sign the onus is put on the driver to check if their vehicle can fit, rather than forcing all tall vehicles to take an extensive detour.Why is the triangular version ever used? As an individual driver can't really stop and measure the bridge, any sensible driver shouldn't be risking it. In which case why not remove the ambiguity and make it a prohibition rather than a warning?
Why is the triangular version ever used? As an individual driver can't really stop and measure the bridge, any sensible driver shouldn't be risking it. In which case why not remove the ambiguity and make it a prohibition rather than a warning?
Latest example in Dover yesterday. Possibly didn't hit the bridge itself as there is protective steelwork there.
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/dover/news/lorry-crashes-into-bridge-close-101883/
Pretty much like the speed limit signs, really - of course you can drive down the M3 at midnight at 100mph*, but the "70" inside a red circle means that you're not supposed to.
* I have not to my recollection ever driven down the M3 at midnight at 100mph, and I would not condone behaviour of this sort...
At the risk of putting this thread back on subject I wonder why there's not some sort of electronic warning device on the more commonly struck bridges that triggers if approached by vehicles of above regulation height. After all these sort of devices triggered by speed are all over the place.
At the risk of putting this thread back on subject I wonder why there's not some sort of electronic warning device on the more commonly struck bridges that triggers if approached by vehicles of above regulation height. After all these sort of devices triggered by speed are all over the place.
Do you mean this sort of thing?At the risk of putting this thread back on subject I wonder why there's not some sort of electronic warning device on the more commonly struck bridges that triggers if approached by vehicles of above regulation height. After all these sort of devices triggered by speed are all over the place.
Tulse Hill got a new electronic system fitted about a month ago but one of the new signs that was a bit close to the edge of the pavement has already got clouted through 90 degrees so it isn't visible (lots a camber at that point...)
The one on the East side of the bridge is LED and used to work fine a few years ago (since I last went on a U1A bus which always trigger it of course, being double decker and going on a route that goes very close to, but obviously not passing under, the bridge in question). But yeah, the one on the main road is an older mechanical sign which has just been stuck on the "divert" screen for at least since I first lived in Soton (2012), perhaps longer.Yes there are, at a few locations around the country, but in the case of my local example, at Swaythling where the A27 passes under the BML, the local authority (presumably Southampton council) won't maintain it any longer, so it just sits there with the 'divert' warning permanently displayed...
Lorry stuck under railway bridge near Kearsney railway station, Alkham Valley Road, Dover.
Just for a change this bridge was hit from the opposite direction.
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/dover/news/lorry-hits-railway-bridge-115381/
Just for a change this bridge was hit from the opposite direction.
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/dover/news/lorry-hits-railway-bridge-115381/
Just for a change this bridge was hit from the opposite direction.
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/dover/news/lorry-hits-railway-bridge-115381/