Latest bridge strike - Dover

[Cletus]

I think it was possible that the protective steelwork may be slightly lower than the bridge sign says.

 

[shredder1]

I think it was possible that the protective steelwork may be slightly lower than the bridge sign says.

Oh yes I`m sure some are.

 

[snowball]

deleted

 

[shredder1]

Yes thats right, I`ve always found it strange that one. I think most motorway bridges are 17 ft or more, apart from the ones that are sinking and they are monitored, the average trailer size of 14.6, 15 ft and over have limited routes, STGO Cat`s 1 to 3 I can understand at having no height limit, but ordinary LGV`s should have

 

[snowball]

I think most motorway bridges are 17 ft or more

For a long time (certainly over 60 years, probably several decades more), bridges less than 16'6" over public roads have needed to be signed, and almost all new bridges over roads (not just motorways) are about that height or a few inches higher. Certain roads are designated high load routes and new bridges over those are a bit higher still.

 

[MotCO]

I think most motorway bridges are 17 ft or more

Except for the footbridge near Maidstone over the M20 which got knocked down by a lorry passing on the hard shoulder a year or so ago!

 

[Chrisgr31]

There will be presumably be occasions where the height marked on the bridge is incorrect or there is no height marked. The M20 one may have been too low, but that will become clear if and when there is a court case.

On the other cases my suspicion is that it is part tiredness and in part forgetting what you are driving. Effectively its no different to a train driver stopping at the wrong point on the platform because they have forgotten how long their train is. If you are an agency driver driving a different lorry every time then you will be checking the height daily. If you drive the same lorry day in day out, but then change a mistake is more likely I guess.

 

[Spartacus]

My correspondent heard the lorry driver insist his height was 4.0m and the police measured the clearance to be 4.0m, not the 4.2m on the bridge.

Although if that was true, not sure why it hadn’t been noticed before.

The bridge protection beam has been measured at slightly higher than 4.2m. I suspect the driver was more concerned with the height of his cab than the load behind him.

 

[DelW]

Except for the footbridge near Maidstone over the M20 which got knocked down by a lorry passing on the hard shoulder a year or so ago!

The driver in that case is awaiting trial on multiple charges of dangerous driving and criminal damage, which implies that his load (an excavator) was over height at the time, rather than any lack of normal clearance under the bridge. The charges are sufficiently serious that the case has been sent to Crown Court rather than being dealt with by magistrates.
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/maidstone/news/m20-bridge-collapse-driver-in-court-120695/

 

[shredder1]

The driver in that case is awaiting trial on multiple charges of dangerous driving and criminal damage, which implies that his load (an excavator) was over height at the time, rather than any lack of normal clearance under the bridge. The charges are sufficiently serious that the case has been sent to Crown Court rather than being dealt with by magistrates.
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/maidstone/news/m20-bridge-collapse-driver-in-court-120695/

There is no height limits though on UK roads and you are not supposed to stop on motorways, but it says he passed on the hard shoulder, sounds like all the fact are not present in the press release.

 

[furnessvale]

There is no height limits though on UK roads and you are not supposed to stop on motorways, but it says he passed on the hard shoulder, sounds like all the fact are not present in the press release.

Without commenting on this particular case, excavators are notorious for their arms raising themselves in transit as the oil in the rams heats up and lifts the arm. For this reason, any excavator in transit is supposed to have its moveable arm chained down, over and above any chaining necessary for securing the whole machine to the lorry.

 

[swt_passenger]

Another point is bridges should be marked both in metric and imperial measurements, many older drivers wouldnt have a clue what 3.5 meters means, they were taught at school in imperial measurements, meters came along later.

It's "metres". Speaking in my mid 60s, I find it rather amusing to think 'many older drivers' might not know about metric measurements. Even my late mother, born 1929, was taught metric measurements at school. She used to get really wound up about this myth of 'older people' not understanding the metric system.

As I understood it, dual imperial/metric measurements were only included in the traffic sign regulations a few years ago, for use at low bridges specifically, for the benefit of foreign drivers who might not understand feet and inches...

 

[AM9]

It's "metres". Speaking in my mid 60s, I find it rather amusing to think 'many older drivers' might not know about metric measurements. Even my late mother, born 1929, was taught metric measurements at school. She used to get really wound up about this myth of 'older people' not understanding the metric system.

I clearly remember the units of measurement on the back of every exercise book at school. I asked what centimetres were and was shown on a wooden 12 inch ruler (which also had millimetres, centimetres and decimetres in it). Through most of my education, I swapped backwards and forwards between metric imperial units as required. In 1970, my employers started a company-wide programme to metricate all new designs and eventually convert all existing work to metric. Nobody there used the lame excuse about not understanding.

As I understood it, dual imperial/metric measurements were only included in the traffic sign regulations a few years ago, for use at low bridges specifically, for the benefit of foreign drivers who might not understand feet and inches...

Quite a necessity in Dover!

 

[Antman]

It's "metres". Speaking in my mid 60s, I find it rather amusing to think 'many older drivers' might not know about metric measurements. Even my late mother, born 1929, was taught metric measurements at school. She used to get really wound up about this myth of 'older people' not understanding the metric system.

As I understood it, dual imperial/metric measurements were only included in the traffic sign regulations a few years ago, for use at low bridges specifically, for the benefit of foreign drivers who might not understand feet and inches...

Whatever the rights and wrongs of it all surely it is better to display both metric and imperial on bridges to reduce the chances of an accident?

 

[shredder1]

It's "metres". Speaking in my mid 60s, I find it rather amusing to think 'many older drivers' might not know about metric measurements. Even my late mother, born 1929, was taught metric measurements at school. She used to get really wound up about this myth of 'older people' not understanding the metric system.

As I understood it, dual imperial/metric measurements were only included in the traffic sign regulations a few years ago, for use at low bridges specifically, for the benefit of foreign drivers who might not understand feet and inches...

Well I`m 66, have a BSc (Hons) 2.1 and Master degree in science and still struggle with the metric system at times, I certainly didnt get taught it in school to any degree in the 50`s and 60`s, good luck to your mum, although you will find she was an exception more than the rule. I think also you will find out that the metric measurement came into play in UK traffic regulations more than a few years ago.

Have a read at this friend, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_Kingdom

Without commenting on this particular case, excavators are notorious for their arms raising themselves in transit as the oil in the rams heats up and lifts the arm. For this reason, any excavator in transit is supposed to have its moveable arm chained down, over and above any chaining necessary for securing the whole machine to the lorry.

Steel Jessys should be used on heavy plant, and yes you are corrected.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of it all surely it is better to display both metric and imperial on bridges to reduce the chances of an accident?

Thats what the law says,

 

[takno]

Do you actually need to understand or have much a concept of it? There's a number on the bridge, and there's a number which is your height. If the first number is smaller than the other carrying on driving is an unwise manoeuvre.

 

[shredder1]

Do you actually need to understand or have much a concept of it? There's a number on the bridge, and there's a number which is your height. If the first number is smaller than the other carrying on driving is an unwise manoeuvre.

Read the previous posts, practice, theory, experience, reality and the human element are often different animals.

 

[mallard]

Do you actually need to understand or have much a concept of it? There's a number on the bridge, and there's a number which is your height. If the first number is smaller than the other carrying on driving is an unwise manoeuvre.

So, if the bridge is 10 feet high and you know your vehicle is 3.5 meters tall, you're perfectly safe because 3.5 is less than 10? (Hint: 10 feet is actually only approximately 3.05 meters). Obviously you need to understand heights and units to drive safely...

 

[shredder1]

So, if the bridge is 10 feet high and you know your vehicle is 3.5 meters tall, you're perfectly safe because 3.5 is less than 10? (Hint: 10 feet is actually only approximately 3.05 meters). Obviously you need to understand heights and units to drive safely...

Thats correct, also many driver change trailers on a regular basis, the number in the cab doesnt automatically change as you pick up a trailer

 

[Antman]

Thats correct, also many driver change trailers on a regular basis, the number in the cab doesnt automatically change as you pick up a trailer

Indeed and the height on the trailer cannot always be taken as gospel, it can vary according to the unit underneath it.

 

[shredder1]

Indeed and the height on the trailer cannot always be taken as gospel, it can vary according to the unit underneath it.

Exactly, its easy to speak without experience and just see things in black and white.

 

[AM9]

Thats correct, also many driver change trailers on a regular basis, the number in the cab doesnt automatically change as you pick up a trailer [/

Indeed and the height on the trailer cannot always be taken as gospel, it can vary according to the unit underneath it.

So it is up to whoever is responsible for the vehicle, i.e. the driver, to make a note of its actual height and neither guess or just ignore it. Either the driver is responsible enough to drive what can be a hazardous vehicle or he/she should get out of the job. If a train overshoots/undershoots a platform (not a terminal one) it is inconvenient/embarrassing/possibly disciplinary. If an inconsiderate driver abuses the restictions on road height clearance, it could be fatal or cause serious injury of those who were just unlucky to be in the wirong place at the wrong time.

 

[takno]

Thats correct, also many driver change trailers on a regular basis, the number in the cab doesnt automatically change as you pick up a trailer

I have no issues with spot checks and fines for non-compliance until changing the number becomes automatic.

 

[shredder1]

I have no issues with spot checks and fines for non-compliance until changing the number becomes automatic.

No not at all takno, totally agree.

 

[Antman]

And if the height on the trailer is wrong? (Not that the driver in the Dover incident could use that excuse)

 

[furnessvale]

Steel Jessys should be used on heavy plant, and yes you are corrected.

Typo? or some sort of comment on my point?

 

[axlecounter]

So it is up to whoever is responsible for the vehicle, i.e. the driver, to make a note of its actual height and neither guess or just ignore it. Either the driver is responsible enough to drive what can be a hazardous vehicle or he/she should get out of the job. If a train overshoots/undershoots a platform (not a terminal one) it is inconvenient/embarrassing/possibly disciplinary. If an inconsiderate driver abuses the restictions on road height clearance, it could be fatal or cause serious injury of those who were just unlucky to be in the wirong place at the wrong time.

Yeah, right. Anyone making a mistake should be fired. You included, ain't it?

Yes, I'm aware of the hypotetical serious consequences of a bridge strike. But as it has been said, there are many contributing factors that can make it happen.

 

[route:oxford]

Another point is bridges should be marked both in metric and imperial measurements, many older drivers wouldnt have a clue what 3.5 meters means, they were taught at school in imperial measurements, meters came along later.

Of course, it all depends on what kind of meter you are using for measurement... 3.5 parking meters would probably be around 1.5x taller than 3.5 metres whereas 3.5 electricity meters would only be about 5 decimetres tall.

I know my parents were taught metric at primary school in Scotland in the 1940s and Scottish O'Grades and Highers were examined in SI units from the mid 1960s. How old are the drivers you are thinking about?

 

[al78]

Yeah, right. Anyone making a mistake should be fired. You included, ain't it?

If it is a dangerous mistake which really is avoidable, or rather carelessness sugar coated as a mistake, they yes, a professional driver should be fired.

It is bizarre the attempts to trivialise/downpla/excuse motoring road incidents in a way that would never be acceptable in other occupations. Oh sorry love, your mother has just died because the surgeon made a mistake, but it happens you know when they are tired. It doesn't happen.

It is also ridiculous when those who try to excuse driving errors will automatically leap on a cyclist who does something wrong which has far less destruction potential. I conclude that it is more about emotion and personal identity than logic and rational objective thought.

 

[shredder1]

Of course, it all depends on what kind of meter you are using for measurement... 3.5 parking meters would probably be around 1.5x taller than 3.5 metres whereas 3.5 electricity meters would only be about 5 decimetres tall.

I know my parents were taught metric at primary school in Scotland in the 1940s and Scottish O'Grades and Highers were examined in SI units from the mid 1960s. How old are the drivers you are thinking about?

Mid sixties if they got that far, I stopped driving those things in the early 90`s, so many of the older drivers then would have been circa 50` 60 year old, so would have left school prior to the mid 60`s I suppose, but many of my generation, myself included still struggle to some extent with the metric system, especially having years of times tables thrown at us, I still measure a pound at 240 pence, and ask for a quarter of sweets and order a pint of beer and weigh things in pounds and buy things by the dozen The UK sort of half went over to decimalisation and eventually gave up on it I wouldnt know about Scotland, parking meters, or electricity meters, but I do know what a litre of 18 year old Scotch looks and tastes like You`ve just got to love the Scottish.