Bridge bashing

[Chris116]

7 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Strange that they are always referred to as tows but are actually pushes.

I think we have to put that down to an Americanism! Being married to an American I know just how many funny ideas they have! 

[RJS1977]

19 hours ago, melmerby said:

We all know the 11' 8" bridge (now +8")

How about the 10' 6" bridge?

Even has a chicane that catches some out:

 

 

 

 

I wonder if drivers are so busy concentrating on the "chicane" that it distracts them from checking the height of their vehicle? That said, the "CAUTION" sign isn't exactly conspicuous!

 

The "chicane" isn't really a chicane though, as the yellow line goes straight through - the right hand side (from the drivers' perspective) of the road narrows approaching the bridge on each side.

[melmerby]

17 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

 

 

 

The "chicane" isn't really a chicane though, as the yellow line goes straight through - the right hand side (from the drivers' perspective) of the road narrows approaching the bridge on each side.

It's a pretty sharp narrowing of the carriageway with little warning.

The high kerb doesn't help either, acting like a catapult.

 

[PhilJ W]

24 minutes ago, melmerby said:

It's a pretty sharp narrowing of the carriageway with little warning.

The high kerb doesn't help either, acting like a catapult.

 

Perhaps they should erect some sort of barrier or make the narrowing of the road less abrupt.

I wonder what the truck that caught fire was carrying? whatever it was went up very quickly. 

[petethemole]

20 minutes ago, PhilJ W said:

Perhaps they should erect some sort of barrier or make the narrowing of the road less abrupt.

I wonder what the truck that caught fire was carrying? whatever it was went up very quickly. 

I noticed that too.  I ran it at 0.25 speed and there's a jump cut at 2.08, from no apparent smoke to noticeable smoke.

 

On You tube there's a link to the full story.

 

Edited October 24, 2020 by petethemole

[PhilJ W]

12 minutes ago, petethemole said:

I noticed that too.  I ran it at 0.25 speed and there's a jump cut at 2.08, from no apparent smoke to noticeable smoke.

 

On You tube there's a link to the full story.

 

It appears there might have been another fire truck behind the burning vehicle. Note that the road was getting very wet before the visible fire crew 'sprang' into action. It could of course be ice that the lobsters were packed in melting. I was wondering what triggered the fire, I thought it might be the marker lights carried by most American trucks shorting out after being damaged in the accident.

[petethemole]

The fire started in the compressor, which has it's own small motor and fuel supply.  That would have been on the front of the box body above the cab, just right to hit the bridge.  The fuel could have been ignited by damaged wiring.

Edited October 24, 2020 by petethemole

[lmsforever]

Whoever trained those fire fighters neeeds to be replaced they were useless ours are far more efficient and act much quicker to take action.

[dhjgreen]

5 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

Whoever trained those fire fighters neeeds to be replaced they were useless ours are far more efficient and act much quicker to take action.

Maybe they are told to wait for the commander when they arrived action started.

[Budgie]

2 hours ago, petethemole said:

I noticed that too.  I ran it at 0.25 speed and there's a jump cut at 2.08, from no apparent smoke to noticeable smoke.

 

On You tube there's a link to the full story.

 

 

This video suggests that the bridge is to be reconstructed by 2018. Is there an after-2018 picture/video of the bridge?

 

[Adam88]

Near where I live there is a vllage with a chicane to help slow the traffic.  Before it was installed drivers seldom slowed down and roared through.  On the first day after it came into use one driver hit it too fast, the car rolled over and a friend of mine who lives there saw the car's windscreen flying towards him - he had a close call as he dropped flat on the pavement and the debris whistled over him.  Soon after that the chicane was reprofiled from a short to a long narrowing.  I found this web site http://everyaccident.co.uk which has some interesting (but limited) information for the period 1979-2014 and found that the village in question was a bit of a black spot, although I couldn't identify the particular incident I recalled.

[PhilJ W]

1 hour ago, Budgie said:

 

This video suggests that the bridge is to be reconstructed by 2018. Is there an after-2018 picture/video of the bridge?

 

It hadn't changed much up until Sep. 2019 except for removal of the chicane and sidewalks. (Google Earth)

 

Edited October 24, 2020 by PhilJ W

[F-UnitMad]

3 hours ago, lmsforever said:

Whoever trained those fire fighters neeeds to be replaced they were useless ours are far more efficient and act much quicker to take action.

Regardless of how quick any crew acted on arrival that vehicle was going to be a write-off, either lightly toasted or well done.

But hey, let's just condemn a whole nation's Fire services and compare them to "ours" based on one video. Maybe they had to be dragged out of the donut shop? Oh no, silly me, that was the police, of course....

[PhilJ W]

Don't forget that most American fire brigades outside of major conurbations are volunteer brigades.

[Grizz]

Not sure if this question has been raised before on here, apologies if it has. 
 

Some years ago, after privatisation, I was working on the track at Clapham Jcn and there was a quite a bad bridge strike. It ended up with trains on both Central and Southwestern divisions being stopped for a considerable time during the day and then on into the evening peak. The delays and cancellations ran into stupidly high figures for the rest of the day and the next day there were trains in the wrong place etc etc. Obviously Network Rail had to compensate the TOCs so that they could compensate the public who were ‘Inconvenienced’.......

 

A week or so later I was discussing the events with an Inspector from what was HMRI. He informed me that NR (the tax payer) has to pay out but are not permitted (Probably by Government) to recover the full total costs of all the delays, cancellations, suplimentry inspection etc etc from the road hauliers insurance company. 
Basically all total costs resulting from a road haulage vehicle smashing into a railway bridge because the incompetent moron that is driving it cannot judge the height of the vehicle being driven against the sign on the bridge. 

 

Question....why not? Why cannot all costs be recovered. 
 

So what if it bankrupts a road haulier? Tough! If you cannot correctly judge the height of the vehicle you should not be allowed to drive, in what is supposed to be a professional role, in a safety critical job. 
 

Average bridge strikes per year......well over 1000!!!!!
 

can you imagine what would happen if there that number of ‘out of gauge’ freight trains striking road bridges......they would shut the railways down.

Never mind just so long as cowboy bus and wagon drivers keep on going, screw the railways....

 

Edited October 24, 2020 by Grizz
Flip auto correct....

[F-UnitMad]

1 hour ago, Grizz said:

a road haulage vehicle ...... because the incompetent moron that is driving it.....

It's always amazed me that so many car drivers hold that view, yet are willing to trust their lives to such "incompetant morons" when they cut in front of them at the last second, for example to turn off at the next motorway exit - or just because they'd sooner be in front of a truck rather than behind it.  

 

 

 

 

[bigherb]

1 hour ago, PhilJ W said:

Don't forget that most American fire brigades outside of major conurbations are volunteer brigades.

They are in the UK, and still better those cloppers.

[johnofwessex]

2 hours ago, Grizz said:

Not sure if this question has been raised before on here, apologies if it has. 
 

Some years ago, after privatisation, I was working on the track at Clapham Jcn and there was a quite a bad bridge strike. It ended up with trains on both Central and Southwestern divisions being stopped for a considerable time during the day and then on into the evening peak. The delays and cancellations ran into stupidly high figures for the rest of the day and the next day there were trains in the wrong place etc etc. Obviously Network Rail had to compensate the TOCs so that they could compensate the public who were ‘Inconvenienced’.......

 

A week or so later I was discussing the events with an Inspector from what was HMRI. He informed me that NR (the tax payer) has to pay out but are not permitted (Probably by Government) to recover the full total costs of all the delays, cancellations, suplimentry inspection etc etc from the road hauliers insurance company. 
Basically all total costs resulting from a road haulage vehicle smashing into a railway bridge because the incompetent moron that is driving it cannot judge the height of the vehicle being driven against the sign on the bridge. 

 

Question....why not? Why cannot all costs be recovered. 
 

So what if it bankrupts a road haulier? Tough! If you cannot correctly judge the height of the vehicle you should not be allowed to drive, in what is supposed to be a professional role, in a safety critical job. 
 

Average bridge strikes per year......well over 1000!!!!!
 

can you imagine what would happen if there that number of ‘out of gauge’ freight trains striking road bridges......they would shut the railways down.

Never mind just so long as cowboy bus and wagon drivers keep on going, screw the railways....

 

 

Some years ago I was talking to a BT employee

 

If Builders cut through a BT line, unless they can demonstrate that they have been through the current procedures - ie the BT line isnt where its supposed to be their insurers wont cover them for the resulting claim & mamy construction companies have been bankrupted as a result

[caradoc]

2 hours ago, Grizz said:

A week or so later I was discussing the events with an Inspector from what was HMRI. He informed me that NR (the tax payer) has to pay out but are not permitted (Probably by Government) to recover the full total costs of all the delays, cancellations, suplimentry inspection etc etc from the road hauliers insurance company. 

 

As an NR employee dealing with bridge strikes, I asked about compensation, and was told that all we could claim for was the cost of examining the bridge and, if applicable, repairing it; We could not claim for train delays as this was an artificial rail industry system and did not represent actual financial loss. However.... given that TOCs pay compensation for delays (whether it is the industry's fault or not, unlike other transport modes), and that for bridge strikes this money comes from NR, this may (hopefully) have changed. 

 

[Adam88]

Sensor-operated traffic lights or signs might be helpful at some locations.  Near where I live there are solar-powered, speed-triggered signs.  I would have thought it worthwhile investigating something similar for frequently hit bridges.  One bridge near where I live is often in the news for being hit, the local paper states (therefore this must be true) 39 times in eight years.  Traffic jams, diversions and rail replacement buses are inconvenient and costly.

[SHMD]

13 minutes ago, Adam88 said:

Sensor-operated traffic lights...

 

Don't make me laugh!

 

Lights changing to red, (for some reason), makes most road users speed up - especially "Rented Van Man* ".

 

 

Kev.

(* Other genders are available - if they want to be associated, for fairness reasons, with such a stupid male trait!)

 

[phil-b259]

2 hours ago, Grizz said:

Not sure if this question has been raised before on here, apologies if it has. 
 

Some years ago, after privatisation, I was working on the track at Clapham Jcn and there was a quite a bad bridge strike. It ended up with trains on both Central and Southwestern divisions being stopped for a considerable time during the day and then on into the evening peak. The delays and cancellations ran into stupidly high figures for the rest of the day and the next day there were trains in the wrong place etc etc. Obviously Network Rail had to compensate the TOCs so that they could compensate the public who were ‘Inconvenienced’.......

 

A week or so later I was discussing the events with an Inspector from what was HMRI. He informed me that NR (the tax payer) has to pay out but are not permitted (Probably by Government) to recover the full total costs of all the delays, cancellations, suplimentry inspection etc etc from the road hauliers insurance company. 
Basically all total costs resulting from a road haulage vehicle smashing into a railway bridge because the incompetent moron that is driving it cannot judge the height of the vehicle being driven against the sign on the bridge. 

 

Question....why not? Why cannot all costs be recovered. 
 

So what if it bankrupts a road haulier? Tough! If you cannot correctly judge the height of the vehicle you should not be allowed to drive, in what is supposed to be a professional role, in a safety critical job. 
 

Average bridge strikes per year......well over 1000!!!!!
 

can you imagine what would happen if there that number of ‘out of gauge’ freight trains striking road bridges......they would shut the railways down.

Never mind just so long as cowboy bus and wagon drivers keep on going, screw the railways....

 

 

That has changed in recent years.

 

Several court judgements have made it Crystal clear that Network Rail CAN claim the FULL amount it pays out to TOCs back from the insurers of road vehicles which hit NR bridges.

 

https://www.oeclaw.co.uk/images/uploads/documents/Network Rail judgement doc final.pdf

 

https://www.burges-salmon.com/-/media/files/publications/open-access/conarken_reaffirmed_negligent_drivers_liable_to_pay_for_rail_network_delays.pdf

 

https://www.allianzebroker.co.uk/content/allianzebroker/en_gb/application/content/documents/news-and-insight/newsletters/commercial-motor/march-2016/railway-bridge-strikes/_jcr_content/documentProperties/currentDocument.res/railway-bridge-strikes.pdf

Edited October 24, 2020 by phil-b259

[SHMD]

Right. That's it.

I'm going to model a bridge strike on my next build!

...including the driver looking around at the devastation whilst scratching his head.

 

 

Kev.

(Better than road-works or a bus-on-a-bridge!)

 

[Adam88]

10 minutes ago, SHMD said:

 

Don't make me laugh!

 

Lights changing to red, (for some reason), makes most road users speed up - especially "Rented Van Man* ".

 

 

Kev.

(* Other genders are available - if they want to be associated, for fairness reasons, with such a stupid male trait!)

 

 

Speak for yourself!  I once witnessed "Rented Van Man" write off his windscreen within half an hour of picking up his 7.5ton truck and I would guess that was due to a) the early hour and b) his, and it was a man, unfamiliarity with his vehicle.

 

It needn't be a traditional RAG traffic light, nor needn it be immediately next to the bridge, especially if some turning round is required, etc.

[pH]

1 hour ago, F-UnitMad said:

It's always amazed me that so many car drivers hold that view, yet are willing to trust their lives to such "incompetant morons" when they cut in front of them at the last second, for example to turn off at the next motorway exit - or just because they'd sooner be in front of a truck rather than behind it.  

 

I did a lot of hitching around the UK, plus some in Europe and Canada, in the 1960s. Since then, I’ve said that part of a driver’s education should be a couple of trips in the cab of a semi (artic in the UK) on a main road. It really brought home to me how differently they handle from cars (Duh!) and I’ve always tried to remember that around them on the road.