Static caravan, one careful owner, FSH, slight water leak from the roof area. POA.
don’t these things follow approved routes or something?
Did he (or topically she) forget it was on the back?
Should have changed the sun visors to High Load and have it driver facing [emoji23]
On a serious note, do you think the clearance is over stated because of the hill as you come out causing the problem?
Low bridges…
The gift that just keeps giving.
stu675:
On a serious note, do you think the clearance is over stated because of the hill as you come out causing the problem?
At face value it’s an unmarked bridge that looks considerably lower than 16’.
Or possibly the vehicle has been lifted by a hill on the exit before the trailer and load has cleared the bridge.
Strangely enough I rarely here of bridge strikes in Grantham these days , though I did read a piece that intimated part of the outer ring road was open ( not looked myself ) so maybe lorries are using that rather than through town
Another driver and company on their way to see their TC… 
It’s going to be painful
Even worse, a certain TN member will be along shortly to baffle us with bridge strike analysis BS once again
It would be too simple a mistake to get the measuring stick out and take a reading from the roof height along the side, surely…?
Carryfast:
stu675:
On a serious note, do you think the clearance is over stated because of the hill as you come out causing the problem?At face value it’s an unmarked bridge that looks considerably lower than 16’.
Or possibly the vehicle has been lifted by a hill on the exit before the trailer and load has cleared the bridge.
Look through the trees. There’s a red round sign on the bridge, excellent chance it’s a height limit.
Simon:
Carryfast:
stu675:
On a serious note, do you think the clearance is over stated because of the hill as you come out causing the problem?At face value it’s an unmarked bridge that looks considerably lower than 16’.
Or possibly the vehicle has been lifted by a hill on the exit before the trailer and load has cleared the bridge.Look through the trees. There’s a red round sign on the bridge, excellent chance it’s a height limit.
That explains it the sign should be mounted on a pole that’s higher than the trees.It just ain’t high enough where it is.
Seriously the sign isn’t exactly fit for purpose as it is.It could predictably lead to confusion regarding an unmarked bridge for the type of driver who needs an auto truck to drive like a car.
Simon:
Carryfast:
stu675:
On a serious note, do you think the clearance is over stated because of the hill as you come out causing the problem?At face value it’s an unmarked bridge that looks considerably lower than 16’.
Or possibly the vehicle has been lifted by a hill on the exit before the trailer and load has cleared the bridge.Look through the trees. There’s a red round sign on the bridge, excellent chance it’s a height limit.
Zoomed in and you’re right. Looking at the truck (and driving an Actros meself) I’ll hazard a guess that the bridge is 14’ 6" at most. My guess, chanced his arm and failed; agree regarding the lift.
Carryfast:
Simon:
Look through the trees. There’s a red round sign on the bridge, excellent chance it’s a height limit.That explains it the sign should be mounted on a pole that’s higher than the trees.It just ain’t high enough where it is.
Why? The trees aren’t in front of the bridge and sign
I’ll guarantee there will have been other signs well in advance of the bridge.
Either he’s stupidly chanced his arm or it’s bad route planning. Whether it’s a case of the driver not measuring his overall travelling height or using Google Maps instead of a trucker’s Sat Nav makes no difference. Him and the operator are in a world of pain.
I am sorry but everyone has got this wrong, this is a deliberate act on behalf of Highways dept in reaction to their very expensive policy of in-filling bridges :-
bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
Now, they employ the use of static caravans on low loaders so if the Highways dept. are challenged about in-filling it is a simple case of getting a tractor unit to remove the said infill 
Zac_A:
Why? The trees aren’t in front of the bridge and sign
It was a joke aimed at the type of driver who might possibly take a dodgy positioned sign as an unmarked bridge and respective height.
( Or who doesn’t know the difference between over length v over width marker boards ).
So tell us what’s the marked height on the ‘sign’ bearing in mind I didn’t even see the sign, let alone height, in the photo, before it was pointed out ?.
Carryfast:
Zac_A:
Why? The trees aren’t in front of the bridge and signIt was a joke aimed at the type of driver who might possibly take a dodgy positioned sign as an unmarked bridge and respective height.
( Or who doesn’t know the difference between over length v over width marker boards ).So tell us what’s the marked height on the ‘sign’ bearing in mind I didn’t even see the sign, let alone height, in the photo, before it was pointed out ?.
A joke? I wouldn’t have bargained on that from you after the last bridge strike thread regarding metric conversions etc.
I don’t think anyone can see the numerals on the sign, but the sign itself was readily visible, no doubt if someone had the precise location we could view it on Google Street View
EDIT: but just for you, next time I’m in the yard I’ll measure the height of our Actros cabs and use that metric to analyze the picture and It’ll give us a good indication of the bridge height, not that it is of any use to anyone except to further another bridge strike thread argument.
In this bizarre upside down world, I bet the value of that thing went up because of its close proximity to a train line.
Has he hit it?
Carryfast:
Simon:
Carryfast:
stu675:
On a serious note, do you think the clearance is over stated because of the hill as you come out causing the problem?At face value it’s an unmarked bridge that looks considerably lower than 16’.
Or possibly the vehicle has been lifted by a hill on the exit before the trailer and load has cleared the bridge.Look through the trees. There’s a red round sign on the bridge, excellent chance it’s a height limit.
That explains it the sign should be mounted on a pole that’s higher than the trees.It just ain’t high enough where it is.
Seriously the sign isn’t exactly fit for purpose as it is.It could predictably lead to confusion regarding an unmarked bridge for the type of driver who needs an auto truck to drive like a car.
Or maybe, the sign which is relevant to that driver was on the other side of the bridge, he sign seen is for vehicles is towards not away from bridge. Would be height signs on both sides… so being erected on a pole is irrelevant.
It looks to me that he has dumped the air from his drive axle but forgot the trailer- or -he measured his load height at the eaves, not the ridge!
Beau Nydel:
It looks to me that he has dumped the air from his drive axle but forgot the trailer- or -he measured his load height at the eaves, not the ridge!
I think it’s because the caravan is on wheels and tipped down to the front.