Four people dead in Bath after truck incident [Merged]

[carryfast]

newmercman:
Other than measuring brake stroke and lining/drum thickness, there isn’t much you can do to determine if brakes are going to be effective and I imagine that’s the case here.

Air pressure loss will have the spring brakes kicking in, but that will have little effect on out of adjustment brakes as the spring application mirrors that of the pedal being pushed into the carpet.

So I assume that the investigation found that the brakes were out of adjustment, not through fade, but through inadequate preventative maintenance and the key word there is preventative.

As a side note to that.check out the details of the speeds here.

bathchronicle.co.uk/fatal-ti … OOPljel.99

As it stands they are saying a loaded 8 wheeler with just a few working brakes was being driven around on the limiter on A roads at up to 56 mph.Then slowed from 43 mph in one hit ( block change ) down to 4 mph without over shooting it’s turn,then ran it up to 26 at the start of the hill then back down to 20 mph then it started running away.What is noticeable is that his guvnor seems to have been slowing down for the junction before turning onto the hill using sequential downshifts to create required engine braking at least.

An answer as to the exact condition of all the respective brake linings and drums including evidence of over heating and diameters and lining thickness might help in answering at least some of the questions and whether that matches the picture painted by the prosecution.

Bearing in mind the implications if ABS could be shown as being capable of randomly failing and not failing safe in view of the FTA’s and DVSA actions regarding ABS warnings.Or for that matter a training regime based on gears to go brakes to slow.

[muckaway]

I drove a P cab 8w for a while that was 2 or 3 years newer than the one involved and I thought the brakes weren’t as good as Dafs. I don’t see why people go ga ga for a basic truck that is no better than any other 8w tipper.
I also don’t get why people go and drive for such tinpot tipper firms. Driving old exportable junk racing about doing crap paying work. But hey, you get to drive a Scania, often with a “Super” badge and spotlights stuck on the front, and the boss might have a Facebook page. Wow.

[caledoniandream]

CF you brable a lot, a little knowledge would help you.

ABS is not a braking system, if it works it stops the wheels from locking up, if it doesn’t work it does nothing.
It doesn’t affect brake pressure if it not works, it does nothing.
It’s designed if it doesn’t work to do nothing end of.

EBS is a replacement for the old load sensing valves, it regulates the amount of pressure what goes to the brakes relying on the pressure in the air suspension which is related to the loading grade.
If the EBS is faulty it switches of and brakes get full air pressure, so you brakes still work but not regulated.
So if both not work, you probably end up with all wheels locking up.

Because the Scania 8 wheeler is most likely to been on “steel suspension” the rear axles are controlled by a old fashion load sensing valve.

So ABS or EBS have nothing to do with it in this case, but it shows an ignorant driver and/or operator to drive with a vehicle what clearly has a fault.
It shows their attitude and respect too the mechanicals and safety devices on their vehicles.

Regarding secondary devices, most trucks have a split braking system, so if one end fails the other brakes are left to operate.
Some have another dedicated secondary which is operated by the handbrake lever, the operating bit before the handbrake locks.
However if there is no air in the system due overuse or extreme brace actuator travel, the spring bakes come on, and they don’t come of till there is enough pressure build up again.
Most vehcle the spring brakes operate on half of the brakes, some even less.

So the vehicle is in the best situation left with half it’s brakes, and with brakes who are not designed to give the full force, but are designed to keep a stationary vehicle in its place (parking)

[carryfast]

caledoniandream:
CF you brable a lot, a little knowledge would help you.

ABS is not a braking system, if it works it stops the wheels from locking up, if it doesn’t work it does nothing.
It doesn’t affect brake pressure if it not works, it does nothing.
It’s designed if it doesn’t work to do nothing end of.

EBS is a replacement for the old load sensing valves, it regulates the amount of pressure what goes to the brakes relying on the pressure in the air suspension which is related to the loading grade.
If the EBS is faulty it switches of and brakes get full air pressure, so you brakes still work but not regulated.
So if both not work, you probably end up with all wheels locking up.

Because the Scania 8 wheeler is most likely to been on “steel suspension” the rear axles are controlled by a old fashion load sensing valve.

So ABS or EBS have nothing to do with it in this case, but it shows an ignorant driver and/or operator to drive with a vehicle what clearly has a fault.
It shows their attitude and respect too the mechanicals and safety devices on their vehicles.

Regarding secondary devices, most trucks have a split braking system, so if one end fails the other brakes are left to operate.
Some have another dedicated secondary which is operated by the handbrake lever, the operating bit before the handbrake locks.
However if there is no air in the system due overuse or extreme brace actuator travel, the spring bakes come on, and they don’t come of till there is enough pressure build up again.
Most vehcle the spring brakes operate on half of the brakes, some even less.

So the vehicle is in the best situation left with half it’s brakes, and with brakes who are not designed to give the full force, but are designed to keep a stationary vehicle in its place (parking)

Firstly EBS is just an updated form of ABS that takes into account load and possibly other factors.While in either case both have a system of controls that stand between operation of the foot brake valve and the actuators.While according to the information provided EBS at least won’t fail safe,like spring brakes,leaving the vehicle with ‘some’ brakes.Which obviously ain’t much use in the case of a loaded four axle wagon running down a long steep hill.Which then leads to the question of the contradiction in DVSA viewing ABS failure as obviously not a dangerous issue to the point of advising continue a journey in the event of a warning.In which case how can over looking an ABS warning then suddenly and conveniently end up being used as evidence of dangerous driving.

As for all the rest you did read my and windrush’s comments that you’ve only got one set of linings and drums etc and just more than one way of applying them.

On that note I suggest you read my previous post in reply to nmm’s comments. Regarding the question as to how a wagon which wouldn’t supposedly even stop properly while shunting in the yard manage to be driven at 50 mph + on A roads including managing to stop from 43 mph to 4 mph in one braking action without over shooting it’s turning.In addition to other information relating to the heap’s history like nearly taking out a horse and rider owing to intermittent brake failure stated as being cleared in that case by use of the park brake control.

[bluey_circles]

I thought ‘EBS’ was brake by wire?, ie an electronic pedal with air no where near it, one of its many advantages is instantaneous braking as there is no delay whilst the pulse of air travels the length of the vehicle the air just moves between tank and slave…

[caledoniandream]

CF you need to google a bit more, EBS is an operating system, or brake by wire system.
ABS is an driver aid, and stops the wheels from locking up.
They work totally separate, and don’t interfere with each other.

EBS is a fancy command line and load sensing valve,and distributor in one.

You could operate a trailer with only the emergency line attached and the service line disconnected, and the trailer will still brake.
However if the EBS packs up, there will be no brakes.
Also if both are connected and the EBS packs up, the truck sends full pressure through the service line to the trailer when the foot brake is operated.

ABS has SFO to do with this.
Hence the reason you can continue your journey if your ABS packs up.

[carryfast]

caledoniandream:
CF you need to google a bit more, EBS is an operating system, or brake by wire system.
ABS is an driver aid, and stops the wheels from locking up.
They work totally separate, and don’t interfere with each other.

EBS is a fancy command line and load sensing valve,and distributor in one.

You could operate a trailer with only the emergency line attached and the service line disconnected, and the trailer will still brake.
However if the EBS packs up, there will be no brakes.
Also if both are connected and the EBS packs up, the truck sends full pressure through the service line to the trailer when the foot brake is operated.

ABS has SFO to do with this.
Hence the reason you can continue your journey if your ABS packs up.

Let’s get this right.EBS is supposedly a brake by wire system ( doubtful ).As opposed to both ABS and EBS,if not at least ABS,relying on wheel speed v vehicle speed electronic sensing to determine speed difference between wheel and vehicle thereby determining a lock up to whatever degree.‘If’ it senses such a lock up it then sends an electrical signal which reduces/blocks the braking input from the foot brake valve to the actuators by way of sensor signal,ECU and ECU controlled electronic valve control.

What happens in either case assuming ECU or sensor signal failure/corruption which makes the ECU think that one or more wheels are in a lock up situation if/when they actually aren’t or any other number of potential electronic failures creating a similar situation of the ABS system deciding to block the driver’s brake input.

While if you’re right how do you explain the numerous previous references to ABS issues affecting the vehicle regarding other drivers.In addition to intermittent brake failure issues which if supposedly mechanical in nature aren’t going to be intermittent nor are they going to clear themselves.

In addition to which how do you explain a vehicle with supposedly unserviceable brakes managing to stop satisfactorily to the point where the driver is happy to drive the thing at 56 mph on an A road/s and make a successful single braking block change move from 43 mph to 4 without a problem then turn onto the hazardous road going to a speed of around 25 mph then to 20 at which point the thing ran away.IE runaways don’t usually start from a position of a decelerating vehicle especially one that’s managing to hold speeds of 25-20 mph.

In which case an intermittent braking fault.Or cooked brakes caused by the ridiculous idea of block change downshifts heating up the brakes on the approach to the start of a severe decent and running out of heat capacity during the deceleration from 25-20 mph would explain that better than the idea of it effectively having no brakes when it left the yard.Edit to add,according to the information so far,this supposed brakeless heap that supposedly couldn’t be driven safely from one side of the yard to other,let alone down a long steep hill,seems to have made three previous similar runs over the same route that day ?.

While if it’s supposedly ‘safe’ to continue a journey with an ABS warning on then why the zb have the prosecution decided to use such an issue as evidence of dangerous driving.

[cav551]

Carryfast:
then why the zb have the prosecution decided to use such an issue as evidence of dangerous driving.

The prosecution are never interested in getting at the truth, they are solely interested in attempting to convince a jury that its interpretation of events is the correct one. The prosecution never intend that the WHOLE truth will be revealed, which is why it asks questions in a certain way and deliberately avoids asking other pertinent questions. Counsel has already proved himself very adept at this. It will be up to the defence counsel to to bring forward expert witnesses to explain the relevance - or to avoid explaining it - of technical issues: ABS, exhaust brakes, automatic slack adjusters, coefficient of friction, warning lights etc, to the jury.

[carryfast]

cav551:

Carryfast:
then why the zb have the prosecution decided to use such an issue as evidence of dangerous driving.

The prosecution are never interested in getting at the truth, they are solely interested in attempting to convince a jury that its interpretation of events is the correct one. The prosecution never intend that the WHOLE truth will be revealed, which is why it asks questions in a certain way and deliberately avoids asking other pertinent questions. Counsel has already proved himself very adept at this. It will be up to the defence counsel to to bring forward expert witnesses to explain the relevance - or to avoid explaining it - of technical issues: ABS, exhaust brakes, automatic slack adjusters, coefficient of friction, warning lights etc, to the jury.

As we all know defence council is only as good as the budget ( probably legal aid for the driver in this case if he’s lucky ) available to pay for it.

As for expert witness for the defence strangely that already seems to have been compromised by what seems to be an instruction for an ‘agreed’ statement regarding the circumstances of the case by experts for both sides.Which might well be expected in a civil case but not one of this nature. Which then leaves the obvious conflict of interest of a training regime based on gears to go brakes to slow obviously reducing the reserve heat capacity of brakes at the start of severe decents and/or an agreement by the DVSA to downgrade the seriousness of ABS warnings after pressure from the FTA.

[own_account_driver]

I’m still not really finding the prosecution case, based on maintenance, entirely compelling.

bathchronicle.co.uk/live-wee … story.html

[newmercman]

It says that 6 out of 8 slack adjusters were outside of the range of permitted brake stroke, ergo the brakes weren’t working properly. Plus there was some dodgy welding that would’ve resulted in an immediate prohibition. Pretty open and shut to me.

[carryfast]

There’s a lot more detail of the investigations in that report concerning the amount of inbalance between the brakes ‘if’ the temperature comparison taken 4 hours after the event can be relied on for example.From the driver’s point of view it will probably be all about what was/would have been obvious to a competent driver during checks and on the road.As for the operator it seems difficult to see any realistic defence.

[cav551]

I hope that we shall see defence counsel asking what evidence is being produced to show what temperature a ‘brake’ would record after 4 hours at an ambient temperature of 2 to 3 deg C, following a sustained period of heavy braking approaching the capacity of its operating system for the amount of time which tachograph evidence shows is relevant, if all of its components had been in A1 condition. To proclaim on its own that 5 deg C indicates a particular brake to be almost non operational in such circumstances seems to be making an assumption rather than presenting a fact. It has been stated that the driver applied the handbrake in an attempt to slow the vehicle, in which case a brake not operated by the hand control valve will cool down more quickly than one which is, because the hot shoe and drum are not in contact with one another. While ‘keep plates’ fitted the wrong way round and without O rings are evidence of rushed maintenance, unless there is proof that this was affecting (rather than had the potential to affect) the operation of the brake, then this is irrelevant. The missing one is a different matter.

[carryfast]

cav551:
I hope that we shall see defence counsel asking what evidence is being produced to show what temperature a ‘brake’ would record after 4 hours at an ambient temperature of 2 to 3 deg C, following a sustained period of heavy braking approaching the capacity of its operating system for the amount of time which tachograph evidence shows is relevant, if all of its components had been in A1 condition. To proclaim on its own that 5 deg C indicates a particular brake to be almost non operational in such circumstances seems to be making an assumption rather than presenting a fact.

The problem with that from the defence point of view is that they are using the temperature ‘difference’ between the cooked brake/s ‘axle’ v the cold one/s to suggest their relative temperature starting points when that cooling process began,assuming a similar comparable rate of cooling over that same time period.I’d guess that if they can also tie that in with equivalent evidence of over heating and excessive cold at different brakes and that ties in with the slack adjuster issues that’s possibly proof beyond doubt of defective and under performing brakes on whatever point/axle over loading the few remaining working brakes.

IE if they can show defective brakes corresponding with cold brakes and cooked brakes corresponding with defect free operation then that’s obviously some strong evidence.

On that note although we’ve got rough details of temperatures taken at 4 hours later we don’t seem to have an exact record of the temperatures in question at every identified axle and nearside offside positions together with a corresponding record of lining condition and the slack adjuster issue.IE we’d expect to see 6 brakes all subject to defects and all corresponding with similar massively colder temperatures with two brakes corresponding with much higher temperatures both in terms of temperature recordings and lining surface condition.

Which leaves the question of the vehicle’s pre accident braking performance shown on the tacho and does that performance match the prosecution script and if so the question how could a driver possibly not notice only potentially allegedly 2 brakes working properly out of 8 with a loaded 8 wheeler.

[own_account_driver]

newmercman:
It says that 6 out of 8 slack adjusters were outside of the range of permitted brake stroke, ergo the brakes weren’t working properly. Plus there was some dodgy welding that would’ve resulted in an immediate prohibition. Pretty open and shut to me.

Of the brake defects, I’ve seen on trucks I’ve inspected, this one wouldn’t make top 100. There are contributory issues but I’ve seen nothing I would deem causative.

The brakes weren’t optimally adjusted, for wear, but when they reconstructed the brakes and obtained the 36% efficiency figure. It would have seemed logical to adjust the brakes, within tolerance, and obtain another efficiency figure the fact such a figure seems to be omitted from the prosecution case seems to suggest it was not helpful to their case.

I do have real concerns about the conscientiousness, and reliability, of the operator but still have a nagging concern that if you took a Scania tipper on drums, in factory gate condition, and put it in the hands of an inexperienced teenager who drove it in a mechanically unsympathetic manner, with heavy use of the service brakes, you would get the same result.

[carryfast]

Own Account Driver:

newmercman:
It says that 6 out of 8 slack adjusters were outside of the range of permitted brake stroke, ergo the brakes weren’t working properly. Plus there was some dodgy welding that would’ve resulted in an immediate prohibition. Pretty open and shut to me.

There are contributory issues but I’ve seen nothing I would deem causative.

I do have real concerns about the conscientiousness, and reliability, of the operator but still have a nagging concern that if you took a Scania tipper on drums, in factory gate condition, and put it in the hands of an inexperienced teenager who drove it in a mechanically unsympathetic manner, with heavy use of the service brakes, you would get the same result.

Realistically it could only be any of three options.The prosecution has got it right.In the form of any number of defective under performing brakes over loading those fewer number stated as being in working condition thereby those under performing brakes running too cold with the result of that situation having cooked the few remaining in a working condition.

Or the driver cooked the brakes through over use.

Or the possibility that ABS won’t fail safe in blocking brake inputs to any axle/brake at random.

The second of those is more likely to be the result of the training regime ( gears to go brakes to slow ) than experience.Bearing in mind that keeping your brakes as cold as possible for when you need them and keeping plenty of heat capacity in reserve in that regard is a mantra which any driver can learn/should learn before they even start driving a truck.But which DVSA guidelines,regards driver instruction,seems to contradict,at least in terms of approach procedures.

While the third example has obvious implications regards the issue of DVSA advice to drivers regarding ABS warnings.IE safe enough to continue a journey.

Both the second or third examples also obviously providing a potential motive for any establishment white wash ‘if’ the prosecution case is shown to lack credibility for whatever reason.

[own_account_driver]

I have a lot of concerns over the investigation and the VOSA examiner’s evidence similar to Cav551’s though.

For a start it seems ■■■■ poor they are using temperatures taken four hours after the event. How come it took so long for someone from VOSA to get there when there is a VOSA checkpoint just a few miles away. I’m certainly interested if they were driving that route all day as surely not many operators, with knowingly defective vehicles, would take a route past a VOSA checkpoint multiple times.

Secondly, I’m not convinced it’s unquestionable scientific fact brake components, of potentially different makes, would cool evenly when the vehicle is on its side. Air flow around the wheels at the top would be much greater.

The examiner’s claim the reason the cooler brakes were above, that night’s ambient temperature, was residual heat from the tyres and wheel bearings sounds like total nonsense.

[own_account_driver]

Anyone seen that accident damaged Rover 200 sat on the roundabout verge, on the Frome bypass, for weeks.

Guesses on the age and ■■■ of the driver?

[carryfast]

Own Account Driver:
I have a lot of concerns over the investigation and the VOSA examiner’s evidence similar to Cav551’s though.

For a start it seems ■■■■ poor they are using temperatures taken four hours after the event. How come it took so long for someone from VOSA to get there when there is a VOSA checkpoint just a few miles away. I’m certainly interested if they were driving that route all day as surely not many operators, with knowingly defective vehicles, would take a route past a VOSA checkpoint multiple times.

Secondly, I’m not convinced it’s unquestionable scientific fact brake components, of potentially different makes, would cool evenly when the vehicle is on its side. Air flow around the wheels at the top would be much greater.

The examiner’s claim the reason the cooler brakes were above, that night’s ambient temperature, was residual heat from the tyres and wheel bearings sounds like total nonsense.

As I said I’d also want to see photographic and/or physical evidence related to the condition of the relevant linings and drums.IE blue coloured distorted out of dimension heat damaged drums and glazed linings having melted the resin content.Together with itemised identification of which axle and nearside/offside and whether that identification then matched exactly the script of the supposed cold defective brakes v the few cooked working ones.On that note it seems strange why we’ve got a big deal being made about the residual temperatures 4 hours later when physical examination results of the components in question would have been the expected more relevant details ?.

Having said that ‘if’ it was an establishment whitewash,to cover the failings of the training regime,or the issue of instructing drivers to continue a journey with an ABS warning showing,they’d obviously do whatever it takes to make the evidence fit the script.With no real way for the defence to prove ABS failure caused the issue of brake inbalance.Or defective brakes as the prosecution claim.Or for that matter whether all the brakes were just cooked by over use.

IE could the DVSA actually afford the defendants to walk away in this case on the basis that the accident was possibly caused either by the gears to go brakes to slow training regime.Or ABS failure being shown to be some how a matter of it possibly potentially not failing safe in contradiction with DVSA advice to drivers to continue a journey in the event of a warning.

[newmercman]

The ministry have always had a hard on about ABS warning lamps in my experience, from the time they started fitting those green lights at the front of the trailers it seemed to be the first thing they checked. I drummed it into my drivers to keep on top of them to avoid unnecessary aggro. Performance wise, if you failed a test then you could expect a lot of drama. I’ve mentioned before about the trouble I had getting my 143 through the test because of the parking brake only acting on the drive axle and the design weight of 52tons. Achieving the required12% was impossible, I tried everything, new brake chambers, load sensing valves, a reline a couple of weeks before test, new drums and a reline, nothing worked, I ended up having a sit down with the TC and showed him everything I had done to try and hit the required braking force and showed him that the results I did achieve were far beyond what was required if the lorry had a GTW of 44, or even better the 40 tons it was plated at and I got in touch with Scania GB and they recommended reducing the size of the bolts in the 5th wheel mounting flitches to get the GTW down to 40 tons. What a [zb]ing joke!

It would be interesting to know when this lorry was last tested and what results it achieved on the rollers, although with 6 knackered slack adjusters it would hardly have the same braking efficiency now. I would like to see what a lorry with similarly out of adjustment brakes would achieve on the rollers too, that would give a clear indication of the braking performance of the lorry involved in the crash.

Sent from my SM-T805W using Tapatalk