Four people dead in Bath after truck incident [Merged]

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
661

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

Parking brakes on units can still be a problem. In my opinion the efficiency could certainly be dropped on makes that pressurise the yellow line to the trailer. It’s not load sensing/air pressure issues it’s all down to the strength of the springs in the drive axle chambers and generally a new chamber will get most trucks through. However, as drive axle chambers are pretty pricey , like your reline, putting new pads in is a common trick to get a truck through. Another trick is putting the brake pedal to the floor before applying the park brake on the rollers. I’m not aware they get their knickers in a twist about parking brake fails these days.

The truck involved passed it’s MOT nine months earlier at 54% efficiency which may not sound great but I would doubt, with drums all round, it would have been jaw droppingly better than that new. The slack adjusters weren’t knackered, in a way that would impair braking in a catastrophic failure sense, provided they were adjusted ok. The lorry foundation brakes were reconstructed and tested by VOSA and they are saying a 34% but there’s a lot of ifs in that reconstruction. Despite the prosecution rhetoric it really doesn’t sound like the brakes were instant death trap out of adjustment. If the cams had flipped or a brake chamber push rod was reaching it’s end of travel it would be a different kettle of fish.

Considering, I would guess, an aftermarket slack adjuster would be £50 ish the ones with broken anchor brackets ought to have been replaced but I’m, as yet, unconvinced that would have stopped this. The 18 tonner I used to drive down that hill in didn’t have fantastic brakes and an extra ton of load per axle over a 32 tonner.

662

Going over the cam is more an indication of excessive lining and/or drum wear. A faulty automatic slack adjuster can unwind to the point where pushrod travel at a full brake application will not put enough force on the shoes to push them into the drums enough. That’s what I understand to be the case in this instance, which is why I say there is no defence.

Sent from my SM-T805W using Tapatalk

663

newmercman:
Going over the cam is more an indication of excessive lining and/or drum wear. A faulty automatic slack adjuster can unwind to the point where pushrod travel at a full brake application will not put enough force on the shoes to push them into the drums enough. That’s what I understand to be the case in this instance, which is why I say there is no defence.

Sent from my SM-T805W using Tapatalk

Yes, you would need enough clearance between shoe and drum for the cam to flip. Just because the anchor plates are broken it doesn’t necessarily follow the adjusters are therefore unwinding. If the pushrod to slack adjuster angle becomes to acute you theoretically lose brake force but the figures being bandied about, for out of adjustment, aren’t that totally heinous. It wasn’t a total death trap and should have been able to descend the hill safely.

664

Own Account Driver:

newmercman:
Going over the cam is more an indication of excessive lining and/or drum wear. A faulty automatic slack adjuster can unwind to the point where pushrod travel at a full brake application will not put enough force on the shoes to push them into the drums enough. That’s what I understand to be the case in this instance, which is why I say there is no defence.

Sent from my SM-T805W using Tapatalk

Yes, you would need enough clearance between shoe and drum for the cam to flip. Just because the anchor plates are broken it doesn’t necessarily follow the adjusters are therefore unwinding. If the pushrod to slack adjuster angle becomes to acute you theoretically lose brake force but the figures being bandied about, for out of adjustment, aren’t that totally heinous. It wasn’t a total death trap and should have been able to descend the hill safely.

Which brings us neatly full circle to where CF and i and others have for so long been saying, if you don’t use engine via gears and maximum auxilliary, ie exhaust, braking (the lorry, any lorry so fitted, had no place being on the road if the exhauster or other auxilliary retarder was defective) and instead drive like a ■■■, too fast, and on the brakes continually, as they teach them these days :unamused: and is blatantly so wrong in a lorry as to be beyond discussion now, then when the stuff hits the fan and it all goes pear shaped the likelihood of a tragedy is increased to the nth degree.

The driver training methods re braking need revising, now.

This in no way absolves nor mitigates the tragic combination of errors ignorance and lack of knowledge which might apply in any particular case such as this one.

665

newmercman:
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

If you read the details closely we’ve got an example of the thing almost taking out a road user previously because of brake failure with a different driver.Which,according to the driver,was cleared simply by an application of the park brake.

We also seem to have details that this run was its the fourth similar one of the day with no episodes then ?.While I’d guess that the tacho speed trace probably contains sufficient evidence of the thing’s pre accident deceleration capabilities.One of which as I’ve said stating 43 mph to 4 mph in one block change downshift move on the approach to the junction leading in to the hazard area without over shooting it and which I’m guessing might possibly be a clue as to why it ended up running away having then shown a deceleration after that from 25 mph to 20 at that point.

None of which sounds consistent with the script of a loaded 8 wheeler struggling to stop with only a few serviceable brakes.But which does seem consistent with an establishment desperately trying to cover up its own failings in 1 regarding the possibility of ABS not failing safe as impossible.Or 2 the training mantra of gears to go brakes to slow.

666

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.

In which case how does that fit the script of the DVSA downgrading ABS warnings to continue the journey after pressure form the FTA.Which obviously reduces a driver’s ability to tell the guvnor to do one it’s going no where if the warning light is on.Or at best confuses a driver as to what powers he actually has in that regard.Or for that matter how can the manufacturers guarantee that this probably more trouble than it’s worth electronic gizmo is absolutely unarguably fail safe.

667

Juddian:
The driver training methods re braking need revising, now.

This in no way absolves nor mitigates the tragic combination of errors ignorance and lack of knowledge which might apply in any particular case such as this one.

+1

668

Now I like a conspiracy theory, but a cover up of the training regime? Come on… seriously!

669

newmercman:
Now I like a conspiracy theory, but a cover up of the training regime? Come on… seriously!

Personally I think if there is conspiracy here it’s more likely to be that ABS question.

Although yes possibly.Imagine the result of the media frenzy and backlash in the event of a prosecution case trial collapsing,based on the driver being shown to have cooked the brakes,by the combined effects of the block change on the approach to the junction,possibly taking out the brakes’ reserve heat capacity in doing so, and then trying to hold it back on the decent after the junction.Having driven the thing on the DVSA’s own driver instruction guidelines of gears to go brakes to slow.Also bearing in mind the tacho evidence concerning the difference in the case of the other vehicle’s deceleration trace on the same approach. :bulb:

670

The only problem with that argument is that this is an isolated case, of the thousands of lorries on the road using the brakes to slow method day in, day out, only one has gone into free fall down a hill, one with questionable braking performance to boot.

Just let that sink in…

671

newmercman:
The only problem with that argument is that this is an isolated case, of the thousands of lorries on the road using the brakes to slow method day in, day out, only one has gone into free fall down a hill, one with questionable braking performance to boot.

Just let that sink in…

The thing being, most of us who use the old method, having learned years ago that things can and will go wrong, would have been approaching such a hill in the appropriate gear and barely if at all touching the brakes, instead using the auxilliary braking system fully, this would leave us with cool brakes for that once in a lifetime (and then please no) situation should it occur.
Yes its a rare event, thankfully, but it needn’t have happened this time either.

Also we don’t know how many times overheated and unecessarily abused therefore prematurely worn or ruined brakes have contributed to accidents over the years but are never fully investigated like this unless there’s fatalities, lorry hits another up the back wrecking the cab but driver escapes unhurt, oh he was travelling too close etc etc, no one is going to fully investigate to see if there had been mulitple brake only hard stops over the previous few miles with the brakes further losing their edg each time, ending up with nothing left in reserve, when really needed.

672

newmercman:
The only problem with that argument is that this is an isolated case, of the thousands of lorries on the road using the brakes to slow method day in, day out, only one has gone into free fall down a hill, one with questionable braking performance to boot.

Just let that sink in…

Possibly.

However bearing in mind that in many cases the engine braking regime has been taken out of the driver’s hands in the form of automated boxes which ironically contradict the idea of gears to go brakes to slow by imposing a strict engine braking regime of their own themselves.Or disc brakes which present a relatively lower fade hazard than drums. :bulb:

Also bearing in mind other variables like gross weight v braked axles with 18 tonner 4 wheelers and 32 tonner 8 wheelers obviously being about about the worse.Or the fact that the line regards brake heat capacity being reached and exceeded is a very fine one in which a driver could make numerous different approaches at the same junction in which the speed v distance equation may have only met the critical point in that regard on one.IE a block change downshift approach from the same speed is going to heat up the brakes,thereby removing more reserve capacity far more,depending on how close to the junction it was when it was started.

While as I said the prosecution needs to show a lot more information than it has so far if it wants to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

While we’d at least expect the defence to be asking all these questions.

673

Juddian:

newmercman:
The only problem with that argument is that this is an isolated case, of the thousands of lorries on the road using the brakes to slow method day in, day out, only one has gone into free fall down a hill, one with questionable braking performance to boot.

Just let that sink in…

The thing being, most of us who use the old method, having learned years ago that things can and will go wrong, would have been approaching such a hill in the appropriate gear and barely if at all touching the brakes,

I think the point in this case is the question of block change downshifts removing the reserve heat capacity in the brakes ‘before’ starting the decent.IE the specific case of relatively large scale deceleration being applied using brakes alone ‘before’ starting a decent. The training regime still seeming to apply the idea of gears to slow on hazardous decents themselves.

Ironically I’d made that point previously in a discussion with ROG such as the example of gears to go brakes to slow being applied on the approach to the hill leading into Dewsbury from the M1.IE numerous hazards requiring deceleration from even dual carriageway type speeds to roundabout entry type speed etc etc followed by a steep hazardous decent.Which sounds similar to the issues in this case of a 40 mph + deceleration block change move followed by a steep decent scenario.

Also bearing in mind that the driver had already brought thing down from around 25 to 20 mph at the start of the decent at which point it started to run away.

674

newmercman:
Now I like a conspiracy theory, but a cover up of the training regime? Come on… seriously!

It’s a cover up of the decision to allow inexperienced teenagers to get behind the wheel of some of the biggest and heaviest vehicles on the road in a misguided attempt to combat the driver shortage problems.

Anyone with half a brain could foresee it ending in carnage and it has.

The gear the truck came to rest in is still conspicuously absent from the proceedings.

Witness statements confirmed he actually accelerated, in an attempt to catch his boss, on the steepest part of the hill. From experience, on that hill, with good performing disc brakes, you would potentially be in trouble if a child ran out at the school crossing. Once you have started the descent you would not want to touch the accelerator at all.

675

Own Account Driver:
It’s a cover up of the decision to allow inexperienced teenagers to get behind the wheel of some of the biggest and heaviest vehicles on the road in a misguided attempt to combat the driver shortage problems.

Anyone with half a brain could foresee it ending in carnage and it has.

The gear the truck came to rest in is still conspicuously absent from the proceedings.

Witness statements confirmed he actually accelerated, in an attempt to catch his boss, on the steepest part of the hill. From experience, on that hill, with good performing disc brakes, you would potentially be in trouble if a child ran out at the school crossing. Once you have started the descent you would not want to touch the accelerator at all.

Firstly it’s only on that question where I disagree with you.It makes no difference how inexperienced he was because he,like every driver,has to start somewhere and as I’ve said the mantra of conserve your braking heat capacity isn’t one of experience it’s one of training.

While how does the idea of him supposedly accelerating on the steepest part of the hill match the tacho trace showing ‘deceleration’ from 25-20 mph followed by an unrecovered runaway to the point when it crashed. :confused:

But yes an answer to the question what gear was it in at that 20 mph point when it ran away and crashed is key in the driver’s defence or culpability.However the same question could be asked in the case of Sowerby Bridge.Realistically we should hope to be looking at a severely damaged engine caused by over speed at least.

676

I must say I still have an open mind, and it is not from a bash VOSA attitude I say this but, unsurprisingly the VOSA examiner’s evidence is not holding up well to cross examination, it appears. The investigation did not appear particularly impressive or scientifically rigorous.

bathchronicle.co.uk/crash-in … story.html

677

The following written before reading today’s evidence.

I am becoming increasingly concerned that the prosecution is relying on journalistic shock-horror, look-at-this, evening news headline grabbing type evidence. Some reported defects have little direct bearing on what happened, but sound very convincing to Joe Public. Yesterday the VoSA man stated that one of the brake drums was cracked … sounds terrible. If it was in fact fractured, then that is true, although it could have been as a result of overheating and occurred after the vehicle had come to rest. However not mentioned seemingly, is that a brake drum or a disc which has been in service for some time will exhibit signs of heat crazing - numerous short, narrow, and shallow cracks. VoSA’s own tester’s manual and information from the manufacturers describe and illustrate the extent of what can be considered serviceable and what cannot be. The men and women of the jury will be made up of ordinary members of the public with their pre-formed opinions of lorries and their drivers ,which are unlikely to be positive. Much of what we are seeing reported is pandering to those opinions. The result of the MOT brake test has been presented in a way which leaves jurors maybe feeling some kind of fiddle was going on, rather than the experience of the tester over-ruled the computerised brake roller print out. There has been no sign of real guidance to the jurors about what was a direct contributory factor to events and what was instead really evidence that the vehicle should not have been in use.
I am aware that the whole is the sum of its parts, and that the list of defects on this vehicle is horrendous, but those parts do need to be able to make up the whole.

678

Carryfast:

Own Account Driver:
It’s a cover up of the decision to allow inexperienced teenagers to get behind the wheel of some of the biggest and heaviest vehicles on the road in a misguided attempt to combat the driver shortage problems.

Anyone with half a brain could foresee it ending in carnage and it has.

The gear the truck came to rest in is still conspicuously absent from the proceedings.

Witness statements confirmed he actually accelerated, in an attempt to catch his boss, on the steepest part of the hill. From experience, on that hill, with good performing disc brakes, you would potentially be in trouble if a child ran out at the school crossing. Once you have started the descent you would not want to touch the accelerator at all.

Firstly it’s only on that question where I disagree with you.It makes no difference how inexperienced he was because he,like every driver,has to start somewhere and as I’ve said the mantra of conserve your braking heat capacity isn’t one of experience it’s one of training.

While how does the idea of him supposedly accelerating on the steepest part of the hill match the tacho trace showing ‘deceleration’ from 25-20 mph followed by an unrecovered runaway to the point when it crashed. :confused:

Yes, but there are plenty of places to start that are not the biggest, heaviest vehicles operating in the most arduous conditions. If he’d driven ten thousand miles, in his life on the public highway prior to getting behind the wheel of that truck, I’d be surprised.

679

cav551:
The following written before reading today’s evidence.

I am becoming increasingly concerned that the prosecution is relying on journalistic shock-horror, look-at-this, evening news headline grabbing type evidence. Some reported defects have little direct bearing on what happened, but sound very convincing to Joe Public. Yesterday the VoSA man stated that one of the brake drums was cracked … sounds terrible. If it was in fact fractured, then that is true, although it could have been as a result of overheating and occurred after the vehicle had come to rest. However not mentioned seemingly, is that a brake drum or a disc which has been in service for some time will exhibit signs of heat crazing - numerous short, narrow, and shallow cracks. VoSA’s own tester’s manual and information from the manufacturers describe and illustrate the extent of what can be considered serviceable and what cannot be. The men and women of the jury will be made up of ordinary members of the public with their pre-formed opinions of lorries and their drivers ,which are unlikely to be positive. Much of what we are seeing reported is pandering to those opinions. The result of the MOT brake test has been presented in a way which leaves jurors maybe feeling some kind of fiddle was going on, rather than the experience of the tester over-ruled the computerised brake roller print out. There has been no sign of real guidance to the jurors about what was a direct contributory factor to events and what was instead really evidence that the vehicle should not have been in use.
I am aware that the whole is the sum of its parts, and that the list of defects on this vehicle is horrendous, but those parts do need to be able to make up the whole.

Yes, I just posted the link and made a similar comment. The operator should have blame apportioned where it genuinely lies but they seem to have badly over-reached with the cowboy operator narrative and discredited some of the parts where they may have had a point.

If it had been worn linings, bald tyres, and the same story on the rest of the trucks in the yard, they’d have had more of a point although, to my mind, they still need to demonstrate that without those defects the accident would not have happened.

Given the time it has taken to get to trial the prosecution side really ought to have had their ■■■■ together a bit better.

680

Own Account Driver:

Carryfast:
Firstly it’s only on that question where I disagree with you.It makes no difference how inexperienced he was because he,like every driver,has to start somewhere and as I’ve said the mantra of conserve your braking heat capacity isn’t one of experience it’s one of training.

While how does the idea of him supposedly accelerating on the steepest part of the hill match the tacho trace showing ‘deceleration’ from 25-20 mph followed by an unrecovered runaway to the point when it crashed. :confused:

Yes, but there are plenty of places to start that are not the biggest, heaviest vehicles operating in the most arduous conditions. If he’d driven ten thousand miles, in his life on the public highway prior to getting behind the wheel of that truck, I’d be surprised.

As I said the progression from 7.5t to 18 tonner is about as big and hazardous as it gets in terms of braking capacity margins.So are you suggesting the next progression after 7.5t should be limited to driving 38-40t gross on 6 axles ?.In which case you’re still going to end up with an ‘experienced’ driver who’ll wonder what’s hit him if taking an 18 tonner down the old Reigate Hill for the first time for example. :bulb: