109LWB:
It seems the prosecution doesn’t actually really have much to go on and are just trying to bring up any tiny little issue and have “experts” try to make it something it isn’t.
Bearing in mind the simplicity of them answering simple questions like what were the exact individual brake temperatures involved,which gear was it in when it was descending the hill,what type of pre accident deceleration information can be shown from the tacho,is it possible that ABS could not fail safe.
eagerbeaver:
Carryfast- A 19 year old has a maximum of 2 years DRIVING EXPERIENCE. A 30 year old probably has 10 YEARS DRIVING EXPERIENCE.
10 years + experience on the roads and a 30 year old, is surely on average a safer bet than a 19 year old with 2 years driving experience.
How does the 30 year old get the ‘experience’ of driving 18 tonnes or 32 tonnes down a hill with just 4 or 8 brakes without doing it for the first time just like the 19 year old.IE at that point they are both as inexperienced as each other.While no nothing else comes close to doing that other than doing it with the real thing.IE for the umpteenth time age has nothing to do with experience in that case.Bearing in mind that the 19 year old could possibly even actually have more ‘experience’ at that point than the 30 year old has.Just as my under 20 year old dad did having driven tank transporters around Europe when he was demobbed from the army v others twice his age.
FFS. It’s like pulling teeth. All I mentioned was DRIVING EXPERIENCE. Of course age is irrelevant on driving a LGV assuming both are doing it for the first time.
Own Account Driver:
Looks like the prosecution realised the cross examination of the vosa examiner was a disaster and have wheeled out a couple of other experts to bolster the case. One is now claiming he thinks the brakes were only twenty something percent efficient and not the 35% that VOSA found and all three can’t agree on the brake temperatures which frankly wouldn’t have been up for discussion if someone with half a clue from VOSA could have relayed to the traffic police, at the scene, to take the brake temperatures even if, for some yet unexplained reason, no-one from VOSA could attend the scene for four hours despite there being a VOSA checkpoint only five miles up the road.
What a farce and muppet show. Unbelievable incompetence, on the part of the authorities, for an accident so serious it had four fatalities.
Unbelievable incompetence we see on the roads from the drivers that are never wrong!
Your theory is only what you want to believe and certainly far from accurate.
VOSA are far more competent than lorry drivers believe.
They are disliked by lorry drivers because VOSA catch drivers and their shoddy firms that do not like to look after their vehicles.
FACT.
Own Account Driver:
Looks like the prosecution realised the cross examination of the vosa examiner was a disaster and have wheeled out a couple of other experts to bolster the case. One is now claiming he thinks the brakes were only twenty something percent efficient and not the 35% that VOSA found and all three can’t agree on the brake temperatures which frankly wouldn’t have been up for discussion if someone with half a clue from VOSA could have relayed to the traffic police, at the scene, to take the brake temperatures even if, for some yet unexplained reason, no-one from VOSA could attend the scene for four hours despite there being a VOSA checkpoint only five miles up the road.
What a farce and muppet show. Unbelievable incompetence, on the part of the authorities, for an accident so serious it had four fatalities.
What a surprise Ford’s brake temp assessments have unsurprisingly been shown to be bollox.So now the brake performance has been arbitrarily cut to 20 something % .Which as I said the defence would be expected to ask to be referenced against tacho deceleration trace readings.
KR79 mentioned a case being thrown out due to incompetence by VOSA’s investigation and this seems to be flirting with similar. These bits are unbelievable!
Having not had the wit to measure the brake temperatures, in a timely manner at the scene, they’ve got an expert in to determine them from a colour chart:
Mr Price agreed that the metal oxide produced by heat is easily rubbed away and that therefore the discoloration of the lorry’s brakes happened on the day of the crash.
He said he came to his conclusions about how hot the brakes got that day from known temperatures associated with the discoloration of stainless steel.
He agreed that he did not have the figures for cast iron.
The brake drums on the L8 CMT lorry were made from cast iron.
Mr Row provided a steel tempering colour chart for West Yorkshire Steel.
Mr Price agreed that steel is more like cast iron than stainless steel.
The West Yorkshire Steel showed temperatures of 220C for a straw colour, 290C for dark blue and 320C for grey-blue.
Mr Price said, on that chart, the light blue he saw on the brakes of the lorry was associated with a colour of 310C.
Get them from a colour chart, good idea you might think. Well it would be if you weren’t caught out in court using a colour chart for a totally different metal to the one the brake drum was actually made of.
There’s clearly going to be a potential issue with the rate the brakes cool with the truck on its side but don’t worry about that they don’t need to bother themselves with actual science, look at this jaw dropping exchange under cross examination:
Mr Price said that it is accepted that brakes do not work as well when their brake linings become glazed.
He said he did not know how hot the linings had to get before they became glazed.
He said no calculations were done regarding the brake drums based on how long it takes for hot cast iron to cool down.
He accepted the lorry was on its side for four hours before the its brake temperatures were taken but his "gut feel" was that the brakes on both sides of the lorry would have cooled down at about the same rate.
Well that’s alright you useless twerp there’s only four people dead and three people’s liberty and livelihoods at stake why not just do a half-arsed investigation rock up to court and expect the jury to go with whatever your ‘gut feel’ happened to be.
Absolutely unbelievable.
I bet he’s been riding the expert witness gravy train, despite being wholly incompetent for years of the back of this:
David Price is a forensic accident investigator with more than 40 years’ experience.
He was called on by Metropol to examine the crash in which Lady Diana died
In my case the summons they sent out which was for tacho offences had a total different reg number from my vehicle and the alleged offences were totally different from what mine were and the tacho showed.
Mine were for three counts of taking insufficient weekly rest.
Had taken around 40 hours rather than 45.
The charges on the summons were for not taking proper breaks and insufficient daily rest and driving over daily drive limit.
Judge ripped in to them for such errors and threw it out.
Nope but I have faith in them and think they do a good job keeping dangerous vehicles off the road.
Never had a problem with them over the years probably because my vehicles are in tip top condition throughout and I know that the drivers that drive them are competent and trustworthy.
Eager Beaver leave Carryfast alone.He is one of the few that makes me laugh on here with all his illogical replies:lol:
[/quote]
There is such a thing as 'intermittent brake failure
[/quote]
I going to leave the ABS thing alone, as i think you are struggling to understand the finer details of abs & the air brake systems in general.
Please can you give me an example of what is, or what causes an intermittent brake failure with a full air brake system?
eagerbeaver:
Carryfast- A 19 year old has a maximum of 2 years DRIVING EXPERIENCE. A 30 year old probably has 10 YEARS DRIVING EXPERIENCE.
10 years + experience on the roads and a 30 year old, is surely on average a safer bet than a 19 year old with 2 years driving experience.
How does the 30 year old get the ‘experience’ of driving 18 tonnes or 32 tonnes down a hill with just 4 or 8 brakes without doing it for the first time just like the 19 year old.IE at that point they are both as inexperienced as each other.While no nothing else comes close to doing that other than doing it with the real thing.IE for the umpteenth time age has nothing to do with experience in that case.Bearing in mind that the 19 year old could possibly even actually have more ‘experience’ at that point than the 30 year old has.Just as my under 20 year old dad did having driven tank transporters around Europe when he was demobbed from the army v others twice his age.
+1
Let’s only let people on the road once they’ve got 5 years experience
In my works manual it states gears to go brakes to slow…i’m 53 and fair new to truck driving but i’ll drive has always and that’s gears to slow …so age has a lot to do with it.
eagerbeaver:
FFS. It’s like pulling teeth. All I mentioned was DRIVING EXPERIENCE. Of course age is irrelevant on driving a LGV assuming both are doing it for the first time.
So exactly what difference would raising the age at which an LGV licence can be held to 30 make.Bearing in mind that 10 years of driving cars and vans won’t make the slightest difference when they are given an 18 tonner to drive.IE that’s why we have the LGV licence because it’s a totally different type of vehicle in which previous experience of driving the former won’t make any difference regarding the latter.In that an LGV driver is starting from exactly the same point whether they start at 18 or 30.While as I’ve said the issue of potential over reliance on brakes is the same whether it’s a ‘boy racer’ driving his first car for the first time or LGV driver driving his first truck for the first time and has absolutely nothing to do with ‘experience’ as opposed to training.
While if you’re really so worried about the implications of giving inexperienced drivers brake critical vehicles to drive then the last thing you’d want them to be driving is any of the present rigid axle v gross weight specs.
eagerbeaver:
Carryfast- A 19 year old has a maximum of 2 years DRIVING EXPERIENCE. A 30 year old probably has 10 YEARS DRIVING EXPERIENCE.
10 years + experience on the roads and a 30 year old, is surely on average a safer bet than a 19 year old with 2 years driving experience.
How does the 30 year old get the ‘experience’ of driving 18 tonnes or 32 tonnes down a hill with just 4 or 8 brakes without doing it for the first time just like the 19 year old.IE at that point they are both as inexperienced as each other.While no nothing else comes close to doing that other than doing it with the real thing.IE for the umpteenth time age has nothing to do with experience in that case.Bearing in mind that the 19 year old could possibly even actually have more ‘experience’ at that point than the 30 year old has.Just as my under 20 year old dad did having driven tank transporters around Europe when he was demobbed from the army v others twice his age.
+1
Let’s only let people on the road once they’ve got 5 years experience
Great so you increase the age at which an LGV licence can be obtained to 22 what have you actually achieved when that same driver has to drive that same 18 tonner down that same hill for the first time.Other than put back the level of potential ( truck driving ) experience gained by 4 years.Or are you seriously suggesting that there is the slightest connection in getting a truck with an average of 4.5 tonnes of loading on each brake down a hill as a van with less than 1 tonne.
Bearing in mind as I said the ‘experience’ issue has no connection with age anyway.The result being 25 + year old Brits with no ‘experience’ either having to lie to get a job or the job goes to an East Euro with ‘experience’ gained where your views don’t apply.IE you do know you have to start with no experience to get experience.
eagerbeaver:
Carryfast- A 19 year old has a maximum of 2 years DRIVING EXPERIENCE. A 30 year old probably has 10 YEARS DRIVING EXPERIENCE.
10 years + experience on the roads and a 30 year old, is surely on average a safer bet than a 19 year old with 2 years driving experience.
How does the 30 year old get the ‘experience’ of driving 18 tonnes or 32 tonnes down a hill with just 4 or 8 brakes without doing it for the first time just like the 19 year old.IE at that point they are both as inexperienced as each other.While no nothing else comes close to doing that other than doing it with the real thing.IE for the umpteenth time age has nothing to do with experience in that case.Bearing in mind that the 19 year old could possibly even actually have more ‘experience’ at that point than the 30 year old has.Just as my under 20 year old dad did having driven tank transporters around Europe when he was demobbed from the army v others twice his age.
+1
Let’s only let people on the road once they’ve got 5 years experience
Great so you increase the age at which an LGV licence can be obtained to 22 what have you actually achieved when that same driver has to drive that same 18 tonner down that same hill for the first time.Other than put back the level of potential ( truck driving ) experience gained by 4 years.Or are you seriously suggesting that there is the slightest connection in getting a truck with an average of 4.5 tonnes of loading on each brake down a hill as a van with less than 1 tonne.
Bearing in mind as I said the ‘experience’ issue has no connection with age anyway.The result being 25 + year old Brits with no ‘experience’ either having to lie to get a job or the job goes to an East Euro with ‘experience’ gained where your views don’t apply.IE you do know you have to start with no experience to get experience.
17 - 19 year olds are 37% more likely than 20 - 24 year olds to be involved in traffic accidents. I don’t know if that is through lack of experience or the recklessness of youth. However it sounds like limiting young drivers to smaller vehicles could be a reasonable argument.
rearaxle:
In my works manual it states gears to go brakes to slow…i’m 53 and fair new to truck driving but i’ll drive has always and that’s gears to slow …so age has a lot to do with it.
No it’s all about the respective training regime not how old anyone was/is when they entered it.While ironically I’m almost 58 and I was also taught gears to go brakes to slow ( block change downshifts on the approach ) as part of the HGV training regime at the age of 21 but luckily I’d ‘also’ been taught to drive by others who knew better.
Bluey Circles:
17 - 19 year olds are 37% more likely than 20 - 24 year olds to be involved in traffic accidents. I don’t know if that is through lack of experience or the recklessness of youth. However it sounds like limiting young drivers to smaller vehicles could be a reasonable argument.
If you’re worried about the braking issue specifically the best possible vehicle to learn on would be a 5 axle 35 tonner rigid which is what I’d suggest all 8 wheelers should be phased out and replaced with.Which still won’t help much when they reach the age of 30 and are then given an 18 tonner 4 wheeler to drive.
As for the ageist PC bs.No having been driving the police car of its day like I stole it in the 1970’s at the age of 17 and a much quicker than that BMW at the age of 22 and given up to a 38 tonner 6 wheeler to get on with within weeks of passing my class 2 at the age of 21.Having been taught to drive by my dad who’d driven tank transporters at the age of 18.I don’t buy it.
Let’s just say that the idea of under 25’s being lumbered with a job driving a van and a Corsa to commute to and from work with is about as PC as it gets.
Let’s just say that the idea of under 25’s being lumbered with a job driving a van and a Corsa to commute to and from work with is about as PC as it gets.
Why is it PC, Surely it’s more old school thinking that young workers are discriminated against because of their age not their ability?
Bluey Circles:
17 - 19 year olds are 37% more likely than 20 - 24 year olds to be involved in traffic accidents. I don’t know if that is through lack of experience or the recklessness of youth. However it sounds like limiting young drivers to smaller vehicles could be a reasonable argument.
If you’re worried about the braking issue specifically the best possible vehicle to learn on would be a 5 axle 35 tonner rigid which is what I’d suggest all 8 wheelers should be phased out and replaced with.Which still won’t help much when they reach the age of 30 and are then given an 18 tonner 4 wheeler to drive.
As for the ageist PC bs.No having been driving the police car of its day like I stole it in the 1970’s at the age of 17 and a much quicker than that BMW at the age of 22 and given up to a 38 tonner 6 wheeler to get on with within weeks of passing my class 2 at the age of 21.Having been taught to drive by my dad who’d driven tank transporters at the age of 18.I don’t buy it.
a 22 year old is likely to have had 4 years more driving experience than an 18 year old, I don’t think it is any more straight forward than that.
didn’t know there was such a thing as a 5axle 35t rigid in the UK ?
and the 38t 6 wheeler you speak of ? sounds a bit overloaded. or do you mean a draw bar which would have been 5 axle? but even then, too heavy for 1974
