Four people dead in Bath after truck incident [Merged]

muckles:

Carryfast:

muckles:

Carryfast:
As for the ageist PC bs.

Surely being ageist isn’t Politically Correct? :confused:

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?

Ironically maybe no different in the case of the workplace then IE sometimes no problem others not,as in my own case which I think damaged my own career opportunities to an extent.

The difference now is that the establishment generally doesn’t like the idea of young drivers whether cars or trucks and regardless of the reduction in the LGV licencing age restriction.

Bluey Circles:

Carryfast:

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. :bulb:

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

The point was that a 19 year old having driven trucks since the age of 18 would have one more year’s ‘relevant’ experience than a 25 year old having only driven vans since the age of 17.While they’d obviously both have no relevant experience at all before those respective points regardless of their age so would start on equal footing.IE no ‘relevant’ experience regardless of age. :bulb:

As for a 5 axle rigid I meant making the change to that spec like in the case of 6 axle 44 tonners from 5 axle 38-40 tonners.

As for a 38 tonner 6 wheeler that was when working with special types emergency vehicles.

dave docwra:
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?

I’d say you want to leave the ABS question alone because you can’t provide the answer to the question.What is the fail safe,built into the ABS ECU that controls the release and application of brake pressure,that would stop it releasing a brake when it should be applying a brake,because of a corrupted ECU to Wheel Speed Sensor circuit signal and latching ?.

I’ve given you the ( potential ) answer in the form of that possibility.While we obviously won’t know if it’s a possibility without an answer to the question.

There is a failure safe in an ABS system, the speed sensor, which is what triggers the system. If it’s [zb]ed it will not recognise that the vehicle is moving, therefore the ABS function will be disabled, otherwise you wouldn’t be able to hold an ABS equipped vehicle on the brakes ever. That’s the default it goes to when there’s a problem. So please STFU about ABS fail safes being a possible cause of this incident.

Oh and the age thing, yeah you can pack that nonsense up too, lots of people crash vehicles of all kinds, some are teenagers, some in their 20s/30s/40s/50s/60s/70s/80s and even their 90s. It means SFA, if you drive a vehicle with defective brakes or go down a hill too fast, or a combination of the two, or even some other as yet unidentified phenomenon, you will stand a good chance of losing control.

There you go, I’m your life coach, you’re welcome…

The latest from the Bath Chronicle…m.bathchronicle.co.uk/bath-tippe … story.html

Carryfast:

stevieboy308:

Carryfast:

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. :unamused:

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.

Whilst it’s not something I tend to do, I was agreeing you!

The 5 years exp was tongue in cheek and I was actually meaning 5 years hgv experience before we let anyone out on the road in a hgv.

Plus anyone calling for raising the age hasn’t mentioned mandatory x amount of years driving cars and then you’ve got people who have passed their test but do little or no driving.

I’d not been driving long and I can’t remember who was doing what, but me and an old guy had to swap trailers, we nearly ■■■■■■ up, dropping the trailer whilst on a camber, I said not been driving long, never thought of that, he said the same!

Too much being made about the ineffective exhaust brake in my opinion. Yes they are useful but thousands of trucks must have negotiated that hill safely over the years before exhaust brakes became widely available, and they most likely went down it steadily and in a low gear. Blimey, when we had Fodens with the ■■■■■■■ engine we had to disconnect the exhaust brake anyway because ■■■■■■■ wouldn’t warranty the engine with them fitted so what you haven’t had you don’t miss, and I’m guessing that the lad driving the Scania would have realised it wasn’t working in the day or days before the accident?

Pete.

Agree with the first part, but not strictly the second. The Scania exhaust brake when switched to operated from the brake pedal doesn’t really seem to do a lot - it doesn’t even make very much noise, so working or not he possibly would not have been able to tell.

Fresh from training he will have been indoctrinated with all this ‘keep it in the green’, eco roll and cruise control nonsense, none of which contribute to road safety, all however very much focused on fuel economy to the significant detriment of the former.

First mention of the gears.

The driver said…

“I could see the traffic lights were on red. I tried the handbrake but nothing happened and I managed to put it into a lower gear but the truck was not slowing”

Still no mention what gear that was though.

newmercman:
There is a failure safe in an ABS system, the speed sensor, which is what triggers the system. If it’s [zb]ed it will not recognise that the vehicle is moving, therefore the ABS function will be disabled, otherwise you wouldn’t be able to hold an ABS equipped vehicle on the brakes ever. That’s the default it goes to when there’s a problem. So please STFU about ABS fail safes being a possible cause of this incident.

Oh and the age thing, yeah you can pack that nonsense up too, lots of people crash vehicles of all kinds, some are teenagers, some in their 20s/30s/40s/50s/60s/70s/80s and even their 90s. It means SFA, if you drive a vehicle with defective brakes or go down a hill too fast, or a combination of the two, or even some other as yet unidentified phenomenon, you will stand a good chance of losing control.

There you go, I’m your life coach, you’re welcome…

If you were right about the speed sensor being the fail safe in an ABS system then the similar situation of a crankshaft position sensor fault let alone an associated ECU fault or short causing induced,or loss,of voltage anywhere in that line would always stop an engine rather than create a misfire.Which is bollox.So I’ll ask again what’s the exact fail safe within an ABS system in the case of a fault anywhere in the wheel speed sensoring circuit including the ECU.Bearing in mind the definition of circuit and ECU doesn’t necessarily mean that the sensor is zb’d at all.But even if it was it doesn’t necessarily have to mean that it is totally dead as opposed to it just misreading and/or providing a corrupted signal.Just as an ECU fault could corrupt a good signal from the sensor when it arrives.

As for the age thing that’s more or less what I’ve said.It’s up to you and those with your ideas to prove beyond reasonable doubt that slowing the thing from 43 mph to 4 mph at a junction for one example and then 25 mph to 20 mph at the start of the hill without any seeming problems fits the description of a driver going too fast down a hill with brakes that were obviously ( to him ) zb’d.While finding out what gear the thing was in at that point would obviously help.

So ABS has been mandatory for quite a few years now, do you not think there would’ve been failures of every component and process in an ABS system by now?

This whole thing is a witch hunt, contrary to initial reports, the lorry seems in reasonable shape, the lorry in front made it down the hill without a problem, so it points towards driver error, maybe the driver was checking out a yummy mummy taking her kids home from school, looked back at the road and panicked?

newmercman:
So ABS has been mandatory for quite a few years now, do you not think there would’ve been failures of every component and process in an ABS system by now?

This whole thing is a witch hunt, contrary to initial reports, the lorry seems in reasonable shape, the lorry in front made it down the hill without a problem, so it points towards driver error, maybe the driver was checking out a yummy mummy taking her kids home from school, looked back at the road and panicked?

We do at least know that there have been questions raised regarding EBS systems.But yes I’d agree the absence of other previous examples in the case of ABS would be a problem regarding that question.

As for a runaway truck caused by driver error.I’d go with cooked brakes starting with the block change downshift when turning into the junction and the wrong gear going down the hill.In which case we’ll have 8 cooked brakes including 8 blue drums and glazed sets of linings.Together with the thing being found in a higher gear than that which would put it well into the yellow,getting on for red,band at 20 mph and/or at least an answer to the questions,put by the law and the prosecutor in court.Did you use the brakes alone to slow from 43 mph to 4 mph at the junction and what gear was it in son when it ran away,saying same.Which would of course raise the issue of a defence being based on the driver instinctively reverting to his gears to go brakes to slow training.

109LWB:
First mention of the gears.

The driver said…

“I could see the traffic lights were on red. I tried the handbrake but nothing happened and I managed to put it into a lower gear but the truck was not slowing”

Still no mention what gear that was though.

Too late to put it in a low gear when it’s already run away would be my reply to that.The question is what gear was it in during the 25 - 20 mph deceleration reading ‘before’ it ran away.Together with how did he slow it down when turning into the junction at the start. :unamused:

cav551:
Agree with the first part, but not strictly the second. The Scania exhaust brake when switched to operated from the brake pedal doesn’t really seem to do a lot - it doesn’t even make very much noise, so working or not he possibly would not have been able to tell.

Fresh from training he will have been indoctrinated with all this ‘keep it in the green’, eco roll and cruise control nonsense, none of which contribute to road safety, all however very much focused on fuel economy to the significant detriment of the former.

Any exhaust brake needs maximum engine speed IE as near to the red as possible in the lowest gear possible for the road speed to be effective anyway.Whatever the outcome of the this case we really need a massive shake up of the training regime.

Carryfast:

newmercman:
So ABS has been mandatory for quite a few years now, do you not think there would’ve been failures of every component and process in an ABS system by now?

This whole thing is a witch hunt, contrary to initial reports, the lorry seems in reasonable shape, the lorry in front made it down the hill without a problem, so it points towards driver error, maybe the driver was checking out a yummy mummy taking her kids home from school, looked back at the road and panicked?

We do at least know that there have been questions raised regarding EBS systems.But yes I’d agree the absence of other previous examples in the case of ABS would be a problem regarding that question.

As for a runaway truck caused by driver error.I’d go with cooked brakes starting with the block change downshift when turning into the junction and the wrong gear going down the hill.In which case we’ll have 8 cooked brakes including 8 blue drums and glazed sets of linings.Together with the thing being found in whatever gear puts it well into the yellow,getting on for red,band at 20 mph and/or at least an answer to the question what gear was it in son when it ran away, saying same.

What you have been suggesting does not chime with my experience of ABS or EBS faults. With the information available I do not think it’s a rabbit hole that’s worth continued burrowing down. Although it has to be considered that the VOSA investigation has been badly wanting .

Unless further evidence appears it is currently all pointing to driver error. The main bits for me are:

The evidence he did not pull up to turn into the junction, at the top of the hill, in a gradual fashion making full use of engine braking.

Witness evidence, in the vehicle behind, he could smell the brakes.

Witness evidence, from layby on the hill, he seemed to be actually accelerating to catch his boss.

It then added up to a sort of perfect storm, in a heavily laden vehicle with drum brakes more prone to fade than other makes or designs. Massive error number one was starting the turn into the hill descent with hot brakes. Massive error number two was actually accelerating once on the hill - which I suspect at that point, if it was the first time he had been that route he may not have anticipated how steep it was or the significance of the signs warning of the gradient. Getting that bit of acceleration back under control most likely put another big, and unnecessary, demand on the service brakes.

I then think he was either following his boss too closely, or there was a lack of forward planning, and he did not adequately foresee the likelihood of his boss stopping at the crossing outside the school which necessitated the service brakes conjuring up an emergency stop that they were too overheated to provide and tipped them over the edge to the point they were so hot they failed catastrophically.

Hard to theorise how anyone would react but I do suspect many wiser, more experienced heads, would have immediately realised that the likelihood of riding your way out of it was slim and a collision with his bosses truck was the better option but I don’t really criticise him for that.

Own Account Driver:

Carryfast:

newmercman:
So ABS has been mandatory for quite a few years now, do you not think there would’ve been failures of every component and process in an ABS system by now?

This whole thing is a witch hunt, contrary to initial reports, the lorry seems in reasonable shape, the lorry in front made it down the hill without a problem, so it points towards driver error, maybe the driver was checking out a yummy mummy taking her kids home from school, looked back at the road and panicked?

We do at least know that there have been questions raised regarding EBS systems.But yes I’d agree the absence of other previous examples in the case of ABS would be a problem regarding that question.

As for a runaway truck caused by driver error.I’d go with cooked brakes starting with the block change downshift when turning into the junction and the wrong gear going down the hill.In which case we’ll have 8 cooked brakes including 8 blue drums and glazed sets of linings.Together with the thing being found in whatever gear puts it well into the yellow,getting on for red,band at 20 mph and/or at least an answer to the question what gear was it in son when it ran away, saying same.

What you have been suggesting does not chime with my experience of ABS or EBS faults. With the information available I do not think it’s a rabbit hole that’s worth continued burrowing down. Although it has to be considered that the VOSA investigation has been badly wanting .

Unless further evidence appears it is currently all pointing to driver error. The main bits for me are:

The evidence he did not pull up to turn into the junction, at the top of the hill, in a gradual fashion making full use of engine braking.

Witness evidence, in the vehicle behind, he could smell the brakes.

Witness evidence, from layby on the hill, he seemed to be actually accelerating to catch his boss.

It then added up to a sort of perfect storm, in a heavily laden vehicle with drum brakes more prone to fade than other makes or designs. Massive error number one was starting the turn into the hill descent with hot brakes. Massive error number two was actually accelerating once on the hill - which I suspect at that point, if it was the first time he had been that route he may not have anticipated how steep it was or the significance of the signs warning of the gradient. Getting that bit of acceleration back under control most likely put another big, and unnecessary, demand on the service brakes.

I then think he was either following his boss too closely, or there was a lack of forward planning, and he did not adequately foresee the likelihood of his boss stopping at the crossing outside the school which necessitated the service brakes conjuring up an emergency stop that they were too overheated to provide and tipped them over the edge to the point they were so hot they failed catastrophically.

Hard to theorise how anyone would react but I do suspect many wiser, more experienced heads, would have immediately realised that the likelihood of riding your way out of it was slim and a collision with his bosses truck was the better option but I don’t really criticise him for that.

Firstly the ABS questions I raised were in the light of exploring all the possible angles of the cause being brake inbalance on the basis of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.

While I’ve not been following the latest proceedings which seem to now be saying that we’re not now discussing a runaway caused by brake inbalance but on caused by driver error ?.Such as cooking the brakes by block changing it down from 43 mph to 4 mph when turning into the junction.Which obviously contradicts any suggestion that he didn’t slow down when turning in.

In which case that goes back to my view pages back.

While the tacho evidence suggests deceleration from 25 mph to 20 mph before it ran away not acceleration.IE the main cause of this ‘could’ be put down to loss of reserve heat capacity in the brakes caused by a block change downshift from 43 mph to 4 mph when turning into the junction leading to the decent.In which case no wonder that the establishment would do whatever it took to divert attention from that and in which case the driver’s defence would be first and foremost his training based on DVSA’s own guidelines.Having created an instinctive gears to go brakes to slow reaction in the driver’s approach.

[/quote]
I’d say you want to leave the ABS question alone because you can’t provide the answer to the question.What is the fail safe,built into the ABS ECU that controls the release and application of brake pressure,that would stop it releasing a brake when it should be applying a brake,because of a corrupted ECU to Wheel Speed Sensor circuit signal and latching ?.

I’ve given you the ( potential ) answer in the form of that possibility.While we obviously won’t know if it’s a possibility without an answer to the question.
[/quote]
So we are clear I never asked a question on ABS, I tried to give you a very clear & simple outline answer on how the system worked, But what I did ask you was for examples of intermittent brake failures…

P.S back in the seventies the MOT was asking for block changing on tests, and as far as I am aware this had nothing to do with gears to go ■■■■ they teach now. Which strangley enough is what I was
marked down for on the last test drive I did a couple of years ago, I pointed out to the accessor that is the way I drive and I won’t be changing, to which he got a bit shirty about it & told me I would have
a problem with an auto, I pointed out to him that the box was still basically a manual box with an option to use manual override, that left him puzzled looking.

Carryfast- Why did the motorcycle regulations change a number of years ago?

Oh that’s right I remember now. 28hp limit was introduced because young lads could get on a Hayabusa for a couple of grand and kill themselves, and many did.

That’s because they were handling a powerful machine whilst being young and immature and having just passed their test.(But no doubt you will dispute this because you are always right. About everything.)

Carryfast your going down a cul de sac on abs if it has a problem it will be disable abs nothing else.
Just as an aside as I’ve not seen it mentioned remember if it run away you can go down gears but the range change won’t drop down to low unless it’s under a certain speed.
After reading it what I find odd is the examanier has said this lorry was a heap of ■■■■ but when they inspected the fleet next day they was all up to scratch.
In my experience a cowboys fleet will all be dogs not just one lorry.
Maybe the odd thing let go of lorry is due to be sold on but not the kind of stuff they are talking about.
I think this case has so far shown vosas not up to the job in accident investigation and going to crown court.

eagerbeaver:
Carryfast- Why did the motorcycle regulations change a number of years ago?

Oh that’s right I remember now. 28hp limit was introduced because young lads could get on a Hayabusa for a couple of grand and kill themselves, and many did.

That’s because they were handling a powerful machine whilst being young and immature and having just passed their test.(But no doubt you will dispute this because you are always right. About everything.)

I don’t dispute it at all zb happens regardless of age and experience and power.

I knew someone who almost killed himself on a Yam RD from memory a 250 or might have been a 400 not sure now,having had an FS1E with no problems before that and before I’d even passed my car test.My Dad’s mate almost did the same well into his 20’s on a Vincent HRD having had plenty of experience with all sorts of bikes.While my dad also crashed his Ariel square 4 in the 1950’s having had no trouble driving Diamond T’s long before that at the end of WW2.Barry Sheene also had a nasty crash on a bike and he knew a thing or two about handling bikes etc etc etc etc etc.IE as nmm said it’s irrelevant. :bulb:

While if you’re really that worried about inexperience combined with stopping heavy trucks then the last thing you want will be that inexperienced driver behind the wheel of an 18 tonner.Regardless of whether it’s an ‘inexperienced’ 30 year old or 19 year old.