At what height does a trailer become a high sided vehicle? seen plenty of signs these last few days, with such and such road/ bridge closed to high sided vehicles. Are they just covering their arses by not stipulating a height, then when your 4.1m trailer blows over they can blame you?
The signs should read road closed to vehicles over 'X’m high.
The road over woodhead was closed to ‘high siders’ but it was just as windy over the '62 but no signs stopping highsiders
I think caravans are classed as high sided but to be honest if in doubt I’d just take the scenic route. Im paid by the hour and its not enough to die for the job I love.
Do you really need to ask? Could you not just apply common sense?
Is a loaded container a high sided vehicle? Is an empty double-deck?
If you need the Highways Agency to tell you what’s safe and what isn’t,…
cieranc:
Do you really need to ask? Could you not just apply common sense?Is a loaded container a high sided vehicle? Is an empty double-deck?
If you need the Highways Agency to tell you what’s safe and what isn’t,…
You taking the ■■■■?
I was mearley pointing out that it would be more helpful if there was a definition of what height a vehicle has to be to become ‘high sided’, then when there is a problem insurance companies do not have a get out clause.
I don’t need anyone to tell me when its safe or not I make my own decision
vwgpmk2:
You taking the ■■■■?
Yes.
But seriously, if there isn’t a legal defenition of a high sided vehicle, how could you be prosecuted, or the insurance not pay out?
How would it argue in court:
Insurance say you deliberately ignored a ‘road closed to High Siders’.
You say, I wasn’t driving a high sided vehicle.
They say yes you were, it was 15 foot high.
You say what is the legal definition of a high sider?
They can’t answer. There is no such definition.
So you say, how can it be proven I was driving a high sided vehicle, when you don’t know what one is?
Hence why there’s no high given on the warning signs, there is no legal definition.
If you were in court with the police for driving a high sider on a closed road, the simple question in your defence would be:
What is the difference between an ordinary sided vehicle and a high sided vehicle / At what point does an ordinary height vehicle (of which a 13’6 taut could be considered ordinary) become a high sided vehicle?
The same applies to the “Unsuitable for long vehicles” signs.
There is a legal definition for long vehicles though, but I see where you’re coming from.
One of our rigids is 39 feet long, I can’t get it into some places I can get an artic into.
With long vehicles its often on level crossings/humpity backed bridges you see them signs, You can get a 45 foot flat over but maybe not a 30 foot low loader. So yeah, know what you mean 
the m48 high siders was classed as anything over 6"9 yesterday 
Well (don’t quote me but…) I think a vehicle has to have an indicator over 9 footprint something… So won’t that be it?
dazaster:
the m48 high siders was classed as anything over 6"9 yesterday
So, a low roofed ■■■■■■ is the limit ?
vwgpmk2:
You taking the ■■■■?
I was mearley pointing out that it would be more helpful if there was a definition of what height a vehicle has to be to become ‘high sided’, then when there is a problem insurance companies do not have a get out clause.
I don’t need anyone to tell me when its safe or not I make my own decision
Yes, it seemed a reasonable question to me.
thelorryist:
Well (don’t quote me but…) I think a vehicle has to have an indicator over 9 footprint something… So won’t that be it?
You mean the height indicator in the cab?
What if there’s no trailer, and the unit is a low cabbed 9 foot 6 jobby. Still a high sided vehicle?
dazaster:
the m48 high siders was classed as anything over 6"9 yesterday
You’d be ok at 4’ 3" though Daz 
Harry Monk:
Yes, it seemed a reasonable question to me.
Mee to Harry, hence:
vwgpmk2:
You taking the ■■■■?
cieranc:
Yes
No such thing as a stoopid question 
It should really say something different, like “Not suitable for vehicles susceptible to roll-over in high winds” would make more sense.
For example I would be quiet happy to take out a decker with the bottom deck loaded with 30 pallets of bricks and top deck empty, but the same trailer loaded with polystyrene would be another story!
Let the driver decide what’s safe, or close the road completely if it’s that bad…
Martin:
It should really say something different, like “Not suitable for vehicles susceptible to roll-over in high winds not” would make more sense.For example I would be quiet happy to take out a decker with the bottom deck loaded with 30 pallets of bricks and top deck empty, but the same trailer loaded with polystyrene would be another story!
Let the driver decide what’s safe, or close the road completely if it’s that bad…
They closed the A1 overnight a few years back. Wind was far too strong for drivers to pass safely.
Ideal opportunity for us to extract 4 wagons that’d blown over. Not too windy for us hard c nuts
I’m 15 stone and had real difficulty standing upright at one point, the wind was that bad.
cieranc:
Harry Monk:
Yes, it seemed a reasonable question to me.Mee to Harry, hence:
vwgpmk2:
You taking the ■■■■?cieranc:
YesNo such thing as a stoopid question
Apologies, internet mis-understanding! 
It would be good if they did define what they mean by high sided, then those of us who are only employees would then have a better case against being sacked or whatever for refusing to drive in severe conditions, because there are some bosses who don’t want to believe their drivers
According to an ex copper on a non truck related form, his understanding of a high sided vehicle would be “any slab sided vehicle taller than it’s width”.
weeto:
According to an ex copper on a non truck related form, his understanding of a high sided vehicle would be “any slab sided vehicle taller than it’s width”.
That’s always been my understanding as a rule of thumb, minus the slab-sided bit, any vehicle that is taller than it is wide.