If the minibus had a limiter (quite likely) it most probably would have been 100 kph. So unlikely to have been an elephant race.
So AIM Logistics apparently stationary for 12 mins in lane 1 - a very long time.
If I had found myself for some reason marooned there it would have been hazards on, out the cab and off back down along the carriageway waving a hi viz at the approaching traffic whilst on the blower rapido to the boys in blue.
I cannot for the life of me understand why the AIM guy didn’t even use his hazards (for whatever reason he stopped there) unless of course he truly believed that he was on the shelf in which case he must have been well bladdered. He had sidelights on so no major electrical failure.
I’m afraid it’s gonna be Hotel Greybars for him for quite some time.
I did wonder whether the minibus obscured the trailer lights of AIM for the approaching Fed-Ex guy although there should have been two on top of the body above the barn doors.
It’s also possible that the minibus had recently just over taken Fed-Ex, pulled back in and then realised the on coming stationery AIM, braked hard swung out only to be collected by Fed-Ex also making the same discovery.
My own feeling is that Fed-Ex will be probably be discharged but we’ll see.
Dr Damon:
Are you aware the same thing happens in the UK?
Evidence?
Sorry Harry I cannot really divulge details of that on this forum.
From my point of view that would be very dangerous.
I am sure however some on here have heard stories or maybe bought one themselves!
I’m afraid any credibility you may of had, has been completely diminished with that reply; you cannot say things such as that without backing it up, were you not earlier on in the thread asking people to back things up with evidence?
I don’t disagree that it might happen in this country, I’ve worked with enough of our EE cousins to know it’s a common thing over there, with lads working in warehouses here, going home for a week and returning with everything needed to drive a HGV here.
the maoster:
One possible scenario that I’ve been thinking is that (and this very obviously is purely speculation) the Fed Ex lorry and the mini bus had been engaged in a very long elephant race prior to encountering the stationary AIM motor.
On the “who overtakes you the most” thread we have plenty of talk of these parcel types never lifting off the limiter. Is it maybe possible that we had a mini bus limited to 56mph and a “never lift off” merchant sharing the same piece of tarmac perhaps for mile after mile with numerous overtakes and reovertakes?
Perhaps other road users had witnessed this and reported their observations to the police, hence the arrest of Mr Fed Ex?
How is that Fed Ex driver’s fault bearing in mind that mini bus driver has got an artic stopped in lane 1 ahead of him.
Roll up your tinfoil hat for a second and let’s pretend that you have the whit and capability to consider an opinion that (horror of all horrors) may actually differ from the one you have undoubtedly formed and will not be shifted from. I deliberately didn’t speculate that maybe the Fed Ex driver had seen the broken down vehicle and being mightily ■■■■■■ off with the mini bus driver decided to teach him “a lesson” by trapping him in lane one with disastrous consequences. I deliberately didn’t speculate that as I could well be way wide of the mark and thus it’s grossly unfair to even voice that.
I would have thought that any unblinkered individual reading my post would have the intelligence to read between the lines and reach that conclusion themselves. It seems that sadly you are not that person.
I like it Maoster. Second time today I have seen intelligence!
Wish there were more like you on here or am I being a bit hard and been unlucky so far?
Goodnight Gents up early tomorrow.
Carryfast:
How is that Fed Ex driver’s fault bearing in mind that mini bus driver has got an artic stopped in lane 1 ahead of him.
Roll up your tinfoil hat for a second and let’s pretend that you have the whit and capability to consider an opinion that (horror of all horrors) may actually differ from the one you have undoubtedly formed and will not be shifted from. I deliberately didn’t speculate that maybe the Fed Ex driver had seen the broken down vehicle and being mightily ■■■■■■ off with the mini bus driver decided to teach him “a lesson” by trapping him in lane one with disastrous consequences. I deliberately didn’t speculate that as I could well be way wide of the mark and thus it’s grossly unfair to even voice that.
I would have thought that any unblinkered individual reading my post would have the intelligence to read between the lines and reach that conclusion themselves. It seems that sadly you are not that person.
No I didn’t read between the lines on that basis because that would make you as bad a driver as the mini bus driver in that case.Which part of the onus would have been on the mini bus driver to either stop or make a safe lane change in the event of something stopped in lane 1 ahead,didn’t you understand. IE it doesn’t matter at that point what the motives of the Fed Ex driver might or might not have been and certainly no way for the CPS to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he deliberately ran the minibus driver into the stopped AIM truck in those circumstances regardless.Although yes in an ideal world he’d have noted any supposed potential conflict between the minibus and stopped truck in lane 1 and moved into lane 3 PDQ.But not doing so should not make the Fed Ex driver face a charge of causing death by dangerous/careless driving.That charge should/would be on the mini bus driver.
All that assuming that the Fed Ex truck was actually in lane 2,overtaking both the mini bus and the stopped AIM truck and both of those being in lane 1.
looking at the damage to the front of the fedex lorry it must have rear ended the stationary lorry, presumably with the minibus crushed between. It seems quite feasible to me that neither the minibus or the fedex lorry seen the stationary AIM truck and both ploughed straight into the back of it, in fact I am struggling to think of another scenario. It is one of those ‘there-but-for-the-grace-of-god-go-I’ moments. I doubt I would have always seen a stationary wagon on a live lane at 3 in the morning.
It could feasibly turn out that if the AIM lorry had suffered some catastrophic breakdown that had brought it to a grinding halt in lane one, that the driver although drunk had not actually made a driving error and If sober he may not have even been arrested, but failing the breath test will see him in prion for a very long time indeed.
Obviously the above is just speculation and I guess it will be a very very long time before we find out what actually happened, think of the bath tipper tragedy, it was 2+ years before the court case.
Midnight Rambler:
It would be interesting to know the next destination of the AIM driver, had he missed his exit and was attempting to reverse back?
He couldn’t know the roads around there very well then - that junction is as good for MK as the next one. If he was aiming for Newport Pagnell itself though? He could still have U-turned at J13 in less than 10 minutes…
When it comes to “Cab Cameras” - I’ve seen the fedex cabs with the large blocks cemented to the center bottom of the windscreen, which are forward facing only. I’ve never seen a “driver facing” camera at Fedex. Mind you, the last time I did the Marston Gate/Leicester trailer swap was 2015…
Has anyone given any consideration to the notion that for Dave Wagstaff - this may be his very first incident upon what could well be his otherwise umblemished prior record?
If that turns out to be the case - then this incident truly could have involved any of us I would have thought… “Wrong place at the wrong time” argument applies.
Whenever the FedEx boys come past they always seem to drive safely… never cutting in or sitting right behind you etc. As you said can happen to anyone
I’ve been thinking about this all night so far. What I really want to get to the bottom of is whether the AIM truck had any lights on I. E taillights and top marker lights not to mention side markers.
I fail to see how any reasonably alert driver would not see the stationary vehicle in enough time to take avoiding action. You can tell quite easily if a vehicle is moving and can see even tail lights for quite some distance at night so if the sidelights were on both drivers should have seen it in enough time to alter speed and or change lanes. I get the fact that it can be hard from a distance to work out where the vehicle is as to which lane it is in I. E the hard shoulder or lane 1 until you are almost on top of it. That’s the bit that is really bugging me about this scenario. Just my thoughts and probably the reason the second driver has been charged for dangerous driving. All supposition but the only way I can see is that the AIM truck had no lighting on at all. Even rear reflectors cab been seen at quite a reasonable distance as you approach.
simcor:
I’ve been thinking about this all night so far. What I really want to get to the bottom of is whether the AIM truck had any lights on I. E taillights and top marker lights not to mention side markers.
I fail to see how any reasonably alert driver would not see the stationary vehicle in enough time to take avoiding action. You can tell quite easily if a vehicle is moving and can see even tail lights for quite some distance at night so if the sidelights were on both drivers should have seen it in enough time to alter speed and or change lanes. I get the fact that it can be hard from a distance to work out where the vehicle is as to which lane it is in I. E the hard shoulder or lane 1 until you are almost on top of it. That’s the bit that is really bugging me about this scenario. Just my thoughts and probably the reason the second driver has been charged for dangerous driving. All supposition but the only way I can see is that the AIM truck had no lighting on at all. Even rear reflectors cab been seen at quite a reasonable distance as you approach.
Stretching the old grey matter again here.
Tail lights should be visible for 1000 feet behind the vehicle. That’s if they’re in good working order and in good visibility. 56mph is about 85 feet per second. From seeing the taillights, the driver has approximately 12 seconds to avoid a collision. I’ve no idea what reaction or stopping times are. But I wonder, how much of that 12 seconds were taken up by the driver realising what he was seeing and deciding on a course of action.
I’d say most taillights on vehicles are visible in good conditions for a fair longer distance than 1000ft. Obviously I don’t know what the conditions were on that morning and whether he even had them on. I suppose most of it is down to attention and planning and looking as far as ahead for potential problems. Having said that we have all done the smiths training, making us think more about looking even further ahead than we already would have been. There are plenty of people driving who look as far as the bonnet and no further and then are surprised when something unexpected happens.
Dr Damon:
I am no expert certainly not in Road Transport but I have a fairly comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the rules and regs and more as they are requirements for my main occupation.
I have also held a Vocational licence for over twenty years.I state a few basic facts and all I get is abuse.
Well that’s quite an about turn then Damon, is it not? Because just a couple of days ago you were telling us that you are an expert in autonomous lorries and know all that there is to know about the haulage industry. Funnily enough, you didn’t bother to answer the question I asked you about what your expertise in autonomy is and where it comes from. I wonder why that could be?
Here is what I think you are. I think you’re one of these gibbering, know-it-all types that are to be found at every firm and who believe that because they read Commercial Motor every now and then, and look up things on Wikipedia, they are above mere mortal drivers. I think that you’re the kind who walks around an RDC with his hi-vis vest on at all times, along with a Bluetooth earpiece. You’re the kind of driver who believes that a trunk from Magna Park to Northampton is the kind of job that pushes one’s wagon piloting capabilities to the max. You’re the kind of driver who will grass his colleagues because you regard yourself as above them, yet in actual fact your own workmates go to great lengths to avoid having to speak to you.
Of course, I could be wrong about all of that. But since you surfaced on here a few days ago all you have done it try to portray yourself as being above the average lorry driver, if indeed such a being exists. I have encountered dozens of know-it-all drivers like you, as I’m sure the other lads on here who have been around the block a few times have, and in sharp contrast to their sense of self-worth these twits are often the type who couldn’t get a trailer on a bay in one go if they had a football pitch to play with and are the source of some amusement to their colleagues.
That is, if you’re not one of the regular winder-uppers in disguise, and if you are, you’ve done a good job…
Dr Damon:
I am no expert certainly not in Road Transport but I have a fairly comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the rules and regs and more as they are requirements for my main occupation.
I have also held a Vocational licence for over twenty years.I state a few basic facts and all I get is abuse.
Well that’s quite an about turn then Damon, is it not? Because just a couple of days ago you were telling us that you are an expert in autonomous lorries and know all that there is to know about the haulage industry. Funnily enough, you didn’t bother to answer the question I asked you about what your expertise in autonomy is and where it comes from. I wonder why that could be?
Here is what I think you are. I think you’re one of these gibbering, know-it-all types that are to be found at every firm and who believe that because they read Commercial Motor every now and then, and look up things on Wikipedia, they are above mere mortal drivers. I think that you’re the kind who walks around an RDC with his hi-vis vest on at all times, along with a Bluetooth earpiece. You’re the kind of driver who believes that a trunk from Magna Park to Northampton is the kind of job that pushes one’s wagon piloting capabilities to the max. You’re the kind of driver who will grass his colleagues because you regard yourself as above them, yet in actual fact your own workmates go to great lengths to avoid having to speak to you.
Of course, I could be wrong about all of that. But since you surfaced on here a few days ago all you have done it try to portray yourself as being above the average lorry driver, if indeed such a being exists. I have encountered dozens of know-it-all drivers like you, as I’m sure the other lads on here who have been around the block a few times have, and in sharp contrast to their sense of self-worth these twits are often the type who couldn’t get a trailer on a bay in one go if they had a football pitch to play with and are the source of some amusement to their colleagues.
That is, if you’re not one of the regular winder-uppers in disguise, and if you are, you’ve done a good job…
Can’t recall his name but reminds me of that knobber who always used to start every other post with ‘when I was a captain of industry’.
Dr Damon:
I am no expert certainly not in Road Transport but I have a fairly comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the rules and regs and more as they are requirements for my main occupation.
I have also held a Vocational licence for over twenty years.I state a few basic facts and all I get is abuse.
Well that’s quite an about turn then Damon, is it not? Because just a couple of days ago you were telling us that you are an expert in autonomous lorries and know all that there is to know about the haulage industry. Funnily enough, you didn’t bother to answer the question I asked you about what your expertise in autonomy is and where it comes from. I wonder why that could be?
Here is what I think you are. I think you’re one of these gibbering, know-it-all types that are to be found at every firm and who believe that because they read Commercial Motor every now and then, and look up things on Wikipedia, they are above mere mortal drivers. I think that you’re the kind who walks around an RDC with his hi-vis vest on at all times, along with a Bluetooth earpiece. You’re the kind of driver who believes that a trunk from Magna Park to Northampton is the kind of job that pushes one’s wagon piloting capabilities to the max. You’re the kind of driver who will grass his colleagues because you regard yourself as above them, yet in actual fact your own workmates go to great lengths to avoid having to speak to you.
Of course, I could be wrong about all of that. But since you surfaced on here a few days ago all you have done it try to portray yourself as being above the average lorry driver, if indeed such a being exists. I have encountered dozens of know-it-all drivers like you, as I’m sure the other lads on here who have been around the block a few times have, and in sharp contrast to their sense of self-worth these twits are often the type who couldn’t get a trailer on a bay in one go if they had a football pitch to play with and are the source of some amusement to their colleagues.
That is, if you’re not one of the regular winder-uppers in disguise, and if you are, you’ve done a good job…
Can’t recall his name but reminds me of that knobber who always used to start every other post with ‘when I was a captain of industry’.
You’re not thinking of the ‘coach captain’ are you.
SouthEastCashew:
Someone stated yesterday about the minibus driver being on a tacho… What’s the answer there??
Page 11:-
Stanley Knife:
Harry Monk:
A very quick question which I was asked elsewhere and which is outside my scope, will the minibus have been fitted with a tachograph?
Straight answer is yes. All vehicles over 3500kg and all minibuses with more than eight seats must be fitted with a tacho. Whether it was being used is another matter as there are some exceptions where tachographs are not required for domestic work. These include the exclusive use of the minibus for the non-commercial carriage of passengers. As Mr Joseph was not just the driver of the minibus but also the owner of the taxi firm, and he was carrying relatives, it is possible that he was doing this journey as a family favour and not as Hire & Reward. He would therefore need the relevant D1 category to drive the minibus but would not need to have his driver card in.
Trolling is an art form of which he is wholly devoid of. Trolling on a thread in which eight people have died is pathetic and childish. He’s just an absolute disgrace!
the maoster:
I would have thought that any unblinkered individual reading my post would have the intelligence to read between the lines and reach that conclusion themselves. It seems that sadly you are not that person.
Some folks just like the sound of their own voice.
I’m wondering if Fed-Ex was perhaps tailgating the minibus in lane 1, and they’ve both come upon the AIM lorry at the same time, both swerved to avoid it, and got mangled up with each other in the process, especially if the minibus saw Fed-Ex swerve out at the same time and panic hit his brakes in a futile bid to not get shafted. The position the Fed-Ex lorry ended up in, the heavy damage to its nearside, the AIM trailer being pushed into the hard shoulder and the whole truck ending in a jack-knife position, and the minibus being caught between the 2 lorries - it seems quite plausible to me, and would also explain why Mr Fed-Ex has been arrested and charged.
Well I’ve read it all and quite simply the only thing missing seems to be facts. We’ll get to the truth eventually and then the blame can be properly apportioned. Seriously sad whatever the reasons.
SWEDISH BLUE:
Secondly the test in Europe is far more stringent and a lot are done on A frame drawbar and it takes a lot more than a few days.
I had the unfortunate experienge of having to go out with a driver from LT.
He had paid the equivelent of £125 and got a C+E(CLASS 1)
He admitted it was bought
Would that mean even more of a nail in the coffin of the EU stupidity in allowing “Uniform and harmonized mickey mouseness across Europe” in what used to be called “Official documents”?
It’s no dafter than having agencies in this country full of “9 points OK” LGV drivers if you think about it…
Just asking a question here and not accepting drink driving as I know it is completely unacceptable under any circumstances.
How would it be deemed if the drunk driver was, other than the actual alcohol in his system, “Innocent”. I am using this term loosely as obviously he is still wrong for being drunk. Say for example he was the lead wagon and had to break for an emergency in front, or even his “Auto breaking system” activated, with the minibus and other wagon just both running in to the back of him, how would this be dealt with?
