James96:
You can see the trucks from the crash of the m1 if your going northbound as soon as the slip road starts for newport Pagnell services look left and there they areSent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
yeah look left , 
On tonights news it stated that the Polish driver was seen wandering across several lanes by another trucker shortly before the incident; “some of the worst driving he had seen in 30+ years” apparently. Others said that he had earlier gone around a roundabout the wrong way as well.
Pete.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article … crash.html
A bit more info.
What a lot of people don’t seem to appreciate is how disorientating it can be seeing tail lights on unlit motorways.
Captain Caveman 76:
Lorry driver was 'twice the drive limit' before M1 crash | Daily Mail OnlineA bit more info.
What a lot of people don’t seem to appreciate is how disorientating it can be seeing tail lights on unlit motorways.
As an aside on that point I see now and again wagons on the hard shoulder stationary with side lights on and no hazards, tonight it was a coach but I’ve noticed it on artics too. If soneone inadvertently aligns behind them before realising they are stationary could end badly. In fog you take what you can get to locate your road position.
windrush:
I wonder what is considered to be ‘adequate sleep’ then? For 20 years when I was driving trucks I only had around five or six hours sleep a night, even when I wasn’t working, and even now I’m long retired I rarely go to sleep much before 12.30am and am always awake by 6.30 and get up at 7am. If I stay in bed too long it makes me feel lethargic all day. Some folk need very little sleep and if this was just a ‘one off’ for the minibus driver I can’t really see that is an issue, though no doubt the court will think otherwise?Makes no odds to him now though.
Pete.
Most drivers who sleep at home only get 4 to 5 hours sleep anyway, they arrive home, spend an hour reading the paper, seeing the kids, talking to the wife, then they will have tea, and play with the dog, wife’s sister, wife’s brother before getting a broken sleep
njl:
Captain Caveman 76:
Lorry driver was 'twice the drive limit' before M1 crash | Daily Mail OnlineA bit more info.
What a lot of people don’t seem to appreciate is how disorientating it can be seeing tail lights on unlit motorways.
As an aside on that point I see now and again wagons on the hard shoulder stationary with side lights on and no hazards, tonight it was a coach but I’ve noticed it on artics too. If soneone inadvertently aligns behind them before realising they are stationary could end badly. In fog you take what you can get to locate your road position.
I thought that it was mandatory that if you were on the hard shoulder, i.e. broken down, you had to put your hazards on, or is it just one of those " it would be advisable " things to do
Captain Caveman 76:
What a lot of people don’t seem to appreciate is how disorientating it can be seeing tail lights on unlit motorways.
I really do think that having done lots of this type of car driving for fun before I started night trunking really sharpened up my levels of alertness and advanced perception of and dealing with hazards and speed differentials,on unlit motorways.While seeing examples of the potential consequences of getting it wrong,as seemingly in Wagstaff’s case 
,looking back I’m very thankful for the grounding that those roads and speeds gave me. 
Watch the lane change at 1.15 and the tail lights ahead which he’s basing that lane change on and which he doesn’t actually reach until 1.27.That’s advanced perception and that’s the point when you need to make the call to either stop for a stationary hazard or just overtake a slower vehicle in lane 1,no ifs no buts no excuses. 
Captain Caveman 76:
pierrot 14:
[Cavey , you make a very good point there. Take out the middle man ie the mini bus driver, I have to ask did he actually contribute to the accident? IMHO no, I think as you say wrong place wrong time. The Polish driver was stopped in L1 , the FedEx driver, if as said, he wasn’t concentrating, he would have still run up the back of the other wagon, but sadly there was another vehicle in his path. And maybe that may have saved his own life, but he will surely have that thought on his mind for the rest of his life
I see your point, it was a poor choice of words on my part. The collision would have taken place with or without the minibus being there. If I was to continue this train of thought, it would sound like I was placing blame for the loss of life where (I personally think) it ought not lie. I don’t want to do that.
One thing I haven’t seen mentioned though. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that section isn’t smart motorway yet. But there should still be some matrix signs on the approach. Were they lit and warning of the obstruction? If not, why not? Ten minutes is a long time for nobody to ring that through. Was there a failing in the system that’s supposed to protect drivers in these types of instances?
How so?
From what I gather, the stationary truck was in lane one, and Dave Wagstaff was in lane two.
windrush:
I wonder what is considered to be ‘adequate sleep’ then? For 20 years when I was driving trucks I only had around five or six hours sleep a night, even when I wasn’t working, and even now I’m long retired I rarely go to sleep much before 12.30am and am always awake by 6.30 and get up at 7am. If I stay in bed too long it makes me feel lethargic all day. Some folk need very little sleep and if this was just a ‘one off’ for the minibus driver I can’t really see that is an issue, though no doubt the court will think otherwise?Pete.
I did about 10 years of midnight starts and trying to sleep through the day time was horrible, when it was hot in the summer I was lucky to get 3 hours sleep, suppose that’s why they call it the grave yard shift.
I like lots of other drivers used to call each other for a chat to help keep awake so I carn’t slag the FedEx driver off for something I used to do. I now on lunch time starts, couldn’t do nights again
bestbooties:
Captain Caveman 76:
pierrot 14:
[Cavey , you make a very good point there. Take out the middle man ie the mini bus driver, I have to ask did he actually contribute to the accident? IMHO no, I think as you say wrong place wrong time. The Polish driver was stopped in L1 , the FedEx driver, if as said, he wasn’t concentrating, he would have still run up the back of the other wagon, but sadly there was another vehicle in his path. And maybe that may have saved his own life, but he will surely have that thought on his mind for the rest of his life
I see your point, it was a poor choice of words on my part. The collision would have taken place with or without the minibus being there. If I was to continue this train of thought, it would sound like I was placing blame for the loss of life where (I personally think) it ought not lie. I don’t want to do that.
One thing I haven’t seen mentioned though. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that section isn’t smart motorway yet. But there should still be some matrix signs on the approach. Were they lit and warning of the obstruction? If not, why not? Ten minutes is a long time for nobody to ring that through. Was there a failing in the system that’s supposed to protect drivers in these types of instances?
How so?
From what I gather, the stationary truck was in lane one, and Dave Wagstaff was in lane two.
Where did you get that idea?
But shortly after, a minibus carrying an Indian family on their way to Disneyland Paris, saw Masierak’s stationary lorry and stopped behind it, switching on their hazard lights.
Following behind was David Wagstaff in a HGV who failed to see either the lorry or the minibus and ploughed into them at 56mph - killing all eight occupants of the minibus sandwiched between the trucks.
i find it completely predictable the blase` way they announce that " the minibus stopped behind the hgv in lane 1" as if its just a normal event that anyone would do. or is it only me that sees it like that?
Santa:
bestbooties:
Captain Caveman 76:
pierrot 14:
[Cavey , you make a very good point there. Take out the middle man ie the mini bus driver, I have to ask did he actually contribute to the accident? IMHO no, I think as you say wrong place wrong time. The Polish driver was stopped in L1 , the FedEx driver, if as said, he wasn’t concentrating, he would have still run up the back of the other wagon, but sadly there was another vehicle in his path. And maybe that may have saved his own life, but he will surely have that thought on his mind for the rest of his life
I see your point, it was a poor choice of words on my part. The collision would have taken place with or without the minibus being there. If I was to continue this train of thought, it would sound like I was placing blame for the loss of life where (I personally think) it ought not lie. I don’t want to do that.
One thing I haven’t seen mentioned though. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that section isn’t smart motorway yet. But there should still be some matrix signs on the approach. Were they lit and warning of the obstruction? If not, why not? Ten minutes is a long time for nobody to ring that through. Was there a failing in the system that’s supposed to protect drivers in these types of instances?
How so?
From what I gather, the stationary truck was in lane one, and Dave Wagstaff was in lane two.Where did you get that idea?
But shortly after, a minibus carrying an Indian family on their way to Disneyland Paris, saw Masierak’s stationary lorry and stopped behind it, switching on their hazard lights.
Following behind was David Wagstaff in a HGV who failed to see either the lorry or the minibus and ploughed into them at 56mph - killing all eight occupants of the minibus sandwiched between the trucks.
If you see the photos of the accident scene, the FedEx truck is alongside of the AIM truck.
But then again, we may all be wrong, none of us was there so we can only speculate, which we shouldn’t really be doing!
If you see the photos of the accident scene, the FedEx truck is alongside of the AIM truck.
But then again, we may all be wrong, none of us was there so we can only speculate, which we shouldn’t really be doing!
[/quote]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
yes we should,its a truckie forum and the norm is that we spout utter unsubstanciated mince about every aspect of incidents and speculate about everything related.
we nitpick everyone elses posts to death then pick up on their speling mistakes if it dont go our way,or we vanish for a while till we come out of the huff.
its all good craic and then it eventually all pans out in the end.
its a heavily censored rdc waiting room for most of it or i think some of it is meant to be?
all the serious topics are world class anyway with great pics of times gone by…oh the good old days when i was in me 180 gardner and me twin splitter,if only i could go back to that… 
dieseldog999:
If you see the photos of the accident scene, the FedEx truck is alongside of the AIM truck.
But then again, we may all be wrong, none of us was there so we can only speculate, which we shouldn’t really be doing!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
yes we should,its a truckie forum and the norm is that we spout utter unsubstanciated mince about every aspect of incidents and speculate about everything related.
we nitpick everyone elses posts to death then pick up on their speling mistakes if it dont go our way,or we vanish for a while till we come out of the huff.
its all good craic and then it eventually all pans out in the end.
its a heavily censored rdc waiting room for most of it or i think some of it is meant to be?
all the serious topics are world class anyway with great pics of times gone by…oh the good old days when i was in me 180 gardner and me twin splitter,if only i could go back to that…
[/quote]
^^^^^^ this
Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk
Santa:
bestbooties:
From what I gather, the stationary truck was in lane one, and Dave Wagstaff was in lane two.Where did you get that idea?
It’s a moot point bearing in mind that he’s actually pleaded guilty to running into the stopped vehicles ahead.It wasn’t a case of the minibus driver pulling out on him.He’s toast and his case is basically a legal argument as to the definition of careless v dangerous driving and whether his standard of driving met one or the other.In which case his defence isn’t doing him any favours by putting that in front of a jury to decide.It should have opted for a decision just by a judge and then appealed to the supreme court for a definitive ruling as to that definition and how it applies to his specific case if required.
bestbooties:
From what I gather, the stationary truck was in lane one, and Dave Wagstaff was in lane two.
If Mr Wagstaff was in lane 2 there wouldn’t be 8 people dead and we wouldn’t be discussing this incident.
Myself I think it will be a harsh decision to send Dave Wagstaff to prison for this, yes he made a error of judgement and lacked attention and he should lose his entitlement to drive HGV’s but he did not set out that night to have a fatal accident where as the AIM driver made the decision to start drinking, he knew it was wrong to get in his lorry and start driving and he made the decision to stop in the live lane of a motorway at night for no reason.
You can say yes but Dave Wagstaff was driving on cruise control whilst making a handsfree phonecall but neither of those actions are illegal.
Midnight Rambler:
Myself I think it will be a harsh decision to send Dave Wagstaff to prison for this, yes he made a error of judgement and lacked attention and he should lose his entitlement to drive HGV’s but he did not set out that night to have a fatal accident where as the AIM driver made the decision to start drinking, he knew it was wrong to get in his lorry and start driving and he made the decision to stop in the live lane of a motorway at night for no reason.
You can say yes but Dave Wagstaff was driving on cruise control whilst making a handsfree phonecall but neither of those actions are illegal.
I agree with that completely. And IIRC there have been plenty of studies showing how nightwork affects people, including fughtiyng against your natural circadian rhythm, interference with attention and a host of other issues, along with the effects of doing a monotonous job, and I feel it unfair not to think of those when it comes to sentencing.
albion:
Midnight Rambler:
Myself I think it will be a harsh decision to send Dave Wagstaff to prison for this, yes he made a error of judgement and lacked attention and he should lose his entitlement to drive HGV’s but he did not set out that night to have a fatal accident where as the AIM driver made the decision to start drinking, he knew it was wrong to get in his lorry and start driving and he made the decision to stop in the live lane of a motorway at night for no reason.
You can say yes but Dave Wagstaff was driving on cruise control whilst making a handsfree phonecall but neither of those actions are illegal.I agree with that completely. And IIRC there have been plenty of studies showing how nightwork affects people, including fughtiyng against your natural circadian rhythm, interference with attention and a host of other issues, along with the effects of doing a monotonous job, and I feel it unfair not to think of those when it comes to sentencing.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
+1 there
he wasnt driving dangerously,he wasnt driving carelessly,he probably was driving without due care and attention,and it wasnt his fault that mr minibus was driving with the same lack of attention to come to a stop 25 yards away from a parked in lane 1 artic that for the previous 12 mins everyone else had driven past.
however,its media food now with the fedex dude as the bait,and the judge will make sure he covers his bum so theres no comeback for him and crucifixion will inevitably follow.
if there was no indian driven minibus in the sandwich then it would have been 1 truck creams another truck with a drunk driver and yesterdays news the next day.
id reckon the polish dude would have a good chance of mitigating circumstances than the fedex guy.
albion:
Midnight Rambler:
Myself I think it will be a harsh decision to send Dave Wagstaff to prison for this, yes he made a error of judgement and lacked attention and he should lose his entitlement to drive HGV’s but he did not set out that night to have a fatal accident where as the AIM driver made the decision to start drinking, he knew it was wrong to get in his lorry and start driving and he made the decision to stop in the live lane of a motorway at night for no reason.
You can say yes but Dave Wagstaff was driving on cruise control whilst making a handsfree phonecall but neither of those actions are illegal.I agree with that completely. And IIRC there have been plenty of studies showing how nightwork affects people, including fughtiyng against your natural circadian rhythm, interference with attention and a host of other issues, along with the effects of doing a monotonous job, and I feel it unfair not to think of those when it comes to sentencing.
Theres an argument going further than that Id say: being on the phone would surely be a good way of staying alert. Night driving aint easy whether youre habituated or not. Better talking on phone hands free than listening to the radio or music that requires no interaction?
Another thought: preceding vehicles apparently “saw” the stopped truck. The FedEx driver didn`t. Given the minibus was obscuring the view of the truck, (it was between truck and approaching traffic) was it less visible to approaching vehicles somehow?
No idea if any of that is relevant or not. Just thinking aloud.