Reef:
Is there actual set rules and regs for measuring bridges? What I mean is isn’t it possible one council might be a bit more generous with their measurements than another, you could for example go under a local 14’9 bridge in your 14’11 trailer time and time again, then be in another part of the country and hit a 14’9 or even a 14’10 because the false sense of security the local bridge gave you.
I know of one bridge near me that has had the road dug out as it is the most direct route to Kenfig Industrial Estate and has had more “ski’s” stuck under it than a fat Polish working girl when it was a 12’9, not sure what the new height is because Google maps haven’t updated the street view part yet.
I suppose some bridges have also shrunk a few inches too due to resurfacing and such, in other words we need updated clear and concise information if they are going to market Truckers satnavs, and hopefully this is what this OS mapping will be.
What about the one where the EE got stuck under the bridge and he got charged with dangerous driving or whatever and his company ended up with a right bill only for some HGV driver to notice that the measurements on the sign were wrong and inform the local newspaper that ran the story. Turns out the measurements what the Europeans use which are on our signs was actually set at a safe height for the trailer to get through and the council had ■■■■■■ up big time. The thread will be on here somewhere
Eric Rambler:
Is there anyone out there who has actually hit a bridge? I’ve always wanted to know this. Did you see the bridge and decide to have a go instead of turning around? Or did you just not notice the big brick thing?
I’ve come across loads I couldn’t get under…
But never nutted one of them.
Just had to find another way. That was without TwonkNav, you just got yer map out and worked out another route. Most of the low bridges you get to know about in advance, like the one on the A5 near Hinckley.
I had to crawl under one on the A513 once. It was posted at 13 3" and I was running 13 2". As I was halfway through with the usual unhappy audience of queueing cars, a freight train went over… I near on filled my boxers mate.
i can only assume freight trains sound like bridge strikes
SuperMultiBlue:
I’ve already got a truck sat-nav and had it as soon as I got my licence. It’s the [zb] who do things on the cheap with car sat-navs that are the problem.
Well I’m a [zb] that does things on the cheap in that case, so should I invest do you reckon ?..bear in mind before you answer I went for about 25 years before I bought my cheap sh sat nav, and never had any bother with high trailers using a map.
And still use a cheap sh sat nav today, after 11 years.
So how can I put this as politely as possible without causing offence ?
Here goes.
You are talking complete ■■■■■■■■ mate!
Sorry that’s the best I could do.
Yes you used a map im on about [zb] who just use a car sat-nav. How many times do I have to say this. Did you go to school you [zb] ■■■■■■?
Eric Rambler:
Is there anyone out there who has actually hit a bridge? I’ve always wanted to know this. Did you see the bridge and decide to have a go instead of turning around? Or did you just not notice the big brick thing?
I’ve come across loads I couldn’t get under…
But never nutted one of them.
Just had to find another way. That was without TwonkNav, you just got yer map out and worked out another route. Most of the low bridges you get to know about in advance, like the one on the A5 near Hinckley.
I had to crawl under one on the A513 once. It was posted at 13 3" and I was running 13 2". As I was halfway through with the usual unhappy audience of queueing cars, a freight train went over… I near on filled my boxers mate.
i can only assume freight trains sound like bridge strikes
The one at Hinckley is actually 15 foot. I wouldn’t class that as low. It’s down in the Phillips atlas as 14 foot 9 inch but I went under it the other week when I went that way from Tamworth after the M6 was shut with that fatal HGV accident at junction 3.
I’ve noticed that fewer customers can give an address these days; Talking to customers I often get a long winded verbal tour along a totally unsuitable route, or the postcode. Just give me the street name, the town and if there’s no door number, a landmark nearby and I’ll find it.
Someone mentioned the A41 out of Bicester; The road was lowered about 10 years ago but I think the height signs were still set at the old height. I don’t know what the height is now, as I can fit under it so ■■■■■■■■ to anyone else.
Yes this is good news ,
We all know there are prats around that follow sat nav instructions to the letter and ignore signs.
and yes these are the prats that hit bridges and get stuck down narrow roads
But with this development all that will be a thing of the past.
Drivers will be able to follow the sat nav instructions without thinking
and never ever again have to worry about being sent down an unsuitable road
Why have the sat nav /ordinance survey people waited until now before bringing this invention out
It won’t be the end of it because as it says in the article the sat nav company will have to pay for use of the data. This will in turn push the price of the sat nav up so only the most expensive truck ones will have it.
For the drivers who get the cheaper truck sat navs or certainly the car ones, the sat nav company won’t have paid for the extra data on these models so trucks will always get stuck and hit bridges when using them.
SteveBarnsleytrucker:
The one at Hinckley is actually 15 foot. I wouldn’t class that as low. It’s down in the Phillips atlas as 14 foot 9 inch but I went under it the other week when I went that way from Tamworth after the M6 was shut with that fatal HGV accident at junction 3.
I agree, it’s hardly the lowest in the country but, it’s a bridge that I take into account when I’m sorting out which way I’m going. It gets battered a few times a year. Because it’s under 16 6" it’s just sticks in my mind. There are loads of bridges that I plan for.
None of my maps ever had heights written on them. You just learned by driving around the UK where the more notorious ones are.
Got to agree with my mate ROBROY on this one ( well we are very professional in our trade ) I have a car sat nav, which i have used in the uk and across the water, and yet in my 50 odd years tramping here there and everywhere, not once have i ever hit a bridge, or come close to hitting one, neither have i ever been stuck down an unsuitable road or country lane, neither have i ever dropped a trailer on its knees…why ■■ because i have a brain, if my sat nav told me to turn, and it looks unsuitable, i wont turn, i note the road i am on and call the delivery point if needs arise, for their help, or ask a local the best route in if i dont trust my satnav…but there will always be numpties in this industry, always have been, always will be whether english or foreign.
I do welcome more help in this industry, and if a sat nav can be made to send trucks in the right direction without mishaps, of course i welcome that technology, but i will keep my trusty steed, as it has served me well over the years, as has good maps for double reference…so there…
I have to wonder if this new push to improve mapping data has nothing about helping drivers, and stopping us from hitting bridges or going down unsuitable roads But is instead more about getting things ready for driverless vehicles. Just a thought…
A driverless vehicle would have even less need of a satnav system with accurate bridge heights, as it would already have umpteen radar, laser and ultrasonic detectors monitoring every part of the vehicle and assessing the risk of it hitting something 100% of the time without the distractions of phones, passing bits of fanny or being tired, bored, preoccupied or simply not paying attention.
SuperMultiBlue:
I’ve already got a truck sat-nav and had it as soon as I got my licence. It’s the [zb] who do things on the cheap with car sat-navs that are the problem.
Well I’m a [zb] that does things on the cheap in that case, so should I invest do you reckon ?..bear in mind before you answer I went for about 25 years before I bought my cheap sh sat nav, and never had any bother with high trailers using a map.
And still use a cheap sh sat nav today, after 11 years.
So how can I put this as politely as possible without causing offence ?
Here goes.
You are talking complete ■■■■■■■■ mate!
Sorry that’s the best I could do.
Yes you used a map im on about [zb] who just use a car sat-nav. How many times do I have to say this. Did you go to school you [zb] ■■■■■■?
You are talking complete ■■■■■■■■ mate.
Yeh??
Ok, really can’t be arsed mate tbh
I could point out how you come across as being a bit childish on a grown up’s forum, by your immature retorts to all those who have a different opinion to you, but you are managing to illustrate that quite well yourself.
(For the record my initial reply to you was meant to be a bit tongue in cheek, and not entirely serious…hence the ( ) smiley, but you were too dim to pick up on it.)
No need to reply this time mate, but if you feel the need to, at least try and construct a non aggressive and constructive one eh?..just to prove me wrong.
Something i found out on one of the facebook groups is that some people were not inputting the correct heights into the sat nav that i use. I use the sat nav from trucktables and it ask’s you for height in feet. Some people were entering 14.11 for a 14 foot 11 inch trailer and were wondering why they were coming up to 14 foot 6 bridges lol. they should have been entering 14.92 in the sat nav for a 14 foot 11 inch bridge for it to work. So really you can betcha a lot of truckers dont realise what they are entering lol.
Roymondo:
A driverless vehicle would have even less need of a satnav system with accurate bridge heights, as it would already have umpteen radar, laser and ultrasonic detectors monitoring every part of the vehicle and assessing the risk of it hitting something 100% of the time without the distractions of phones, passing bits of fanny or being tired, bored, preoccupied or simply not paying attention.
When a driverless vehicle gets within range of an obstacle like a bride, width restriction, hairpin turn, etc. you’re quite correct that it may do a better job than a human, but that wasn’t the point I was making. I was thinking more about it selecting the appropriate route so it doesn’t come up against these obstacles when within sensor range, and therefore doesn’t have to make a correction like reversing back 2 miles… I’d also be interested to know if driverless vehicles will be able to read signs like weight limits, assuming the sign hasn’t already been knocked over by one of us pesky humans!
Basically a computer is only as good as its programming, AND the data it processes…
Dazza1980:
Something i found out on one of the facebook groups is that some people were not inputting the correct heights into the sat nav that i use. I use the sat nav from trucktables and it ask’s you for height in feet. Some people were entering 14.11 for a 14 foot 11 inch trailer and were wondering why they were coming up to 14 foot 6 bridges lol. they should have been entering 14.92 in the sat nav for a 14 foot 11 inch bridge for it to work. So really you can betcha a lot of truckers dont realise what they are entering lol.
SuperMultiBlue:
I’ve already got a truck sat-nav and had it as soon as I got my licence. It’s the [zb] who do things on the cheap with car sat-navs that are the problem.
No its ■■■■■ like you that have just passed their test and think they are gods gift to trucking, but don’t know how to read a map, that are the problem. A lot of us drove before sat navs were invented. When we first used a sat nav, we still used our map books, and general knowledge, and common sense to find our way around. I’ve only ever used a car sat nav, and only used it once in over 3 years. I’ve never hit a bridge. So get off your high horse, because at the height you are riding it, you stand a good chance of actually hitting a bridge yourself.
I imagine that SuperMultiBlue is one of those bulging vein drivers that you see. Permanently highly strung over the hugely important task of delivering some truck full of crap that nobody wants or needs and always think that they know better than everyone else…
He does come across as being a bit highly strung to put it mildly.
If he gets so stressed over something as trivial as a discussion forum, wtf is he like in charge of 44 tonnes on a busy Fri afternoon.
