Driver tries a dangerous overtake on lorry and completely destroys his caravan
youtu.be/72liVG6g-ac
|
|
That looks like a poorly planned overtake even without towing a van.
|
|
What fun to advance it frame by frame!
|
Caravans are awful things, and dangerous in the hands of typical motorists who are careless about things like tyre pressures and ignorant of the effect of sharp deceleration of the towing vehicle when the trailer has no brakes of its own. Even at low speed (as in the video) the combination is so unstable that the driver needs to be quick-thinking and have a sensitive bottom to ensure a measure of 'safety'.
I know this will sound selfish and snobbish, but I think the damn things should be illegal. If there had been anyone inside the caravan in the video (it's not unknown for sleeping children to be left in a caravan on the road although it isn't a good idea) they would have been strewn across the road with the caravan's other contents, lavatory, library and knicknacks included.
Anyone here who can admit to a caravan tank slapper?
|
>> I think the damn things should be illegal
In a forum where the abundance of laws is often criticized, it is quite surprising that the first reaction to something we do not approve of is a call for more laws.
Like roads, its all very well making new ones, but nobody ever gets rid of the old ones. Just more and more all the time.
Why should we impinge on the freedom of somebody who wishes to be a caravanner? Just because someone doesn't want to do it and therefore thinks that everybody else should be banned?? Of course they should do it responsibly, but is this really something else to ban?
We need less laws, not more.
|
>> We need less laws, not more.
Hey, take it easy FMR. I am the first to agree.
Actually there are probably plenty of existing laws that cover trailer stability, maintenance and structural integrity, all disastrous in the caravan shown. Caravans like that probably are banned for several different reasons.
Trouble is, there are a hell of a lot of them and they give a lot of innocent budget pleasure to their owners. That being the case, it would be politically difficult to enforce the law stringently. A blind eye is systematically turned by all the authorities, until someone causes a disaster through idiocy or recklessness and can be officially blamed.
The road is dangerous. Plenty of cars are lethal without caravans. Give everyone a wide berth, don't be hasty and be aware of what's happening behind and well ahead, not just what's going on fifty feet away (too close, idiot!).
|
It's very clear from the video by the way that the unbraked momentum of the caravan pushes the car's rear end wide as the driver tries to slow and cut in.
It's a spectacularly miscalculated piece of driving, closer than close. One of those disasters that jump on the dozily unwary when they least expect it.
|
I reckon, someone else in the car said something like, "Oh look, there's Glastonbury Tor"
Closely followed by, "Oh look, there's a traffic island"
|
>>
>> We need less laws, not more.
Fewer laws?
Are you turning into a Libertarian?
|
>>Are you turning into a Libertarian?
About as likely as you turning into a rational thinker.
|
>> >>Are you turning into a Libertarian?
>>
>> About as likely as you turning into a rational thinker.
>>
:-)
|
>> Fewer laws?
>> Are you turning into a Libertarian?
feel free to.
|
>> Caravans are awful things, and dangerous in the hands of typical motorists who are careless
>> about things like tyre pressures and ignorant of the effect of sharp deceleration of the
>> towing vehicle when the trailer has no brakes of its own. Even at low speed
>> (as in the video) the combination is so unstable that the driver needs to be
>> quick-thinking and have a sensitive bottom to ensure a measure of 'safety'.
It shouldn't have been unstable at that speed unless there had been violent steering input or maybe contact with a kerb.
Nearly all caravans have overrun brakes. If maintained properly, they work well. I have had occasion to make a very heavy stop with a caravan and pulled up quickly and in a straight line.
>>
>> I know this will sound selfish and snobbish, but I think the damn things should
>> be illegal. If there had been anyone inside the caravan in the video (it's not
>> unknown for sleeping children to be left in a caravan on the road although it
>> isn't a good idea) they would have been strewn across the road with the caravan's
>> other contents, lavatory, library and knicknacks included.
I can't imagine anybody travelling with children in a caravan now. If it can happen, I suppose it does, but the number must be immaterial.
You're extrapolating a a lot from one accident video. I don't know what the stats say, but I suspect caravanners as a group are fairly cautious.
>> Anyone here who can admit to a caravan tank slapper?
Never happened to me, though of course it could. I'd advise any caravanner to load carefully keeping weight low and central, check noseweight, check tyre pressures including the car's before every leg, not to exceed 60mph, and avoid heavy control inputs. I never tow above 60mph, and I have 'tested' my combination well beyond that (very carefully!) so I know that I am not on the edge.
My biggest fear is probably a puncture on the trailer - harder to know about than one on the car, and there's only one axle on mine. But I suspect most rapid deflations that aren't to do with things in the road are to do with overheating caused by underinflation.
|
>> My biggest fear is probably a puncture on the trailer - harder to know about than one on the car, and there's only one axle on mine. But I suspect most rapid deflations that aren't to do with things in the road are to do with overheating caused by underinflation.
That's all I meant Manatee. I haven't got it in for caravans or caravanistas. People are careless about tyre pressures on their cars let alone trailers (by the way caravans aren't the only ill-maintained dangerous trailers on the road by any means, there's a whole FU commercial world out there).
|
>> That's all I meant Manatee. I haven't got it in for caravans or caravanistas. People
>> are careless about tyre pressures on their cars ......
Easy done, I recently had a slow puncture in a rear tyre, only picked up on my weekly pressure checks. I am on a motorway several times a week, an under inflated tyre would soon overheat.
|
>> >> My biggest fear is probably a puncture on the trailer - harder to know
>> about than one on the car, and there's only one axle on mine.
>>But I suspect most rapid deflations that aren't to do with things in the road are to
>> do with overheating caused by underinflation.
>>
Many years ago a small French trailer was borrowed from a friend for us to tow to Spain.
The tyre pressures were checked and road speed was kept down to 60mph.
I was driving a 5.3 Jaguar XJC when my good friend indicated that I should urgently aim for the hard shoulder. " There are sparks showering from the trailer !".
With plenty of HP and no rear view of the trailer I neither felt or saw anything happening.
The tyre had failed, hit the mudguard which had stopped the wheel rotating which in turn had ground away and left a half mile grove in the motorway.
The cause seemed to be a tube in a tubeless tyre and up to that date a little used trailer.
|
|
Must have gone round that keep left bollard the wrong side surely? Not room for them side by side is there?
|
|
Not sure it did, i think that's why the car cut back in so quickly. There looked to be a bit more space on the other side of the road. I think the LR and trailer might have changed speed or flashed headlights etc if it was on the wrong side of the bollard.
|
|
That is funny! Not for the car driver, of course, and I hope the HGV wasn't delayed by the accident or too badly damaged. The HGV driver must be grateful for the CCTV, showing the blame was 100% with the car driver.
|
It looks as if the driver cut in in front of the lorry having forgotton he'd got the caravan behind.
It's easily done when the towing vehicle doesn't have to work too hard. When you are slogging up a hill with two horses in a trailer you don't forget about the trailer, but with a powerful car, a level road and a light trailer you can drift back into normal car mode for a fatal second.
Last edited by: Cliff Pope on Thu 9 Apr 15 at 14:32
|
|
I know that stretch of road well, it's on the way out of Street on the road to Glastonbury. Just underneath the Tor more or less. If you look to the left of the final few frames you'll see a wholesale bakers called "Burns The Bread" which always amuses me more than it should when I'm passing that way.
|
The manoeuvre the car attempts would be dodgy even without a trailer or caravan. Presumably the location is a 30 limit so beggars belief that an overtake would be attempted. Adds to the arguments about tests to tow.
|
|
I was half expecting Clarkson to get out of the Mondeo
|
|
I thought so too, SP, but I think the caravannist tried to dodge past the lorry at the double-lane traffic lights (I guess while they were green) and underestimated the amount of road he'd need. A car - probably that car without the wendy trailer - would have made it with no more than a mild clenching of the buttocks; a Golf GTI, or Humph's Westfield - nae bother.
|
Hadn't realised I'd mentioned I used to have a Westfield? Must have done at some point I guess. Well remembered WDB.
;-)
|
Well remembered WDB.
Lucky guess, that's all.
|
|
Crappy 4 cyl Westfield. And I bet you cannot fit a tow bar. So where do you put the mixer and half a ton of sand & cement?
|
>> the blame was 100% with the car driver.
A lot of it was, but perhaps not 100%. Traffic accidents involving two or more vehicles are very seldom attributable exclusively to one driver. More typical is an unlucky combination of actions by two or more drivers (it would be interesting to know whether our traffic police members agree with this by the way).
For example, truck drivers in particular, being so often overtaken, are good with their mirrors and can e.g. slow down or change course if they see an overtaker about to run into trouble. Indeed I was once saved by just such a quick-thinking intelligent trucker.
I don't often go fast now, but even mimsing you can run into one of those ill-starred combination events.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Thu 9 Apr 15 at 16:59
|
If it happened as WdeB says at the traffic lights then the lorry driver certainly would have seen the caravan and should have backed off to let him in.
Using a lorry as a bullying tool is never clever whoever is right or wrong.
Pat
|
>> Using a lorry as a bullying tool is never clever whoever is right or wrong.
More like being slow in the uptake I think Pat, bull-headed and a bit stubborn, not necessarily really bad. But that's all it takes - someone who isn't intelligent, considerate and observant as a driver (the way you are and we would all like to be) in the wrong combination of circumstances.
God knows we can all come to grief. I shudder to remember some of the things I did when young and reckless. Ignorant really.
|
I've had another look at the video. As I see it, the incident occurs well after the lights, firmly after two lanes have merged, and more to the point, well after the traffic island. While one can't say it's impossible for the car and caravan to have pulled out after the island, it is a bonkers thing to do.
This could be the rare accident of one person being an idiot and one (the lorry driver) being blameless. Just because usually it takes errors of two parties, does not mean this one is.
Shame the speed readout lags and is not real time as we can't see when the lorry driver reacted. Can't watch all the mirrors all the time, got to look at the road ahead sometime!
For my money - no blame on the lorry driver at all.
|
|
Agreed. Not much the truck driver could have done....
|
|
I've taken "pole position" at that merge many a time. Quite do-able if you're not tugging a shed. Maybe he forgot about that.
|
>> I've taken "pole position" at that merge many a time...
As did the red Audi.
|
>> For my money - no blame on the lorry driver at all.
None that can be fairly levelled by anyone else. The man himself may be tortured by 'what if' thoughts to the end of his days though. He's the only person who knows whether he's at fault at all. But when something bad, or almost bad, has happened everyone feels a bit guilty and worries about their share of blame. Their real judgement may not be spot on. Been there and done it.
|
|
True. One thing I was musing to myself the other day is the problem people have with leaving a reasonable gap behind you. Bad enough on a bike or in a car but in a truck it can be lethal. I find I have to depend on seeing their shadows in the mirrors of the works truck.
|
|
Absolutely Pat. The driver in the NS lane should have been aware of the suicidal overtake and acted accordingly. Look at everything, stare at nothing. Use all three mirrors constantly. I'm very aware of that, pooltling along at 80 on a clear NSL and bikers appear up my chuff doing 100+.
|
>> >> the blame was 100% with the car driver.
>>
>> A lot of it was, but perhaps not 100%. Traffic accidents involving two or more
>> vehicles are very seldom attributable exclusively to one driver. More typical is an unlucky combination
>> of actions by two or more drivers (it would be interesting to know whether our
>> traffic police members agree with this by the way).
>>
Yes, often accidents are not entirely one parties fault, but in this case I maintain the fault lies 100% with the shed-tugger.
M'Lud.
|
|
It looks like it was the overtakers fault. He was heading for a closing gap, never a good move.
|
The outfit was out of control before the car crossed the path of the lorry so I don't think it was a simple case of an ill judged overtake. The speed was not high enough to start an oscillation so something else caused the upset. Either the car driver swerved, or braked violently, perhaps because he was trying to bail out of the overtake, or perhaps had hit the kerb around the island further back.
Whichever, it's hard to see that it was anyone else's fault but the car driver's.
|
|
I reckon he kerbed the van on that island..
|
Nice that Zentral Zummerzet has a Gazette. Asking for an Exprezz or an Arguz would just sound silly.
That article says the caravan was 'completely destroyed'; one half looks pretty normal to me, but perhaps you'd have to spent two weeks in half a caravan to get the same pleasure as one week in a whole one - or is that the other way round?
|
100% the vanner's fault. Maybe he was trying to outdrag the HGV away from the lights but underestimated his own and the truck's acceleration. Who knows whether the truck was loaded or not........some of these 8 legger tippers seem to have the speed of a sports car when empty....power to weight ratio...innit ?
Stupid to try and get through a closing gap. We're taking the shed to the White Peak next Friday and I guarantee I won't overtake anything on the way...unless there's something heavy crawling up the Chapel-en-le-Frith by-pass !
Hope the bog was empty !
|
>> 100% the vanner's fault.
Nah. Mainly, but 100% is very unusual. Pat says the lorry could have backed off. I agree.
What's the matter with you guys and your open and shut 100% monochrome crap? Anyone would think you had never seen a real situation in your lives and were 12 years old.
Damn rubbish. Show a bit of measure like grownups.
|
Just to clarify I agree the car driver is to blame.
It takes but a minute to back off and let someone in front in a situation like that. The lorry driver would certainly seen this in his offside mirror and as a professional driver should have anticipated the result what was happening.
This sort of driving is the reason we get the reputation we have........and also the reason we tend to call tipper drivers 'brute force and ignorance drivers'.
Pat
|
>
>>
>> Pat says the lorry could have backed off.
>> I agree.
>>
Perhaps in this case, yes.
But I think I once before observed that an overtaken driver sometimes has a dilema when he sees someone starting an overtake that is clearly suicidal.
a) brake sharply so that the overtaker has a chance to shoot ahead and pull in
b) incease speed so that the overtaker clearly gets the message that the manoeuvre is impossible, so he aborts it
c) maintain constant speed and let the overtaker sort out his own mistake
(b) is nearly always wrong.
(a) often appears a sensible thing to do, but I think I was recounting an incident when I did exactly that, but the overtaker realised his mistake at the same time and also braked sharply.
The approaching vehicle also braked hard. So all three vehicles came to a near stop, two of us abreast, the overtaker and the approacher head-on.
Stupid situation. All I could do was then drive on, leaving the others to sort out the congestion I could see in the rear mirror. With hindsight, I'd have done better to maintain speed to let him slip back in behind.
Last edited by: Cliff Pope on Fri 10 Apr 15 at 08:48
|
This video has done the rounds of all the lorry drivers forums and Facebook groups and has been dissected at length frame by frame.
The general opinion is that the lorry driver speeded up after listening closely to the soundtrack of the gear change.........on purpose.
There is also a quote from the lorry driver taken from his Facebook page around, but you'll have to look for that one as I don't re-post others comments.
Pat
|
There was rather more on there the day it happened!
Pat
|
>>With hindsight, I'd have done better to maintain speed to let him slip back in behind.
Absolutely not (probably!). You followed a cautious approach and didn't have an accident. If he hadn't slowed down, and you had no way of knowing, then there would have been likely to have been bent metal.
|
I've had the same experience as Cliff; I routinely just lift off momentarily now when being overtaken, to get the process over with, if there is oncoming traffic anywhere close. It's very common for people to start an overtake and then brake and drop in behind again, not easy if the overtakee slams the brakes on.
Once they have their nose in front it's a different case.
As somebody who likes to knock on I'm not often overtaken on a clear road, but increasingly when in a procession on a busy road there seem to be people who think it's worth expending an extra half pint of fuel to move from ninth to eighth in the queue.
Interesting to read the Facebook page linked above on the caravan incident. It appears that the caravanist had gone through a green light at speed (50 was estimated by somebody) and was using that to pass the slower traffic. That sort of opportunistic driving is usually fine solo, but doesn't really work with a trailer.
I quite enjoy towing, but one does need to look well ahead and plan a bit - as we should do solo too, but a lot of car drivers don't seem to look more than a few yards ahead of the bonnet. Take that approach with a bulky trailer and an incident of some sort is only a matter of time.
I suspect it was a few seconds of really bad judgement, which happens to us all occasionally even if we get away with it.
|
I suspect it was a few seconds of really bad judgement
Takes longer than that to buy a caravan, doesn't it?
|
I quite enjoy towing, but one does need to look well ahead and plan a bit
Could not agree more. The distance in front one needs to consider grows greatly when one is towing, and since the act of starting moving is time consuming and clutch wearing, one tries not to stop when towing by approaching an obstruction, ie traffic lights slowly and trying to time things so the light is green when one arrives.
Due to the fact the brakes are poor by modern standards, the vintage car also needs to be driven with similar considerations.
|
|
Yes, a professional driver might have spotted what was unfolding in his door mirror, and could have lifted off the accelerator to give the car as much room as he could. But if the car was doing 50 mph (as reported), then lifting off would have made very little difference, surely?
|
>> then lifting off would have made very little difference, surely?
Vid clip shows the lorry speed as approx 28mph at the time of impact.
Beats me how the 2 people leaving Burns the Bread on the LH side of the clip were totally oblivious to the accident. Surely they should have heard it even if they didn't immediately see it?
|
Looking at that clip;
In the front another truck goes through first. Looking at that truck, then it would appear that from about 10ft before its nose reaches the traffic island and bollard, there is not sufficient room for a car to get through without hitting either the island or the truck, even if the truck is stationery.
The truck with the camera has passed the bollard and its nose is three of the 5 white dashes along the road markings, so the chances are that its back end was not quite clear of the island.
There is a blue landrover with trailer going the other way, and it seems unlikely that it would be beyond the island in time for the car to go the wrong side of the island.
Also, the back left corner of the caravan has hit the truck.
And the truck is doing 28.0 at the moment that two bangs can be heard.
For me, the truck driver is not even slightly at fault. Even had he actually stopped before the collision, then the car would still have hit the island with whatever effect that would have had.
There is no way that the car was attempting a reasonable maneuver, there was no path available with the island taking the space between the truck and the blue Landrover.
I reckon the car simply didn't see the island and bollards and hit them while trying to overtake and got thrown off course into the side of the truck.
|
>> I reckon the car simply didn't see the island and bollards and hit them while
>> trying to overtake and got thrown off course into the side of the truck.
That seems very likely, viewing it again.
The caravan would really have launched itself off that kerb. The tail must have been wagging the dog pretty violently if that happened at 50 or so.
I've never hit one, but I have had to take evasive action a couple of times - those stupid little hob-nobs, as we call them, are scattered around basically to obstruct traffic flow and aren't always very visible amid a forest of road furniture.
The last one I nearly hit was missing its illuminated plastic bollards, presumably knocked off by an earlier victim, and was almost invisible.
That isn't a good one either. Although the bollards are there, it's in the middle of a hatched area that once would have provided the safety margin where the lanes merge.
|
>> I reckon the car simply didn't see the island and bollards and hit them while
>> trying to overtake and got thrown off course into the side of the truck.
How do you not see it? its the biggest keep left bollard I have ever seen!
I reckon the bloke forgot he had a caravan on the back when he went for the gap and would have made it (just) without the shed on the back.
|
>> he went for the gap and would have made it (just) without the shed on the back.
The truck is, I think, an artic. That bloke wouldn't have made it in Thrust 2, never mind in an estate car pulling a caravan.
Look at the video, and try and imagine where the back of the truck was., using the shot of the earlier and smaller truck as reference. There was no gap.
|
>> >> he went for the gap and would have made it (just) without the shed
>> on the back.
Given that the truck hit the caravan, the car made it in front. The problem is we dont know how the camera is aimed, we don't know how much free road space in front of the truck is not in frame.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 10 Apr 15 at 15:19
|
I think the caravan looks like it bounced sideways into the truck; the damage seems to be on the side and backwards, not on the front left corner which you might expect if it had run forward into the truck.
And there is no way of telling whether or not the car hit the island, but its difficult to see what else it could have done.
If it was the other side of the road from the truck and from the caravan, then it must have totaled the island since it would have been straddling it, and I cannot see how there can be space between the island and the truck for a car, with or without the caravan.
Do you have any thoughts as to where the car was in relation to the bollard and island?
Because if you think that he could have overtaken without the 'van, then if you're ever following me and want to get past, just flash your lights, I'll pull over to let you go.
EDIT: ooo, didn't you do some serious editing.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 10 Apr 15 at 15:22
|
>> Because if you think that he could have overtaken without the 'van, then if you're
>> ever following me and want to get past, just flash your lights, I'll pull over
>> to let you go.
I do think, because lo and behold there it is in front of the lorry. It didn't get there via Harry Potter methods.
>>
>> EDIT: ooo, didn't you do some serious editing.
Valid tho. Supports my theory.
|
>>It didn't get there via Harry Potter methods.
It looks to me like it went straight across the traffic island.
|
>> The truck is, I think, an artic.
It's a lorry, not a truck ;)
You've been away from Blighty far too long.
|
>>It's a lorry, not a truck ;)
>You've been away from Blighty far too long.
Correct, of course. But people give such sideways looks over the word "lorry". And then, of course, ones says it several times and by then it sounds completely ridiculous.
|
>> >> But people give such sideways looks over the word "lorry". And then,
>> of course, ones says it several times and by then it sounds completely ridiculous.
>>
That's if you try to say "red lorry, yellow lorry" many times .
|
>> That's if you try to say "red lorry, yellow lorry" many times .
If you got knocked down by a red lorry, and then a yellow lorry, and then funnily enough by a red lorry again, the police would have to tell the relatives "there's no easy way to say this...".
|
>>"there's no easy way to say this...".
I'm weeping.
|
>> >>"there's no easy way to say this...".
>>
>> I'm weeping.
I'm afraid I shamelessly filched that from someone on Twitter.
My jokes are much funnier of course but I don't put them here.
|
Try saying "my lorry's all oily" several times quickly ( if you're a bit bored that is )
;-)
|
Actually, it's a waggon!
8o)
|
Only if you're from Halifax or Leeds:)
Pat
|
>>Try saying "my lorry's all oily" several times quickly
Couldn't resist, had to try.
Next time I might wait until I'm not sat in a quiet Starbucks though.
p.s. Couldn't do it, sounded slightly unbalanced.
|
>>I quite enjoy towing
How so? I quite enjoy reversing a trailer, but I can't see that towing a trailer does anything that you could enjoy. As proved here, it means you need bigger gaps...
|
>> >>I quite enjoy towing
>>
>> How so? I quite enjoy reversing a trailer, but I can't see that towing a
>> trailer does anything that you could enjoy. As proved here, it means you need bigger
>> gaps...
I enjoy driving, I pay attention and do it as well as I can - it's not boring that way. Towing, which I do less frequently than solo motoring, has additional aspects.
My wee bothy at 2m wide is slightly narrower than the width between the car mirrors. At 1200kg, and with a towing limit on the car of 2000kg, it's quite nimble too.
You just have to watch out for the insecure types who accelerate as you overtake them on a single carriageway:)
Of course I might be trolling.
goo.gl/zNnzxT
|
www.facebook.com/roger.franklin.969/videos/819270788166514/
Although, I would say 50/50 on this one, truck could have backed off a little to let the pushy git in...
warning, contains strong language
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 20 Apr 15 at 09:24
|
|
One good reason to stick to camping...
|
>> www.facebook.com/roger.franklin.969/videos/819270788166514/
>>
>> Although, I would say 50/50 on this one, truck could have backed off a little
>> to let the pushy git in...
Six of one, half a dozen....
The car driver thought that he could just behave like a lorry driver - put his indicator on and everybody would get out of his way.
However the lorry driver behaved like a lorry driver - just because I expect everyone to get out of my way when I put my indicator on - or have a crash - it doesn't work the other way round.
|
More like a dozen of one and 12 of the other.
Very bad driving by caravan man (where did he think the lorry had gone? Answer, he didn't look, or couldn't see*), and a collision that could 100% have been avoided by the lorry driver who is not fit to be on the road.
*Caravan man doesn't appear to have extension mirrors either. That might have helped, had they been there and set properly.
Last edited by: Manatee on Mon 20 Apr 15 at 08:27
|
>> www.facebook.com/roger.franklin.969/videos/819270788166514/
>>
>> Although, I would say 50/50 on this one, truck could have backed off a little
>> to let the pushy git in...
Unlike the last one where I laid blame on the Caravaner, this is nearly all lorry driver fault, the telling point is that he was still accelerating even while battering the side of the caravan, and was still trying to force the van out of the slip lane at the point it ended up under the front.
Yes the Caravan has some blame, the caravan driver being dense, but the lorry driver aggressively and deliberately pushes this to collision conclusion.
|
Missed this thread originally as I was away.
The first one is pretty much 100% 'vanner to blame. You'd have struggled to complete that manoeuvre in a sports car never mind a Mondy estate with a caravan.
Don't recognise the 'van model involved but it's considerably bigger than mine and probably more than the 85% of car's kerbweight - the recommended limit for inexperienced towers. Not saying driver WAS a newbie but when van weight gets close to car's the probability of a careless move setting up a snake is considerable.
Number two beggars belief. It's a road must of must immediately recognise - S/B M6 J8, the M5 intersection. Already clear at start of film by RAC control centre at Bescot that the M5 is congested and traffic's backing up. Either the 'vanner and his passenger were asleep on the job he he was trying to beat the queue. If he'd go that near and missed it the correct reaction is to 'go around', either diverting by other roads or doing a 360 at next junction. Instead he tries to push in.
Lorry man is already too close to the blue Scenic and decides to be bloody minded. Agian the 'vanner should have aborted but still carries on. I have to say that the build, dress, age and attitude are typical of a certain genre of caravanner one might encounter on club sites or on the Caravan Club forum - some posters there make WP and MD look like soft liberals...
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 20 Apr 15 at 10:23
|
>> this is nearly all lorry driver fault, the telling point is that he was still accelerating even while
>> battering the side of the caravan, and was still trying to force the van out of
>> the slip lane at the point it ended up under the front.
Can't agree Z, while the lorry driver played his part in the collision and shouldn't have forced it that far, I think the caravanner is 90% to blame, he was the one changing lanes at the last moment, on a motorway way at less than 50 mph why was he not in the correct lane at least half a mile beforehand and why was he so bloody minded that he thought it was worth trying to push in front of a lorry over the chevrons instead of going on and turning round at the next junction.
How many people on here would have tried to push the point that far even without a caravan?
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 20 Apr 15 at 10:23
|
>> .... why was he not in the correct lane at least half a mile beforehand
I agree
>> and why was he so bloody minded that he thought it was worth trying
>> to push in front of a lorry over the chevrons instead of going on and
>> turning round at the next junction.
>>
I just wonder how many would do that next junction and 180 turn round ?
>> How many people on here would have tried to push the point that far even without a caravan?
>>
Maybe not on here but I suspect most on here know it is the norm
See my comments re mini bus on the same video.
I thought survival is one of the key activities when driving.
The truck driver trusts to the bulk of his truck so get out of my way the rest of you ?
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 20 Apr 15 at 10:25
|
The view ahead shows a white mini bus doing a late exit, so there before your eyes, what can happen so be prepared as it might happen again.
Obviously the caravan did a late exit but it is not unknown to make a mistake on an exit but maybe trying not to be stuck behind the truck?
The truck driver appeared to drive even closer to the car in front than previously.
The truck driver considers himself 100% not to blame else why publish the video.
I thought the verbals applied to the truck driver !
" I can't go any where your choice" is brilliant.
It was the truck drivers choice to not back off.
The truck driver must be pleased with the Facebook support :-(
|
>> www.facebook.com/roger.franklin.969/videos/819270788166514/
And for those people who don't have a facebook account, or cannot log onto it at work....
youtu.be/iFeBIxRyxag
warning, contains strong language
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 20 Apr 15 at 09:23
|
|
It's a shame we hardly ever hear the final outcome of these "caught on cam" accidents and which way the insurer sways towards. Especially the latest one that's just been posted.
|
>> It's a shame we hardly ever hear the final outcome of these "caught on cam"
>> accidents and which way the insurer sways towards. Especially the latest one that's just been
>> posted.
Always so unfortunately. I have same issue with trying to follow through the London bike accidents with tip/skip lorries.
|
>> Always so unfortunately. I have same issue with trying to follow through the London bike
>> accidents with tip/skip lorries.
That one is much easier, the outcome is usually reported in the metro or the standard.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 20 Apr 15 at 12:59
|
50/50 in my book.
The caravaner must have thought he was driving an Audi the way he left it till the last minute to get into his lane, which had been indicated well in advance. Not the sort of thing to try when towing a caravaner when up against a truck driver who will not budge. Much as it would pain me to let the pushy git get his way, any sensible driver would have let the caravaner in rather than cause an accident.
|
>> 50/50 in my book.
>>
How can it be 50/50 when the caravanner is the one changing lane and, if I have it right, the one who does not have any claim to right of way, especially in the lasy few metres before the end of the slip road.
Fully accept the lorry driver is an ignorant wotsit and is partly responsible but legally it was up to the Honda driver to make his lane change safely.
|
>> any sensible driver would have let the caravaner in rather than cause an accident.
And any sensible 'van driver wouldn't have pushed in. Right pair of idiots, if you ask me. Insurance should be voided for both of them and they should be jailed for a week, sharing the same cell. Actually, they should be put into a Travelodge room for a week and tagged. Much cheaper.
|
A man who would trash his vehicle to get a lane, versus another man who will trash his vehicle to stop him - how can a few spaces in a traffic queue be worth it?.
Both knew exactly what they were doing; the one trying to force his way and the other trying to stop him.
Has to be more the car driver's fault than the lorry and the car driver appears to be someone who always believes they have the right of way. "I was indicating" ! Oh, well that's all right then.
But quite clearly the lorry driver is a t***. And if I was his employer I would feel compelled to explain that the lorry being one place further back in the queue didn't bother me, but it having accidents, impacting my insurance premiums and causing huge delays to my schedule is a problem.
One would have thought that a professional driver would have been more grown up about the whole thing.
|
Was that a police car in front of the car that was in front of the lorry, or something like a Highways Agency car?
Either way, they should to learn to use their mirrors to see what was going on behind them and provide assistance where necessary.
|
|
Need to know where you are going not where you have been :)
|
|
Where was the woman running to??
|
Actually I'd say the lorry driver was more to blame, arrogant and selfish not to back off and let the stupid caravanner in. I'd say he was guilty of careless if not dangerous driving from what I could see. The caravanner must take his quite large share of responsibility, because by accelerating hard he could have found the much better gap just a bit forward.
An everyday tale of doziness, crassness and stupidity on Britain's quite good roads. A lot of expensive bent metal and explanations to employers, spouses etc. but no one maimed or dead.
What you do when you notice one of these situations shaping up is slow decorously and stay out of the way as far as possible, without doing anything sudden or stupid. When you know you're going to crash you have to go into lightning damage-limitation mode, if necessary taking your foot off the brake pedal to regain some steering. That way you can hit something fairly yielding like a dry-stone wall rather than a killer large oak tree or park gatepost. Beware of hitting cones some of which are heavy, when making progress.
I do speak from experience here. Lucky to be alive actually, and so is everyone else.
|
>>Fully accept the lorry driver is an ignorant wotsit and is partly responsible but legally it was up to the Honda driver to make his lane change safely.
>>
>> any sensible driver would have let the caravaner in rather than cause an accident.
>>And any sensible 'van driver wouldn't have pushed in. Right pair of idiots, if you ask me.
>>
>>A man who would trash his vehicle to get a lane, versus another man who
>> will trash his vehicle to stop him - how can a few spaces in a traffic queue be worth it?.
>>
>> Both knew exactly what they were doing; the one trying to force his way and
>> the other trying to stop him.
>>
>> Has to be more the car driver's fault than the lorry and the car driver
>> appears to be someone who always believes they have the right of way. "I was
>> indicating" ! Oh, well that's all right then.
>>
>> But quite clearly the lorry driver is a t***.
>> One would have thought that a professional driver would have been more grown up about
>> the whole thing.
>>
From what I saw the lorry driver knew the car was there and used his lorry as a weapon to ram the car.
That in my book is road rage .
Instead of backing off, mouthing off and then going on his way he posted his dangerous antics and decided judge and jury that he was totally innocent.
BiB have a track record of acting on such postings !!
IMO 10% car drivers fault vs 90% professional lorry drivers fault.
Sadly a good example of the red mist.
At relatively slow speed no one seemed to get injured.
A great friend lost a 20+ aged son and nearly lost his 20+aged brother when their car was T boned.
My aim is to arrive safely and not to be dead right!
|
|
It is always the best policy to let the idiots have right of way, it boosts their confidence. Then they are free to take on another idiot and cause a collision elswhere. If you get things wrong, (and we all do) someone will let you in while thinking that you are an idiot. :-)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 20 Apr 15 at 16:26
|
>> From what I saw the lorry driver knew the car was there and used his lorry as a weapon to >> ram the car. That in my book is road rage .
On both sides surely, the Honda knew the Lorry was there and still tried to force in
>> IMO 10% car drivers fault vs 90% professional lorry drivers fault.
Don't agree, Lorry driver was a plonker, agreed, I reckon 25% of blame.
Honda driver was the one who changed lane where there was no room, despite plenty of warning of the approaching slip road in heavy traffic, crossing the chevrons never mind the lane markings. Got to be road rage there too 75% of blame.
A pair of idiots who happened to meet another idiot at the wrong time
>> My aim is to arrive safely and not to be dead right!
and mine and thankfully the same is true of most drivers
|
>> Honda driver was the one who changed lane where there was no room, despite plenty of warning of the approaching slip road in heavy traffic, crossing the chevrons never mind the lane markings. Got to be road rage there too 75% of blame.
No commerdriver, you're absolutely wrong, it's the other way round. Lorry driver's a pro who can and should read the situation and do the right thing from the practical, not 'moral' point of view. The caravanner's just a mimsing prat who doesn't know what he's doing. There are many such. You must have saved their lives a good few times.
That lorry driver was half asleep, or very nasty. One or the other. I think the latter.
It would be interesting to know what our other truckers and policemen think. I suppose they will take refuge in the partial nature of youtube clips, how can you tell without being there, that sort of thing. All the same it would be interesting to know what their gut feelings are.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Mon 20 Apr 15 at 17:48
|
I think Commerdriver is an IT bod like me, AC. We don't really do saving lives - or indeed anything of much value to humanity.
};---)
PS, in case you were wondering, I'm not actually a large African ungulate either, although I still prefer my rivers crocodile-free.
|
>> The caravanner's just a mimsing prat who doesn't know what he's
>> doing.
>>
Sorry AC if you think that caravanner didn't know what he was doing and had got into that position by mistake, you have more faith in humanity when it is behind the wheel of a car than I do.
Maybe 1 in 100 get into the position on a motorway where they miss their junction by mistake, the other 99, IMHO, get into the position that caravanner was in by aggressive design.
As I have said, the lorry driver is far from blameless but please don't insult my intelligence by telling me the Honda driver was there by accident.
|
|
It amazes me that people will risk it all to make a junction, there is always an alternative route. Five miles, ten minutes, even more is better than an a collision.
|
>> It amazes me that people will risk it all to make a junction, there is
>> always an alternative route. Five miles, ten minutes, even more is better than an a
>> collision.
>>
I agree wi' him
|
>>I agree wi' him
Me too.
Road rage is a mystery to me. Even though years ago in my angry 20s I was an offender. goodness knows why, it just isn't important enough.
|
>> Road rage is a mystery to me. Even though years ago in my angry 20s
>> I was an offender. goodness knows why, it just isn't important enough.
>>
Having had experienced serious road rage a couple of times it is a mystery to me too.
Both times the guys were not in their 20s.
The last event lasted so long I was very seriously formulating how to ensure the biker was dumped in the road. He never realised that he had a lucky escape when he finally gave up his efforts.
|
>>Road rage is a mystery to me. Even though years ago in my angry 20s I was an offender. goodness knows why, it just isn't important enough.
Me too. A combination of adrenaline, testosterone, caffeine, and white sugar, in my case.
Even got charged with dangerous driving once upon a time, reduced to careless driving on the day, thankfully.
My mother-in-law dying from a brain tumour at the age of 45, the week before, didn't do a lot for my mood at the time either.
|
And with sensitive use of the pedals, the towing car had acres of space to pull in in front of the car in front of the lorry. And if he was not capable of getting there in time, bit of a twit really.
Come the glorious day, that and quite a lot of 'accidents' will be deemed a deliberateness and it will be illegal for insurance to pay out. Each pays for his own repairs. (Said with tongue firmly in cheek).
|
>> As I have said, the lorry driver is far from blameless but please don't insult my intelligence by telling me the Honda driver was there by accident.
I didn't say that or anything like it. I think the caravanner's an absolute halfwit who shouldn't be driving a vehicle. But being a non-professional he must be less to blame than the lorry driver, who either made an unforgivable mistake or deliberately tried to do harm.
Let's say lorry driver 55 or 60% responsible. But only because he's a professional and ought to know better than to maintain speed when it's clear a car and trailer are trying to squeeze into a small space in front of him. The car driver simply doesn't count as a driver, he isn't one. What you do with those is give them a wide berth.
Sorry commerdriver, they tell me you're not a trucker. Your handle is misleading. No blame though.
|
For what it's worth I agree 100% with commerdriver.
What does amuse me is this...
>>IMO 10% car drivers fault vs 90% professional lorry drivers fault.<<
As soon as 'fault' and 'lorry driver' appear in the same sentence the lorry driver becomes 'professional':)
Let's not forget the car driver had at least 3 miles of warning signs of that particular junction coming up, plus the dedicated lane warning for more than 2 miles.
Or that he jumped out of his car accusing the lorry driver of being at fault in an angry and aggressive manner using language that would have made any lorry driver proud.
The woman was probably running away to disown her husband, who wouldn't in that situation? I would.
The lorry driver needs to learn some panache.
There is a far more 'professional' way to handle situations like this when it all happens so slowly.
The knack is to stop just before hitting the car or the caravan but trapping them in the position where they can't go forward or backwards, then refuse to move until they have looked suitably stupid and incurred the wrath of everyone behind being held up.
This has the added bonus of stopping them ever doing it again!
Pat
|
>> Or that he jumped out of his car accusing the lorry driver of being at fault in an angry and aggressive manner using language that would have made any lorry driver proud.
The sound is misleading Pat, but I thought the very clear (and profane!) shouting was from the source nearest to the microphone: the lorry driver. You couldn't really hear what the car driver was saying.
Nor did I say the lorry driver was 90% to blame. 55% was what I said, and only because he was the putative 'professional'.
All right, perhaps it was a hired truck and he'd never driven one before in his life. But the driver of a big vehicle has an obligation not to run into or over smaller vehicles. That's just obvious.
We all agree the car driver was a screaming twit.
This thread illustrates what I keep saying: there's no such thing as a traffic accident involving two or more vehicles which is caused exclusively by one of them.
Thanks for commenting Pat. I believe you at least are a professional.
|
Over a long and varied driving life I have gone from a young tearaway to a mellow enthusiast. During that time I have have done the HGV, blue lights and sirens, advanced training, and lots of miles, la de da de da.......
I believe the majority of drivers use driving to get around without much thought or planning, there are some drivers who just don't "get" driving at all, and those who see it as a battle to be won, the best are the ones that make rapid unobtrusive progress without necessarily being the first at any location or situation.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 21 Apr 15 at 08:17
|
>>>There is a far more 'professional' way to handle situations like this when it all happens so slowly. The knack is to stop just before hitting the car or the caravan but trapping them in the position where they can't go forward or backwards, then refuse to move until they have looked suitably stupid and incurred the wrath of everyone behind being held up.
Sadly that displays the same need to "win" or feel the bigger man/woman in the situation which we see from the lorry driver in the video clip.... very much us vs them mentality.
There is no doubt the caravan guy initiated the circumstance that produced the accident but as it unfolded a tiny kindness from the lorry driver in easing off for a few yards (and a mild grumble of "typical caravan tugger" if he wished) would have produced the safest and easiest resolution.
The irony is on my travels, probably as with everyone here, on a daily basis I allow such kindness to lorries that find themselves in need of the road space that is "rightfully mine".... ease off the throttle and give an "after you" sign with a hand lifted off the wheel and it's all good.... everyone's happy and traffic flows nicely.
ON has it spot on... <<<...those who see it as a battle to be won, the best are the ones that make rapid unobtrusive progress without necessarily being the first at any location or situation.>>>
|
>>Sadly that displays the same need to "win" or feel the bigger man/woman in the situation which we see from the lorry driver in the video clip.... very much us vs them mentality.<<
I disagree Fenlander, as a professional driver I feel I am justified in avoiding an accident safely without damage or injury but also allowing the car driver to learn a lesson he won't forget, which you have to agree, he sorely needs to learn.
Now argue professionalism as much as you like among yourselves, but remember you can't have me down as professional when I do something wrong and not credit me with the same when aspiring to educate another road user in a safe manner.
I'm off into the greenhouse for the day so I'll leave that one open to discussion:)
Pat
|
>>> also allowing the car driver to learn a lesson he won't forget, which you have to agree, he sorely needs to learn.
It is not for any road user to teach another a lesson... particularly with the "I'm in a lorry with a dashcam so I'm OK" attitude.
Should I be teaching all the lorries I usually let in a lesson and squeeze them out into the difficult situations they've got themselves into... of course not.
|
My conscience would be clear because it's far better to learn a lesson without injury or damage whoever teaches it. That manoeuvre had the potential for both and as the car driver seems to think he's entirely in the right I would assume he's likely to carry on doing it.
Surely we all learn from others on the road everyday, if not what to do we certainly learn what not to do and I never stopped learning, I always figured that when I did it would be time to stop driving........but I'm not too proud to admit I don't know everything about driving.
Pat
|
>> I disagree Fenlander, as a professional driver I feel I am justified in avoiding an
>> accident safely without damage or injury but also allowing the car driver to learn a
>> lesson he won't forget, which you have to agree, he sorely needs to learn.
>>
>> Now argue professionalism as much as you like among yourselves, but remember you can't have
>> me down as professional when I do something wrong and not credit me with the
>> same when aspiring to educate another road user in a safe manner.
So far as I am concerned the word 'professional' means 'paid to do that job'. It says absolutely nothing about anyone's competence.
|
>> It says absolutely nothing about anyone's competence. <<
Then why dangle it as a carrot whenever a lorry driver is seen to make a mistake quoting 'as a professional driver his standards should be higher'?
You can't have it both ways, as is often said.
Pat
|
>> I disagree Fenlander, as a professional driver I feel I am justified in avoiding an
>> accident safely without damage or injury but also allowing the car driver to learn a
>> lesson he won't forget, which you have to agree, he sorely needs to learn.
Trying to educate other drivers is doomed to failure. The only thing they will learn from that, unfortunately, is to detest lorry drivers. Yuman nature.
The caravannist in this case was an idiot. But the lorry should have let him in - simple. I've done it literally hundreds of times for lorry drivers even when they have slid up the inside and I know they are about to embark on a two mile elephant race in front of me - I see the signal, I ease off and let them out, even though it means (horror of horrors) unlatching the cruise control and giving up "my right" to carry on in "my" lane.
On watching the video again, I do wonder if the caravanner actually lost the plot and thought there would be room (or room made) for him, when suddenly he was confronted by the barrier, and as people tend do do in a funk, aimed for the gap he was looking at. All he had to do when he couldn't get to the exit was carry on...which is probably what the lorry driver intended to make him do.
I still think the worst of the two was the lorry driver. The caravannist was just incompetent/confused/panicked - the lorry driver wanted to hurt somebody, if only by cutting him off spitefully. He got more than he bargained for. Maybe he was trying to "teach somebody a lesson", if so he got it badly wrong.
|
Conflicts almost always require a minimum of two combatants. Either driver could have avoided that impact. One was more at fault of course but the collision didn't need to happen.
The world is full of stupid people and when two of them happen to be in the same place at the same time, really stupid things happen.
|
Both pig headed and it resulted in tears. Close to where I live the road narrows between buildings to only allow single file traffic. There are plenty of priority signs from both directions. Visitors sometimes do not see them at all, and there are poor sight lines. Often I have priority over the quarry wagons, but as they are invariably fully loaded coming in that direction I am more than happy to let them have priority over me. It is simply good driving manners to let them through rather than force them to stop and restart, which is easier for me to do than them. They always acknowledge with a friendly wave. Probably costs me 15 seconds, and these days I cannot drink a pint that fast. I like to think of it as some sort of karma.
Not saying I'm correct, but that's just me.
|
|
One thing I was taught in the dim distant past and I try to remember is "Do not drive into a problem".
|
>> Conflicts almost always require a minimum of two combatants.
>> .....The world is full of stupid people
>>
Perhaps I have been unlucky.
!. Sitting in a stationary queue of traffic fore and aft when I was hit from behind.
" Sorry my foot slipped off the clutch" Why was a foot on the clutch when it was very clear that nowt ahead was moving?
2. Stationary, waiting for an old dear to pass parked cars and return to her side of the road but she drove straight into me.
3. 10mph ish in rush hour when hit from behind, pushed into a BM estate and my Triumph 2000 totally wrecked. A woman TWO vehicles behind hit the gas instead of the brakes.
|
>> There is a far more 'professional' way to handle situations like
>> this when it all happens so slowly.
I think that you and I have a different understanding of the word "professional".
|
Pat wrote:>>There is a far more 'professional' way to handle situations like this when it all
>>happens so slowly.
>>The knack is to stop just before hitting the car or the caravan but trapping them in the
>>position where they can't go forward or backwards, then refuse to move until they have
>>looked suitably stupid and incurred the wrath of everyone behind being held up.
Seriously? And you wonder why lorry drivers have a bad reputation? What do you think you are; a headmistress punishing a naughty boy?
You should be ashamed of yourself.
Quite funny though.
|
Right or wrong it gives a certain amount of satisfaction and doesn't cause anger or injury and yes the idiot with the caravan needs punishing, so does the lorry driver for being an angry dash cam drama queen.
Dash cams bring out the worst in some drivers and there are those who do and those of us who never would.
Pat
|
>>The man himself may be tortured by 'what if' thoughts to the end of his days though.
>> He's the only person who knows whether he's at fault at all.
See below his response to the trapped car passenger
>> >>IMO 10% car drivers fault vs 90% professional lorry drivers fault.<<
>>
>> As soon as 'fault' and 'lorry driver' appear in the same sentence the lorry driver
>> becomes 'professional':)
>>
I thought all lorry drivers were supposed to be professional.
I thought they have to pass extra tests obey extra rules etc etc. hence the label professional as opposed to most of us being just drivers
>> The woman was probably running away to disown her husband, who wouldn't in that situation?
>> I would.
For your information
"His wife didnt get out that was a lady in a car his wife was stuck in the car below my front"
to quote Mark Hazell
>>
>> The lorry driver needs to learn some panache.
>>
Flamboyant and confidence of style or manner!
>> There is a far more 'professional' way to handle situations like this when it all
>> happens so slowly.
>>
Gently brake and then all, including the queue behind can smoothly procceed maybe?
>> The knack is to stop just before hitting the car or the caravan but trapping
>> them in the position where they can't go forward or backwards, then refuse to move
>> until they have looked suitably stupid and incurred the wrath of everyone behind being held
>> up.
>>
>> This has the added bonus of stopping them ever doing it again!
>>
>> Pat
>>
Did you forget the smiley?i
|
> Sorry commerdriver, they tell me you're not a trucker. Your handle is misleading. No blame
>> though.
>>
No I am in it with large 3 letter company
The handle, unchanged since joining backroom years ago is that I have a Commercial camper, nothing to do with trucks
|
I see the lorry driver has upped his privacy on that facebok video page so I can't see it, he's also made the Youtube version private.
Not surprised as his actions and comments made him look a right git.
|
>> he's also made the Youtube version private.
I saw from the handful of comments that followed the clip, he mentioned that it was now in the hands of the police.
so he's either took it down pending police action against the other driver, or the police have quite rightly slapped him for being a tit.
|
>>I see the lorry driver has upped his privacy on that facebok video page so I can't see it,
>> he's also made the Youtube version private.
>>Not surprised as his actions and comments made him look a right git.
>>I saw from the handful of comments that followed the clip, he mentioned that it was now in the hands of the police.
Quote
"!'ve got 2 more vids of him gobbing off afterwards that the police can listen to"
i'm gonna hold the ( the videos ) til after the plod have viewed them mate"
>>so he's either took it down pending police action against the other driver, or the police have quite rightly slapped him for being a tit.
" Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt "
Abraham Lincoln
In todays world it applies to Facebook and Youtube.
I am expecting further action from the authorities.
|
>> I see the lorry driver has upped his privacy on that facebok video page so
>> I can't see it, he's also made the Youtube version private.
It's still available on other websites
www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/watch-astonishing-road-rage-footage-9087940
Also, Surrey Police (on their twitter account anyway) agree the caravan driver was in the wrong.
images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/04/21/e2063ff981a699dd2de81268d5ad54b3.jpg
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 22 Apr 15 at 09:57
|
>> > Sorry commerdriver, they tell me you're not a trucker. Your handle is misleading. No
>> blame
>> >> though.
>> >>
>> No I am in it with large 3 letter company
>> The handle, unchanged since joining backroom years ago is that I have a Commercial camper,
>> nothing to do with trucks
>>
Joys of updating on the phone and autocorrect the camper is a Commer
|
|
Oops ! Multi tasking failure. :-)
|
>> Words fail me !!!!
>>
>> www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3048673/Moment-driver-deliberately-blocks-sneaky-motorist-trying-beat-traffic-jam-undertaking-manoeuvre-forcing-wait-ten-minutes-like-else.html
Interesting to see the DM readers' comments though - top rated is someone siding with the queuers (1243 green, 211 red) although 2nd favourite is with the undertaker (890/233). So looks like opinion is divided.
|
Sometimes in a strange area you get it wrong. Sometimes you miss the signs on approach to junctions due to the size of the heavies. Sometimes people think they can push in. If you get into the first scenario you are reliant upon the good nature of someone easing off and letting you in. The caravan tugger gave a clear indication, and well infront of the heavy, of wanting to filter off to the left.
But what you don't do is make the assumption that someone is going to let you in. So you have to keep moving straight on until that there is some form of acknowledgement that you are going to be let in, either a flash and/or by slowing down to give you a gap. If you get your speed and position right its not an issue. If it isn't happening then unfortunately its indicator off and making alternative arrangements. What you don't do is force yourself in.
Not too dissimilar to the attitude of drivers travelling down the onslip onto a motorway and expecting to emerge onto the motorway whatever the vehicle positions and traffic conditions.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Tue 21 Apr 15 at 17:36
|
>> Sometimes in a strange area you get it wrong. >>
I think that small minded who never venture far from home are the ones that assume everyone in the world knows the one way systems and lane layouts on their patch. Also the local conventions for car park layouts and direction of movement.
|
An indicator/trafficator shows ones intention not an actuality. Just because someone intends or wants to do something does not mean the other traffic has to let them, although it is politer if they do.
Far too many people think they have a right to do something just because they've indicated.
|
Agree with both of the above. I find it really stressful in a strange place, particularly in one way systems where you are trying to juggle directions, signs, lights and road markings, oh and stay safe. Throw in the dark and rain. Then you have other drivers sat right on your back corners making it impossible to change lane. Its then you have to have your wits and good observation. Indicate, slow and wait for someone to give you some space.
Forgot the last stress builder - SWMBO giving you ear ache :))
|
>> Agree with both of the above. I find it really stressful in a strange place,
>> particularly in one way systems where you are trying to juggle directions, signs, lights and
>> road markings, oh and stay safe.
Its a case of knowing where to be and when on most roads, specially in towns with left or right only lanes, where the regulars expect you to know. Sat Nav helps immensely there. If you don't know, do whatever you do, right or wrong, with confidence and decisiveness.
|
Agree about the SatNav. The ability to get back on track even if you have taken a wrong turning removes much of the stress of drivng in a strange town. Wouldn't be without one.
Strangely don't really like the inbuilt types. Much prefer a cheap portable located on the screen so I can keep my eye on the road as well as the screen.
|
>> Its a case of knowing where to be and when on most roads, specially in
>> towns with left or right only lanes, where the regulars expect you to know. Sat
>> Nav helps immensely there. If you don't know, do whatever you do, right or wrong,
>> with confidence and decisiveness.
And WATCH OUT FOR BUSES!
;>)
|
>> Sometimes in a strange area you get it wrong.
Some still get it wrong when they're in a familiar area. Me included.
|
>> Some still get it wrong when they're in a familiar area. Me included.
Me too, increasingly.
Drove to London and back today, just to Clapham which I knew very well thirty years ago. No major changes affecting me but I still found I had forgotten, occluded from my mental map, a mile or so of the A3 through Wandsworth to Clapham Common and a road just off it where we had to go to a literary party, a posthumous book launch of a novel by Herself's late cousin.
The cousin's elder son works in F1, spindoctor for a team. So there were four names I recognized from F1 (management though, no drivers) and some vaguely familiar mugs. I didn't want to bore anyone though, even the son who is a good friend but was running the event so busy.
So no F1 for me, just a few exchanges with this person and that in the literary phalanx, a tough-old-broad Oxford friend and a lady novelist who read a couple of extracts from the book being launched. Too knackered and gaga to get away with either conversation. The lady novelist looked puzzled as my discourse wavered, and the Oxford friend has always treated me with sarcastic disdain. Although we are still friends after 500 years or so.
Only one of my daughters turned up, the literary and movie one. A lot of herself's cousins though. No grandnippers, the occasion was too grand... heh heh.
PS: the car was a sort of long and wide, unnecessarily so really, Peugeot estate, 607 or 608, something like that, with rails along the sides of the roof. A turbo diesel about 130,000 miles old, everything working more or less, dirty but not battered in black. Two cousins from here said we could go in their car but only if I would drive. They are terrified of driving in London.
I'm always pleased when I can do the driving and I suppose that Peugeot is a nice motor in its way but I didn't get used to it in the available 130 miles or so. I find six-speed gearboxes fussy and annoying so was often in the wrong gear. And top is so high - about 27mph per 1,000 revs - that you have to be doing 60 or so to be comfortable in it on the rolling English road. And coming into London... I talk arrogantly of using gearboxes fluently, just as easy as auto... but I'm as crap as the next person in that particular motor, so far. A trace of sporadic front wheel imbalance from time to time. And the owner didn't seem to know how to work the heater. And the car squeaked at me angrily whenever I did anything. The upside is that it probably bettered 40 mpg and we were well over the speed limit a lot of the time when possible.
|
>> Only one of my daughters turned up, the literary and movie one. A lot of herself's cousins though. No grandnippers, the occasion was too grand... heh heh.
There were three people who looked like priests. One was the late cousin's first husband and father of her sons, actually a distinguished concert pianist who just dresses like that. The others were real priests though: one a formerly well-known political agitator, sitting with the late cousin's second husband and widower, a friend and frequent drinking companion of mine - the widower, not the priest. The third was some sort of mysterious east European Catholic priest called Vlad. He had a piercing, penetrating gaze. Went with the name somehow.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Wed 22 Apr 15 at 15:50
|
One less caravan on the road - Old Navy
