Tipper crash in Bath

[bigjim]

I've held an HGV licence since 1976. It's drivers responsibility to ensure vehicle is roadworthy before taking it out. If you are stopped by VOSPA [different name now I think] you the driver as well as the company will be fined. Obviously you canot be expected to know what the hidden condition is as it's limited to a visual inspection of tyres, lights etc and checking the brakes are working. As he left the yard they would have been, but an experienced driver would be engine braking on that hill. So the brakes were working, but the driver cooked them. Inexperience.

[Vorpal]

I've held an HGV licence since 1976. It's drivers responsibility to ensure vehicle is roadworthy before taking it out. If you are stopped by VOSPA [different name now I think] you the driver as well as the company will be fined. Obviously you canot be expected to know what the hidden condition is as it's limited to a visual inspection of tyres, lights etc and checking the brakes are working. As he left the yard they would have been, but an experienced driver would be engine braking on that hill. So the brakes were working, but the driver cooked them. Inexperience.

He couldn't use exhaust braking. Apparently it wasn't working, either.

And if the driver had read the manual for the lorry, he would have known that it was a possibility that exhaust braking wasn't working because the ABS light was on. He only learned to drive that particular vehicle it a few days before, from a driver who told him that the ABS light was 'always on' and that it was a (possibly intermittent) problem with the light.

He said he had told Gordon about the ABS light the day before, and that Gordon had said: "Don't worry just carry on and drive it."

He was also reassured by the fact that other drivers used the lorry.

http://www.24liveblog.com/live/1366373
http://www.24liveblog.com/live/1366621

[bigjim]

He couldn't use exhaust braking. Apparently it wasn't working, either.

You don't need exhaust braking. It's just a good extra safety feature. I wonder how they train HGV drivers these days? I learnt to drive in a truck. We didn't even have air brakes. We were taught to engine brake as the old brakes were so bad and a truck could be uncontrollable on steep hills. A lot of hills used to have an escape lane for this reason. Cars are so good these days that drivers are taught to slow down by only using the brakes. They have no concept of engine braking as it is obsolete now, due to improved technology. Watch how many drivers drive right up to a red light and then just slam the brakes on. Now put that young driver in a truck and does he still have that same mindset. Truck brakes are also very good these days, a million miles away from the old Fodens and Scammels I would have driven as a youngster. But with no exhaust brake available, in that situation, he should have been going down the box. An experienced old school driver would be doing it by instinct and entering that hill in low gear anyway.

[BakfietsUK]

If I figure the last couple of posts by bigjim correctly, the driver has to have some responsibility in law for the crash. To my knowledge, he has not been convicted of anything. Although he seems vey remorseful about what happened and is clearly suffering the emotional effects of his alleged actions, it seems justice has not been done. I wonder if the families of the deceased persons figure that some closure would mean a criminal conviction for the driver as well as the operator and the maintenance technician.

It's time, in my opinion, that some of the most facilitative parts of health and safety culture as applied to industry and organisations is applied to road traffic law. To my knowledge, anyone involved in any aspect of a rail crash is potentially liable to a charge of manslaughter if they can be proven as negligent. That includes the driver. With the driver of the Glasgow lorry crash not seeming to have to take responsibility for what seemed like breeches of certification procedure, I think the law needs to change.

[reohn2]

He couldn't use exhaust braking. Apparently it wasn't working, either.

You don't need exhaust braking. It's just a good extra safety feature. I wonder how they train HGV drivers these days? I learnt to drive in a truck. We didn't even have air brakes. We were taught to engine brake as the old brakes were so bad and a truck could be uncontrollable on steep hills. A lot of hills used to have an escape lane for this reason. Cars are so good these days that drivers are taught to slow down by only using the brakes. They have no concept of engine braking as it is obsolete now, due to improved technology. Watch how many drivers drive right up to a red light and then just slam the brakes on. Now put that young driver in a truck and does he still have that same mindset. Truck brakes are also very good these days, a million miles away from the old Fodens and Scammels I would have driven as a youngster. But with no exhaust brake available, in that situation, he should have been going down the box. An experienced old school driver would be doing it by instinct and entering that hill in low gear anyway.

Spot on IMO.
Clog and anchor driving is very prevalent these days,and I believe 'going down the box' is outlawed on the driving test

[jezer]

The driver was at fault for trying to drive down the hill. I know it well and heavy vehicles are banned from it.

[Vorpal]

Spot on IMO.
Clog and anchor driving is very prevalent these days,and I believe 'going down the box' is outlawed on the driving test

It's not outlawed, only discouraged. I think if someone used engine braking once or twice on a driving exam, a reasonable examiner is likely to either forgive it, or mark it as a minor. I doubt even an inflexible examiner would fail someone on that alone, unless they did it consistently.

I had to train myself out of it to pass my driving exam & I still managed to do it once. The examiner noticed and asked me about it, and I explained that the Highway Code recommends the use of engine braking, which is impossible at the torques of higher gears, and that I was going down a hill approaching a junction and I judged it safer. I then went on to explain that I had been driving that way for 20 years and made much less use of downshifting than I had in past. I also explained that my driving instructor had told me the 'gears are for go & brakes are for slow', and that we had had a number of lengthy discussion on that very topic. My driving examiner seemed to accept the explanation. At any rate, he didn't mark me up for it. The only thing he marked me up for was a minor for 'not making progress'.

[bigjim]

I can't see anywhere where the brakes [apart from the exhaust brake] were faulty. These deaths IMO were caused by bad driving. Not knowing the area is no excuse. Many of us don't know the area when delivering. He said he was trying to put it in third gear. So he was in fourth on that hill! I imagine it was a six speed box so he was in the wrong gear to be travelling down a steep hill, loaded. So he is now panicking and freewheeling out of control. Beyond me how he was able to walk away without losing his license or insisting on another test or further training.

[Ivor Tingting]

I hope the the owner of this cowboy outfit and has crap mechanic get lengthy jail sentences and be banned from either holding office as a director ever again or working with trucks in any capacity. Their criminal negligence killed four people. The Company should also be shut down as I should imagine all the staff were all complicit to some degree in sticking two fingers up to road safety and the law.

[mjr]

I can't see anywhere where the brakes [apart from the exhaust brake] were faulty. These deaths IMO were caused by bad driving. Not knowing the area is no excuse. Many of us don't know the area when delivering. He said he was trying to put it in third gear. So he was in fourth on that hill! I imagine it was a six speed box so he was in the wrong gear to be travelling down a steep hill, loaded. So he is now panicking and freewheeling out of control. Beyond me how he was able to walk away without losing his license or insisting on another test or further training.

One of the reports says 6 of 8 axle brakes had failed, but I suppose that's after the crash and it's not easy to know how many failed during the episode because the company tester wasn't testing them beforehand like he should.

The top of Lansdown Lane was clearly marked as unsuitable (more yellow signs and red paint since the crash) which is why I'm mystified. I guess he had some defence but I don't know what the valid possibilities are.

[SA_SA_SA]

When I learnt to drive you had to change down through all the gears (4-3-2) but I don't think it was for engine braking: just to always be close to the theoretical best gear for that speed but I always thought the time spent with clutch in for the extra change canceled it out anyway. Always using the engine as a significant brake is surely just wasting fuel/causing pollution. I would only think of engine braking down hills where you don't want to risk brake fade as still mentioned in the highway code rule 160.

[roubaixtuesday]

I guess he had some defence but I don't know what the valid possibilities are.

According to the Guardian he was following the firm's owner at the time. In those circumstances I can understand the acquittal.

[thirdcrank]

... I guess he had some defence but I don't know what the valid possibilities are.

No doubt some accounts of the trial will be published. This will be back in the news at the sentencing hearing for the two men who were convicted and I expect the judge's sentencing comments will include how the three verdicts have put the blame on them. I'm only guessing but I fancy the driver's defence was run on the lines that he was a hard-working young man, desperate to impress his boss and acting totally under the influence of his co-accused (who included his boss.) The jury doesn't have to find reasons to acquit: the prosecution has to convince them of guilt.

[Vorpal]

I can't see anywhere where the brakes [apart from the exhaust brake] were faulty. These deaths IMO were caused by bad driving. Not knowing the area is no excuse. Many of us don't know the area when delivering. He said he was trying to put it in third gear. So he was in fourth on that hill! I imagine it was a six speed box so he was in the wrong gear to be travelling down a steep hill, loaded. So he is now panicking and freewheeling out of control. Beyond me how he was able to walk away without losing his license or insisting on another test or further training.

His brakes completely failed. He tried to use them to slow down for the 20 mph, and they didn't work. Nor did the exhaust brake or the handbrake.

He was following his boss and didn't know where their destination was. That meant two things. He had to keep up with him, and he didn't know that he wasn't taking his load within the restricted zone.

[meic]

Only those of us who actually maintain and service our own brakes are in a position to know of any internal defects. All a driver of a vehicle serviced by another can do is inspect various exposed parts of the system and detect any abnormality of feel or response from the brake system once they have started driving.

The workings of a HGV's pneumatic brakes are outside of most peoples' experience.