Bridge collapse on M20
Discussion
Iva Barchetta said:
Halmyre said:
I wouldn't be surprised. The Arkleston Road bridge over the M8 near Renfrew suffered from more than its fair share of 'strikes', my lorry-driving dad (who never hit it himself) always reckoned it was noticeably lower than any other bridge on the motorway. It was raised by 150mm in 2009, 40 years since it was built, to "bring it into line both with current standards and other bridges along the M8".
Assuming this one had its low height on warning signs that some ignored.https://goo.gl/maps/AoVHesgaiz92
Do any UK motorway bridges have low height warnings, come to that?
I guess with this accident we need to know the reason why the loader lorry was in the hard shoulder lane. If he's having some emergency and is taking some action to get off the main carriageway then we have a mitigation, if the part of that bridge is below the standard height limit accross motorways. The use of painted lines to protect the bridge is frankly laughable if it is under height that would be normal.
If however the crane would have struck the bridge in lane one also, which I suspect to probably would have, then the lorry driver has some explaining to do as to why his load is over height.
Clearly however the bridge was an accident waiting to happen. The impact itself dose not look to have been enough to be so catestrophic as the damage to the crane appears negligible. A bit more than a heavy nudge, but either way the bridge deck shouldn't have come down without at least have smashing the crane. All such structures are going to need looking at imho.
If however the crane would have struck the bridge in lane one also, which I suspect to probably would have, then the lorry driver has some explaining to do as to why his load is over height.
Clearly however the bridge was an accident waiting to happen. The impact itself dose not look to have been enough to be so catestrophic as the damage to the crane appears negligible. A bit more than a heavy nudge, but either way the bridge deck shouldn't have come down without at least have smashing the crane. All such structures are going to need looking at imho.
CAPP0 said:
Digga said:
I do wonder…...whether ………. there was a cock up with the bridge height?
That section of the M20 was opened in 1971, and the bridge connects two sections of another road which presumably ran straight through beforehand, so truer will have been a bridge there since it opened. I've lived in the area all my life and the bridge has been as it is for as long as I can remember; it may or may not be the original but I'd be very surprised if it hasn't been there in its current form for at the very least 15 years. It would be quite extraordinary if the height was wrong and they had just winged it and got away with it for that long. First, the level of the road surface can change.
Second, on many motorways, the hard shoulders have recently been put into use, as a sticking plaster cure to underinvestment in roads, as live carriageways. If this happened here, it might just be that the innermost part of the carriageway had not been used by traffic before.
Digga said:
CAPP0 said:
Digga said:
I do wonder…...whether ………. there was a cock up with the bridge height?
That section of the M20 was opened in 1971, and the bridge connects two sections of another road which presumably ran straight through beforehand, so truer will have been a bridge there since it opened. I've lived in the area all my life and the bridge has been as it is for as long as I can remember; it may or may not be the original but I'd be very surprised if it hasn't been there in its current form for at the very least 15 years. It would be quite extraordinary if the height was wrong and they had just winged it and got away with it for that long. First, the level of the road surface can change.
Second, on many motorways, the hard shoulders have recently been put into use, as a sticking plaster cure to underinvestment in roads, as live carriageways. If this happened here, it might just be that the innermost part of the carriageway had not been used by traffic before.
The section there isn't a smart motorway of any sort, so unless for some reason trafpol or the wombles had directed traffic to use the hard shoulder, then it should have remained for emergency use only. But I think we'd know by now if that had happened. Perhaps the truck had stopped for some reason and only recently pulled away and was still building speed. But I'd still expect the minimum clearance to be there unless signs said otherwise? That hatching doesn't really tell a driver very much.
In extreme, ie rush hour, traffic, and if/when the M26 has been congested or closed, there is a possibility that traffic could back up as it approaches the J3 intersection but that exit slip is c. 1km away and I think it would have been reported already if traffic elsewhere was bad enough to have caused that much tailback.
It remains a complete mystery to me at this time how (a) the truck has passed under multiple other bridges before getting to the point of collision (even if it joined at J4 there are at east 4 bridges before this one, including another footbridge), and (b) how this bridge has stood for such a long time without this ever happening before. Those 2 points seem mutually exclusive.
CAPP0 said:
It remains a complete mystery to me at this time how (a) the truck has passed under multiple other bridges before getting to the point of collision (even if it joined at J4 there are at east 4 bridges before this one, including another footbridge), and (b) how this bridge has stood for such a long time without this ever happening before. Those 2 points seem mutually exclusive.
My thoughts exactly. It doesn't stack up, so there is, somewhere in all of theis and element of the maverick or unusual, that has caused the event.rolando said:
The Q&A comments are priceless.Speed recovery to the injured parties.
A bridge in my hometown has its own webpage, it gets hit so often.
http://howmanydayssincemontaguestreetbridgehasbeen...
https://www.facebook.com/Montague-St-Bridge-412169...
A bridge in my hometown has its own webpage, it gets hit so often.
http://howmanydayssincemontaguestreetbridgehasbeen...
https://www.facebook.com/Montague-St-Bridge-412169...
CAPP0 said:
It remains a complete mystery to me at this time how (a) the truck has passed under multiple other bridges before getting to the point of collision (even if it joined at J4 there are at east 4 bridges before this one, including another footbridge), and (b) how this bridge has stood for such a long time without this ever happening before. Those 2 points seem mutually exclusive.
If youve driven that stretch of road that bridge has always looked low at that sideThe difference this time around is the digger is on the hard shoulder so even less height
We have to assume it was being driven on the hard shoulder so was the driver worried about height so chose the H/S to try driving slowly under the bridge
Another slopey bridge (but not so low) on the network is just west of the Coldra at Newport
For years youd see damage to the bridge underside then one year the bridge knocked an over height container off the back of a lorry - cant find it on interweb now
Smokehead said:
I take it the road markings on the hard shoulder under the ex-bridge mean move out to lane one?
They are chevrons as Highway code rule 130 - do not enter solid chevrons. You see it a lot on widened-on-the-cheap, sorry, "value engineered" widened motorways where there isn't enough clearance, either horizontal or vertical, for the full design vehicle envelope on the hard shoulder lane, e.g. here between Denham viaduct and Junction 16https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5758063,-0.53580...
This is an interesting POV: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3088214,0.379774...
Digga said:
This is an interesting POV: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3088214,0.379774...
Why is it interesting? The kink in the bridge is where the photos have been stitched together.KTF said:
Digga said:
This is an interesting POV: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3088214,0.379774...
Why is it interesting? The kink in the bridge is where the photos have been stitched together.Bit of an update..
Taken off trucknet.com
On Auto Renovations FB page.
After speaking to a mate just now, i now have some facts for you all the lorry was on the hard shoulder as i said he had stopped with a possible blow out after checking the tyres were ok the driver headed up the hard shoulder gaining speed to join the carriageway the vehicle its self is tracked and in the tracker the maximum speed the lorry got up to before the impact was 21mph and then stopped dead, yesterday the police measured the height of the digger arm and was found to be at 16'7" with the bridge still on the front of the trailer and the airbags on the trailer at full stretch on the axle straps, today once the bridge had been removed and the trailer had settled at running height the digger arm was measured again and was found to be 16'6, so as it states that all bridges on any motorway should be no lower than 16'6 unless stated. And as the driver had picked the digger and dumper up from the roadworks on the London bound section under junction 4 the lorry and load had passed under at least 4 other bridges in lane 1 before coming to this one and never touched any of them. These are facts and not opinion. Thanks for reading
Taken off trucknet.com
On Auto Renovations FB page.
After speaking to a mate just now, i now have some facts for you all the lorry was on the hard shoulder as i said he had stopped with a possible blow out after checking the tyres were ok the driver headed up the hard shoulder gaining speed to join the carriageway the vehicle its self is tracked and in the tracker the maximum speed the lorry got up to before the impact was 21mph and then stopped dead, yesterday the police measured the height of the digger arm and was found to be at 16'7" with the bridge still on the front of the trailer and the airbags on the trailer at full stretch on the axle straps, today once the bridge had been removed and the trailer had settled at running height the digger arm was measured again and was found to be 16'6, so as it states that all bridges on any motorway should be no lower than 16'6 unless stated. And as the driver had picked the digger and dumper up from the roadworks on the London bound section under junction 4 the lorry and load had passed under at least 4 other bridges in lane 1 before coming to this one and never touched any of them. These are facts and not opinion. Thanks for reading
DAVEVO9 said:
Bit of an update..
Taken off trucknet.com
On Auto Renovations FB page.
After speaking to a mate just now, i now have some facts for you all the lorry was on the hard shoulder as i said he had stopped with a possible blow out after checking the tyres were ok the driver headed up the hard shoulder gaining speed to join the carriageway the vehicle its self is tracked and in the tracker the maximum speed the lorry got up to before the impact was 21mph and then stopped dead, yesterday the police measured the height of the digger arm and was found to be at 16'7" with the bridge still on the front of the trailer and the airbags on the trailer at full stretch on the axle straps, today once the bridge had been removed and the trailer had settled at running height the digger arm was measured again and was found to be 16'6, so as it states that all bridges on any motorway should be no lower than 16'6 unless stated. And as the driver had picked the digger and dumper up from the roadworks on the London bound section under junction 4 the lorry and load had passed under at least 4 other bridges in lane 1 before coming to this one and never touched any of them. These are facts and not opinion. Thanks for reading
Kinda stacks up with what I said/asked yesterday evening.Taken off trucknet.com
On Auto Renovations FB page.
After speaking to a mate just now, i now have some facts for you all the lorry was on the hard shoulder as i said he had stopped with a possible blow out after checking the tyres were ok the driver headed up the hard shoulder gaining speed to join the carriageway the vehicle its self is tracked and in the tracker the maximum speed the lorry got up to before the impact was 21mph and then stopped dead, yesterday the police measured the height of the digger arm and was found to be at 16'7" with the bridge still on the front of the trailer and the airbags on the trailer at full stretch on the axle straps, today once the bridge had been removed and the trailer had settled at running height the digger arm was measured again and was found to be 16'6, so as it states that all bridges on any motorway should be no lower than 16'6 unless stated. And as the driver had picked the digger and dumper up from the roadworks on the London bound section under junction 4 the lorry and load had passed under at least 4 other bridges in lane 1 before coming to this one and never touched any of them. These are facts and not opinion. Thanks for reading
CAPP0 said:
DAVEVO9 said:
Bit of an update..
Taken off trucknet.com
On Auto Renovations FB page.
After speaking to a mate just now, i now have some facts for you all the lorry was on the hard shoulder as i said he had stopped with a possible blow out after checking the tyres were ok the driver headed up the hard shoulder gaining speed to join the carriageway the vehicle its self is tracked and in the tracker the maximum speed the lorry got up to before the impact was 21mph and then stopped dead, yesterday the police measured the height of the digger arm and was found to be at 16'7" with the bridge still on the front of the trailer and the airbags on the trailer at full stretch on the axle straps, today once the bridge had been removed and the trailer had settled at running height the digger arm was measured again and was found to be 16'6, so as it states that all bridges on any motorway should be no lower than 16'6 unless stated. And as the driver had picked the digger and dumper up from the roadworks on the London bound section under junction 4 the lorry and load had passed under at least 4 other bridges in lane 1 before coming to this one and never touched any of them. These are facts and not opinion. Thanks for reading
Kinda stacks up with what I said/asked yesterday evening.Taken off trucknet.com
On Auto Renovations FB page.
After speaking to a mate just now, i now have some facts for you all the lorry was on the hard shoulder as i said he had stopped with a possible blow out after checking the tyres were ok the driver headed up the hard shoulder gaining speed to join the carriageway the vehicle its self is tracked and in the tracker the maximum speed the lorry got up to before the impact was 21mph and then stopped dead, yesterday the police measured the height of the digger arm and was found to be at 16'7" with the bridge still on the front of the trailer and the airbags on the trailer at full stretch on the axle straps, today once the bridge had been removed and the trailer had settled at running height the digger arm was measured again and was found to be 16'6, so as it states that all bridges on any motorway should be no lower than 16'6 unless stated. And as the driver had picked the digger and dumper up from the roadworks on the London bound section under junction 4 the lorry and load had passed under at least 4 other bridges in lane 1 before coming to this one and never touched any of them. These are facts and not opinion. Thanks for reading
DAVEVO9 said:
Bit of an update..
Taken off trucknet.com
On Auto Renovations FB page.
After speaking to a mate just now, i now have some facts for you all the lorry was on the hard shoulder as i said he had stopped with a possible blow out after checking the tyres were ok the driver headed up the hard shoulder gaining speed to join the carriageway the vehicle its self is tracked and in the tracker the maximum speed the lorry got up to before the impact was 21mph and then stopped dead, yesterday the police measured the height of the digger arm and was found to be at 16'7" with the bridge still on the front of the trailer and the airbags on the trailer at full stretch on the axle straps, today once the bridge had been removed and the trailer had settled at running height the digger arm was measured again and was found to be 16'6, so as it states that all bridges on any motorway should be no lower than 16'6 unless stated. And as the driver had picked the digger and dumper up from the roadworks on the London bound section under junction 4 the lorry and load had passed under at least 4 other bridges in lane 1 before coming to this one and never touched any of them. These are facts and not opinion. Thanks for reading
Depends whether height over the hard shoulder is allowed to be lower.Taken off trucknet.com
On Auto Renovations FB page.
After speaking to a mate just now, i now have some facts for you all the lorry was on the hard shoulder as i said he had stopped with a possible blow out after checking the tyres were ok the driver headed up the hard shoulder gaining speed to join the carriageway the vehicle its self is tracked and in the tracker the maximum speed the lorry got up to before the impact was 21mph and then stopped dead, yesterday the police measured the height of the digger arm and was found to be at 16'7" with the bridge still on the front of the trailer and the airbags on the trailer at full stretch on the axle straps, today once the bridge had been removed and the trailer had settled at running height the digger arm was measured again and was found to be 16'6, so as it states that all bridges on any motorway should be no lower than 16'6 unless stated. And as the driver had picked the digger and dumper up from the roadworks on the London bound section under junction 4 the lorry and load had passed under at least 4 other bridges in lane 1 before coming to this one and never touched any of them. These are facts and not opinion. Thanks for reading
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff