Bridge collapse on M20

Author
Discussion

Vaud

50,507 posts

155 months

Friday 2nd September 2016
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Nahhh.. that's the Gruffalo
(for all the parents of a certain age group)


Digga

40,324 posts

283 months

Friday 2nd September 2016
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I used to have a Gruffalo, but he sadly passed away earlier this year.


Hunky Dory

1,049 posts

205 months

Friday 2nd September 2016
quotequote all
Digga said:
es, they used Deutz a fair bit, as well as Dormans. Those early machines were so good it nearly finished the firm, because they went on forever.

British machines got left behind by the Japs though. The old man went from RB to JCB, but at that time, they couldn't really compete either, despite taking the competition's machines to bits:

Out of intrest, where was that photo taken? It looks very familiar.

Digga

40,324 posts

283 months

Friday 2nd September 2016
quotequote all
Hunky Dory said:
Digga said:
es, they used Deutz a fair bit, as well as Dormans. Those early machines were so good it nearly finished the firm, because they went on forever.

British machines got left behind by the Japs though. The old man went from RB to JCB, but at that time, they couldn't really compete either, despite taking the competition's machines to bits:

Out of intrest, where was that photo taken? It looks very familiar.
Old JCB test site, near Ashbourne.

You can see all the company Chavaliers in this one of the nicely bogged Hitachi:


tight fart

2,913 posts

273 months

Friday 2nd September 2016
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
yes
Does anyone else here have an apt user name scratchchin
No

hidetheelephants

24,357 posts

193 months

Friday 2nd September 2016
quotequote all
pim said:
Deutz engine good ship engines run forever.
Fecking expensive bits though. Contrary to my username I have no practical experience with elephants.

Did they manage to recover that 360 or is it still there? hehe

KTF

9,805 posts

150 months

Friday 2nd September 2016
quotequote all
tight fart said:
saaby93 said:
yes
Does anyone else here have an apt user name scratchchin
No
biggrin

Private Pile

754 posts

195 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
227bhp said:
Private Pile said:
227bhp said:
If you measured 10mm away from the max would you drive it under a bridge on the motorway? I know I wouldn't.
Not on the motorway, but I do this almost on a daily basis.
Well therein lies the difference. I don't drive a truck, but i'd want to see about 300mm/1ft less, what would be your tolerance? Is there a tolerance quoted to work from?
Sorry for the delay 227, I'm seldom in this area.

And just to clarify, I know nothing about the bridge strike, so I've no idea if the plant driver was at fault.

A 1 foot clearance would be nice but isn't practical. Look at all those double deckers trailers you pass on the motorway. The majority of those will be 16' plus.

To answer your question, my tolerance is what the sign says. If I'm 13'6" then I'll go under a 13'6" bridge. If I'm 13'7" then I won't. As long as I don't exceed the height then I'll use it. I do still duck going under bridges that I've used dozens of time though.

It's like a speed limit sign. 30 is ok, 31 isn't. Weight limits signs are the same, your either legal or not ( though there are exemptions )

I've also driven extensively in Europe for a major multinational oil and gas company and that is their policy too. It's not about fly by night companies cutting corners.

Anyway 227, I hope this help. I'm sure we'll find out in due course the true story what happened



rolando

2,151 posts

155 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
Private Pile said:
If I'm 13'6" then I'll go under a 13'6" bridge. If I'm 13'7" then I won't.
As has already been said before, 13' 6" under 13' 6" bridge is what, in engineering term, is called an interference fit, i.e. it won't go. To prevent bridge strike, some clearance is essential.

Private Pile

754 posts

195 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
Rolando, the sign is the max height of the vehicle allowed under the bridge not the height of the bridge.
I'm off out, but I'll try and explain better later on.

rolando

2,151 posts

155 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
Private Pile said:
Rolando, the sign is the max height of the vehicle allowed under the bridge not the height of the bridge.
I'm off out, but I'll try and explain better later on.
Agree, the sign allows clearance.

saaby93

32,038 posts

178 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
rolando said:
Agree, the sign allows clearance.
If there is a sign

Digga Whats that picture of a snake doing with your dog?

Digga

40,324 posts

283 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
rolando said:
Agree, the sign allows clearance.
If there is a sign

Digga Whats that picture of a snake doing with your dog?
There's been a lot of them about this summer. Next door's Labrador Retriever was bitten by one a month or so back and was quite poorly.

Unfortunately, it seems that unless they're on the move, dogs can't see snakes - as the picture illustrates.

rolando

2,151 posts

155 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
If there is a sign
If no sign, the assumption is that there is clearance for 16' 3", as I understand it

CAPP0

19,583 posts

203 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
I don't know whether this will work or not, but it seems they took the scientific approach to removing the remaining half of the bridge:

https://www.facebook.com/Colin.Fox1994/videos/1015...

saaby93

32,038 posts

178 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
CAPP0 said:
I don't know whether this will work or not, but it seems they took the scientific approach to removing the remaining half of the bridge:

https://www.facebook.com/Colin.Fox1994/videos/1015...
Scientific in that they looked at the results of a previous experiment and repeated the same
- they pushed it over with a digger laugh

The replacement will have improved lateral strength?

SilverSpur

20,911 posts

247 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
saaby93 said:
Scientific in that they looked at the results of a previous experiment and repeated the same
- they pushed it over with a digger laugh

The replacement will have improved lateral strength?
Doesn't need to be stronger, just higher!

boxedin

1,354 posts

126 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/14714122.Thamesm...

ah well, no biggie, could have been worse is his general view.

Digga

40,324 posts

283 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
CAPP0 said:
I don't know whether this will work or not, but it seems they took the scientific approach to removing the remaining half of the bridge:

https://www.facebook.com/Colin.Fox1994/videos/1015...
A graphic illustration of why you can't stick to normal air filter service and replacement cycles on demolition excavators.

All that jazz

7,632 posts

146 months

Saturday 3rd September 2016
quotequote all
boxedin said:
http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/14714122.Thamesm...

ah well, no biggie, could have been worse is his general view.
"Mr Shaw said his wife Doreen, 68, only found out he had been taken to hospital in Tunbridge Wells after she rang him to ask him to bring the washing in."

hehe