HGV vs caravan smash on the M6
Discussion
barker22 said:
There is two separate incidents in that clip. The second smack is 100% the CRV's fault.
I still think it should all go as the CRV's fault, however the truck driver could have handled it better.
When you watch, the point at which the CRV starts to cross, look at where the caravan is, the door of the caravan isn't visible. Looking up the caravan specs its a Bailey Pegasus GT65 and looking at the placement of the door its one of the larger models which puts it at 7.4m long minimum.
http://www.baileypegasusgt65.co.uk/bailey-pegasus-...
This means that over 2/3rds the length of that caravan hasn't even entered the lane yet and it just in't going to fit with the CRV's current trajectory.
The snapshot above is the point where you can be certain that that vehicle is coming over ready or not.
If the trucker had Emergency stopped at this point then in my mind that would put the CRV solely at fault anyway as that's a complete fail on a driving test. Causing another road user to change speed/direction which would be a serious fail. Or just plain dangerous driving.
Even if the truck was stopped dead at this point in the clip(which it isn't) the CRV will cross over the solid white line which is illegal in itself and should carry a 3 point penalty. Up to this point in the clip the trucker hasn't actually done anything wrong.
Exactly what I thought. There was never a "gap" to begin with. The Honda wanted in and wasn't taking no for an answer. The Honda is pushing up against the Renault first, who moves to the left probably worried hes about to get hit. Then the truck is left looking at a gap still to small for the Honda and shed to get in without the chance there still being an accident. Finally the Honda hits the truck and then still proceeds trying to squeeze the truck which ends up with him on the front of the truck. The Honda driver had several chances to back out, including the warning from the first hit but still insists on coming over! I still think it should all go as the CRV's fault, however the truck driver could have handled it better.
When you watch, the point at which the CRV starts to cross, look at where the caravan is, the door of the caravan isn't visible. Looking up the caravan specs its a Bailey Pegasus GT65 and looking at the placement of the door its one of the larger models which puts it at 7.4m long minimum.
http://www.baileypegasusgt65.co.uk/bailey-pegasus-...
This means that over 2/3rds the length of that caravan hasn't even entered the lane yet and it just in't going to fit with the CRV's current trajectory.
The snapshot above is the point where you can be certain that that vehicle is coming over ready or not.
If the trucker had Emergency stopped at this point then in my mind that would put the CRV solely at fault anyway as that's a complete fail on a driving test. Causing another road user to change speed/direction which would be a serious fail. Or just plain dangerous driving.
Even if the truck was stopped dead at this point in the clip(which it isn't) the CRV will cross over the solid white line which is illegal in itself and should carry a 3 point penalty. Up to this point in the clip the trucker hasn't actually done anything wrong.
Totally the Hondas fault, the only thing the truck driver is guilty of was thinking no sane person would attempt to get into a non existent space.
Gandahar said:
Bodo said:
Here's another https://youtu.be/rAGNDfXSRHY
Bonus points for having the caravan bursting on camera.
Is the caravan equivalent of "It will buff out" actually " I bit of Mr Sheen will sort that right " ?Bonus points for having the caravan bursting on camera.
spats said:
Exactly what I thought. There was never a "gap" to begin with. The Honda wanted in and wasn't taking no for an answer. The Honda is pushing up against the Renault first, who moves to the left probably worried hes about to get hit. Then the truck is left looking at a gap still to small for the Honda and shed to get in without the chance there still being an accident. Finally the Honda hits the truck and then still proceeds trying to squeeze the truck which ends up with him on the front of the truck. The Honda driver had several chances to back out, including the warning from the first hit but still insists on coming over!
Totally the Hondas fault, the only thing the truck driver is guilty of was thinking no sane person would attempt to get into a non existent space.
There wasn't a gap because the truck driver accelerated to close the gap when the scenic moved forwards.Totally the Hondas fault, the only thing the truck driver is guilty of was thinking no sane person would attempt to get into a non existent space.
heebeegeetee said:
vonhosen said:
1. It is his responsibility to avoid collisions where he can, rather have one in order to enforce what he sees as his right.
2. If he wants the other party dealt with he should provide evidence to the prosecuting authorities rather than deal out his own form of justice.
3. When both parties have a collision by attempting to force their will when it's completely avoidable, then they both carry a portion of the blame for that collision.
1. Just for the record, I feel the need to say, as I learnt through my experience of driving hgvs (mainly in a local, short distance environment), avoiding accidents is what you do all day long, every day, in a way that you very rarely have to do when driving a car. All day long people are either trying to have an accident with you, or are unaware of how close they came to having an accident. I feel that possibly each and every one of us has an hgv driver somewhere to thank, for avoiding an accident when we were making a mistake that we were unaware of.2. If he wants the other party dealt with he should provide evidence to the prosecuting authorities rather than deal out his own form of justice.
3. When both parties have a collision by attempting to force their will when it's completely avoidable, then they both carry a portion of the blame for that collision.
2. Sorry, that's a cop out. Imo the bib only take action when they have an interest, and that by no means is confined to traffic matters.
3. You're right, but does it really apply here? Is an accident completely avoidable at this point? I realise both parties could have behaved better previously, but at this moment in time, what is going to happen?
I'd also just add, that again I do feel that this caravanner is a scourge of m'ways. Irrespective of the collision, even had it not happened, this guy would have slowed two motorways (M5 and M6) to a crawl, and possibly a halt.
There are tens of thousands of his like out there who are unbelievably selfish and don't give a kipper about the tail backs at peak times that they cause. There is another slip road onto the M5 south just 2 miles up the road, but instead this caravanner would sooner stop 2 motorways rather than inconvenience himself.
I do hope we see how this pans out. I presume the police did get involved, given that these two closed the entrance to the M5 off.
2. It's not a cop out, whether the Police deal with it or not doesn't alter the fact it's not up to the other driver to deal out their own justice as they see it. Their duty is to avoid the collision, not actively participate in it.
3. It's all part of the same incident. The court wouldn't just look at a snapshot, they'd look at the the event from start to finish.
There are selfish drivers/riders in cars, bikes, coaches & lorries. It's selfish to actively participate in a completely avoidable collision that blocks a motorway & they are both guilty of that.
]
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 21st April 17:26
Issi said:
What is all this nonsense about 'The caravan driver might not be from the area'. Isn't that what signs are for.
Personally, I don't consider that the HGV driver accelerated into the CRV, the CRV indicated and presumed that the HGV would slow down to let him in.
100% CRV fault.
Sometimes the queue starts before the signs. Like for example when there are roadworks on the slip as in the video you just watched.Personally, I don't consider that the HGV driver accelerated into the CRV, the CRV indicated and presumed that the HGV would slow down to let him in.
100% CRV fault.
Issi said:
What is all this nonsense about 'The caravan driver might not be from the area'. Isn't that what signs are for.
Yep, lot of of nonsense. The other day I was in London, I was in the right lane, needing to turn left, couldn't get across, so I had to go straight on instead. Ended up on a 2 or 3 mile detour, not the end of the world really.Sensibleboy said:
100% the Hondas fault. Seems to believe an indicator being on gives a right to change lanes. He seemed to initially want to bully the car in front too.
He just seemed to want to get ahead at any cost. What a bizarre bit of driving.
Of course there is blame on the Honda driver, but the lorry driver is not without blame in the circumstances outlined. It's easy for him to see the potential for what happened & he does nothing to reduce the risk of the collision. He instead actively participates in increasing the risk. He takes no avoiding action to a clear problem, he intentionally drives at it. With the mindset of both drivers a collision was inevitable. All it took was for one of them to be unwilling to drive into a collision & neither was. Insurance companies don't like that kind of driver.He just seemed to want to get ahead at any cost. What a bizarre bit of driving.
With these feet said:
spats said:
Exactly what I thought. There was never a "gap" to begin with. The Honda wanted in and wasn't taking no for an answer. The Honda is pushing up against the Renault first, who moves to the left probably worried hes about to get hit. Then the truck is left looking at a gap still to small for the Honda and shed to get in without the chance there still being an accident. Finally the Honda hits the truck and then still proceeds trying to squeeze the truck which ends up with him on the front of the truck. The Honda driver had several chances to back out, including the warning from the first hit but still insists on coming over!
Totally the Hondas fault, the only thing the truck driver is guilty of was thinking no sane person would attempt to get into a non existent space.
There wasn't a gap because the truck driver accelerated to close the gap when the scenic moved forwards.Totally the Hondas fault, the only thing the truck driver is guilty of was thinking no sane person would attempt to get into a non existent space.
We have a Professional Driver and a silly old duffer in a Honda, responsibility to the Hinda driver and accountability to the Professional Driver
I've not read all the posts so I don't know if the age old question has been asked; if the caravanist had been driving a marked police car, would the outcome have been different?
Of course it would. The HGV driver would have taken the correct action to avoid a collision.
Regardless of insurance outcomes, the HGV driver is equally responsible.
Of course it would. The HGV driver would have taken the correct action to avoid a collision.
Regardless of insurance outcomes, the HGV driver is equally responsible.
Stenn said:
I've not read all the posts so I don't know if the age old question has been asked; if the caravanist had been driving a marked police car, would the outcome have been different?
It would never have happened as a Police driver would never have allowed himself to be in the same position that the driver of the CRV was.Can't see the video anymore for some reason but if I remember it looks like slow moving traffic on the slip.
Everyone is queuing nicely and traffic is slowly moving. It appears the Mr caravan can't be bothered to queue with everyone else and tries to bully a lorry of all things at the last moment into letting him in.
Lorry driver is having none of this and Mr caravan, instead of carrying on to the next junction or trying to get in behind the lorry, gambles on the lorry driver relenting. He doesn't.
CRV driver fault. He put himself in a position where he caused an accident.
Everyone is queuing nicely and traffic is slowly moving. It appears the Mr caravan can't be bothered to queue with everyone else and tries to bully a lorry of all things at the last moment into letting him in.
Lorry driver is having none of this and Mr caravan, instead of carrying on to the next junction or trying to get in behind the lorry, gambles on the lorry driver relenting. He doesn't.
CRV driver fault. He put himself in a position where he caused an accident.
How do you know the caravan driver wa deliberately trying to jump the queue? He may have been, but it's just as likely he's on holiday (pretty obvious that actually!) and at a junction he doesn't know and realised at the last minute he needed to come off. He wasn't crossing any solid white lines or anything and was indicating. He could have been trying for ages. Two idiots there I'm afraid, not one. Caravan guy does something dangerous, lorry driver sees it happening and does nothing whatsoever to avoid it, and what's more, can't see the error of his ways and swears at the other guy - what a rude prick.
Having watched it again I think the caravan tower was concentrating on the car to his left and when that car then moved forwards assumed the lorry driver had left him space.
He had not. For whatever reason
and so they rubbed. You can hear the car horn go off and the rude words start.
This then turned into low level road rage, or road annoyance, and hence the result.
I'd like to see this on Seconds from Disaster on one of those sat channels, where a sequence of events leads up to disaster and we can all nod sagely and say, I can't believe they did that, I wouldn't !
He had not. For whatever reason
and so they rubbed. You can hear the car horn go off and the rude words start. This then turned into low level road rage, or road annoyance, and hence the result.
I'd like to see this on Seconds from Disaster on one of those sat channels, where a sequence of events leads up to disaster and we can all nod sagely and say, I can't believe they did that, I wouldn't !
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff