How many died on M1 J12 last night
Discussion
Junction 12 M1 this morning at about 2am ish, a purple coloured coupe hit the central barrier and caught fire. I did`nt see it but i was north bound at 3.30am and the south side was blocked, blue lights every were and a tarpaulin covering the interior.
Anything in the local papers?
>> Edited by on Tuesday 18th October 21:49
Anything in the local papers?
>> Edited by on Tuesday 18th October 21:49
bmw114 said:
hustlebabe said:
There was a second accident near the same spot later M1 closed in one-direction for over 5 hours with 16 mile tailbacks
What and were was the other accident.
Did some one run into the back of the standing traffic.
One fatality in each accident.
Details here
>> Edited by jeremyc on Tuesday 18th October 21:50
On my weekly trek to the westcountry on Sunday night I saw two 3 car pile ups and there was another just south of where I left the M5. Too many people not realising what fog does to your perception of distance and not knowing that a wet road means its slippy..
Keep them shiny side up folks.. Better to arrive a little late than not at all.
Keep them shiny side up folks.. Better to arrive a little late than not at all.
Psychobert said:
Too many people not realising what fog does to your perception of distance and not knowing that a wet road means its slippy..
Keep them shiny side up folks.. Better to arrive a little late than not at all.
Too true. Couple of years ago, massive pile ups on M4 due to fog, a driver was being interviewed, still foggy at the time, he was asked why it had happened, he said it was the fault of the police, asked to explain that, he said "Well there are no signs saying fog", the interview guy said "But you can see its foggy", to which he said "Yes but there arnt any signs lit up"..................
Vipers said:
Must of been speeding
Well if you cant stop in time to avert a crash, then you are driving faster than conditions allow surely, how come the lorry ploughed into the back of STATIONARY cars if he wasnt "speeding".....
Somethings in life will never change.
Speeding == driving faster than a posted limit, this is not necessarily the same as driving too fast for the conditions. In heavy fog/spray with wet surfaces too fast for the conditions will be far below the posted limit, hence not speeding.
Vipers said:
Too many people not realising what fog does to your perception of distance and not knowing that a wet road means its slippy..
Keep them shiny side up folks.. Better to arrive a little late than not at all.
Too true. Couple of years ago, massive pile ups on M4 due to fog, a driver was being interviewed, still foggy at the time, he was asked why it had happened, he said it was the fault of the police, asked to explain that, he said "Well there are no signs saying fog", the interview guy said "But you can see its foggy", to which he said "Yes but there arnt any signs lit up"..................
Time for instant licence removal. With re-test required. Numpty.
That looks dreadful. My thoughts go to the families of all concerned.
What I don't understand though (and perhaps we're all jumping to conclusions) is how two hours later there wasn't sufficient signage to warn subsequent drivers that the traffic ahead was stopped. I think that's different to the numpty and his fog above.
I once spent an enjoyable( ) five hours on the M4 as the road had been closed three hours before I got there. I'd had national news and radio on before I left, although I hadn't checked the traffic web sites (I do now...)the first I knew of the problem was a matrix sign saying 50 which was just AFTER a junction. The traffic immediately ground to a halt and crawled, over a period of five hours, the next 12 miles to the next junction where I could give up and go home. My sister on the other hand was stuck at Gatwick airport!!
It seemed crazy to me that more traffic was allowed to barrel into the end of a stationary queue without any warning. I imagine some of it perhaps is the chaos that drivers all getting off of the motorway would have caused to the surrounding area. I still don't understand whey there weren't more suitable warnings to avoid further problems.
>> Edited by Piglet on Wednesday 19th October 08:56
What I don't understand though (and perhaps we're all jumping to conclusions) is how two hours later there wasn't sufficient signage to warn subsequent drivers that the traffic ahead was stopped. I think that's different to the numpty and his fog above.
I once spent an enjoyable(
) five hours on the M4 as the road had been closed three hours before I got there. I'd had national news and radio on before I left, although I hadn't checked the traffic web sites (I do now...)the first I knew of the problem was a matrix sign saying 50 which was just AFTER a junction. The traffic immediately ground to a halt and crawled, over a period of five hours, the next 12 miles to the next junction where I could give up and go home. My sister on the other hand was stuck at Gatwick airport!! It seemed crazy to me that more traffic was allowed to barrel into the end of a stationary queue without any warning. I imagine some of it perhaps is the chaos that drivers all getting off of the motorway would have caused to the surrounding area. I still don't understand whey there weren't more suitable warnings to avoid further problems.
>> Edited by Piglet on Wednesday 19th October 08:56
Einion Yrth said:
ZR1cliff said:
Must of been speeding
Well if you cant stop in time to avert a crash, then you are driving faster than conditions allow surely, how come the lorry ploughed into the back of STATIONARY cars if he wasnt "speeding".....
Somethings in life will never change.
Speeding == driving faster than a posted limit, this is not necessarily the same as driving too fast for the conditions. In heavy fog/spray with wet surfaces too fast for the conditions will be far below the posted limit, hence not speeding.
I didnt mention speed limits!... I said driving faster than conditions allow.....hense the term speeding in this context............ hokey cokey!
Vipers said:
I didnt mention speed limits!... I said driving faster than conditions allow.....hense the term speeding in this context............ hokey cokey!
I and many (most?) others would define speeding as 'in excess of a posted limit', not 'inappropriate for conditions' hence my post.
It was on the local news last night and did look awful - they also showed footage of the police chopper landing after it had been surveying the scene and taking photos. Fine, but to land they closed the northbound carridgeway and landed it there - surely that is bonkers as the south was already closed and could probably cause a load more accidents from the queue now going north.
>> Edited by tonyvid on Wednesday 19th October 09:09
>> Edited by tonyvid on Wednesday 19th October 09:09
Psychobert said:
Speeding == driving faster than a posted limit, this is not necessarily the same as driving too fast for the conditions.
As a good friend of mine who is a BiB on the motorways once said, its a limit, not a target.
Except in the case of 30's it's pretty much both - drive much slower than 30 on your test (when safe obviously) and you will fail for failure to make adequate progress.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff