Discussion
6 dead, worst accident in Surrey section since M25 opened
difficult to comprehend how things like this happen on deserted roads
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/su
difficult to comprehend how things like this happen on deserted roads
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/su
The news said:
Six people died yesterday when a recovery vehicle that had picked up a group returning from a friend's stag party was in a collision with the back of a lorry.
The Bank Holiday tragedy on the M25 in Surrey killed five of the returning party-goers - all men aged between 25 and 30 - as well as the 46-year-old driver of the low-loader, who had picked them up along with their minibus after it broke down on the M1.
A sixth member of the group remained in a serious but stable condition in hospital last night.
advertisementThe cab of the recovery truck was destroyed in the crash, which occurred between junctions 8 and 9, Reigate and Leatherhead, and resulted in the anti-clockwise section of the M25 being closed for nine hours.
The minibus had broken down on the M1 near Rugby earlier in the night. There were 13 men in the vehicle, all returning to the Brighton area after the weekend's stag party in Leicestershire.
Seven of them were taken home by other vehicles, but six stayed with the minibus and called the Automobile Association which arranged for the low-loader from Dunchurch Motors at Dunchurch, Rugby, to rescue them.
At 2.13am yesterday, the recovery vehicle - whose occupants did not include the bridegroom - collided with the rear of the articulated lorry on the inside lane of the M25.
It took fire and ambulance crews an hour to free the survivor from the wreckage. Last night, he remained in East Surrey Hospital in Redhill with a broken leg and facial injuries.
The driver of the lorry, who was unhurt, was being questioned by police late yesterday. A police spokesman declined to say whether his vehicle was stationary at the time of the accident, one of the worst on the London orbital motorway since it opened 20 years ago.
Chief Supt Rob Price, who is leading the investigation into the accident, said: "This is a tragic day. Our thoughts are very much with the family and friends of the six people who died in this crash. This is one of the worst collisions Surrey Police has ever dealt with on the M25. At this stage, it is too early to confirm the exact cause of the collision. We are holding a thorough investigation."
A spokesman for Dunchurch Motors said in a statement: "This is a terrible tragedy. We are trying to come to terms with this ourselves. Our thoughts are with the family of our driver and the families of those affected by this incident."
Wreckage from the accident was strewn across the motorway, causing police to close it until 11.30am yesterday. Bank Holiday traffic piled up for miles as local diversions were put in place, although the Highways Agency said that the congestion would have been much worse if it had been a normal working weekday.
Police said the recovery vehicle was set up correctly to accommodate a driver and six passengers. "This cab was configured to seat two passengers in front with a driver and four passengers behind," a spokesman said.
The families of the dead were informed by police by yesterday but the victims are not expected to be named until today.
The Bank Holiday tragedy on the M25 in Surrey killed five of the returning party-goers - all men aged between 25 and 30 - as well as the 46-year-old driver of the low-loader, who had picked them up along with their minibus after it broke down on the M1.
A sixth member of the group remained in a serious but stable condition in hospital last night.
advertisementThe cab of the recovery truck was destroyed in the crash, which occurred between junctions 8 and 9, Reigate and Leatherhead, and resulted in the anti-clockwise section of the M25 being closed for nine hours.
The minibus had broken down on the M1 near Rugby earlier in the night. There were 13 men in the vehicle, all returning to the Brighton area after the weekend's stag party in Leicestershire.
Seven of them were taken home by other vehicles, but six stayed with the minibus and called the Automobile Association which arranged for the low-loader from Dunchurch Motors at Dunchurch, Rugby, to rescue them.
At 2.13am yesterday, the recovery vehicle - whose occupants did not include the bridegroom - collided with the rear of the articulated lorry on the inside lane of the M25.
It took fire and ambulance crews an hour to free the survivor from the wreckage. Last night, he remained in East Surrey Hospital in Redhill with a broken leg and facial injuries.
The driver of the lorry, who was unhurt, was being questioned by police late yesterday. A police spokesman declined to say whether his vehicle was stationary at the time of the accident, one of the worst on the London orbital motorway since it opened 20 years ago.
Chief Supt Rob Price, who is leading the investigation into the accident, said: "This is a tragic day. Our thoughts are very much with the family and friends of the six people who died in this crash. This is one of the worst collisions Surrey Police has ever dealt with on the M25. At this stage, it is too early to confirm the exact cause of the collision. We are holding a thorough investigation."
A spokesman for Dunchurch Motors said in a statement: "This is a terrible tragedy. We are trying to come to terms with this ourselves. Our thoughts are with the family of our driver and the families of those affected by this incident."
Wreckage from the accident was strewn across the motorway, causing police to close it until 11.30am yesterday. Bank Holiday traffic piled up for miles as local diversions were put in place, although the Highways Agency said that the congestion would have been much worse if it had been a normal working weekday.
Police said the recovery vehicle was set up correctly to accommodate a driver and six passengers. "This cab was configured to seat two passengers in front with a driver and four passengers behind," a spokesman said.
The families of the dead were informed by police by yesterday but the victims are not expected to be named until today.
Very sad.
I do not know the facts of this accident but having experienced a couple of recoveries involving transporters I have my suspicions. Some years ago a guy I knew broke down about tea time whilst in Cornwall towing a caravan back to Dorset. The recovery driver (subcontracted from RAC IIRC) worked as a mechanic in a local garage and had already done adays work. He was obviously tired and nearly fell asleep en route to Dorset amd my friends wife had to keep talking to him. He arrived at my friends house abot 10pm and then had to return to Cornwall and then be at work at 8am next day. I was also recovered from Cambridge to Dorset and the driver told me the same sort of story about his working hours. He said recovery vehicles are excempt from tacho regs and driver hours.
Heard a number of rumours the truck in front
was the 45' container as oppsed to a 40'
these slighlty longer loads carried on a conventional container trailer
or 'skelly' are only to be used in conjunction with the
extending under-run barrier which slides out from under the the back in the rear light area.....
its however not uncommon to see these monsters going down the road
without extra protection deployed, leaving an horrendous overhang
of the container on board,
with (I'm loathe to say) just such an resulting accident waiting to happen
was the 45' container as oppsed to a 40'
these slighlty longer loads carried on a conventional container trailer
or 'skelly' are only to be used in conjunction with the
extending under-run barrier which slides out from under the the back in the rear light area.....
its however not uncommon to see these monsters going down the road
without extra protection deployed, leaving an horrendous overhang
of the container on board,
with (I'm loathe to say) just such an resulting accident waiting to happen
Edited by rich 36 on Thursday 10th May 21:42
rich 36 said:
Heard a number of rumours the truck in front
was the 45' container as oppsed to a 40'
these slighlty longer loads carried on a conventional container trailer
or 'skelly' are only to be used in conjunction with the
extending under-run barrier which slides out from under the the back in the rear light area.....
its however not uncommon to see these monsters going down the road
without extra protection deployed, leaving an horrendous overhang
of the container on board,
with (I'm loathe to say) just such an resulting accident waiting to happen
was the 45' container as oppsed to a 40'
these slighlty longer loads carried on a conventional container trailer
or 'skelly' are only to be used in conjunction with the
extending under-run barrier which slides out from under the the back in the rear light area.....
its however not uncommon to see these monsters going down the road
without extra protection deployed, leaving an horrendous overhang
of the container on board,
with (I'm loathe to say) just such an resulting accident waiting to happen
Edited by rich 36 on Thursday 10th May 21:42
I've never heard so much bollox in my life!
Most 45-footers overhang at the front, ie: work with a "close-couple" setup. The rear overhang type skelly is usually a telescopic/multi-couple type trailer, which allows two twenty-footers to be carried by one artic, where they can drop off the back bit in a layby, and take the front container, then come back, pick up the rear one, take that, once off-loaded, trombone the whole thing up shorter, and toodle back to the docks empty.
The fact is, if you drive too close to the vehicle in front and have to stop quickly, it's your own silly arse fault for hitting it. It's like saying - I burned my hand in the fire because there wasn't a guard - which is a no brainer because common sense dictates that you don't put your hand in the fire, or near it.
The incident here, from what I see of it, was a stopped container lorry on the carriage way, for what ever reason, in an area that was well lit. The recovery driver was either distracted by his passengers, or nodding/sleeping at the wheel and hit it at speed. Under-run protection would have made no difference here as by looking at the pictures, the cab of the wrecker was destroyed in the impact.
Driver error. No fault can be apportioned to the container vehicle driver. If his vehicle broke own, there is no hard shoulder in that area. It was down to poor observation, either due to eyes shut, or not paying attention.
There are not many truck cabs that would withstand such an impact. Perhaps the former ERF 'SMC' based plastic ones (sheet moulded composite, over a steel frame), but since MAN took them over, they use the German's steel cabs for the badge engineered "British" truck.
Your post sounds like it was written by John Sergeant!! Do you like 4x4's?
rich 36 said:
Hey thanks, I was wondering
if i'd in fact learnt anything over the last decade,
I'll send this back and take up a new career
see what I can pick up down the job centre
but hey thanks.....
if i'd in fact learnt anything over the last decade,
I'll send this back and take up a new career
see what I can pick up down the job centre
but hey thanks.....
That looks similar to mine, except mine says C+E in the next box.
But hey, WTF do I know.
Dogwatch said:
Whatever the configuration of the trailer it seems to me that to cause that much damage to the cab the recovery truck must have gone full tilt into the back of the trailer. Why is pure speculation but falling asleep at the wheel must be a possibility.
I'd say that it's probably the only answer that fits such a terrible loss and waste of human life.
Unlike the idiots in their express coaches back in the late 80's who insisted at running at 70mph(+) in dense fog, one of which killed quite a few people on the M25.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff