M1 Lorry crash
Discussion
DurianIceCream said:
Boydie88 said:
I fail to see how not looking where you're going can not be considered dangerous driving when you're driving an artic.
Horrible succession of errors led to this, but it feels like Wagstaff's was worse than the other truck.
A single error is usually careless driving. Wagstaff made a single error. It had severe consequences, but it was still a single error. Horrible succession of errors led to this, but it feels like Wagstaff's was worse than the other truck.
The other chump parked on the live motorway, which was deliberate, not an error.
He stopped for 12 minutes, which was deliberate.
He was drunk, which was deliberate, not an error.
All of those fall well below the standard that a reasonable driver would be expected to show, so that was dangerous driving.
Edited by DurianIceCream on Thursday 8th March 09:34
Not seeing the impending hazard ahead with plenty of notice.
Not stopping in time to avoid impact.
That's 3 at least.
I cannot see how you can plough into the back of a well lit (plus hazard lights) vehicle, killing 8 people and still not be considered dangerous.
oyster said:
I cannot see how you can plough into the back of a well lit (plus hazard lights) vehicle, killing 8 people and still not be considered dangerous.
For a momentary lapse, or distraction, I would disagree with you, but given the CCTV footage and the evidence of the length of 'phone call the driver was on, I can't quite see how his lack of attention was anything other than dangerous.AJL308 said:
By possibly having nicked the pissed-up driver who fell asleep in his vehicle in the slow lane of a motorway casing multiple deaths before he could do so???
You can do much better than this - the motorway has no 'slow' lane. Perpetuating this myth creates danger and it always needs pointing out, especially on a website such as this one where we're supposed to be enthusiasts.
Digga said:
iven that the HGV was stopped in clear view of surveillance cameras, at a junction, surely questions also need to be asked about how 'smart' our motorways are that other, approaching road users had not been alerted, or that police had not attended?
I do fear that smart motorways, without any hard shoulders, have huge potential to replicate this type of shunt when vehicles legitimately stop due to breakdown or other incident.
this potential issue cannot be overstated, imo. what is the point of those cameras if no one is watching them ? surely there is the capability for automatic detection of vehicles having stopped in a lane and the ability to highlight this on signs for a few miles prior to the stopped vehicle ?I do fear that smart motorways, without any hard shoulders, have huge potential to replicate this type of shunt when vehicles legitimately stop due to breakdown or other incident.
oyster said:
I cannot see how you can plough into the back of a well lit (plus hazard lights) vehicle, killing 8 people and still not be considered dangerous.
With the little bit of lorry driving that I've done in the UK, i can report that it is bloody boring. At 3am your body wants to shut down and go to sleep.
It is much harder to pick out a stationary object that one that is moving.
We are all perfect drivers on here, obviously. But maybe driving along a wide stretch of road at a pedestrian 56mph at 3am when you want to go to sleep it would be hard to tell if the back of that artic you can see in front of you is actually stopped, when every other one you see is moving. The advice is that if you are stopped on the hard shoulder you should get out of your vehicle and walk up the embankment, exacty because of his happening. It's not surprising that when a vehicle is stopped in lane 1 at 3am someone runs into the back of it, even a proffessional driver. The mini bus driver had also missed it and missed his opportunity to get around it
The law expects airline pilot levels of responsiblity from our lorry drivers, yet what were these two guys paid?
wc98 said:
Digga said:
iven that the HGV was stopped in clear view of surveillance cameras, at a junction, surely questions also need to be asked about how 'smart' our motorways are that other, approaching road users had not been alerted, or that police had not attended?
I do fear that smart motorways, without any hard shoulders, have huge potential to replicate this type of shunt when vehicles legitimately stop due to breakdown or other incident.
this potential issue cannot be overstated, imo. what is the point of those cameras if no one is watching them ? surely there is the capability for automatic detection of vehicles having stopped in a lane and the ability to highlight this on signs for a few miles prior to the stopped vehicle ?I do fear that smart motorways, without any hard shoulders, have huge potential to replicate this type of shunt when vehicles legitimately stop due to breakdown or other incident.
Remember this one https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/feb/16/lorry-d...
The signs were lit up from Strensham about the motorway being closed, there was a sea of advanced countdown VMS on approach, you know the ones you hate, queue ahead, 60, 40 etc. Also a massive ocean of 3 lanes of slowing traffic all in the dark with the brake lights lighting up (unlike the present case in lighter fast flowing traffic) and the complete and uttercocksocket still ran into the back of it, you tell me/us how you fix stupid ? Which is incidentally why the motorway was closed caused by the preceding fatal crash.
I can't remember if 22 or 26 died that night across the motorway network in a variety of locations, virtually all preventable ??
zarjaz1991 said:
AJL308 said:
By possibly having nicked the pissed-up driver who fell asleep in his vehicle in the slow lane of a motorway casing multiple deaths before he could do so???
You can do much better than this - the motorway has no 'slow' lane. Perpetuating this myth creates danger and it always needs pointing out, especially on a website such as this one where we're supposed to be enthusiasts.
That is a major issue I think with motorway lane discipline; the terms "slow lane" and "fast lane", when I hear them I always cringe, there was a report on BBC news on this very subject and the reporter referred to the lane as the "slow lane"; I cringed whenever it was mentioned in that way, problem is I've even heard the Police use those terms too in news reports.
oyster said:
DurianIceCream said:
Boydie88 said:
I fail to see how not looking where you're going can not be considered dangerous driving when you're driving an artic.
Horrible succession of errors led to this, but it feels like Wagstaff's was worse than the other truck.
A single error is usually careless driving. Wagstaff made a single error. It had severe consequences, but it was still a single error. Horrible succession of errors led to this, but it feels like Wagstaff's was worse than the other truck.
The other chump parked on the live motorway, which was deliberate, not an error.
He stopped for 12 minutes, which was deliberate.
He was drunk, which was deliberate, not an error.
All of those fall well below the standard that a reasonable driver would be expected to show, so that was dangerous driving.
Edited by DurianIceCream on Thursday 8th March 09:34
Not seeing the impending hazard ahead with plenty of notice.
Not stopping in time to avoid impact.
That's 3 at least.
I cannot see how you can plough into the back of a well lit (plus hazard lights) vehicle, killing 8 people and still not be considered dangerous.
The junction where it happen has zero street lights.
I drive one myself and the last thing you expect baring in mind MR FedEx will of no doubt don't that run for X amount of night over X amount of months/years is Mr drunk parking in a live lane for a rest as hes has too much pop.
I call it complacency in not expecting the unexpected, which as a lorry driver your expected to as your the professional.
If the bus wasn't there the Mr FedEX would certainly have been dead.
cossy400 said:
oyster said:
DurianIceCream said:
Boydie88 said:
I fail to see how not looking where you're going can not be considered dangerous driving when you're driving an artic.
Horrible succession of errors led to this, but it feels like Wagstaff's was worse than the other truck.
A single error is usually careless driving. Wagstaff made a single error. It had severe consequences, but it was still a single error. Horrible succession of errors led to this, but it feels like Wagstaff's was worse than the other truck.
The other chump parked on the live motorway, which was deliberate, not an error.
He stopped for 12 minutes, which was deliberate.
He was drunk, which was deliberate, not an error.
All of those fall well below the standard that a reasonable driver would be expected to show, so that was dangerous driving.
Edited by DurianIceCream on Thursday 8th March 09:34
Not seeing the impending hazard ahead with plenty of notice.
Not stopping in time to avoid impact.
That's 3 at least.
I cannot see how you can plough into the back of a well lit (plus hazard lights) vehicle, killing 8 people and still not be considered dangerous.
The junction where it happen has zero street lights.
I drive one myself and the last thing you expect baring in mind MR FedEx will of no doubt don't that run for X amount of night over X amount of months/years is Mr drunk parking in a live lane for a rest as hes has too much pop.
I call it complacency in not expecting the unexpected, which as a lorry driver your expected to as your the professional.
If the bus wasn't there the Mr FedEX would certainly have been dead.
They show the vehicle had its lights on throughout, many many other vehicles managed to avoid it during the time it was stopped. Motorway was quite busy for 3am. The slip road is well illuminated, but the main carriageway is not.
Reviewing the various dashcam footage, even with the poor quality grainy examples, the truck and the stopped bus with hazards going can be clearly seen.
Considering this and add on the number of other vehicles braking and indicating to move into lane 2, plus those accommodating others wanting to move into lane 2 should have alerted any driver even paying half attention.
The minibus was stopped well back from the truck and couldn't get out because of the heavy traffic avoiding the parked vehicle. Lights and hazards on.
Agree that when approaching a stationary obstacle at motorway speeds the rate of approach can be deceptive. But at risk of repetition anyone paying half attention should have spotted something.
Imvho the CPS and police were 100% correct to prosecute Wagstaff for death by dangerous driving. The jury decided as they did and that decision is accepted, obviously, it's how the justice system works, but personally feel his driving fell well below the standard required.
FiF said:
They show that Wagstaff wasn't the only driver that didn't notice the stationary truck, the only difference the other drivers noticed at the last minute and managed to move over. Seems a couple of them may have hit the minibus as it was stopped some distance behind the truck. After watching the clearest video, it's hard to tell the truck is stationary until quite close and even then we know in advance it is stopped there, the slip road lighting makes it harder to differentiate between stopped and moving until closer to it. It's one of those things that you might see but not believe it until too late. While i don't wish to speak ill of the dead, some blame has to go to the minibus driver, he obviously hadn't seen the truck until the last minute otherwise he would have had time to pull around it, every other vehicle in the 12 mins it was stopped there did so without stopping behind it. Whether the 3 hours of sleep he had prior to driving had bearing on it we'll never knowNickyboy said:
FiF said:
They show that Wagstaff wasn't the only driver that didn't notice the stationary truck, the only difference the other drivers noticed at the last minute and managed to move over. Seems a couple of them may have hit the minibus as it was stopped some distance behind the truck. After watching the clearest video, it's hard to tell the truck is stationary until quite close and even then we know in advance it is stopped there, the slip road lighting makes it harder to differentiate between stopped and moving until closer to it. It's one of those things that you might see but not believe it until too late. While i don't wish to speak ill of the dead, some blame has to go to the minibus driver, he obviously hadn't seen the truck until the last minute otherwise he would have had time to pull around it, every other vehicle in the 12 mins it was stopped there did so without stopping behind it. Whether the 3 hours of sleep he had prior to driving had bearing on it we'll never knowIt wont happen of course, but Id like to see life ban from driving for the perpetrators!
I mean if you shot someone by accident you'd be banned from owning a gun again wouldn't you?
I think it's high time we treated road fatalities with the same seriousness as death by any other way. Forget fines and points. No one cares seemingly! Only if you thought you may never be able to drive again would people give it the same level of attention!
I mean if you shot someone by accident you'd be banned from owning a gun again wouldn't you?
I think it's high time we treated road fatalities with the same seriousness as death by any other way. Forget fines and points. No one cares seemingly! Only if you thought you may never be able to drive again would people give it the same level of attention!
speedyguy said:
MIDAS has been around years, there's enough about it on here, search it or Google it.
Remember this one https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/feb/16/lorry-d...
The signs were lit up from Strensham about the motorway being closed, there was a sea of advanced countdown VMS on approach, you know the ones you hate, queue ahead, 60, 40 etc. Also a massive ocean of 3 lanes of slowing traffic all in the dark with the brake lights lighting up (unlike the present case in lighter fast flowing traffic) and the complete and uttercocksocket still ran into the back of it, you tell me/us how you fix stupid ? Which is incidentally why the motorway was closed caused by the preceding fatal crash.
I can't remember if 22 or 26 died that night across the motorway network in a variety of locations, virtually all preventable ??
you are correct , i made the mistake of thinking that those involved in this incident would pay more attention to the preceding signage than the actual road ahead of them. going by your example and this accident there is nothing to suggest they would have made any difference.Remember this one https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/feb/16/lorry-d...
The signs were lit up from Strensham about the motorway being closed, there was a sea of advanced countdown VMS on approach, you know the ones you hate, queue ahead, 60, 40 etc. Also a massive ocean of 3 lanes of slowing traffic all in the dark with the brake lights lighting up (unlike the present case in lighter fast flowing traffic) and the complete and uttercocksocket still ran into the back of it, you tell me/us how you fix stupid ? Which is incidentally why the motorway was closed caused by the preceding fatal crash.
I can't remember if 22 or 26 died that night across the motorway network in a variety of locations, virtually all preventable ??
Autonomous braking has been a compulsory fitment to new hgv's over 7.5 tons since November 2015.
www.thatcham.org/news-and-events/news-and-press-re...
www.thatcham.org/news-and-events/news-and-press-re...
Edited by Ben s14a on Sunday 11th March 18:46
Rich_W said:
It wont happen of course, but Id like to see life ban from driving for the perpetrators!
I mean if you shot someone by accident you'd be banned from owning a gun again wouldn't you?
I think it's high time we treated road fatalities with the same seriousness as death by any other way. Forget fines and points. No one cares seemingly! Only if you thought you may never be able to drive again would people give it the same level of attention!
There is a big difference in the intended function of a gun and vehicle though. Plus they have been effectively banned from driving HGVs for life, since no one will ever employ them again.I mean if you shot someone by accident you'd be banned from owning a gun again wouldn't you?
I think it's high time we treated road fatalities with the same seriousness as death by any other way. Forget fines and points. No one cares seemingly! Only if you thought you may never be able to drive again would people give it the same level of attention!
Russian Troll Bot said:
Rich_W said:
It wont happen of course, but Id like to see life ban from driving for the perpetrators!
I mean if you shot someone by accident you'd be banned from owning a gun again wouldn't you?
I think it's high time we treated road fatalities with the same seriousness as death by any other way. Forget fines and points. No one cares seemingly! Only if you thought you may never be able to drive again would people give it the same level of attention!
There is a big difference in the intended function of a gun and vehicle though. Plus they have been effectively banned from driving HGVs for life, since no one will ever employ them again.I mean if you shot someone by accident you'd be banned from owning a gun again wouldn't you?
I think it's high time we treated road fatalities with the same seriousness as death by any other way. Forget fines and points. No one cares seemingly! Only if you thought you may never be able to drive again would people give it the same level of attention!
Vipers said:
Russian Troll Bot said:
Rich_W said:
It wont happen of course, but Id like to see life ban from driving for the perpetrators!
I mean if you shot someone by accident you'd be banned from owning a gun again wouldn't you?
I think it's high time we treated road fatalities with the same seriousness as death by any other way. Forget fines and points. No one cares seemingly! Only if you thought you may never be able to drive again would people give it the same level of attention!
There is a big difference in the intended function of a gun and vehicle though. Plus they have been effectively banned from driving HGVs for life, since no one will ever employ them again.I mean if you shot someone by accident you'd be banned from owning a gun again wouldn't you?
I think it's high time we treated road fatalities with the same seriousness as death by any other way. Forget fines and points. No one cares seemingly! Only if you thought you may never be able to drive again would people give it the same level of attention!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff