Anyone ever had a trailer tyre blow out?
Discussion
Congratulations on surviving!
I'd echo others and say time to start looking, unless you think you can keep your head down until the warnings epire (if they do?).
Of interest, that list was over how many miles? I've no experience with commerical vehicles so I've no idea how that compares to anything other than relatively low mileage day to day car driving; is that good, bad or indifferent for a commerical driver?
And which of those incidents caused your first warning(s)? Were they valid, or are they gunning for you?
I'd echo others and say time to start looking, unless you think you can keep your head down until the warnings epire (if they do?).
Of interest, that list was over how many miles? I've no experience with commerical vehicles so I've no idea how that compares to anything other than relatively low mileage day to day car driving; is that good, bad or indifferent for a commerical driver?
And which of those incidents caused your first warning(s)? Were they valid, or are they gunning for you?
Edited by jimmyjimjim on Monday 30th July 16:55
Mirrors? suzies? mudflaps? That counts as wear and tear in most places, as does tyre damage. If our lot gave written warnings for trim damage on trailers there would be about 3 drivers left on the firm. Unless they are supplying you with spanking new V8 scanias covered in stainless, they are expecting way too much.
Although most of our work involves building sites, out of the way country lanes and most of east london, unless all you was doing was trunking up and down motorways into massive recieving hubs I would expect most of that as part of the job, would almost guarantee it if you spent a lot of the time working in the dark.
Its fair enough them recording all of that stuff if they had you working on a bonus scheme for damage and you lost your £50 weekly bonus if you broke something/lost a pallet, even the occasional car squashing experience is acceptable in quite a few places. The only times we get final written warnings is when you are really stupid, basically writing units/trailers off, and then they wait for you to do something minor and out you.
Shouldnt be reversing under trailers and missing the pin though, thats the sort of stuff that gets you standing in the corner with the dunce hat on
e.t.a. We dont even report stuff like that. Mirrors, suzies, tyres, tears in curtains/trim/smashed lights all just involve stopping at the workshop on the way in, telling them what you destroyed and getting them to fit a new one. At last count we had a good few hundred vehicles in our fleet, almost all of them under 3 years old.
Although most of our work involves building sites, out of the way country lanes and most of east london, unless all you was doing was trunking up and down motorways into massive recieving hubs I would expect most of that as part of the job, would almost guarantee it if you spent a lot of the time working in the dark.
Its fair enough them recording all of that stuff if they had you working on a bonus scheme for damage and you lost your £50 weekly bonus if you broke something/lost a pallet, even the occasional car squashing experience is acceptable in quite a few places. The only times we get final written warnings is when you are really stupid, basically writing units/trailers off, and then they wait for you to do something minor and out you.
Shouldnt be reversing under trailers and missing the pin though, thats the sort of stuff that gets you standing in the corner with the dunce hat on
e.t.a. We dont even report stuff like that. Mirrors, suzies, tyres, tears in curtains/trim/smashed lights all just involve stopping at the workshop on the way in, telling them what you destroyed and getting them to fit a new one. At last count we had a good few hundred vehicles in our fleet, almost all of them under 3 years old.
Edited by 4key on Monday 30th July 19:43
You muppet !You should write a book.
Oh hang on, you just did
I'd also echo the mirrors/suzies/mudflaps comments. They are considered consumables down yere.
If you do decide to move, or they keep gunning for you, and replace you with someone whose surname ends with an "I", they will get a bigger list than that.
philthy said:
You muppet !You should write a book.
Oh hang on, you just did
I'd also echo the mirrors/suzies/mudflaps comments. They are considered consumables down yere.
If you do decide to move, or they keep gunning for you, and replace you with someone whose surname ends with an "I", they will get a bigger list than that.
ker then it would have been forgotten.
Humper said:
It is a fair list for 18 months........
But most are minor mishaps, there,s just a hell of a lot in a short space of time, but no need for all the ste youve been given.
To be fair, the Transport Manager looked down the list, said "They're all pretty minor, aren't they?"But most are minor mishaps, there,s just a hell of a lot in a short space of time, but no need for all the s
te youve been given.Then I pointed out that - up until the most recent incident - I'd gone eight months without hitting anything. He agreed that this was a big improvement.
Then I pulled an ace out of my sleeve:
"Did you get another driving assessment after the last disciplinary?"
"Er, no."
"Right, I see. Well you should have."
"I know, I was told that was what would happen. I was also promised further shunting training, but that didn't happen either..."
"OK, I'll have to look into that."
I'm a Senior Citizen these days and I've had numerous blow-outs, punctures and tyres coming off the rim. Of course the end result depends on the driver and I can vouch for the fact that blow -outs are NOT A PROBLEM, not a problem at all in fact if one has a good spare, a wheel-brace and a jack. The golden rule is NOT to hit the brake, in fact it often helps to give the loud pedal a little touch and then bring the trailer to where you want it to be (the hard shoulder?)
I did have a close call a few years ago. I'd bummed a lift up to London hoping to see the Notting Hill Carnival. The car was a 1.3 litre French Eurobox that had been garage maintained. At top speed the engine sounded very harsh so I pointed out that whilst 99 was just speeding going ton-up was a bit naughty and a licence loser. With the benefit of 20-20 hindsight it turned out that the garage that maintained the car had only ever replaced the tyres that wore out - the front ones. The rear tyres must have been the original ones that came with the car when it was new. Numerous bumps and bangs came from the rear of the car during the journey so I said that something must be loose at the back. We stopped but the tailgate was firmly shut and in the dark it was impossible to see anything amiss. The driver got on the loud-pedal again and after a while the car lurched and there was a humming noise. It seemed as if we had crossed a ramp and the present section of road had been roughed-up ready for fresh tarmac. WRONG! we were now travelling at high speed on three tyres and a rim - but this was NOT a problem. The problem occurred when the driver noticed sparks in the rear view mirror and stamped on the brakes. VERY BAD IDEA! (all that was needed was to slow down and fit the spare) In case you have never tried it I'll tell you right now that if you try to do an emergency stop at motorway speeds on three tyres and a rim the car will do pirouettes like an ice skater. Luckily the motorway was deserted but after doing three complete 360 degree spins the car left the motorway and went down a bank. With the car still spinning the passenger side front wheel hit a small tree. This slowed the spin abruptly causing the driver to rocket across my lap and head-butt the passenger window breaking it and knocking himself out for a few seconds. (clunk-click every trip) The car was a write-off and all because of an unnecessary emergency stop. Maybe they don't teach Newtons Laws of Motion any more?
Recently I had troubles with an old twin axle trailer that had Michelin 6.00 R9 XTA tyres. In spite of what barrack room lawyers say these tyres are NOT fork lift truck tyres, they are in fact proper highway rated tyres and they cost a small fortune to replace. The problem is that to get the 109 load rating of the tyres 116 psi is needed. Nowadays this is a real pain in the A$$ as supermarket air-lines are all limited to 65 psi for safety reasons. I did have what I now call a "Malaire" 12 volt compressor with me that was rated for 130 psi. Unfortunately its pumping cylinder blew off the crankcase when the tyre was at 85 psi and the machine was basically ruined. A great deal of money was then squandered on a petrol driven compressor but this too was a failure. A leaking PCL fitting (possibly counterfeit) leaked and limited the pressure to 95 psi so I know all about shredded tyres.
The trailer which will not move again this year, is a "wheels underneath" type. The overall diameter of the 6.00 R9 tyres is about 21" but with the trailer fully laden there is still about 3" between the top of the tyre and the underneath of the trailer deck. It is desired to get away from those 116 psi tyres and have tyres that need less than 100 psi. So far the 185/70 R13C which has a load rating of 106 at 86 psi seems to be the front runner but if anyone knows of a more suitable tyre please let me know. An overall diameter up to about 23" or 24" is possible. The 155/70 R12C with a load rating of 104 has not been very successful and doesn't match the 6.00 R9 even when both are at 95 psi. There is the 195/50 R13C which looks a bit more promising but the load rating is only 104. The 155/70 R12 tyres would be good if they could be used as duals but how could it be done? Some kind of adapter ring made from very thick pipe might be needed as AFAIK no one makes 12" dualies.
Incidentally the "raised crossings" (speed humps by another name) that are now so common, throw the bulk of the weight onto each axle in turn as a long trailer cannot "climb" over the hump like a car can. This now means that each axle on a 3.5T trailer really needs to be capable of carrying about 3 tons all by itself! Fitting rocking-beam military pattern load equalisers is not a five minute job. Don't you just love councils?
Best regards from Davey.
I did have a close call a few years ago. I'd bummed a lift up to London hoping to see the Notting Hill Carnival. The car was a 1.3 litre French Eurobox that had been garage maintained. At top speed the engine sounded very harsh so I pointed out that whilst 99 was just speeding going ton-up was a bit naughty and a licence loser. With the benefit of 20-20 hindsight it turned out that the garage that maintained the car had only ever replaced the tyres that wore out - the front ones. The rear tyres must have been the original ones that came with the car when it was new. Numerous bumps and bangs came from the rear of the car during the journey so I said that something must be loose at the back. We stopped but the tailgate was firmly shut and in the dark it was impossible to see anything amiss. The driver got on the loud-pedal again and after a while the car lurched and there was a humming noise. It seemed as if we had crossed a ramp and the present section of road had been roughed-up ready for fresh tarmac. WRONG! we were now travelling at high speed on three tyres and a rim - but this was NOT a problem. The problem occurred when the driver noticed sparks in the rear view mirror and stamped on the brakes. VERY BAD IDEA! (all that was needed was to slow down and fit the spare) In case you have never tried it I'll tell you right now that if you try to do an emergency stop at motorway speeds on three tyres and a rim the car will do pirouettes like an ice skater. Luckily the motorway was deserted but after doing three complete 360 degree spins the car left the motorway and went down a bank. With the car still spinning the passenger side front wheel hit a small tree. This slowed the spin abruptly causing the driver to rocket across my lap and head-butt the passenger window breaking it and knocking himself out for a few seconds. (clunk-click every trip) The car was a write-off and all because of an unnecessary emergency stop. Maybe they don't teach Newtons Laws of Motion any more?
Recently I had troubles with an old twin axle trailer that had Michelin 6.00 R9 XTA tyres. In spite of what barrack room lawyers say these tyres are NOT fork lift truck tyres, they are in fact proper highway rated tyres and they cost a small fortune to replace. The problem is that to get the 109 load rating of the tyres 116 psi is needed. Nowadays this is a real pain in the A$$ as supermarket air-lines are all limited to 65 psi for safety reasons. I did have what I now call a "Malaire" 12 volt compressor with me that was rated for 130 psi. Unfortunately its pumping cylinder blew off the crankcase when the tyre was at 85 psi and the machine was basically ruined. A great deal of money was then squandered on a petrol driven compressor but this too was a failure. A leaking PCL fitting (possibly counterfeit) leaked and limited the pressure to 95 psi so I know all about shredded tyres.
The trailer which will not move again this year, is a "wheels underneath" type. The overall diameter of the 6.00 R9 tyres is about 21" but with the trailer fully laden there is still about 3" between the top of the tyre and the underneath of the trailer deck. It is desired to get away from those 116 psi tyres and have tyres that need less than 100 psi. So far the 185/70 R13C which has a load rating of 106 at 86 psi seems to be the front runner but if anyone knows of a more suitable tyre please let me know. An overall diameter up to about 23" or 24" is possible. The 155/70 R12C with a load rating of 104 has not been very successful and doesn't match the 6.00 R9 even when both are at 95 psi. There is the 195/50 R13C which looks a bit more promising but the load rating is only 104. The 155/70 R12 tyres would be good if they could be used as duals but how could it be done? Some kind of adapter ring made from very thick pipe might be needed as AFAIK no one makes 12" dualies.
Incidentally the "raised crossings" (speed humps by another name) that are now so common, throw the bulk of the weight onto each axle in turn as a long trailer cannot "climb" over the hump like a car can. This now means that each axle on a 3.5T trailer really needs to be capable of carrying about 3 tons all by itself! Fitting rocking-beam military pattern load equalisers is not a five minute job. Don't you just love councils?
Best regards from Davey.
It looks as though youve hit something in the road, probably whilst going around a left handed corner. I did something similar to a second steer on an eight wheeled tarmac tipper down a Derbyshire lane.
A piece of dry stone wall was in the road which I couldnt see until I was on top of it. Even though the tyre didnt burst the deflation was audible, but I suspect that the radio wouldve masked this.
If the trailer was laden, then it might even have been debris in the yard.
A piece of dry stone wall was in the road which I couldnt see until I was on top of it. Even though the tyre didnt burst the deflation was audible, but I suspect that the radio wouldve masked this.
If the trailer was laden, then it might even have been debris in the yard.
Cock Womble 7 said:
OK, if you insist.
Bloody hell !!!!!| Date | Location | Details | Damage | Liable |
| 04/01/2011 | Twickenham | Alleged hit third party. Driver unaware. | None. | Liability on balance of probability |
| 12/02/2011 | Bushey, Herts | Whilst avoiding an over-hanging tree, hit a van on the other side of the road. | Scrape along N/S rear of van. | Liable. |
| 23/02/2011 | Warrington | Third party backed into cab. | O/S mirror cracked and dent to O/S cab. | Non-liable |
| 04/06/2011 | London | Took N/S wing mirror off parked Mercedes when turning left. | Broken mirror and scrape down the side of the car. | Liable. |
| 12/06/2011 | Errol, Scotland | A large American car coming the other way caused me to pull over to the left and the mirror collided with a tree. | N/S convex mirror broken. | Liable. |
| 12/08/2011 | Errol, Scotland | Broke convex mirror on a tree (yes, the same one). | N/S convex mirror broken. | Liable. |
| 17/08/2011 | A51 between Colwich and Hixon | Hit a railway bridge. | Corner cap knocked off trailer. | Driver not liable - RailTrack proven to have incorrect sign on the bridge. |
| 16/09/2011 | Burntwood | Caught trailer mud-guard on kerb. | Mud-guard ripped off. | Liable. |
| 25/10/2011 | Northampton | Reversing under a trailer and caught the handle. | Damaged handle on fifth wheel. | Liable. |
| 29/10/2011 | Northampton | Reversing under a trailer and hit the O/S wind deflector. | Damage to O/S wind deflector. | Liable. |
| 04/11/2011 | Ashby-de-la-Zouch | Turning in delivery area, pulled out electrical Suzie. | Suzie broken. | Liable. |
| 07/11/2011 | Northampton | Collided with another trailer when leaving a loading bay. | Damaged trim on trailer. | Liable. |
| 17/07/2012 | Northampton | Wheel and tyre damage caused by a strike. | Tyre punctured and wheel dented. | TBA. |
I've a clean sheet after 4 years!
Gassing Station | Commercial Break | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff