In article ,
Ian Jackson wrote:
In roadworks, I've never really understood why there should be a greater
risk of accidents. In 50 years of driving, I've never seen one happen
there. [In fact, I've hardly ever seen a 'live' accident - except those
involving myself!]

I have: on the M11 a lorry lost a tyre about a mile ahead of me.
Quite entertaining.

--
Please help Imogen May keep talking - www.imogenmay.com

On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:46:22AM +0100, Brimstone wrote:

Saaarf Lunnon morons innit?

They ain't got used to traffic moving at more than 15 mph through their
congested streets an' that.

Whenever I'm foolish enough to drive through London instead of going out
and around, it's always the bits north of the Thames that are slow and
make me arrive at my destination late.

--
David Cantrell | A machine for turning tea into grumpiness

What profiteth a man, if he win a flame war, yet lose his cool?

On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 02:43:19PM +0100, Batman55 wrote:

Is it just because you know the name well, that whenever anything happens,
it stands out? "Accident near/between Junction X/Y" isn't so memorable.

Traffic reports and signs that blather on about junction numbers annoy
me. I have no idea what junction number is where. I don't even know
what junction number I use to come off the M25 to get home. What the
****'s wrong with using place names?

--
David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic

In this episode, R2 and Luke weld the doors shut on their X-Wing,
and Chewbacca discovers that his Ewok girlfriend is really just a
Womble with its nose chopped off.

On Wed, 05 May 2010 11:55:23 +0100, David Cantrell
wrote:

Traffic reports and signs that blather on about junction numbers annoy
me. I have no idea what junction number is where. I don't even know
what junction number I use to come off the M25 to get home. What the
****'s wrong with using place names?


I couldn't agree more. I'm fed up of advanced warning signs and radio
reports that refer only to junction numbers. Even using the A road
number(s) at each motorway intersection would be better than using
junction numbers.

The cause is, at a minimum, reckless and inconsiderate driving by HGV
drivers (trying to get more out of the road than it can give in terms of
speed and capacity).

HGV's are limited to 56 mph mate

and?

How else do to two lorries crash into each other on a deserted motorway at
3 am?

Er, Driver fatigue? Mechanical failure? Tyre blowout?

phil

phil wrote:
The cause is, at a minimum, reckless and inconsiderate driving by HGV
drivers (trying to get more out of the road than it can give in terms of
speed and capacity).
HGV's are limited to 56 mph mate
and?

How else do to two lorries crash into each other on a deserted motorway at
3 am?

Er, Driver fatigue? Mechanical failure? Tyre blowout?

phil

It's too frequent at that spot to be a coincidence. Honestly.

On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 10:25:51AM +0100, Mike Bristow wrote:
Ian Jackson wrote:
In roadworks, I've never really understood why there should be a greater
risk of accidents. In 50 years of driving, I've never seen one happen
there. [In fact, I've hardly ever seen a 'live' accident - except those
involving myself!]
I have: on the M11 a lorry lost a tyre about a mile ahead of me.
Quite entertaining.

I have too. On some northern motorway, someone coming the other way was
drifting all over the place. I thought "bah 'eck" (I'd been in the
north for a week, it was rubbing off on me) "that looks like trouble",
and then they hit the central barrier and the car bounced up in the air
and disintegrated. Seconds later I went through the cloud of debris,
thankfully suffering nothing worse than a chipped windscreen and a
dented roof.

I didn't see what else happened, or what happened to cause the initial
loss of control, and didn't hang around either, working on the
assumption that the accident was going to stop the traffic on the
northbound carriageway anyway and someone else would call for an
ambulance.

I did phone the Oop North Police when I got home to try and give a
statement but they weren't interested.

I wouldn't call it entertaining, but it was at least exciting. I expect
that having an HIV test after your SO admits to sleeping with tramps is
similar.

--
David Cantrell | Cake Smuggler Extraordinaire

THIS IS THE LANGUAGE POLICE
PUT DOWN YOUR THESAURUS
STEP AWAY FROM THE CLICHE

On Thu, 06 May 2010 12:25:00 +0100
David Cantrell wrote:
north for a week, it was rubbing off on me) "that looks like trouble",
and then they hit the central barrier and the car bounced up in the air
and disintegrated. Seconds later I went through the cloud of debris,

Motorway barriers are far too thin and low IMO. Occasionally they don't stop
cars and almost never stop trucks going through them. The yanks have the
right idea in some states - a 5 foot high solid concrete wall between the
carraigeways which even a tank can't get over as they found out in LA a few
years back. Plus it makes it harder for rubber neckers to get a look.

B2003

Before the M25 was completed around 1979 A man protesting against that stretch being completed gave a warning of impending doom to all that travelled along that section and he was seen as a nutter, He said it was sacred ground. Apparently there was a village there that disappeared off the maps in Tudor Times . When the motorway was completed within weeks there was the most horrendous accident with cars catching fire and people getting burned to death, and nearly everyday there is an accident or an incident. This is a dead straight length of road with no hazards and no obvious danger

Thirty years ago I had a tyre blow-out on the southbound M11 carriageway about
a mile before the M25 junction. It was interesting but not entertaining. At
that point the southbound carriageway is downhill for about a mile, which of
course did not help me to slow down. I didn't dare touch my brakes so I
changed gears and drifted downhill. I thought I was going to get away with it
but when I was down to about 20 mph the car spun round and crashed into
the central reservation.