In article , d wrote:

On Thu, 5 May 2016 08:43:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 4 May 2016 17:32:41 +0100
Mizter T wrote:
On 04/05/2016 17:17, Graeme Wall wrote:

[signage, flashing lights, level crossings, idiots, steel beams,
luminous paint, hanging fringe]

As always: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk9DjO-_rT8

Sam

--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

On 05/05/2016 09:14, d wrote:
Looking at the signs they've already got I'm not sure what more they could
do other than have overheight flashing warning lights. But then idiots ignore
flashing lights at level crossings so...

I agree, it seems impossible to not notice. Shouldn't drivers who miss
signs such as this be required to take another driving test (which I
understand now includes an element that tests one's ability to notice
hazards on the road) and also an eyesight test before being allowed to
continue?

Just the knowledge that this would be the result of a bridge bash might
be enough to make drivers of high vehicles just a little bit more careful.

--
Clive Page

On 05/05/16 09:43, Recliner wrote:

I think the only solution is to have a sturdy steel beam, painted in
luminous paint, a few metres before the bridge (and obviously mounted so
that, even if hit, no force is transferred to the bridge parapets). The
beam might be a few cm below the bridge, but there might also be a hanging
fringe below that so it's right in the driver's eye line.


The only solution is ruinous punitive damages plus criminal charges
levelled against the driver.

If a bridge strike cost their insurers £50000 and the driver 6 points, I
be the standard of reading would shoot up overnight.

On 05/05/16 10:18, Clive Page wrote:
On 05/05/2016 09:14, d wrote:
Looking at the signs they've already got I'm not sure what more they
could
do other than have overheight flashing warning lights. But then idiots
ignore
flashing lights at level crossings so...

I agree, it seems impossible to not notice. Shouldn't drivers who miss
signs such as this be required to take another driving test (which I
understand now includes an element that tests one's ability to notice
hazards on the road) and also an eyesight test before being allowed to
continue?

Just the knowledge that this would be the result of a bridge bash might
be enough to make drivers of high vehicles just a little bit more careful.


No - 6 points on license. That would soon stop their carefree attitude
and propensity to buy cheap non-truck grade GPS satnavs.

In article ,
(Sam Wilson) wrote:

In article , d wrote:

On Thu, 5 May 2016 08:43:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 4 May 2016 17:32:41 +0100
Mizter T wrote:
On 04/05/2016 17:17, Graeme Wall wrote:

[signage, flashing lights, level crossings, idiots, steel beams,
luminous paint, hanging fringe]

As always: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk9DjO-_rT8

Cool! Now, why don't Network Rail try that?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
(Tim Watts) wrote:

On 05/05/16 10:18, Clive Page wrote:
On 05/05/2016 09:14, d wrote:
Looking at the signs they've already got I'm not sure what more they
could do other than have overheight flashing warning lights. But then
idiots ignore flashing lights at level crossings so...

I agree, it seems impossible to not notice. Shouldn't drivers who miss
signs such as this be required to take another driving test (which I
understand now includes an element that tests one's ability to notice
hazards on the road) and also an eyesight test before being allowed to
continue?

Just the knowledge that this would be the result of a bridge bash might
be enough to make drivers of high vehicles just a little bit more
careful.

No - 6 points on license. That would soon stop their carefree
attitude and propensity to buy cheap non-truck grade GPS satnavs.

Not enough. They should be disqualified at least and made to re-take tests.
These are professional drivers who are not fit and proper people to be on
the roads if they cannot handle their large vehicles safely.

They should also be charged with endangering passengers on the railway and
sent to jail if that is what they have done. I can't understand why the
worst level crossing cases are never charged with that when that is what the
idiots are doing.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 09:12:50 on Thu, 5 May
2016, d remarked:
I think the only solution is to have a sturdy steel beam, painted in
luminous paint, a few metres before the bridge (and obviously mounted so
that, even if hit, no force is transferred to the bridge parapets). The
beam might be a few cm below the bridge, but there might also be a hanging
fringe below that so it's right in the driver's eye line.

Well he failed to spot the pretty obvious warning signs on the bridge so I
doubt this particular Einstein would have seen a painted beam either.

Are we sure he ignored the signs, rather than forgot (or didn't properly
know) the height of his vehicle. Forgetting what you are driving is just
about the only reason one of the fairly regular double-decker bus bashes
happens.
--
Roland Perry

On 05/05/16 10:23, Tim Watts wrote:
On 05/05/16 10:18, Clive Page wrote:
On 05/05/2016 09:14, d wrote:
I agree, it seems impossible to not notice. Shouldn't drivers who miss
signs such as this be required to take another driving test (which I
understand now includes an element that tests one's ability to notice
hazards on the road) and also an eyesight test before being allowed to
continue?

Just the knowledge that this would be the result of a bridge bash might
be enough to make drivers of high vehicles just a little bit more
careful.


No - 6 points on license. That would soon stop their carefree attitude
and propensity to buy cheap non-truck grade GPS satnavs.
No 11 points on license. That really would make them think.

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 09:12:50 on Thu, 5 May
2016, d remarked:
I think the only solution is to have a sturdy steel beam, painted in
luminous paint, a few metres before the bridge (and obviously mounted so
that, even if hit, no force is transferred to the bridge parapets). The
beam might be a few cm below the bridge, but there might also be a
hanging fringe below that so it's right in the driver's eye line.

Well he failed to spot the pretty obvious warning signs on the bridge so
I doubt this particular Einstein would have seen a painted beam either.

Are we sure he ignored the signs, rather than forgot (or didn't
properly know) the height of his vehicle. Forgetting what you are
driving is just about the only reason one of the fairly regular
double-decker bus bashes happens.

Either way it's a major failure to meet the standard of driving expected of
people driving such large vehicles.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:12:50 on Thu, 5 May 2016,
d remarked:
I think the only solution is to have a sturdy steel beam, painted in
luminous paint, a few metres before the bridge (and obviously mounted so
that, even if hit, no force is transferred to the bridge parapets). The
beam might be a few cm below the bridge, but there might also be a
hanging
fringe below that so it's right in the driver's eye line.

Well he failed to spot the pretty obvious warning signs on the bridge so I
doubt this particular Einstein would have seen a painted beam either.

Are we sure he ignored the signs, rather than forgot (or didn't properly
know) the height of his vehicle. Forgetting what you are driving is just
about the only reason one of the fairly regular double-decker bus bashes
happens.

It's a shipping container that hit the bridge, so the driver may well have
been caught out by the size of that.

Another solution for fixed height vehicles would be to mandate the fitting
of warning devices to the vehicles themsleves; I saw a very effective radar
system in use on a coach some years ago. However, this would be harder to
put into practise for vehicles like this one that can carry a variable
height load.

--
DAS