Prev: Accident update
Next: Motorists above the law.
From: Cynic on 14 Dec 2009 07:31 On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 09:48:52 +0000, Raymond Dalgleish <rwmd1(a)le.ac.uk> wrote: >> Bear in mind that the reports say that there was fairly dense fog at >> the time. It is possible that the bridge was not clearly visible at >> all in such conditions, and certainly the driver would have needed to >> concentrate far more than normal on the road surface ahead. >I work just up the hill from the bridge in question and there was >certainly no "fairly dense fog" that day. A little misty, perhaps, but >no more than that. Are you sure you were looking at the time it happened? Both the met office and the news report indicated foggy conditions. I was driving near Brighton when I first heard the news on the radio. It was certainly foggy where I was, and the weather report stated that the fog was widespread across the whole country. -- Cynic
From: Roland Perry on 14 Dec 2009 09:17 In message <4rbci5lct4q90e6rtabkigrevva6nb5sa1(a)4ax.com>, at 12:31:20 on Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Cynic <cynic_999(a)yahoo.co.uk> remarked: >I was driving near Brighton when I first heard the news on the radio. >It was certainly foggy where I was, and the weather report stated that >the fog was widespread across the whole country. I was twenty miles to the north, and it was "misty" at the time of the incident, but I wouldn't call it foggy, let alone the sort of pea-soup you get once every few years that would make a bridge difficult to see. Which is why I've made a point of asking why so few of the at-the-scene reports mention thick fog. -- Roland Perry
From: Raymond Dalgleish on 14 Dec 2009 09:31 Roland Perry wrote: > In message <4rbci5lct4q90e6rtabkigrevva6nb5sa1(a)4ax.com>, at 12:31:20 on > Mon, 14 Dec 2009, Cynic <cynic_999(a)yahoo.co.uk> remarked: >> I was driving near Brighton when I first heard the news on the radio. >> It was certainly foggy where I was, and the weather report stated that >> the fog was widespread across the whole country. > > I was twenty miles to the north, and it was "misty" at the time of the > incident, but I wouldn't call it foggy, let alone the sort of pea-soup > you get once every few years that would make a bridge difficult to see. > > Which is why I've made a point of asking why so few of the at-the-scene > reports mention thick fog. I drove under the bridge during the morning rush hour, prior to the accident. I saw the conditions with my own eyes. Slightly misty, NO fog (and consistent with the conditions "twenty miles to the north"). Brighton is 130 miles from here FFS. Can you take a look out the window right now and tell me what the weather is like in Leicester?
From: Cynic on 14 Dec 2009 10:20 On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:31:14 +0000, Raymond Dalgleish <rwmd1(a)le.ac.uk> wrote: >>> I was driving near Brighton when I first heard the news on the radio. >>> It was certainly foggy where I was, and the weather report stated that >>> the fog was widespread across the whole country. >> I was twenty miles to the north, and it was "misty" at the time of the >> incident, but I wouldn't call it foggy, let alone the sort of pea-soup >> you get once every few years that would make a bridge difficult to see. >> Which is why I've made a point of asking why so few of the at-the-scene >> reports mention thick fog. >I drove under the bridge during the morning rush hour, prior to the >accident. I saw the conditions with my own eyes. Slightly misty, NO fog >(and consistent with the conditions "twenty miles to the north"). >Brighton is 130 miles from here FFS. Can you take a look out the window >right now and tell me what the weather is like in Leicester? Obviously not, and I in no way implied that I might be able to. Just that the weather reports were claiming that there was widespread fog throughout the country, and that in my location there were certainly isolated but very frequent patches of pretty dense fog that I had been driving in and out of for a while. I had not been listening with complete attention to the radio news, as driving in those conditions required greater than normal concentration. It may well be that I misremembered the news of the accident, and incorrectly inserted into that report the later weather report of fog. Memory can often play tricks on a person, especially if it is a memory of something that you were not paying any particular attention to at the time. If fog has not been mentioned in any later media reports, and people who were close to the location at the time are saying that there was no fog, then I accept that I must be incorrect. -- Cynic
From: collybs on 14 Dec 2009 11:41
The driver has now been sacked http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/8412071.stm Peter |