train crossing truck driver
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: Noddy on 9 Jun 2007 00:14 "Michael" <mickpc(a)bigpond.com> wrote in message news:h6pai.10824$wH4.3164(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... > Now let me spell it out for you, if that cargo on the truck was were it > should have been, on a train, it would have never collided with that > train, duh. Probably not. The train would most likely have been behind time, the driver hopped up on crack to meet the schedule, and it would have cleaned up a few cars when it flew through the crossing at double the limit before the bells & lights had a chance to go off. Sound comical? No more than yours does :) -- Regards, Noddy.
From: Clockmeister on 9 Jun 2007 00:57 "Toby_Ponsenby" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message news:f4d0e4$c2b$1(a)registered.motzarella.org... > George W. Frost blathered on in Re: train crossing truck driver: > >> >> "DalienX" <somewhere(a)earth.com> wrote in message >> news:46696ae4$0$1180$61c65585(a)un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au... >>> Arthur Brain wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Don H wrote: >>>> >>>> > And just how is a government supposed to stop cars and trucks >>>> > from road-rail collision, by boom gates, etc - if the motorists >>>> > themselves persist in trying to "beat the train"? >>>> >>>> A monster-chicane on either side of each level-crossing would do the >>>> trick - if you've got to slow down to 30km/h anyway, the dumbfuck >>>> driving the truck might even stop. >>>> >>>> Bottom line is all these semis on the road >>>> - break the road, which we car-drivers have to pay to fix through our >>>> taxes >>>> - kill people, because so many of them are dumbfucks >>>> - waste resources when rail can carry SOOOOOOO MUCH MORE, for a >>>> fraction of the effort. >>> >>> A smarter government would prevent the situation in the first place >>> with overpasses and underpasses. >>> If the road never meets the rail, there will be no accidents. >> >> Too late for that >> Should have been thought of when they first laid the rail system >> > > Go to the top of the class. > > But the same sort of stuff is still cheerfully inflicted on us by GovCo. > Ferinstance right-hand entry/exits on what are laughingly called > Freeways. > New roads that don't cope with traffic volumes at day 1. > And too many other genius GovCo acts to mention here. > > Of course, nothings changed. > Doesn't matter what they do, there will still be dickheads on the road that won't follow simple road rules. You can't keep stupid people from doing stupid things, but you can make sure that stupid people don't get a license.
From: Daryl Walford on 9 Jun 2007 00:56 Noddy wrote: > "Daryl Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message > news:136k3cmqv8uhrcc(a)corp.supernews.com... > >> Is that what the driver is saying caused the crash? >> If so I don't buy it, I can understand not seeing the actual train but not >> seeing the flashing warning lights because of the sun is difficult to >> believe. > > It is indeed. > > Given the geography it's difficult to believe that Ray Charles couldn't have > seen the train coming five minutes before it got to the crossing. > >> My guess is he wasn't concentrating enough but that said a truck driver >> needs lot of distance to stop so IMO there should be extra warning >> flashing lights at least 200mtrs before crossings like that where the >> speed limit is high or alternatively speed limits on the approach to level >> crossings should be reduced or maybe a combination of both. > > The story in this morning's paper (Herald Sun) seemed to be suggesting that > he presumed he was going to beat the train over the crossing but bailed out > at the last minute when he realised he wasn't going to make it. There's also > been plenty of suggestion recently that such practices are relatively common > in country areas as some truck drivers would rather take the risk than have > to stop and waste ten minutes going through 18 gears to get back up to > speed. > If true thats bloody stupid, IMO it would be better to have make vehicles slow down when approaching a level crossing. I don't know if the rule still exists but passenger coaches used to have to "come to a complete stop and engage first gear" before entering a level crossing, IMO thats a bit extreme but its got to be safer than going through a crossing at 100kph. > It's *way* over time for tachographs to be mandatory in all heavy vehicles. There are better technologies around these days like GPS tracking, at any time who ever is controlling the system can find out where a vehicle is, how fast its going and even what gear its in and the engine rpm. The DAF has some sort of tachograph system fitted as standard but AFAIK no one looks at the data, I don't know if it even works. A lot of the trucks in our fleet, especially the interstaters have the GPS system fitted, the older DAF I used to drive has it but for some reason mine doesn't. One of our drivers does weekend work for Linfox doing supermarket deliveries, apparently they have been told they are not allowed to exceed 1800rpm in the MB Actross's, they must have a tracking system or tachograph installed because the fleet controllers know if the drivers disobey the no more than 1800rpm rule and they get a warning if they do it too often. Daryl
From: Clockmeister on 9 Jun 2007 01:01 "Jock" <the-nospam-bloke(a)bigpond.net.au> wrote in message news:MWnai.10799$wH4.10163(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... > Just realign the crossing so it's at a 90degree (perpendicular) angle of > approach. Till they investigate this fully we won't know if there are any > mitigating circumstances to the accident happening. The driver might have > had some sort of temporary impairment (blinded by the sun?) that caused > the lapse / prang. Not a chance unless he had his eyes shut for 10 minutes. > In any case, it sucks to be any of the people involved, their families, > friends or the rescue / care contingent. He made a run for it and lost, unfortunately many others lost too.
From: George W. Frost on 9 Jun 2007 01:30
"Michael" <mickpc(a)bigpond.com> wrote in message news:IPoai.10818$wH4.1547(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... > Noddy wrote: >> "Arthur Brain" <arthur_brain1(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >> >>> - waste resources when rail can carry SOOOOOOO MUCH MORE, for a >>> fraction of the effort. >> >> So, when you go to Big W to buy your new plasma screen so you can sit >> around and watch Home & away, they give you a coupon to trot along to >> your nearest rail freight depot to pick up your telly? >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Noddy. > How many Big W semi's do u see on the road mate, how many of these deliver > to your door. > Get a clue. > Mick C I think you have missed the point there Michael |