Tunnel crash truckie 'on mobile'

[GXL078]

That's most of them isn't it?
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21553680-2,00.html
Ah, but who is to say that talking on the mobile contributed to the crash? Blah blah blah. They need to START by blocking all mobile phone coverage inside the tunnels and have emergency phones every 50m or so.

[Sorted]

From what I see Truck Drivers are always on thier mobiles BUT what makes that different from the CB Radio?

Is it illegal also now to talk on a CB whilst driving?

Then again still 1,000's of Car Drivers Talk on thier mobiles while driving and yes you do notice their driving is more eractic than usual............

[BJ]

Rosco it was and is illegal to talk on the CB while driving.

[Elks]

This whole thing is a tragedy

The real problem remains that the Govt made the decision not to build and emergency lane in the tunnel to save money, An acceptable risk they call it. If the first truck had somewhere to pull off to, the accident would not have happened. Mobile or no mobile.

If they charge the truckie they need to charge the management team at Vicroads as well.

They will no doubt respond by putting speed cameras somewhere else. That will fix it.

[Fordman1]

Get a hands free and don't freaking talk on your 'hands held' whilst driving I say !!!!!

Even more importantly DONT try sending or reading text messages.

I had a friend who was killed by an idiot driving whilst using their phone. It's a serious matter IMO, and inexcusable - the law is quite specific in this area and people (especially professional drivers) know it.

So if this driver is found guilty of 'doing it', and therefore of 'being culpable', he should be locked up for a long time and made an example of.

[Hardtopxb]

Originally Posted by DRHEMI

From what I see Truck Drivers are always on thier mobiles BUT what makes that different from the CB Radio?

Is it illegal also now to talk on a CB whilst driving?

Then again still 1,000's of Car Drivers Talk on thier mobiles while driving and yes you do notice their driving is more eractic than usual............

The other day I was in a roundabout and a young woman on her mobile came through on my left without looking and nearly cleaned up me and the bloke next to me. she was not driving erratically.She was just obliviousto her surroundings..Mobiles are a bl00dy peril to everyone..

[vztrt]

The Herald Sun is reporting that phone records show the driver's mobile was answered just seconds before his rig ploughed into two cars and a truck that was parked in the left lane after a tyre blowout.

By the sounds of it, it looks like he took his eyes off the road to either find the phone or press the button to answer it. Looked up and didn't have enough room to stop.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by BJ

Rosco it was and is illegal to talk on the CB while driving.

BULLSHIT :ymca:

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by myts

This whole thing is a tragedy

The real problem remains that the Govt made the decision not to build and emergency lane in the tunnel to save money, An acceptable risk they call it. If the first truck had somewhere to pull off to, the accident would not have happened. Mobile or no mobile.

If they charge the truckie they need to charge the management team at Vicroads as well.

They will no doubt respond by putting speed cameras somewhere else. That will fix it.

Absolute tragedy yes....but blaming the government for bad driving? : People seem to try and blame anyone but themselves.

If he picked up the phone he needs to take responsibility fo what happened end of story. Tunnel or no tunnel not every road has a breakdown lane. You cannot make roads idiot proof.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by LSTerritoryGhia

BULLSHIT :ymca:

Agreed, it is NOT illegal to use a CB radio when driving BUT the driver must be in full control of the vehicle whilst doing so and not be distracted.

A prohibition on the use of CB radio and two-way radios generally was discussed at pre 1999 ARR formulation and was steadfastly refused by the contributing states. Rightly so.

The 'mechanics' of using a mobile phone - holding to ear and sometimes kinking neck are completely different to merely picking up a mic and yapping into it.

Even IF by some drug affected disaster, the other states managed to vote such a prohibition into the ARR, NSW will NOT accept the prohibition.

Responsible use of a CB radio is accepted and encouraged, See MY Sig Pdf.

Stefan writes: Absolute tragedy yes....but blaming the government for bad driving? People seem to try and blame anyone but themselves.

THE GOVERNMENT are certainly and absolutely to blame for the attitude that prevails on the roads today, particularly in VIC, SA and QLD.

If you dumb "driving requirements" down by lower and lower speed limits and overbearing camera enforcement, AND then have the vehicle fleet comply with MINIMALIST equipment given as standard in other places, then DON'T EXPECT quality driving, rather pig headedness and poor behaviour and discipline.

People drive without care because they can, and will continue to do so. No AUS government is serious about the road toll, yet. If you want serious, come and see me. . .

[BJ]

Originally Posted by LSTerritoryGhia

BULLSHIT :ymca:

No not Bullsh!t at all. I got booked twice for doing it in the mid 80s.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

THE GOVERNMENT are certainly and absolutely to blame for the attitude that prevails on the roads today, particularly in VIC, SA and QLD.

If you dumb "driving requirements" down by lower and lower speed limits and overbearing camera enforcement, AND then have the vehicle fleet comply with MINIMALIST equipment given as standard in other places, then DON'T EXPECT quality driving, rather pig headedness and poor behaviour and discipline.

People drive without care because they can, and will continue to do so. No AUS government is serious about the road toll, yet. If you want serious, come and see me. . .

Is this an extract from the Transport Union Handbook? The government didn't ask this bloke to take his eyes off the road. This has nothing to do with "dumbing things down", speed cameras, breakdown lanes or any other bullsh!t excuse you can come up with.

If my wife and our son have flat I hope the bloke in a B-Double a couple of kms behind her is concentrating on what he is doing not off in La La Land answering phones or trying to find another way to blame the Government or Fleet Company for his misfortunes.

[atec77]

Originally Posted by BJ

Rosco it was and is illegal to talk on the CB while driving.

Do you have a link ?
It is legal to talk on Ham radio while driving .

[Jason[98.EL]]

this is the news i got

A truck driver talking on a mobile phone MAY have triggered the fatal chain of events in Melbourne's Burnley tunnel last month that left three people dead.

The phone call, ALLEGEDLY received by the truck driver seconds before his semi-trailer ploughed into three vehicles in the tunnel, will come under scrutiny at a coronial inquest on Monday.

why cant people wait till facts are out and prooved before they post threads like this

what ever happened to inocent till proven guilty

then by all means rip crap through him ........not before it is proven

[Sorted]

Originally Posted by heljas

what ever happened to inocent till proven guilty

I don't think innocent before "proven" guilty exists anymore........ would be nice though

[GXL078]

A guy was jailed for 8 years in NSW recently, and had his appeal dismissed. Ran into 33 cars. was driving an unregistered truck with fake plates and brakes that he knew were faulty. Killed a woman and injured other people.

[bcr2734]

I think you guys need to shut up about this. I work for the company that was hit from behind ( far right) and the far bottom left of that photo. Now the driver was legal in stopping the truck in that lane cause the lane was closed by the tunnel operators. the truck that hit the sterling had bad brakes. He had a bolt in one of the booasters ( if unsure on truck brakes look up in a manual). That made the trailer reduce its braking capacity. Now if one of the drivers was using a mobile it may hinder the drivers ability to react to the situation tho he had no where to go. Now if ya have a problem with truck drivers and the company i work for. Please dont hesitate to msg me. Also that guy that hit 33 cars. That guy had his trailer rego'd under a box trailer, His prime mover had stolen plates. He had a quanity of drugs in his pocession. Now the uhf is legal in every state and terroity( spelling). Now all drivers have been cleared by vic roads and awaiting the coroner to hand down his findings. other charges may come from the coroner tho it seems unlike due to driver error and judgement. Now thats what the driver told us in melbourne and he is fit to drive. Now it would seem that people are judging on media so-called evidence. Us truck drivers see every one do stupid things and yes i have seen several ford fourum stickers on cars doing that. I dont put everyone down because some small group are not experienced as others. Now being a interstate driver for a few years, i have seen idiots in cars truck and bloody caravans. Tho i don't start threads up about them. So finally i think you's should use your energy in building top cars than believe what you read in the papers!

Cheers

[S3SR]

anyone else see the "done it again"


sorry if it offends people

[schmidty]

Originally Posted by FALCONSR

anyone else see the "done it again"


sorry if it offends people

Um yeah, its a McCain signed trailer.

Its also on their other frozen goods packaging available at a supermarket near you!

[bcr2734]

you are a dick.

[JC]

If the truckie being on the phone is found to have contributed to the accident, then I hope he gets 20 years for every person killed (that would be 60 years total). Then the TAC will use the crash as a reminder for what happens when you drive while on the phone.

If the truckie is found to be innocent, then he deserves to get off with nothing - but the truck that did all the slamming of cars etc has to be at fault in some way. In this instance, I don't see how there can possibly be no fault attributed to someone.

The truck's owner may also have a case to answer under OH&S rules, if the truck didn't have a hands free kit.

[schmidty]

Originally Posted by bcr2734

you are a dick.

Kids & Sooks? Changing their name to Inferno Freightlines arent they?

[JC]

Originally Posted by schmidty

Kids & Sooks? Changing their name to Inferno Freightlines arent they?

That's a pretty inflammatory remark. ;-) :SaiyanSmi

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by bcr2734

I think you guys need to shut up about this. I work for the company that was hit from behind ( far right) and the far bottom left of that photo. Now the driver was legal in stopping the truck in that lane cause the lane was closed by the tunnel operators. the truck that hit the sterling had bad brakes. He had a bolt in one of the booasters ( if unsure on truck brakes look up in a manual). That made the trailer reduce its braking capacity. Now if one of the drivers was using a mobile it may hinder the drivers ability to react to the situation tho he had no where to go. Now if ya have a problem with truck drivers and the company i work for. Please dont hesitate to msg me. Also that guy that hit 33 cars. That guy had his trailer rego'd under a box trailer, His prime mover had stolen plates. He had a quanity of drugs in his pocession. Now the uhf is legal in every state and terroity( spelling). Now all drivers have been cleared by vic roads and awaiting the coroner to hand down his findings. other charges may come from the coroner tho it seems unlike due to driver error and judgement. Now thats what the driver told us in melbourne and he is fit to drive. Now it would seem that people are judging on media so-called evidence. Us truck drivers see every one do stupid things and yes i have seen several ford fourum stickers on cars doing that. I dont put everyone down because some small group are not experienced as others. Now being a interstate driver for a few years, i have seen idiots in cars truck and bloody caravans. Tho i don't start threads up about them. So finally i think you's should use your energy in building top cars than believe what you read in the papers!

Cheers

Just to correct one point, the far left tunnel lane was closed after the first semi pulled up (blown tyre) and not before. This occurred aftrer the control room cctv showed the truck stationary with hazards on. The driver then only got out after he heard the public announcement and lane closure signs come on...I know that usually the left lane gets closed in afternoon peak for traffic control but this wasn't the case as it occurred around 10.00am.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

Just to correct one point, the far left tunnel lane was closed after the first semi pulled up (blown tyre) and not before.

Just to 'adjust' one point, it IS the left lane. The lane to its right is the middle lane:-) I reinforce your observations btw.


I stand by my comments posted earlier in thread regarding governments and driver education. Of course, that does not detract from personal responsibility, however - low requirement equals low standards.

And, the chap advising folk to 'shut up about this' (event) - would do well to not 'attempt facts' about the case on a public forum. The post is liable to legal action owing what is stated.

[schmidty]

Originally Posted by bcr2734

I think you guys need to shut up about this. I work for the company that was hit from behind ( far right) and the far bottom left of that photo. Now the driver was legal in stopping the truck in that lane cause the lane was closed by the tunnel operators. the truck that hit the sterling had bad brakes. He had a bolt in one of the booasters ( if unsure on truck brakes look up in a manual). That made the trailer reduce its braking capacity. Now if one of the drivers was using a mobile it may hinder the drivers ability to react to the situation tho he had no where to go. Now if ya have a problem with truck drivers and the company i work for.
Cheers

So what you're saying is the main contributing factors of the accident are that the K&S driver stopped in the left lane for something he should never have stopped for - then the lane was closed, the other K&S driver was on the phone, and also his trailer had brakes that didnt work properly?

So if we be so kind as to leave the guy alone who was pulled over for a friggen blow out, does this mean if he was legal in doing so, we now put it all on the driver who was driving while on his hand held mobile, or because he was hauling a rooted trailer, or on K&S for pathetic maintenance?

We've got handsfree kits in all of our trucks, and bluetooth kits too for anyone who ever gets in and doesnt have a phone that fits. They cost a whole of $300 each fitted, and require the push of a dash mounted button to answer/hang up, and activate voice dialing.

I think if K&S want to repair their image, its about time they better educate some of their drivers on propper procedures and basic safety. Within a few days of the blow out in the tunnel, saw a K&S semi changing a tyre on the bend before toorak rd on the monash, stopped, but that was it. No safety anything. 2 days later, sun almost set, thursday night peak out, pouring rain, K&S double stopped on the left hand side emergency lane on the princes fwy near hoppers crossing changing a blown tyre, no parkers, no hazards, no vest and no triangles.

K&S have a strong presence on the roads. Since the crash, people do watch and judge more than they used to., Thats human nature. But when you see it all too often questions are raised about the driver training and maintenance regime. The bulk of their trailers and local prime movers are looking pretty shabby.

Ever see a dirty run down Cootes tanker?


Once you're driving something with a sign on the door or a distinctive logo on the side, you're always going to be somewhat judged by the actions of your collegues, as generally people who see the same sign or logo will group them all together. We've only got 5 or 6 trucks on the road, so naturally the chances of people seeing our trucks enough for them to stand out or be remembered is minimal. A company like K&S are everywhere, and if someone has a bad experience on the road with 1, they'll generally be weary of all of them.

[LUXO_8]

good post schmidty!
well said

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by schmidty

Snip - I think if K&S want to repair their image, its about time they better educate some of their drivers on propper procedures and basic safety. Within a few days of the blow out in the tunnel, saw a K&S semi changing a tyre on the bend before toorak rd on the monash, stopped, but that was it. No safety anything. 2 days later, sun almost set, thursday night peak out, pouring rain, K&S double stopped on the left hand side emergency lane on the princes fwy near hoppers crossing changing a blown tyre, no parkers, no hazards, no vest and no triangles.

227 Using portable warning triangles
(1) This rule applies to a driver if the GVM of the driver’s vehicle
is over 12 tonnes.

Note Driver’s vehicle and GVM are defined in the dictionary.

(2) If the driver stops on a road and the vehicle is not visible at any
time for at least 200 metres in all directions from the vehicle,
the driver must use at least 3 portable warning triangles,
positioned in accordance with subrule (4), to warn other road
users of the vehicle.

(3) If some or all of any load being carried by the vehicle falls onto
a road and is not clearly visible at any time for at least
200 metres in all directions from the fallen load, the driver
must use at least 3 portable warning triangles, positioned in
accordance with subrule (4), to warn other road users of the
fallen load.

(4) The driver must position the portable warning triangles so:
(a) 1 triangle is at least 50 metres, but not over 150 metres, in
front of the vehicle or fallen load; and
(b) 1 triangle is at least 50 metres, but not over 150 metres,
behind the vehicle or fallen load; and
(c) 1 triangle is at the side of the vehicle, or fallen load, in a
position that gives sufficient warning to other road users of
the position of the vehicle or fallen load.

Schmidty, folk really need to tread carefully insofar 'identifiers' as to this case. Keep if 'generic' if you will.

[schmidty]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

227 Using portable warning triangles
(1) This rule applies to a driver if the GVM of the driver’s vehicle
is over 12 tonnes.

Note Driver’s vehicle and GVM are defined in the dictionary.

(2) If the driver stops on a road and the vehicle is not visible at any
time for at least 200 metres in all directions from the vehicle,
the driver must use at least 3 portable warning triangles,
positioned in accordance with subrule (4), to warn other road
users of the vehicle.

(3) If some or all of any load being carried by the vehicle falls onto
a road and is not clearly visible at any time for at least
200 metres in all directions from the fallen load, the driver
must use at least 3 portable warning triangles, positioned in
accordance with subrule (4), to warn other road users of the
fallen load.

(4) The driver must position the portable warning triangles so:
(a) 1 triangle is at least 50 metres, but not over 150 metres, in
front of the vehicle or fallen load; and
(b) 1 triangle is at least 50 metres, but not over 150 metres,
behind the vehicle or fallen load; and
(c) 1 triangle is at the side of the vehicle, or fallen load, in a
position that gives sufficient warning to other road users of
the position of the vehicle or fallen load.

Schmidty, folk really need to tread carefully insofar 'identifiers' as to this case. Keep if 'generic' if you will.

All instances i mentioned, fell within your point (1) & (2)

And tread carefully? Why? Should everyone speak hypothetically and generically??

Almost everything you post is from a law, legislation or handbook. There's more goes on in life than that.

[bcr2734]

Originally Posted by schmidty

So what you're saying is the main contributing factors of the accident are that the K&S driver stopped in the left lane for something he should never have stopped for - then the lane was closed, the other K&S driver was on the phone, and also his trailer had brakes that didnt work properly?

So if we be so kind as to leave the guy alone who was pulled over for a friggen blow out, does this mean if he was legal in doing so, we now put it all on the driver who was driving while on his hand held mobile, or because he was hauling a rooted trailer, or on K&S for pathetic maintenance?

We've got handsfree kits in all of our trucks, and bluetooth kits too for anyone who ever gets in and doesnt have a phone that fits. They cost a whole of $300 each fitted, and require the push of a dash mounted button to answer/hang up, and activate voice dialing.

I think if K&S want to repair their image, its about time they better educate some of their drivers on propper procedures and basic safety. Within a few days of the blow out in the tunnel, saw a K&S semi changing a tyre on the bend before toorak rd on the monash, stopped, but that was it. No safety anything. 2 days later, sun almost set, thursday night peak out, pouring rain, K&S double stopped on the left hand side emergency lane on the princes fwy near hoppers crossing changing a blown tyre, no parkers, no hazards, no vest and no triangles.

K&S have a strong presence on the roads. Since the crash, people do watch and judge more than they used to., Thats human nature. But when you see it all too often questions are raised about the driver training and maintenance regime. The bulk of their trailers and local prime movers are looking pretty shabby.

Ever see a dirty run down Cootes tanker?


Once you're driving something with a sign on the door or a distinctive logo on the side, you're always going to be somewhat judged by the actions of your collegues, as generally people who see the same sign or logo will group them all together. We've only got 5 or 6 trucks on the road, so naturally the chances of people seeing our trucks enough for them to stand out or be remembered is minimal. A company like K&S are everywhere, and if someone has a bad experience on the road with 1, they'll generally be weary of all of them.

you said five trucks. Hmmm. The company has a good aray of trucks. It could be worse mate it could have been a bulls from adel. we have over 5000 trucks not including 6500 trailers. thats only in australia. Times that by 300 for a phone. If they changed a tyre on these roads you said we'll you being a fellow truck driver would of helped?. interesting that all partys have a view on this. And all welcom if they a not blaming anyone. All of K & S gear is roadworth and it may not be flash but it does it's job. In linehaul there are no trucks over 4 years. in reference to cootes, they have been broke 3 times and have contracts that say that the gear must be washed. But in australia we have a drought. the driver was legal when he stopped. thats it. An as to say we have a poor training regime. i think you need to come over to the depot and go throught it ok. I am standing up for the company and the driver until proven guilty. Thats where it stands and if thats upsets you well go and build a bridge. The sarents trailer was the one with the bolt in the boaster.