When are we going to solve bridge strikes?

ED E

[Sorry if there was a recent one, search is throwing up 07 and 11 threads]

Check out @IrishRail’;s Tweet: https://twitter.com/IrishRail/status/912677991859269632?s=09
Delays to services between Malahide & Donabate due to a truck hitting Strand Street Bridge, staff on route to inspect, update to follow.

Check out @IrishRail’;s Tweet: https://twitter.com/IrishRail/status/912598237479043072?s=09
There is up to 20 mins of delays to North and Southbound DART due to a truck hitting a bridge at Grand Canal Dock.


Russian railways use security barriers for level crossings, surely we could put in a laser triggered bus gate/similar to prevent bridge contact. At what point does the cost of disruption and engineering time outway the cost of measures greater than signage?

budhabob

There's loads of technology out there, both proactive and reactive. The problem is cost. IE have been underfunded (fact based on current costs / income) but have sought to solve bad actor bridges - bash beams, raising the deck etc.

It is worth noting there have been serious incidents caused by bridge strikes in Ireland . A bridge in gort was skewed in recent years following a strike

goingnowhere

It has led to fatalities https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/remembering-the-new-year-s-eve-train-crash-of-1975-1.2480479

Strictly speaking Irish Rail are the innocent party here, they are being struck. The legal responsibility lies with the person in charge of the vehicle to ensure they do not drive under a bridge that it too low.

When was the last time you saw Irish Rail release a photo, registration number (they like to hide these in the photos)? When was the last prosecution ? Thats were action is needed, name, shame and then chase them down for all costs involved, including loss of earnings, basically bankrupt anyone stupid enough.

That probably won't be enough, then you get the insurance companies to explicitly state you are not covered if you hit a bridge as in doing so you broke the law and only 3rd party will be paid

Dravokivich

People ignore hight restrictions. The truck yesterday had a load on it that was clearly taller than the driver anticipated. But they never checked it. There's warnings on the run up to these bridges. They should have been able to see it and divert themselves.

Gerrup Outta Dat!

When I did bus lessons, it was second nature if I came near a bridge or tunnel, check the height plate ... if height of bus >= height of tunnel ... then turn around. It's really quite simple.

ED E

Gerrup Outta Dat! wrote: »

When I did bus lessons, it was second nature if I came near a bridge or tunnel, check the height plate ... if height of bus >= height of tunnel ... then turn around. It's really quite simple.

"Driving for more than two hours a day steadily reduces intelligence, a new study suggests.

Researchers investigating how sedentary behaviour affects brainpower found IQ scores fell faster in middle-aged Britons who drove long distances every day."

Relying on truckers not to be fools won't work. IR cant prosecute, only sue. And its not IR only, luas is hit multiple times per annum. At least IR can build barriers between infrastructure and traffic.

Take the roof/load off if required, driver can pay his boss for a replacement.

AirBiscuit

Could always put a beam before the bridge that takes the impact instead, á la https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0BJmC6u7MU

Gerrup Outta Dat!

ED E wrote: »

"Driving for more than two hours a day steadily reduces intelligence, a new study suggests.

Researchers investigating how sedentary behaviour affects brainpower found IQ scores fell faster in middle-aged Britons who drove long distances every day."

Relying on truckers not to be fools won't work. IR cant prosecute, only sue. And its not IR only, luas is hit multiple times per annum. At least IR can build barriers between infrastructure and traffic.

Take the roof/load off if required, driver can pay his boss for a replacement.

The penalty point offence states "Bridge Strikes, etc.". What does the "etc." refer to? Does striking a plastic bollard with a bus / lorry count?

prinzeugen

Having worked on the tolls in the port tunnel, most of the over height alarms were due to poor loading, loose loads/load covers or incorrect settings by the driver.

In all fairness, more than one trailer said "xx height" but when the tape went on it, it would be feet higher.

Lots of arguments! There was also one double decker that set the alarms off as it had a fault with the suspension.

loyatemu

More of these: https://goo.gl/maps/Yc6jYgEtNtM2

not great visually but they do the job.

BrokenArrows

Simple solution would be to put a metal bracket over the road 100 meters before the bridges which have the correct height. Similar to what you see in front of carparks to prevent caravans going in. Its cheap and will cause a crash before the important bridge.

Macy0161

RSA builders vests for bridges - that's the normal solution for when motorists keep hitting things isn't?

On a more serious note, bigger penalities - if any are actually given now, as I can't recall ever hearing what happened - and cctv at all bridges to prevent drive off's.

Barriers would work, but not sure I was to see what should be unnecessary, and ugly structures around the place just to deal with idiot drivers.

If there's an issue with real v claimed heights of vehicles, maybe a tolerance should be built into the restrictions?

Dravokivich

Macy0161 wrote: »

If there's an issue with real v claimed heights of vehicles, maybe a tolerance should be built into the restrictions?

You can't be doing that. Less people will be concerned with vehicle height if they can assume it'll be a bit taller.

The signs are simple.

Unfortunately some drivers are simpler.

gctest50

Rising bollards are they only way

Dravokivich

The bollard is already up in those videos. How effective is that going to be in traffic?

gctest50

Stick a gas ram or something fast acting, only has to rise as far as the front axle

07Lapierre

If you hit a bridge, your fine should be
1: the cost of the repair
2: the cost of constructing a "height Bar" on both sides of the bridge ( to protect the bridge from future strikes)

Zero cost to IE/ the government or tax Payer and a HUGE deterrent!

schemingbohemia

You should lose your licence. These are (in the case of lorries etc) professional drivers who if they don't know the height of their vehicles shouldn't be on the road.

ED E

Dravokivich wrote: »

The bollard is already up in those videos. How effective is that going to be in traffic?

They can raise themselves fast enough to stop a vehicle.

OR

Dravokivich

In the first video, that bollard is brought down by remote control. And raises when a sensor recognises the vehicle has completed passing over. it is not targetting a vehicle in traffic to raise to in response.

The second video, appears to be something requiring manual operation as well. Should we be looking to avoid that?

markpb

Anyone who thinks enforcement, fines or public shaming will solve this problem must think that drivers are deliberately targeting bridges with the intent of shutting down the rail line. This is ludicrous. Truck drivers are humans, they make mistakes like everyone else. They forget that their load is higher than usual or they accidentally forget to check one bridge out of the numerous bridges they driver under on each trip. All the enforcement in the world isn't going to stop those things happening.

The only workable solutions are what AirBiscuit and loyatemu suggested. Laser based systems are far too expensive and very difficult to fit in an urban environment where most of the incidents are and where each incident causes the most disruption.

Infini

Sack all the bridges!





Cos that seems to be the easy answer to every strike according to cancer media! :P

gctest50

Dravokivich wrote: »

In the first video, that bollard is brought down by remote control. And raises when a sensor recognises the vehicle has completed passing over. it is not targetting a vehicle in traffic to raise to in response.
.....

well, it could - speed of this sorter for example :

thomasj

On the way around mulhuddart bridge, I witnessed an ambulance (full sirons on etc) that had to turn around and take another route because it couldn't fit under the bridge. This is the second time I've seen this in months.

Maybe there is something that can be done that these warnings could be inserted into the map software / satnav etc warn drivers when they approach three bridges.

Del2005

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Simple solution would be to put a metal bracket over the road 100 meters before the bridges which have the correct height. Similar to what you see in front of carparks to prevent caravans going in. Its cheap and will cause a crash before the important bridge.

100m is way too close to a bridge for a big rig to get a warning. The warning/barriers should be on the approach roads with a viable alternative route signed. Not much point in warning the operator when they are on a narrow road with nowhere to turn a tractor and trailer that they can't fit, which is where most of the height warning signs are.

Marty Bird

AirBiscuit wrote: »

Could always put a beam before the bridge that takes the impact instead, á la https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0BJmC6u7MU

That would be a perfect solution and only needs to be deployed at high risk bridges to keep costs low.

Zebra3

markpb wrote: »

Anyone who thinks enforcement, fines or public shaming will solve this problem must think that drivers are deliberately targeting bridges with the intent of shutting down the rail line. This is ludicrous. Truck drivers are humans, they make mistakes like everyone else. They forget that their load is higher than usual or they accidentally forget to check one bridge out of the numerous bridges they driver under on each trip. All the enforcement in the world isn't going to stop those things happening.

The only workable solutions are what AirBiscuit and loyatemu suggested. Laser based systems are far too expensive and very difficult to fit in an urban environment where most of the incidents are and where each incident causes the most disruption.

Nonsense. Risk of serious punishment focuses the mind.

thomasj

Bridge has been struck in portmarnock this morning

Services are currently only running from Clongriffin .

LXFlyer

Back moving now.

tabbey

thomasj wrote: »

On the way around mulhuddart bridge, I witnessed an ambulance (full sirons on etc) that had to turn around and take another route because it couldn't fit under the bridge.

Sorry, I am confused, Mulhuddart is over a mile from the railway,do you mean a bridge over the N3 dual carriageway (Blanchardstown bypass)?.
Surely all modern roads were built with full clearance.

Hilly Bill

Stop the reliance on GPS to get you places and pay attention.

tabbey

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Stop the reliance on GPS to get you places and pay attention.

Absolutely, there are too many distractions when driving, without adding more.

I got a SatNav some years ago, but stopped using it, as it was too dangerous. Now I just use it while stationary, if I get lost or want to review my route.

RobertFoster

tabbey wrote: »

Sorry, I am confused, Mulhuddart is over a mile from the railway,do you mean a bridge over the N3 dual carriageway (Blanchardstown bypass)?.
Surely all modern roads were built with full clearance.

Under the N3 on the Blakestown Rd. Clearance is 2.6m according to the Street View images.

ED E

UK, today.

When truckers do things like this I'm not sure you count on financial penalties waking them up.