![]() |
Tree bash
|
Tree bash
In message , at 14:41:36
on Sun, 22 Dec 2013, remarked: If he stayed on the road (it's not obvious from the reports/pictures that he didn't) then I don't blame a bus driver for assuming any potentially conflicting roadside trees have been cleared away. (Low bridges are an entirely different matter). I think you are wrong there. He was certainly heading off the road to hit the tree in that manner. The picture I posted shows him pretty much parallel to the kerb, I'd have thought. http://i2.mirror.co.uk/incoming/arti...ATES/s2197/Mai n-Bus-Crash-2946066.jpg -- Roland Perry |
Tree bash
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 16:07:02 +0000
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 15:41:03 on Sun, 22 Dec 2013, d remarked: Clearly until there is an outcome from the investigation all of that is speculation as is allocating "blame" to the bus driver when he was not the person that triggered the events that caused the collision with the tree. Unless the tree jumped in front of his bus then he has to share part of the blame. No competent driver is going to avoid hitting a car just to drive into a tree instead. If he stayed on the road (it's not obvious from the reports/pictures that he didn't) then I don't blame a bus driver for assuming any potentially conflicting roadside trees have been cleared away. Eh? If a tree has a low branch overhanging the road that a bus could hit then fair enough, but this tree is clearly on the pavement and its not exactly small. Unless he's clinically blind there is no way he couldn't have seen it. - Spud |
Tree bash
In message , at 10:10:56 on Tue, 24 Dec
2013, d remarked: If he stayed on the road (it's not obvious from the reports/pictures that he didn't) then I don't blame a bus driver for assuming any potentially conflicting roadside trees have been cleared away. Eh? If a tree has a low branch overhanging the road that a bus could hit then fair enough, but this tree is clearly on the pavement and its not exactly small. Unless he's clinically blind there is no way he couldn't have seen it. In this picture, is the bus on the pavement? http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/others/i...s/default.aspx I'm assuming the kerb next to the bus aligns with that white line just beyond the two hi-viz in the foreground, and not out where the police van is parked. Although there does seem to be perhaps the end of a lay-by directly in front of the bus. -- Roland Perry |
Tree bash
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 10:35:10 +0000
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:10:56 on Tue, 24 Dec 2013, d remarked: If he stayed on the road (it's not obvious from the reports/pictures that he didn't) then I don't blame a bus driver for assuming any potentially conflicting roadside trees have been cleared away. Eh? If a tree has a low branch overhanging the road that a bus could hit then fair enough, but this tree is clearly on the pavement and its not exactly small. Unless he's clinically blind there is no way he couldn't have seen it. In this picture, is the bus on the pavement? http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/others/i...s/default.aspx No idea, but IP6 is certainly a car crash. Albeit in slow motion. Always check your cut and pastes before posting! :o) -- Spud |
Tree bash
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote: In message , at 14:41:36 on Sun, 22 Dec 2013, remarked: If he stayed on the road (it's not obvious from the reports/pictures that he didn't) then I don't blame a bus driver for assuming any potentially conflicting roadside trees have been cleared away. (Low bridges are an entirely different matter). I think you are wrong there. He was certainly heading off the road to hit the tree in that manner. The picture I posted shows him pretty much parallel to the kerb, I'd have thought. http://i2.mirror.co.uk/incoming/arti...s2197/Main-Bus -Crash-2946066.jpg OK. That's a different view from the one I saw earlier. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Tree bash
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 11:18:43 +0000
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:44:42 on Tue, 24 Dec 2013, d remarked: In this picture, is the bus on the pavement? http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/others/i...s/default.aspx No idea, but IP6 is certainly a car crash. Albeit in slow motion. Always check your cut and pastes before posting! :o) I spotted that and thought I'd corrected it :( http://i2.mirror.co.uk/incoming/arti...ATES/s2197/Mai n-Bus-Crash-2946066.jpg Well that tree looks pretty firmly planted in the pavement and I'd say yes, the bus is slightly off the road. It wouldn't surprise me of course if the tree isn't cut down now under some spurious H&S grounds due to it being a "menace" (or similar loaded words) to traffic even though other drivers have probably managed to avoid hitting it since the internal combustion engine was invented as it looks a good 200 years old. -- Spud |
Tree bash
In message , at 19:44:07 on Tue, 24 Dec 2013,
d remarked: http://i2.mirror.co.uk/incoming/arti...ATES/s2197/Mai n-Bus-Crash-2946066.jpg Well that tree looks pretty firmly planted in the pavement But what about the top of the trunk leaning towards the road? and I'd say yes, the bus is slightly off the road. How many feet are the nearside wheels up the kerb, and why isn't it tilted as a result? -- Roland Perry |
Tree bash
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 11:18:43 +0000 Roland Perry wrote: http://i2.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article2946066.ece/ALTERNATES/s2197/Main-Bus-Crash-2946066.jpg traffic even though other drivers have probably managed to avoid hitting it since the internal combustion engine was invented as it looks a good 200 years old. https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=e...2F%3B860%3B570 For a benchmark, the Kingston half mile tree is 60 years old -- Mike D |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk