Could have been very bad?
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32218443

Could have been very bad?
 

In message 2015040818524589775-email@domaincom, at 18:52:45 on Wed, 8
Apr 2015, eastender remarked:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32218443

The worst thing about it is you not giving us any context as to why this
story might be interesting.
--
Roland Perry

Could have been very bad?
 

On 2015-04-08 18:24:30 +0000, Roland Perry said:

In message 2015040818524589775-email@domaincom, at 18:52:45 on Wed, 8
Apr 2015, eastender remarked:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32218443

The worst thing about it is you not giving us any context as to why
this story might be interesting.

I wouldn't post anything off topic. Well, nearly always.

E.

Could have been very bad?
 

It was a dark and stormy night when Roland Perry
wrote in article ...
In message 2015040818524589775-email@domaincom, at 18:52:45 on Wed, 8
Apr 2015, eastender remarked:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32218443

The worst thing about it is you not giving us any context as to why this
story might be interesting.

No, the worst thing about it is the LFB spokesman's grammar...

S&ra
--
Grebbsy McLaren

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Well, the story is about a traffic incident which affected public transport in the
London area. I believe that's what London Banter is about.

Could have been very bad?
 

In article 2015040818524589775-email@domaincom,
(eastender) wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32218443

Nothing in that report about the incredibly stupid crane driver. I hope he
is charged with endangering passengers on the railway. I doubt he will
though. No level of idiocy seems to lead to that charge, not even at Heck if
memory serves me right.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Could have been very bad?
 

On Wednesday, 8 April 2015 21:44:59 UTC+1, Grebbsy McLaren wrote:
It was a dark and stormy night when Roland Perry
wrote in article ...
In message 2015040818524589775-email@domaincom, at 18:52:45 on Wed, 8
Apr 2015, eastender remarked:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32218443

The worst thing about it is you not giving us any context as to why this
story might be interesting.

No, the worst thing about it is the LFB spokesman's grammar...

Richard Knighton, from LFB, said: "The lorry has smashed into the bridge and the 'grabber' on top has gone on to the track.
"The train driver has quickly seen it and jumped on the emergency brakes, which has narrowly escaped a potential disaster.
"The track has also been damaged so there was also the possibility of a derailing."

That's what he said; it is indeed all over the place but I have been on Facebook and compared to most native English speakers Knighton is like Malcolm Muggeridge.

Could have been very bad?
 

On Wednesday, 8 April 2015 18:52:47 UTC+1, eastender wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32218443

The good thing is that if the bridge HAD started to collapse there was a crane nearby to help support it.

Could have been very bad?
 

In article ,
() wrote:

On Wed, 08 Apr 2015 18:12:25 -0500, wrote:

In article 2015040818524589775-email@domaincom,
(eastender) wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32218443

Nothing in that report about the incredibly stupid crane driver. I hope
he is charged with endangering passengers on the railway.

As the driver he will be responsible but it could be a maintenance
issue, those hydraulic arms on lorries are prone to raising themselves
due to leaks on the hydraulic controls especially as the revs go up
when the vehicle is accelerated. Has been the cause of several
incidents where the boom has been lowerd but crept up again and often
the boom will not be visible in the drivers mirrors so they don't see
it.
Ideally they should be physically be hooked down between moves.

Paging Health and Safety Executive!

--
Colin Rosenstiel