Road closed after lorry trapped under bridge

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/20921 ... der_bridge" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

THE top of a postal lorry was torn off on Thursday when it tried to go underneath a Guildford railway bridge that was almost two feet too low for it.

The Royal Mail vehicle became stuck under the bridge on Woodbridge Road at around 1.30pm, ripping the whole of the roof and the back off.

Motorists were forced to divert after part of the road was closed for around two hours.

The incident was reported to Surrey Police at 2.10pm, and Network Rail also attended the scene. Engineers decided the bridge had not suffered any structural damage.

The roof of the lorry was eventually removed by workers from McAllisters Recovery.

[clashcityrocker]

Georoute?

[fishtank]

Do you think that will show up as harsh braking?

[Straight4ward]

A harsh boll*cking, probably.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Its only 0.6 miles from Guilford DO and he had to drive close to the M3 - wonder it had a double load because looking at the map its a near direct route to Horsham.

[SpacePhoenix]

Its only 0.6 miles from Guilford DO and he had to drive close to the M3 - wonder it had a double load because looking at the map its a near direct route to Horsham.

Looking at the photo it looks like it might be a double stacker

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Its only 0.6 miles from Guilford DO and he had to drive close to the M3 - wonder it had a double load because looking at the map its a near direct route to Horsham.

Looking at the photo it looks like it might be a double stacker

Got sent another picture of it from a member:

guilford.png

He did a real job on it by the looks of it.

[SpacePhoenix]

Fairly certain it's a double stacker, I wonder if the run it was on is normally done with a non-double stacker. From the photo looks like a normal artic would be able to just squeeze under there (probably wouldn't be much spare room above).

[fishtank]

Fairly certain it's a double stacker, I wonder if the run it was on is normally done with a non-double stacker. From the photo looks like a normal artic would be able to just squeeze under there (probably wouldn't be much spare room above).

Happens with buses all the time.
No singles available stick a double on the route...what's the difference.

[SpacePhoenix]

Fairly certain it's a double stacker, I wonder if the run it was on is normally done with a non-double stacker. From the photo looks like a normal artic would be able to just squeeze under there (probably wouldn't be much spare room above).

Happens with buses all the time.
No singles available stick a double on the route...what's the difference.

Not every MC can accept them (the doorways on the loading docks have to be enlarged), our MC only has 3 bays modified to handle them.

[DGP1]

Fairly certain it's a double stacker, I wonder if the run it was on is normally done with a non-double stacker. From the photo looks like a normal artic would be able to just squeeze under there (probably wouldn't be much spare room above).

Happens with buses all the time.
No singles available stick a double on the route...what's the difference.

Not every MC can accept them (the doorways on the loading docks have to be enlarged), our MC only has 3 bays modified to handle them.

Joined up thinking from RM

[DAF85]

It is a 16' 2" tall double deck 92 york trailer. You can tell by the size of the trailer wheels. At least it looks like it is empty though.

[BT2010]

DAF, you sound very experienced in this field......

so would the driver be given a specific route to take?

or would he have to plan at least some of the route himself?

i have heared smoker jim was in the vehicle at the time.

[DAF85]

With the 16' 2" trailers he should have been given an approved route - but at the end of the day it is the responsibility of the driver to check the route he is going to use with maps etc.

I know when we drive into London with them we have to follow certain routes as the cops are getting a bit ticked off with closing roads so RM trailers can reverse away from lower bridges..........

But in the name of progress and efficiency we now have to use these 92 york trailers (rather than the 75s) and it is probably costing far more in time and extra fuel using longer routes getting round the height restrictions


edit . . and no I have not hit any low bridges .......yet

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Another picture of the accident: