ADUK Archive

I feel the cop is at fault. He should have recognised the indication and realised not to assume it would hold lane 2. Also the HGV starts to hint by positon and movement a likely Lane 3 entry early on, I feel the cop is slightly late in braking to this effect/ i.e he risks it thinking it "cant" go to lane 3...

As for the blowout - nobody can help that - it aint his fault...

I think "unlucky" is a matter of opinion

He was very lucky...on both occasions....

The blow out couldn't be helped....

but the HGV incident was quite avoidable...

Having been in that circumstance before, I would suggest the best course would have been to use lane 1....

The HGV was moving from left to right, with offside indicator on, travelling around a left hand bend.... That's great odd on him continuing..either by choice or the forces of physics....

Lane 1 by the cop, would have meant a clean get past...

Well i wouldn't like to say being only a numpty when it comes to qualifications, but bad driving or excessive use of exemptions/expectations are clear for all to see.

Isn't it interesting when he said "there was nothing I could do".

The HGV driver, although he didn't look and should not have been in lane 3, was indicating and the Mr Plod should have aired on the side of caution and braked a lot earlier.

Absolutely correct Chris

Nothing he could do... lol... anyone that knows that junction would know that he is just trying to cover his ass.... it drops to 2 lanes just after that and in actual fact the LGV driver was pre planning for that, because the Police driver has his opinion does not mean this is right.. he could have easily have backed off and gone inside the LGV, and if i had been in his position that would have been my choice. (even in normal driving) not that i would ever be doing more that 56mph.

I'm glad you guys agree with my choice of option...

I would never disagree with an obviously experienced TO on this type of thing.. you guys know best.

Rick wrote:I would never disagree with an obviously experienced TO on this type of thing.. you guys know best.

That guy had more experience than me...and he got it wrong...

I don't think his personality really shone during any of those films..did it?

One further point on the 'lane 3' incident. There was very little time during which the police vehicle would have been visible in the mirrors of the heavy.

I remember that in another discussion on this VH advocated the option of going to the left of the heavy.

I was appalled that this film was presented on TV with no hint that the TO might have got it wrong on this occasion - not only in his drivng, but in the way he treated the driver of the heavy.

In connection with the blow-out clip, a comment made in another discussion on this clip was that it may not have been necessary to drive through the hatched area - where it is quite likely he picked up debris which subsequently led to the deflation.

I agree with the comment that this was one lucky TO, to come out of those two incidents apparently unhurt and probably (??) with his record unblemished.

hpcdriver wrote:I agree with the comment that this was one lucky TO, to come out of those two incidents apparently unhurt and probably (??) with his record unblemished.

he's now sunning it up...living and working in New Zealand...

This was posted on the Trucknet UK site and my comment was "Why did the police car go on the offside when the nearside was clear? - the lorry could not have changed direction quickly enough to block it"

I felt that:

1. Continuing to push past the HGV on the right when it was perfectly obvious that the lorry driver was heading for lane 3 (or at least there was a serious danger of him doing so) especially when there was loads of clear space on the left, showed an amazing lack of anticipation and good judgement.

2. The use of infrequently swept areas (hatched etc.) probably could have been avoided or reduced, in which case there would have been less risk of the puncture.

Best wishes all,
Dave.