Anyone near Taunton on the M5 last night?

[dazza12]

Sounds like squeaky bum time for whoever organised that rugby club bonfire.

They've had displays at the same club for as far back as I can remember.

I know the Treasurer and a couple of the committee at the club and it's very professionally done, in conjunction with the Fire Brigade and there have never been any issues before. The stories in the news imply that it's right next to the motorway - there are at least two fields and a train line between the club and the M5. The fireworks finished at around 8:15, the accident started at about 8:23.

Knowing the set up at the club, I would expect this is more likely down to a freak series of events (low lying fog mixed in with the smoke, people driving too close / too fast, distractions, possibly issue with another small accident seconds before). If it is down to the club bonfire, it couldn't have been predicted or expected - therefore I don't expect individuals to be held responsible. However, I doubt they'll be allowed to (or even want to) hold a display in future.

Despite the accident, I still see motorways as the safest roads - thankfully accidents such as this are very rare - I'd certainly prefer driving at 60-70 with everyone else heading in my direction than 60-70 with traffic heading towards me protected by a thin strip of white paint.

[PAH]

How would you interpret these accident stats from the DoT showing age profiles?

I'd interpret them as no age group is immune from crashing.

In the context of fatal accidents, unless there's a serious bias in the media reporting, it would appear those under 25 are most at risk.

Besides, young bad drivers that manage not to kill themselves turn into older bad drivers, so education at an appropriate early age is the key to improving driving standards.

One day technology (autopilot, danger warning systems, connected vehicle convoy systems) may come to the rescue but it seems a long time coming.

[OwlHoot]

It was the diesel that was the problem.

Diesel is harder to detonate than petrol. In fact it only even ignites under pressure; so it is unlikely to catch fire if spilled on a road or even a hot surface inside a vehicle.

Mind you, it is horribly slippery on the road, as any (surviving) motorcyclist will know. So maybe a diesel spill made the accident worse.

[PAH]

If it is down to the club bonfire, it couldn't have been predicted or expected - therefore I don't expect individuals to be held responsible. However, I doubt they'll be allowed to (or even want to) hold a display in future.

There seems to be a lot of possible contributing factors and some confusion from witnesses not involved in the incident, so really need to wait for those involved to say what happened before facts can be established.

Possible contributing factors:

1. Drifting fog bank (witnesses say they 'hit a wall of fog', yet others arriving moments later said it had cleared, backed up by the amateur footage that show no noticable fog)

2. Smoke from the firework display that may have lingered after the big finale. (reports of no breeze to dissipate the smoke quickly)

3. Smoke from a nearby small holding bonfire not connected to the firework display by the reports. (For all we know they could have been burning junk that caused dense smoke)

4. Standing water or wet surface from an earlier deluge increasing stopping distances.

5. Bad slip road design at the junction just prior to the incident. (it has an uphill section that makes it difficult for heavy goods and underpowered cars to get up to speed in time to join the main carriageway, often forcing drivers in the inside lane to take avoiding action into the middle lane)

6. Distraction from the firework display. (this may have caused the initial collision)

7. Speeding into fog. (at least one report of a car doing 60/70mph into a truck)

8. Heavy breaking in fog

9. Not moving off the carriageway (if possible) after the initial collision, causing others to take avoiding action, resulting in jacknife of a truck that blocked most of the carriageway giving those following nowhere to maneuver.

10. unlit section of motorway making fog/smoke difficult to detect until you're in it, or very close if following another vehicle (reports of the Iceland truck disappearing from view as it was engulfed in the fog/smoke)

So all in all quite a long list of possible factors, and explains why such incidents are so rare as it takes several of them to happen to cause such a tragic event.

[PAH]

In fact it only even ignites under pressure

Maybe a severe collision, such as a car belting into the side of a truck at speed would be enough to ignite the diesel tank(s) on the truck?

[VectraMan]

Foam or other forms of inert gas would suffocate a trapped or incapacitated driver. Formula One cars are fitted with an oxygen supply for the driver.

You've made that up!

That's commendable but in the context of this accident woud you have been able to get the boot open? The best place is probably somewhere you can reach without even taking off your safety belt.

Good point, but it's more there in case of coming across an accident. I had an oppurtunity to use one the first time I went to The Nürburgring when I came round a corner to see an upside down Porsche on fire. Fortunately it was a small fire that was dying quite quickly, and a couple of squirts of extinguisher put it out (and other people had arrived and pulled the driver out). But big fires tend to start out as small fires, so you never know.

Lots of factors in a big accident like this, yes, but the big one is always driving too close and being unable to stop.

[malvolio]

I'd interpret them as no age group is immune from crashing.
.

Not really what the numbers say. Most of the groups average out at a consistent 67% plus or minus a bit. 40-59 is over 70%, over 60's under 50%.

So you could argue that the younger groups have benefited from bettter and better driver training, the 40-59s are the remnants of the original fairly weedy test (and possibly don't share later generations abhorrence of drink driving) and the over 60s are the survivors...? Or possibly the middle-agers are the ones that can now afford the more powerful cars they aren't competent to drive.

The safest group are the under 17s at 20%, whci is a little odd since they can't actually drive anyway and won't have been taught by anyone

They're statistics. What do you want them to say...

As for training, how passing your test means you can only have a car with a power to weight ratio of 100 bhp/ton - something that takes 10 seconds to get to 60. You need another test to get up to 200bhp/ton - which is fast BMW territory - and another to get over 200 bhp/ton when you can go and get your Porsche.

Driver training's all well and good, but it needs to be maintained.

[mudskipper]

Not really what the numbers say. Most of the groups average out at a consistent 67% plus or minus a bit. 40-59 is over 70%, over 60's under 50%.

So you could argue that the younger groups have benefited from bettter and better driver training, the 40-59s are the remnants of the original fairly weedy test (and possibly don't share later generations abhorrence of drink driving) and the over 60s are the survivors...? Or possibly the middle-agers are the ones that can now afford the more powerful cars they aren't competent to drive.

The safest group are the under 17s at 20%, whci is a little odd since they can't actually drive anyway and won't have been taught by anyone

They're statistics. What do you want them to say...

As for training, how passing your test means you can only have a car with a power to weight ratio of 100 bhp/ton - something that takes 10 seconds to get to 60. You need another test to get up to 200bhp/ton - which is fast BMW territory - and another to get over 200 bhp/ton when you can go and get your Porsche.

Driver training's all well and good, but it needs to be maintained.

If you're disabled, or in the armed forces you can learn to drive at 16.

[Doggy Styles]

You've made that up!

No, although I think they've now dropped that regulation (about the oxygen supply).

It is certainly true that if you flood a car's cabin with inert gas any occupants inside will suffocate if they are incapacitated or trapped and cannot get out.

[centurian]

Diesel is harder to detonate than petrol. In fact it only even ignites under pressure; so it is unlikely to catch fire if spilled on a road or even a hot surface inside a vehicle.

Yep - apparently you can throw a lit match into a vat of diesel and it will just extinguish the match.

Don't try that at home, just in case what I have heard is tulip