Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Road Safety (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/road-safety/)

-   -   Accidents in India | Pics & Videos (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/road-safety/109249-accidents-india-pics-videos-1412.html)

That's common sense isn't it? But then, we have mostly seen trucks load these rolls exactly the way it was on this one.

A simple jolt over a pothole can easily make the weight put a lot of stress on the loading area. In this case you can notice even one of the tires gone flat which might have happened after the load shifted to the axle area or a possibility that this happened only after the truck suffered a flat tire.

IMHO, we have always witnessed these rolls exactly the way it is here but have rarely come across anything where it has broken the truck's loading area! Not really a filthy Job but calculations gone wrong that's it.

It looks to me the reason for the bed to break was overloading.
One roll is heavy enough, if I remember from the last discussion on this topic it weighs close to 40t.

Two such rolls, no wonder the bed broke.

The trailer has 3 axles, and usually the first axle in the set is fitted with worn torn tires.

I did my engineering project at Salem steel plant where these rolls are used extensively. These rolls are normally 15 tonnes each. It cannot be 40tonnes for sure.

These are steel coils (finished product from a steel rolling mill). Each of these coils will weigh approx 15 tons. I grew up at Salem Steel Township.

Generally while loading on a truck, they position the coils such that they are on top of the axles.

I was wrong on the weight.
Not sure what the finished product in this case is exactly. From post #20799 on page 1387 of this thread, it says each roll weighs 27t.
Moreover I've never seen two rolls loaded on one truck bed. It's usually just one, or one roll this size and a smaller one.
This trailer would have been loaded many times before the same way which led to this.

Time to reflect on the saying that it is the last straw that breaks the camel's back,

A Hilarious accident - one that involved a cyclist.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...onary-car.html

Just a km or two from where I was born! Which makes it a bit offtopic ;) --- but I love the description of the argument. Cyclist rides into stationary car: blames car driver. :Frustrati

~

The funny bit of the cyclist incident aside, the behavior of the motorist involved (trying to get the offending cyclist's info) is in stark contrast to what happens in India. The cyclist would've left with more than a mangled bicycle and hurt pride if it was in our neck of the woods.

"Exchanging insurance information, you say? What's that? We settle it like MEN in India!"lol:

From the video I can see the cyclist initially put up his arms perhaps to say it's all okay. He did have a pretty nasty fall and that's bound to induce some anger and mixed emotions (I've witnessed people not being able to think with a level head in lesser situations).

Please! Let's not give such high praise. More like Rats than "MEN". Too afraid to admit fault, too pansy to sort it out without their local "contacts".

What have rats ever done to you (except maybe chew a few wires here and there)? :). Even rats have enough sense to take turns when a gap is too small for all of them to pile in together.

Looking at humans on road today, one wonders if whoever it is that proclaimed humans the smartest race on earth need their head examined (preferably not by another human).lol:

I received the following pics over Whatsapp. The accident has happened somewhere in Mumbai/Thane suburbs.

It's said that the Hyundai (red) came in the wrong direction and rammed the Range Rover. After that the Hyundai rolled over a couple of times. No casualties but people in the Hyundai needed an ambulance, RR driver was fine.

A news report/someone else clarifying the same would be helpful.

Saw this today morning at ORR near Embassy tech village. Its a yellow board Lodgy, the back and roof was bent.
I couldnt click much pics as I was passing by at 9:30 AM today. Thought of clicking pics when returning, but by about 10:10 when I returned, the vehicle was already towed away.
The only pic that I could click

Saw this alto on the higway NH45 near sirugabur, Trichy. Frontal impact, slow speeds, by a truck and sadly none of the two passengers at front wore seatbelts. The cabin was intact though I could find blood stains on seats. The victims are stable I heard.

Please wear seat belts!

Airbags are a big life saver overall. Just because in the BMW incident they didn't save lives doesn't mean they are useless in all instances. Worrying about the cost of airbags is flawed logic. A car should err on the side of safety and deploy the airbags rather than being programmed for a really high threshold and thereby risking injuries. Take a look at a crash test video at even 56 kmph and see how much damage is inflicted. Therefore, even at a lower speed of around 40 kmph, an occupant can suffer injuries. Airbags are there to prevent or at least lessen these injuries. Sure, once in a while you would have an extra cost due to airbag deployment but on the whole it is a vital safety component and prevention of death or serious injury is far more important than cost.

Finally, many people are labouring under a misconception that airbags do not deploy if seatbelts are not worn. That is absolutely incorrect. Airbags deploy regardless of seatbelt usage in ALL cars. Of course, it is far better to be belted as that provides more protection but the airbags will deploy regardless. Only possible exception is some systems where a sensor would detect if there is a passenger in the front seat and depending on the weight, if the passenger is believed to be a child, then the front passenger airbag may not deploy or would deploy with a lower force. All other airbags in the vehicle would deploy as needed. Similarly, the rear curtain and side airbags would deploy regardless of whether a passenger is belted.