Photo of the Month

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 608 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 31  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Bollards!
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 23:47 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 13:37
Posts: 2799
Location: London
Surprised no-one has picked up on yet. Interesting footage (and No Entry VMS):

Daily Mail

:twisted:


Last edited by SubaruImprezaWRX on Sat Nov 04, 2006 01:05, edited 6 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Car-trashing Bollards
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 23:58 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:40
Posts: 1765
Location: Shoreham, Nr Brighton, Sussex
SubaruImprezaWRX wrote:
Surprised no-one has picked up on yet. Interesting footage (and No Entry VMS):

Daily Mail

:twisted:


LOL, where does that road lead to anyway?

Ive seen this happen before on a rising bollard at the Royal Pavillion in Brighton.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 00:02 
Offline
Member

Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 15:33
Posts: 2502
Cambridge has several - mostly controlling access to the city centre - I've certainly head of cars being impaled and subsequently written off - and then the owners being asked to foot the bill for the repair of the bollard.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 00:07 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 23:29
Posts: 566
There was an item about these on the NW BBC news a week or two back.
People attempting to 'nip' through after the busses in city centre Manchester. The bollard comes up really quickly and only a few seconds after the bus has cleared it. had a 'council bloke' saying it's impossible to follow the bus, and it would be madness to try. they had a pic of a 206 with the front wheel smashed off after trying.

MEN Article


Last edited by Mediaman_12 on Fri Oct 20, 2006 00:12, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 00:11 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 18:33
Posts: 3949
Location: Glasgow
My home town of Hamilton was the first place in Scotland to install them, in the early nineties. Perhaps it was an early model, but they actually raised very slowly. Kids used to stand on top and enjoy a lift! They seemed very prone to breaking down, however, and they were often lowered and switched off.

_________________
John

* VMS Simulator - See your own message on an electronic sign!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 00:11 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Posts: 17497
Location: Blackburn, Lancashire
The bollard in question is right in the middle of the area that was blown up by the IRA in 1996, and has been converted into a bus only area - before that it was generally open to all vehicles.

I think some people haven't quite realised this yet!

_________________
Bryn Buck
Traffic Technician and General Grumpy Young Man
The Road Giveth, and the Road Taketh Away.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 00:55 
Offline
Banned
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 01:01
Posts: 6339
Location: the room with the computer in!
no more than two years ago that was open to all traffic, as I nearly got ran over by a bus cos i didn't look when crossing!

this is near the new Arndale extension area, near M&S, Slefridges, and Harvey Nicks.

There is a similar bollard in York.
Trouble is, it's only on one side of the road, so all the townies in their peugeot 105's just zip onto the wrong side of the road and go through!
Also, the bollard seems to fail every tuesday, at about 10.30 - sometimes it makes it 3 weeks without failing during restriction hours, but not often.

And by failing I don't mean it stays down, I mean it doesn't go down even the light shows green. many a volvo B6 has had to have new bumpers because of this! Also, an ambulance on emergency call got beached as the bollard went down and immediatly back up again!
I am all for closing up certain city-center streets to allow tourists better access to the cities' functions, however a serious re-think is needed as to how exactly these bollards work. I haven't heard yet of one that hasn't damaged authorised traffic.

_________________
"God was probably very proud of Yorkshire when he had finished with it"
- Jeremy Clarkson
--


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 08:13 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 23:41
Posts: 2107
Location: Kent
Fantastic! Serves them right, hope they get sued for criminal damage. Watching that feels good!

_________________
Martin

You know the name, you know the number. a228_mb


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 09:58 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 14:33
Posts: 229
Location: Orpington
a228_mb wrote:
Fantastic! Serves them right, hope they get sued for criminal damage. Watching that feels good!


Hear hear!!!

Though I think, in this compensation-culture that we live in, someone will try and sue the council.

Mind you, it brightened up my Friday morning :bounce: :rofl:

_________________
Liverpool's John lennon Airport has the tagline "Above us only sky" and, to avoid being left out, Heathrow have added a tagline to T5...

"Imagine no possessions, it's easy if you try!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:10 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 14:33
Posts: 229
Location: Orpington
The black 4x4 is my fav. He must have hit that bollard hard, as the airbad went off and the back wheels left the ground.

Shame the reporter in the Daily Wail can't tell the difference between a left and a right hand vehicle :D

Still darned funny though. I wish I could download it :rofl:

_________________
Liverpool's John lennon Airport has the tagline "Above us only sky" and, to avoid being left out, Heathrow have added a tagline to T5...

"Imagine no possessions, it's easy if you try!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:37 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2003 11:44
Posts: 5464
Location: Norwich
Totally agree, what a bunch of :censored: ! It's not as if the "NO ENTRY" are hard to see after all.

Derek


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:52 
Offline
Assistant Site Manager
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 01:19
Posts: 18869
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Derek wrote:
Totally agree, what a bunch of :censored: ! It's not as if the "NO ENTRY" are hard to see after all.

It seems to me grossly disproportionate and absolutely outrageous to be wrecking people's cars (and potentially inflicting serious injury) simply for contravening an access restriction. I thought we had long seen the back of barbaric mediaeval justice in this country.

Would it be acceptable to attack your house with a ball and chain if you fell behind with your council tax?

If they have to have these things (which I don't accept they do anyway) then surely they must be configured so that there is no way they can rise up if a vehicle is approaching or on top of them.

_________________
"Just as the private car is the embodiment of the concept of freedom, in metal and rubber, so the speed bump represents in tarmac the essence of regulation, nannying and political interference." (Tom Utley)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:56 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 13:37
Posts: 2799
Location: London
Jon Priest wrote:
The black 4x4 is my fav. He must have hit that bollard hard, as the airbad went off and the back wheels left the ground.

Shame the reporter in the Daily Wail can't tell the difference between a left and a right hand vehicle :D

Still darned funny though. I wish I could download it :rofl:


Who in their right mind would accelerate into a rising post?! It beggers belief, esp as there was a child in the back.

Incredibly clear CCTV as well, for once.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:06 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 13:37
Posts: 2799
Location: London
PeterA5145 wrote:
Derek wrote:
Totally agree, what a bunch of :censored: ! It's not as if the "NO ENTRY" are hard to see after all.

It seems to me grossly disproportionate and absolutely outrageous to be wrecking people's cars (and potentially inflicting serious injury) simply for contravening an access restriction. I thought we had long seen the back of barbaric mediaeval justice in this country.


Well TBH, it could cause serious injury through smacking your head on the windscreen, albeit not wearing a seatbelt, as per white van man in that clip.

I think the posts are somewhat OTT. What's wrong with a fine / points via ANPR? (t'would be 3 points as contravening a No Entry sign, I believe)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:06 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2003 08:41
Posts: 8678
Location: Cheadle Hulme, Cheshire
My wife and I were in Manchester and walked down that road just as the ambulance were taking the 206's occupants away. The 206 was in a mess; and its airbags had gone off.

And while it blocked the road the city centre buses couldn't get through meaning their passengers were severly inconvenienced.

Speaking to a nearby shopkeeper he reckoned something like it happened once or twice a month.

_________________
Tony

"We have more and more laws, and less and less law enforcement."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:14 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 17:01
Posts: 4979
Location: Blackburn
I disagree with the idea that the council is wrecking peoples cars; it is the drivers who are wrecking their own cars by driving in to a physical object with blatent disregard for the No Entry signs and the red STOP indicator.

Is it a car park operators fault if a vehicle waiting to get in to or out of a car park drives in to the barrier because they decided to follow the car in front in to the car park without heeding the requirement to stop?

What about toll booths? These too only have red/green indicators. Is it the toll operators fault if a vehicle subsequently drives through the barrier without heeding the notices to stop and pay?

This is blatent driver stupidity and they deserve all the damage they get. It is NOT barbaric medieaval justice, its modern day public stupidity and complacency and the "well it surely wont apply to me" attitude.

_________________
Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is still the truth...

boing_uk: causing distress and upset with facts and blunt opinion since 2003 ;-)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:16 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 13:37
Posts: 2799
Location: London
Whilst I confess some schadenfreude-type glee watching the foolish drivers (as per 'You've Been Framed' et al), I feel that a wrecked car and possible serious injury does seem a high price to pay for a minor altercation, albeit one of stupidity.

I, for one, would be utterly seething. The punishment is far in excess of the crime, and more likely to catch out non-locals.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:20 
Offline
Assistant Site Manager
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 01:19
Posts: 18869
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
boing_uk wrote:
I disagree with the idea that the council is wrecking peoples cars; it is the drivers who are wrecking their own cars by driving in to a physical object with blatent disregard for the No Entry signs and the red STOP indicator.

As some vehicles are allowed through, it is not a conventional NO ENTRY sign. I'm sure most people who fall foul of these bollards do so because they are confused rather than deliberately trying it on.

Quote:
This is blatent driver stupidity and they deserve all the damage they get. It is NOT barbaric medieaval justice, its modern day public stupidity and complacency and the "well it surely wont apply to me" attitude.

I still don't accept wrecking a car possibly worth £10k or more is an acceptable punishment for stupidity.

If this system is needed, then surely there should be conventional red lights with the bollards only rising a few seconds after the lights have changed to red (as with a level crossing). If you've never come across such a thing before it is not remotely obvious.

_________________
"Just as the private car is the embodiment of the concept of freedom, in metal and rubber, so the speed bump represents in tarmac the essence of regulation, nannying and political interference." (Tom Utley)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:20 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:40
Posts: 1765
Location: Shoreham, Nr Brighton, Sussex
SubaruImprezaWRX wrote:

I, for one, would be utterly seething. The punishment is far in excess of the crime, and more likely to catch out non-locals.


But you have to pass a no-entry sign, there are various warning signs, and the only real way you can get stuck on one is if you follow the bus very closley, knowing that the bollard will rise.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:24 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 13:37
Posts: 2799
Location: London
PeterA5145 wrote:
surely there should be conventional red lights with the bollards only rising a few seconds after the lights have changed to red (as with a level crossing). If you've never come across such a thing before it is not remotely obvious.

Grrr, Beat me to it!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 608 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 31  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group