Burnley Tunnel fire - Page 4

GTpilot · 24-03-2007, 09:23 AM

Well Todays paper is telling the story of how some "Knob Head" truck driver (I'm not calling all truckies knob heads BTW, just this idiot) stopped in the tunnel to check his blown BACK tyre. WTF, This guy stould not only have his HV license revoked , but even his car drivers license should be burnt.
I drive through these tunnels evey weekday Hell If any tyre on my car blew in a tunnel I sure as hell would not be stopping in there to chnge it. Hazard lights Immediatly on... Limp out to the emergency bay at the exit. Jeez, has anyone ever even driven through there with a windows open, the poolution is terrible, you would also risk passing out if you go out of your vehicle..

I must say I do get sick to death of the truck in there that tail gate you, AND NO it's no because I have cut in front of them. They come barrelling down that decline into the tunnel at a rate of knots, WHY, just to get some speed up for the exit hill??? I agree with what someone else said, LEAVE the right lane for cars. trucks should keep to the centre and left lanes ONLY, Why do you need the right lane on a 3 lane freeway to overtake. you have at least two others to use.

Matty4 · 24-03-2007, 09:54 AM

This from one of the previously linked articles;

"A TRUCK driver says a burst tyre caused the chaos that led to the death of three people in the Burnley Tunnel in central Melbourne yesterday as operators said it was not known when the tunnel would open again.

Don Micallef, 43, flicked on his hazard lights and pulled into the left-hand lane when his semi-trailer's back tyre exploded"

and this also;

"Mr Micallef, who has been driving for 18 years, was making a routine delivery to Springvale when disaster struck. "

The driver confirms it was a BACK tyre and that he's a "veteran" driver

**GasoLane** · 24-03-2007, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgb

Well Todays paper is telling the story of how some "Knob Head" truck driver (I'm not calling all truckies knob heads BTW, just this idiot) stopped in the tunnel to check his blown BACK tyre. WTF, This guy stould not only have his HV license revoked , but even his car drivers license should be burnt.

Agreed.
Obviously the lad had a death wish for even thinking of getting out to check it!

Having seen the way people drive on the roads (cars and trucks) any blowout I get stays where it is untill the next parking bay -:which was 20kms away in one case:- that way I dont get to be somebodys bonnet ornament!

I'm guessing that said driver has only been driving trucks for a short time, but having said that, we are getting some real dipsticks in the industry these days. Usually under 30yo and all want to be a BTIKD (Big Time Interstate Kenworth Driver).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matty4

"Mr Micallef, who has been driving for 18 years, was making a routine delivery to Springvale when disaster struck. "
The driver confirms it was a BACK tyre and that he's a "veteran" driver

You beat my post Matty, but if this is the case he should have bloodywell known better!

JC · 24-03-2007, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by schmidty

So many people are that freakin worried about checking the speedo every 2 seconds going down that incline into the burnley that they arent watching what they are doing. Too worried about getting a ticket.

Based on what we have been told about the driver of the semi being puled over because of a flat tyre, his actions were clearly negligent, he must have been pretty uneducated and lacking in common sense. No rim/tyre is worth putting yourself in that position for let alone other road users. This accident might not be entirely his fault, but it started a massive chain reaction of events that would not have started had his truck not been there in the first place.

This incident clearly displays the lack of caution and emergency defensive driving skills of many road users and ability to anticipate and read the conditions. Driving a truck, you have to be able to drive well ahead of yourself, and anticipate what all the cars ahead, beside and behind you are going to do. Because you have to. If the tool next to you doesnt know any better about the distance it takes you to stop or maneouver, and decides to cut in to get 1 car space ahead, you have to anticipate his actions and allow for it otherwise you hit him!

I agree that your first point about checking speedo and having no idea what's go on around them is what has caused this accident. The truck pulling over in the tunnel, while plainly a stupid idea, was not the cause. The accident may have happened as an indirect result of his actions, but not as a direct result. I say it is indirect because by the time the accident happened, this guy had already moved over to the left, and had managed to stop, and put his hazards on, before any other vehicle was hit. To be a direct cause, he would've had to hit one of the cars involved on his way to pulling over.

It will be interesting to see if he's charged with anything at all, but unless there is an actual that you cannot stop in the tunnel, I doubt he will even get a fine. A lack of common sense is seldom a finable/chargeable offence.

As for needing to anticipate etc only when driving a truck, I'm sorry but I don't agree with this at all. You need to be able to anticipate and know what's happening around you if you are on a skateboard, bicycle, legging it, in a car, on a motorbike, driving a truck, bus, plane, boat or any other means of transportation known to man. Most of us have functioning eyes, ears, and other senses that we are supposed to use when driving, unfortunately, the Victorian government just about mandates that the only use for your eyes is to watch your speedo so you don't go over 2km/h more than the posted speed limit (and thus cop a speeding fine).

If the coronial inquest that follows this tragedy does not find the fixed, hidden speed cameras as a contributing factor to the distracted nature of the drivers involved in this accident, then there's no help for us. I think the Victorian government is morally negligent in this matter, and should be held accountable for contributing to the state of the driver's minds that led to the events that caused this tragedy.

**Charliewool** · 24-03-2007, 11:10 AM

It also says: "He stepped out of his cabin to inspect the tyre only after a safety alert had declared the left lane blocked"
Everyone would have heard that broadcast..

Matty4 · 24-03-2007, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charliewool

It also says: "He stepped out of his cabin to inspect the tyre only after a safety alert had declared the left lane blocked"
Everyone would have heard that broadcast..

Not if you've got a CD playing and your windows up, A/C fan running hard (it was a very hot day yesterday)etc, etc.....

They need bigger, dynamic warning signs in those tunnels to ensure everyone gets the message ASAP.

**GasoLane** · 24-03-2007, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charliewool

It also says: "He stepped out of his cabin to inspect the tyre only after a safety alert had declared the left lane blocked"
Everyone would have heard that broadcast..

How does this work, PA system/car radio/red flags dropping from roof or what?

bob^ · 24-03-2007, 11:44 AM

They transmit over all radio frequencies in the tunnel if you are listening to the radio. So obviously it doesn't work if you are listening to CD's.
There are also overhead signs which notify motorists.

Hunter · 24-03-2007, 11:45 AM

With regards to the tyre blowing out... if it were a rear tyre on the trailer, could that not cause the trailer to become unstable and start swinging all over the place?

I'm not a truck driver but curious because in my minds eye, I could see a loss of the tyre at the back causing some issues with a trailer, particularly if its heavily loaded.

Dezza · 24-03-2007, 11:46 AM

I wouldn't completely blame the truck driver. I wouldn't be surprised if a number of drivers in the left lane tried to move to the middle lane only to be cut off. One thing I've noticed, particularly coming from the country, is that a lot of Melbourne drivers show no courtesy. You try to merge right into a gap, but as soon as you put the indicator on, one of the drivers from the middle lane will try to fill that gap. They don't want to let you in front of them so they speed up. This is the sort of mentality that causes accidents. You have to read ahead, let others know what you're doing well in advance (put indicator on a few seconds before changing lanes, don't do it halfway through the lane change), and show courtesy to other drivers. Usually if people are trying to merge from the left, I try to leave them a bit of space. The simple fact is though, it shouldn't have happened, but don't completely blame the truck driver

Hunter · 24-03-2007, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ea_silver_ghia

I wouldn't completely blame the truck driver. I wouldn't be surprised if a number of drivers in the left lane tried to move to the middle lane only to be cut off. One thing I've noticed, particularly coming from the country, is that a lot of Melbourne drivers show no courtesy. You try to merge right into a gap, but as soon as you put the indicator on, one of the drivers from the middle lane will try to fill that gap. They don't want to let you in front of them so they speed up. This is the sort of mentality that causes accidents.

Oh they do that up here in QLD - most a-holes on the road don't realise its illegal to not let someone merge. If they don't let me in (when legally obliged to do so), what I do is just keep driving towards them and well if they don't move, we're going to have a crash, aren't we? Most of the idiots in QLD seem to understand the language of the dollar so it

: seems to work. And yes I acknowledge its not terribly safe but most people tend to want to get out of the way of a big Falcon (unless its a truck or bus, I don't mess with those).

**Silver Ghia** · 24-03-2007, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JC

I agree that your first point about checking speedo and having no idea what's go on around them is what has caused this accident. The truck pulling over in the tunnel, while plainly a stupid idea, was not the cause. The accident may have happened as an indirect result of his actions, but not as a direct result. I say it is indirect because by the time the accident happened, this guy had already moved over to the left, and had managed to stop, and put his hazards on, before any other vehicle was hit. To be a direct cause, he would've had to hit one of the cars involved on his way to pulling over.

It will be interesting to see if he's charged with anything at all, but unless there is an actual that you cannot stop in the tunnel, I doubt he will even get a fine. A lack of common sense is seldom a finable/chargeable offence.

As for needing to anticipate etc only when driving a truck, I'm sorry but I don't agree with this at all. You need to be able to anticipate and know what's happening around you if you are on a skateboard, bicycle, legging it, in a car, on a motorbike, driving a truck, bus, plane, boat or any other means of transportation known to man. Most of us have functioning eyes, ears, and other senses that we are supposed to use when driving, unfortunately, the Victorian government just about mandates that the only use for your eyes is to watch your speedo so you don't go over 2km/h more than the posted speed limit (and thus cop a speeding fine).

If the coronial inquest that follows this tragedy does not find the fixed, hidden speed cameras as a contributing factor to the distracted nature of the drivers involved in this accident, then there's no help for us. I think the Victorian government is morally negligent in this matter, and should be held accountable for contributing to the state of the driver's minds that led to the events that caused this tragedy.

Fully agree with you JC.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full Noise

What are you, some anti truck campaigner?

Get your head out of the clouds, or from the front of the computer, as your location suggests and get into the real world. Speeding is not the issue in the tunnels, it’s more of a design fault. Do you know how many speed cameras are in this tunnel already?

How can you say 'speeding is not the issue'? I believe that speeding is whenever a vehicle is travelling at an inappropriate speed regardless of the speed limit. Many trucks travel at the speed limit regardless of how long it takes for them to pull up if something suddenly happens up ahead. Exactly like what seems to have happened in the tunnel.

I do get out, 2 hours a day amongst other cars and trucks. And yes, I do see truckies who drive immaculately (and also some real cowboys), and yes, I have driven semis in the past.

mik · 24-03-2007, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hunter

With regards to the tyre blowing out... if it were a rear tyre on the trailer, could that not cause the trailer to become unstable and start swinging all over the place?

I'm not a truck driver but curious because in my minds eye, I could see a loss of the tyre at the back causing some issues with a trailer, particularly if its heavily loaded.

your spot on mate a blow out can cause a semi to sway especially if its heavy, bogie trailers (2 axles)are more to it that said i agree with most the driver should have kept it goin even at a slow speed however no one knows how the truck was handling exept the driver and the arm chair experts, on the other hand a 5 foot lump oh heavy rubber hitting a vehicle windscreen could have easily caused the same result, in my book 99 percent blame should be the roadmakers not supplying a safe place(emergency lane to pull over) how often do cars and trucks break down ,how many posts have we had about our beloved henrys on occasion just die were they stand!!!

**GasoLane** · 24-03-2007, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ea_silver_ghia

I wouldn't completely blame the truck driver.
Snipped a bit out of here....
The simple fact is though, it shouldn't have happened, but don't completely blame the truck driver

I do.
He should have known better than to have stopped there.
Unless the tyre had taken off the the mudguard which jammed it under the truck, then it could be a different story

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hunter

With regards to the tyre blowing out... if it were a rear tyre on the trailer, could that not cause the trailer to become unstable and start swinging all over the place?

I'm not a truck driver but curious because in my minds eye, I could see a loss of the tyre at the back causing some issues with a trailer, particularly if its heavily loaded.

No way. I've seen trucks with both tyres blown (one tyre was flat and the other then blew) on one axle and all this does is make really pretty sparks which look really good at night. To make it unstable all 6 would have to go.

**GasoLane** · 24-03-2007, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mik

your spot on mate a blow out can cause a semi to sway especially if its heavy, bogie trailers (2 axles)are more

Rubbish.

mik · 24-03-2007, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GasOLane

Rubbish.

its not rubbish i have experiencied it, bogie trail with steel on

GK351 · 24-03-2007, 12:48 PM

My guess is truck driver pulled over to stop any debris flying off into the tunnel
from the blow out, espeacially if it were a retread. (bits of rubber size of rocks)

That in a confined area like a tunnel could have caused accidents alone.

And anyway, if truckie pulled over with hazards on, other motorists should
of seen the warning signs in the tunnel and had their radios on for the PA voice over.
and be paying attention (trucks cars bikes)

lets not all blame the truckie. do you really think he stopped to cause an accident?
i would say he wanted to prevent one.

**GasoLane** · 24-03-2007, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mik

its not rubbish i have experiencied it, bogie trail with steel on

REALLY? then if it was loaded properly I suggest that you get the trailer suspension checked.

I have NEVER in 34 years of interstate driving had a blowout that has caused any drama. Even one (many moons ago) at 130kmh!

mik · 24-03-2007, 12:57 PM

yes it was an old trailer and it was loaded properly however other circumstances can cause a trailer to be on the edge of lets say decent handling and handling poorly and a blow out certainly would contribute to handling poorly, if you have been in the game 34 years you should know that, tire presures, high loads ,over dimensional loads,and yes poorly loaded, you would probably have picked up a taught liner that was locked up and carted it of to find the top racks were loaded with heavy stuff, need i say more.

Piotr · 24-03-2007, 01:07 PM

Its not the truckies faults. What his engine had stalled? would you still think he was at fault?

He was stopped on the side and whoever hit him was at fault for not being alert to a road side hazard.

Dr Smith · 24-03-2007, 01:10 PM

Believe it or not I've actually seen a truck have it's tyre changed within the tunnel. Citylink road patrol was assisting and the left lane was closed well before at the time. I'm certain is was the front drivers side wheel as well.
Today's Herald-Sun claims to have spoken to the truck driver with the blow out and he is quoted as saying :
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...66-661,00.html

Quote:

Don Micallef, 43, flicked on his hazard lights and pulled into the left-hand lane when his semi-trailer's back tyre exploded.
"About a minute and half later I got out of the truck, went to the rear of the truck," he said. "I walked back towards the front of the truck and got in the passenger side because there were too many vehicles coming around."

That's when the chaos started.
"When I went back into my truck, I looked in the rear vision mirror and saw cars and trucks going everywhere," he said.

"All I saw from the mirror were cars and trucks swerving."

Moments later his truck, laden with a container of paper, lurched forward. A light truck and a semi-trailer had collided and rear-ended him.

"The impact pushed me down the road, then a car got crushed against the wall," he said

And this link from The Age might actually shed more information, particularly about the second semi involved...which actually was the one involved in clipping a car, the ute seen on it's side and a third car which is described as a 'molten ball"...more to it I would guess now.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...597890512.html

LUXO_8 · 24-03-2007, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piotr

Its not the truckies faults. What his engine had stalled? would you still think he was at fault?

He was stopped on the side and whoever hit him was at fault for not being alert to a road side hazard.

but, his engine didnt stall....... he had absolutley no reason to stop in there.
he didnt stop at the side of the road, he stopped IN THE LANE OF TRAFFIC.

**Fordman1** · 24-03-2007, 01:17 PM

In the end, drivers should keep the distance between themselves, the vehicle in front, and think about their environment.

* Don't tailgate.

* Dont use a mobile phone while driving (a friend of mine was killed by an idiot driving whilst texting).

* Concentrate on the road 200m ahead of you not 10m ahead.

Think !!!!

I'll be interested in the coroners report.

Piotr · 24-03-2007, 01:23 PM

From http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21438007-2,00.html
Don Micallef, 43, flicked on his hazard lights and pulled into the left-hand lane when his semi-trailer's back tyre exploded.

"About a minute and half later I got out of the truck, went to the rear of the truck," he said.

"I walked back towards the front of the truck and got in the passenger side because there were too many vehicles coming around."

So it took one and half minutes for two trucks to collide and then run into him.

**GasoLane** · 24-03-2007, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piotr

Its not the truckies faults. What his engine had stalled? would you still think he was at fault?

He was stopped on the side and whoever hit him was at fault for not being alert to a road side hazard.

How can I put this in words that can be understood...

His....Truck....did....NOT...stall...

He....should.... not.... have.... stopped.... there....to.... look....at....a....blown....tyre.

A....blowout....is.... not.... a.... major.... drama. (unless it's raining, then you get very wet!)

Scott · 24-03-2007, 01:35 PM

Piotr, you are defending the indefensible. He did not pull over to the side of the road, he parked his truck smack bang in the left hand lane. Agreed, avoiding impact may have been possible for the first TRUCK that hit him..... after that they had no chance.

This simply would not have happened if the absolute ****wit moron ******** didn't decide to block a whole lane in a tunnel. No sympathy for me, I hope he is charged with manslaughter and well punished. If only they could lock him up for being the stupidest person in the country that day.

Imagine stopping your car and getting out on any freeway, motorway or highway - no right minded person would even do it on an urban thoroughfare let alone on one of the states busiest roads in a ******* tunnel.

JC · 24-03-2007, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piotr

From http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21438007-2,00.html
Don Micallef, 43, flicked on his hazard lights and pulled into the left-hand lane when his semi-trailer's back tyre exploded.

"About a minute and half later I got out of the truck, went to the rear of the truck," he said.

"I walked back towards the front of the truck and got in the passenger side because there were too many vehicles coming around."

So it took one and half minutes for two trucks to collide and then run into him.

Yep, so not the original truckies fault. Definitely an indirect cause of him having pulled over. Perhaps if the time after him stopping to when the others collided was 10 seconds, or even 30 seconds, you could say it was his fault.

If you work out 80km/h for 1.5 mins means the trucks that collided could have been as far away as ~ 1.75km and as close as approx 1km (at 40km/h). This means there was really plenty of time for traffic to adjust, and other posts in this thread have pointed out that the tunnel operators normally close the lane using overhead signals within 1 minute of something happening. It is possible that the guy monitoring the consoles was inattentive and did not see the breakdown, so he/she may also be more negligent than the trucky that pulled over.

I feel very sorry for Mr Micallef - he is copping a lot of grief for something that was actually the fault of:

1. Biggest culprit - Vic government for making people so paranoid that the only thing they look at when driving is their speedos (would love to see crash stats since 3km/h tolerance and unmarked speed cameras were instigated - I'm guessing there is an overall increase in rear enders)
2. Possible negligence by the person monitoring the tunnel cameras, in not closing down the left hand lane quick enough.
3. It would appear that the truck & car/2 cars that were effectively stopped behind the pulled over truck and just pulled in front of a semi caused the first bit of carnage - everything else is as a direct result of that. Unfortunately, these drivers probably paid with their lives.

While I'm at it - yes, some truckies may tailgate through the tunnel or whatever, but if they do, why not just move out of their way. What is wrong with people that think just because they're in a lane, that they shouldn't move out the way of better flowing traffic? They think the trucky is doing the wrong thing, and the trucky probably just wishes they would get out the way! Stalemate.

Anyway, this is all speculation. Hopefully the video footage and then the coroners inquest will determine what really happened.

JC · 24-03-2007, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GasOLane

How can I put this in words that can be understood...

His....Truck....did....NOT...stall...

He....should.... not.... have.... stopped.... there....to.... look....at....a....blown....tyre.

A....blowout....is.... not.... a.... major.... drama. (unless it's raining, then you get very wet!)

You were not driving that truck so have no idea why a trucky with 18 years experience did what he did. Neither do I. But I imagine that he thought he was doing the right thing, trying to not cause an accident by flying debris from the blown tyre. It is all well and good in an ideal world to say he should not have done this or that. But reality and theory are quite often worlds apart, and the thing is, drivers have to deal with the reality of a situation, not the theory that he should not have stopped. They didn't, and they paid dearly for it.

Put it this way, it's like saying that someone who directly causes an accident by running a red light should NOT have run the red. No 5h!t sherlock. But the reality is that they did, and the car that hit didn't have a chance to react. In this case, the hit came approx 90 seconds after the trucky pulled over; plenty of time for following traffic to react. The proof of that is the the trucks and cars immediately following and next to him did not hit him, it was a vehicle or vehicles some way back that did. So nothing that happened after he did pull over is directly his fault. Indirectly, at a stretch, but not really. In my mind, the fault rests with the 3 factors in my previous post.

Scott · 24-03-2007, 01:56 PM

There is no dispute that stopping caused the accident. Being stopped did.

JC · 24-03-2007, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTP006

There is no dispute that stopping caused the accident. Being stopped did.

Actually, it was the sudden stop by the vehicles that hit the parked truck that caused the accident. The parked truck just happened to have caused most of the traffic to slow, apart from the idiots that had no idea of how to keep traffic flowing in a 3 lanes to 2 situation.

In simplistic terms, saying that the parked truck caused the accident is like saying 1 + 1 = 3. Sure, 1 + 1 contributes to a total of 3, but there is another factor (another 1) that needs to be present to allow a total of 3 to be reached. Relating this to the Burnley accident, let's make 3 the end result/carnage, and the 1 + 1 is the truck tyre blowing plus the trucky pulling over. At the stage he did, the total was only 2, and no accident had occurred. And in fact, without a third factor, no accident would have occurred, as evidenced by the seemingly regular event of one of the lanes in the tunnel being closed at various times of the day.

So, in this case, to get to the accident (total =3), the third factor is a combination of things that caused one more vehicles to collide. The major factor of this is people's inattention to what is going on around them, which I believe is largely due to people have their eyes fixed on the speedo so as not to get a fine. So for the accident to happen, the truck being pulled over merely created the POTENTIAL to get to the end result of the accident, but did not, in and of itself, actually CAUSE the accident.

If the accident had've happened while the trucky was moving to the left and trying to pull over, then that is direct cause. But the fact that it happened 90 seconds later means all he created was a potential situation that other motorists should have been aware of by the slowing nature of the traffic. It is the fault of the drivers that actually caused the collision that the accident happened, not the bloke who was pulled over to the side waiting for help.