Well he got himself well wedged. On a 3T weight limit bridge.

Gromett

Gromett

Joined
Feb 27, 2011
Posts
15,420
Likes collected
83,525
Location
UK
Funster No
15,452
MH
Self Build
Exp
Since 2005
Why was he trying to go over it in a 3.5T van?

1622717043488.png


1622717053468.png


www.bucksfreepress.co.uk

Campervan becomes stuck at weight-restricted Marlow Bridge

Firefighters were called to help release a campervan which got stuck at Marlow Bridge yesterday.
www.bucksfreepress.co.uk www.bucksfreepress.co.uk
 
It does look more like a width restriction issue to me. The sign says 2m width. Not many coachbuilts are that slim. Perhaps there isn’t a warning sign coming from the direction the van was travelling.
 
Not all bollards are equal (width)

We have a similar 2m width restriction on a bridge on our road.

Due to the camber, which causes vans to lean, the width on the 'up' side is less than 2m, as can be witnessed on a daily basis judging by the amount of plastic and paint on the side of the road.
The vans coming 'down', are not on a camber, so I can get my 2.2m motorhome through the gap.
 
I used to drive a works Mercedes long wheel based van at 2.02 metres wide through Cambridge. Going from Westminster College to Fitzwilliam College there is a two metre width restriction which I could pass through with a few centimetres to spare 😊
 
Last edited:
We have 6’ 6” restrictions on a road towards our village 52 seater coaches still get down, looks like the bollards did what they were supposed to 👍 stop him getting any further, now who was it🤭anyone owning up🤪
 
Seems like the width controlling bollards are wider on his approach, he possibly presumed they would be the same both sides

bit mean on the councils part to fit different sizes 🤔

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
I suggest you read the comments (copied below) for the full situation regarding the width etc:

MOTR: Never mind the weight limit. The reason the motor home got stuck was due to it being about 30cm too wide. The maximum width is clearly sign posted at both ends of the bridge.

only.me: The reason it got stuck is because the driver is a plank. Both ends of that lane have a bollard top missing after a van smashed through them a couple of days ago. So he got through the first set, and didn't make the second - with the same gap.
But this is a 3.4T MGW vehicle, going over a clearly posted 3T MGW restriction. So that's two sets of signs he's either ignored, or not known the details of his vehicle. Either way, he shouldn't be driving it if he can't pay attention.

However there are also some idiots leaving comments!

have a moan: If the bridge is not fit for purpose then knock it down and build a better one

Dave the Red: It's listed you plank.

switzerland: Just dismantle and rebuild further down the river. It can be a lovely pedestrian feature.
Then build a bridge that can take vehicles and is fit for purpose. If all the money spent on bollards, repair, etc had been initially spent on reinforcing the bridge, then perhaps we wouldn't be having the same repetitive problems.
This will be ongoing for years to come in and no solution will be found,but you can bet that much more of our hiked Community Charge will be spent on it.
 
I doubt the bridge limit would be a problem, they are always set at a very low safe limit.
I saw a 7.5t RV cross a 3.5t bridge at Haganaps meet in Cheshire a few years ago.... Didn't I Geo!
Though his front wheels were just about over the bridge before the rears got on it. A very short canal bridge.
 
The signage is ambiguous. The width restriction can be either 2.0m or 6'6" but not both.

3T presumably means 3 Tons (imperial) not 3 metric tonnes.

Councils need to be more precise.
 
I wonder why the bollards have that oddly designed wider lip bolted to the top. Makes it harder to see especially at night. Perhaps the council can unbolt them when they need to get through or to release stuck Mohos. 🤔
 
Possibly he had seen a bigish lorry go through before him? I was struck [not literally thank god] by the huge wood lorries [and others ] in narrow roads that did not get bogged down in the muddy roadsides - then noticed their wheels are not as wide as the loads- which are much higher off the ground [and nearer my lovely moho !]
This kind of pic gives me panics- we were once forced to go down a street in Italy which was one way [nasty local man pulled his car over the 2 sides of a road to prevent me going 100 yds through a bus lane marked bridge] loads of cars behind me got to the next bridge and it was officially too low for me to get through. Lots of tears and many helpful itallians guiding me through the gap- literally millimetre to spare.
 
Two on Tour said:
They had already crossed the bridge, so had managed to squeeze though the restriction on the over side as well as missing the signage on both sides of the road.

View attachment 503198
Click to expand...

I think that must be an old photo before they added the extra restrictions on top of the bollards that Karl showed in his OP.

Before the additions, despite the signs, it was obviously wide enough between the bollards to get a 2.3m vehicle through so people were ignoring the width restriction signs.

Maybe this driver had been across before but did not notice the newer bollard caps.

Geoff

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
nicholsong said:
I think that must be an old photo before they added the extra restrictions on top of the bollards that Karl showed in his OP.

Before the additions, despite the signs, it was obviously wide enough between the bollards to get a 2.3m vehicle through so people were ignoring the width restriction signs.

Maybe this driver had been across before but did not notice the newer bollard caps.

Geoff
Click to expand...
Regardless if that was the case, still over weight and too wide if they were crossing and getting away with it before.
 
SpeedyDux said:
The signage is ambiguous. The width restriction can be either 2.0m or 6'6" but not both.

3T presumably means 3 Tons (imperial) not 3 metric tonnes.

Councils need to be more precise.
Click to expand...
Pretty precise on the width. The difference between 6 feet 6 inches and 2 meters is less than 2 cm.
 
Everybody knows you should fill the van with helium balloons and get everyone on board to breath in
 
I reckon they rotate as you go through and are controlled by a motorhome hating operative

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

Join us or log in to post a reply.

To join in you must be a member of MotorhomeFun

Join MotorhomeFun

Join us, it quick and easy!

Join us

Log in

Already a member? Log in here.

Latest journal entries

Back
Top