Spitfire damaged in motorway incident

[fly_tornado]

you had one job!

 

A World War Two Spitfire replica fell off the back of a lorry today, causing extensive damage, a traffic jam and heartache among plane spotters.

 

Terry Arlow, who built the aeroplane during 'tens of thousands of hours' over 28 years, was transporting the replica to the Isle of Wight for a 1940s weekend when the incident occured on the A3 in Surrey.

 

The Spitfire was being transported on a trailer, which detached from the vehicle and veered off the road into a large tree.

 

 

• SHARE PICTURE
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

 

Read more: WWII Spitfire falls off the back of a lorry and skids into a tree

 

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

WWII Spitfire falls off the back of a lorry and skids into a tree

 

 

[pmccarthy]

How sad.

 

 

[shafs64]

Very sad I am sure that man loved that plane

 

 

[Neil_S]

That's appalling! It looks like a beautiful plane.

 

I used to drive along the A3 from my house in Hampshire to my workplace at Heathrow airport for many years - I can imagine the chaos :(

 

I hope he manages to repair it .......

 

 

[alf jessup]

I'm guessing during the 45 minute stop someone not with the travelling group pulled the trailer pin

 

Cannot see any other reason for the trailer to become unhitched

 

I find it hard to believe a unhitched trailer from a prime mover would go for hours fine then suddenly just disconnect after a 45 minute stopover

 

 

[rankamateur]

Trailer looks more like it attaches to a ute rather than a prime mover. It's ball hitch would have been just fine until he hit a bump. It is easy to leave the hitch unlocked if you leave the locking lever resting above it's tab.

 

 

[SDQDI]

Trailer looks more like it attaches to a ute rather than a prime mover. It's ball hitch would have been just fine until he hit a bump. It is easy to leave the hitch unlocked if you leave the locking lever resting above it's tab.

On that note we travelled over 600klms with a trailer half loaded with timber with the hitch unclipped and only noticed after we unloaded the timber and the trailer departed when we crossed a railway line...

 

 

[Nobody]

I have seen a glider trailer driven quite some distance and fact that it wasn't connected only became apparent when someone stood on the back of the trailer to get the fuselage out. The standard ball hitch isnt fail safe as the clip can prop it up.

 

 

[rankamateur]

On that note we travelled over 600klms with a trailer half loaded with timber with the hitch unclipped and only noticed after we unloaded the timber and the trailer departed when we crossed a railway line...

Mine usually departs as I go over the grid at the mailbox and turn onto the main road. I just have one thing to add, Check Chains!

 

 

[boleropilot]

I had an unpleasant experience when a 6x4 box trailer was loaded incorrectly by a concrete pipe manufacturer. The weight was within limits (75%) but the pipes were 7 feet long and 18 inches in diameter - they loaded two first side by side, then the other on top of those two, with the bottom two resting on the tailgate of the trailer. It looked a bit weird because there was so much weight on the top of the tailgate that it created a negative weight on the towball, and the back suspension of the Fairlane was lifted up about 2 inches. I asked the loader if that was OK, he said yes - I asked at the office if it was OK, the guy peered out the window and said "yeah, just don't go over 80". Right.

 

Slowly I enter the freeway, and at about 30 km/h the trailer starts to move from side to side - I start to gently lift the throttle but to no avail - the trailer wobble increases incredibly rapidly, within about two seconds it has swung right around into the side of the Fairlane and the 3 pipes fly off down the motorway in 3 different directions. The trailer is upside down and a twisted mess, the pipes are fine, the Fairlane is facing back the way I came with the left side destroyed. The culprit was the negative pressure on the towbar, which basically makes any load unstable (depending on the degree of negative weight - my situation was extreme).

 

The RACQ were asked to investigate and they provided statements to my insurance company that basically forced the pipe manufacturer to pay for everything, including the hire of the crane truck to move the pipes and the trailer to our home. What did I learn from this event?

 

1. Don't try to be a cheapskate to save on delivery costs - it usually ends in disaster

 

2. Don't ask for advice from people unless you are certain they know what they are talking about

 

3. Always double check the trailer setup for negative pressure on the towball, hitch locked, chains secure, dolly wheel UP, and lights all working

 

4. If you're stepping into the ring, make sure you have some clout on your side - without the RACQ this would have cost me a small fortune...

 

Here endeth the sermon.

 

Cheers,

 

BP

 

 

[Yenn]

Boleropilot, you were very lucky to get away without having to explain why you were driving a trailer while it was obviously unroadworthy. One of the forst things you should know when towing is where is the C of G.

 

 

[boleropilot]

Not sure what the forst you are talking about Yenn - there was nothing 'unroadworthy' about the trailer - it was loaded incorrectly by persons who should have known their job.

 

As far as I am aware there is no training or licensing for trailers in Oz (there should be) and if the RACQ have the opinion that no fault was attributed to me then I think I'll take their word for it.

 

I have personally pulled over three drivers towing trailers which obviously were loaded with a rearward C of G - none of them had any idea about the concept - neither did I until my unfortunate incident. I also pulled over a driver who had left the dolly wheel down, it had virtually disintegrated and was dropping bits of wreckage as it went along - the driver had no idea and was even more surprised when I showed him how to lock the ball in place (true story - he thought you just dropped the trailer on the towball and the chains stopped it from "going anywhere").

 

My current trailer is a heavy duty unit - I have replaced the lights with LEDs and replaced the crappy old s/h tyres with new light truck tyres - I check underneath the trailer and re-grease the wheel bearings on the 1st April every year (the same day I replace all my smoke detector batteries). And I do a double check of all items (including lights) before I drive off.

 

Trailers are damn dangerous thingys, and now that I am older and wiser I can see a real need for drivers to have a nice big T on their licence to indicate they have attended the Trailer Information Session run by the RACQ (or similar).

 

BP

 

 

[onetrack]

I'm guessing during the 45 minute stop someone not with the travelling group pulled the trailer pinCannot see any other reason for the trailer to become unhitched

I find it hard to believe a unhitched trailer from a prime mover would go for hours fine then suddenly just disconnect after a 45 minute stopover

Metal fatigue has been known to be a cause of trailers parting company with their tow vehicle. I can't see the fine details, but that trailer is a very large car transporter-type trailer and is more than likely, merely a towball-type coupling. It's easy to overload this style of large trailer, and when you do, towbar or towball failure is highly likely. I've had towballs snap at their neck (the thin part above the mounting base), I've seen entire towbars come off vehicles when the retaining bolts broke (usually caused by poor installation - the lowliest and most incompetent apprentice is usually the one given the job of towbar installation, because no-one else likes doing it - it's hard, difficult, work).

 

Drawbars have been known to fracture and detach because of metal fatigue - usually caused by inadequate metal thickness, poor welding, or excessive drawbar flex over many kms, heavy loads, and rough roads.

 

Towballs fracture because they are overloaded, or overstressed by reversing, and having the tow vehicle hit the trailer drawbar, thus imposing severe loading on the towball and towbar.

 

Safety chains should ensure that a detached trailer doesn't become a wayward missile, and in this case, the safety chains have totally failed. A major investigation needs to be initiated to find out why. Safety chains are there to stop the detached trailer from launching itself into oncoming traffic, usually with fatal results.

 

In addition (although I'm not familiar with U.K. trailer laws), trailers over 4500kg Gross Mass in Australia must be fitted with a breakaway braking system that activates the trailer brakes immediately upon the trailer becoming detached.

 

It's pretty obvious this trailer carrying the Spitfire didn't have a breakaway system, or a working breakaway system.

 

Whether it is required on a trailer that size in the U.K., I don't know, but it looks like it's big enough, that it should have one.

 

 

[Yenn]

boleropilot. What I wa sgetting at is that the driver is responsible for what he drives. I agree that there should be a trailer category to the licence, a small box trailer is just as difficult as a semi trailer to drive in reverse. I hpe you don't blindly accept wahat others tell you is OK when you are flying.

 

 

[alf jessup]

boleropilot. What I wa sgetting at is that the driver is responsible for what he drives. I agree that there should be a trailer category to the licence, a small box trailer is just as difficult as a semi trailer to drive in reverse. I hpe you don't blindly accept wahat others tell you is OK when you are flying.

Yen

 

I'd much rather back a 45 ft trailer any day of the week than a single axle box trailer

 

As for a B Double well that's not my favourite thing to do even though I have my MC ticket

 

 

[boleropilot]

boleropilot. What I wa sgetting at is that the driver is responsible for what he drives. I agree that there should be a trailer category to the licence, a small box trailer is just as difficult as a semi trailer to drive in reverse. I hpe you don't blindly accept wahat others tell you is OK when you are flying.

holy moley yen, I wish someone had told me that before I started flying - the other day an old bloke at the airfield said to me "why don't you try a touch and go at VNE?" and I blindly accepted that what he told me was OK...and the landing was a bit hard and the gear collapsed and the underslung fuel tank exploded and the Drifter ended up skidding down the runway in a ball of fire and.............

 

get my drift?

 

BP

 

 

[pmccarthy]

But you were too green to burn....

 

 

[M61A1]

You can do a touch and go at vne in a Drifter......

 

 

[boleropilot]

I know, I did one, and it wasn't pretty............

 

 

[M61A1]

You weren't tryin'.....

 

 

[boleropilot]

wooda done better if I hadn't closed me eyes on short final......

 

 

[Geoff13]

What an interesting concept, that someone other than me the driver could be responsible for incorrect loading of a trailer. The driver should be aware of the abilities of themselves and their vehicles. If I loaded a truck incorrectly and killed someone out on the road I am certain that the judge would be happy for me to say but your honor the girl on the weighbridge said it looked ok. I find it difficult to understand that you could even consider it would be someone elses fault other than the driver.

 

As for trailer and caravan licences, should be compolsury without doubt.

 

Another point for anyone considering towing a trailer/caravan you should google double pendulum. It is a scary concept and We see the results every day we mostly just do not understand why.

 

 

[boleropilot]

Yes of course Geoff, I see where you're coming from (and I hope you keep heading in that direction as quickly as possible). The trailer was not loaded by a girl - it was loaded by someone who should have been trained and had a DUTY OF CARE to load it correctly. The person in the sales office who said "looks OK, just don't go over 80" was, in hindsight, not the best person to ask - nevertheless, he also had a DUTY OF CARE to make an informed comment as to the safety of the load. As the RACQ statements indicated, either of these employees should have asked for advice from a professional if they were not qualified to respond correctly to TWO requests for confirmation that the pipes were loaded correctly.

 

And why should anyone have to Google "double pendulum" - surely this is a concept that should be taught in Grade 1. As should Trailers 101, which of course would give all persons an intimate knowledge of ALL the technical and safety information required for the operation of trailers - in fact, it surprises me that all babies are not born with this information firmly planted in their little brains. We should all know this stuff, shouldn't we??????? As we should all know from birth that a light sprinkle of rain on a road that has not seen rain for a long time will make it as greasy as a butchers block - but people keep crashing their cars, thinking that a tiny mist of rain will not make the road slippery.

 

My response to your post is this - THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT OF THE RACQ GAVE ME DOCUMENTS THAT CLEARLY STATED THAT THE COMPANY THAT LOADED THE PIPES WAS 100% AT FAULT. Silly me, but I prefer to accept THEIR opinion to yours. Part of their decision to make this statement was that "as there are no legal requirements for operators of domestic trailers to obtain knowledge of trailer dynamics (whereas companies do have a Duty of Care in that respect when they are involved in the loading of trailers) we consider the driver not at fault in this case, notwithstanding his multiple attempts to obtain confirmation that the load was safe".

 

I have broken my Number One rule to wait 24 hours and not respond to words that make me want to scream at the computer monitor, because steam is still coming out of my ears. I find it difficult to understand that you could even consider that everybody should know everything, and if they don't, they could ask for guidance, and if that guidance is flawed, and someone gets hurt, then it's their fault entirely. What a crock of you know what.

 

 

[Geoff13]

The fact that on two occasions I have had the RACQ legal department determine the one of my drivers was 100% at fault and on both occasions a judge has determined that my drivers had no fault makes me question the RACQ legal departments motive in anything involving an insurance claim.

 

My comment on Double Pendulun effect was not meant to be belittling on the contrary in this forum of trying to learn from others mistakes I was trying to get people who have not heard of it to consider it. I can assure you that when I bring it up in caravan groups or worse still bike groups very few people actually understand the concept or just how dangerous it can be.

 

That fact that you are angry about my comments bothers me not a bit even though that was not my intention.

 

The fact that people drive on the roads with poorly loaded or dangerously loaded vehicles bothers me a lot. And that those people think it is someone elses fault when it all turns to crap bothers me more.

 

 

[M61A1]

Without trying to stir anyone up, a link to towing (QLD transport) which contains a link to a national document about loading vehicles.

 

I am aware that for some time now, someone has made those loading a trailer responsible for the load, which besides, in my opinion being utterly wrong, is a complete pain in the arxe, as I have had to deal with some companies that will not even sell you stuff, if they don't like how you intend to move it, even though their own rule are different to QLD Transport rules. Which is really annoying when you've driven 50 k's or so with the longest trailer in the world (a slight exaggeration) to legally pick up your load.

 

The QLD transport Safe towing Guide, which refers to the National Transport document for loads.

 

Towing (Department of Transport and Main Roads)

 

I refer you to Page 39, Fig. 13.9

 

http://www.ntc.gov.au/Media/Reports/(E62BE286-4870-ED95-1914-1A70F3250782).pdf

 

Have to agree with Geoff about RACQ, from what I've read in their magazine, the standard of knowledge of QLD drivers is appalling. and their attitude isn't much better.