Sat-Nav idiocy.... Blindly 'obeying' the machine.

[struth]

Most realised there was an error after turning off main drag and turned at beginning before it becomes too late. Probably 20 a day.. the 4 or 5 that didnt caused chaos.. not talking lorries here, but juggernauts.damaged kerbs, fences etc. Marco knows where i stay and its plainly obvious its not a route to anywhere for arctics

[Macca]

In fairness I am sure a lot of these lorry drivers are distracted by the thought of murdering their next prostitute.

[struth]

Too busy watching telly and texting.

[Stratmangler]

I'm with Martin.
The local authority need to get off their fat arses and erect signs.

[Marco]

Yes, but the point is, how will they see the signs if they're too busy texting and looking at the screens on their sat-navs!!

Common sense also has to come into play, too. When it becomes patently obvious (usually at the very beginning) that the area and subsequent road you're entering is unlikely to be suitable for the vehicle you're driving, then quite simply, DON'T enter it.

In my view, without any doubt, mankind is paying the price for some advances in technology. People certainly aren't becoming cleverer with the advent of sat-navs and smart phones, that's for sure.... The fact is, anything that teaches you to think and use the common sense and instincts you were born with less, is liable to disincline you from using those skills and become lazy, with the inevitable consequences!

For example, how many people today, especially youngsters, can still read and use a map properly?

Marco.

[Stratmangler]

The point is that excuses along the lines of "I was just following the SatNav" are not valid ones if there are signs to indicate that there is some kind of difficulty ahead.

Truckers who get stuck under low bridges get the full weight of the law thrown at them, because the low bridges are all signposted in the approaches.
They driver will usually get a hefty fine and points on their license, plus all the associated extras such as recovery costs, repair to the damaged bridge, fines for inconvenience caused and disruption to services (most low bridges carry railway lines), and large hikes in insurance prices.
If there's a low bridge on a major route then there will be diversions signed for vehicles that exceed the maximum height permitted.

It should be the same everywhere with width restrictions and length restrictions signposted.
Then there are no excuses.

In this case there is a sign advising that the road is unsuitable for heavy goods vehicles.
I have just been tracking up the lane the HGV was travelling along (Google Earth does have its uses), and the road is unsuitable for HGVs.
The driver should have the full weight of the law thrown at him.

[Macca]

In this case there is a sign advising that the road is unsuitable for heavy goods vehicles.
I have just been tracking up the lane the HGV was travelling along (Google Earth does have its uses), and the road is unsuitable for HGVs.
The driver should have the full weight of the law thrown at him.

Just had a look myself and I agree he is an idiot. There is a sign and the lane is clearly going to be a tight fit right from the off.

[Stratmangler]

The other thing to bear in mind is that there is such a thing as a truck satnav https://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/sat-nav/truck-sat-nav/
HGV drivers should not be using satnavs intended for car use.
Any truckers found not to be using appropriate satnav devices deserve all the weight of the law throwing at them if they cause an issue.

[Audio Al]

Marco , Have you ever driven a 44 ton articulated HGV ?
I will ask this question before commenting further

[walpurgis]

Marco , Have you ever driven a 44 ton articulated HGV ?
I will ask this question before commenting further

There shouldn't be trucks that size on British roads.