Walsall Garage

[18WilliamsLi]

Platinum 6749 currently out following the 4H route in Hasbury driver training

Think they are trying to bring decker backs on 4s

[Tony]

Think they are trying to bring decker backs on 4s

No. NX will not use double deckers under Sandwell & Dudley Station bridge with the current signage

[Trident 4194]

No. NX will not use double deckers under Sandwell & Dudley Station bridge with the current signage

What was it over here for then?

[Tony]

What was it over here for then?

The garage driving Instructor decided to go over there, what's the problem.

[winston]

No. NX will not use double deckers under Sandwell & Dudley Station bridge with the current signage

Has the bridge signage been changed recently? 

During Covid April / May 2020, Walsall were using Platinums on the 4H regularly

[2206]

Has the bridge signage been changed recently?

During Covid April / May 2020, Walsall were using Platinums on the 4H regularly

If you look at old streetview of that location changed from 14' 6" September 2020 to 13' 3" April 2021 onwards. And they aren't going to send the platinums under a 13' 3" bridge.
West Bromwich double decks running dead to/from Oldbury likely take a alternative route  West Bromwich Street/Oldbury Road.

[Lukeee]

Shame as its just the sinage that has changed, a platinum could technically fit but no company would risk it for obvious reasons 

[Bus_user_jay]

Has the bridge sunk into the ground or something? That's over an entire foot? Surely the buses were not skimming the bridge before????

[the trainbasher]

Has the bridge sunk into the ground or something? That's over an entire foot? Surely the buses were not skimming the bridge before????

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/black-country/new-height-restriction-sandwell-bridge-19344535

[font="Open Sans", sans-serif]It's hoped the new limit - which will be advertised with signage on the bridge and its approaches - will reduce the number of tall vehicles unsuccessfully driving underneath.[/font]

[Steve3229vp]

Has the bridge sunk into the ground or something? That's over an entire foot? Surely the buses were not skimming the bridge before????

It might be that the sign on the bridge used to be a red triangle which is advisory but now it's a red circle which is an order.

[Tony]

It might be that the sign on the bridge used to be a red triangle which is advisory but now it's a red circle which is an order.

The reason behind it is the bridge is in a dip and as HGVs have got longer although the front of the trailer was low enough to go under because the rear was higher before the dip the middle of the trailer was what was catching the bridge.

Sandwell Council realised this problem didn't affect buses so when the new traffic order was applied for they excluded buses from it so legally any bus can go under that bridge. The problem is there is no recognised roadsign that applies a height to HGVs but not buses so there is nothing at the bridge to say buses can go under.

[Stevo]

I remember when the Ailsas on Oldbury used the bridge. It was slightly unnerving to be riding downstairs and see the bus's height given as 14' 9" (or thereabouts) when passing under a bridge clearly marked 14' 6"!

[ellspurs]

The reason behind it is the bridge is in a dip and as HGVs have got longer although the front of the trailer was low enough to go under because the rear was higher before the dip the middle of the trailer was what was catching the bridge.

Sandwell Council realised this problem didn't affect buses so when the new traffic order was applied for they excluded buses from it so legally any bus can go under that bridge. The problem is there is no recognised roadsign that applies a height to HGVs but not buses so there is nothing at the bridge to say buses can go under.

Are they not allowed to use the sign, and then put an "except buses" on it, and have a separate sign for the bus, or do the regulations not allow for that usage?

[Tony]

Are they not allowed to use the sign, and then put an "except buses" on it, and have a separate sign for the bus, or do the regulations not allow for that usage?

Regulations currently don't allow that, we have asked Sandwell Council if there was anything possible at all.

[don]

Regulations currently don't allow that, we have asked Sandwell Council if there was anything possible at all.

It's highly unlikely the DfT would accept that because the public would not understand or accept a sign which is a height restriction, with exemptions for certain classes of vehicle - this would likely encourage non compliance for HGVs if they think they can get through. This is different from environmental and structural weight restrictions which often have excemptions for PCVs and agricultural vehicles (structural weight restrictions are often in minor roads in rural areas).

There is a technical process for identifying and setting height restriction (both mandatory and advisory (latter for arched bridges) for low bridges (which includes allowing for a margin for error). The mandatory signs (intended for non arched bridges) can be used without a TRO and are subject to endorsement of driving licence and totting up when enforced. The usual reason for changes to the height restriction values are caused by resurfacing of the road - it seems extraordinary that the restriction height is set so much lower than previously - I suppose we have to presume this has been surveyed correctly etc.

That lower height will catch a lot of drivers of HGVs out.