Tanker Drivers

bugslet

I am not a 100% sure, but I don't think so - there was a huge fire, but AFAIK it was caused by fuel in the vehicle tanks. I can remember two of Samworths (Ginsters) and an Iceland truck.

chris_m

Starbrite wrote: »

Didn't one blow up in that M5 crash back in November?

Nope, no tankers involved - if there had been, and one of the tanks ruptured, it would have been a far larger fire with, I expect, far higher casualty numbers. As it was, it was just the fuel tanks from some of the vehicles, combined with inflammable loads on the wagons.
Had a tanker tank actually exploded (through heat softening the steel and boiling the contents, thereby increasing the pressure) it would have been a VERY big bang with debris scattered over a much larger area.

darkpool

pararct wrote: »

On other occasions people would be stood filling their cars with their mobile phones stuck to their ears and look dumbfounded when you asked them to switch them off.

has there ever been an incident when a mobile caused a petrol explosion?

tbh i don't see why switching on an engine/ radio is safe but a mobile phone is not.....

ess0two

darkpool wrote: »

has there ever been an incident when a mobile caused a petrol explosion?

tbh i don't see why switching on an engine/ radio is safe but a mobile phone is not.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gct1BmKNvU0&feature=related

chris_m

darkpool wrote: »

has there ever been an incident when a mobile caused a petrol explosion?
tbh i don't see why switching on an engine/ radio is safe but a mobile phone is not.....

I don't know if there has been - IIRC the arguments for banning their use are more to do with the risk of sparks if one is dropped and the battery comes adrift, whereas car engines have the sparks internally contained.
My own suspicion is that mobiles (and CB radios) used to make the pump meters under-read, hence the customer being under-charged.

That said, I really don't see a problem with banning their use in filling stations or, even, in other locations - far too many people seem incapable of living their lives without a mobile jammed under their ears all their waking hours, yet are the first to object if a mobile mast is erected anywhere near them.

Going4TheDream

ILW wrote: »

Not sure, but is it the case that many of these companies employ unionised and non unionised drivers working side by side?

Yes, these days companies cant discriminate (no closed shops I think it was called?) We have unionised and non unionised drivers, the vast majority of the permanent drivers are in the union though and working currently under at least 3 different sets of T&C's depending on when on how they came to join us.

Lotus-eater

ess0two wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gct1BmKNvU0&feature=related

Mythbusters proved it wasn't the mobile phone that was the problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uw6-PhvcS3M

They did alot more tests than shown in the video as well IIRC.


Also, I don't see why people think hijacking a tanker would be difficult, it would be ridiculously easy, however the tracker on board would mean you have to move very fast, even if you knew where the tracker was (and I would assume anyone with any wit who was planning a job like this, would know), you still need to move very fast, a tanker can't be moved very fast, or hidden/disposed of easily.

You could do it and I feel we may well see it in the future. But no crook worth his while is going to do it and that's because it's not worth the risk.
A tanker may carry 30 000 litres I believe. The problem is not stealing it, the problem is selling it and keeping it. Far easier to hold up a post office/shop on a particular day.

sheffield_lad

I see the Uniite SCUM are at it again telling drivers to turn the latest offer down.

This has nothing to do with the drivers and all to do with Len wanting a summer of discontent.

Absolute SCUM who hurt everyone including their own members.

I have no issues in anyone being in a union (allthough not for me no way), but I would encourage Unite members to find another union anyone bar them.