Coroners Findings - caravanning triple fatality
Submitted: Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 10:18
ThreadID:
38623
Views:
5282
Replies:
6
FollowUps:
2
This Thread has been Archived
DIO
On 18th October 2006, the South Australian Coroner's Court released the findings of the triple fatality that occurred near
Morgan (SA) back in July 2004. It is compelling reading and 'food for thought'.
http://www.courts.sa.gov.au/courts/coroner/findings/findings_2006/jong.finding.htm
'Drive to stay alive'
DIO
Reply By: DIO - Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 10:20
Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 10:20
This is the link (again)
Coronial Findings
DIO
AnswerID:
199810
Reply By: Kiwi Kia - Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 13:40
Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 13:40
Thanks for posting the link DIO. The report doesn't give you much confidence in the way that Police crash investigation works does it !
One witness stated that the missing gas bottle was "immaterial" to the weight on the tow ball !
Well that guy needs a few math lessons in how to do weight & balance calculations. There are a few people on this
forum that have aviation experience where weight & balance is a life & death calculation every day. A full gas bottle with a lever arm of more then two metres from the balance point between the axles may have been just the amount required to be the difference between stable and unstable when towing. There was no evidence of the lever arm for the
water tank and no knowledge of what items were stowed in the caravan. Damage to the jockey wheel was acknowledged by the coroner and the representitive of the manufacturer but not by the 'expert' witness!
AnswerID:
199836
Follow Up By: DIO - Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 14:54
Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 14:54
Regardless of the standard of the Police investigation, and it would seem that there were some fundamental errors/ommissions on their part, the fact of the matter is that something contributed to that dreadful accident. My belief is that the answer(s) are contained in the Coroners report. There are many obvious errors and issues the combination of which undoubtedly contributed/caused the untimely death of three innocent and apparently non contributory victims. As caravan owners/users we should ALL take note of these issues and make sure that it DOESN'T HAPPEN TO US. Isn't it a terrible thing to say but if we can't learn from other's misfortunes, then what hope is there !!!!!
It's your life - drive sensibly
DIO
FollowupID:
458837
Follow Up By: Member - Roachie (SA) - Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 15:32
Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 15:32
Just from a layman's point of view, the side-on view of that van certainly made it look inherently unstable, with far too much of the bodywork being aft of the axles. It would have been an absolute PIG of a thing to tow in any sort of side wind. Add to that the strong cross winds prevailing at the time and the bow-wave of the B-Double and I would only have been surprised if they HADN'T collided (R.I.P.).
I guess not all road users appreciate and understand the affect a strong cross wind can have on a moving vehicle. This is just one more reason why I am of the opinion that every intending road user should be made to ride a road-going motor-cycle for at least 12 months before getting behind a "wheel". On a bike you get to learn about real-world road conditions......you 'feel' the effect of the wind, especially when you go through a cutting........you also get to feel the road surface changes, even on different types/quality bitumen.
If you don't understand what your rig is being subjected to on the road, you have Buckley's chance of keeping the whole show ON the road.
Cheers
Roachie
FollowupID:
458846
Reply By: Neil & Pauline - Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 16:05
Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 16:05
It is always the leeward side of a truck that is the most unstable on a windy day. I is up to the caravaner to make the allowances
AnswerID:
199846
Reply By: Kumunara (NT) - Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 16:26
Thursday, Oct 19, 2006 at 16:26
I attended this accident shortly after it occurred.
On the day there was a strong north wind. The explorer and the B-double were both travelling in a westerly direction towards
Morgan.
The collision occurred when the explorer driver lost control as the B-double passed. The explorer ended up under the front of the B-double off the northern side of the road.
The caravan continued on until colliding with a tree.
This tragic event was devastating for the family of the deceased persons and for the driver of the B-double.
AnswerID:
199852
Reply By: SA_Patrol - Friday, Oct 20, 2006 at 09:34
Friday, Oct 20, 2006 at 09:34
I remember that accident, I saw that Ford Explorer at the Police compound in Ottoway, the whole roof flattened. And the people in the Explorer were going to meet the owners of that very truck that killed them. they were good friends, according to the police at Ottoway compound.
Regarding the Towbar:
1: why didn't the car have a heavier duty towbar fitted in the first place, no use having a say 1200kg towbar on the back of a big 4wd.
2: Maybe the Caravan seller should be fined for allowing the caravan to leave his yard because it was unsafe.
eg; the local sand/metal garden centre won't load more than 500 kgs of loam into your 750 kg unbraked trailer.
I think the truck sucked the car/caravan towards him like a vacuum
AnswerID:
199982
Reply By: Craigjackaroo - Sunday, Oct 22, 2006 at 15:42
Sunday, Oct 22, 2006 at 15:42
The issue of surface area -horizontal forces is very interesting.
I have not put any real thought into that.
It is obvious the van in the photo does not carry a great towball weight.
Think how we load our vans. The kitchen food pots and pans would have been over the axles. A large amount of storage under the beds to the rear - easy to get.
The photo's don't show where the spare was kept. Was it in the boot or on the back of the steel bumper taking weight from the towball.
The weight of the bottle and jockey wheel are going to be proportionally less than their actual weight...30kg at at a point 1 third/2 third proportion towball to axle distance reduces to 20kg at the towball.
Northerly wind the driver would most likely have a steering bias into the wind or to the right.
It does appear the surface area at the front would be less than the rear of the van.
As the truck approaches the rear of the van the air pressure would increase on the rear giving a clockwise result.
As the front of the truck pulls alongside the the centre of the van the air wake would be pushing the front of the van to the left - the low pressure zone past the front of the truck would be drawing the rear of the van back towards it.-a change to counter clockwise force which would generate a clockwise result into the towing vehicle and a tendancy to steer into the truck.
The van obviously travelled fairly
well when disconnected ,jockey wheel or not which would also support a low ball weight finding I would think.
Definitely worth keeping in mind.
A sad time for the Jong family irrespective of what the actual causes were.
AnswerID:
200339