CLOSE ENCOUNTER • Congratulations on the choice of title for
Page 90
Page 91
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
the Fleet Management Conference. I can personally vouch for the reception of 'commercial' ver sus safety proposals from our direct experience in test equipment sales. I obviously hope your efforts will increase the awareness of the realities of cost effective, safe operation. I make no apology for the tinge of irony, as perhaps the following true anecdote may justify: Travelling through a motorway contraflow, an artic on my nearside changed lanes and in doing so snagged the rear quarter of my estate car and proceeded to push the car broadside down the motorway (full marks to ERF and its low bumper height). Eventually the car was discharged into the Armco. At this point I could not help but notice, as the unit passed by, both tyres smoking well under total lock-up. However, the trailer (fully freighted) then came along with wheels rotating and ran over and removed the front of the car (bodywork, suspension, engine, steering rack — the whole lot?).
At the time the car was loaded with our brake test equipment en route for delivery to Mercedes-Benz. ERF does not buy our equipment directly as it is more expensive than its single gauge (not BS calibrated).
From my viewpoint, I look at the costs of that accident (approx £7,500 in repairs and hire car etc) and feel fortunate that I walked away without personal injury.
S C Oates Managing Director Oakrange Engineering Sheffield