View Full Version : Mine Site Incident - Curragh
45tr0
13th February 2009, 11:13 AM
Recieved the following by email the other day:
"Once again the result of light vehicle Vs heavy vehicle.
Fortunately no on has been killed.
HME 1 – LV 0
Note the comment re trying to retrieve vehicle, why take the risk!
Photos of an incident in QLD – LV vs HV. Not sure of the dates or detail but looks obvious.
Minimal detail….
it happened at Curragh mine - Central Qld.
• Car had been on site for 48hrs, less than 1000km on clock
• OCE attempted to retrieve vehicle as hauler was rolling toward it.
• Note ROPs over cab has been torn out of cabguard framework, without bending any surrounding metal.
• Unseen (still) on back of ute is new truck wheel chock (un-used)
Car is now on display at entrance of mine site."
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/781.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/782.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/783.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/784.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/785.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/786.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/787.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/788.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/789.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/790.jpg
BMKal
13th February 2009, 11:52 AM
Good to hear that there was nobody killed. I assume that there was nobody in the vehicle at the time, as I can't imagine anyone surviving that if they were in the cab.
We had this one happen on a site that I was managing a little while back.
http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/1954/phbefore1po7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/1949/dscf0027vj9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
The girl in the first photo was driving - she got out through what was left of the driver's side window. The passenger is still in the vehicle in this photo - it took three hours to get him out and he was in hospital for a couple of months, and suffered injuries that will restrict his capacity to work for the rest of his life.
The loader in the photo backed over the ute - hit the drivers side of the ute and rolled it over and then the belly plate under the fuel tank squashed the passenger side of the ute into the ground. Fortunately, the loader stopped before the wheels ran over the ute.
martinozcmax
13th February 2009, 01:48 PM
Thank god for that, for one awful moment I didn't realise it was a Toyo, thought it may have been a LR. Now that would have been sad. :o
Bigbjorn
13th February 2009, 02:15 PM
We used to have a few similar photos around the office and workshop in my time with the Euclid and Fialallis products. The one I liked best was a high drive D8 dozer whose rear end got trod on by a dragline foot whilst acting as the cleaner when the dragline was being moved.
PhilipA
13th February 2009, 02:54 PM
How about this one?
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/1031/iatebulldozeroo5.th.jpg (http://img3.imageshack.us/my.php?image=iatebulldozeroo5.jpg)
Regards Philip A
Sprint
13th February 2009, 02:59 PM
the one at curragh happened when the OCE went out to investigate reports of a fire on a belly dumper.... the fire was real, the brakelines failed and ended with his new toyota getting squished halfway through its second shift with about 380km on the clock
moose
13th February 2009, 04:02 PM
"that'll buff right out":D
(sorry, someone had to say it):cool:
Sprint
13th February 2009, 04:21 PM
i dont know why it mentions ROPS, the rops cage on landcruiser traybacks isnt an in-cab job, its allways boled onto/built into the tray, and IIRC isnt part of the curragh site requirements for LV's
PAT303
13th February 2009, 05:30 PM
So what if the rops is in the cab or out,rops,airbags,beakin lights won't do a damn thing if a haul truck goes over it.Safety in LV's acounts for nought were heavy vehicles are involved. Pat
V8Ian
13th February 2009, 05:46 PM
So what if the rops is in the cab or out,rops,airbags,beakin lights won't do a damn thing if a haul truck goes over it.Safety in LV's acounts for nought were heavy vehicles are involved. Pat
Steel caps, high vis and hard hat are supposed to make one immortal aren't they?
Sprint
13th February 2009, 08:23 PM
So what if the rops is in the cab or out,rops,airbags,beakin lights won't do a damn thing if a haul truck goes over it.Safety in LV's acounts for nought were heavy vehicles are involved. Pat
i was referring to this:
• OCE attempted to retrieve vehicle as hauler was rolling toward it.
• Note ROPs over cab has been torn out of cabguard framework, without bending any surrounding metal.
• Unseen (still) on back of ute is new truck wheel chock (un-used)
both points that dumbass minesite safety reps love to bring up - issues that have either nothing to do with the incident in question, or wouldnt have have affected the events
1: the vehicle shows no evidence of having a ROPS structure fitted
2: exactly what does the wheel chock have to do with the incident?
the real issue with what happened, is that the LV was parked in a position which put it in danger considering the situation, being a HV on fire and with the possibility of uncontrolled movement
of concern is that the operator of the LV was an OCE (open cut examiner), a position that involves, amongst other responsibilities, overseeing safety issues and practices, so it would be expected that the OCE would know better than to leave the LV where he did, nevermind risking his life by trying to move the vehicle while the HV was moving towards it
DiscoTDI
13th February 2009, 08:55 PM
i was referring to this:
both points that dumbass minesite safety reps love to bring up - issues that have either nothing to do with the incident in question, or wouldnt have have affected the events
1: the vehicle shows no evidence of having a ROPS structure fitted
2: exactly what does the wheel chock have to do with the incident?
the real issue with what happened, is that the LV was parked in a position which put it in danger considering the situation, being a HV on fire and with the possibility of uncontrolled movement
of concern is that the operator of the LV was an OCE (open cut examiner), a position that involves, amongst other responsibilities, overseeing safety issues and practices, so it would be expected that the OCE would know better than to leave the LV where he did, nevermind risking his life by trying to move the vehicle while the HV was moving towards it
2: Depending on the mine any vehicle that has no one in control (behind the wheel) has to by law have a wheel chock in place.
1:Light vehicle ROPS on mining vehicles are mandatory if that mine deems them important, BMA for example only deems them important on 4wds, apparently you cannot roll a 2wd. Yet the ROPS they enforce are agricultural so any time a mining light vehicle hits the highway it endangers everyone in the vehicle. For all of you miners out there next time you are in your course that you must take to enter site ask the question about how effective mining regulation ROPS are on the highway, in particular for dual cab 4wd utes, then ask how many people have been killed by mining ROPS on the highway. And then ask how fitting "roll bars" that mount to the tray, not the chassis will help people live.
Sprint
13th February 2009, 09:32 PM
1a: try finding a BMA specification for a BMA approved ROPS structure, a while back a previous employer tried to get the specs from BMA to become an approved BMA ROPS manufacturer, nobody could help him
1b: how many other minesites other than BMA owned sites require a ROPS structure to be fitted as a requirement of entry to the site? BMA are stupid when it comes to thier safety requirements, often to the point of paranoia (BMA have specified that all LV's be fitted with dual SRS airbags...... yup, thats gonna stop a HV from driving over you and killing you)
1c: try finding a Qld Transport modification code for an external rollcage, theres one for an internal cage but nothing for an external cage, making EVERY external ROPS in QLD illegal
1d: for styleside utes, AFAIK, the rollcage is required to be mounted to the mounting points for the rear body, where it meets the chassis, and braced at suitably strong points on the sides/floor of the body, and for flat tray utes, the ROPS, for the main hoop, has to extend to chassis level, and for the bracing, either has to penetrate the tray and be fixed to the chassis, or braced to suitably reinfoced points on the sides of the tray
2a: a wheel chock wouldnt have done anything in this instance, it was the HV that was subject to uncontrolled movement, the LV was stationary.
2b: every site i've been to (thank god no BMA sites) only require a vehicle to be "fundamentally stable" in as much as it is parked on flat, level ground with the handbrake engaged and transmission in gear so the vehicle wont move without human intervention, or if it is parked on a slope, the vehicle be parked in a fashion that its movement be restricted by wheel chocks or a earth formation (IIRC) a third of the height of the largest wheel the rill is expected to prevent movement of
2c: afaik, the big requirement for wheel chocks is in the event of a flat tyre to prevent movement of the vehicle while it is on a jack
DiscoTDI
13th February 2009, 09:47 PM
Unfortunaetly the answers are available to all of that and unfortunately they only make sense to BMA
1a, spoke to the wrong person, good luck on finding the right person
1b yes BMA are stupid
1c All vehicles with the modification are meant to have an exemption from the police in their vehicle at all times (how many know that one) so they can legally drive them on the road
1d never seen it happen, even with BMA's own vehicles and without paperwork from 1a, prove it:D
2a if there was no one in the HV it was meant to be chocked
2b visit a BMA site and a new world of stupidity will be opened to you because what you have just mentioned is a death sentence to them
2c have you ever done a JSEA on changing a tyre, screw the chock we should all be dead:eek:
Sprint
13th February 2009, 10:08 PM
1a: the right person is a figment of your imagination!
1b: DUH! lol
1c: try getting people to believe it...... i've got an example of the permit for high mount indicator/tail/stop lights, beacons and buggy whip/flags in my desk at work, its good for winning bets and settling arguments with idiots who think they know better
1d: used to work for an engneering workshop and diesel fitter, i've seen more ROPS setups than i've had hot dinners
2a: the HV was on fire, to my knowledge, SOP for a tyre fire is to declare an emergency, get the vehicle to a location suitable to park up and bail out, f**k the chocks, they're in the workshop (HV's afaik dont carry chocks, you're expected to park them on a hardstand with a spoon drain, or a berm that will restrict movement)
2b: theres a reason i actively avoided anything even remotely resembling a job on a BMA site
2c: what JSRA/SLAM/etc..... call a fitter!....... oh wait.... try having to be the poor SOB who had to go around with a 3/4" drive torque wrench and CHECK that EVERY wheel nut on a 8x4 volvo with 10 stud wheels was torqued to volvo's specifications..... you soon discover EVERY mucle you have!
theres a reason i stopped TA'ing and started flying a desk!
DiscoTDI
13th February 2009, 10:14 PM
hehehe Im so glad I dont work out there any more, drove me nuts:)
DiscoTDI
13th February 2009, 10:17 PM
They used to sit just outside Goonyella mine limits and check every vehicle that went past, if you had your flag up you were banned from the mine for 24 hours. Had many a day off from going to that mine, thing was everyone used to leave it up on purpose in the end:D
Bearman
17th February 2009, 10:13 AM
BUGGER.............................Oh what a feeling!!!!!!!!
p38arover
17th February 2009, 10:21 AM
Boy! This thread is so full of acronyms and TLAs that I'm having trouble keeping up! :D
wovenrovings
17th February 2009, 10:56 AM
The important thing is whos landy is it in the background? Could it be a 120". :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.