See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-66490869 Newgale campsite is right on a main road with no fencing etc which i find rather strange?
Last edited:
Accident at campsite
- Thread starter Buckman
- Start date
We’ve driven that road several times. As you drive the beach a pebble bank is one side. The other is a small grass rise to the campsite. The lack of fencing allows campers to easily access the beach. But even normal style wooden post snd wire fencing would not have done much to stop a rolling vehicle.
By the various reports it would appear that the driver (who had only passed his test in June) lost control at high speed in this single vehicle crash., A tonne of car travelling at say 60mph has a colossal amount of momentum, the only thing that might restrict it from leaving the carriageway at that sort of speed is an ARMCO type barrier as seen protecting motorway bridge support pillars! Any other type of fencing woukd simply not be up to the task.
In terms of fence I am thinking of toddlers or young children wandering across the road and not whether it can stop a car that is speeding and loses control.
Just seen that and i was horrified there was hardly any boundary protection between the site and the road i wonder if that might change now after this accident?
As mentioned even a robust barrier would not have prevented that car from rolling into the campsite, but from a parent's point of view yes it is horrifying. I am surprised that the local council planning have allowed the campsite with no form of barrier as an accident waiting to happen?
It’s been an established camp site for many years. There are steepish descents from both ends of the bay, but a fence to restrict children or roaming dogs would be a good idea. It does get flooded at times during really bad weather as it sits below road level, , and shingle/pebbles are driven onto the road. But nevertheless it is very popular.
Hang on a minute,
If a site does not have a secure boundary, then its up to the campers to decide if they want to use it, and if they do use it they need to ensure they have full control of children. or go elsewhere. No one is forced to use the site.
The site did not cause the incident.
Assuming the reports here are correct the blame and responsibility rests on the driver of the car.
If a site does not have a secure boundary, then its up to the campers to decide if they want to use it, and if they do use it they need to ensure they have full control of children. or go elsewhere. No one is forced to use the site.
The site did not cause the incident.
Assuming the reports here are correct the blame and responsibility rests on the driver of the car.
No one has said that the site caused the incident. No one said that anyone has to use the site. No one said that anyone at the campsite was to blame. However what some people did say including myself that it would not be the type of site they would visit.
Others including myself expressed concern for toddlers or young children wandering across the road due to no fencing. Those of us who have had children appreciate and understand how quick they can move when you glance away.
Others including myself expressed concern for toddlers or young children wandering across the road due to no fencing. Those of us who have had children appreciate and understand how quick they can move when you glance away.
The papers suggest the car was travelling at an excessive speed and with a young driver who has wildly underestimated his ability and looks like a total lack of common sense. There is a ditch between the road and the site so that should have stopped anything travelling at a sensible speed. Apparently the car just flew across it due to speed. With that sort of speed nothing that could be reasonably erected would have prevented the accident.
I do not know the locus though so am only going by the news reports.
I do not know the locus though so am only going by the news reports.
Buckman and Beachball - if the site is not somewhere that you would wish to visit, that's entirely up to you. However, with respect, to query whether it should be allowed to operate in its current condition is unfair. This accident was not their fault.
I have family in Pembrokeshire and know the site well. It's been there for as long as I can remember (30 years +) with no instances of unaccompanied children wandering out onto the road and getting injured, as far as I am aware.
The site is separated from the road by a ditch, the main purpose of which is to collect surface water from the road in instances of heavy rain. In exceptionally wet periods the ditch can overflow and the site flood - this is intentional. Therefore, they can't have a solid fence or barrier because this would increase the risk of flooding of the road. Perhaps they could have a timber post and rail fence, but is this really a deterrent? A young child determined enough to climb through a ditch will also climb through, or over, a partially open fence.
Reports say that the car hit the ditch with enough momentum to flip and roll several times. Any form of timber fence would have had no effect at all in slowing that down and indeed, might have led to flying debris injuring more people. Had there been anything like an Armco barrier, the force of the car striking that could well have resulted in one or more of its occupants being killed.
On the opposite side of the road is a shingle bank. At the time of the accident (about 10.30pm) the weather was overcast, following rain earlier in the day. There is no street lighting so it would have been pitch dark as the car came down the hill. Perhaps the driver saw the shingle too late and struck it before losing control and veering across the road and into the ditch. But that is for an ongoing police investigation to determine.
I have family in Pembrokeshire and know the site well. It's been there for as long as I can remember (30 years +) with no instances of unaccompanied children wandering out onto the road and getting injured, as far as I am aware.
The site is separated from the road by a ditch, the main purpose of which is to collect surface water from the road in instances of heavy rain. In exceptionally wet periods the ditch can overflow and the site flood - this is intentional. Therefore, they can't have a solid fence or barrier because this would increase the risk of flooding of the road. Perhaps they could have a timber post and rail fence, but is this really a deterrent? A young child determined enough to climb through a ditch will also climb through, or over, a partially open fence.
Reports say that the car hit the ditch with enough momentum to flip and roll several times. Any form of timber fence would have had no effect at all in slowing that down and indeed, might have led to flying debris injuring more people. Had there been anything like an Armco barrier, the force of the car striking that could well have resulted in one or more of its occupants being killed.
On the opposite side of the road is a shingle bank. At the time of the accident (about 10.30pm) the weather was overcast, following rain earlier in the day. There is no street lighting so it would have been pitch dark as the car came down the hill. Perhaps the driver saw the shingle too late and struck it before losing control and veering across the road and into the ditch. But that is for an ongoing police investigation to determine.
I suggest that you take your time and read the cposts properlly instead of jumping to conclusions. Please highlight where either of us stated that the caravan park was at fault!
No one mentioned that a fence would have stopped the vehicle and all seem to agree that it would not have stopped that vehicle. However what people did express was concern for young children perhaps wandering onto the road as some of us oldies are still concerned about young children.
Parksy
Moderator
Let's not get into an argument about who said what or whether a site with no boundary fence should have been allowed by council planning.
The reported facts of the matter are that the campsite had operated for years perfectly legally.
A driver allegedly lost control of his vehicle when travelling at a higher than suitable speed, the vehicle rolled into the edge of the campsite and hit a tent, injuring the occupants of the tent.
It's the responsibility of parents to look after the wellbeing and safety of their children on any unfenced area bounded by a road, and the responsibility of drivers to drive according to road conditions under every circumstance.
We will have to await a possible court verdict before we can say who or what was at fault.
The reported facts of the matter are that the campsite had operated for years perfectly legally.
A driver allegedly lost control of his vehicle when travelling at a higher than suitable speed, the vehicle rolled into the edge of the campsite and hit a tent, injuring the occupants of the tent.
It's the responsibility of parents to look after the wellbeing and safety of their children on any unfenced area bounded by a road, and the responsibility of drivers to drive according to road conditions under every circumstance.
We will have to await a possible court verdict before we can say who or what was at fault.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
-
-
12v supply to fridge fault after testing voltage !! Help please
- Started by Joggerdude
- Replies: 4
-
Facebook
Twitter