Tailback proceedure at incidents

for Recruitment and General Issues

Moderator: R C C

User avatar
Biffo
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 452
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 12:51 pm

Tailback proceedure at incidents

Post: # 30833Post Biffo
Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:35 pm

It's bothered me for a while that a couple of police forces ask out patrols to do "tail back proceedure" at incidents, to see how much traffic is being affected.
This practice has been stopped by the ACPO a couple of years ago, so why are we getting asked to do it??

Check out here;...

http://www.kent.police.uk/About%20Kent% ... orways.pdf
look under incident handling, item 6/10, on page 58.

Ok, I'm not out there with you guys & gals, but I don't think you should be doing it.
Maybe it's time it was brought to the OM's attention.

Biffo
He who dies with the most toys, WINS!!!

User avatar
skinner
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 179
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 7:18 am
Location: England here there every where

Post: # 30841Post skinner
Sun Nov 11, 2007 7:41 am

As understand we should not be doing it, I can be sure that my own DRA would say to me NO and tell the police to go a hide were the sun dont shine.

User avatar
Jock Abroad
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 571
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 8:52 am
Location: Abroad

Post: # 30842Post Jock Abroad
Sun Nov 11, 2007 7:45 am

I cant remember the name of the thread Biffo, but this has been discussed. I believe we are one of the only regions to still be doing this practice. Personally I dont see the danger as such,location and condition dependant. However, we should not be sitting in our wagons while doing it.

My colleague and I did it to good effect recently displaying slow. It was lashing down with rain over the brow of a hill, signs limitted. There would have been bedlam had we not slowed the traffic.

We had a relief crew for a little while who chose to sit in the car.

Individual DRA on the ground dictates whether you should be there and not just the wishes of BiB. It should not be standard, expected practice.
Speed is not a cause, it is a contributory factor. It's incompetent driving that kills!

User avatar
Northern Lad
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: North

Post: # 30845Post Northern Lad
Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:25 am

I thought the idea was to reverse along the hard shoulder to keep pace with the end of the(growing) tail back.

Police don't do it in our area and I think it is dangerous as it places you and your vehicle in the sudden braking zone when dozy drivers realise that everyone in front has stopped.
Northern Lad
I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking too good either.

User avatar
Jock Abroad
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 571
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 8:52 am
Location: Abroad

Post: # 30847Post Jock Abroad
Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:33 am

Well, it is to be in position to pre warn traffic approaching, you should be able to pre empt the build up and hopefully stay well outside the braking zone. Not always easy I know. Not every region has the luxury of countless signs and signals, our TOV, well placed, could be the only warning of stationary traffic ahead.

As I mentioned, it is not always the best or safest practice but does have a place, weather, conditions and DRA permitting. Considerations I have include the observer walking back up the shoulder as there is sometimes no need for both HATOs to be in car as it reverses.

I say again, this should perhaps not be considered normal practice but has it's place.
Speed is not a cause, it is a contributory factor. It's incompetent driving that kills!

Race Track
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 8:19 pm
Location: South East
Contact:

Post: # 30854Post Race Track
Sun Nov 11, 2007 12:33 pm

See previous thread on this:

http://www.nationaltraffic.co.uk/phpBB2 ... php?t=1647

NO-ONE should be doing tailback. No-one should be accepting requests from the police to do it (you are only required to undertake a REASONABLE request from a police officer - tailback procedure is deemed far to dangerous and thus is not reasonable).

Already memos and notifications issued. No need to bring it to OMs attention. Look up the old references.

Don't do it.

User avatar
Wrist Assessment
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 2:46 pm
Location: The very cold bit of up north

Post: # 30855Post Wrist Assessment
Sun Nov 11, 2007 12:34 pm

Jock Abroad wrote:I say again, this should perhaps not be considered normal practice but has it's place.
Jock, I agree with a lot of what you've said and would make a couple of observations.

Firstly, I'm convinced that (some) local BiB get us to do this because they either don't know what our remit is or just want us to go away. Several times I've pulled into their usual 4 cone Lane 3 closure and offered our help only to be told to 'go and monitor the tailback'. What I've started doing is pulling into L3 and then immediateley overlaying the Bib's closure and neatly placing their TM by the back of the volvo ready for a quick gettaway. They seem to appreciate this - except for the Bib who exited stage right leaving his neatly stacked TM in L2 - oops!

Secondly, It is VERY tempting when doing tailback to stay in the car, especially if the tailback is yo-yoing back and forth. I remember once leaving a colleague outside of the car whilst reversing and he quickly became a tiny figure over 1k away. Mind you - he could do with the exercise :wink:
Life is one big DRA

User avatar
slabber
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts: 3536
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 9:17 am
Contact:

Post: # 30858Post slabber
Sun Nov 11, 2007 12:58 pm

Wrist Assessment wrote:Secondly, It is VERY tempting when doing tailback to stay in the car, especially if the tailback is yo-yoing back and forth. I remember once leaving a colleague outside of the car whilst reversing and he quickly became a tiny figure over 1k away. Mind you - he could do with the exercise :wink:
I wasn't on with you!! :wink: 8)

User avatar
Jock Abroad
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 571
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 8:52 am
Location: Abroad

Post: # 30867Post Jock Abroad
Sun Nov 11, 2007 2:22 pm

Thanks RT, I will try to find something in writing at work or pick the correct moment to bring it up in conversation.
For some reason, as Wristy and Slabber know, this is not questioned round our neck of the woods. At a recent incident two Supes asked me to do it. I did my DRA of that particular situation and had no reason to question it. In that one case, on that bit of tarmac we were able to make a difference without any more risk to ourselves as normal.
Speed is not a cause, it is a contributory factor. It's incompetent driving that kills!

User avatar
The Bone
Registered Member
Registered Member
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:56 am
Location: WHERE T' SHEEP LOOK WORRIED

Tail end charlie

Post: # 30872Post The Bone
Sun Nov 11, 2007 2:56 pm

I've only ever done this once when traffic backing up a slip onto the carrigeway, even then we had several vehicles swerving into lane 2 as they see our lights and the 610 arrow we are told to put out resulting in several very near misses.
I can see the point of pre-warning traffic to potential danger, a patrol car on the hard shoulder, at best a nuisance and distraction to the traffic and could contribute to an accident, or struck by a confused driver.
I would much sooner put out signs prior to the incident, and recover them later, rather than put ourselves at risk and be a distraction.
This method also ties up a valuable patrol which should be covering, whilst the others are dealing.
I've moved to an outstation where tail end charlie has been adopted by managers as best practice, I do worry of the serious consequences when this goes wrong, pherhaps they have just been lucky.
Ooooofffff, you can't do that BOYO!!!!!!!

Race Track
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 8:19 pm
Location: South East
Contact:

Post: # 30874Post Race Track
Sun Nov 11, 2007 2:59 pm

Jock Abroad wrote:Thanks RT, I will try to find something in writing at work or pick the correct moment to bring it up in conversation.
For some reason, as Wristy and Slabber know, this is not questioned round our neck of the woods. At a recent incident two Supes asked me to do it. I did my DRA of that particular situation and had no reason to question it. In that one case, on that bit of tarmac we were able to make a difference without any more risk to ourselves as normal.
This is what gets me. Not having a go at you here btw JA.

The HA and ACPO has categorically stated no-one should do tailback due to the dangers so why do people believe that there are circumstances where it can be done? Some TO's are the first to bleat on about not doing anything that is dangerous and contravenes external laws/guidance/procedures/experience, so why do this one?

User avatar
Jock Abroad
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 571
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 8:52 am
Location: Abroad

Post: # 30877Post Jock Abroad
Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:11 pm

RT, I look forward to seeing something in writing about this colleague.
Obviously we have to be careful what docs we show on the site, but can we have an extract from ACPO perhaps?

RT, I have PMd you
Speed is not a cause, it is a contributory factor. It's incompetent driving that kills!

User avatar
Off Network
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 351
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 5:15 pm
Location: Out of sight

Post: # 30878Post Off Network
Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:18 pm

6.5.4 TAILBACK PROCEDURES
Stationary traffic on motorways is now a regular, spontaneous occurrence. The dangers of
carrying out tailback procedures outweigh the advantages. As such, this working
practice should cease to be used.

The ACPO hand book is downloadable from their public website
"Speed has never killed anyone, suddenly becoming stationary... That's what gets you."

User avatar
Jock Abroad
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 571
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 8:52 am
Location: Abroad

Post: # 30879Post Jock Abroad
Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:22 pm

Thanks Offnet, anything been issued by HA that I haven't seen before? ACPO is enough for me though, it's just I'm an info junky.
Speed is not a cause, it is a contributory factor. It's incompetent driving that kills!

Race Track
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts: 3167
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 8:19 pm
Location: South East
Contact:

Post: # 30880Post Race Track
Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:22 pm

http://www.acpo.police.uk/asp/policies/ ... _Roads.pdf

Page 65

Will check from the HA side when next in

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic