I think this is the most logical possibility.
Unfortunately I doubt we'll ever know for sure and the driver will be labelled by a lot of people as having done it deliberately.

Those Google images are interesting. It reminds me of something I read on the Swedish forum, where a driver mentioned it's not even that obvious you are heading towards a bridge. It is one of a series of bridges side by side, so there is no steep drop to the side until you get very close to the point where the road crosses over the water. In poor visibility, it could be easy to assume there is not much danger (apart from all the warning lights and barriers, of course).

The barriers do not look that substantial either.

Well it can't be that hazardous or a lot more people would die like Viola Beach. Just sheer stupidity on the drivers part and I hope it was that more than anything else.

True. I think as has been mentioned before, the barriers aren't meant to physically stop a vehicle, but are rather a visual barrier (if that makes sense). In fact, they are probably designed to break easily. The last thing you want when a vehicle crashes through the barrier is for it to be damaged in such a way that the driver is incapacitated or a mechanical failure prevents it from stopping. I would be surprised if the car had more than a few scratches.

It would be interesting to find out what type of construction materials are used on the ‘barriers’ i.e. fibre glass/plastic or maybe lightweight tubular steel/aluminium et al.

I guess calling them ‘safety’ barriers is probably a misnomer. As you say they aren’t designed as a ‘stop at all costs’ barrier but more as the demarcation of a ‘no go’ danger area.

If you study the Google image of the ‘1st barrier zone’ you will note that there is a large’ish black box attached to each of the two (right and left) barriers that is presumably a warning light of some description.

It’s difficult to judge the perspective of the Google images correctly but maybe that large ‘warning light’ attached to the (otherwise lightweight) barrier could inflict some significant damage to a windscreen/driver if struck at speed by a car travelling in that narrow outside lane;

…all complete conjecture of course.

I vaguely remember reading somewhere that the police were forensically studying the damaged barrier/debris to see if it offered any clues;…. I haven’t seen anything more on that aspect though.

The theory that the driver, having unexpectedly crashed through the 1st barrier (for whatever reason) , panicked as he believed the vehicle was actually on the bridge itself and simply sped onward in a vain attempt to reach the safety of the other side sounds plausible.

However, would that be the instant reaction of most drivers?... he presumably had no idea how long the bridge actually was, and, having collided with an unexpected obstacle most drivers would (I guess ???) have braked sharply and stopped,…or at least slowed down before making the panicked decision to carry on regardless.

According to the eye witness the car simply sped onward, completely unabated. A car travelling at 40mph would impact the bridge approx 8 seconds after crashing through the 1st barrier.

I don’t much subscribe to the theory that there was any deliberate malicious intent on the part of the driver, but anything else is seemingly up for grabs and will probably remain so until the police/forensics’ come up with something tangible.

I’m just tossing things in the air really,… but once again,…who knows what happened…..

I agree with the first part - If you hit anything, the reaction would always be to stop or at least slow, and try to work out what just happened. You wouldn't just assume that you were on a swing bridge, put your foot down, and attempt to get off the other side.

Unfortunately we will never know what was going on inside the car but, as far as I can see, the driver acting deliberately is the only thing that makes any sense at the moment, and even then, it doesn't make much sense. Given the unusualness of this style of bridge in the UK, I don't think anyone in the car could have perceived how it was going to play out, even with an eight second warning from barrier to bridge.

Did he even know he was on a bridge? Maybe he thought it was a level crossing train track, with the two barriers either side? He couldn't see a train coming and in a moment of lunacy he decided to just plough through the first barrier, over the train track and through the second barrier and on his way before the train came.

Maybe so, in any case I think the second barrier is what confused him. In the dark and snow the though they had passed unscathed through whatever the warnings were for.

Probably just thinking about getting to the hotel or plane to relax after a successful evening, oblivious to the fact there was a raised bridge and lethal gap in the road coming up ahead.

I am getting to quite like their track played on Radio 1 now. Such a shame they were lost.

How had they passed unscathed when they crashed though the first barrier?

Anybody with a brain cell at that moment stops and does not carry on towards death.

Also there would of been signs , and they would of presumably passed by it on the way to the gig so it's not like this bridge magically appeared to kill them. Everybody else managed to pass though unscathed.

Also it was just before 2am so no flights would take off at that time of the morning so would of not been I'm any rush either.

Do we know what their destination was? I thought I'd read somewhere that they were going to their hotel, but having looked at the map it seems likely that they were heading for the airport.

The gig was in Nörrkoping, which is about a 2 hour motorway drive from Stockholm Arlanda airport, and the Sodertalje bridge is just over halfway. The accident happened around 2 am, so I guess they either had an early flight, or had a hotel booked at the airport. Or did they have another gig in Sweden?

As another poster pointed out it could be that they were racing to catch their plane, which would explain the supposed hurry. Having passed over the bridge en route to the gig, earlier in the day, I'd have thought the driver would have been well aware of that particular road system.

Why the need to explain the hurry? Perhaps he was just one of those people who seem to want to drive at 110mph all the time regardless of the speed limits, with no consideration for other road users and no respect for "please slow down now" signs.

You know, the sort of person who's on your tail flashing their lights at you because you're "only" doing 55mph in a 50mph roadwork zone on the M6.

I doubt they'd notice unless a ship was about to come through. I've regularly travelled routes with many moveable bridges, and most of them look just like normal roads when not in action.

As someone said above, there wouldn't have been a plane scheduled at that hour of the night, so there would have been plenty of time to get to the airport, if that was their destination.

Oh well that's thrown that theory out of the widow.

Yes, I did think the same about the bridge. I guess unless familiar with or seen in action you'd be none the wiser.

What plane takes off at 2am ?

Earliest flight would not of been until 6ish and the crash happened before 2am

Yup. I've since retracted

Inquest has begun

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...manager-drove/

Hard to see any explanation other than a murder-suicide by the manager while the band slept. He might have been unfamiliar with raised bridges/Swedish roads but not to the extent of crashing through two separate barriers.

All the more strange because he actually came to a complete halt just ahead of the first barrier ,…and then deliberately manoeuvred to crash through it and thence through the 2nd barrier;

…very perplexing.

Bit tired of them being lauded as "the next big thing". It's sad that they all died but their music isn't all that. Bit derivative, in my opinion. Shoe-horning them to the number one spot seems rather pointless.

Obviously a lot of people don't share your opinion.

Ahhhh... I seeeeee...

Well, thank you for stating the obvious.

Heard about the inquest on the news at tea-time and they described the manager's actions but said they can't be explained. Surely he deliberately committed suicide and murder or am I missing something? Are we not allowed to think or say that?

We can only speculate as to his motivation but it seems to be the only theory that fits.

They literally hit the edge of the bridge as it was rising according to the news, I'm erring towards an accident or recklessness rather than the Manager committing suicide.

If he did - then what I think is unprintable.