(no subject)

[dolari]

So who do you think is to blame here?

My dad was a trucker all his working life. He often told me that as long as his load was under 14 feet, which is the maximum height for a trailer without a permit, he usually didn't look at clearance signs, unless they were really consipcuous. Thankfully, when they're under 14 feet they usually are.

The bridge height here was 14 feet 6 inches. It was also completely unmarked at all.

The company got an overheight permit they should have known there might be bridges that are too low since they usually tell the driver which route to take.

There was also a pilot car, for the truck driver to follow, who should have known he was running an overheight load. But there was no signage (either on the bridge, or before the nearest exit), so how was the pilot car supposed to know?

The driver knew he had an oversize load, and should have had an inkling it might be too low...but then the pilot car went right through. And the comapny set up this route for him. And there was no signage on the bridge.

The bridge was "functionally obsolete" and juuuuuust this side of needing to be replaced.

Personally, I dunno. I'm thinking the pilot driver, who guides the oversize load. But then again, the bridge wasn't marked for height at all so what did the pilot car have to go on?

I've driven that bridge many times...it didn't seem low. Wonder what Dad would have done before (and after) getting to the bridge.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57586034/bridge-collapse-in-washington-state-blamed-on-tractor-trailer/

Comments

[emilydm.livejournal.com]

As I understand it: the trucking company said "we have a 15-foot-9 load here, is it okay to transport it on this route?" and the state said "sure, no problem". They sent a test load with the same dimensions down and it didn't have a problem... but only because it went through on the center lane where the bridge girder was about a foot and a half higher. IMHO the state dropped the ball and the trucking company proceeded to trip over it and faceplant into the mud.

For comparison's sake, just about everything on major routes or main thoroughfares in Canada with less than 5.5 metres (18 feet) of clearance is well-marked as such; I've seen clearance signs as high as 8.6 metres (28 feet and change). Something comparable to the Skagit bridge are the Glover Road and CP Rail overpasses of the Trans Canada Highway in Langley at 4.4 metres (14-foot-5). Half a foot over legal height, they're still marked with warning signs about five miles in advance, and about a mile before the bridges proper is an overheight detector with alarms and flashing lights. Despite this, every other month or so a semi truck will manage to wedge its trailer underneath. Many years ago the Glover Road bridge was damaged by a strike, and is now heavily reinforced over the travel lanes. The rail overpass has deep gouges in the ceiling. They're both from the mid-sixties and have never been replaced, only upgraded.

See also this site in Durham NC, not too far from Trinoc '05: http://11foot8.com/ . Truck after truck after truck hits the main span of a train trestle and it doesn't budge. Yet one oversize trailer hits a single reinforcing beam of a steel highway bridge and the whole thing instantly buckles and collapses. Granted there's a speed difference, but something still seems fishy.

[jenndolari.livejournal.com]

I was really surprised a the lack of signage. In Texas, if there's a bridge, not only is it plainly marked on the bridge, but if it's on a freeway, there's a clearance sign with the dimensions about a mile before the exit so they can exit. I had to double check and truiple check on google earth, but nothing like that existed on this bridge.

In Pennsylvania, they not only mark the signs, but will put the sign at the lowest clearance on the bridge, usually with a little arrow pointing to the spot.

I feel bad for the trucker, since this more than likely wasn't his fault - he was going by what everyone had told him and downright certified.

As for the buckling bridge itself, one of the reasons I asked this was I wanted to know what caused the accident, not the immediate knee jerk reaction of "IT's an old bridge, MORE MONEY TO INFRASTRUCTURE!" It's not an untruth...we REALLY need more money to upgrade infrastructure built in the 50s. LOTS of money. But I wanted to try and figure out where the "failure point" in this whole thing was without pointing fingers at politicians who wouldn't know this bridge from any other....

[thoughtsdriftby.livejournal.com]

Everyone.

Like many system failures there are many people along the way that could have prevented the accident but didn't.

Driver will likely eat this one since even if everyone else got it wrong he is expected to be responsible for his load and conditions in and around his vehicle.

Here in California they like to repave from time to time. Remove a few inches of clearance every couple of years. Pavement guy just adds asphalt and the fun begins.

Ok, it has been years but I think there was a clearance sign on that bridge. Did someone take it down because it was wrong? Did the bridge inspectors note there was no clearance sign in their report? When was the last time clearances were inspected and are these clearance available in the DOT permit office? Are there even procedures in place so things get cought before a major fail?

Everyone.

[jenndolari.livejournal.com]

From what I saw on Google Earth, and reported in the news, there were no clearance signs at all. Which blows my mind. Texas marks most every bridge, regardless of height, or if it's a two lane road, or a dirt one. In fact, on freeways, there's usually a marker a mile before the exit, to let you know what the upcoming clearances are so you can exit if necessary.

[thoughtsdriftby.livejournal.com]

It is supposed to be marked. Interesting looking at it on google maps. No signs to be found on either end but if you look south at it from the north end there is an oversized load crossing.

[elenderel.livejournal.com]

A few miles from my house is a low railroad bridge that is notorious for the number of drivers who fail to acknowledge its lowness and strike it. In 2010, a double-decker Megabus slammed into it and killed 4 passengers.

("According to police, Tomaszewski [the driver] was using a personal GPS when his 13-foot-high double-decker struck a bridge with less than 11 feet of clearance. There are about 10 signs leading up to the bridge to warn trucks of the low bridge, some with flashing yellow lights, authorities have said.")

Not only are there flashing lights, there are now at least a dozen signs, including one of those big message-board signs in either direction and several others that indicate commercial vehicles are prohibited, and a strip of highly reflective safety-orange metal along the bottom edge of the bridge that can be seen for miles.

I am baffled to learn that somewhere in America there's a bridge with no posted clearance. That is INSANE. Whoever's responsible for posting bridge clearances should be held responsible for the Washington bridge's collapse. Whoever designed and built it. Whoever "owns" it. Not the driver or the escort. How could they have known?