bridge collapse

[Tractorat]

I dont know if anyone saw it on national news. But the I-5 bridge over the skagit river collapsed yesterday afternoon when an oversized semi truck hit it. The bridge was inspected in nov and was found to be structurally safe.



So, the news is talking about the aging infrastructure in washington and the US. They are complaining about bridge maint.



Well, to say the bridge came down because of lack of maint is like saying the twin towers came down because they forgot to wash the windows.

 

[dkoldno7]

Another load that should have been shipped by rail!

 

[Tractorat]

Yup. Or another truck driver who should have made sure he had current information.

 

[NIsaacs]

The bridge was inspected in nov and was found to be structurally safe.

If it was safe, it should be able to rip that lightweight load off the trailer. It only sustained minor damage. The pilot car driver and truck driver should have made sure they were in the left lane, away from the tapered sides that reduced the height clearance. The bridge was junk.



Nick

 

[Grizzly]

I've been across that bridge so many times. Very scary.



george

 

[HBarlow]

I dont know if anyone saw it on national news. But the I-5 bridge over the skagit river collapsed yesterday afternoon when an oversized semi truck hit it. The bridge was inspected in nov and was found to be structurally safe.

So, the news is talking about the aging infrastructure in washington and the US. They are complaining about bridge maint.

Well, to say the bridge came down because of lack of maint is like saying the twin towers came down because they forgot to wash the windows.

Has it actually been established that a truck hit the bridge or is that just passing the responsiblity? If a trucker did it has he been cited, arrested? Any photos?

 

[Tractorat]

yes it was established.

He hit one of the girders with the top of the box. When he hit it, the bridge section came down.

Bridge was originaly built with I think about 18 feet clearance. But, over the years, with the road being resurfaced, it has shrunk down to I believe it was about 14 and a half feet. The truck drive was using old information.

The reason it came down (the real experts are saying) is because of the way they made bridges back in the 50's.

 

[JR]

I was driving down a rural section of a 4 lane highway (2 lanes each way) when I came up on a tri axle dump merging onto the highway. They were doing some work on the over pass and he had just delivered a load of dirt. He made the big loop on the on ramp and was just in front of me as he merged onto the freeway about 200 feet before the overpass. The guy never lowered his bed from dumping his load. I was in the left lane and slowed as I came up on him and did my best to get his attention but he had tunnel vision and continued to look straight ahead as he was grabbing gears. I sped up at the last second I didn't want to be behind him when he went under that bridge. The top of his bed hit the overpass and sent the truck airborne before ripping the bed completely off the frame and wedging itself between the bridge and the road. The truck spun over in the air and slammed down on the driver side of the cab. The impact was so violent I could actually feel it when he hit.

They closed that bridge for inspection and deemed it safe for use. 10 Years later the gouge marks are still there just as fresh looking as the day it happened

 

[Tractorat]

It was explained pretty nicely in the seattle times this morning. Evidently these bridges were built with key trigger points. If you remember how fonsie in happy days would hit the juke box just right and it would play, same thing with this era of bridge. If you smack it in the right place, the whole thing comes down like a stack of cards. If this bridge had been hit in the same place the day after it was first built in the 50's, it would have been the same result.

If the truck had been over in the left hand lane like he should have, he wouldnt have hit the bridge. I hope the trucking company has good insurance.

 

[mwilson]

If it was safe, it should be able to rip that lightweight load off the trailer. It only sustained minor damage. The pilot car driver and truck driver should have made sure they were in the left lane, away from the tapered sides that reduced the height clearance. The bridge was junk.



Nick

Maybe not junk, it was smply not designed to take a hit in that fashion. That is not a normal occurance.



The State of Maine has spent millions of dollars on repairs to overpasses that are way newer than the fallen bridge because drivers try to stuff an excavator boom that is 15' tall under an overpass with a 14' clearance, loads of wood do a lot of damage as well. It hits the bridge on its side. The bridge and "I" beams are not designed for a side load. The bridge deck is to carry the load.



I used to haul oversize loads, no excuse for that to happen. I saw the curved supports in the picture and figured the drone didn't get over in the left lane. It's called being aware of your surroundings.



The very first time that I had go up Route 9 out of NYC it was apparent to me that any underpass required being in the left lane as each one was arched. You could see damage to every one from the drivers that had no clue that the right corner of a 13'6" dry van was not going to clear. .



Storrow Drive in Boston, same thing. Flashing orange lights, big signs with clearance height, more big signs saying "NO TRUCKS!", and in the event that a big rig wound up on the off-ramp in error there was another sign indicating just around the corner there was a truck escape ramp and once a day some moron driving a truck STILL wound up down there screwing everything up. Some truck drivers are not TRUCK DRIVERS.



See low clearance section... . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storrow_Drive



I do not fault that bridge in this case.



Mike.

 

[HBarlow]

yes it was established.

He hit one of the girders with the top of the box. When he hit it, the bridge section came down.

Bridge was originaly built with I think about 18 feet clearance. But, over the years, with the road being resurfaced, it has shrunk down to I believe it was about 14 and a half feet. The truck drive was using old information.

The reason it came down (the real experts are saying) is because of the way they made bridges back in the 50's.

Trat,

Your statement doesn't make sense. In order to believe that you have to believe the road surface has raised 3 1/2 feet over the years as additional resurfacing efforts have been made.

You are far more trusting of your local paper propaganda piece and of AP reporters than I am. I quickly scanned the propaganda piece you bought. There is no factual evidence of a truck that hit the bridge causing it to fracture and fail. If that had happened why didn't the truck or at least the rear wheels of the trailer fall into the structure and hit the leading edge of the pavement? Baloney.

The real meat of that story is the perpetual lament of all leftists: the line about government needing more taxpayer money to fund more bridge repair. Billions of taxpayer dollars sink into the morass of road and bridge maintenance every year only to be spent on handouts for favored leftist constituents.

No wonder dumocraps are the majority in WA.

 

[NIsaacs]

Maybe not junk, it was smply not designed to take a hit in that fashion. That is not a normal occurance.



The State of Maine has spent millions of dollars on repairs to overpasses that are way newer than the fallen bridge because drivers try to stuff an excavator boom that is 15' tall under an overpass with a 14' clearance, loads of wood do a lot of damage as well.



The very first time that I had go up Route 9 out of NYC it was apparent to me that any underpass required being in the left lane as each one was arched. You could see damage to every one from the drivers



I do not fault that bridge in this case.



Mike.

Mike, you say on one hand, bridge impacts are not a normal occurance then point out it happens regular. You and I both know it happens all the time, we see the witness marks.



Per Washington State DOT, this same bridge was struck by an oversize load on 11-29-12. It caused impact damage, including tears, deformations and gouges. It was deemed safe and repairs were put off for a later date.....



I doubt it was designed for 4-lanes and huge amounts of traffic that it sees today. In one picture I see those heavy concrete barriers that they use in road consturction, lined up on the edge of the traffic lanes. If they are on both sides of the bridge, the added weight must be huge. The damage to the trucks light weight housing unit that he was hauling was minor.



I do fault the bridge.



Nick

 

[Tractorat]

Your statement doesn't make sense. In order to believe that you have to believe the road surface has raised 3 1/2 feet over the years as additional resurfacing efforts have been made.

You're right. Brain fart there. I was listening to a guy that called into a radio station who said he knew what he was talking about.
See my post about hitting the bridge at just the right place. That information was from bridge engineers, not news folks.

 

[mwilson]

Mike, you say on one hand, bridge impacts are not a normal occurance then point out it happens regular. You and I both know it happens all the time, we see the witness marks.



Per Washington State DOT, this same bridge was struck by an oversize load on 11-29-12. It caused impact damage, including tears, deformations and gouges. It was deemed safe and repairs were put off for a later date.....



I doubt it was designed for 4-lanes and huge amounts of traffic that it sees today. In one picture I see those heavy concrete barriers that they use in road consturction, lined up on the edge of the traffic lanes. If they are on both sides of the bridge, the added weight must be huge. The damage to the trucks light weight housing unit that he was hauling was minor.



I do fault the bridge.



Nick

See, this is what rational human beings do. Rather than flip out and block Nick I'm going to go search up some more photos of the bridge to see if I missed something. If I did I'll admit he was right and I was wrong. Or vice versa. In either event I'll still buy him a beer when I meet him.



Mike.

 

[NIsaacs]

A good adult answer Mike, thanks... . however, I will not admit anything until the facts are in:-laf I have a hunch when they pull the bridge deck out of the river, they will see numerous existing fractures of the deck itself, that it collapsed and brought the whole works down. The truck strike was just the straw that broke the Camels back.



Check out the picture of all the moss growing on the concrete piers



Nick

 

[Tractorat]

Uh... ... , this is the pacific northwest. Everything has moss on it. If it doesnt, it means that someone forgot to wash it off that morning.

 

[rscurtis]

Here's a bridge strike that didn't turn out too well. It happened in Locust Valley, LI, last July. Note that the mixer barrel and the engine/transmission assembly have been dislodged from the chassis, but that it still had enough energy to demolish the school bus and kill the driver. The cement truck driver was unlicensed and high on some kind of drugs. The clearance on the RR bridge was only a little over 10 feet.

 

[JR]

Was that bus full of children? Seeing a bus in that condition is about enough to make me queasy... .

 

[NIsaacs]

Another load that should have been shipped by rail!

On coming train traffic can't steer out of the way for wide loads plus their own covered bridges and tunnels are narrow.



Nick

 

[BIGNASTY]

Maybe not junk, it was smply not designed to take a hit in that fashion. That is not a normal occurance.

The State of Maine has spent millions of dollars on repairs to overpasses that are way newer than the fallen bridge because drivers try to stuff an excavator boom that is 15' tall under an overpass with a 14' clearance, loads of wood do a lot of damage as well. It hits the bridge on its side. The bridge and "I" beams are not designed for a side load. The bridge deck is to carry the load.

I used to haul oversize loads, no excuse for that to happen. I saw the curved supports in the picture and figured the drone didn't get over in the left lane. It's called being aware of your surroundings.

The very first time that I had go up Route 9 out of NYC it was apparent to me that any underpass required being in the left lane as each one was arched. You could see damage to every one from the drivers that had no clue that the right corner of a 13'6" dry van was not going to clear. .

Storrow Drive in Boston, same thing. Flashing orange lights, big signs with clearance height, more big signs saying "NO TRUCKS!", and in the event that a big rig wound up on the off-ramp in error there was another sign indicating just around the corner there was a truck escape ramp and once a day some moron driving a truck STILL wound up down there screwing everything up. Some truck drivers are not TRUCK DRIVERS.

See low clearance section... . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storrow_Drive

I do not fault that bridge in this case.

Mike.

I agree with this statement but the one that I really agree with is the one that states " Some truck drivers are not TRUCK DRIVERS. "

just because someone has a Class A license doesn't make them a DRIVER this has been proven MANY MANY TIMES

A Freeway in the Calif Bay (I think its 580) has signs that say NO TRUCKS bunch of warning sings. What do ya see? a truck stuck into an overpass!!! what did you miss the 20ft x 20ft sign!!! several of them.

Long Beach Air Port has a road that goes under the runway, So what does a driver from Chevron do DRIVES A GAS TRUCK THRU THE TUNNEL and then complained that she was SET UP when she got a ticket. When I was a driver trainer same girl took me for a gas delivery she RAN A RAILROAD CROSSING!!!!! I asked her to pull over and let me make the delivery! she wouldn't so at a stop light, I GOT OUT OF THE TRUCK AND LET HER DRIVE OFF!! called the shop they came and got me and they FINALLY HAD , HAD ENOUGH and fired her.