You realize that just because he was given a route that doesn't give him carte blanche to drive too far over in the lane and put lives at risk. The driver says that he had pulled over to allow another truck to pass - which the driver should never have done anywhere near that bridge.
btw simon, just because you have a permit it doesnt mean that you should shut your brain off. if he got the permit it means the load was able to clear the bridge...unless ofcourse you don't pay attention and decide to go on the shoulder :eyebrows:
You are absolutely right. That's why it was termed a "structurally deficient bridge" it isn't that it was in poor repair, rather that the design of the bridge was such that a) it would not be currently be designed that way and b) failure of one member could cause the entire structure to fail.
By a US government agency, no less, just after it collapsed.
your own link says the bridge was functionally obsolete. every article i read on it says the driver was questioned and released without fine or infraction. that tells me the driver is not at fault.
Actually long beforehand.
Don't know Fast, but he did have the proper paperwork, and that paperwork stated the dimensions and weight of the load.
link for that ? that is not what i hear out in the field. not in reference to this particular case but just in general conversation. over weight and height drivers are told where and when they can and can't drive and their route is planned for them start to finish. perhaps the shipper gave wrong info and the dot gave a permit based on that.
Isn't that usually the situation? The driver catches the blame. A few things to ponder. Was the minimum route clearance based upon center lane clearance, or shoulder clearance? The clearance is supposed to be based upon the lowest clearance on the roadway. Pennsylvania used to have low clearance signs everywhere, because the shoulder clearances were less than 13'6". Quite an eye-opener at 3am when your eyes are starting to droop and you see a 12'8" low clearance warning sign. The signs in New York were worse. I don't know how they measured them, but actual clearance was usually about 2 ft. higher than posted clearance.
20 wrecks in a year ? jesus man, i don't know what you do but please get off the road.
On the interstates and main highways, clearances can usually be trusted, it's the ones in the cities that can sometimes be a problem. I remember one 13'10" clearance where they put in drainage, because of water buildup during hard rain. They ended up raising the road level by over 6 inches without changing the clearance. The day they reopened the road a reefer became a convertible. That was in Ft. Wayne, IN about 20 years back.
