“We’ll never totally eliminate stupidity in this world,” he says.
January 7, 2016 9:38 AM Subscribe
The train bridge’s underside trimmed a layer off the truck’s top, looking like a grater shaving a layer of cheese.
The world can watch the whole thing, thanks to Jürgen Henn.
The WSJ B&W stippled headshot of the 11'8" sign is comedy gold.
posted by GuyZero at 9:48 AM on January 7, 2016 [16 favorites]
posted by GuyZero at 9:48 AM on January 7, 2016 [16 favorites]
A big rig getting mangled is funny because the driver is insured and also a professional who should know better.
U-Haul trucks are being driven by regular people, most likely not wealthy, whose lives are probably in a financially tenuous state of transition. And as far as I know, insurance doesn't cover those types of accidents. So many of them are probably going to be fucked.
(Get a load of Debbie Downer, over here.)
posted by Atom Eyes at 9:53 AM on January 7, 2016 [18 favorites]
U-Haul trucks are being driven by regular people, most likely not wealthy, whose lives are probably in a financially tenuous state of transition. And as far as I know, insurance doesn't cover those types of accidents. So many of them are probably going to be fucked.
(Get a load of Debbie Downer, over here.)
posted by Atom Eyes at 9:53 AM on January 7, 2016 [18 favorites]
Why wouldn't they just add one of those hanging yellow and black plastic pipes like they use in parking garages?
posted by contraption at 9:54 AM on January 7, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by contraption at 9:54 AM on January 7, 2016 [6 favorites]
Why wouldn't they just add one of those hanging yellow and black plastic pipes like they use in parking garages?
They have a more advanced version of this that uses sensors and has flashing lights and such, people just ignore it. You could maybe install the plastic bar a ways up the road but it probably wouldn't help.
posted by majuju at 9:57 AM on January 7, 2016
I wonder if these incidents have increased in the era of smart phones/ GPS navigation, where we just blindly go where the device is telling us? In that case more signs won't do the trick because drivers are paying more attention to their phones, and maybe the solution is in embedded warnings in map apps.
posted by kingv at 9:57 AM on January 7, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by kingv at 9:57 AM on January 7, 2016 [4 favorites]
Mod note: Couple comments deleted. Fair warning - the site described in the WSJ article, 11foot8.com, seems to be serving malware - so don't click through from the article. The article itself is ok.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:57 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:57 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
Why wouldn't they just add one of those hanging yellow and black plastic pipes like they use in parking garages?
They have a more advanced version of this that uses sensors and has flashing lights and such, people just ignore it.
Yeah, I'm with contraption -- a BANG on your truck seems more likely to make you stop than a bunch of flashing lights. But then, I'm not a traffic engineer, and there's probably a good reason that's not just "It's got sensors!"
posted by Etrigan at 9:58 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
They have a more advanced version of this that uses sensors and has flashing lights and such, people just ignore it.
Yeah, I'm with contraption -- a BANG on your truck seems more likely to make you stop than a bunch of flashing lights. But then, I'm not a traffic engineer, and there's probably a good reason that's not just "It's got sensors!"
posted by Etrigan at 9:58 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Jürgen Henn is a "systems analyst." But he's never quoted in The Onion!
posted by chavenet at 9:58 AM on January 7, 2016
posted by chavenet at 9:58 AM on January 7, 2016
Having said that, I did rip the back off a box truck on a low trestle in long island in 2001, so maybe it's not cell phones' fault!
posted by kingv at 9:59 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by kingv at 9:59 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
U-Haul trucks are being driven by regular people, most likely not wealthy, whose lives are probably in a financially tenuous state of transition. And as far as I know, insurance doesn't cover those types of accidents. So many of them are probably going to be fucked.
That's terrible and depressing in the sense that "man, insurance is broken". But it’s not like, when watching someone drive into a bridge, I wonder who's really at fault. (Maybe I should?)
posted by Going To Maine at 10:00 AM on January 7, 2016
That's terrible and depressing in the sense that "man, insurance is broken". But it’s not like, when watching someone drive into a bridge, I wonder who's really at fault. (Maybe I should?)
posted by Going To Maine at 10:00 AM on January 7, 2016
In the Boston area, we call this "storrowing", after Storrow Drive, which has quite a number of these low bridges combined with quite a number of drivers who ignore the CARS ONLY signs.
posted by tobascodagama at 10:01 AM on January 7, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by tobascodagama at 10:01 AM on January 7, 2016 [7 favorites]
Just to the left of the on-ramp for the Viaduct in downtown Seattle, a couple blocks away from Pike Place Market, there is a short underpass that goes under the Viaduct, which shaves at least a couple trucks a year. I'm surprised no one gets hurt.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 10:01 AM on January 7, 2016
posted by a lungful of dragon at 10:01 AM on January 7, 2016
I can see how a train track is hard to move, but I don't understand why they can't move those underground utility lines a couple feet further into the ground.
posted by monospace at 10:04 AM on January 7, 2016
posted by monospace at 10:04 AM on January 7, 2016
contraption: "Why wouldn't they just add one of those hanging yellow and black plastic pipes like they use in parking garages?"
There is a crash bar ... people still routinely ignore it. The bridge can't go up without requiring something like two miles of work each direction on the railroad so that the grade works out properly; the road can't go down because of a 100-year-old sewer and underlying ground conditions that make moving the sewer hard.
Here is a youtube video (the site does serve up malware but watching this bridge decapitate trucks is my kids' favorite thing so we watch this video a lot).
There are even signs on the side street approaches warning you if you make the turn. Here's street view. You kinda have to work to be bringing a truck into that part of town from that direction, and new student info (for Duke students who tend to be the ones bringing UHauls in) and landlords in the area all warn you against it.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 10:06 AM on January 7, 2016 [7 favorites]
There is a crash bar ... people still routinely ignore it. The bridge can't go up without requiring something like two miles of work each direction on the railroad so that the grade works out properly; the road can't go down because of a 100-year-old sewer and underlying ground conditions that make moving the sewer hard.
Here is a youtube video (the site does serve up malware but watching this bridge decapitate trucks is my kids' favorite thing so we watch this video a lot).
There are even signs on the side street approaches warning you if you make the turn. Here's street view. You kinda have to work to be bringing a truck into that part of town from that direction, and new student info (for Duke students who tend to be the ones bringing UHauls in) and landlords in the area all warn you against it.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 10:06 AM on January 7, 2016 [7 favorites]
One said, “‘Oh, no. Not this bridge,’ ” Mr. Henn says. “He knew the website. He had seen the footage. And he still hit the bridge.”
Stupidity indeed.
posted by Greg_Ace at 10:06 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Stupidity indeed.
posted by Greg_Ace at 10:06 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Why wouldn't insurance cover this, assuming you have adequate insurance that covers your use of the truck? I'm sure people rent trucks without appropriate insurance, but is there really an exclusion for incidents like this? They cover you if you get confused between the gas and the brake, so it's not like car insurance comes with a stupidity/mistake exception.
posted by zachlipton at 10:07 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by zachlipton at 10:07 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
Needs a "Stop" sign and a "Stop." sign and a "Stop!" sign. People are trained to stop for stop signs.
Also, a "No Trucks (over 11'8'')" sign. And a "Fuck You, Rental Truck Drivers. No, Seriously. Fuck You." sign.
posted by pracowity at 10:09 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Also, a "No Trucks (over 11'8'')" sign. And a "Fuck You, Rental Truck Drivers. No, Seriously. Fuck You." sign.
posted by pracowity at 10:09 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
That's terrible and depressing in the sense that "man, insurance is broken".
I think it's more in the sense of, "man, people should not be able to legally drive commercial trucks without a CDL". Drivers are shitty enough with passenger vehicles under the common licensing regime.
Although, as the video demonstrates, CDL holders will also make the same mistake, so maybe the real solution is "adjust the clearance of this out-of-code bridge", but of course that takes a lot more planning and money than just stringing some warning lights.
posted by indubitable at 10:18 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
I think it's more in the sense of, "man, people should not be able to legally drive commercial trucks without a CDL". Drivers are shitty enough with passenger vehicles under the common licensing regime.
Although, as the video demonstrates, CDL holders will also make the same mistake, so maybe the real solution is "adjust the clearance of this out-of-code bridge", but of course that takes a lot more planning and money than just stringing some warning lights.
posted by indubitable at 10:18 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
The site notes that the usual sort of warning bar placed sufficiently ahead of the actual low bridge won't work here for logistical reasons; apparently, there's a turn JUST before the bridge that trucks often take to make deliveries, and every one of them would hit it even though they have no intention of continuing under the bridge.
(I got no malware warnings on the site, fwiw.)
posted by uberchet at 10:19 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
(I got no malware warnings on the site, fwiw.)
posted by uberchet at 10:19 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
"Yeah, I'm with contraption -- a BANG on your truck seems more likely to make you stop than a bunch of flashing lights."
I'm in favor of multiple bang bars, at least three in a row, with signs written with progressively increasing snark just after each one.
Have Samuel L. Jackson or Lewis Black write the last one.
posted by King Sky Prawn at 10:20 AM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
I'm in favor of multiple bang bars, at least three in a row, with signs written with progressively increasing snark just after each one.
Have Samuel L. Jackson or Lewis Black write the last one.
posted by King Sky Prawn at 10:20 AM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
Most of the time we don't see reality, we see through a filter that only lets through what we expect to see, things that agree with our expectations of how things work. And that filter doesn't just block things, it actually changes some things to make them agree with our exception before letting them pass.
I've seen this in social interaction, aerospace accidents, politics, and basically everywhere. These drivers aren't necessarily stupid, it's probably more like they have an absolute lifetime of driving under bridges and overpasses and never once has one been too short to let them through. It's not that they read the sign, understand that the bridge is too low, and choose to ignore it. It's more like the sign just doesn't fit in their worldview and their mental filter isn't letting them see it.
posted by LastOfHisKind at 10:25 AM on January 7, 2016 [29 favorites]
I've seen this in social interaction, aerospace accidents, politics, and basically everywhere. These drivers aren't necessarily stupid, it's probably more like they have an absolute lifetime of driving under bridges and overpasses and never once has one been too short to let them through. It's not that they read the sign, understand that the bridge is too low, and choose to ignore it. It's more like the sign just doesn't fit in their worldview and their mental filter isn't letting them see it.
posted by LastOfHisKind at 10:25 AM on January 7, 2016 [29 favorites]
...and now I'm wondering if VDOT has a similar private gag reel for the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel, where one tube is a foot shorter than the other (leading to what I am sure are some interesting return trips for truckers).
posted by indubitable at 10:26 AM on January 7, 2016
posted by indubitable at 10:26 AM on January 7, 2016
We used to live a couple of miles from this bridge. There's another one, on 9th St right by campus, that can be even worse. These bridges are great because they allow you to avoid rail crossings for the very frequent freight trains. Until somebody gets a UHaul stuck underneath and then you can't get get to Sam's Quik Shop and you are said.
posted by hydropsyche at 10:30 AM on January 7, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 10:30 AM on January 7, 2016 [5 favorites]
There is a crash bar ... people still routinely ignore it.
I think the "crash bar" mentioned and pictured in that article is the steel I-beam installed across the road just in front of the bridge so that trucks strike it instead of the concrete bridge itself. It seems like they could also hang a plastic or wooden bar from chains some distance before the bridge, so that distracted drivers would hear it clatter against the vehicle and hopefully slam on the brakes before doing real damage.
posted by contraption at 10:31 AM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
I think the "crash bar" mentioned and pictured in that article is the steel I-beam installed across the road just in front of the bridge so that trucks strike it instead of the concrete bridge itself. It seems like they could also hang a plastic or wooden bar from chains some distance before the bridge, so that distracted drivers would hear it clatter against the vehicle and hopefully slam on the brakes before doing real damage.
posted by contraption at 10:31 AM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
I can see how a train track is hard to move, but I don't understand why they can't move those underground utility lines a couple feet further into the ground.
Anything is movable if you are willing to spend enough money. $500k property damage and one minor injury over the years is probably a lot cheaper than utility relocation.
I am surprised by that one injury claim, though -- some of the crashes in the highlights video looked quite severe.
posted by Dip Flash at 10:35 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Anything is movable if you are willing to spend enough money. $500k property damage and one minor injury over the years is probably a lot cheaper than utility relocation.
I am surprised by that one injury claim, though -- some of the crashes in the highlights video looked quite severe.
posted by Dip Flash at 10:35 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
The FAQ from the apparently malware-infested site mentions the bar-on-chains possibility, but dismisses it because a couple nearby restaurants take deliveries from trucks that need to drive down the road running parallel to the bridge. Given that the other options are routine dangerous crashes, rebuilding several miles of railway or digging up and reengineering an ancient sewer, it seems like finding a way to mollify a few annoyed restauranteurs might be the way to go.
posted by contraption at 10:36 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by contraption at 10:36 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
"Durham officials on Monday began building a system hooking the height sensor to a traffic light before the bridge that will turn red when it picks up a too-high truck. The light will turn green eventually . . . "
. . . what? Why?
posted by ostro at 10:38 AM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
. . . what? Why?
posted by ostro at 10:38 AM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
Beat me to it, tobascodagama! Came here to say, this happens on a monthly basis in Boston on Storrow Drive (which has lots of bars-on-chains), usually around college move-in season.
posted by Melismata at 10:38 AM on January 7, 2016
posted by Melismata at 10:38 AM on January 7, 2016
11foot8.com, seems to be serving malware
Can anyone give more details on this malware situation? I looked at the site... not very malware-aware; my main avoidance strategy is obscure browsers and no Java enabled...
posted by amtho at 10:39 AM on January 7, 2016
Can anyone give more details on this malware situation? I looked at the site... not very malware-aware; my main avoidance strategy is obscure browsers and no Java enabled...
posted by amtho at 10:39 AM on January 7, 2016
The best system I've seen for preventing accidents like this is in Australia, but clearly there is a lot of runway before the final signal activates:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILNQN7fniDE
posted by scolbath at 10:43 AM on January 7, 2016 [15 favorites]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILNQN7fniDE
posted by scolbath at 10:43 AM on January 7, 2016 [15 favorites]
I've read about this bridge plenty before. Some of the common Q&A:
Why don't they raise the railroad? Because it would require several miles of track redesign. The entire track bed has to be raised for approximately 3-4 miles of track. That would involve replacing several bridges and grade crossings. The railroad would be responsible for the cost, and they aren't about to pay for it.
Why don't they lower the road bed? Sewer lines run under the road. To lower the road bed means lowering the sewers at a cost of millions. So far, truck damage is around half a million and one mior injury. It's far cheaper to tell everyone to go around, even with the wrecked trucks. I doubt they could get planning done for under $500k, let alone the actual work.
Why don't they have sensors/warning lights/warning chains/this thing? There are multiple warning signs on the three-block approach to the underpass, along with flashing lights. Beyond that, there is little incentive to put in more sensors. The railroad doesn't care as the crash bar protects the bridge from damage. Replacing the crash bar is seen as a "cheap" solution. The city is ultimately responsible for the signage, and they've talked about more signs/lights.
Does insurance cover this? No. Most of the people who wreck here are really up a creek. The insurance specifically points this out as not covered. The truck rental places point this out specifically and warn people about the bridge. And trucks still get wrecked/stuck.
Are the signs accurate? Yes. In fact, the actual height is more like 11 foot 10.
posted by Mister Fabulous at 10:47 AM on January 7, 2016 [5 favorites]
Why don't they raise the railroad? Because it would require several miles of track redesign. The entire track bed has to be raised for approximately 3-4 miles of track. That would involve replacing several bridges and grade crossings. The railroad would be responsible for the cost, and they aren't about to pay for it.
Why don't they lower the road bed? Sewer lines run under the road. To lower the road bed means lowering the sewers at a cost of millions. So far, truck damage is around half a million and one mior injury. It's far cheaper to tell everyone to go around, even with the wrecked trucks. I doubt they could get planning done for under $500k, let alone the actual work.
Why don't they have sensors/warning lights/warning chains/this thing? There are multiple warning signs on the three-block approach to the underpass, along with flashing lights. Beyond that, there is little incentive to put in more sensors. The railroad doesn't care as the crash bar protects the bridge from damage. Replacing the crash bar is seen as a "cheap" solution. The city is ultimately responsible for the signage, and they've talked about more signs/lights.
Does insurance cover this? No. Most of the people who wreck here are really up a creek. The insurance specifically points this out as not covered. The truck rental places point this out specifically and warn people about the bridge. And trucks still get wrecked/stuck.
Are the signs accurate? Yes. In fact, the actual height is more like 11 foot 10.
posted by Mister Fabulous at 10:47 AM on January 7, 2016 [5 favorites]
There is one of these bridges on University of Louisville's campus, near the intersection of Third and Winkler. It has two subreddits devoted to it.
Plenty of signage and warnings of the maximum height. People just ignore them. I get normal folks driving a Ryder truck or whatever; we aren't used to looking for stuff like that. Commercial truck drivers however have no excuse.
posted by chaoticgood at 10:50 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Plenty of signage and warnings of the maximum height. People just ignore them. I get normal folks driving a Ryder truck or whatever; we aren't used to looking for stuff like that. Commercial truck drivers however have no excuse.
posted by chaoticgood at 10:50 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Rather than a red light, how about hooking the sensors to a standard railroad crossing barricade arm with appropriate signage attached?
posted by contraption at 10:53 AM on January 7, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by contraption at 10:53 AM on January 7, 2016 [4 favorites]
And as far as I know, insurance doesn't cover those types of accidents.
is there really an exclusion for incidents like this?
I looked it up and apparently U-Haul excludes overhead collision damage. Which they acknowledge is the most common kind they experience. Which is kinda a bullshit thing to do if you ask me. Thing is though, I don't think this is typical auto insurance -- at least I hope not. It's something offered by U-Haul when you rent the truck, you can get their optional damage waiver or whatever. Your own insurance won't cover you driving a rented truck I don't think, though, so that's your only option if you're moving I guess.
posted by Hoopo at 10:53 AM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
is there really an exclusion for incidents like this?
I looked it up and apparently U-Haul excludes overhead collision damage. Which they acknowledge is the most common kind they experience. Which is kinda a bullshit thing to do if you ask me. Thing is though, I don't think this is typical auto insurance -- at least I hope not. It's something offered by U-Haul when you rent the truck, you can get their optional damage waiver or whatever. Your own insurance won't cover you driving a rented truck I don't think, though, so that's your only option if you're moving I guess.
posted by Hoopo at 10:53 AM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
it seems like finding a way to mollify a few annoyed restauranteurs might be the way to go.
I mean, maybe I'm missing something, but we're talking about a much different situation than a parking garage where you're hitting that warning bar at 5-10MPH.
We're talking about an active street that's at least 35MPH. Your truck is going to get damaged every single time you hit it. And every single truck, RV, Bus, that is allowed to drive down that road is getting hit now, every, single time. (Even just a warning chain would cause considerable damage at those speeds.)
I'm sure whoever does the deliveries for these restaurants would not be happy with their entire fleet being damaged.
posted by mayonnaises at 10:57 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
I mean, maybe I'm missing something, but we're talking about a much different situation than a parking garage where you're hitting that warning bar at 5-10MPH.
We're talking about an active street that's at least 35MPH. Your truck is going to get damaged every single time you hit it. And every single truck, RV, Bus, that is allowed to drive down that road is getting hit now, every, single time. (Even just a warning chain would cause considerable damage at those speeds.)
I'm sure whoever does the deliveries for these restaurants would not be happy with their entire fleet being damaged.
posted by mayonnaises at 10:57 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
the driver is a professional who is insured and should know better.
Except in Indiana, maybe. The link I selected doesn't include the info, but the driver in this incident appears to have been an 18-year-old who grew up in an Amish community, if I recall correctly.
posted by mwhybark at 11:12 AM on January 7, 2016
Except in Indiana, maybe. The link I selected doesn't include the info, but the driver in this incident appears to have been an 18-year-old who grew up in an Amish community, if I recall correctly.
posted by mwhybark at 11:12 AM on January 7, 2016
Here's crash #100 (SLYT)
posted by Mister Fabulous at 1:28 PM on January 7 [+] [!]
I went on the Budget website and the truck in questions is listed at 11'6". In the video it's obvious he makes the bridge until the front wheels hit the other side, where there's a slight hill and the truck is lifted.
This just doesn't seem fair to me. If you're a regular joe driving a rental car and the number in the brochure is lower than the number on the sign, then of course you think you'll make it.
posted by FirstMateKate at 11:35 AM on January 7, 2016 [14 favorites]
posted by Mister Fabulous at 1:28 PM on January 7 [+] [!]
I went on the Budget website and the truck in questions is listed at 11'6". In the video it's obvious he makes the bridge until the front wheels hit the other side, where there's a slight hill and the truck is lifted.
This just doesn't seem fair to me. If you're a regular joe driving a rental car and the number in the brochure is lower than the number on the sign, then of course you think you'll make it.
posted by FirstMateKate at 11:35 AM on January 7, 2016 [14 favorites]
It's software, not road design, but my users do this kind of thing all the time: You give them warnings, additional warnings, error messages, last minute confirmation dialogs and still, if given a choice, they will do the wrong thing a lot of the time. Why? Because they have been overwhelmingly trained to expect that The System behaves in rational ways and has built-in safety barriers and is not going to let them hurt themselves - plus they need to get their thing done and don't want to / can't expend any mental energy dealing with unusual edge cases.
Obviously, UI / application logic design is a lot more flexible than building actual roads and bridges - but if your audience is the general public and the average user is regularly getting bitten, your design is Bad and you should feel Bad about it.
posted by Dr Dracator at 11:37 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
Obviously, UI / application logic design is a lot more flexible than building actual roads and bridges - but if your audience is the general public and the average user is regularly getting bitten, your design is Bad and you should feel Bad about it.
posted by Dr Dracator at 11:37 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
Why is the WSJ running articles that are the "print" version of 90s's FOX "When Good Bridges Go Bad" TV special?
Oh, right.
posted by entropicamericana at 11:42 AM on January 7, 2016 [4 favorites]
Oh, right.
posted by entropicamericana at 11:42 AM on January 7, 2016 [4 favorites]
We have our own version of this bridge, that can't be fixed for all the same reasons. It is unclear why it was built that way in the first place, though.
posted by TedW at 11:53 AM on January 7, 2016
posted by TedW at 11:53 AM on January 7, 2016
fwiw: Earlier last year in Ann Arbor...
posted by JoeXIII007 at 11:54 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by JoeXIII007 at 11:54 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
As a high schooler my class took a field trip that involved a stop at a fort somewhere in Virginia (it was both an historic site and an active military installation of some kind). The teacher got the bus into the fort just fine, but took a different route out, and got the bus wedged under a low brick archway that was over the road. Realizing there was nothing to be done about it, the teacher hit the gas and scraped the emergency exit doors off the top of the bus, causing the alarm to start going which it did for a few hours. As we fled the scene we saw some MPs heading in the other direction with their lights on, but we never stopped to let anyone know what happened. Eventually he took the bus to a nearby school district's garage where they disabled to the alarm, and some smaller students put trashbags over the hole to keep out rain and wind.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 11:54 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 11:54 AM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
I friend of mine was parking a rental box truck. there was a tree. he didnt see the branch. it was really only 5-6" in diameter but the damage was stunning! the whole top corner of the box was just ripped open. when we returned the truck they were so cool about it "yep, we see this all the time..."
posted by supermedusa at 12:04 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by supermedusa at 12:04 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Everybody in Greater Boston knows about Storrowing and #storrowpool, but fewer are aware of Storrow Drive's malevolent cousin, the Islington Bridge in Westwood, MA. Highlights: it gets hit almost as often as the pedestrian overpasses on Storrow, except every time it happens, train service gets suspended until the bridge is inspected for structural integrity. Someone pointed out that it would be much cheaper to just tear the thing down, regrade the area, and build the bridge 3 feet higher; residents promptly opposed the idea because the construction would be a nuisance. Collisions seemed unavoidable: drivers just kept on going, ignoring the giant flashing sign warning about low bridge clearance. Then a truck knocked it off the bridge last year. Things have, astonishingly, not improved.
posted by Mayor West at 12:11 PM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Mayor West at 12:11 PM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
The best one I remember was across the river from Storrow Drive on a road that has corresponding low underpasses. The rental truck had been moving at a good clip and the entire box was sitting on one side of the bridge and the truck, now a flatbed on the other side; where there seemed to be a carefully arranged apartment arranged for all to see.
posted by sammyo at 12:14 PM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by sammyo at 12:14 PM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
Why don't they drop the height down to 7 or 8 feet? Problem solved!
posted by blue_beetle at 12:25 PM on January 7, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by blue_beetle at 12:25 PM on January 7, 2016 [7 favorites]
FirstMateKate: I went on the Budget website and the truck in questions is listed at 11'6".
The truck in crash #100 is Budget's 24 foot truck, which is listed as having a clearance height of 13' 6".
posted by RichardP at 12:29 PM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
The truck in crash #100 is Budget's 24 foot truck, which is listed as having a clearance height of 13' 6".
posted by RichardP at 12:29 PM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
Better than mistaking the weight limit on bridges because you don't know what a ton is.
posted by BrotherCaine at 12:30 PM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by BrotherCaine at 12:30 PM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
It looks as though this only happens on the one side of the bridge. Is there something better about going under it in the other lane? Is there a better control system in place for the other direction?
posted by yesster at 12:32 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by yesster at 12:32 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Except in Indiana, maybe. The link I selected doesn't include the info, but the driver in this incident appears to have been an 18-year-old who grew up in an Amish community, if I recall correctly.
posted by mwhybark at 2:12 PM on January 7
She was twenty-three years old, and got her CDL license in May 2015. She was driving a 53-foot box trailer containing 43,000 pounds (close to 30 tons) of bottled water. The driver had missed a turn to her destination, and she wasn’t comfortable backing up her truck, so she just chanced it on the bridge.
The bridge was rated for 6 tons. The driver told police she didn't know how many pounds her truck was.
The driver will be fined $135 fine for citations of “reckless operation of Tractor-Trailer” (a class B misdemeanor), “disregarding a traffic control device” (a class B infraction), and “overweight on posted bridge.” No word on the legal nightmare that awaits Louisville Logistics, the company that hired this woman.
posted by magstheaxe at 12:34 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by mwhybark at 2:12 PM on January 7
She was twenty-three years old, and got her CDL license in May 2015. She was driving a 53-foot box trailer containing 43,000 pounds (close to 30 tons) of bottled water. The driver had missed a turn to her destination, and she wasn’t comfortable backing up her truck, so she just chanced it on the bridge.
The bridge was rated for 6 tons. The driver told police she didn't know how many pounds her truck was.
The driver will be fined $135 fine for citations of “reckless operation of Tractor-Trailer” (a class B misdemeanor), “disregarding a traffic control device” (a class B infraction), and “overweight on posted bridge.” No word on the legal nightmare that awaits Louisville Logistics, the company that hired this woman.
posted by magstheaxe at 12:34 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
The last time I rented a truck, nothing actually bad happened, but I did merrily cruise past multiple signs informing me that there were no trucks allowed on these streets. Luckily for me, this was entirely for aesthetic reasons and not because of low bridges or anything like that. Now, of course, I didn't know that at the time (though I suspected it), and, really, the main reason I rolled past those signs without a second glance is exactly what I'm guessing is going on with these folks, which is that I was panicking. The truck was huge and I was totally unfamiliar with it and driving on unfamiliar roads to boot. I was completely focused on just keeping the thing moving and hopefully not murdering anyone else in the process. A lot of other stuff (including stuff that I pay attention to while driving in less nerve-wracking situations and stuff that my temporary ignorance of could have caused injuries or seriously damaged the truck) was just not in my universe at that time. Driving a normal-sized car is hard enough, and driving something 4 times larger that you have no experience with safely is probably too much to ask of a person.
I'd like to say that the solution would be to not allow anyone to drive giant trucks that they have no training in maneuvering or operating, but that would probably mean that moving would suddenly shift from extremely expensive to unbearably expensive for a lot of people and it would become unfeasible to do something like move a couch across town unless you had a couple hundred bucks to burn on it. Maybe it's just another one of the many problems that will have to be solved by self-driving cars.
posted by Copronymus at 12:34 PM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
I'd like to say that the solution would be to not allow anyone to drive giant trucks that they have no training in maneuvering or operating, but that would probably mean that moving would suddenly shift from extremely expensive to unbearably expensive for a lot of people and it would become unfeasible to do something like move a couch across town unless you had a couple hundred bucks to burn on it. Maybe it's just another one of the many problems that will have to be solved by self-driving cars.
posted by Copronymus at 12:34 PM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
It looks as though this only happens on the one side of the bridge. Is there something better about going under it in the other lane? Is there a better control system in place for the other direction?
Thankfully truck drivers appear to pay attention to the one-way / do-not-enter signs.
posted by BrotherCaine at 12:43 PM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
Thankfully truck drivers appear to pay attention to the one-way / do-not-enter signs.
posted by BrotherCaine at 12:43 PM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
Do that on both sides, problem solved.
posted by yesster at 12:53 PM on January 7, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by yesster at 12:53 PM on January 7, 2016 [6 favorites]
fwiw: Earlier last year in Ann Arbor...
Oh, man. I used to work in the office building right next to that 10’ 6” bridge (it was a converted ice house for the railroad). Every couple months I’d feel the building rumble and I’d walk out to look and there, of course, would be another angry & embarrassed sap next to a rental truck wedged under the bridge with the truck roof peeled back like a tin of sardines. If they’d been going fast enough (it’s at the bottom of a hill, so they often were), when they backed out the sides of the truck would flop open and furniture & boxes would tumble all over the road. Eye-poppingly hilarious the first time -- except it was usually, you know, someone just trying to move, which is stressful enough.
posted by miles per flower at 1:08 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Oh, man. I used to work in the office building right next to that 10’ 6” bridge (it was a converted ice house for the railroad). Every couple months I’d feel the building rumble and I’d walk out to look and there, of course, would be another angry & embarrassed sap next to a rental truck wedged under the bridge with the truck roof peeled back like a tin of sardines. If they’d been going fast enough (it’s at the bottom of a hill, so they often were), when they backed out the sides of the truck would flop open and furniture & boxes would tumble all over the road. Eye-poppingly hilarious the first time -- except it was usually, you know, someone just trying to move, which is stressful enough.
posted by miles per flower at 1:08 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
The last time I rented a truck, nothing actually bad happened, but I did merrily cruise past multiple signs informing me that there were no trucks allowed on these streets. Luckily for me, this was entirely for aesthetic reasons and not because of low bridges or anything like that.
Or possibly because road wear goes up with something like the 4th power of axle weight and the roads weren't designed to handle the damage you were inflicting.
I'd like to say that the solution would be to not allow anyone to drive giant trucks that they have no training in maneuvering or operating, but that would probably mean that moving would suddenly shift from extremely expensive to unbearably expensive for a lot of people and it would become unfeasible to do something like move a couch across town unless you had a couple hundred bucks to burn on it.
We also don't let any schmuck walk in off the street and rent an airplane to fly off somewhere. Outrageous, I know, especially with airline prices these days, but The Man has conspired with the FAA to oppress people in the name of "safety", so that's the world we have to live with.
posted by indubitable at 1:26 PM on January 7, 2016 [8 favorites]
Or possibly because road wear goes up with something like the 4th power of axle weight and the roads weren't designed to handle the damage you were inflicting.
I'd like to say that the solution would be to not allow anyone to drive giant trucks that they have no training in maneuvering or operating, but that would probably mean that moving would suddenly shift from extremely expensive to unbearably expensive for a lot of people and it would become unfeasible to do something like move a couch across town unless you had a couple hundred bucks to burn on it.
We also don't let any schmuck walk in off the street and rent an airplane to fly off somewhere. Outrageous, I know, especially with airline prices these days, but The Man has conspired with the FAA to oppress people in the name of "safety", so that's the world we have to live with.
posted by indubitable at 1:26 PM on January 7, 2016 [8 favorites]
You can see where trucks have hit the arched stone train bridge over Ponce de Leon Ave in Atlanta: they need to NOT be in the curb lane.....
posted by thelonius at 1:41 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by thelonius at 1:41 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
I once saw a tractor trailer get partially peeled in the approach area to the upper deck George Washington Bridge in NYC. I have no idea how it happened since trucks use the upper deck all the time without a problem.
posted by tommasz at 1:45 PM on January 7, 2016
posted by tommasz at 1:45 PM on January 7, 2016
I can see how a train track is hard to move, but I don't understand why they can't move those underground utility lines a couple feet further into the ground.
Sewer lines are more difficult to relocate than municipal water lines. Just like in your home, they rely on gravity to move the sewage, they have to maintain a downhill slope to do so. Water supply lines are pressurized so they're not bound by the same restriction on the local scale. Water supply lines can be redundant so an area can be served by multiple water sources; sewer lines can not, there's only one wastewater treatment plant and only one downhill path to get the sewage there.
But the real problem is that you can't just turn a valve to close a sewer line for construction. The sewer main is not a closed system. All the subscribers on the line have open toilets and sinks that the sewage can back up through to escape if pressure builds up. If the main is capped, the inputs from the users at the highest elevations on the line become outputs coming up through the toilets, sinks, and shower drains of the users on the lowest elevations above where the cap is. The agencies that manage sewage don't ever want this to happen. And since there's no way to convince half a city not to use their toilets and sinks (and control the weather in cities where storm water runoff is collected as wastewater) sewer lines can't be capped. The spice must flow, downhill.
The engineering solution would be to build an underground basin and a pumping station that would allow the sewer line to be lowered in one section (not very exciting google maps view of one where sewage is being pumped uphill from subdivision to the north and northeast to the treatment plant a mile to the west). This costs a lot of money in both engineering, construction, and ongoing operation, especially compared to a steel crash bar, some warning signs and blinking lights. Plus, you can't undermine the earth supporting a railroad bridge to lower the road without doing a lot of engineering studies, and perhaps even rebuilding the bridge. So to do any of that, you'd have to convince the state and local transportation agencies, the local water and sewer authority, the rail road, and local residents and businesses that it's worth the expense and the years, a decade realistically, of construction. And do it all in a political environment where it would be labeled something like "The Underpass to Nowhere" or "The Cadillac Train Trestle." Good luck!
posted by peeedro at 1:57 PM on January 7, 2016 [16 favorites]
Sewer lines are more difficult to relocate than municipal water lines. Just like in your home, they rely on gravity to move the sewage, they have to maintain a downhill slope to do so. Water supply lines are pressurized so they're not bound by the same restriction on the local scale. Water supply lines can be redundant so an area can be served by multiple water sources; sewer lines can not, there's only one wastewater treatment plant and only one downhill path to get the sewage there.
But the real problem is that you can't just turn a valve to close a sewer line for construction. The sewer main is not a closed system. All the subscribers on the line have open toilets and sinks that the sewage can back up through to escape if pressure builds up. If the main is capped, the inputs from the users at the highest elevations on the line become outputs coming up through the toilets, sinks, and shower drains of the users on the lowest elevations above where the cap is. The agencies that manage sewage don't ever want this to happen. And since there's no way to convince half a city not to use their toilets and sinks (and control the weather in cities where storm water runoff is collected as wastewater) sewer lines can't be capped. The spice must flow, downhill.
The engineering solution would be to build an underground basin and a pumping station that would allow the sewer line to be lowered in one section (not very exciting google maps view of one where sewage is being pumped uphill from subdivision to the north and northeast to the treatment plant a mile to the west). This costs a lot of money in both engineering, construction, and ongoing operation, especially compared to a steel crash bar, some warning signs and blinking lights. Plus, you can't undermine the earth supporting a railroad bridge to lower the road without doing a lot of engineering studies, and perhaps even rebuilding the bridge. So to do any of that, you'd have to convince the state and local transportation agencies, the local water and sewer authority, the rail road, and local residents and businesses that it's worth the expense and the years, a decade realistically, of construction. And do it all in a political environment where it would be labeled something like "The Underpass to Nowhere" or "The Cadillac Train Trestle." Good luck!
posted by peeedro at 1:57 PM on January 7, 2016 [16 favorites]
The only time I've driven a truck in my life was also the time I was happiest to have paid for the extra rental insurance. Telephone poles, man, they just tear shit off like it was never even there.
posted by aramaic at 1:57 PM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by aramaic at 1:57 PM on January 7, 2016 [3 favorites]
The last time I rented a truck, nothing actually bad happened, but I did merrily cruise past multiple signs informing me that there were no trucks allowed on these streets. Luckily for me, this was entirely for aesthetic reasons and not because of low bridges or anything like that.
Or possibly because road wear goes up with something like the 4th power of axle weight and the roads weren't designed to handle the damage you were inflicting.
This was rather dramatically illustrated for me when the underground water main on my block was burst by a commercial truck that should not have been on that street. Thousands of gallons of water, cubic yards of displaced dirt and mud, flooded basements, and other drama resulted.
posted by BrotherCaine at 2:02 PM on January 7, 2016 [7 favorites]
Or possibly because road wear goes up with something like the 4th power of axle weight and the roads weren't designed to handle the damage you were inflicting.
This was rather dramatically illustrated for me when the underground water main on my block was burst by a commercial truck that should not have been on that street. Thousands of gallons of water, cubic yards of displaced dirt and mud, flooded basements, and other drama resulted.
posted by BrotherCaine at 2:02 PM on January 7, 2016 [7 favorites]
FYI, there's literally another truck caught under this bridge RIGHT NOW. The NBC News/Weather Channel truck was on the scene!
posted by kickingthecrap at 2:33 PM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by kickingthecrap at 2:33 PM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
We're talking about an active street that's at least 35MPH. Your truck is going to get damaged every single time you hit it. And every single truck, RV, Bus, that is allowed to drive down that road is getting hit now, every, single time. (Even just a warning chain would cause considerable damage at those speeds.)
Well sure, I'm not suggesting that overheight truck traffic continue to travel down the affected road, that's why the restauranteurs will be annoyed. I'm suggesting that finding a way for them to get their supplies delivered by smaller vans (or better, creating a different surface street route for the big ones to take) might be simpler and cheaper than undertaking a huge earthworks project.
posted by contraption at 3:46 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Well sure, I'm not suggesting that overheight truck traffic continue to travel down the affected road, that's why the restauranteurs will be annoyed. I'm suggesting that finding a way for them to get their supplies delivered by smaller vans (or better, creating a different surface street route for the big ones to take) might be simpler and cheaper than undertaking a huge earthworks project.
posted by contraption at 3:46 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Although looking at the pictures, it seems to me you could just add a stop sign at the intersection with Peabody (that parallel street) and thereby ensure that traffic going under the bridge is moving slowly enough for a hanging bar placed after the intersection to be effective.
Also I wonder if this whole thing could be fixed by just getting rid of the current warning which is a yellow sign that says "OVERHEIGHT WHEN FLASHING" positioned near some lights that can flash, and replacing it with a light-up sign that says "STOP! YOU WILL HIT THIS BRIDGE"
posted by contraption at 3:56 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
Also I wonder if this whole thing could be fixed by just getting rid of the current warning which is a yellow sign that says "OVERHEIGHT WHEN FLASHING" positioned near some lights that can flash, and replacing it with a light-up sign that says "STOP! YOU WILL HIT THIS BRIDGE"
posted by contraption at 3:56 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
"Smaller? I don't think that's a word." --America, basically
posted by tobascodagama at 3:56 PM on January 7, 2016
posted by tobascodagama at 3:56 PM on January 7, 2016
As we say in the business, "Truck can't duck."
posted by Purposeful Grimace at 3:58 PM on January 7, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by Purposeful Grimace at 3:58 PM on January 7, 2016 [4 favorites]
There are a couple of those bridges near me in the UK.
One even has a claxon and warning flashing signs that would wake the dead, but people still take no notice.
I used to work in an office overlooking one and you could reckon on about one an hour on average.
posted by Burn_IT at 4:14 PM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
One even has a claxon and warning flashing signs that would wake the dead, but people still take no notice.
I used to work in an office overlooking one and you could reckon on about one an hour on average.
posted by Burn_IT at 4:14 PM on January 7, 2016 [2 favorites]
Deflating the tires might help, according to Jerry Reed and Burt Reynolds.
posted by yesster at 4:46 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by yesster at 4:46 PM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]
The problem is the underpass is too tall. People in trucks *think* they can make it. If it looks a lot smaller, they won't try.
That stretch of land between the bridge and the corner? They should roof it over at 12', put a sign on the front that says "8 foot clearance, cars only", and then fill the top 3 foot of the tunnel with dangling plastic cords, front to back, side to side, and a whole curtain of them in front.
People with vehicles over height will drive in, hear *bang* *bang* *bang* on their roof, and (hopefully) back out before they hit the bar protecting the bridge.
posted by fings at 8:33 PM on January 7, 2016
That stretch of land between the bridge and the corner? They should roof it over at 12', put a sign on the front that says "8 foot clearance, cars only", and then fill the top 3 foot of the tunnel with dangling plastic cords, front to back, side to side, and a whole curtain of them in front.
People with vehicles over height will drive in, hear *bang* *bang* *bang* on their roof, and (hopefully) back out before they hit the bar protecting the bridge.
posted by fings at 8:33 PM on January 7, 2016
There is a bridge near me that has this issue, and people are forever scraping it (both rental trucks and commercials - the last time was a garden truck which was okay when fully loaded, but when he went to return to the depot empty he seems to have gained a few inches.
Just yesterday I saw two youngish ladies (mid-20s) who found a new and exciting issue with the truck/bridge interface. They'd turned to go under the bridge, seen the solar-powered flashing warning, and realised they weren't going to fit.
Unfortunately, they'd taken the corner wide, and were blocking two lanes of traffic, couldn't go forward and the peal hour traffic behind them was bumper to bumper.
I assume some kind people helped them out with traffic management, and they went on their merry way, but I felt very sorry for them.
posted by Mezentian at 9:57 PM on January 7, 2016
Just yesterday I saw two youngish ladies (mid-20s) who found a new and exciting issue with the truck/bridge interface. They'd turned to go under the bridge, seen the solar-powered flashing warning, and realised they weren't going to fit.
Unfortunately, they'd taken the corner wide, and were blocking two lanes of traffic, couldn't go forward and the peal hour traffic behind them was bumper to bumper.
I assume some kind people helped them out with traffic management, and they went on their merry way, but I felt very sorry for them.
posted by Mezentian at 9:57 PM on January 7, 2016
There are even signs on the side street approaches warning you if you make the turn. Here's street view.
I get that there's a lot of signs, but instead of the weirdly phrased "OVERHEIGHT WHEN FLASHING", maybe it should have red lights (people are accustomed to stopping for red lights, flashing amber has many different meanings) and "IF RED LIGHTS, STOP! VEHICLE TOO TALL".
Regarding GPS taking trucks down bad routes, there are issues in the UK where lorry drivers will follow GPS navigation down roads that are too narrow, muddy, etc, etc. Googling "lorry satnav stuck" will get you endless results. Some places it happens so frequently authorities have to put up special signs.
posted by EndsOfInvention at 3:04 AM on January 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
I get that there's a lot of signs, but instead of the weirdly phrased "OVERHEIGHT WHEN FLASHING", maybe it should have red lights (people are accustomed to stopping for red lights, flashing amber has many different meanings) and "IF RED LIGHTS, STOP! VEHICLE TOO TALL".
Regarding GPS taking trucks down bad routes, there are issues in the UK where lorry drivers will follow GPS navigation down roads that are too narrow, muddy, etc, etc. Googling "lorry satnav stuck" will get you endless results. Some places it happens so frequently authorities have to put up special signs.
posted by EndsOfInvention at 3:04 AM on January 8, 2016 [1 favorite]
Yes, that whole "OVERHEIGHT WHEN FLASHING" thing seems designed to take a long time to figure out and be easy to misinterpret. Picture this, all happening within the 10 seconds between first seeing the signs and impact:
You're driving along in your unfamiliar rented truck, scoping out the new neighborhood, thinking about your move, when you see a rail bridge up ahead, and it's festooned with lights and caution signs as bridges and rail crossings usually are. As you approach it some yellow lights start to flash, which at a rail crossing means a train is coming, right? But the train will be above the road on the bridge and there's no red light or railroad crossing arm, so you're fine. As you continue speeding toward the bridge, ignoring the clearance signs as you have been conditioned to do for your entire life, you notice the yellow sign says "OVERHEIGHT WHEN FLASHING." "Overheight?" you think, "What is that word? Do they mean 'overhead?' What does it mean for a train be over-"*CRUNCH*
posted by contraption at 9:51 AM on January 8, 2016 [3 favorites]
You're driving along in your unfamiliar rented truck, scoping out the new neighborhood, thinking about your move, when you see a rail bridge up ahead, and it's festooned with lights and caution signs as bridges and rail crossings usually are. As you approach it some yellow lights start to flash, which at a rail crossing means a train is coming, right? But the train will be above the road on the bridge and there's no red light or railroad crossing arm, so you're fine. As you continue speeding toward the bridge, ignoring the clearance signs as you have been conditioned to do for your entire life, you notice the yellow sign says "OVERHEIGHT WHEN FLASHING." "Overheight?" you think, "What is that word? Do they mean 'overhead?' What does it mean for a train be over-"*CRUNCH*
posted by contraption at 9:51 AM on January 8, 2016 [3 favorites]
“Will that bridge be friends with me?”
posted by Going To Maine at 11:39 AM on January 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Going To Maine at 11:39 AM on January 8, 2016 [2 favorites]
« Older Sound construction. | And good riddance Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by 1970s Antihero at 9:41 AM on January 7, 2016 [1 favorite]