Another Interstate Bridge Collapse

[jon_berzerk]

AUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGH! A truck going over it DID NOT cause the collapse! An oversized truck KNOCKING DOWN A SUPPORT BEAM caused the collapse! God and goddess, THINK!

Yeah we get that Jarl.

Now I'll say it again...any bridge that is built to a standard where a truck crossing over it can knock it down if it has an accident is NOT built to an acceptable standard for the vehicles that cross over it.

The mere fact that a truck could hit such critical supporting structures makes me think the bridge was NEVER SAFE for THAT TYPE OF TRAFFIC in the first place.

the truck was an oversized load

apparently they had been in the wrong lane

or should not have crossed that bridge to begin with

those things should have been sorted out before

the load left the yard

 

[Jarlaxle]

AUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGH! A truck going over it DID NOT cause the collapse! An oversized truck KNOCKING DOWN A SUPPORT BEAM caused the collapse! God and goddess, THINK!

Yeah we get that Jarl.

Now I'll say it again...any bridge that is built to a standard where a truck crossing over it can knock it down if it has an accident is NOT built to an acceptable standard for the vehicles that cross over it.

The mere fact that a truck could hit such critical supporting structures makes me think the bridge was NEVER SAFE for THAT TYPE OF TRAFFIC in the first place.

WHACK, WHACK, WHACK! Hello, McFly?! You listening?! The truck was over height! The bridge was, repeat WAS safe for regular truck traffic! (As an Interstate bridge, it had at least 13'6" clearance, which is the maximum legal height for a truck.) The over-height truck should never have been routed over that bridge!

 

[FA_Q2]

Any bridge that is designed in such a way that a truck passing over it can knock it down is NOT safe.

Either they ought to have limited the size of vehicles going over it, or built it to higher standards.

I am NOT at all sure this event has anything to do with maintenance.

At this point I think it is clear that it had nothing to do with maintenance. Maintenance does not stop a semi from ripping out support struts.

There is a governmental issue here though. The government has decided that bridges such as this one that do not have redundant enough supports are unfit for new construction. It seems that the smart thing to do here would be to add some redundant supports to the very small percentage of bridges that fall in this category.

Of course, how many bridges actually have had this problem? I don’t know and if it is a very small number then it might not even be worth updating them.

 

[FA_Q2]

AUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGH! A truck going over it DID NOT cause the collapse! An oversized truck KNOCKING DOWN A SUPPORT BEAM caused the collapse! God and goddess, THINK!

Yeah we get that Jarl.

Now I'll say it again...any bridge that is built to a standard where a truck crossing over it can knock it down if it has an accident is NOT built to an acceptable standard for the vehicles that cross over it.

The mere fact that a truck could hit such critical supporting structures makes me think the bridge was NEVER SAFE for THAT TYPE OF TRAFFIC in the first place.

Well, not really. Any bridge will collapse if hit by the right size load in the wrong spot. Some of these smaller bridges are not going to be built like Fort Knox. That is simply not tenable. The design was not sufficient for modern bridges, that is correct, but there does need to be a cost analysis here about what to do if anything really should be done about other bridges in that condition. They are fine bridges when not being run into by heavy equipment.

 

[candycorn]

AUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGH! A truck going over it DID NOT cause the collapse! An oversized truck KNOCKING DOWN A SUPPORT BEAM caused the collapse! God and goddess, THINK!

Yeah we get that Jarl.

Now I'll say it again...any bridge that is built to a standard where a truck crossing over it can knock it down if it has an accident is NOT built to an acceptable standard for the vehicles that cross over it.

The mere fact that a truck could hit such critical supporting structures makes me think the bridge was NEVER SAFE for THAT TYPE OF TRAFFIC in the first place.

Well, not really. Any bridge will collapse if hit by the right size load in the wrong spot. Some of these smaller bridges are not going to be built like Fort Knox. That is simply not tenable. The design was not sufficient for modern bridges, that is correct, but there does need to be a cost analysis here about what to do if anything really should be done about other bridges in that condition. They are fine bridges when not being run into by heavy equipment.

The lowest builder builds many of these projects. They are not the lowest bidder by accident...right.

If I were running for office--any federal office nationwide, I'd have my announcement right at the banks of where the bridge goes across the water and point out that this is what is wrong. Everybody can see that it needs to be fixed, everybody agrees that it needs to be fixed. We have access to the money to get it fixed Yet we can't get out of our own way to get it done. And as a result, lives were put at risk.

In other words, our reach exceeds our grasp.

 

[Star]

We should fund the construction of our infrastructure. This is a loser for us republicans to build other nations while doing nothing for ours.

Yep, Republicans are losing big time on this issue. Private wealth is built on commonwealth.

It looks to me like the obsolete bridge was just simply incapable of holding today's traffic.



Sligh told KOMO he was traveling south on the interstate behind the tractor-trailer when he realized the load appeared to be about four feet too wide to fit through the bridge's superstructure.

"Any time he wants to go over to the left would be OK," Sligh said he told his wife.

But another tractor-trailer appeared to hem the truck in to the right lane.

"There was a big puff of dust, and I hit the brakes."
Dale Ogden told CNN affiliate KING that he was driving near the tractor-trailer's pilot car when he saw a device on that car designed to indicate whether a truck can clear an obstacle hit the top of the bridge.

.

 

[martybegan]

Imagine how many bridges would eventually collapse, if we had the size government that Republicans insist on!

Let's see if some private company decides to rebuild the bridges for us, with their own money!



It's OK. We can't spend money, we have to save to avoid debt.. but businesses and others need lower taxes.

Eventually, all of that growth of business has a cost.. a cost on the roads and systems that are the lifeblood of our economy. And someone will have to pay the piper.

In case you wondered, several studies have been done on this, and we only have slightly over 76000+ bridges that are considered high risk.


Daily Kos: Washington State Bridge Collapses.. think Infrastructure Spending Doesn't matter?

Yep can you imaging if we had this crop of baggers in back in the 30's Hover dam would not have been built, in the south the TVA wouldn't have happened to bring electricity to that region. in the 50's the interstate highway system would not have been built (All government funded). Eisenhower warned us about the lunatic fringe in his party in his farewell speech
Eisenhower's Forgotten Warning and the Threat of Authoritarian Currents in Our Politics | Alternet

and none of those projects could be built today due to inane regulations, lawsuits to protect the long nosed woodfucker, people not wanting the things "in thier backyard" and a myriad of other progressive roadblocks to progress.

 

[Missourian]

AUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGH! A truck going over it DID NOT cause the collapse! An oversized truck KNOCKING DOWN A SUPPORT BEAM caused the collapse! God and goddess, THINK!

Yeah we get that Jarl.

Now I'll say it again...any bridge that is built to a standard where a truck crossing over it can knock it down if it has an accident is NOT built to an acceptable standard for the vehicles that cross over it.

The mere fact that a truck could hit such critical supporting structures makes me think the bridge was NEVER SAFE for THAT TYPE OF TRAFFIC in the first place.

That's up to the state, Ed.

The state permits these loads had gives them specific routing from which it is unlawful to deviate. According to news sources, the state of Washington approved and issued permits for this route.

State officials approved the trucking company to carry a load as high as 15 feet, 9 inches, according to the permit released by the state.


However, the southbound vertical clearance on the Skagit River bridge is as little as 14 feet, 5 inches, state records show. That lowest clearance is outside of the bridge's vehicle traveling lanes, Transportation Department communications director Lars Erickson said Friday.



The bridge's curved overhead girders are higher in the center of the bridge but sweep lower toward a driver's right side.


The bridge has a maximum clearance of about 17 feet, but there is no signage to indicate how to safely navigate the bridge with a tall load.


I-5 Bridge Collapse Caused By Oversize Load On Tractor-Trailer; Highway Delays Expected
​

 

[Stephanie]

Well? who didn't see this coming and being used as political? NEVER let a good crisis or tragedy GO TO WASTE eh?

Isn't this a STATE issue?

 

[Stephanie]

Old? It was built 60 years ago.

The President has been talking about infrastructure spending since he was a candidate. Who is stopping it?

Yea, 60 years is old for a bridge that has a large volume of traffic. Obama talked about infastructure as a candidate, but what has he done in the last 5 years? Look at all the stimulus money that was supposed to go for stuff like this.

He needs a congress that's not dead set on austerity, and defying Obama.

wtf? defy him? who is he, KING, Dictator? And lets see, that 800 BILLION where we got to see pretty signs made with it on construction they were doing on the roads,WASN'T ENOUGH for Infrastructure?
THIS is a friggen STATE ISSUE.
.Obama and the rest of you should keep you nose of it

 

[Wyatt earp]

This reminds me of a story, This company in Ireland orders a vertical molding machine from Japan, it takes them six months to build it. It travels half way around the earth by boat, and you know what happens a 1/2 mile from the plant? yup a truck driver totals it into a low bridge. lol

 

[Stephanie]

We should fund the construction of our infrastructure. This is a loser for us republicans to build other nations while doing nothing for ours.

Yep, Republicans are losing big time on this issue. Private wealth is built on commonwealth.

It looks to me like the obsolete bridge was just simply incapable of holding today's traffic.



Sligh told KOMO he was traveling south on the interstate behind the tractor-trailer when he realized the load appeared to be about four feet too wide to fit through the bridge's superstructure.

"Any time he wants to go over to the left would be OK," Sligh said he told his wife.

But another tractor-trailer appeared to hem the truck in to the right lane.

"There was a big puff of dust, and I hit the brakes."
Dale Ogden told CNN affiliate KING that he was driving near the tractor-trailer's pilot car when he saw a device on that car designed to indicate whether a truck can clear an obstacle hit the top of the bridge.

.

good grief, so now this bridge collapsing is the Republicans FAULT TOO..

and you all want infrastructure spending tell your dear Leader to get rid of some GUBERMENT agencies, starting with the IRS, NEA, EPA, etc etc...Free's up all that money and he doesn't have to pluck it off that magic money tree in the back of the white house

 

[Missourian]

On his CNN show last night, Anderson Cooper chronicled the Obama administration’s unfulfilled promises and wasteful spending on high-speed rail projects across the country.

Cooper and investigative reporter Drew Griffin reported that, while the administration sold its $12 billion in projects as high-speed rail, the funding has spent has largely been used to make existing trains slightly faster.

In Washington State, for instance, $800 million have been used to reduce the length of the trip from Seattle to Portland by 10 minutes.

CNN Demolishes Obama's 'High-Speed Rail Boondoggle'



​

/thread

 

[Missourian]

[youtube]UBm0jg6QM90&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]


$800 million dollars to save 10 minutes.

That's the federal contribution to Washington state, tax payer money.

According to HuffPo, they estimate 15 million to replace this bridge.

Washington state could have replaced this bridge 53 times over!

But instead, that money went to "high speed" rail...

To reduce a 3 hour and 40 minute ride by 10 minutes.
​

 

[Papageorgio]

[youtube]UBm0jg6QM90&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]


$800 million dollars to save 10 minutes.

That's the federal contribution to Washington state, tax payer money.

According to HuffPo, they estimate 15 million to replace this bridge.

Washington state could have replaced this bridge 53 times over!

But instead, that money went to "high speed" rail...

To reduce a 3 hour and 40 minute ride by 10 minutes.
​

They would not have replaced this bridge, it was deemed structurally sound. So the point is mute. There are many bridges that would have been replaced before this one.

 

[depotoo]

[youtube]UBm0jg6QM90&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]


$800 million dollars to save 10 minutes.

That's the federal contribution to Washington state, tax payer money.

According to HuffPo, they estimate 15 million to replace this bridge.

Washington state could have replaced this bridge 53 times over!

But instead, that money went to "high speed" rail...

To reduce a 3 hour and 40 minute ride by 10 minutes.
​

that, my folks, is our asinine government at work.

 

[Meister]

We should fund the construction of our infrastructure. This is a loser for us republicans to build other nations while doing nothing for ours.

Yep, Republicans are losing big time on this issue. Private wealth is built on commonwealth.

It looks to me like the obsolete bridge was just simply incapable of holding today's traffic.



Sligh told KOMO he was traveling south on the interstate behind the tractor-trailer when he realized the load appeared to be about four feet too wide to fit through the bridge's superstructure.

"Any time he wants to go over to the left would be OK," Sligh said he told his wife.

But another tractor-trailer appeared to hem the truck in to the right lane.

"There was a big puff of dust, and I hit the brakes."
Dale Ogden told CNN affiliate KING that he was driving near the tractor-trailer's pilot car when he saw a device on that car designed to indicate whether a truck can clear an obstacle hit the top of the bridge.

.

Have another glass of kool-aid. This isn't a right or left issue, this was an accident that ended up having consequences

 

[Quantum Windbag]

AUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGH! A truck going over it DID NOT cause the collapse! An oversized truck KNOCKING DOWN A SUPPORT BEAM caused the collapse! God and goddess, THINK!

Yeah we get that Jarl.

Now I'll say it again...any bridge that is built to a standard where a truck crossing over it can knock it down if it has an accident is NOT built to an acceptable standard for the vehicles that cross over it.

The mere fact that a truck could hit such critical supporting structures makes me think the bridge was NEVER SAFE for THAT TYPE OF TRAFFIC in the first place.

Next thing you will say is that any bridge that is not built to withstand a nuclear bomb is sub standard. Get real, this bridge suffered a freak accident when it was both overload and a key structural support was damaged at the same time. Either the driver ignored the signs, or they were not there, that does not prove that more money spent reinforcing bridges is going to prevent every bridge in this country from collapsing.

Fuck, California just spent millions of dollars, and took a decade, to design and build a bridge, and they are making repairs before they even open it because a key part is flawed, and they have no way to replace it.

 

[Missourian]

$800 million dollars to save 10 minutes.

That's the federal contribution to Washington state, tax payer money.

According to HuffPo, they estimate 15 million to replace this bridge.

Washington state could have replaced this bridge 53 times over!

But instead, that money went to "high speed" rail...

To reduce a 3 hour and 40 minute ride by 10 minutes.
​

They would not have replaced this bridge, it was deemed structurally sound. So the point is mute. There are many bridges that would have been replaced before this one.

Absolutely true.

But this is the narrative the liberals are pushing.

And my point is, if we weren't pissing money away, there would be money for these projects.

 

[Missourian]

[youtube]UBm0jg6QM90&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]


$800 million dollars to save 10 minutes.

That's the federal contribution to Washington state, tax payer money.

According to HuffPo, they estimate 15 million to replace this bridge.

Washington state could have replaced this bridge 53 times over!

But instead, that money went to "high speed" rail...

To reduce a 3 hour and 40 minute ride by 10 minutes.
​

that, my folks, is our asinine government at work.

If I made this it's own thread, liberals would fall all over themselves defending it.

Must protect Obama.

And vice versa if it was a republican project wasting money.

So the status quo continues, the government pisses away our money unobstructed.

At least the republicans don't insist upon increasing taxes to give the government more money to flush down the commode.