Another Interstate Bridge Collapse

[Missourian]

How much infrastructure spending will it take exactly to keep a truck from colliding with the overhead girder supports...rounded off to the nearest gazillion?

Since the liberals have abandoned this thread as if it was the Titanic, I'll answer this question myself.

How much infrastructure spending would it take exactly to keep a truck from colliding with the overhead girder supports?

Almost enough to make liberals happy.

(My bold)

Here, let me help:

1. Remedial reading lessons for the semi-driver & his lead vehicle driver - who both should have seen the vertical clearance signs & stopped.

2. Remedial reading lessons for the semi-driver & his lead vehicle driver - who both should have seen the max load signs & stopped.

3. Both of these drivers' records should be investigated in depth. If they're such piss-poor drivers as to miss max height & max load signs, they've been driving for years if not decades, & probably have several suspended licenses each. They should probably be stricken from commercial driving, ever. If in fact they both have other suspended licenses, they should do some jail time - a coupla years sounds good to me, depending on how much damage & carnage they've been responsible for in total.

4. Both drivers' liability insurance should pay up for bridge repairs, bridge inspections, civil damages to the other vehicles, hospital charges, ambulance charges, lost labor, water rescue charges for the other drivers who took a bath as a result of these twos' stupidity.

Total costs are probably in the millions, mostly for bridge repair. If push comes to shove, I'd be willing to explore breaking up these two drivers for parts. If these two are too far gone to do their job in an acceptable manner, perhaps we can get Stephen Hawking back on his feet - a more than worhtwhile trade, my opinion.

My understanding is there is no sign.

My understanding is that the bridge was tall enough in the center, but not marked that it was lower in the right lane.


[youtube]01wxlztU6Z0[/youtube]




My understanding is the truck wasn't overweight, just over height and width.

Chances are good that this wasn't the drivers fault, although they or the escort driver will probably get the blame.

An oversized load is required to use the furthest right lane where possible.

The escort vehicle (pole car) is required to travel in the lane and over width load is using in addition to the lane it is traveling in...the center lane.

It the bridge was higher in the center lane than it was in the right lane, and it wasn't marked...the Washington State Department of Transportation is at fault.

It should be marked like this:

​

 

[Harry Dresden]

The bridge was old and should have been fixed already- before the sequester, which merely reduces future spending by a trivial amount.

Is everything that goes wrong going to get blamed on cuts? Obama has had five years to address stuff like this, but has been too busy worrying about other issues, like abortion, birth control and granting amnesty to millions of illegals.

There haven't been any deep cuts. Obama supporters keep trying to claim that he spent less than anyone, so maybe you should direct your complaints to White House website if you really believe his spending less was the cause of this.

Old? It was built 60 years ago.

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

who is stopping it in our State?.....just today on the news some spokeshole from Sacramento was saying how California's bridges are ok nothing to worry about.....do you believe that?......look at how bad some of the Freeways are?.....the same traffic goes over those bridges....

 

[Missourian]

Since the liberals have abandoned this thread as if it was the Titanic, I'll answer this question myself.

How much infrastructure spending would it take exactly to keep a truck from colliding with the overhead girder supports?

Almost enough to make liberals happy.

(My bold)

Here, let me help:

1. Remedial reading lessons for the semi-driver & his lead vehicle driver - who both should have seen the vertical clearance signs & stopped.

2. Remedial reading lessons for the semi-driver & his lead vehicle driver - who both should have seen the max load signs & stopped.

3. Both of these drivers' records should be investigated in depth. If they're such piss-poor drivers as to miss max height & max load signs, they've been driving for years if not decades, & probably have several suspended licenses each. They should probably be stricken from commercial driving, ever. If in fact they both have other suspended licenses, they should do some jail time - a coupla years sounds good to me, depending on how much damage & carnage they've been responsible for in total.

4. Both drivers' liability insurance should pay up for bridge repairs, bridge inspections, civil damages to the other vehicles, hospital charges, ambulance charges, lost labor, water rescue charges for the other drivers who took a bath as a result of these twos' stupidity.

Total costs are probably in the millions, mostly for bridge repair. If push comes to shove, I'd be willing to explore breaking up these two drivers for parts. If these two are too far gone to do their job in an acceptable manner, perhaps we can get Stephen Hawking back on his feet - a more than worhtwhile trade, my opinion.

More than likely, there were no weight or height limit signs. Interstate bridges have minimum weight limits to meet when built, and unless called out as such, permit loads can use them. At 14'7", the bridge was over a foot higher than the Interstate minimum height (13'6"), and as such needed no height marking. (Note: MANY bridges have no height markings for that reason.)

Very true, but most interstates are marked to 15 ft at the lowest point of the bridge...especially west of the Mississippi.

​

 

[ScienceRocks]

IT'S time to build and construct infrastructure of a first world nation. We can't be having anymore of this shit.

We're supposedly a first world country.

 

[ScienceRocks]

All this is why we don't have funding for infrastructure. Instead of playing the blame game, congress etc. need to work together and get something done.
Who cares about what happened in 2010, we need to focus on problems today.

Yep,

We need to build our country for once.

 

[ScienceRocks]

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.

The CONGRESS controls the money and distributes the line items not the president.

You must have missed that in Civics class

True,

but the executive branch is the part of government that carries it out.

 

[tjvh]

$10 billion a month wasted on Iraq Democracy, and the right wing spent like crazy. Spending it at home, and we all of a sudden have to pinch every penny.

And they wonder why Obama won so easily, twice.

Wow, and nothing about Obama's stimulus building GM plants in China, and throwing our Tax dollars at failed green energy companies.

 

[Luissa]

All this is why we don't have funding for infrastructure. Instead of playing the blame game, congress etc. need to work together and get something done.
Who cares about what happened in 2010, we need to focus on problems today.

Yep,

We need to build our country for once.

We need to start demanding more from our politicians and journalist. We won't get anywhere if we don't.

 

[Mertex]

So again...exactly how much infrastructure spending do you liberals imagine it will take to keep this 16(?) foot high oversized load from collapsing a bridge...rounded off to the nearest gazillion?

Can't let a crisis go to waste...

We could do as conservatives want to do and let them all fall down - who cares, eh?

 

[Mertex]

$10 billion a month wasted on Iraq Democracy, and the right wing spent like crazy. Spending it at home, and we all of a sudden have to pinch every penny.

And they wonder why Obama won so easily, twice.

Wow, and nothing about Obama's stimulus building GM plants in China, and throwing our Tax dollars at failed green energy companies.

I thought you all were cheering Rand Paul - he thinks Apple is cool to rape America of revenue. At least GM will have "people" who actually work there, unlike Apple's bogus subsidiaries.

As for throwing tax dollars at failed green energy companies, that is one bone conservatives keep gnawing at, but hey, it's only one. How about Tesla? Why don't you all mention that?

The U.S. government’s $465 million loan turned the factory that built my Prizm into the launching pad of Tesla Motors Inc.’s (Nasdaq: TSLA) Model S, the luxury electric sedan Consumer Reports calls one of the best two cars it has ever tested. (The Model S tied the 2007 Lexus LS 460L, receiving 99 of 100 points.)

The plug-in Tesla has surpassed all expectations, but here’s what’s really extraordinary about the company: It’s a government-financed clean-energy project that’s actually a great American success story that even some conservatives can love.

And, the craziest is spending our tax money to provide "Muslims" in Iraq with a democracy - yeah, like conservatives like Muslims that much! Go figure.

 

[asterism]

God dammit, we need infrastructure spending!!!!

Your side clamored for and received many hundreds of billions in funding for "shovel ready" projects.

What happened?

 

[ScienceRocks]

God dammit, we need infrastructure spending!!!!

Your side clamored for and received many hundreds of billions in funding for "shovel ready" projects.

What happened?

The money for infrastructure for some reason between 2009-2012 have been cut 75% for Oregon and Washington. WTF is going on? I seen this on the news tonight.

 

[Mertex]

.
According to the TV report I'm watching, the bridge was hit by a truck. From the look of the truck, it must have been a glancing blow -- only the side of the trailer is showing damage.

Three people have been taken to local hospitals.
.

That's not what I heard. It was a truck with oversize load, but it didn't hit the bridge.

Truck hauling heavy equipment caused I-5 bridge collapse | Memphis Breaking News, Weather and Sports | WPTY-TV | ABC24, abc24.com

 

[Mertex]

Uh...at it's last inspection, the bridge in question was rated as Satisfactory. ^^^


A 6 rating = Equal to present minimum criteria.

National Bridge Inventory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Er, the Sufficiency rate at 54 suggests the followiing.

Sufficiency Rating
50 – 79 - Eligible for costs to rehabilitate or refurbish bridge
http://old.post-gazette.com/downloads/20070814PennDOT_bridge_chart.pdf

Also, it was listed as being functionally obsolete.

The bridge is not considered structurally deficient but is listed as being “functionally obsolete” - a category meaning that their design is outdated, such as having narrow shoulders are low clearance underneath, according to a database compiled by the Federal Highway Administration.

The bridge was built in 1955 and has a sufficiency rating of 57.4 out of 100, according to federal records. That is well below the statewide average rating of 80, according to an Associated Press analysis of federal data, but 759 bridges in the state have a lower sufficiency score.
I-5 bridge collapses north of Seattle; people in water | West Central Tribune

Yes, it was "Functionally obsolete" because the guardrail transitions did not meet the current acceptable standard.

http://www.nationalbridges.com/inde...s&query=8&lqm_id=679300&&format=raw&&Itemid=2

The bridge was deemed structurally sound.

So, an oversized load can bring down a structurally sound bridge?

Truck hauling heavy equipment caused I-5 bridge collapse | Memphis Breaking News, Weather and Sports | WPTY-TV | ABC24, abc24.com

 

[asterism]

Er, the Sufficiency rate at 54 suggests the followiing.

Sufficiency Rating
50 – 79 - Eligible for costs to rehabilitate or refurbish bridge
http://old.post-gazette.com/downloads/20070814PennDOT_bridge_chart.pdf

Also, it was listed as being functionally obsolete.

The bridge is not considered structurally deficient but is listed as being “functionally obsolete” - a category meaning that their design is outdated, such as having narrow shoulders are low clearance underneath, according to a database compiled by the Federal Highway Administration.

The bridge was built in 1955 and has a sufficiency rating of 57.4 out of 100, according to federal records. That is well below the statewide average rating of 80, according to an Associated Press analysis of federal data, but 759 bridges in the state have a lower sufficiency score.
I-5 bridge collapses north of Seattle; people in water | West Central Tribune

Yes, it was "Functionally obsolete" because the guardrail transitions did not meet the current acceptable standard.

http://www.nationalbridges.com/inde...s&query=8&lqm_id=679300&&format=raw&&Itemid=2

The bridge was deemed structurally sound.

So, an oversized load can bring down a structurally sound bridge?

Truck hauling heavy equipment caused I-5 bridge collapse | Memphis Breaking News, Weather and Sports | WPTY-TV | ABC24, abc24.com

Is that a serious question?

 

[Mertex]

With Washington State being such a Deep Blue State, why didn't the Democrats of that State keep the bridge repaired?

You sound like Boehner and the rest of the Republicans in Congress who didn't want to help the victims of Sandy unless there were offsets, but who are scampering to help the victims of West, Texas and now Moore, Oklahoma - talk about partisan hackery!

Blue states contribute more "tax-dollars" than the red states, and now you want to gyp them some more? Spoken like a true conservative!



I’m under no such constraint. The numbers, for decades now, have been quite clear: With some exceptions, what we regard as red states are sent a whole lot more of your hard-earned tax dollars than the traditional blue states. In effect, supposedly indolent, “tax and spend” liberals actually subsidize the individualistic, pure, and hard-working lifestyle of our conservative countrymen.
Blue state, red face: Guess who benefits more from your taxes?

 

[Mertex]

Yes, it was "Functionally obsolete" because the guardrail transitions did not meet the current acceptable standard.

http://www.nationalbridges.com/inde...s&query=8&lqm_id=679300&&format=raw&&Itemid=2

The bridge was deemed structurally sound.

So, an oversized load can bring down a structurally sound bridge?

Truck hauling heavy equipment caused I-5 bridge collapse | Memphis Breaking News, Weather and Sports | WPTY-TV | ABC24, abc24.com

Is that a serious question?

Well sure? How would you like to be the person driving a car a couple of blocks behind an oversize-load truck that is going to bring down a bridge that has been determined to be structurally sound?

 

[waltky]

Granny holds her feet up whenever we go across a bridge...

Who, what, why: How safe are US road bridges?
24 May 2013 - A four-lane highway bridge in Washington state has collapsed after being struck by a lorry, six years after 13 people were killed when another bridge fell. So how safe are bridges in the US?

Repairs to the collapsed Skagit River bridge will cost an estimated $15m (£10m), but in human terms it could have been far worse. Only three people were injured as their vehicles fell dozens of feet into the water when Interstate 5 crumbled beneath them, after a girder was struck by a lorry's rig casing. Dan Sligh needed to "pop" his dislocated shoulder back in order to rescue his wife in the freezing waters after their truck and trailer fell into the river. After a bridge collapse in Minnesota in 2007 claimed 13 lives and injured 145, there was a national review. So has the state of US bridges improved since then?

The I-35W collapse over Mississippi River was one of the worst in US history

On one measure, some progress has been made, according to figures provided by the American Society of Engineers. In 1992, 22% of the country's bridges were labelled "structurally deficient", meaning they required maintenance or replacement. In 2012, that had fallen to 11%. That doesn't mean one in nine bridges is unsafe, but that they are in poor condition.

Andrew Herrmann, the society's president, says the bridge inspection programme is robust but the government is still not spending enough money to update and maintain them. "Congress basically lacks the courage to do what is needed to raise the funds," he says. "Bridges require maintenance, and maintenance and rehabilitation require funding. "Politicians like to show up and cut a ribbon on a brand new bridge, but they don't like to show up and applaud a new paint job that may increase the life of a bridge." His organisation gave the nation's 607,380 bridges a C+ in its four-yearly report card on the country's infrastructure, which has suffered from years of under-investment.

The bridge over Skagit River collapsed due to a truck collision

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) estimates that clearing the backlog of deficient bridges requires an extra $8bn (£5bn) annually from federal, state, and local governments. It was unable to supply figures for the number of bridge collapses, but major ones are relatively rare. In 2001, the Queen Isabella Causeway in Texas collapsed, killing eight people. The bridge in Washington - which as a major highway between Seattle and Vancouver was mostly funded through federal, not state, funds - was not structurally deficient. Built in 1955, it was "functionally obsolete", a label that applies to bridges that are too old to meet current safety standards.

More BBC News - Who, what, why: How safe are US road bridges?

 

[Star]

Since the liberals have abandoned this thread as if it was the Titanic, I'll answer this question myself.

How much infrastructure spending would it take exactly to keep a truck from colliding with the overhead girder supports?

Almost enough to make liberals happy.

(My bold)

Here, let me help:

1. Remedial reading lessons for the semi-driver & his lead vehicle driver - who both should have seen the vertical clearance signs & stopped.

2. Remedial reading lessons for the semi-driver & his lead vehicle driver - who both should have seen the max load signs & stopped.

3. Both of these drivers' records should be investigated in depth. If they're such piss-poor drivers as to miss max height & max load signs, they've been driving for years if not decades, & probably have several suspended licenses each. They should probably be stricken from commercial driving, ever. If in fact they both have other suspended licenses, they should do some jail time - a coupla years sounds good to me, depending on how much damage & carnage they've been responsible for in total.

4. Both drivers' liability insurance should pay up for bridge repairs, bridge inspections, civil damages to the other vehicles, hospital charges, ambulance charges, lost labor, water rescue charges for the other drivers who took a bath as a result of these twos' stupidity.

Total costs are probably in the millions, mostly for bridge repair. If push comes to shove, I'd be willing to explore breaking up these two drivers for parts. If these two are too far gone to do their job in an acceptable manner, perhaps we can get Stephen Hawking back on his feet - a more than worhtwhile trade, my opinion.

My understanding is there is no sign.

My understanding is that the bridge was tall enough in the center, but not marked that it was lower in the right lane.


[youtube]01wxlztU6Z0[/youtube]




My understanding is the truck wasn't overweight, just over height and width.

Chances are good that this wasn't the drivers fault, although they or the escort driver will probably get the blame.

An oversized load is required to use the furthest right lane where possible.

The escort vehicle (pole car) is required to travel in the lane and over width load is using in addition to the lane it is traveling in...the center lane.

It the bridge was higher in the center lane than it was in the right lane, and it wasn't marked...the Washington State Department of Transportation is at fault.

It should be marked like this:

.
The bridge was a fracture critical bridge that should have been replaced years ago.


Bridge collapse shines light on aging infrastructure

Bridge collapse in Washington


The Skagit River bridge, built in 1955, is classified as a "fracture critical" bridge by the Federal Highway Administration. That means it lacks redundant supports elements, not that the design is faulty. Many fracture-critical bridges were built in the 1960s and 1970s to finish the Interstate highway system because they were quicker and cheaper to build. They generally aren't built today because newer designs require less maintenance.

• 
• 
• 

Source: Sources Arturo E. Schultz, professor of civil engineering, U-Minn.; AP; USA TODAY research
Frank Pompa, Janet Loehrke and Anne R. Carey, USA TODAY





I haven't heard anything on the local news about the Canadian company's truck being overweight but there have been reports about A) the truck was to tall and B) to wide for two trucks, side by side, to stay in their lanes on the functionally obsolete bridge that should have been replaced years ago.


"The lorry was hauling drilling equipment that was too tall, and the top right corner at the front of the load hit several of the bridge's trusses, Washington State Patrol trooper Mark Francis told the Skagit Valley Herald.

The vehicle was able to drive off the bridge and the driver waited for police at the scene.

'Miracles'
The company that owns the lorry, Mullen Trucking in Alberta, Canada, said it had a permit to transport the equipment across the bridge and had hired a local escort to help with navigation."
.

 

[asterism]

So, an oversized load can bring down a structurally sound bridge?

Truck hauling heavy equipment caused I-5 bridge collapse | Memphis Breaking News, Weather and Sports | WPTY-TV | ABC24, abc24.com

Is that a serious question?

Well sure? How would you like to be the person driving a car a couple of blocks behind an oversize-load truck that is going to bring down a bridge that has been determined to be structurally sound?

Do you really not understand gravity?

Or do think it's feasible to make sure that every bridge be able to hold any possible load that can be put on a truck?