AP via WTOP Radio, Washington, D.C.: NTSB: Bridge collapse in Wash. is wake-up call (http://www.wtop.com/209/3336159/NTSB-Bridge-collapse-in-Wash-is-wake-up-call)
QuoteSEATTLE (AP) -- The chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board said Saturday the bridge collapse in Washington state is a wake-up call for the nation.
Quote"This is a really significant event and we need to learn from it, not just in Washington but around the country," Debbie Hersman said after taking a boat ride on the Skagit River below the dramatic scene where a truck bumped against the steel framework, collapsing the bridge and sending two vehicles and three people falling into the chilly water.
QuoteInvestigators need to find out what happened in Washington and if it could be repeated at similar bridges around the country, Hersman said.
Hmmmm, and I thought the I-35W bridge collapse in Minneapolis was supposed to be a 'wake-up call'......
NTSB report can be summarized as: "dude, don't drive into the side of a bridge."
Quote from: txstateends on May 26, 2013, 06:44:46 PM
Hmmmm, and I thought the I-35W bridge collapse in Minneapolis was supposed to be a 'wake-up call'......
Exactly ;-)
This is going to get highway departments all riled up to replace or repair structurally-inefficient bridges for like a year. Then they are going to forget all about this. That's always how it works.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on May 26, 2013, 07:50:10 PM
NTSB report can be summarized as: "dude, don't drive into the side of a bridge."
Agreed. This is
not, in and of itself, an indicator that all bridges on the Interstate and National Highway System networks are ready to fail
The bridge had (and has) functional deficiencies (the structural steel was too close to the bridge deck), but I presume the low overhear clearance was posted in advance of the bridge.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 27, 2013, 12:28:10 AMbut I presume the low overhear clearance was posted in advance of the bridge.
Not that I can recall.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 27, 2013, 12:28:10 AM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on May 26, 2013, 07:50:10 PM
NTSB report can be summarized as: "dude, don't drive into the side of a bridge."
Agreed. This is not, in and of itself, an indicator that all bridges on the Interstate and National Highway System networks are ready to fail
The bridge had (and has) functional deficiencies (the structural steel was too close to the bridge deck), but I presume the low overhear clearance was posted in advance of the bridge.
Apparently not posted in advance or at the bridge according to WSDOT (as noted in the thread in the Northwest section).
Quote from: Molandfreak on May 26, 2013, 08:15:52 PM
Quote from: txstateends on May 26, 2013, 06:44:46 PM
Hmmmm, and I thought the I-35W bridge collapse in Minneapolis was supposed to be a 'wake-up call'......
Exactly ;-)
This is going to get highway departments all riled up to replace or repair structurally-inefficient bridges for like a year. Then they are going to forget all about this. That's always how it works.
NY has already been busy replacing many bridges, starting last year before this. Does that mean that Governor Cuomo is secretly a Time Lord from Gallifrey?
Quote from: vdeane on May 27, 2013, 11:47:54 AM
NY has already been busy replacing many bridges, starting last year before this. Does that mean that Governor Cuomo is secretly a Time Lord from Gallifrey?
Don't think so.... he looks nothing like the Time Lords I know :)
New graphic at Huffington Post's website about state percentages of structurally-deficient bridges and a few notable bridge collapses in the last few years:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/24/bridge-collapses-structurally-deficient-_n_3333649.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 27, 2013, 12:28:10 AM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on May 26, 2013, 07:50:10 PM
NTSB report can be summarized as: "dude, don't drive into the side of a bridge."
Agreed. This is not, in and of itself, an indicator that all bridges on the Interstate and National Highway System networks are ready to fail
The bridge had (and has) functional deficiencies (the structural steel was too close to the bridge deck), but I presume the low overhear clearance was posted in advance of the bridge.
I don't think the clearance was posted for the bridge. Clearance was high enough that signage wasn't required. The speed limit goes down to 60 when approaching the bridge southbound, but that's probably as much because it enters the Mt. Vernon city limits as because of the bridge.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 26, 2013, 02:55:35 PM
AP via WTOP Radio, Washington, D.C.: NTSB: Bridge collapse in Wash. is wake-up call (http://www.wtop.com/209/3336159/NTSB-Bridge-collapse-in-Wash-is-wake-up-call)
QuoteSEATTLE (AP) -- The chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board said Saturday the bridge collapse in Washington state is a wake-up call for the nation.
Quote"This is a really significant event and we need to learn from it, not just in Washington but around the country," Debbie Hersman said after taking a boat ride on the Skagit River below the dramatic scene where a truck bumped against the steel framework, collapsing the bridge and sending two vehicles and three people falling into the chilly water.
QuoteInvestigators need to find out what happened in Washington and if it could be repeated at similar bridges around the country, Hersman said.
It sounds like the question is - Can a truck taller than 14'6" crash into a bridge that is 14'6" tall?
I hope a multi-million dollar investigation takes place to determine if this can happen.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 26, 2013, 02:55:35 PM
QuoteInvestigators need to find out what happened in Washington and if it could be repeated at similar bridges around the country, Hersman said.
To me, it sounds like Hersman wants to find out how to make even
more bridges collapse... :hmmm:
Quote from: Molandfreak on May 26, 2013, 08:15:52 PM
This is going to get highway departments all riled up to replace or repair structurally-inefficient bridges for like a year. Then they are going to forget all about this. That's always how it works.
MoDOT replaced over 800 bridges in a 3 1/2 year span, though many more are probably in need.
Love the way the mainstream media has spun this into a "bridges are going to fall unless we raise taxes to fix them."
The wake-up call needs to be to truckers to make sure their loads will fit under standard bridges.
So we need to regulate businesses instead of raising taxes. I wonder which one's easier to get past the Repubs.
Never mind - to a Repub, everything they don't like is a tax. Force a trucker to split a load? Tax. Force a trucker to use less fuel? Tax. Bengoatse? Tax.
Quote from: NE2 on May 28, 2013, 10:50:21 PM
So we need to regulate businesses instead of raising taxes. I wonder which one's easier to get past the Repubs.
Never mind - to a Repub, everything they don't like is a tax. Force a trucker to split a load? Tax. Force a trucker to use less fuel? Tax. Bengoatse? Tax.
Republicans generally don't like taxes or regulations.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi3.kym-cdn.com%2Fentries%2Ficons%2Foriginal%2F000%2F012%2F132%2Fthatsthejoke.jpg&hash=10b50d7a9b0ea07a1fc7ee6bb77b45e0b9b5a112)
All I can say is: Here we go again....
Quote from: hbelkins on May 28, 2013, 10:42:52 PM
bridges are going to fall unless we shift spending from other places it isn't needed to fix them
There. Statement fixed. >_>
Quote from: Duke87 on May 29, 2013, 08:29:50 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on May 28, 2013, 10:42:52 PM
bridges are going to fall unless we shift spending from other places it isn't needed to fix them
There. Statement fixed. >_>
Except spending, or the lack thereof, didn't have a damn thing to do with the collapse of that bridge. An overheight truck did.
Quote from: hbelkins on May 29, 2013, 09:40:17 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on May 29, 2013, 08:29:50 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on May 28, 2013, 10:42:52 PM
bridges are going to fall unless we shift spending from other places it isn't needed to fix them
There. Statement fixed. >_>
Except spending, or the lack thereof, didn't have a damn thing to do with the collapse of that bridge. An overheight truck did.
Not the point. True, this event was not caused by lack of maintenance. But, generally speaking, lack of maintenance is nonetheless a problem.
Quote from: Duke87 on May 29, 2013, 10:21:35 PM
Not the point. True, this event was not caused by lack of maintenance. But, generally speaking, lack of maintenance is nonetheless a problem.
I agree that lack of maintenance is a problem.
This past week, we had a big hole in the deck of the bridge that carries the Inner Loop of the Capital Beltway (I-95 southbound) over Good Luck Road (I don't know if anyone had the bad luck of getting hit on the head with a chunk of thee bridge) in Prince George's County, Maryland (Google satellite view here (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=new+carrollton+md&ll=38.978087,-76.873826&spn=0.000587,0.001206&hnear=New+Carrollton,+Prince+George%27s,+Maryland&gl=us&t=h&z=20)).
A temporary repair was made to get traffic moving, and then a more-permanent patch was installed, though the entire bridge (which dates to the opening of the Beltway in 1964) needs to have its deck replaced.
Quote from: hbelkins on May 28, 2013, 10:42:52 PM
Love the way the mainstream media has spun this into a "bridges are going to fall unless we raise taxes to fix them."
That is a good thing. We do need to fix more bridges. We're falling behind. So many of them were built in such a short span during the Depression.
Out of Control: Fixing Structurally Deficient Bridges Does not Require More Funding (http://reason.org/blog/show/fixing-structurally-deficient-bridg)
QuoteThe Skagit River bridge collapse in Washington State has focused attention on the state of America's bridges. But as I stated on NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams bridges are in substantially better shape than 5 years ago. And more funding by itself will not improve the nation's bridges.
QuoteThe 2013 report, from advocacy group Transportation for America, paints an overly negative picture of bridges to justify additional transportation spending. First, bridge conditions are improving. In 2008 there were more than 71,000 deficient bridges; in 2012 there were only slightly over 66,000 deficient bridges. Five thousand fewer structurally deficient bridges in only five years is a major accomplishment! More importantly, the number of structurally deficient bridges has decreased substantially over the last 20 years from almost 120,000, 21 % of all bridges in 1992, to slightly more than 66,000, or 11% of all bridges, today.
QuoteNext, there is little evidence that states that spend more money on transportation have bridges in better condition. Take the examples of Georgia and Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania has the highest number of structurally deficient bridges in the country: 5,543 out of 6,043 or approximately 25% of all bridges. But Pennsylvania also has one of the highest gas taxes in the country–51 cents per gallon. So why doesn't Pennsylvania have better bridges? The state's transportation organizations have prioritized rural highway expansion over bridge maintenance and repair. Higher administrative costs reduce the amount of funds used for infrastructure. And union wages leave less revenue for highways. Georgia, on the other hand, has one of the lowest gas taxes in the country; its per capita transportation spending is 49th of the 50 states. Yet only 6% of Georgia's bridges are structurally deficient. Why? Georgia has prioritized bridge maintenance and repair while Pennsylvania has not. Weather and age of infrastructure are also factors but clearly GA is spending its existing revenue much more efficiently than Pennsylvania.
yawn
Quote from: Topic
wake-up call
Quote from: NE2 on June 25, 2013, 01:30:07 PM
yawn
Sounds like NE2 needs another wake-up call. He can be reached at 1-800-872-7245.
To be fair to NE2, the piece Cpzilliacus linked to has an axe to grind, as is indicated by the shot against unions. PennDOT is a pretty obvious whipping boy, but to portray GDOT--whose rural four-laning program has attracted much criticism on here--as a model of fiscal prudence . . . really?
The problem with relying on the marginal fuel tax rate and nothing else is that it does not relate directly to the revenues actually spent on state highways or to their needs. In order to do that it is necessary to take into account statutorily mandated revenue distributions and distill that down to incomings and outgoings per maintained centerline mile for various typical cross-sections, and no advocacy piece will ever embarrass its audience with that much detail.
Quote from: txstateends on May 26, 2013, 06:44:46 PM
Hmmmm, and I thought the I-35W bridge collapse in Minneapolis was supposed to be a 'wake-up call'......
And I have the feeling that after the new bridge is built in Washington, everybody will hit the snooze button until the next similar tragedy.
I think PA's biggest problem is that they divert highway money to other areas, such as city beautification.
The problem there was, the driver was not paying attention, the fix would be for an overheight alarm ahead of it, perhaps at the exit right before the span, that way they were warned, also improve the signage of the height of a span, a yellow sign with warning lights (2 per side, flashing diagonally) would probably have helped.
Also, does anybody have any idea on what his alt route should have been? Where if someone was doing their homework, that truck would have been on a different span?
Quote from: SteveG1988 on June 26, 2013, 05:12:12 PM
The problem there was, the driver was not paying attention, the fix would be for an overheight alarm ahead of it, perhaps at the exit right before the span, that way they were warned, also improve the signage of the height of a span, a yellow sign with warning lights (2 per side, flashing diagonally) would probably have helped.
Also, does anybody have any idea on what his alt route should have been? Where if someone was doing their homework, that truck would have been on a different span?
The oversize truck would have fit if it had been in the left lane. (Is it normal procedure for oversize trucks to use a route where only one of the lanes will allow it to clear?)
The detours for overheight and overweight vehicles now are:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/commercialVehicle/Restrictions/ (http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/commercialVehicle/Restrictions/)
QuoteI-5, MP: 230 to 225, Direction: S
Date Effective: 6/19/2013 12:00 AM
Detour availability: N
Permanent restriction: Y
Location:
Name: I-5 - Skagit River Bridge -Southbound
Description: I-5, MP 230-225
Comments:
I-5 Southbound milepost 230 to Milepost to Milepost 225 - No over legal axle weights allowed. Legal Loads only. 105,500 lbs. Total Weight Limit. Oversize loads prohibited. Overweight loads prohibited. Detour Southbound I-5: **LEGAL HEIGHT LOADS ONLY** Take exit 229; Turn left onto George Hopper Rd.; Turn right onto southbound Burlington Blvd. that becomes Riverside Ave.; Turn right onto westbound College Way (SR538); turn left onto southbound I-5. Height restriction at I-5 undercrossing (SR 538 MP .1) Restriction legal height only! Loads may travel during daytime hours, loads over 11ft wide or over 100 ft. long, must have 1 front and 1 rear pilot. Detour Southbound I-5: **OVER HEIGHT LOADS** Consider SR 9 as an alternate route. Local detours maybe considered by contacting 360-848-7230.
QuoteI-5, MP: 225 to 230, Direction: N
Date Effective: 6/19/2013 12:00 AM
Detour availability: N
Permanent restriction: Y
Location:
Name: I-5, Skagit River Bridge
Description: I-5, MP 225-230
Comments:
I-5 Northbound milepost 225 to Milepost 230 - No over legal axle weights allowed. Legal Loads only. 105,500 lbs. Total Weight Limit. Oversize loads prohibited. Overweight loads prohibited. Detour Northbound I-5: Take exit 227; turn right onto eastbound College Way (SR 538); turn left onto northbound Riverside Ave. that becomes Burlington Blvd.; turn left onto westbound George Hopper Rd.: turn right onto northbound I-5. Loads may travel during daylight hours. Loads over 11ft wide or 100 ft. long must have 1 front and 1 rear pilot.