Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2024/05/26/another-victim-claimed-by-11foot8-8-bridge.html
…
12 Likes
Maybe it’s time to add a new entry to the bingo card: “What about a sign specifically warning idiots driving rental trucks not to pass through?”
19 Likes
I have another on the bingo card: why not add a red light camera before the traffic light, with of course a big warning sign?
So after having to pay for the van repairs, one has also to pay a fine, to add insult to injury.
13 Likes
I don’t think that meets the spirit of the Bingo card which is all about preventive measures, rather then punitive measures. But I defer to @wazroth
15 Likes
15 Likes
Yeah, the systems thinking implicit in the bingo card is biased towards being solution-oriented. I don’t know if there are existing penalties beyond liability for a bridge strike in place already, though.
Speaking of bingo:
Also, this question has come up before and I thought to answer this in the other 11-foot-8 thread, but I’ll say again here: when a truck trundles off camera after the collision in a strike like this, they’re usually not just driving off like nothing happened. It’s just that this spott on Gregson is a terrible place to stop, with no shoulder and a pretty significant curve in that spot. A but further down the road is a straightaway that has better visibility for a stopped vehicle, not to mention some driveways and other pull-offs.
(EDIT: fix bad wording, language hard)
30 Likes
Are they really the victim when it’s their own fault?
10 Likes
You didn’t see that bridge run right out in front of them?
22 Likes
This calls for a drawbridge for those train tracks. Is that on the bingo card?
14 Likes
What if the “laser height sensor” was equipped with an overpower mode, so as to remove the problem?
OVERHEIGHT
OVERHEIGHT
zap, crash
YOU ARE NO LONGER OVERHEIGHT. PLEASE ARRANGE TO HAVE THE TOP OF YOUR VEHICLE COLLECTED FROM THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. HAVE A NICE DAY.
23 Likes
As someone who drives a Class C rv that’s 11’ and change (I always forget the change, it’s 2 or 3 inches, but it is on the dashboard) that would absolutely clear that bridge, I still wouldn’t go near that bridge.
I get nervous going under 13 foot bridges.
18 Likes
To be fair, the crash beam does a decently good job of this, without the need for a massive capacitor bank.
16 Likes
They have so many warning indicators now, and yet people still drive into it, making me wonder if they’re actually counter-productive to some degree. Obviously the drivers are inattentive (and many inexperienced), but I wonder if also drivers are getting overloaded by all the signs and flashing lights and failing to notice that flashing signs, telling them their vehicle is too tall, triggered by height sensors are very specifically aimed at them - yes, them. I suspect, even if they could put in a clearance bar, that would just make things worse - drivers would be so distracted by hitting it, they’d be even more likely to miss the signs.
6 Likes
Forget a water curtain, we need high powered water jets, AI-camera aimed, that can gently slow oncoming trucks and force them to stop.
Or that safety floam stuff from Demolition Man
9 Likes
A usual feature of traffic design is that trains have right of way, no matter what. I have seen only one exception to this rule, at a steel mill. Trains were restricted to a crawl on site and the trucks hauling ladles carrying tons of molten steel had right of way of way over everything. No sloshing allowed.
Trains had the next-highest priority.
19 Likes
Trains have much longer braking distances than road vehicles, so stopping rail traffic when an overheight truck is detected is not a realistic option. The protection for the bridge has to be designed on the assumption that a train will cross the bridge after a truck has struck it.
ETA: Rail traffic must be stopped as soon as possible in case the bridge is unsafe, but anything that relies on trains always stopping before they reach the bridge is a non-starter.
8 Likes
Poking around the area on street view, it’s interesting that there’s an even shorter 12 foot underpass nearby, on what look like a bigger/busier street (Chapel Hill St.)
The bridge has some obvious signs of impact damage, but don’t see any extra warnings, water curtains, laser height detectors or bingo squares. Maybe this has been covered, but does it not get hit as often for some reason, or is it just lacking a youtube channel?
(also, I don’t see “speed bumps” on the bingo card)
9 Likes
That’s easy. They have a sign that says there’s a 12-foot bridge ahead so van drivers know not to go that way.
/s
13 Likes
Not the “need”; the DESIRE! 
14 Likes
The thing about the Gregson St. overpass is that it’s the natural route to NC-147/I-885 from many parts of Durham. Gregson is also a major cross-town thoroughfare. Chapel Hill St. is a significant road into downtown, but even without the 12-foot railbridge you would not want to drive a heavy vehicle through those parts without really needing to. And no one would just “cut through” on CH St. – it’s just not connected in a way that would facilitate that.
With the CH St. railbridge it’s also visually quite apparent how low this bridge is (it’s a much longer span, so I think that helps) and there are easy detours not too far off – neither of which is true for Gregson. There’s an even shorter rail bridge on Roxboro – 11’ 4" – and Roxboro is also a major downtown road, but again not really on the way anywhere if you’re not already downtown.
16 Likes
