Thank goodness no other vehicle was involved with this and I hope the driver is okay.

Glad that our incredibly intelligent provincial government is now going to designate this highway as a Class A highway. So happy this highway won’t be considered a rural route anymore. **When you read this, please insert a lot of sarcasm**

Whatttt another truck???? WHAT gives???

I always thought our hyways were Class A and that the plowing provided appeared to be lack of maintenance.. But… what do I know…

No load. Based on my experience and the laws of probability, likely going over the speed limit.

As long as there are roads and bad drivers, they will find themselves in the ditch, regardless of government classificaion.

Gus looks to me like you have no experience with trucks. No load means be carful on the ice the laws of probability say this professional driver was going below the speed limit. Look at the road behind the tow truck glare ice. Probably had to avoid some dumbass like you.

If the road maintenance can’t keep up, all they have to do is shut the road temporarily.

No informed opinions here. too little info.

btrucker wrote: “Gus looks to me like you have no experience with trucks.”

I have driven the highway between here and Washington state about 20 times over the past year and a half. I know how far too many of these “professional” drivers drive from that experience.

In the USA it went so far that a group of “professionals” with an oversize load took out a span of a bridge just north of Burlington.

They speed, just like other drivers when they get a chance to.

“No load means be carful on the ice”

Sitting in the ditch is a good indicator that he/she was not careful enough.

Simple, isn’t it?

BTW, as I mentioned before, we will not likely get to know the actual cause of the crash. One has to rummage through safety sites for such info. There are several on the BCFSC site which provide some information of that. Most causes on there are due to not considering the conditions of the road.

No load = no weight.

According to the linked report about trucks and busses involved ion fatal crashes in the USA this is what it states for 2011.
==================================

Of the 3,757 drivers of large trucks involved in fatal crashes, 341 (10 percent) were not wearing a safety belt at the time of the crash; of those, 29 percent were completely or partially ejected from the vehicle.
—————- these are “professionals”

One or more driver-related factors were recorded for 56 percent of the drivers of large trucks involved in single-vehicle fatal crashes and for 29 percent of the drivers of large trucks involved in multiple-vehicle fatal crashes.
—————— these are “professionals”

In comparison, at least one driver-related factor was recorded for 76 percent of the drivers of passenger vehicles (cars, vans, pickup trucks, and sport utility vehicles) involved in single-vehicle crashes and 52 percent of the passenger vehicle drivers in multiple-vehicle crashes.
——— these are NOT professionals

Speeding was the most often coded driver-related factor for both vehicle types;

—————- those are “professionals”

distraction/inattention was the second most common for large truck drivers,
————- those are “professionals”

and impairment (fatigue, alcohol, drugs, illness) was the second most common for passenger vehicle drivers.
———- those are not professionals

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/facts-research/research-technology/report/LargeTruckandBusCrashFacts2011.pdf

Knock yourself out. Welcome to the reality of the world. Professional drivers are no different than other professionals …. there is a whole range of different behaviours.

Gus…if you are talking about the Skagit River bridge I don’t think that it was just the trucker’s fault.

“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, 9 inches, state records show.

The bridge’s curved overhead girders are higher in the centre 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.

The permit specifically describes the route the truck would take, though it includes a qualification that the state “Does Not Guarantee Height Clearance.”

Until everyone gets their head out of their ass. We are going to keep having accidents at about the same rate as we always have. People like Gus who think they can find the causes by rummaging threw safety sites needs his head read. 20 trips to Washington State is a month’s work for most truckers. The most likely cause for truck accidents is.

Driver fatigue, Driver fatigue, distracted driver, texting, phone calls. In a job were 70 hrs per week is legal and the norm Driver fatigue.

Last but not least Drugs and alcohol.

Or could have just blown an air line, took the ditch to get out of the way of someone else in trouble, swerved for wildlife, blown a tire, took out a front wheel bearing, popped a tie rod….

Professional drivers??…..from what I’ve seen over the years there’s a whole bunch of truckers out there that aren’t any more professional than any of the other idiots that managed to somehow get driver licenses!

gitterdun … that is the bridge I am talking about …. most of the bridges in that area are about the 1950’s vintage with a curved tie beam across the road. Lousy design for today’s loads. The vehicle could have gotten across without a scratch if it had driven in the left hand lane. But, it didn’t as had several more at other time. That one was the last one to get away without dropping the span.

There are no height warnings on any of those bridges that I crossed in that region.

I am sorry, but I liken a PORFESSIONAL truck driver to a pilot. He has final responsibility for carrying the load safely to its destination. He should be aware of the height of the load AND he should be able to determining the clear height of an underpass or bridge with overhead restrictions. It goes with the territory. That is where the buck stops.

If I’m not mistaken, the trucker whose load hit the Skagit River bridge had a pilot vehicle running ahead of him, to confirm overhead clearance on bridges. It could be that he was relying on that resource to inform him of any potential clearance problems.
metalman.

Yes, he did have pilot cars. I liken it to a pilot being on board a ship when guiding the ship through a difficult channel or an air traffic controller guiding a plane to land. There always has to be a person who makes the final decision. In both those cases it is the captain.

I believe the same is true in the case of a trucker being escorted by pilot cars. The pilot cars are not steering the truck. The truck driver is.

In the final analysis there is no way to shrug off that responsibility to the state, the bridge designer, the pilots, those who researched the route and whoever else.

I am not sure if some on here have seen this early report after the birdge collapse.

From a National Transportation Safety Board report released Tuesday, June 11, 2013.

The driver of an overloaded semi that struck the Skagit River bridge last month said he felt “crowded” by another truck driver and moved closer to the side of the bridge that had less clearance, causing his load to hit a truss.

The tractor-trailer driver and other witnesses told the NTSB that another tractor-trailer had passed the over-height load on the left. The driver reported feeling “crowded” and moved farther to the right, causing the top of the load to hit the “overhead portal and multiple sway braces” on the far right side of the bridge truss, collapsing the span, the report said.

The NTSB has been looking to speak with the driver of the truck and trailer that passed the oversize load, but board spokesman Peter Knudson said officials still have not found the person or vehicle.
The truck driver reported he had a 15-foot-9-inch load, and the lowest portion of the sway braces on the bridge is 14 feet, 8 inches, the NTSB reported.

The operator of the pilot vehicle told investigators that the clearance pole mounted on the front of her vehicle was set at 16 feet, 2 inches high – leaving room between the top of the pole and the top of the load.

The pilot car driver, Tammy DeTray of Olympia, released a statement last week saying she did not detect a strike when the pilot car drove across the bridge.
=====================================

Then we have these words coming from a speech at a conference, August 27, 2013
We (NTSB) made a bold recommendation in December 2011 that called for a ban on all portable electronic devices while behind the wheel.

In the aftermath of our recommendation, we heard from many people – most now agree that texting is risky. Some can understand a ban on hand-held devices. But when it comes to a complete ban – including hands free – they dispute that there is a distraction problem.

And yet, our accident investigations continue to demonstrate that this technology poses a significant risk to the safety of our transportation system.

Right now, we have two ON-GOING INVESTIGATIONS WHERE WE ARE EXAMINING WHAT ROLE, IF ANY, CELL PHONE USAGE MAY HAVE PLAYED.

ONE IS THE I-5 BRIDGE COLLAPSE IN WASHINGTON STATE. The other, a grade-crossing collision between a freight train and a dump truck in Maryland that resulted in a derailment and a subsequent fire and explosion that injured bystanders and damaged numerous buildings. In both of these accidents, hands-free cell phones were being used.

Just this past June, the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety released a science-based report that shows that hands-free is not risk-free. Something that the aviation community has long understood with their sterile-cockpit concept.

IT IS ALL ABOUT FOCUSING ON THE TASK AT-HAND, NO MATTER HOW ROUTINE IT MAY SEEM – fatal accidents can result from only one mistake.

http://www.ntsb.gov/news/speeches/hersman/daph130827.html

I looked at the accident pictures above and I don’t see a bridge no matter how I try. ;-)