the link above is not working…

for a loaded truck to make that route in 10 hours and a few minutes sounds almost impossible….or have their speed limits been modified?

Are they crazy, have they drove on our roads, it’s not like we have 4 lane split HWY here and they best plowed highway either

http://drivebc.ca/cvrp

There was an extra “http://” in the link.

I drove that route many times in the last couple of years other than the PG to Mackenzie leg. Loaded truckers would certainly have a tough time making that without speeding when they are going downhill or have relatively long straight stretches. So, I have seen too many going beyond 100kph in those situations and hitting 110 and 120.

In addition, when trucks were bunched up, the case far too often would be that they were passing each other on short 2 km or so passing lanes while passenger cars were sitting back, unable to pass. Some were courteous enough to let passenger vehicles first.

So, it is possible, but put a stop or two in there for a break and it no longer is. The calculation is done on pure speed limit driving time without slow down for uphill sections and traffic.

Google Earth calculates the distance from the Sumas Huntington Border Crossing as 900km and equates it to 10 hours and 11 minutes travel time to the center of Mackenzie.

The thing is that if trucker have input into this they can make adjustments for hills, loads., etc.

I have tried several times to load the page and it seems to be struggling.

No problem loading the drivebc page.

When I put the two points in that tool, from Sumas to Mackenzie it provided me with the following info

distance = 900.94km …. (amazing accuracy, eh?)

time = 10hrs 13 min.

So, they all use the same database for distance and speed limits. Thing is, speed limits change in construction sections, so slow downs to 50, 70, 80 etc in 100kph zones are not accounted for. Neither are winter road conditions. The times are the same, no matter what the road conditions.

I expect the height and width restrictions are a bit more accurate and that they can more easily be adjusted for driver input into the system.

But then they have the weasel clause in there anyway, so it might be good enough for a first filter, but not if a driver is doing professional due diligence.

What is the point of this website? Any load that exceeds legal measurements or weights has to get a permit anyways. This is just google maps with the overpass heights. It doesn’t offer alternate routes if you are overheight. The driving time isn’t adjusted for trucks. There is no place to put in weights and each bridge has different limits. Very disappointing…..prob more so if I knew how much money they spent on it.

Posted by: gitterdun on February 6 2014 7:13 AM
What is the point of this website?

—————–

Some overpaid bureaucrat (or a whole team of bureaucrats!) had to justify their salary somehow.

Gees you people whine sooooo much! The website works fine! It even works better on a smartphone. I think this is a great idea for truck routes. While you all may think it uses Google Maps, pfft, mobile site does not use Google Maps and is actually more user friendly than the full site. All everyone does is complain when something NEW comes out. Instead of clicking the link just goto DriveBC.ca or even better, try it on a phone!

Our tax dollars hard at work.

pookerjams, what I said was the LINK wasn’t working…and it isn’t..not complaining at all….

Posted by: pookerjams on February 6 2014 7:55 AM
Gees you people whine sooooo much! The website works fine!

———————-

The website works fine? No it doesn’t. Put in a 6 meter height and watch what happens. It flags the underpasses that you can’t use but it still tells you it will take you 10 hours and change to get to the lower mainland. That’s not my idea of “works fine”.

When you put in “find route” don’t you think it should find a route that you can actually take?

Gitterdun is right. If it is a dimensional load because of height or width, then they need to get permits in any event.

Posted by: Palopu on February 6 2014 10:54 AM
Gitterdun is right. If it is a dimensional load because of height or width, then they need to get permits in any event.

—————

Had they programmed it properly I should have never been shown a route that took me past the first unpassable obstacle.

pookerjams ….. the link provided in the report does not work and it is easy to see why not if you look at the properties of the link. But then, you likely do not know that.

In addition, when I actually go to the site, it is caught in a loop. For all I know it is because my computer uses Windows 8.1 as the operating system.

Drive BC web site works fine.

Now, if you think that DriveBC does not use Google maps, you are the most naïve person I have ever come in contact with.

See the little yellow person on he upper left…. drag him over to the map and part of the map will turn blue … that indicates where you can see a street view….. THAT’S GOOGLE at work.

There are not dozens or hundreds of companies doing the same work. Google knows what they are doing and how they can make money with the data services they provide, unlike most governments.

JB:”Our tax dollars hard at work.”

Not entirely, in my opinion. I am a strong supporter of spending more dollars on four laning our highways 16 and 97.

When I see the graders and paving equipment hard at work I can actually believe that something practical and useful is being accomplished.

Should be a restriction on wide loads going from Mackenzie Junction to Chetwynd both directions between 7AM and 8pm when traffic is heavy. Its just not safe in a lot of spots with the highway not near wide enough for normal traffic, much less the wide loads.