Please Be Careful !

Arcamper wrote:
Loss of life over such a simple mistake is always sad and my heart goes out to the families involved. However I would really like to see pictures of the bed and hitch of that truck. What kind of hitch and how it held up as well as the mounting. Was it the factory puck system or aftermarket. I only ask because I have the same truck and would like to know where the weak points might be.

As this was a horse trailer, it's extremely likely that this was a gooseneck.

Lyle

Cloud Dancer wrote:
I still haven't seen the description of the start-to-finish for this event. I'm curious because so far the scenarios for a collision that occurs in a merging incident don't normally result in such devastation.
Did road rage play a part in this one? If the merging vehicle came onto the traffic lane AHEAD of the #2 vehicle, did the #2 hit the merger in the rear bumper? AND, THAT is what caused both lose control? It seems to me that if I was driving the #2, I would've touched the brakes enough to avoid contact.

It has been pointed out that this was NOT a merge, but a direct pull out from a side road into the pat of the truck. Either didn't see or didn't care!!
This is the reason I drive with lights on 24/7/366.

As I read the entire thread it seems this was NOT a merge, but a vehicle "pulling out"from another roadway into the path of the truck and trailer.

Am I right?

I still haven't seen the description of the start-to-finish for this event. I'm curious because so far the scenarios for a collision that occurs in a merging incident don't normally result in such devastation.
Did road rage play a part in this one? If the merging vehicle came onto the traffic lane AHEAD of the #2 vehicle, did the #2 hit the merger in the rear bumper? AND, THAT is what caused both lose control? It seems to me that if I was driving the #2, I would've touched the brakes enough to avoid contact.

Loss of life over such a simple mistake is always sad and my heart goes out to the families involved. However I would really like to see pictures of the bed and hitch of that truck. What kind of hitch and how it held up as well as the mounting. Was it the factory puck system or aftermarket. I only ask because I have the same truck and would like to know where the weak points might be.

jfkmk, reread my comment I said 2 lanes. I have traveled all over the US and put on no less than 15,000 each year and more often much more than that. Some states are far worse than others for traffic and their drivers. BUT as you approach a city the roads like I10 go to at least 3 lanes the semis which in a lot of case only travel at 65 stay in the 2nd lane, you should also if you do not know the city you are coming upon. Let the people that drive the road daily show you which lane to be in and you'll be in the 2nd lane. period. Oh and another point as you approach the cities the amount of exits and merges increases substanually also, just another reason no to be in that lane.

tomman58 wrote:

jfkmk wrote:

tomman58 wrote:

jfkmk wrote:

tomman58 wrote:
A little hint, when the road way interstate becomes 3 lanes instead of two, get in the 2nd lane or follow the semis as they know the game. Never put yourself in the first lane unless you are exiting.
.

I drive a major 3-lane interstate to work every day. The trucks drive in the middle lane as you suggest, as well as the slow lane. It creates major traffic problems. Ive heard this is something they were going to crack down on in NJ, as it is not legal.

I try not to go to NJ. My daughter lives in MD and it is no fun driving there either.

Whether driving in NJ, MD, MI or any other state,if you're in any other lane than the slow lane and you're not keeping up with the flow of traffic, you're creating a roving road block, impeding the flow of traffic and creating a dangerous situation.

Wrong, the minimum speed is 45mph. I normally am driving at 65 to67mph on Michigan and most interstates that a fairly level and in good shape. I drive 80 in the car and am in the furthest left lane a lot. The real problem are two lanes where RV's generally drive from 50 to 65 and the cars want 80. They get stuck behind a 60mph RV then pull into the 80+ lane and all hell breaks loose.

Semis are constantly passing other semis so your point is more than moot. semis in Michigan are limited to 65mph.

Wrong, a minimum speed limit of 45 doesn't mean you can do it any lane you want. As stated, in NJ (where you don't drive) they were going to crack down on drivers not keeping up with traffic in the middle and left lanes, as it creates dangerous situations of being passed on both the left and the right. Not sure what happened, they still do it.

Yeah, semis pass each other. Every day I see a semi in the middle lane and other semis making all kinds of maneuvers to try to get around them. Sometimes they pass in the third lane, really creating a mess.

So, are you trying to say that when someone gets stuck behind a 60 mph RV in the middle lane then try to pass into a lane going 80, that the RV isn't causing "all hell to break loose"?

Cummins12V98 wrote:

mich800 wrote:

rhagfo wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:
Very sad indeed!

I think this is an example of what not to do. What I mean is if someone pulls in front of you hit the brakes and hold on. Don't try drastic evasion maneuvers. Every situation is different but the evasion part can get you more than the collision part.

Very Sad indeed, I agree with Cummins that I am sure all in the truck survived the initial impact. It was the impact with the wall of the wash, that inflicted the real damage.
It does sound real callous to say not to avoid a collision, but you really want to stay on the roadway after impact.

This is one of the reasons I drive with my lights on 24/7 when driving, I have done this for all 49 years I have been driving. You are far more visible!!!!

You guys do realize in a major impact like this the vehicles do not just stop. It is a huge assumption to state the truck made any evasive maneuvers. If that car pulled out directly in front of the truck this is exactly what happens. Airbags, blackout and 50-60 mph puts that truck exactly where it is.

Good points!

I still say don't try evasive maneuvers unless you know your surroundings for a fact.

I 100% agree. I just don't think that is what happened here. I was in an accident very similar years ago and the vehicles did not end up anywhere close to the impact. And trust me there was no "driving" after the initial hit.

mich800 wrote:

rhagfo wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:
Very sad indeed!

I think this is an example of what not to do. What I mean is if someone pulls in front of you hit the brakes and hold on. Don't try drastic evasion maneuvers. Every situation is different but the evasion part can get you more than the collision part.

Very Sad indeed, I agree with Cummins that I am sure all in the truck survived the initial impact. It was the impact with the wall of the wash, that inflicted the real damage.
It does sound real callous to say not to avoid a collision, but you really want to stay on the roadway after impact.

This is one of the reasons I drive with my lights on 24/7 when driving, I have done this for all 49 years I have been driving. You are far more visible!!!!

You guys do realize in a major impact like this the vehicles do not just stop. It is a huge assumption to state the truck made any evasive maneuvers. If that car pulled out directly in front of the truck this is exactly what happens. Airbags, blackout and 50-60 mph puts that truck exactly where it is.

Good points!

I still say don't try evasive maneuvers unless you know your surroundings for a fact.

LOL so true. Ill take the semi's . Driving habits have become very poor right along with the roadways here. Overpopulated mess, everyday in local section of paper, 3+ deaths from day before and most just drive right off and leave person laying in roadway. Sadly the norm here :(