Rollover accident I-81 South PA/MD border

mtrumpet wrote:
Unfortunately, I for one, can't afford an upscaled Wanderlodge (one with slides and all), or a Foretravel.:(

Without any scientific statistics at my disposal, I'd be willing to guess that given the amount of RV's on the road and the miles traveled in them each year, the amount of "incidents" involving RV's is relatively small.

You could get a Wanderlodge M380 with a slide or 2 for around $100-110K and it would be 1-2 years newer than your Newmar.

Per NADA (not the greatest source but its easy), your Newmar is worth about $60-70K (plus or minus).

Is $100-110K out of the budget?

FWIW, it is for me. But, my wife and I didn't really feel like we needed or wanted slides so we got one without them.

wny_pat wrote:

kab449 wrote:
The local ABC affiliate posted this on Facebook. Immediately the discussion turned ugly. Many people commenting that drivers of "rigs" this large with air brakes should have CDL licenses. Lots of comments to change the license law as it pertains to RV's. Of course none of the experts knew exactly what caused the accident.

Going by the approximate GVWR, 35,320 lb, and the fact that it was licensed in NYS, the NYS driver should have held a NYS class D with RV endorsement for over 26,000 lbs. NYS does not require a air brake endorsment, and I do not see where it would have made any difference in this accident other that air brakes may have been to effective under these conditions. But then a Jake brake could have gotten them into the accident also. Pennsylvania has the very same requirement for a non-commercial Class A or B license above 26,000 lb GVWR or GCWR.

When I took my road test for my NYS "R" endorsement, the examiner as I recall, mentioned that the only other states that require the "R" endorsement were Connecticut and, I believe he said Kansas, while some others may have some special requirements, but not many.

I asked if I in fact could get the Air Brake Endorsement added to my License. NYS DMV told me that it was only required for CDL License holders. I told them I would have no problem with the fee and taking the test so I could at least get the endorsement on my license, but they wouldn't even bother allow me to take the test. (It's only a written test here.) I may go back and try again sometime. You know how the DMV can be - depending on the day and whom you speak too, the rules can sometime change 180 degrees! :W

Unfortunately, I for one, can't afford an upscaled Wanderlodge (one with slides and all), or a Foretravel.:(

Without any scientific statistics at my disposal, I'd be willing to guess that given the amount of RV's on the road and the miles traveled in them each year, the amount of "incidents" involving RV's is relatively small.

OhhWell wrote:
There's one. Any others that would fare well in a rollover?

The older Foretravel Unihomes built up till 1995. I don't know if the newer Foretravels handle a rollover as well as the older ones but believe that they do. Actually any coach built using a monocoque chassis construction technique which supports a structural load by using an object's exterior, as opposed to using the internal frame or truss which is then covered with a non-load-bearing skin or coachwork, is going to be stronger in a roll over. This technique is also known as stressed skin or unitary construction. There use to be a couple different companies that used this construction technique. But I don't know what happens when you throw a slide out section into the mix. Is semi-monocoque construction stronger than ladder frame or truss? I would think so, but am not a automotive engineer. There have been documented reports of a number of older Foretravel Uni-homes being rolled over, uprighted, and driven back to the factory for repairs. One rolled four times and was uprighted and driven back to the factory and used for parts. I believe that Country Coach also used the Monocouque construction method. The reason most manufacturers do not use this type of constuction is cost.

That is why I believe in 100% replacement insurance. Not a brand issue just a seen need based on how they all look after a wreck.

There's one. Any others that would fare well in a rollover?

OhhWell wrote:

mike brez wrote:

OhhWell wrote:

MeanderMan wrote:
It's depressing, yet all too common, that some people would go off subject to criticize a report of an accident. A 32K lb vehicle, of which probably 70% or more of the weight is below the floor line, flips over at a significant speed. The two occupants suffer only minor damages, and because some people don't own that brand of MH or any MH at all, they decide to weigh in on "poor construction". Would they have fared better in another brand MH? A car? I doubt it.

Are we looking at the same picture???? I don't know of ANY motorhome that has any form of roll cage construction. To my knowledge, we are all driving fiberglass with aluminum framing holding it up. If any of our rigs flips, we are in serious trouble. Our walls cannot hold the chassis up!

As I already mentioned BlueBirds were roll over certified.

I guess I should have specified non-bus conversion. School Busses are pretty solid.

I don't consider a Wanderlodge to be a bus conversion. They were purpose-built as a motorhome - not produced as shells and moved over to be converted. They were designed and built from the ground up as a motorhome and never started out as an empty shell that could be used for other purposes. Did they share some components with buses? Yes - particularly in the chassis and frame. They did apply the same principles that were used in building a bus to build an equally solid motorhome, though. But, that's about it.

mike brez wrote:

OhhWell wrote:

MeanderMan wrote:
It's depressing, yet all too common, that some people would go off subject to criticize a report of an accident. A 32K lb vehicle, of which probably 70% or more of the weight is below the floor line, flips over at a significant speed. The two occupants suffer only minor damages, and because some people don't own that brand of MH or any MH at all, they decide to weigh in on "poor construction". Would they have fared better in another brand MH? A car? I doubt it.

Are we looking at the same picture???? I don't know of ANY motorhome that has any form of roll cage construction. To my knowledge, we are all driving fiberglass with aluminum framing holding it up. If any of our rigs flips, we are in serious trouble. Our walls cannot hold the chassis up!

As I already mentioned BlueBirds were roll over certified.

I guess I should have specified non-bus conversion. School Busses are pretty solid.

OhhWell wrote:

MeanderMan wrote:
It's depressing, yet all too common, that some people would go off subject to criticize a report of an accident. A 32K lb vehicle, of which probably 70% or more of the weight is below the floor line, flips over at a significant speed. The two occupants suffer only minor damages, and because some people don't own that brand of MH or any MH at all, they decide to weigh in on "poor construction". Would they have fared better in another brand MH? A car? I doubt it.

Are we looking at the same picture???? I don't know of ANY motorhome that has any form of roll cage construction. To my knowledge, we are all driving fiberglass with aluminum framing holding it up. If any of our rigs flips, we are in serious trouble. Our walls cannot hold the chassis up!

As I already mentioned BlueBirds were roll over certified.

Lets see---In the past 2 months I drove the DP from Palm Springs East, drove to Petersburg,Va and back, (400 mi) and to Savanah, Ga and back (600 mi)pulling a trailer part of the time. Big bus, big trailer, and 73yo driver. Did I mention that I also drove my race car 3 days in a row in Va----so just what is "to old"?