Towing above 65

jaycocreek wrote:


If you were not there or you do not have first hand knowledge of that accident, you don't have a clue what happened other than the report that does not go into detail.

You were not there either nor do you have first hand knowledge.....hear say yes/second hand yes.

But no where have you posted any report/statement that SPEED caused accident.

SPEED would be a contributing factor IF (BIG IF) driver LOST CONTROL because he was going to fast........

Based on incident report......driver did lose control when he pulled over in front of semi, not due to speed but before clearing. Semi then whacked TT which resulted in wreck.

IF driver had not pulled over to soon.......no wreck regardless of speed. On this road, on 2 lane road by my place, on 2 lane road in middle of WY, on Lolo Pass, on 4 lane Interstate.

Driver error caused wreck.....not the speed at which he was towing.


:S :S :S :S

No doubt at all it was driver error on many points including speed. I have pulled that exact grade prior to the wreck with multiple towing vehicle's from logging /lumber and grain trucks to a multitude of RV's from motorhomes/fifth wheels/pickup campers and travel trailers... Its home!

I have no trouble maintaining the speed limit over that grade with my whimpy 2008 5.4.His unit was newer.

I have yet to here one reply based on experience towing on that road pulling a trailer. Not one but a lot of guessing not knowing the road or anyone involved. The speed limit is 65 mph and passing a semi at 65 mph on a two lane road is stupid because the speed needed to pass that semi going 65 mph is beyond what a person should drive pulling a trailer on that road.

If you were not there or you do not have first hand knowledge of that accident, you don't have a clue what happened other than the report that does not go into detail.

jaycocreek wrote:

Had he been content to follow behind the semi at a slower speed he would likely be alive today.

The slower speed was 65 mph while his speed had to exceed that to pass.

Except driver didn't lose control of vehicle/trailer due to his passing speed it was because he pulled back in front of semi BEFORE clearing front of semi.

10 mph........80 mph wouldn't have mattered if he had NOT clipped front of semi after passing. He didn't complete pass successfully----driver error

Had he been content to follow behind the semi at a slower speed he would likely be alive today.

The slower speed was 65 mph while his speed had to exceed that to pass.

Huntindog wrote:
This just proves that even when you get jello nailed to the tree..... It won't stay there.

This "story" about the pic has been convuleted so much as the poster of it trys to eveade the questions.. That it is hard to see the fire for the smoke.

Since the picture poster was supposedly trying to make a point by posting the pic...

It is up to him to make said point by stopping the evasion dance, and actually answering the questions that are being asked.


HERE IT IS IN PLAIN ENGLISH:

HOW FAST WAS THE TT GOING?

and

WHAT DID THAT HAVE TO DO WITH HIM MERGING INTO THE SEMI?

100% correct there is no direct correlation between the speed and the crash, the RV driver would have crashed at any speed when he contacted the front of the semi. Why the semi driver didn't hit the brakes when he saw the guy coming in short...like a giant game of chicken.

The ONLY correlation to speed in this crash is that you could say that the RV driver's desire to go faster caused him to want to pass the semi, which turned out not to be a prudent decision. Had he been content to follow behind the semi at a slower speed he would likely be alive today.

Evidence so far suggests: Driver 1 made a bad pass, while Driver 2 kept on trucken'.

HOW FAST WAS THE TT GOING?

Dog.. I'm not going to repeat myself to you now or ever. If you would talk less and read more you would see the answer you want before you went on this childish rant.

I could post a picture of the last extraction here they were on. It shows one firefighter cutting off the door of the rolled over car as two were assisting while the occupant/victim inside was talking up a storm to the EMT inside and the others helping and the officer was standing back letting them do there job they were trained for out of sound from the victim. He later interviewed her.

My point is, first responders sometimes here more anitially than the officers there. Sometimes first immediate responses are more detailed than later after all is said and done.

This is why some reports don't tell the whole story.

jaycocreek wrote:

Why not put this to rest.

I'd be more than happy to do just that. It has run its course but others, including yourself in your last post, keep asking questions or discrediting the accounts of the accident by those that were there on scene in an official capacity to save/extract to save life and limb.

When fire/extraction is called, it's usually a grim scene,not always but usually. This is why few volunteered for the extra training.

I am not sure what you mean by run its course by asking questions. That is the reason it continues the question asked was never answered. What was the statement? I am well aware of the chaos of a fatal accident. I am not tying to discredit anyone. That is impossible as I don't even know what this statement was to even do that.