BubDelicious
Explorer
Joined 14 years ago
User Profile
User Widgets
All Activity
Re: Why would Keystone remove egress windows from newer models?
Must have missed this thread some how. I read specifications all the time(NTHSS(FMVSS), European(ESE), OEM), not RV specifications. Keep in mind that I only half arsed read this specification as well. I would also read the definitions and make sure a travel trailer falls under recreational vehicle in this spec. Ha, well where were you a week ago? Lol.720Views0likes0CommentsRe: Why would Keystone remove egress windows from newer models?
Its free to view but you have to create a profile and give up your email address. National Fire Protection Association el.jefe wrote: BubDelicious wrote: 6.2.1.2.1 Where more then one sleeping area is provided and a sleeping area has a door as a primary means of escape to the outside of the recreational vehicle, no additional escape shall be required for this area. Ha, well where were you a week ago? Lol. Do you have a link to the updated version? There are still a couple things I wonder about, though it appears from what you've posted the manufacturer has more than enough wiggle room to obey the letter of the standard without adhering to the spirit of it. What I read earlier had a not about beds in their normal sleeping position, and having to have a wide enough path. 13 inches, I believe it was. Would that apply to sofa sleepers? I also think it's interesting that they designate "sleeping areas" rather than "rooms". By Keystone's interpretation, you could have a 40' long trailer with only a door at the far end as long as you don't put and interior doors in it.566Views0likes0CommentsRe: Why would Keystone remove egress windows from newer models?
First thing to do when reading any specification is to make sure you are reading the right one. NFPA 1192, 2018 Edition, vehicles manufactured after Sept 01 2017. 6.2.1.2.1 Where more then one sleeping area is provided and a sleeping area has a door as a primary means of escape to the outside of the recreational vehicle, no additional escape shall be required for this area. The way I see it, if your bunk house does not have a door to close it off from the rest of the trailer then the primary escape is the outside door and no additional escape is required. Iam assuming your front bedroom has a door to close it off from the rest of the trailer, which requires an addition escape (window). el.jefe wrote: NFPA 1192 6.2.1.2 Each bedroom or area designed for sleeping shall have at least two unobstructed paths to exit. (Keystone is saying that since it is a curtain separating the bunkhouse from the rest of the trailer and not a door it doesn't count as a separate room. Either way, the egress window is behind a door in the front bedroom) 6.2.1.3 The path to exit shall not require passing any designated exit to gain use of another designated exit except where any part of a bed in its normal sleeping configuration is within 24 in. (610 mm) of the plane of the nearest designated exit as projected across the vehicle. (I don't fully understand what they are saying at the end, but the egress window is forward of the exit door, so it wouldn't seem to be a valid path to escape from the rear bunkhouse) 6.2.5.1 The alternate exit, if not an exterior passage door, shall provide an opening of sufficient size to permit unobstructed passage, keeping the major axis parallel to the plane of the opening and horizontal at all times, of an ellipsoid generated by rotating about the minor axis an ellipse having a major axis of 24 in. (610 mm) and a minor axis of 17 in. (432 mm). (My slider windows might fit this standard if they opened all the way, but they don't open far enough.) By all of these sections, I believe the 2018 3290bh fails to meet the NFPA standard.507Views0likes0CommentsRe: Might have needed a WDH ?
profdant139 wrote: Bub, you have sharper eyes than I do -- I can't tell if the line on the far side of the photo is yellow or not. On a four lane divided highway, is the left line yellow? I thought yellow was just for undivided highways. So your reading is that the truck and the trailer spun 180 degrees and still stayed in alignment? That could happen, I suppose, but it is amazing. I guess we will never know. Just having fun speculating on what might have happened. As someone else pointed out, his LP tank is out a ways on the ice. Looks like footprints next to it, maybe going to the other direction of the divided hwy. I'll also surmise that they were ok since they took the time to stack/arrange there belongings.423Views0likes0CommentsRe: Might have needed a WDH ?
profdant139 wrote: Bub, are you sure they are facing the wrong way? It looks to me, judging by the angle of the light and the shadows, that this photo was taken in the winter, in late afternoon, with the nose of the truck pointing north. Probably on the east coast (judging by the topography). And I agree that this is a divided four lane highway, with the truck and trailer off on the right shoulder of the northbound lanes. Good call on the deployment of the side curtains! This amateur speculation is fun, but maybe the OP can give us more info about the location of the accident? Ha, it is fun. Based on the color of the road lines, he is backwards. It appears the he is on the yellow dividing line.242Views0likes0CommentsRe: Might have needed a WDH ?
BubDelicious wrote: profdant139 wrote: Assuming no one got hurt (knock on wood), the photo presents an interesting puzzle. Chances are good that the wood was firewood stacked in the bed of the truck. And I can understand how, if the truck tips over, the wood spills out and trails the truck as it slides to a stop. But what I can't understand is how the spilled wood travelled farther down the road than the truck did?? Wild guess -- first, there was more friction between the side of the truck and the road than there was between a piece of wood and the road. So once the truck spilled the load and screeched to a stop, some of the wood kept going for a few more feet. If all of that is correct, then note the linear distribution of the firewood. That would indicate that the truck and trailer were not spinning around at all (which would create a fan-shaped scatter pattern) but instead tipped over and slid in a straight line, essentially together. And what that means, I have no idea! Maybe it means a side gust is more likely than a severe sway incident?? 4 lane divided highway, he is facing the wrong direction. His air curtains on the passenger side have deployed, had to have enough deceleration on that side for them to deploy.242Views0likes0CommentsRe: Might have needed a WDH ?
profdant139 wrote: Assuming no one got hurt (knock on wood), the photo presents an interesting puzzle. Chances are good that the wood was firewood stacked in the bed of the truck. And I can understand how, if the truck tips over, the wood spills out and trails the truck as it slides to a stop. But what I can't understand is how the spilled wood travelled farther down the road than the truck did?? Wild guess -- first, there was more friction between the side of the truck and the road than there was between a piece of wood and the road. So once the truck spilled the load and screeched to a stop, some of the wood kept going for a few more feet. If all of that is correct, then note the linear distribution of the firewood. That would indicate that the truck and trailer were not spinning around at all (which would create a fan-shaped scatter pattern) but instead tipped over and slid in a straight line, essentially together. And what that means, I have no idea! Maybe it means a side gust is more likely than a severe sway incident?? 4 lane divided highway, he is facing the wrong direction.242Views0likes0Comments
Groups
RV Families
Activities, advice, and destinations for those traveling with kids!Oct 09, 2024501 Posts RV Newbies
We all start out new. Share lessons learned or first-time questions!Jun 15, 20174,026 Posts Travel Trailer Group
Prefer to camp in a travel trailer? You're not alone.Jan 20, 202544,030 Posts
