• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wife of truck driver in bridge collapse says husband has 'impeccable' record

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
8,661
Reaction score
5,307
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Wife of truck driver in bridge collapse says husband has 'impeccable' record | CTV News

The wife of an Edmonton-area truck driver who police say struck part of a bridge in Washington State Thursday evening and caused it to collapse said her husband has an “impeccable” safety record in 20 years on the job.

William Scott, a 41-year-old resident of Spruce Grove, Alta., was at the wheel of a semi-truck carrying a large load of steel when he struck one of the bridge's girders, said Sgt. Kirk Rudeen, of the Washington State Patrol.

Scott made it across the four-lane span but the bridge collapsed behind him, sending the structure tumbling down 15 metres into the Skagit River. Rescuers arrived at the scene within minutes and pulled three people from the frigid water. By late Thursday, officials declared the rescue effort a success.

The bridge was built in 1955 and has a sufficiency rating of 57.4 out of 100, according to federal records. That is well below the statewide average rating of 80, according to an Associated Press analysis of federal data, but 759 bridges in Washington State have a lower sufficiency score.

I'm glad that everyone got out okay. I understand that a truck carrying steel could cause a bridge collapse, but this accident points to the issue of aging infrastructure. Our Federal and State governments are so focused on war or cutting back public services that we are now seeing the results.

Are we prepared to have more bridges collapse in the coming decade in exchange for bloated Federal projects, corporate handouts, and endless wars?
 
It is absurd to blame the bridge collapse on a truck driver for accidently hitting a bridge girder.
 
Yep, I'm sure that girder being struck was more responsible than the outdated nature of the bridge itself...
 
It is absurd to blame the bridge collapse on a truck driver for accidently hitting a bridge girder.




From what I have read this load had a permit and an escort.

If anyone is at fault, it's whoever issued the permit.
 
From what I have read this load had a permit and an escort.

If anyone is at fault, it's whoever issued the permit.

IF the truck , which sounds like it was loaded to exceed 80,000 pounds, which is the wieght limit or use to be the limit on a over the road haul, HIT the girder, IT IS THE TRUCK DRIVERS FAULT.

No one elses.

The claims of crumbling infrastructure are a bit premature, unless any of you have degrees in structural engineering and have access to the data on this specific bridge.
 
Wife of truck driver in bridge collapse says husband has 'impeccable' record | CTV News



I'm glad that everyone got out okay. I understand that a truck carrying steel could cause a bridge collapse, but this accident points to the issue of aging infrastructure. Our Federal and State governments are so focused on war or cutting back public services that we are now seeing the results.

Are we prepared to have more bridges collapse in the coming decade in exchange for bloated Federal projects, corporate handouts, and endless wars?

Actually, an objective review of budgets would show social expenditures as well as the drain of maintaining unsustainable spending at the state level on public employee pensions and benefits has had the greatest impacts on funds available for infrastructure.
 
Any bridge ought to be able to withstand loads well in excess of their rated limits for short periods of time. IMO, this bridge was going to collapse very soon, probably that same day, whether that truck struck the girder or not. Think about it...the truck itself wasn't badly damaged, but the strike against the girder caused the whole bridge to come down...shouldn't bridges be FAR stronger than the vehicles travelling over them?
 
Wife of truck driver in bridge collapse says husband has 'impeccable' record | CTV News



I'm glad that everyone got out okay. I understand that a truck carrying steel could cause a bridge collapse, but this accident points to the issue of aging infrastructure. Our Federal and State governments are so focused on war or cutting back public services that we are now seeing the results.

Are we prepared to have more bridges collapse in the coming decade in exchange for bloated Federal projects, corporate handouts, and endless wars?

Is anyone blaming the truck driver?
 
During my 3 year stay in the US I have to say that infrastructure was in my opinion the biggest thing that had to be addressed by your government. I lived in Portsmouth NH and they had to close down a bridge that connected the town with Maine because it failed an inspection, they ended up having to tear it down and re-build it this was a major bridge as well.
 
I would expect that the US is no different from here in Canada. Those who use the roads, drivers of personal automobiles and businesses who truck merchandise across the continent, have been paying excessive gasoline taxes, driver and vehicle licensing fees and other charges for decades, presumably to fund regular infrastructure maintenance and for new roads and bridges, etc. Unfortunately, political thieves have stolen that money to fund their own pet projects, social welfare programs, arts grants and other nonsense always saying they could put off the road/infrastructure work for another year. Now we have trillions of dollars of new building and maintenance work to do and no way to fund it.

This is simply another example of past generations saddling the current and future generations with their irresponsible and selfish management of the public's money and facilities. It's shameful.
 
During my 3 year stay in the US I have to say that infrastructure was in my opinion the biggest thing that had to be addressed by your government. I lived in Portsmouth NH and they had to close down a bridge that connected the town with Maine because it failed an inspection, they ended up having to tear it down and re-build it this was a major bridge as well.

Infrastructure for the most part is dependent on the State Governments, not the Federal Government unless it's specifically a Federal project.
 
Any bridge ought to be able to withstand loads well in excess of their rated limits for short periods of time. IMO, this bridge was going to collapse very soon, probably that same day, whether that truck struck the girder or not. Think about it...the truck itself wasn't badly damaged, but the strike against the girder caused the whole bridge to come down...shouldn't bridges be FAR stronger than the vehicles travelling over them?

Bridges are designed to withstand static loads, creep and loads created by the elements. They're not designed to withstand a truck running into a load bearing strut, though nowadays this wouldn't be possible. This bridge was "functionally obsolete" which means that it is not how bridges would be designed today, but was not classified as structurally deficient, meaning that it was still fine as a bridge.

Municipalities and states aren't going to start tearing down bridges that work just because their mode of design is obsolete. I'm sure the people complaining about this not happening would also complain about the construction and billions of dollars spent to replace bridges that are structurally sound.

During my 3 year stay in the US I have to say that infrastructure was in my opinion the biggest thing that had to be addressed by your government. I lived in Portsmouth NH and they had to close down a bridge that connected the town with Maine because it failed an inspection, they ended up having to tear it down and re-build it this was a major bridge as well.

It sounds like the inspection process worked then.
 
Wife of truck driver in bridge collapse says husband has 'impeccable' record | CTV News



I'm glad that everyone got out okay. I understand that a truck carrying steel could cause a bridge collapse, but this accident points to the issue of aging infrastructure. Our Federal and State governments are so focused on war or cutting back public services that we are now seeing the results.

Are we prepared to have more bridges collapse in the coming decade in exchange for bloated Federal projects, corporate handouts, and endless wars?
The bridge did have a poor rating, but even with a 100% rating, who is to say the same accident wouldn't have done the same thing?
 
Infrastructure for the most part is dependent on the State Governments, not the Federal Government unless it's specifically a Federal project.

and the state government is dependent on the federal government for infrastructure funding for the most part.

Regardless, I have no problem fixing existing infrastructure. I have huge problems with building bunches of new roads and bridges when we aren't taking care of the ones we have.
 
Bridges are designed to withstand static loads, creep and loads created by the elements. They're not designed to withstand a truck running into a load bearing strut, though nowadays this wouldn't be possible. This bridge was "functionally obsolete" which means that it is not how bridges would be designed today, but was not classified as structurally deficient, meaning that it was still fine as a bridge.

Municipalities and states aren't going to start tearing down bridges that work just because their mode of design is obsolete. I'm sure the people complaining about this not happening would also complain about the construction and billions of dollars spent to replace bridges that are structurally sound.



It sounds like the inspection process worked then.

actually no they were about 10 years later than they should of been.
 
It is absurd to blame the bridge collapse on a truck driver for accidently hitting a bridge girder.
Even with a load of steel...

think about the mass involved for a moment...
 
Bridges are designed to withstand static loads, creep and loads created by the elements. They're not designed to withstand a truck running into a load bearing strut,
Especially with the mass of solid steel on that particular truck!
 
Honestly I don't even know if this would have been avoidable from a design point of view. It's an 18 wheeler with an oversize load traveling at 55mph, you can't design a bridge to withstand that level of impact.
 
The bridge did have a poor rating, but even with a 100% rating, who is to say the same accident wouldn't have done the same thing?

It is a fair question, but given that trucks wreck on other bridges without them collapsing, I suspect it was a combination of factors. My city replaced a bridge awhile back that scared the bajeezes out of people, myself included. Some days the bridge shook like crazy. The city kept saying that it was supposed to do that but could never figure out supposedly why that bridge was requiring increased maintenance if it was supposed to be doing that. There were some days you could feel your front tires almost bouncing in the air that bridge shook so bad. I have been on many bridges of different types in my life in many places, including old ones that still had wood planks and I never felt a bridge shake like that one did. A similar bridge downriver to it didn't do it, the replacement bridge doesn't do it. I think we dodged a bullet.
 
Actually, an objective review of budgets would show social expenditures as well as the drain of maintaining unsustainable spending at the state level on public employee pensions and benefits has had the greatest impacts on funds available for infrastructure.

I understand that suitcases full of money, that our government gives our "friends" around the world to remain our paid-for "friends" is probably important to someone, but why build things for them when a lot of our infrastructure is rated in poor shape by engineers. Time is not on our side here. Fortunately no one died in the latest bridge collapse, but our luck cannot hold forever.

Also, water and sewer mains all over the country are ancient, and are failing, causing flooding, plus the necessity for the public to boil water to make it safe to drink. Ridiculous! We are not a backward third world country to put up with this state of affairs. We pay taxes that are supposed to provide for the common good. Safe infrastructure benefits every one of us, and must be made a priority by our leaders. They know the problems with our failing infrastructure...why can't they be proactive instead of always reactive? And when I say proactive, I'm not talking about the hundreds of millions of dollars that is going to be spent on the new train line in California that most people won't even use. :shock:
 
It is a fair question, but given that trucks wreck on other bridges without them collapsing, I suspect it was a combination of factors. My city replaced a bridge awhile back that scared the bajeezes out of people, myself included. Some days the bridge shook like crazy. The city kept saying that it was supposed to do that but could never figure out supposedly why that bridge was requiring increased maintenance if it was supposed to be doing that. There were some days you could feel your front tires almost bouncing in the air that bridge shook so bad. I have been on many bridges of different types in my life in many places, including old ones that still had wood planks and I never felt a bridge shake like that one did. A similar bridge downriver to it didn't do it, the replacement bridge doesn't do it. I think we dodged a bullet.
The truck had a heavy and oversize load. Taking out a support of a box design bridge is pretty easy to understand from a physics point of view. After reading that the top of the truck hit the top of the bridge, I think I can safely say, this same accident would have had the same results, the day after it was built.
 
I understand that suitcases full of money, that our government gives our "friends" around the world to remain our paid-for "friends" is probably important to someone, but why build things for them when a lot of our infrastructure is rated in poor shape by engineers. Time is not on our side here. Fortunately no one died in the latest bridge collapse, but our luck cannot hold forever.

Also, water and sewer mains all over the country are ancient, and are failing, causing flooding, plus the necessity for the public to boil water to make it safe to drink. Ridiculous! We are not a backward third world country to put up with this state of affairs. We pay taxes that are supposed to provide for the common good. Safe infrastructure benefits every one of us, and must be made a priority by our leaders. They know the problems with our failing infrastructure...why can't they be proactive instead of always reactive? And when I say proactive, I'm not talking about the hundreds of millions of dollars that is going to be spent on the new train line in California that most people won't even use. :shock:

I don't see how maintaining our infrastructure and developing high speed mass transit are mutually exclusive.
 
infrastructure in America is laughable. What's sad is we already pay taxes that are supposed to keep it up. We need to reapportion our spending and cut spending in other areas to fix up infrastructure. We also need to have competitive contracts and companies bidding to do these jobs to help drive down the cost of the work. As cities grow and interstates get old (and do not expand) we are bound to have more problems. The fact that rush hour exists in any city is a sad thing.
 
I don't see how maintaining our infrastructure and developing high speed mass transit are mutually exclusive.

A thought to entertain.

We insufficiently maintain out existing structure. As long as we do not properly maintain it, why should we build more, but to not properly maintain?

Now how about the cost. We already run unmanageable deficits and debt. Now you want to spend even more?
 
Back
Top Bottom