"The sky is falling!"
1400 strikes in 15 years. Wow. That's not even 8 per month.

Then you have one county that reports a huge number of strikes?
Are the signs posted properly? Are truckers made aware of that low bridge
before they are committed? Most likely not.

Then the state of NY goes around and posts clearance signs that are
precisely 12 inches lower than the actual clearance. So most drivers do not
know for a fact if they can clear that bridge until they try.

lol!!!

New York state alone has seen more than 1,400 bridge strikes in the past
15 years, including 46 so far this year in suburban Westchester County,
testing many old bridges already in need of repair, said County
Executive Andrew J. Spano. One bridge in his county was hit nine times
this year.

On 2009-10-16, Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Brent wrote:

I got a better question for you. How about you stop hauling any cargo
that ever had an engineer involved with it's production in any way? You
might be able to haul hand picked and planted produce but that's about
it.
How about we just stop using GPS's engineered to drive trucks into bridges?

They aren't and don't. It's the loose nut behind the wheel.

Errant truckers are always causing delays by making turns too fast on
a tight ramp at I-76/I-476. They flip over and cause massive delays
on both roads.

Not "errant". "Idiots for assuming that the roads were engineered for

the traffic they are expected to carry.

Believing that engineers know what they are doing can get you killed,
and that is a stupid way to go.

They never should've allowed 53' trailers on local streets to make
deliveries.  They always block traffic trying to turn or back into a
spot; they are far too big for local streets.

Are you willing to pay the higher price to cover unloading the bigger
trucks and loading the smaller ones?

I didn't think so.

Errant truckers are always causing delays by making turns too fast on
a tight ramp at I-76/I-476.  They flip over and cause massive delays
on both roads.

Not "errant".  "Idiots for assuming that the roads were engineered for
the traffic they are expected to carry.

We don't need more laws (we really need fewer so that people can
reasonably be expected to follow them) but we do need people who use
their common sense, professional judgement, and don't break the laws.

WTF does this have to do with truckers stoping and blocking traffic to
measure if their trailers fit under bridges?

hanco... at (no spam) bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
And
what happened to your repeated promise to killfile me?

Sorry.

Thought I had--must have mistaken you for somebody with a valid opinion.

I think Thunderbird must time out stuff in the kill-files, or some
people nymshift.  Dunno.  Keeping track of idiots is not where I like to
spend my time.

Do the arithmetic some time--work out loading a truck in California with
something you want, have the truck drive to say Hoboken where it is
unloaded, and the goods are transferred to smaller trucks that drive
one-at-a-time to the Bronx.

Compare that with loading the truck and driving it it to the Bronx.

Maybe the prices didn't go down.  Maybe  they didn't go up, either.

But the solution is right there--stop buying things that are transported
by truck.

Actually, that was the "the entire economy would come to a grinding
halt without Truckers" card.

On Oct 16, 10:31 pm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:

Actually, that was the "the entire economy would come to a grinding
halt without Truckers" card.

Which shows extreme paranoia because NO ONE ever suggested getting rid
of all the trucks.

Yet when anyone suggests truckers are responsible for some of their
problems, they get real defensive.

The newspaper reported that the state police conducted a trucking
inspection.  As usual, a number of rigs pulled off the road on the
spot because they had problems so dangerous the truck had to be
immediately pulled off the street.  Many other citations were issued.

On 2009-10-16, Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Brent wrote:

Great... more traffic problems caused by truckers.

Why don't you stop buying or using anything that was ever in a truck?

If everybody did that, trucks would stop being a problem.

WTF does this have to do with truckers stoping and blocking traffic to
measure if their trailers fit under bridges?

Oh that's right, when anyone is critical of truckers causing traffic
problems, just decide to play the 'superiority' card.

Brent wrote:

Great... more traffic problems caused by truckers.

Why don't you stop buying or using anything that was ever in a truck?

If my GPS is telling me to take a certain route but the sign says Dead End or
Bridge Out or Do Not Enter, I think I will pay more attention to the sign than
what the voice in my GPS is telling me. Don't these guys know what No Commercial
Vehicles or Low Clearance means?

H.B. Elkins wrote:
If my GPS is telling me to take a certain route but the sign says Dead End or
Bridge Out or Do Not Enter, I think I will pay more attention to the sign than
what the voice in my GPS is telling me. Don't these guys know what No Commercial
Vehicles or Low Clearance means?

Sure. But if the first Low Clearance sign is posted on a bridge, after
you've spent the last 20 miles on a narrow road lined on both sides with
telephone poles so it's impossible to turn around, it's a bit too late
for the trucker to avoid the problem. The MUTCD ought to require signs
warning of the low clearance (or truck ban, or weight limit) back where
the trucker *can* turn around and avoid the hazard.

This especially goes in states like New York where these hazards are so
common, you don't dare take an unfamiliar exit from the freeways.