The idle musings of a former military man, former computer geek, medically retired pastor and now full-time writer. Contents guaranteed to offend the politically correct and anal-retentive from time to time. My approach to life is that it should be taken with a large helping of laughter, and sufficient firepower to keep it tamed!
There are several similar underpasses across the country, most of which seem to serve as combination traffic impediments and sources of supposedly humorous youtube videos.
First, it's a given that no matter the height of the underpass someone, somewhere, at some time, will attempt to traverse it with something taller than clearance allows.
That, however, is no excuse for whichever authorities have responsibility for those underpasses to allow such impediments to continue to exist. I suspect there's a de facto "standard maximum height" for intra- and interstate cargo trucks set, not by government edict, but by the companies manufacturing semi trailers and box trucks. I don't know what it is, but I'd guess it's a little under 14 feet, judging by the semi trailers I've observed.
I'd guess - but do not know - that there's a minimum clearance standard for interstate roadways set by the mavens of such matters in Washington, to which interstate highways are constructed (it might be a "chicken/egg" thing - a trailer or truck manufacturer has little to gain by building products unable to clear a substantial number of underpasses, so as to which came first - so as to whether the clearance standard reflects the actions of truck builders or vice-versa, I don't know).
This leaves local streets and roads in the hands of the lesser mortals of the 57 states (which actually should be "59 states" if you listen closely to the statement and do the math). Certainly, there would be substantial expense incurred by states and municipalities in the lowering of pavement, even if that's only a couple of feet, to meet the interstate standard. Instead, we've accepted the idea that installing a sign relieves those in positions of responsibility of all liability, and the legitimate shifting of expense to the citizenry.
Anon from 1:31, 22OCT: You're an example of the problem. Standard height is 13' 6". Drivers know this, or they have no business driving trucks. It's up to them to pay attention to clearance signs. It is not an all-knowing government's place to steal my money to lower the roadway, simply in order to absolve a driver from responsibility for his performance of his job. Perhaps we should install little cushioning arms to bring cars to a stop at intersections, as well? After all, expecting drivers to see & obey a stop sign might place the onus on them, & we can't have that, can we? Let's get the government to do it! It seems to do so many other things so well. --Tennessee Budd
7 comments:
Close call! The driver *almost* hit the sign showing how high a vehicle can fit.
The fail is strong with this one. I thought it was only the Air Force whose motto was "Aim High".
This is 'zactly what happens when the Overpass & Trestle Delivery dude is not payin' close-enough attention, and he runs outta fuel!
There are several similar underpasses across the country, most of which seem to serve as combination traffic impediments and sources of supposedly humorous youtube videos.
First, it's a given that no matter the height of the underpass someone, somewhere, at some time, will attempt to traverse it with something taller than clearance allows.
That, however, is no excuse for whichever authorities have responsibility for those underpasses to allow such impediments to continue to exist. I suspect there's a de facto "standard maximum height" for intra- and interstate cargo trucks set, not by government edict, but by the companies manufacturing semi trailers and box trucks. I don't know what it is, but I'd guess it's a little under 14 feet, judging by the semi trailers I've observed.
I'd guess - but do not know - that there's a minimum clearance standard for interstate roadways set by the mavens of such matters in Washington, to which interstate highways are constructed (it might be a "chicken/egg" thing - a trailer or truck manufacturer has little to gain by building products unable to clear a substantial number of underpasses, so as to which came first - so as to whether the clearance standard reflects the actions of truck builders or vice-versa, I don't know).
This leaves local streets and roads in the hands of the lesser mortals of the 57 states (which actually should be "59 states" if you listen closely to the statement and do the math). Certainly, there would be substantial expense incurred by states and municipalities in the lowering of pavement, even if that's only a couple of feet, to meet the interstate standard. Instead, we've accepted the idea that installing a sign relieves those in positions of responsibility of all liability, and the legitimate shifting of expense to the citizenry.
What's this 'supposedly', Anon? I don't know about you but I find them hilarious.
Looks like our driver attempted a shortcut and didn't succeed.
Anon from 1:31, 22OCT:
You're an example of the problem. Standard height is 13' 6". Drivers know this, or they have no business driving trucks. It's up to them to pay attention to clearance signs. It is not an all-knowing government's place to steal my money to lower the roadway, simply in order to absolve a driver from responsibility for his performance of his job.
Perhaps we should install little cushioning arms to bring cars to a stop at intersections, as well? After all, expecting drivers to see & obey a stop sign might place the onus on them, & we can't have that, can we? Let's get the government to do it! It seems to do so many other things so well.
--Tennessee Budd
Post a Comment