Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Brian the fisherman]

Like i said in my post, I have driven this bridge with such ristricted vis that its almost un driveable. as well, unmentioned which i thought would be unrelated but in the winter with white out conditions. I don't care how bad this breif section was with smoke there is no excuse for this to happen. careless drivers cause incidents. conditions add to the risk when carelessness takes pleace. I didn't have to be there to know that drivers caused the pile up with careless aproach to the smoke. its not like it all of a sudden happened and blocked all vision with the snap of a finger. such as a flashbang or some other ridiculous imparement. people misjudged a situation and a chain reaction was a result.

[Dennis.t]

Like i said in my post, I have driven this bridge with such ristricted vis that its almost un driveable. as well, unmentioned which i thought would be unrelated but in the winter with white out conditions. I don't care how bad this breif section was with smoke there is no excuse for this to happen. careless drivers cause incidents. conditions add to the risk when carelessness takes pleace. I didn't have to be there to know that drivers caused the pile up with careless aproach to the smoke. its not like it all of a sudden happened and blocked all vision with the snap of a finger. such as a flashbang or some other ridiculous imparement. people misjudged a situation and a chain reaction was a result.

Once again, you were not there,and don't know what really happened. The wind could of shifted blowing the thick smoke across the bridge very rapidly. Fog and snow don't relate to this situation.

[TheFishingLad]

Once again, you were not there,and don't know what really happened. The wind could of shifted blowing the thick smoke across the bridge very rapidly. Fog and snow don't relate to this situation.

I disagree. I've driving in the worst white outs at night up north over mountains in a car with semis around, if you stop you've caused an accident and made things worse.

I'm not doubting that visibility could of been 0, even if it was, that person that made it to the bridge first and STOPPED caused a 17 car pile up. The cars before him/her didn't stop, and that PLUME of smoke would of been seen a mile away to allow that person to slow and prepare for it.

Oddly enough once you hit a straight piece of road, even if you let go of your steering wheel you will travel straight enough for a long enough period of time to probably make it past the bridge, that's with no hands and accounting for road banking for water run off.

No, god damn excuse.

[Sandman]

I disagree. I've driving in the worst white outs at night up north over mountains in a car with semis around, if you stop you've caused an accident and made things worse.

I'm not doubting that visibility could of been 0, even if it was, that person that made it to the bridge first and STOPPED caused a 17 car pile up. The cars before him/her didn't stop, and that PLUME of smoke would of been seen a mile away to allow that person to slow and prepare for it.

Oddly enough once you hit a straight piece of road, even if you let go of your steering wheel you will travel straight enough for a long enough period of time to probably make it past the bridge, that's with no hands and accounting for road banking for water run off.

No, god damn excuse.

The only excuse for stopping is they thought the bridge was out and did not want to drive off it into the river (like all those people did on the Sea to Sky highway when the debris torrent wiped out a bridge years ago), or else they feared someone else may have stopped and feared running over someone.   I bet many of those people driving to their deaths off that bridge into the torrent were thinking the same as you...the cars in front of me didn't stop, no god damn reason for me to stop.

While I agree the smoke should have been visible from a distance, so there was plenty of time to stop and pull over, I am a little more understanding about why they may have stopped.  Obviously the person made a judgement call to continue when they first saw the smoke (their first mistake).  Once they decide to proceed over the bridge, they essentially were committing to it.  However, you are not legally able to keep driving when visibility is zero (if the police are criticizing people for driving too fast for the conditions), clearly (no pun intended) if the visibility is zero, your speed should be zero.  Once he realized the smoke was thicker than expected and they could not see anymore, they had no legal option but to stop and, as I mentioned above, they may have felt that the bridge may be out.  Really, are you actually saying you would go on and drive right off a bridge?  I am no lemming.  I would have stopped... but then I would have stopped before reaching the bridge.

[troutbreath]

 
Oddly enough once you hit a straight piece of road, even if you let go of your steering wheel you will travel straight enough for a long enough period of time to probably make it past the bridge, that's with no hands and accounting for road banking for water run off.

No, god damn excuse.

I use that time to lift my arms off the steering wheel and protect my head, by crossing my arms in front of my face. Then peek out between my arms to see if it's OK.

[Dennis.t]

The only excuse for stopping is they thought the bridge was out and did not want to drive off it into the river (like all those people did on the Sea to Sky highway when the debris torrent wiped out a bridge years ago), or else they feared someone else may have stopped and feared running over someone.   I bet many of those people driving to their deaths off that bridge into the torrent were thinking the same as you...the cars in front of me didn't stop, no god damn reason for me to stop.

While I agree the smoke should have been visible from a distance, so there was plenty of time to stop and pull over, I am a little more understanding about why they may have stopped.  Obviously the person made a judgement call to continue when they first saw the smoke (their first mistake).  Once they decide to proceed over the bridge, they essentially were committing to it.  However, you are not legally able to keep driving when visibility is zero (if the police are criticizing people for driving too fast for the conditions), clearly (no pun intended) if the visibility is zero, your speed should be zero.  Once he realized the smoke was thicker than expected and they could not see anymore, they had no legal option but to stop and, as I mentioned above, they may have felt that the bridge may be out.  Really, are you actually saying you would go on and drive right off a bridge?  I am no lemming.  I would have stopped... but then I would have stopped before reaching the bridge.

Finally someone who makes sense!!!!!! Thanx for this great post!

[TheFishingLad]

Grrr anger grr.

[Ahh...Why Not]

Look up the definition of "Pain".

[Riverman]

Was anyone actually there?Did anybody see the conditions?

[Carich980]

I'm sure most people here have driven in near whiteout conditions.

Ive been there on way to hunting trip is Sask going over Rogers pass in the dead of winter in the middle of the night with near zero visibility. Limited visibility means slow down, not stop in the middle of the road. Never once did I think well legally I cant really see whats going on around me. Ill stop in the middle of the road and wait for conditions to clear, what could go wrong?

Fault is on the driver that stopped. Its Common Sense to proceed forwards and find a safe place to pull over if you know people are coming up the road behind you.

[Johnny Canuck]

8 days later and this is still being discussed 

[Suther]

8 days later and this is still being discussed 

Still being discussed here, while the real world has already forgotten it even happened... Except the part where they blamed fishermen!!! Wont be forgetting that any time soon...

[FrayedKnot]

 I was at the canal thursday and drove under the bridge to sit and fix a reel and wait for a buddy. I thought id see a big firepit with some scorched earth. I looked around and the only firespot I could see wasnt any bigger than a 2 X 2 spot, hardly campfire sized. So it wasnt the pile of mattresses and wire I had envisioned. Obviously the materials had been cleaned up but you could clearly see the blackened earth and Im surprised it cause enough smoke to make someone stop on the freeway.

[Suther]

I was at the canal thursday and drove under the bridge to sit and fix a reel and wait for a buddy. I thought id see a big firepit with some scorched earth. I looked around and the only firespot I could see wasnt any bigger than a 2 X 2 spot, hardly campfire sized. So it wasnt the pile of mattresses and wire I had envisioned. Obviously the materials had been cleaned up but you could clearly see the blackened earth and Im surprised it cause enough smoke to make someone stop on the freeway.

If you are burning something like the plastic coating on wire, you dont need a big fire to create a big plume of smoke. It takes a lot of wood to create a huge smoke cloud because wood burns relatively clean... plastic on the other hand...

[salmonrook]

Still being discussed here, while the real world has already forgotten it even happened... Except the part where they blamed fishermen!!! Wont be forgetting that any time soon...

Me too, still stinging from that remark