Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trapped Under Trucks

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 241 posts

Re: Trapped Under Trucks

#171

Post by Symbiote »

seizethecheese wrote: post #151
Noumenon72 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A statistical life is worth $1-10 million, and this policy costs $127 * 4 million trucks (not counting fuel), so $1.25 million per life the first year and less after that. So it may be a logical argument couched in emotional terms. Perhaps the trucking companies' position is a negotiating tactic too. I don't see why they should have to pay the entire cost of a solution that benefits society more than themselves; that…

Do you really believe that it will cost $125, including installation? It’s probably a large multiple of that. Add in the aerodynamics, and it might not pass the cost/benefit analysis.

It should be easy to find out. The side and rear bars have been mandatory in Europe for decades, and are available as an option where European vehicles are sold abroad.

Re: Trapped Under Trucks

#172

Post by IOT_Apprentice »

Dalewyn wrote: post #136
csours wrote: post #113

> "In 2022, more than a decade after Brumbelow’s tests, NHTSA updated its rules. Even then, the agency acted only after the passage of a federal law directing it to do so." Not going to defend NHTSA here, but it's a good idea to pass laws like this. NHTSA would likely have been sued if they passed the rule. Having a law really cuts down on the lawsuits. After reading 5th Risk by Michael Lewis, I updated my thinking a…

Even from the perspective of keeping authoritative powers held within the reins of the people, it is better for rules and regulations to be legislated into proper laws by the legislature. Legislatures are voted in by and answer to the people, at least ostensibly. Government agencies don't necessarily answer to the people.

Yet legislators are in the grasp of associations, who want no such legislation to occur and either block it or never allow it to be proposed. They are in the clutches of corporations & oligarchs.

Re: Trapped Under Trucks

#173

Post by jonasdegendt »

vanderZwan wrote: post #165
WirelessGigabit wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please no. Sundays in Belgium were awful. Nothing to do. At least now in the USA I can go do what I want. It's like any other day. I don't need to stuff everything in my Saturday. And if that means that I'll pass a couple of Semi trucks? No problem. Hell, I'll move out of the way for them. After all, there isn't a single thing in my hands that hasn't been delivered by a truck.

I don't get your point. How would a lack of trucks in the weekend negatively affect your Sundays in Belgium exactly?

He's implying the same laws that say you can't drive trucks on a Sunday, also restrict other labor, or make it uneconomical (e.g. having to pay mandatory overtime for weekend hours performed).

He's wrong anyway, there's no ban on general trucking on the weekends in Belgium, only oversized loads. He is right about strict labor laws, you'll barely find any open stores on a Sunday, besides restaurants, bars and some other forms of entertainment.

But yeah, God forbid you can't go to the European equivalent of a Best Buy on a Sunday, so some retail worker can enjoy their weekend.

Re: Trapped Under Trucks

#174

Post by AdamN »

brookst wrote: post #79
gambiting wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coming from countries where truck transport is not allowed on Sundays - it's great. Means that if you're going with your family somewhere on Sunday it's very quiet on the roads. Also awesome for long distance driving, always plan those for a Sunday and the traffic flows much smoother. As for the idea that it moves the traffic to other days - no it doesn't, because a lot of that traffic wouldn't be driving on Sunday a…

Isn't this just a somewhat arbitrary benefit for people who have Sundays free? Lots of people have to work Sundays. It seems like a lottery that some people will benefit from and some will suffer from, for no good reason.

Here in Berlin plenty of people work on Sunday (service industry, gas stations) but all grocery stores are closed and the number of people working is significantly less than in NYC for instance. I like it this way ... but do kind of miss NY too :-)

Re: Trapped Under Trucks

#175

Post by AdamN »

katbyte wrote: post #133
JimtheCoder wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you need 3 trailers, time to go back to freight trains." Trains can only run on train tracks. The tracks/train stations don't always go close to where the freight needs to go. It is bordering on impossible to build new rail infrastructure to get freight where it needs to go. It takes a lot longer to ship something on a train than on a truck. Add on the fact that transport in general is getting more expensive, and…

Nothing is cheaper or more efficient and green then shipping by rail. We used to have an amazing rail network in NA (eu still does) and we basically have letf it fall into ruin and become a shell of what would constitute a functioning railway. It literally has done everything possible to kill passenger rail and make shipping via rail painful / unreliable. If we had not trucking wouldn’t be the only option and we woul…

Actually US freight train system is ahead of EU. It's just the passenger system that's broken.

Re: Trapped Under Trucks

#176

Post by inferiorhuman »

Gordonjcp wrote: post #143
inferiorhuman wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're called Mansfield bars in the US, named after the actress Jane Mansfield who died after colliding with a trailer. They're not required federally and not particularly effective as they're generally not inspected or maintained.

It's bonkers that the US named them but don't require them. They're called Mansfield Bars in the UK too, presumably because there isn't really a better or more descriptive name you can give them. There's probably an "official" name in some dusty Ministry of Transport document like "side protection collision bar" or some such, and TÜV probably calls it something like "Seitenaufprallschutzgerätüberlaufschutzausrüstung"…

Oh, looks like I got that wrong. Rear bars are required, but the US standards are well lower than the Canadian ones and periodic inspection isn't required.

https://www.trucknews.com/features/are-standards-for-trailer...

https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/iihs-recognizes-semitrailer...

Re: Trapped Under Trucks

#177

Post by Freeaqingme »

sn41 wrote: post #105

I saw the PBS documentary yesterday. If I am not mistaken, one of the accidents mentioned involved a Chevy Silverado [1]. If so, then the lobbyists are full of it. On the whole, I don't understand why the objection is there: are bars all that expensive? For comparison, here are Daimler trucks sold in India [2] - side protection is clearly visible. (Admittedly, they are high-end trucks as far as the Indian market is c…

> are bars all that expensive?

From the article:

> The beefier, more robust rear guards would’ve cost an additional $127 each, according to industry estimates.

I'm inclined to think that 127 USD (even if the side rails were a little bit more expensive because they're larger) is not too expensive for a feature like this.

Also, I think that in Europe these rails are already mandatory. At least the rear guard is required in The Netherlands if the trailer protrudes >60cm at the rear iirc.

Re: Trapped Under Trucks

#178

Post by digitalengineer »

elihu wrote: post #77

> "The Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association, a lobbying outfit representing semitrailer builders, had little desire to make safer rear guards. In correspondence with the department, the TTMA said it would be 'far more practical' to force Volkswagen and other companies making compact cars to produce larger vehicles that were less likely to slip beneath a truck." Of course.

Meanwhile in Europe: "New European legislation on the bumper to improve road safety" https://www.krakertrailers.eu/en/news/126/new-european-legis...

Re: Trapped Under Trucks

#179

Post by TeMPOraL »

fooker wrote: post #139

India has an interesting solution to these issues. Ban large trucks from city roads (including highway sections) during daytime. The large US cities are getting dense enough to start enacting rules from third world countries. No amount of safety regulations will make these issues go away.

Interesting. Isn't this the case everywhere? In European countries there are rules for where and when large trucks and trailers can go; inside cities, plenty of roads have size/weight limits, and outside, many roads allow trailer truck traffic only at night or during weekends.

Re: Trapped Under Trucks

#180

Post by _trampeltier »

Freeaqingme wrote: post #177
sn41 wrote: post #105

I saw the PBS documentary yesterday. If I am not mistaken, one of the accidents mentioned involved a Chevy Silverado [1]. If so, then the lobbyists are full of it. On the whole, I don't understand why the objection is there: are bars all that expensive? For comparison, here are Daimler trucks sold in India [2] - side protection is clearly visible. (Admittedly, they are high-end trucks as far as the Indian market is c…

> are bars all that expensive? From the article: > The beefier, more robust rear guards would’ve cost an additional $127 each, according to industry estimates. I'm inclined to think that 127 USD (even if the side rails were a little bit more expensive because they're larger) is not too expensive for a feature like this. Also, I think that in Europe these rails are already mandatory. At least the rear guard is require…

Yes in Europe all trucks have bars, but I'm not sure if they would hold a car or if they are more for people on bycicles.
Post reply on HN