Reset Password
Reset Link Sent
| Blogs > OnDaFence > Bret's Blogisphere |
|
A New Proposal  Better check those air brakes. On Friday, the Obama administration proposed a measure to limit the top speeds of large trucks and buses. The new rule, suggested by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, proposes limiting road-going vehicles weighing more than 26,000 pounds to a top speed of either 60, 65, or 68 miles per hour. The agencies say they will consider alternatives to these speeds, however, based on public comment.  The size category in question covers semi-trucks, garbage trucks, and dump trucks, among many other types of rig, as well as a large chunk of the nation’s bus fleet. Under the proposal, only new trucks and buses would be equipped with the speed limiters, with the vehicle operators being responsible for setting the devices at or below the maximum speed. The U.S. Department of Transportation suggests the move could save more than $1 billion in fuel costs every year, on top of the safety benefits to cutting down on the kinetic energy of these road-going goliaths. “This is basic physics,” NHTSA administrator Mark Rosekind said in a statement. “Even small increases in speed have large effects on the force of impact. Setting the speed limit on heavy vehicles makes sense for safety and the environment.”  The idea of limiting the speeds of trucks and other large vehicles is not new. The European Union, Australia, Japan, and the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec have imposed legal restrictions on how fast trucks can travel. However, the U.S. trucking industry has resisted past efforts to cap the velocities of its vehicles, according to The Verge. According to a report issued by the NHTSA, limiting the speeds of large vehicles could save between 27 and 498 lives every year on America’s roadways, with the number rising as the maximum speed falls. The agency suggests approximately 1,044 fatalities occurred in crashes where the speed of a large vehicle was a factor in the accident between 2004 and 2014.  At least one group representing truckers has spoken out in favor of the measure. Sean McNally, spokesperson for the American Trucking Associations, told Trucks.com that speed is a factor in almost a quarter of all truck crashes and a third of all motor vehicle accidents overall. McNally’s group has previously urged regulators to limit all vehicles—including passenger cars—to 65 miles per hour, thus likely earning the ATA the ire of every person reading this sentence. Just where does government meddling end? You also better consider the added costs to goods and services delivered by those trucks in our economy.  |
|||
8/27/2016 6:12 am |
four
| ||
|
I travel the NY State Thruway a lot and I'm tired of getting my Cadillac CTS blown off the road by the winds created when tractor trailers go flying by me at 75 or 80 miles an hour. I'd love to see speed limits enforced for ALL vehicles. Maybe we don't need new limits, but enforce the current ones.
| ||
|
I think speed restrictions on large mass vehicles is a good idea, but it is going to cost us all more for the cost of moving freight. It will also increase traffic congestion on heavily used roadways.
| ||
|
placing a cost on human life is what we've come to expect from corporations not the general public, right fellas? if it clearly saves lives to put in place such an easy step then what's up for debate....for those of us not sure, think for just a minute about our own and family members safety on the road...
| ||
8/27/2016 5:03 pm |
I have to agree. So many idiots texting or talking on the cellphones are by far more of a problem to driving than speeding truckers. The vast majority of truck drivers are well paid professionals, after all it is their livelihood and their lives that's on the line.
| ||
8/27/2016 5:09 pm |
I travel the NY State Thruway a lot and I'm tired of getting my Cadillac CTS blown off the road by the winds created when tractor trailers go flying by me at 75 or 80 miles an hour. I'd love to see speed limits enforced for ALL vehicles. Maybe we don't need new limits, but enforce the current ones.
| ||
8/27/2016 5:12 pm |
That is a driver problem where the truckers have exceeded the conditions speed limits and they will pay the consequences sooner or later.
| ||
8/27/2016 5:13 pm |
What sort of changes?
| ||
8/27/2016 5:17 pm |
I think speed restrictions on large mass vehicles is a good idea, but it is going to cost us all more for the cost of moving freight. It will also increase traffic congestion on heavily used roadways.
| ||
8/27/2016 5:25 pm |
placing a cost on human life is what we've come to expect from corporations not the general public, right fellas? if it clearly saves lives to put in place such an easy step then what's up for debate....for those of us not sure, think for just a minute about our own and family members safety on the road...
| ||
8/27/2016 5:28 pm |
I drove a big rig over the road for a few years. I have to agree they should set the speed limit to a lower limit. You will save fuel. Going five or ten or more over the limit does not get you there all that much sooner. I have to say I did follow the speed limit. If I didn't make my appointment on time I really didn't care.
| ||
8/27/2016 5:31 pm |
What is boils down to is better driver education and stricter enforcemenmt of existing laws not some more Federally mandated crap that won't or can't be enforced.
| ||
8/27/2016 5:36 pm |
When we go to Illinois they have a 2 tier system like that which creats hazardous bottlenecks to the free flow of traffic. Here in Iowa the limit is 70 with a 11 mph over the limit you loose your license for everybody. So we drive 80 traffic moves and it is those doing 60-65 that are the traffic hazards. Slow moving vehicles causing the bottlenecks which lead to an increase in accidents.
| ||
|
The last statistics that I read, showed Germany with a lot of no limit roads, had a lower accident rate than either the US or Canada. Here in Ontario, when the government reacted to the first energy crisis (i believe the seventies) lowered the limit for all vehicles to 100 Km/hr (62 miles an hour); the death rate dropped dramatically. What you never hear is that the the accident rate went dramatically UP. That does not seem to make sense; however the seeming contradiction, can be explained if you realize that at the same time, cumpulsary seat belt use was also mandated. The bureaucrats are very good at manipulating what we hear in the media to justify the action they have taken
| ||
8/27/2016 8:35 pm |
The last statistics that I read, showed Germany with a lot of no limit roads, had a lower accident rate than either the US or Canada. Here in Ontario, when the government reacted to the first energy crisis (i believe the seventies) lowered the limit for all vehicles to 100 Km/hr (62 miles an hour); the death rate dropped dramatically. What you never hear is that the the accident rate went dramatically UP. That does not seem to make sense; however the seeming contradiction, can be explained if you realize that at the same time, cumpulsary seat belt use was also mandated. The bureaucrats are very good at manipulating what we hear in the media to justify the action they have taken
| ||
8/28/2016 9:02 am |
Sometimes I have a harsher Darwinian view in that these accidents are a thinning of the gene pool of those that are unfit to operate motorized vehicles. Just like JD survive the ride down into the ravine by his skilled manipulation of the lawnmower where others would have been hurt or killed given the same circumstances.
| ||
8/28/2016 2:27 pm |
maybe they did something stupid like not looking and pulled out in front. Awhile back while driving JD's Beemer an old lady made a left hand turn from the right hand lane and dam near got me. Those non-observant and/or distracted drivers do need to be thinned out by accidents or observant cops
| ||
8/28/2016 5:12 pm |
Good blog & conversation as one expects from OnDaFence. Heard a "snippet" on the radio the other day about a new law in Seattle. Haven't had time to research it but thought well informed Bret might have. A new (maybe purposed) that would make it a crime to not rent an apartment to the first person that applies. To bad if they are "bad news" and will trash your property. It's either pay a fine or pay to fix up if you can.
| ||
8/28/2016 6:22 pm |
Good blog & conversation as one expects from OnDaFence. Heard a "snippet" on the radio the other day about a new law in Seattle. Haven't had time to research it but thought well informed Bret might have. A new (maybe purposed) that would make it a crime to not rent an apartment to the first person that applies. To bad if they are "bad news" and will trash your property. It's either pay a fine or pay to fix up if you can.
| ||
8/28/2016 6:24 pm |
The truckers are then at fault for not securing their loads and exceeding safe and reasonable road conditions.
| ||
|
I remember when truck drivers were the most curtious people on the road, not anymore they are all involved in getting where they have to go
| ||
9/5/2016 7:20 pm |
I remember when truck drivers were the most curtious people on the road, not anymore they are all involved in getting where they have to go
|
×
×