So what sticks in your craw?

Inkaneer Aug 23, 2019

  1. Rich_S

    Rich_S TrainBoard Member

    838
    1,620
    34
    That's why I'm glad I got out of trucking. I remember when the 48' 102" wide trailers came out. They were hard to see around because everyone's mirrors were setup for 96" wide trailers. I use to haul long loads out of US Steel South Chicago (South Works) mostly 60' beams. I 100% agree city streets built in the mid 1800's were not designed for trailers that long and back then just about all company trucks were cab overs. Hauling those laod today would be even worse with a conventional tractor. Sadly the trucking industry once again wants the federal government to increase truck length and the gross weight. Like you mentioned the upgrade from 48' to 53' was wrong, any further upgrade would be a serious mistake.
     
    Hardcoaler likes this.
  2. ns737

    ns737 TrainBoard Supporter

    722
    135
    26
    and increasing the gross weight is not good for the roads ether.
     
    Hardcoaler likes this.
  3. Hardcoaler

    Hardcoaler TrainBoard Member

    10,676
    44,851
    142
    Amen on that. I think overall gross weight used to be limited to 73,280 LBS. It was then lifted to 80,000 in the mid-1970s if states wished to allow it, then was made mandatory in the early 1980s. I think the next step would be an increase to 91,000 LBS, but it's under study.

    When I lived in TN in the latter 1970s, I was told that the state kept its limit at 73,280 instead of adopting the new Federal limit of 80,000. TN's long east/west geographic length effectively prevented adoption of the new Federal limit on long haul north/south routes and it greatly frustrated trucking companies. I think the TN state legislature eventually capitulated. :oops:
     
  4. Inkaneer

    Inkaneer TrainBoard Member

    4,325
    1,424
    77
    Not really. Here is the real reason;

    "The Interstate Highway System gained a champion in President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was influenced by his experiences as a young Army officer crossing the country in the 1919 Army Convoy on the Lincoln Highway, the first road across America. Eisenhower gained an appreciation of the Reichsautobahn system, the first "national" implementation of modern Germany's Autobahn network, as a necessary component of a national defense system while he was serving as Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe during World War II. In 1954, Eisenhower appointed General Lucius D. Clay to head a committee charged with proposing an interstate highway system plan. Summing up motivations for the construction of such a system, Clay stated,

    'It was evident we needed better highways. We needed them for safety, to accommodate more automobiles. We needed them for defense purposes, if that should ever be necessary. And we needed them for the economy. Not just as a public works measure, but for future growth.'"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System

    So the rationale was 1. safety for increased automobile traffic, 2. national defense purposes and lastly, No.3. the economy

    Notice the economy (this is where trucks come in) is mentioned last. I am told that some interstates are designed to function as runways for strategic bombers should it become necessary to disperse them from their bases.
     
  5. bill pearce

    bill pearce TrainBoard Member

    619
    264
    18
    Relax, Rich, you're getting a little touchy.
     
  6. MK

    MK TrainBoard Member

    3,496
    4,798
    82
    That's not the way I see it Bill.
     
  7. acptulsa

    acptulsa TrainBoard Member

    3,344
    5,868
    75
    Well, whoever appeared to be touchy first, this usually happens to conversations about driving. After all, it's the most dangerous thing many of us ever do, much less on a daily basis. It's hard to stay objective when some idiot tries to kill you. Even if you didn't leave that other idiot enough room to do anything else.

    Present company excepted, of course. :censored:

    It's very good practice to try to be dispassionate about it, though. The laws of physics are very dispassionate. They are totally objective. Anyone who expects that guy and his eighty thousand pound rig (or anyone else) to violate the laws of physics for their benefit will be disappointed every single time.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2020
    rpeck likes this.
  8. Rich_S

    Rich_S TrainBoard Member

    838
    1,620
    34
    My Freightliner cab over was the fastest truck I ever drove, top speed was 68 mph. Of course all trucks can go fast down hill thanks to gravity and weight, that's why I always thanked God for my 3 stage Jake brake to keep that truck under control. That Freight shaker had a 350 Cummins, a RTO 9 speed transmission and 3:70 Eaton Rears. She was a ruff rider with that Hendrickson 55,000 lbs. spring suspension, but that suspension handled those 52,000 lb donuts (Single Coils) with ease.
     
  9. ns737

    ns737 TrainBoard Supporter

    722
    135
    26
    mine had a cat
     
  10. Rich_S

    Rich_S TrainBoard Member

    838
    1,620
    34
    After I got off the road, I drove tri-axle roll offs for a company that had Peterbilts with 3406 Cats and 13 speed transmission. They also had air ride suspension. Those trucks rode better than my car. One of the mechanic's told me those 3406 Cats were rated at 325 HP. I never had one of those trucks above 60 mph, so I'm not sure how fast or what rear ends were in this trucks, but they pulled pretty good on hills, so I'm guessing at least 3:70 rears.
     
  11. ns737

    ns737 TrainBoard Supporter

    722
    135
    26
    my last truck before i was retired. had air seats and auto tranny . it was a 02 century class. I got it at a good price. had it until i was had to retire
     
  12. sidney

    sidney TrainBoard Member

    1,235
    2,086
    37
    i thought the freeway systems were built for just in case air force needed a run way in cases of war times. other than moving more traffic down a road. the concrete was built in stages to handle the weight of landing big heavy aircraft if needed. as i recall most concrete freeways were about 6 foot deep (cant remember for sure about that) but i do remember they were pretty thick layers 3 deep. something to that effect.
     
  13. bill pearce

    bill pearce TrainBoard Member

    619
    264
    18
    Three foot deep concrete freeways? Maybe in Germany. That's more concrete that the runways at major airports. In WW II, because of the fact that steel was needed to build tanks, Many AAF and USN fields were built without reinforcement in the runways. Thes unreinforced runways were only 1 foot of concrete. AS to the use of highways as runways, bear in mind that there are few places where that could be done. Many military aircraft take a long way to get in the air, and Federal highway standards permit interchanges at 1 mile intervals, and that doesn't include the bridges for country roads to go over freeways. and anyway, we have lots of air force bases available. It would take years to build the necessary infrastructure to use highways for this, an airplane needs more than a strip of concrete.

    Don't know where this stuff comes from.
     
  14. Inkaneer

    Inkaneer TrainBoard Member

    4,325
    1,424
    77
    More like 12 inches according to Google. I've also heard 14 inches and 16 inches. According to Boeing 17-20 inches for airport runways. A thickness of six feet is a bit much, unless it is covering Jimmy Hoffa.
     
    Hardcoaler likes this.
  15. Rich_S

    Rich_S TrainBoard Member

    838
    1,620
    34
    The concrete thickness was one of the many changes the US Government made when designing the Interstate Highway System. The original Reichsautobahn now known as the Autobahn was originally built with a concrete thickness of 28 inches. Since Germany is about the size of Texas, they were able to build the Autobahn to such standards. I was told many years ago and was never able to confirm if the statement was true, but I was told the concrete thickness for the Interstate Highway System was to be 12 inches and it was to be covered with 6 inches of asphalt. I was told we were never suppose to drive on the concrete, the asphalt was suppose to be the driving surface and when it wore out, it was to be replaced with new asphalt. It was a road inspector who told me this, but I was never able to confirm if it was a rumor or part of the actual plan for the Interstate Highway System. Here are some other facts about the Interstate Highway System some people probably already know. Even numbered Interstates run East to West, Odd numbers Interstates run North to South. The Odd numbered North South Interstate Numbers start in California and increase in numeric value as they are numbered in a Eastward direction. Even numbered Interstates begin in the Southern part of the United States and increase in numeric value as the Interstates are numbered heading Northward direction. That is why I-5 is in California and I-95 is on the East Coast. Also why I-10 travels across the southern portion of the US and I-90 Travels across the Northern portion of the US. When it comes to 3 digit numbers, the original rule stated if the first number was even, the road was a beltway around a major city and the next two digits indicated the connecting Interstate. If the first number was odd, the the road was a spur from a major city to the interstate indicated by the next two digits. Example I-270 in Ohio is a beltway around Columbus OH. I-380 in Iowa connects Cedar Falls with Interstate 80. Sadly the government has not stuck to the original plan and now you have spur's with even first digits and beltways with odd first digits. Also all Interstate mile markers are number West to East and South to North per state. Some of my memories about Interstates during my live time, I remember when I-77 from Charleston, WV to about 20 miles south of Charleston was a 2 lane road. I remember Interstate 79 in Pennsylvania being constructed. I helped with the Construction of Interstate 279 from Pittsburgh to it's connection with I-79 North of the city. There have also been a few new Interested added to the map since I first received my truck drivers license, like Interstate 68 across WV and MD. Back when I was driving, that road was WV Route 48, a four lane highway that ended at Cumberland MD and US 40 a two lane road extended from Cumberland, MD to it's connection with I-70 near Hancock, MD. I-86 and I-99 have been added to the map among others in my lifetime.
     
    MK likes this.
  16. acptulsa

    acptulsa TrainBoard Member

    3,344
    5,868
    75
    All of that is also true of the U.S. Routes (white shields), except the lower numbers are in the north and east.
     
    Rich_S likes this.
  17. mtntrainman

    mtntrainman TrainBoard Supporter

    9,982
    10,820
    143
    A few of other tidbits:

    1) You park on a driveway and drive on a parkway. :p:LOL:

    2) There are 3 Interstate highways in Hawaii even though they don't connect to any other state. They are designated H-1, H-2, and H-3,:p:LOL:

    3) There are Interstates in Alaske and Puerto Rico as well...that also do not connect to any other US States. Alaska's Interstate highways are designated A-1, A-2, A-3, and A-4, while Puerto Rico's routes are designated PRI-1, PRI-2, and PRI-3.:p:LOL:
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2020
    Kurt Moose and Rich_S like this.
  18. bill pearce

    bill pearce TrainBoard Member

    619
    264
    18
    I blame the companies for over regulating their drivers, but that's no excuse for you to use for discourteous driving that can create unsafe conditions for others. And yes, they are at work, but I could be too in my car, so perhaps you should consider making flip statements to support your own position. And if you make more money going a small fraction of a second faster than another truck, get another job.

    And yes, I know all about the so called heavy taxation you or your bosses pay. That subject has been beaten to death in D.C. NO ONE, has been able to prove that what truckwer or their owners pay in tax supports the costs of the highways and roads they use, anymore than it fair to say that airlines aren't subsidized by government.

    What really sticks in my craw is people who think by right of their employment they deserve whatever they they want.

    And a second point you damn well need to remember is that everyone on the highway in a car is not on vacation.
     
  19. ns737

    ns737 TrainBoard Supporter

    722
    135
    26
    cars are not subject to a 10 hour driving rule.
     
  20. Kurt Moose

    Kurt Moose TrainBoard Member

    9,813
    14,199
    147
    ....and why do they call it a "freeway", when I know darn well my $500 car tabs a year and taxes pay for it!!:oops::mad::cautious:
     
    SP-Wolf and mtntrainman like this.

Share This Page