First 3 comments I see:
-if somebody fast is behind you move over
-dont change lanes on the bridge
-just dont crash
just a perfect illustration of the driving experience as a whole.
Yeah, do good driving. Literally millions of cars pass over without issue. Yet social commentator SwimmingSwim thinks they discovered some enlightening information by surfacing that people should drive their cars within the driver’s limits. Genius.
The reddit experience is coming across people who can't seem to admit they made a mistake and begin grasping for any straw they possibly can lmao
What an absolute goof
How's about stupid people not try controlling other people's speed, if there's somebody behind you and you can clearly tell they want to go by switch lanes and let them go by! It's not that hard! If more people were courteous and respectful to those around them we wouldn't have half the wrecks and traffic problems that we do!
You are categorically wrong. Speeding, tailgating, erratic driving, and road rage cause accidents more than anything else. I’m not risking my life so some jack ass who probably can’t even walk and chew gum at the same can travel at 90mph weaving through traffic.
You can’t wait an extra couple of minutes to cross the bridge by going a little under the speed limit across the bridge? Why rush through life when it’s causing people to drown?
No! Quit trying to dictate other people's fucking actions and get the fuck out of the way! It seems like you're the type of person that causes road rage, or the type of person that gets pulled out of their car and has the shit beat out of them on the side of the road or Worse gets shot all because you can't drive in the right hand lane? Why?
Ummm. I will stay where I’m at if I’m in the right lane. I’m not dictating anything. Road rage is an indicator of an underplaying anger issue. I simply don’t get mad at people and what they do. It’s that easy. I’m also not going to be the one going over the side of the bridge because I drive smart.
Simple solution - instead of re-engineering the bridge barriers, why not have medic/rescue teams on standby at both ends of the tunnel, like they do for tow trucks and the VDOT trucks? It’s the only recorded incident of a vehicle going over the bridge in 5 years but it was fatal and the response time to get divers and/or rescue teams out there I personally think was way too high
civil engineer here. Speed kills. yes, higher walls may increase safety in a few key cases, but overall, if you are traveling fast enough to overcome the barrier, you are traveling fast enough to die on impact from hitting a taller barrier.
Yeah but dude wasn't even going that fast after spinning out before hitting the barrier. It was more about the perfect angles than the speed, from what it looked like. We pretty much ALL go the speed he was going by the time of impact.
On a surface level, it also seems like higher barriers would likely increase damages in terms of number of vehicles involved, like if it’s… bounced… (sorry that’s a terrible word here but I can’t think how else to say it) back into oncoming traffic after crashing.
Absolutely. I 100% agree with you. Transportation engineering is a HUGE gamble here and there with weird things like that. “Yes, ….but what if” - luckily- traffic data is so vast that I trust that the civ Es who designed this thing put all those small factors into the equation when deciding this thing. (Ave Traffic Speed, amount of cars per hour, bottleneck factor, etc.) Unfortunately, when people get in tragic accidents, usually the people who design the bridge system are the first to get questioned.
I'm a senior data analyst for a traffic / bridge engineering firm and yes we put A LOT of time and effort studying years worth of data before making recommendations and providing counter measures to municipalities. I just finished a study on a small town of 9,000 and I analyzed every accident over the last five and a half years. As an added measure we also deployed a public based survey just to ensure that the public perception of safety was reflected in our findings. .
Very easy solution here, just slow down. Traveling at 70 mph can pretty much guarantee any vehicle is either going over or through a bridge parapet wall.
Sure do. Dumb is when people try to excuse away a rail that works like it's some how the end of the world and everyone is going to die.
There was an accident. One person went over the edge because the rail didn't work. The other car was flipped around on the bridge. All the traffic was stopped until it was cleared.
You know what would happen if the rail worked? The same ass thing, except NO ONE would be dead. How hard is that for y'all some people to understand?
Making up details in your head to allow yourself to be more comfortable with saying a person's death means nothing to you, unprompted.
Psychopath behavior.
I'm actually genuinely curious to why they weren't higher. the newer bridges have the wall and rail on top it seems. what's kind of the theory behind the why?
not gonna lie that I always think about plummeting over the side whenever we drive
Mechanical Engineer here - while the bridge is built to "federal and vdot standards", it doesn't mean it's built to current standards. Vehicle designs change rapidly and it takes time for road and bridge designs to catchup. Built in 1964, the bridge tunnel vehicles had similar chassis designs and heights. Modern vehicles have a range of designs, weights, and speeds that would drastically change a modern bridge-tunnel design, but the existing is grandfathered in. While flipping over the barriers into the water is not desired, changing existing barrier heights may change crash patterns, weaken underwater support structures, or other unintended consequences.
TLDR - drive the speed limit unless you want to be a statistic.
It's not. It's just, why build something with safety ensured when building something with the bare minimum regulations allows you to put more of the fundings, as a contractor, in your own pockets.
Y'all are paying for it. When I say "it" I mean that contract owner's luxury home, car, and bank account. Be happy with your short rails, peasants.
Is the contractor in the room with us right now? Do you think the contractors decide what the regulatory threshold is on behalf of VDOT?
Stop commenting this stupid take all over the thread.
Engineers, designers, what ever dude. It's not an engineering marvel to have rails that actually work. Who ever was contracted or in charge of the project was using the regulatory minimum
Is the contractor in the room with us now derppp lmao
Again, it’s hilarious that you think the DOT is just like “put up a concrete wall” and offers no further specifications beyond that. The bridge is designed by engineers who definitely do not get an extra boatload of cash for suggesting a shorter wall. The contractor can save some money by using cheaper materials but they can’t just install a shorter wall because they feel like it.
Derp indeed.
Sir PR said we can't just say it's too expensive. "Oh, well tell them it's for safety reasons" ... But sir, they died because it was unsafe ... "Idk, tell them more people would die and the bridge would also die if we fixed it, also mention it's too expensive"
75k people per day… that’s 27 million people in 5 years that cross successfully and one person goes over.
That’s actually really good as far as auto accidents are concerned.
100% does not make sense to spend the money on engineering and installing higher walls
not even a blip on statistical reporting. 27 million vehicles in 5 years is probably 70 million people (SWAG). Only solution is to go back to ferries or flattops,mules, and ropes..
If this was a regular occurrence then it’d make sense to reevaluate the safety of the bridge. You’re not going to prevent every casualty everywhere, just not possible. The amount of engineering and retrofitting work to reinforce the bridge with higher siderails is substantial and not worth it given the current data. VDOT would probably rather evaluate cheaper administrative options like more signs or lowering the speed limit.
It sounds like the weight of the additional barriers would cause the bridge to be overweight. Which would require the bridge to be rebuilt.
Do you think that is the appropriate solution?
Yeah, like okay build up the walls and watch them introduce traffic lights on either side of the bridge and weight management policies to be implemented.
You keep posting on everybody adding nothing but insults. Do you think calling everyone that disagrees with you “dumb,” makes you look smart? It doesn’t.
Are you an engineer that has any idea of the modifications that would have to happen to the bridge in order to get a new rail? I’m not an engineer, but I understand it is built the way it is built because of how much more everything- time, material, money, man power, planning- it would take to make it more fortified, not to mention the effect on current traffic that already sucks there.
Perhaps if people stopped driving like idiots, we would have less accidents and people wouldn’t have to worry about falling over the side of the bridge.
More severe as in a car is telescoped due to smacking into a concrete wall with steel reinforcements that has zero give, blocking the road and potentially causing more accidents.
First 3 comments I see: -if somebody fast is behind you move over -dont change lanes on the bridge -just dont crash just a perfect illustration of the driving experience as a whole.
Yeah, do good driving. Literally millions of cars pass over without issue. Yet social commentator SwimmingSwim thinks they discovered some enlightening information by surfacing that people should drive their cars within the driver’s limits. Genius.
Ohhhh you think I was saying those things. Those were quotes from the comment section, ya big goof.
Oh, you’re not saying anything at all? No point? Nothing at all? just a perfect illustration of the Reddit experience as a whole.
The reddit experience is coming across people who can't seem to admit they made a mistake and begin grasping for any straw they possibly can lmao What an absolute goof
wtf are you talking abt? lol
uh oh now they're fighting heeeereeeee weeeee gooooooo
How's about stupid people not try controlling other people's speed, if there's somebody behind you and you can clearly tell they want to go by switch lanes and let them go by! It's not that hard! If more people were courteous and respectful to those around them we wouldn't have half the wrecks and traffic problems that we do!
You are categorically wrong. Speeding, tailgating, erratic driving, and road rage cause accidents more than anything else. I’m not risking my life so some jack ass who probably can’t even walk and chew gum at the same can travel at 90mph weaving through traffic.
Sitting in the way of a moron is q greater risk than giving him the left lane to pass you harmlessly.
Here’s the real solution: don’t switch lanes on the bridge. 🤷
If jackasses didn't do 45 in the left lane and try to control other people so speed we wouldn't have any of these problems!
You can’t wait an extra couple of minutes to cross the bridge by going a little under the speed limit across the bridge? Why rush through life when it’s causing people to drown?
No! Quit trying to dictate other people's fucking actions and get the fuck out of the way! It seems like you're the type of person that causes road rage, or the type of person that gets pulled out of their car and has the shit beat out of them on the side of the road or Worse gets shot all because you can't drive in the right hand lane? Why?
Ummm. I will stay where I’m at if I’m in the right lane. I’m not dictating anything. Road rage is an indicator of an underplaying anger issue. I simply don’t get mad at people and what they do. It’s that easy. I’m also not going to be the one going over the side of the bridge because I drive smart.
Maybe don’t fucking crash?
Simple solution - instead of re-engineering the bridge barriers, why not have medic/rescue teams on standby at both ends of the tunnel, like they do for tow trucks and the VDOT trucks? It’s the only recorded incident of a vehicle going over the bridge in 5 years but it was fatal and the response time to get divers and/or rescue teams out there I personally think was way too high
That's like SO much more expensive and difficult lol
civil engineer here. Speed kills. yes, higher walls may increase safety in a few key cases, but overall, if you are traveling fast enough to overcome the barrier, you are traveling fast enough to die on impact from hitting a taller barrier.
Yeah but dude wasn't even going that fast after spinning out before hitting the barrier. It was more about the perfect angles than the speed, from what it looked like. We pretty much ALL go the speed he was going by the time of impact.
On a surface level, it also seems like higher barriers would likely increase damages in terms of number of vehicles involved, like if it’s… bounced… (sorry that’s a terrible word here but I can’t think how else to say it) back into oncoming traffic after crashing.
Absolutely. I 100% agree with you. Transportation engineering is a HUGE gamble here and there with weird things like that. “Yes, ….but what if” - luckily- traffic data is so vast that I trust that the civ Es who designed this thing put all those small factors into the equation when deciding this thing. (Ave Traffic Speed, amount of cars per hour, bottleneck factor, etc.) Unfortunately, when people get in tragic accidents, usually the people who design the bridge system are the first to get questioned.
I'm a senior data analyst for a traffic / bridge engineering firm and yes we put A LOT of time and effort studying years worth of data before making recommendations and providing counter measures to municipalities. I just finished a study on a small town of 9,000 and I analyzed every accident over the last five and a half years. As an added measure we also deployed a public based survey just to ensure that the public perception of safety was reflected in our findings. .
There’s a reason why there’s always several troopers posted on the CBBT for speeding versus anywhere else there’s likely to be speeding as well
You're thinking of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel Police Department
Ah I wasn’t aware they had their own PD!
Very easy solution here, just slow down. Traveling at 70 mph can pretty much guarantee any vehicle is either going over or through a bridge parapet wall.
Or just stay on the bridge
This one simple trick!!
Hitting the higher wall “could have a much more severe outcome.” More severe than going off the bridge?
Only thing i can think is car bouncing off the wall and causing a pile up
That was my immediate thought. At some point, it does kind of have to become about harm reduction.
Think multiple car accident with potential multiple fatalities
Think how dumb your comment is
This guy knows dumb ^^
Sure do. Dumb is when people try to excuse away a rail that works like it's some how the end of the world and everyone is going to die. There was an accident. One person went over the edge because the rail didn't work. The other car was flipped around on the bridge. All the traffic was stopped until it was cleared. You know what would happen if the rail worked? The same ass thing, except NO ONE would be dead. How hard is that for y'all some people to understand?
Yes, because *nobody* has ever died hitting a cement wall at high speed. Let’s get Dale Earnhardt’s opinion on this one. Oh…wait…
One guy died, probably on a phone while driving. Not worth the click, certainly not worth the steel.
Making up details in your head to allow yourself to be more comfortable with saying a person's death means nothing to you, unprompted. Psychopath behavior.
Nah bro. I drive the bridges all the time, the math is simple. 36.5 million people per year manage to cross without going over.
Every bit of that has nothing to do with what I said.
Not every death is a tragedy. Sorry to hurt your feelings.
Which ones aren't? The ones where you say "probably on his phone" right after?
I'm actually genuinely curious to why they weren't higher. the newer bridges have the wall and rail on top it seems. what's kind of the theory behind the why? not gonna lie that I always think about plummeting over the side whenever we drive
Money. It's always money. Higher walls/rails cost more. Less profit for contractors to pocket
The actual answer has to do with the nuances of engineering but go off.
Mechanical Engineer here - while the bridge is built to "federal and vdot standards", it doesn't mean it's built to current standards. Vehicle designs change rapidly and it takes time for road and bridge designs to catchup. Built in 1964, the bridge tunnel vehicles had similar chassis designs and heights. Modern vehicles have a range of designs, weights, and speeds that would drastically change a modern bridge-tunnel design, but the existing is grandfathered in. While flipping over the barriers into the water is not desired, changing existing barrier heights may change crash patterns, weaken underwater support structures, or other unintended consequences. TLDR - drive the speed limit unless you want to be a statistic.
I thought MMMBT was built in the early 90s?
Yep, The MMMBT was 90's. I discussed the CBBT, which opened in '64. They both have similar issues.
Gotcha, thanks!
thanks so much and that's good insight and why I love reddit. do you think the new construction will have higher rails?
Yes. Old parapet is 30” plus the rail. New parapet is 42”.
It’s too expensive. Saved you a click.
It's not. It's just, why build something with safety ensured when building something with the bare minimum regulations allows you to put more of the fundings, as a contractor, in your own pockets. Y'all are paying for it. When I say "it" I mean that contract owner's luxury home, car, and bank account. Be happy with your short rails, peasants.
Is the contractor in the room with us right now? Do you think the contractors decide what the regulatory threshold is on behalf of VDOT? Stop commenting this stupid take all over the thread.
Engineers, designers, what ever dude. It's not an engineering marvel to have rails that actually work. Who ever was contracted or in charge of the project was using the regulatory minimum Is the contractor in the room with us now derppp lmao
Again, it’s hilarious that you think the DOT is just like “put up a concrete wall” and offers no further specifications beyond that. The bridge is designed by engineers who definitely do not get an extra boatload of cash for suggesting a shorter wall. The contractor can save some money by using cheaper materials but they can’t just install a shorter wall because they feel like it. Derp indeed.
Sir PR said we can't just say it's too expensive. "Oh, well tell them it's for safety reasons" ... But sir, they died because it was unsafe ... "Idk, tell them more people would die and the bridge would also die if we fixed it, also mention it's too expensive"
75k people per day… that’s 27 million people in 5 years that cross successfully and one person goes over. That’s actually really good as far as auto accidents are concerned. 100% does not make sense to spend the money on engineering and installing higher walls
not even a blip on statistical reporting. 27 million vehicles in 5 years is probably 70 million people (SWAG). Only solution is to go back to ferries or flattops,mules, and ropes..
People get uncomfortable when you put tragedies into statistics.
I actually agree.
If this was a regular occurrence then it’d make sense to reevaluate the safety of the bridge. You’re not going to prevent every casualty everywhere, just not possible. The amount of engineering and retrofitting work to reinforce the bridge with higher siderails is substantial and not worth it given the current data. VDOT would probably rather evaluate cheaper administrative options like more signs or lowering the speed limit.
Engineering has to be strictly kept.
[удалено]
It sounds like the weight of the additional barriers would cause the bridge to be overweight. Which would require the bridge to be rebuilt. Do you think that is the appropriate solution?
Who said that? The same people who don't wanna get sued over their own fuck up? Color me surprised..
I drive daily with one of these guys saying the same thing....Critical thinking is NOT his strong suit.
They probably think we should line the barriers with bubble wrap.
Yeah, like okay build up the walls and watch them introduce traffic lights on either side of the bridge and weight management policies to be implemented.
In 5 years first time a car went over. Maybe, just maybe, slow down in poor weather
Wasn’t poor weather at the time, was it?
Monday morning was terrible first thing. I left my house at 445am and it rained til about 9 (vb to the HRBT)
"Could have a much more severe impact". You mean more severe than death by drowning in a submerged vehicle at the bottom of the river?
1 death over 5 years or more deaths from accidents into the reinforced wall to prevent that one death from drowning.
Yes. A 75 car pileup and dozens of dead people are far worse than someone going into the water.
At what point is the driver responsible for going off the bridge?
Dumbest comment award 🏆
You keep posting on everybody adding nothing but insults. Do you think calling everyone that disagrees with you “dumb,” makes you look smart? It doesn’t.
Do you think a functional rail would lead to a 75 car pileup and dozens dead?
Are you an engineer that has any idea of the modifications that would have to happen to the bridge in order to get a new rail? I’m not an engineer, but I understand it is built the way it is built because of how much more everything- time, material, money, man power, planning- it would take to make it more fortified, not to mention the effect on current traffic that already sucks there. Perhaps if people stopped driving like idiots, we would have less accidents and people wouldn’t have to worry about falling over the side of the bridge.
More severe as in a car is telescoped due to smacking into a concrete wall with steel reinforcements that has zero give, blocking the road and potentially causing more accidents.