Quote:
Originally Posted by cdswans
My original reply implied he was sleeping . . in the sleeper. But who really knows? Making a tuna sandwich, buffing the helmet, organizing the sock drawer . . who knows?
|
The article states that the trainer received minor bruises... Now, look at the room in the cab and sleeper. Making a sandwich, buffing the helmet, or organizing the sock drawer would have meant being UN-RESTRAINED. With all that room, the trainer would have been tossed around the area like a RAG DOLL. But the "minor bruises" strongly suggests being restrained in the bunk. ie, SLEEPING.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdswans
It doesn't matter. 3 weeks into the deal, any student should be able to hold the wheel on an interstate. By my third week, I had driven Cabbage, Snoqualmie, Grant's Pass and the Siskiyous, to name a few, on snow and black ice at night with my trainer sleeping with one eye open in the back. It was almost all heavy haul and it was excellent training. The new guy farked up and now he won't be down for breakfast. This kind of mistake is the type that can be made by any driver. I feel bad for him and for his survivors.
|
And, again... With your trainer in the bunk, there was absolutely NO training going on while you were going over Cabbage, Snoqualmie, Grant's Pass, and Siskiyous. You were learning on your own, the same as you are after your training period is over. That is not training. Training is a period of
TEACHING AND LEARNING, and if the trainer is in the bunk, half of that is missing. There is no training going on.
It's been stated, in an earlier post, that there was water over the road, and that the truck had hydroplaned and careened out of controll.
This has a very high probability of accuracy. And, when you look at the mechanics of it, if the trainer was too green to be a trainer, it may not have made a difference where the trainer was either. Both may have run through water in the past, at some time, WITH A 4-WHEELER. But when driving a truck, the parameters are different.
A 3,000 pound car only has 750 pounds of weight on each wheel. At 65 mph, it rides up near the top of the surface of the water, and the "WATER-BRAKE" effect is about equal on all wheels. I, once hit water over the road while doing 70+ mph, and when the car settled down into the water and stopped, I had water coming into the car. But, with a warm engine, it started up again in a few minutes and I was able to drive out and invent "WET BRAKES". The car was a '56 Pontiac, and as heavy as it was, it skimmed across the top of the water until it slowed down and settled into it. When it stopped, it had turned about 7 degrees to the right. And, it did not go off the road. Both sides of the car sank into the water about the same amount.
With a truck, the parameters are completely different. Each steer weigh about 5,000+ on the road surface. Each drive tire also weighs about 4,000+. Several times, that of a car. But, the surface area is not proportional. The tires of a truck do not rise up to the top of the water. Instead, they stay near the bottom of the water level, and it is only the surface tension of the water that lifts the tires off the surface. So, even with 4 inches of water on the road, the tires only have a fraction of an inch between them and the road surface.
The effect of the rest of the water is that of a "WATER-BRAKE". But, due to the crown of the road, that braking is uneven. The lower side of the road will have more braking action then the side of the truck near the center of the hiway. Those of you that have driven farm tractors, or track vehicles like a bulldozer, know the effect of "ONE-WHEEL BRAKING". The truck will be lifted off the surface of the road, steering control is lost, and the truck will begin to turn to the side where the water is deeper. And, YOU ARE NOT LIKELY TO REGAIN CONTROL. You're going to jackknife. Water braking is an old principal. Watch the video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyDuVCxA5qY The rocket-sled hits water to slow it down and stop it. The effect on the truck is the same, but with uneven results on right and left sides. AND, it is VERY EFFECTIVE.
IF the trainer had enough experience to be aware of 'WATER-BRAKING" HAZARDS on the road, and
IF the trainer was in the front seat, he could have cautioned the trainee about it. No one had to die.
Again. EXTREMELY POOR JUDGEMENT on the part of the trainer and the company.
Both should be charged with "WRONGFUL DEATH".
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdswans
As for the other thing . . it was the cdl issuing authority, either the state or an independent contractor that is/was being investigated. It had no connection to Swift other than they rented space from Swift. Beyond that, Swift runs about 40 terminals and trains out of most of them. They put hundreds of good new drivers out on the road every month. Some wash out because they find it isn't for them, some wash out by paying the big price. The enormous majority work through their commitment. Many stay and many go on to greener pastures.
My final word on this is that, while the system isn't perfect because it can't be perfect for each and every newb who participates, it is still a very good system. I offer my own record as proof. Sync is at the end of two years and I'm pretty sure he'll back me up. dobry4u is a work in progress and I wish her all the best. Only time will tell and you've got to admire her attitude.
|
I'm afraid your own record only speaks for you. Dobry's will only speak for her, and I wish her well. The company's record is another matter. And, it includes accidents like this one, as well as accidents that the drivers' were not properly prepared for hazards. A trainee's background plays a very large part in the knowledge of driving, and not all newbies come into this business with the same background. For example, someone involved with farm machinery in earlier years has a very serious advantage over anyone that comes from the city. This accident, and others, do not speak for you, personally, but it does speak for the company image, overall. And, that image is not very good.
i got bored and was browsing old forums and seen this one was started a lil over a month ago. Seen it was 13 pages long and I JUST KNEW(minus by reading the topic) that there was some fighting words being said :-)
