Trailer Brings Down Part Of Pedestrian Bridge In Bangkok

[Soutpeel]

I wonder if the police escort knew that the transport company was in violation of the regulations? That would explain them high-tailing it out of there.

One suspects the police escort were "moonlighting" on this transport for some extra cash...therefore one suspects they didnt really care whether the company had violated the regulations or not, and in all likelyhood the "officers" involved wouldnt have a clue about the pertinent regulations

[maidu]

Those concrete pedestrian bridges are not really needed. If you observe, most of them have very few users They don't justify their expense. I think they're built primarily for use in dire situations, when people with guns might need to keep the highways from being used. Example: If Thailand were invaded, placing armed military on concrete walled bridges high above highways would be useful for slowing down advances. Before you poo poo the idea, consider that the US highways system was upgraded to multiple lanes and roads thickened in the 1950's (during Eisenhower years) to facilitate moving troops around for military purposes - as much as any other reason.

[thaicbr]

Those concrete pedestrian bridges are not really needed. If you observe, most of them have very few users They don't justify their expense. I think they're built primarily for use in dire situations, when people with guns might need to keep the highways from being used.  Example:  If Thailand were invaded, placing armed military on concrete walled bridges high above highways would be useful for slowing down advances.  Before you poo poo the idea, consider that the US highways system was upgraded to multiple lanes and roads thickened in the 1950's (during Eisenhower years) to facilitate moving troops around for military purposes - as much as any other reason.

What a load of poo poo.

People use pedestrian bridges every day. How else do they cross 10 lane highways?

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

[whybother]

Those concrete pedestrian bridges are not really needed. If you observe, most of them have very few users They don't justify their expense. I think they're built primarily for use in dire situations, when people with guns might need to keep the highways from being used. Example: If Thailand were invaded, placing armed military on concrete walled bridges high above highways would be useful for slowing down advances. Before you poo poo the idea, consider that the US highways system was upgraded to multiple lanes and roads thickened in the 1950's (during Eisenhower years) to facilitate moving troops around for military purposes - as much as any other reason.

What a load of poo poo.

People use pedestrian bridges every day. How else do they cross 10 lane highways?

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

Although I agree that plenty of people use the bridges, I have seen people cross a 10 lane highway 50 metres from an overpass, and people cross a busy city road UNDERNEATH the overpass.

[rametindallas]

Those concrete pedestrian bridges are not really needed. If you observe, most of them have very few users They don't justify their expense. I think they're built primarily for use in dire situations, when people with guns might need to keep the highways from being used. Example: If Thailand were invaded, placing armed military on concrete walled bridges high above highways would be useful for slowing down advances. Before you poo poo the idea, consider that the US highways system was upgraded to multiple lanes and roads thickened in the 1950's (during Eisenhower years) to facilitate moving troops around for military purposes - as much as any other reason.

What a load of poo poo.

People use pedestrian bridges every day. How else do they cross 10 lane highways?

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

On many streets you cannot possibly cross, even at the intersection, without using a saphan loy AKA pedestrian bridge or else you die. I use them even when I see locals take their chances.

[ratcatcher]

Is there any rebar in that bridge? How fast was the truck going to pull down that bridge? Should a bridge fall down that easily?

The bridge is still pretty much intact; just not sitting where it is supposed to be. These bridges are overbuilt for their purpose but none of them are built to withstand a hit from the side from a heavily laden truck travelling at speed. Like all non-suspension bridges, gravity is employed to keep the bridge in place. I can't imaging how massive/strong the pedestrian bridges would have to be built to withstand being struck by a big load at speed. It's just not practical/affordable to build for every possible contingency.

The bridges probably can't be built for every possible contingency, but some care should be taken to prevent oversized vehicles from using the road. That's why I was wondering how the oil rigging got there and what was it doing in the area.

I once saw a pickup truck with plastic water bottles so high that when it entered a moo bahn, it took the electric wires down--and sent bottles everywhere. But the bottles were ungodly high.

"That's why I was wondering how the oil rigging got there and what was it doing in the area."

This link may explain why the equipment was in the area.

http://mitraenergylimited.com/ap-thailand.php

[maidu]

Those concrete pedestrian bridges are not really needed. If you observe, most of them have very few users They don't justify their expense. I think they're built primarily for use in dire situations, when people with guns might need to keep the highways from being used. Example: If Thailand were invaded, placing armed military on concrete walled bridges high above highways would be useful for slowing down advances. Before you poo poo the idea, consider that the US highways system was upgraded to multiple lanes and roads thickened in the 1950's (during Eisenhower years) to facilitate moving troops around for military purposes - as much as any other reason.

What a load of poo poo.

People use pedestrian bridges every day. How else do they cross 10 lane highways?

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

For every pedestrian bridge you can show me that is well-used, I can show you 20 that are very rarely used. I've seen the large bridges built in places where there are only just a few houses on each side of the hwy, which might get zero people crossing in 24 hours.

[thaicbr]

Those concrete pedestrian bridges are not really needed. If you observe, most of them have very few users They don't justify their expense. I think they're built primarily for use in dire situations, when people with guns might need to keep the highways from being used.  Example:  If Thailand were invaded, placing armed military on concrete walled bridges high above highways would be useful for slowing down advances.  Before you poo poo the idea, consider that the US highways system was upgraded to multiple lanes and roads thickened in the 1950's (during Eisenhower years) to facilitate moving troops around for military purposes - as much as any other reason.

What a load of poo poo.

People use pedestrian bridges every day. How else do they cross 10 lane highways?

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

For every pedestrian bridge you can show me that is well-used, I can show you 20 that are very rarely used.  I've seen the large bridges built in places where there are only just a few houses on each side of the hwy, which might get zero people crossing in 24 hours.

Yes that's true. But bridges are built for years not hours

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

[Khun Watchaporn]

Ah Thainess... so many news stories just sum it up so perfectly.

[Khun Watchaporn]

For every pedestrian bridge you can show me that is well-used, I can show you 20 that are very rarely used.

That's because for every Thai that uses one there are 20 that run and dodge across six lanes of traffic in order to not have to.

[Tomtomtom69]

Just went passed the accident scene. All the debris has been cleared away. The trucks and loads are still there getting numerous measurements taken. I think it must be a new tractor unit as NO damage to that.

One point. Out of 5 foot bridges along Bororamachi before this one ONLY one had a Max height sign(5.5m) The rest nothing. Also the road was resurfaced a few months ago and is a bit hilly/mound in places

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

From my own observations, it seems that 5.5m is the standard height clearance of all foot bridges built along major roads in Thailand. Irrespective of which road a truck uses, sooner or later they would encounter a footbridge with this clearance. Therefore, I can't understand why the trucking company didn't measure the height of his equipment placed on his truck before proceeding on his trip - also they should already be aware of this height limitation. I agree that all footbridge height clearances should be clearly marked, but as mentioned 5.5m seems to be the standard clearance. On smaller roads, usually in urban areas the clearance will often be less than this (perhaps 3.8m or so), but trucks are usually not permitted to travel on such roads.

[Pib]

Drove by the accident location at 2pm/today...the truck and its load that hit the bridge is still there...actually it looked like a convoy of three traitor-trailers (pretty new...nice looking) each with a different equipment load and it was the middle tractor-trailer (with the highest load) that hit the bridge. You can see the load "almost" cleared the bridge (just needed a few more inches) based on the load damage. I expect the traitor-trailers won't be moved until maybe Monday sometimes so more investigators, insurance reps, police & govt reps, and misc folks get a chance to view. No sign of the destroyed/knock-downed bridge...all cleaned up and gone.

Also, while driving from western Bangkok to Nakhon Pathom and back again today on the road the accident occurred on I paid attention to the number of walkover bridges which were marked with their clearance level, which was very few. While they appeared roughly the same height you could tell they probably varied a little in height/clearance level and as mentioned usually no height marking visible to the driver....or at least on this patch of major highway running between Bangkok and Nakhon Pathom. And these tractor trailers heading west out of Bangkok towards Nakhon Pathom must have already passed under numerous walkover bridges as they seem to be spaced every half to one kilometer in this part of town.

Edited May 12, 2013 by Pib

[Tomtomtom69]

Those concrete pedestrian bridges are not really needed. If you observe, most of them have very few users They don't justify their expense. I think they're built primarily for use in dire situations, when people with guns might need to keep the highways from being used. Example: If Thailand were invaded, placing armed military on concrete walled bridges high above highways would be useful for slowing down advances. Before you poo poo the idea, consider that the US highways system was upgraded to multiple lanes and roads thickened in the 1950's (during Eisenhower years) to facilitate moving troops around for military purposes - as much as any other reason.

What a load of poo poo.

People use pedestrian bridges every day. How else do they cross 10 lane highways?

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

On many streets you cannot possibly cross, even at the intersection, without using a saphan loy AKA pedestrian bridge or else you die. I use them even when I see locals take their chances.

I beep my horn profusely and make an angry face whenever a see a dumb idiot that chooses to spend half an hour waiting for a break in traffic so they can run across a major highway, all the while there is a perfectly good footbridge above their heads that they refuse to use. A few years back I was doing 120km/h on Phahonyothin road between Rangsit and Bang Pa-in (i.e. the highway from Rangsit that eventually becomes the Mittraphap highway to Saraburi with Phahonyothin road branching towards Ayuttaya) around 10pm in the evening when I saw some idiot that just managed to dive into the median just below a footbridge - I just missed the jackass. It still ceases to amaze me the stupidity of choosing not to cross a footbridge - apart from how dangerous it is, it also takes a very, very long time.

Maybe I'm missing something here?

[animatic]

Although this death may be seen to be an accident, and therefore reasonably 'sad', is it not also the case (for which there will never be evidence) that the driver of the pickup truck may have been following too close to the vehicle which caused the walkway to fall?

'Keeping your distance' seems something which Thai drivers never EVER think about.

Is there any evidence that the pick up was even on the same side of the road as the truck?

From the photo, the pickup truck was clearly following the large trucks because the bridge section was knocked down in the direction to travel of the large truck and the pickup truck is behind the bridge, mostly. Maybe they were going too slow and he was trying to pass. There are many possible reasons the pickup truck driver was not responsible for his own death.

Responsable for his own death? Hardly.

Secondly if the big rig hit on the other side from the pickup,

it would have pulled that side forward, but the other side

might easily have pivoted the oposite direction as it can off it's supports.

And it might have traveld a short distance as it crushed the pickup truck.

There is not a lot of visible damage to the walk way showing, that this is the side

that got caught on the big machinery, just damage where it landed on this truck.

But even then if these trucks were all in the far left lane, and going slow,

it is perfectly reasonable that they be passed by regular traffic in the right passing lane.

So not reason this poor man should not have normally driven past them.

Edited May 12, 2013 by animatic

[maidu]

I'm one of those jackasses who cross the 8 lane hwy even when there's a bridge overhead. No car or truck has ever gotten close to me.

[Pib]

I'm one of those jackasses who cross the 8 lane hwy even when there's a bridge overhead. No car or truck has ever gotten close to me.

You probably should modify you last sentence above to say...No car or truck has ever gotten close to me yet.

[Credo]

I am one of those people that almost always uses the bridges. I saw a few close calls and decided it was just a lot safer to use the foot bridge.

Now, I will look to see what's headed for the bridge. I don't think I would want to be on one when it collapses.

[retell]

hey nobody hear if there are any traffic cams nearby that bridge , those would give some interesting footage on what happend there and what direction all was going

[merck]

Like you're not claiming to be some resident Thaivisa road haulage and traffic accident expert by already having cleared the police escort and apportioned blame 100% to the transport company in your earlier post.

Having been involved in the engineering teams that have moved heavy things over the last 25 years of my engineering career in various countries in the world...such a nuclear reactors, oil and gas equipment, power plant equipment etc by land and sea...

I am conversant in the legal requirements/liabilities and insurances involved in moving such equipment....so from that perspective I can legitimately claim to have an "expert" level knowledge of such matters relating to the point I commented on...and as stated the police are not liable for this incident...the transport company are...onus is on them to ensure the route used is suitable...

That's the beauty of the internet. You can claim to be an expert in anything you want

[richard_smith237]

Like you're not claiming to be some resident Thaivisa road haulage and traffic accident expert by already having cleared the police escort and apportioned blame 100% to the transport company in your earlier post.

Having been involved in the engineering teams that have moved heavy things over the last 25 years of my engineering career in various countries in the world...such a nuclear reactors, oil and gas equipment, power plant equipment etc by land and sea...

I am conversant in the legal requirements/liabilities and insurances involved in moving such equipment....so from that perspective I can legitimately claim to have an "expert" level knowledge of such matters relating to the point I commented on...and as stated the police are not liable for this incident...the transport company are...onus is on them to ensure the route used is suitable...

That's the beauty of the internet. You can claim to be an expert in anything you want

And the beauty of having read plenty of posts by Soutpeel is that he is usually spot on with what he writes and tends not to exaggerate his experience.

Some posters on TV.com are respected members who's comments are taken at face value while others do indeed exaggerate wildly.

As you become more familiar with the posters and comments you will get a feel for who the generally more respected posters are and why you have just made a bit of a monkey of yourself.