How long does it take a truck to stop & is it criminal if he doesn't?

I would strongly agree that the training required to get a truck licence is inadequate and there are WAY too many guys out there driving vehicles WAY beyond their competence level. Get them into an out-of-the-ordinary situation and they don't have a clue what to do, or how.

You can depend onsomeone cutting you off and taking away your buffer zone - so you NEED to adjust your speed accordingly - approach the downhill at reduced speed - preferably close to "control speed" so the brakes are not required to maintain the speed. A good Jake can be worth it's weight in gold.

I have the same problem, and I drive four wheels. I set up a following distance, and people merge in front of me, one length ahead.

That doesn't inspire confidence....

It's been a lot of years. I remember hear about a driver who was tired. He got his rig up to 70 MPH and put the cruise control on. He left his 10 year old daughter at the wheel, and went to the sleeper to zone out. The road had a construction area, and the daughter tried her best, wrecked the truck on the side of the road.

Luckily, we don't have those giant trucks in this state.

My brother-in-law is a nut for safety. He once was on a job site where they were pouring concrete for a building. He told the foreman that they were not waiting long enough between pours before going to the next level up and that it was unsafe. As I recall, the wet weather messed up the cure times. He quit because he was ignored. A short time later the whole thing collapsed, killing a lot of people. Sometimes they show the video of this on TV. That guy was always kind of a troublemaker but sometimes that's not a bad thing.

I wonder why opening the exhaust valve early and letting air out, would make more noise than opening a little later and letting hot exhaust out.

The air is highly compressed, when that valve opens it's a lot like a backfire in a gas engine. The normal exhaust doesn't exit under pressure, the valve opens as the piston starts coming back up and just pushed the spent fuel gases out.

An exhaust brake is simple, it's just a simple valve in the exhaust.

Until now, I imagined that exhaust gas was under high pressure when the valve opened. It makes sense that an engine would be designed for the lowest possible exhaust pressure: more efficient.

My old BMW motorcycle was surprisingly quiet with unbaffled megaphones. I guess the valves opened with less pressure than some bikes.

Steve W. wrote, on Sun, 13 Jul 2014 20:14:23 -0400:

They use drum brakes?

That is called "Too fast for conditions" Driver is required to be in control at all times.

Many trucks still have drum brakes...that's the breaks.

The VAST majority of big rigs still use air operated drum brakes

So if you are driving along at 55 mph, come around a curve and discover that the road is blocked in 50 feet for whatever reason. You were driving "too fast for conditions" ?

ALL drivers are required to be in control, regardless of vehicle. Still have thousands of accidents every day. That will change when the "fully autonomous vehicles" are on the road... (SURE it will, just like the computer made paperwork obsolete)

Ah, yes, pretty much the case.

The following, taken from the web promo of an attorney, details the law in Illinois. Many may not agree with it, but it's the law and the way it works in Illinois and most other states. This is a very basic concept in traffic law.

I apologize for the length but given the way this thread has run on forever, it's not that bad.

Failure to Reduce Speed to Avoid an Accident (625 ILCS 5/11-601(a)

Driving Too Fast for Conditions (625 ILCS 5/11-601(a)

If you are ticketed for Failure to Reduce Speed to Avoid an Accident or Driving Too Fast for Conditions, you may need legal representation. Both offenses are petty offenses punishable by a fine of up to $1000. Convictions for these offenses could have serious consequences for both your driver?s license and your insurance.

Failure to Reduce Speed to Avoid an Accident is the most common ticket issued when a traffic accident has occurred. Usually, they are issued by a police officer who arrives on the scene of the accident after it has already occurred and then makes a determination of fault with in minutes of arrival. Very seldom are traffic accidents actually witnessed by a police officer. Sometimes, an officer will, in addition to speaking with the people involved in the accident, talk to other witnesses who were not involved in the accident, but saw it occur. However, this is not always the case, and often the officer will not obtain information that identifies who these third party witnesses are so they may be called to testify in court.

To prove a charge of failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident the State must prove: 1. That you were driving a vehicle on a public highway; 2. That you collided with a person or a vehicle on that highway, and; 3. That you did so in violation of your duty to use ?due care?. With the most typical failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident ticket, the first two requirements are usually easy for the State to establish. It is the third requirement that is the most difficult. Was the accident unavoidable? Was the other party to the accident the person who was not exercising due care? Were there road conditions or unusual obstacles that caused the accident? Were there equipment issues with your vehicle that caused the accident? The duty of due care is a nebulous concept, and an experienced traffic attorney can use this subjective standard to your advantage.

Driving Too Fast for Conditions is a less common violation than failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident and is often issued in the case of a one vehicle accident in which a car slides off the road due to snow, ice, rain, fog, road surface or other environmental condition. It is not limited to this situation, however. Just like a failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident ticket, these are seldom witnessed by a police officer. In fact, there are often no other witnesses to the accident other than the driver who went off the road. The officer just sees the accident, looks at the road conditions, and concludes that the driver was going to fast, and that is why he/she went off the road.

To prove a charge of driving too fast for conditions the State must prove: 1. That you were driving a vehicle on a public highway; 2. That you did so at a speed that was greater than what was ?reasonable and proper? when accounting for highway conditions such as traffic, weather, and road surface, or: 3. you endangered the safety of any person or property. Much like the ?due care? standard, ?reasonable and proper? is a broad definition that can vary widely depending on the subjective opinion of the officer issuing the ticket. In many ways, it is even more subjective, and, therefore, even more difficult for the State to prove. A traffic attorney with years of experience can ensure that the State meets their burden to prove every element of the ticket against you beyond a reasonable doubt.

For both offenses, the fact that you did not exceed the posted speed limit at the time of the accident is generally not a valid defense. This is a very common misconception about accident tickets. Not exceeding the speed limit can be a factor to be explored when cross examining the state?s witnesses about whether or not you used ?due care? or were traveling at a speed that was ?reasonable and proper?, but this is a very complex argument to make, and is best accomplished by an attorney with the experience to ask the right questions.

Both tickets are also eligible for Court Supervision, which is sometimes referred to as earned dismissal. This means that as long as certain requirements are followed (usually a payment of fines and no tickets for

Below is the precise statute published in the Illinois Compiled Statutes.

(625 ILCS 5/11-601) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 11-601)

Sec. 11-601. General speed restrictions.

(a) No vehicle may be driven upon any highway of this State at a speed which is greater than is reasonable and proper with regard to traffic conditions and the use of the highway, or endangers the safety of any person or property. The fact that the speed of a vehicle does not exceed the applicable maximum speed limit does not relieve the driver from the duty to decrease speed when approaching and crossing an intersection, approaching and going around a curve, when approaching a hill crest, when traveling upon any narrow or winding roadway, or when special hazard exists with respect to pedestrians or other traffic or by reason of weather or highway conditions. Speed must be decreased as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person or vehicle on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due care.

(Source: P.A. 97-202, eff. 1-1-12; 98-511, eff. 1-1-14.)

Yes. If you can't see around a corner you should slow down- particularly if you have 8 axles under you and 20 or more tons behind you.

Yes. Recently a driver on the highway near me wrecked his car trying to avoid a deer. Car was totaled, driver sustained some injury and was cited for "too fast for conditions"

Elementary Watson!

SH

I haven't read all 98 posts, but this doesn't seem right. If G increases, that is, a steeper hill, d increases, and that is fine.

But if f increases, the formula shows that d also increases, and that seems clearly wrong. The higher the coefficient of friction, that is, the more friction there is between the road and the tires**, the sooner the truck stops. A very low f would be like melting ice. A very high f would be like a road made of big rocks, maybe.

At any rate f and G are parellel in the formula, even though high values of each have the opposite effect. Maybe there should be a negative sign somewhere.