I was wondering the same thing - who has a camera mounted just before their side mirror?And that dude just happened to have an exterior camera pointed in that direction with the truck perfectly in frame? After the first impact the truck seems to make no attempt to slow?
Looks suspicious.
I was wondering the same thing - who has a camera mounted just before their side mirror?
And what would they have seen before that would make them want to start filming?
Start looking at the mirrors on corporate trucks and you will see cameras on them. Could be a blind spot deal with an option to record. Could be where they mounted the rear facing camera. Could be a company car.
That small correction before impact tells me something is up. My guess would be texting. If they woke up I would assume they would be on the brakes harder. Texters tend to just glance up to make sure they are in their lane but don't really look ahead at traffic.
You could almost understand if it was a curve or hill keeping you from seeing traffic. But that driver had about a mile or so of visibility from that seat. No excuse I can come up with other than negligence.
As to not slowing after first impact, there's almost zero chance to get control of that rig if you are not on the brakes at impact. That driver was being tossed around at impact. Air seats bounce a lot. I've had situations where I was trying to brake and hit a big bump and could not get on the brakes for bouncing around. Or been on them lightly and gotten bounced off the brakes.
As to not slowing after first impact, there's almost zero chance to get control of that rig if you are not on the brakes at impact. That driver was being tossed around at impact. Air seats bounce a lot. I've had situations where I was trying to brake and hit a big bump and could not get on the brakes for bouncing around. Or been on them lightly and gotten bounced off the brakes.
Sound like s dangerous situation that needs to be under .gov control. No more spring/air cushioned seats!
I was thinking more like a medical situation, heart attack or strokeThat small correction before impact tells me something is up. My guess would be texting. If they woke up I would assume they would be on the brakes harder. Texters tend to just glance up to make sure they are in their lane but don't really look ahead at traffic.
You could almost understand if it was a curve or hill keeping you from seeing traffic. But that driver had about a mile or so of visibility from that seat. No excuse I can come up with other than negligence.
I think Tesla’s have that as standard.And that dude just happened to have an exterior camera pointed in that direction with the truck perfectly in frame? After the first impact the truck seems to make no attempt to slow?
Looks suspicious.
Except they’re driving 50-80,000 pounds at 70MPH. Yeah, I’m gonna hold them to a higher standard.Truck driver are really no different then the general public, they have all the same bad habits.
Except they’re driving 50-80,000 pounds at 70MPH. Yeah, I’m gonna hold them to a higher standard.
They’re supposed to be professional drivers.
I was thinking more like a medical situation, heart attack or stroke
The trucking industry is a joke, major companies have driver turn over rates of 110%+. The majority of CDL drivers have less than 5 years experience.
It's about making money, safety is always an after thought.
Are they breeding drivers so they can quit? That’s some funky math there. 110 out of 100 drivers are quitting. Maybe Swift maths as good as they drive.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/driver-issues/truck-driver-turnover-rate-increases
The highest all-time recorded driver turnover rate was 136% in 2005, Costello said last month at the ATA’s Economics Conference. He noted that over-the-road fleets continue to have the most problems with turnover.
No funky math required. Turnover is the ratio of the number of terminations in a period to the number of positions. So say you have a fleet with 100 drivers, and over the course of a year you hired 150 drivers to keep those 100 positions filled. Turnover would be 150%.Are they breeding drivers so they can quit? That’s some funky math there. 110 out of 100 drivers are quitting. Maybe Swift maths as good as they drive.
No funky math required. Turnover is the ratio of the number of terminations in a period to the number of positions. So say you have a fleet with 100 drivers, and over the course of a year you hired 150 drivers to keep those 100 positions filled. Turnover would be 150%.
I will point out that many of those folks would not have been involved if they’d been over in the right lane.
Still funky IMO. If there are companies turning over all their drivers, they are not going to last. And using that type of percentage to reflect a large turnover in a smaller number of positions does not give you very good information. If that was the case, we have near 100% turnover. But the top 5 drivers have over 10 years with the company. And the next 2 have 8-10 years in. So the bottom half of the company accounting for 100% of our turnover gives you a really skewed idea of what is going on. And a skewed idea of what the solutions are too.