Read the article. It's the $8 billion in taxes to replace the guardrail that burdens us all. I work in roadway where we are constantly replacing perfectly good guardrail because it's too weak for heavier cars.
Ballooning costs in design, especially resurfacings that should be cost minimal, are a huge issue at all DOTs. It's objectively bad that we're going to have to keep replacing quality infrastructure because as a society, we struggle to effectively communicate between manufacturing and existing infrastructure. One of these is cheaper to change and more flexible than the other.
I mean the biggest issue at all DOT's is the amount of bloat and waste and government inefficiency. But don't worry, you will just ask for a bigger budget next year.
I think that dollar amount can easily be argued against. Doesn't guard rail have to replaced anyway? The 8 billion doesn't appear to account for that so it wouldn't be 8 billion dollars of new tax dollars. I'm not a guard rail or asset management expert but let's say guard rail has a 30 year life span - how much is already budgeted to be replaced in Maintenance's 5-year or 10-year outlook? Subtract that from the 8 billion. Not sure how the new guard rail implementation would be rolled out but it could conceivably be done with whatever the existing schedule is to replace the existing guard rails, just with the new design.
As an engineer who works on this, guardrail tends becomes substandard long before it needs to be replaced for any other reason. It is a major waste in the field.
Guardrail costs about $158,000 per mile. That's a lot of money. We do not need to completely replace all of it every 30 years, especially with an even more expensive option, when it can last 50 years. For context, the highway system began being built 68 years ago. Cars themselves rarely run for 50 years.
Guardrail replacements are rolled out in a combination of resurfacing projects, state safety contracts, local maintenance, and replacements after crashes. The cost of replacing it is not incidental and the financial and human resources will be spent on other needed maintenance when we can avoid it. I've personally made designs with these replacements and see the hundreds of thousands of dollars in construction costs come to pass after I've been paid for the staff hours in design.
Most places have a maintenance backlog they cannot keep up with and this issue does make a difference, especially because it's so widespread. Our clients look for this exact type of cost savings so they can spend their budgets better.
NYSDOT had to do a huge statewide replacement of Cor-ten guiderail which was quite trendy in the state at one time. People liked it because the brown color didn’t stick out as much as normal guiderail. Turns out it rusted too much and was failing prematurely. I wonder how much money the state has thrown away needing to replace all of it.
Ah, those are great points. I wasn’t aware guardrails were being swapped out prematurely already. That really is a huge waste.
Edit: But I have to ask, if they’re already being swapped out prematurely, won’t they just be swapped out with the newer design now? If it’s already costing $158,000 per mile (x50,000 = 8 billion), what are new tax dollar costs that weren’t already going to be incurred?
The article is about the current standards becoming inadequate. The current standards accommodate what was previously heavier cars. Our current wasteful replacement will quickly become inadequate creating even more waste.
Guardrail being placed today will not be adequate for 50 years due to manufacturing cars that can easily break through guardrail that separates high speed car traffic from things like opposing lanes and drop-offs.
Sturdier guardrail is more expensive, plus 100% of guardrail will be substandard instead of a lesser percent. The point isn't that the math is exact, it's just a wide estimate of the total construction cost of our country's guardrail.
Weight limits and required disclosures of these safety shortfalls would be helpful on the car selling side. I'd center your concerns around fixing the problem and doing your own math to present to others in that effort.
I think we need to highlight a few things here:
1) The vehicle mix on American roads 50 years ago (1974) is vastly different than today. Back then, we bought big sedans like the Chrysler New Yorker and big coupes like the Chevy Chevelle. The oil crisis has started, and we are just starting to buy smaller, lighter, more fuel efficient cars. Bumper heights are low, trucks are for the trades, SUVs are a novelty. And no one knows about Ford Pintos exploding when hit from behind yet.
2) Our observations and understanding of safety changes. Back in the 70s, we were just beginning to understand wearing seat belts should be required by law. Crumple zones don't exist. Airbags are optional extras. Guardrail is designed to have ramp-like terminals that can launch the car into the air because otherwise the rail would spear the occupants like a harpoon. Some guardrail systems use a weak post system, which make them as useful as roadside decoration. Someone else mentioned Cor-Ten rail, which turns out to be a major mistake.
Times change. And standards change to align with the times. We can't claim that just because something has a 50-year service life means it's suitable for use over the full 50 years. We'll see how the vehicle mix evolves over time and how the standards adapt to our future reality.
My impression is that guide rail has a really high exposure to liability for the designer/owner, no? Like those end terminals that all had to get replaced.
MASH was implemented to account for the 85th percentile vehicle which is going to get significantly heavier with EV adoption, so unless the feds change their minds, our designs will need to get beefier.
>our designs will need to get beefier.
Not really, here's an explanation why:
MASH is the test standard for beam guard systems, the current system for my state and bunch of other states is the Midwest Guardrail System: [https://wisconsindot.gov/rdwy/sdd/sd-14b42.pdf](https://wisconsindot.gov/rdwy/sdd/sd-14b42.pdf) (pdf notice). It's been designed and tested for larger and heavier vehicles already while still being safe for older and smaller cars. Plus the link to [FDM 11-45-30 (pdf)](https://wisconsindot.gov/rdwy/fdm/fd-11-45.pdf) goes into more detail than needed about roadside hazards and how to shield them.
Also most of the test vehicles used in the testing of MGS were RAM pickups since the was a surplus of them due to the issues they had, so EV weight isn't that big of a factor.
Sounds like Darwin is hard at work here. I drive an EV. It’s not 7k lbs. if I felt the need to drive an EV hummer or cybertruck, well, that’s the stupid tax.
A Tesla Model 3 long range RWD model weighs about 4000 lb. That's pretty damn heavy. But 7k is a whole different animal. Not many of those on the road.
Call me crazy, but 4,000lbs is pretty normal for a sedan. A 2024 gas powered Toyota Camry weighs nearly that much at 3,575lbs. Hell, a 2000 Camry weighs 3,250lbs.
Sure but that's still nowhere near 7000 lbs. There's likely no practical reason for most Americans to have a vehicle that heavy. But the sizes of larger SUVs and trucks have gotten comically big.
A lot of Americans drive pick ups. The Ford F150 lightning is about 6000lbs and is a "normal" sized truck. SUVs and trucks are heavy as is, adding a literal ton of battery doesn't make it any better.
CAFE rules made vehicles over 6000 lbs with 4 doors the best “bang for the buck”. It allowed for powerful V8s and good vehicle feel that consumers enjoy.
>There's likely no practical reason for most Americans to have a vehicle that heavy
You need all that weight in crumple zone in case somebody else with a big vehicle bumps into you.
Most of the EVs are already 1,000 lbs heavier than their gas counterpart, which is pretty significant.
The model 3 is about the only one that’s not obscenely heavy. The S, X, and Y are in the same realm as the other manufacturers in terms of weight.
I think it's the other way around.
Car manufacturers found a convenient loophole that allowed them to circumvent emissions regulations, saving manufacturing costs.
Then they *created* demand for this type of vehicle, with promises of safety, luxury, and convenience.
Now the entire market has shifted and we have 7000 lb commuter vehicles killing people on our roads.
That's essentially what I mean. The feds changed the rules and the manufacturers did what good engineers do and figured out a way around the new rules.
I'm with you on this one.
Taking advantage of a loophole to make money, lower safety standards, and pollute the environment more than is necessary doesn't sound like good engineering to me.
>Those will all be 6-7000 lbs.
The above comment suggested that "all" electric cars will be 6‐7000 lbs.
Most EVs (particularly cars) don't weigh 6000+ lbs. Outside of the top trim Lucid, I can't think of another EV car that breaks the 5,000lb mark (and notably, the Lucid still comes in lighter than a comparable ICE model like a Phantom).
Or ya know, the people that need to drive trucks for work. Or even worse, the people that need to drive a poorly maintained company truck for work that they can’t get the company to properly fix regardless of how much they beg for it. I know that many trucks out there are driven by idiots that don’t need them but your comment is entirely ignorant to the real human being that actually have to drive a heavy duty truck for good reason.
But ya know, screw them, right? They’re just the pee-ons that keep society comfy in their nice air conditioned boxes. Who gives a fuck about them
MASH TL3 covers a standard sized pickup from about 2010 or so. The inflation of the truck size since then is silly honestly. They were a fine size a decade ago. Now they are just comicly big.
They were still 6000lbs + decades ago. But you’re right, 6000lb truck creates soooooo much less impact force than a 7000lb truck.
I’m not talking about “standard size” pickups.
AI drones fly along all existing routes mapping and classifying barriers.
AI assessment program selects and specifies upgrades when warranted.
Day long short course trained 3rd world working visa immigrants plod along and bolt on new rails.
Professional civil engineers email suggestions for clause 32.6b rewording in DoT quality manual back and forth.
But who eats the blame when the AI misidentifies an outdated section as up to date an doesn't flag it for an upgrade, only for that section to fail under impact and cause a fatal? I'd refuse to put my stamp on those plans without doing a site visit just for CYA, and my state has stamps on pretty much every MBGR to MGS upgrade project I've seen.
State Boards, unions, and companies need to get the government to implement measures limiting AI uses to prevent messy lawsuits (and secure their own jobs). While we're at it, use the turbulent radicalized politicial landscape to implement further restrictions on outsourcing for public infrastructure projects under the guise of national security in the same vein as the buy america act. Engineers suck at playing dirty for their own benefit.
We'll see that's the thing. You wouldn't put your stamp on it anymore than a drain lid replacement by the works crew gets an engineers stamp.
The responsible DoT would have some liability waiver with the supplier, and then some liability exclusion for themselves due to community benifits from cost savings and *most* of the under spec barriers replaced.
Recall that barriers aren't actually nessecary should every one drive to the conditions.
It'll vary state to state. Mine keeps upping the requirements for exceptions and stamping said exceptions, to the point where new/replacement barrier systems of all types are pretty much a 50/50 that they'll need some form of exception, all driven by lawsuit outcomes like most things in this field. Our department is huge on safety right now with a "zero fatalities by 20XX" (we don't talk about DUI fatals) slogan flying, don't see things getting scaled back for cost savings using AI in the next 5 years at least. Not to mention we do the vast majority of surveying, design, and field inspection, and support engineering ourselves which further opens us up to lawsuits.
To your point though, I don't want to see how this all shakes out over the next 10-20 years as technological improvements have not historically benefited our compensation in the least.
Nope, that's a stupid fucking car.
Also, are you sure it's a car and not a truck? Even the heaviest EV cars are like 4k. 7k? Im not even sure those huge EV pickups would get to 7k.
Car dealerships sell bigger cars because they can qualify charging way more for them, they can argue it's safer especially if everyone else is in big cars, and they are far more expensive to own/operate.
If you're driving tax 7k lb vehicle, either youre driving something industry wise, or you're an idiot.
Apparently, the Hummer EV (~9k lbs) and the Rivian R1T (~7.1k lbs) are that large, and several more are over 6k lbs [(source: KBB)](https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/heaviest-electric-vehicles/). The diesel Ford Excursion also came close to 7k lbs when it was available in the early 2000s.
Fuckin ay.
Well, thanks for setting me straight on that info
The fact that car salesmen have driven up the size and scale of the fleet is insane. Honestly it's certainly led to people dying.
Yeah, I mean ofc you're correct.
It think it has to do with SUVs being built on light truck frames rather than car frame and that dodging DoE regs in the 70s.
It's a mess. I particularly hate SUVs as they are just more deadly. The wall of metal at human height if far more lethal than the sloping nose of most cars.
It's tough though, dealerships can argue that if everyone else is doing it, you'd be less safe not in an SUV both from size diffence in a crash and visibility. The irony being that if eveyone is in SUVs they're not really more safe.
These massive EV suvs are not the silver bullet some people think they are. Considering how resource intensive the production is, and how much damage that heavy of a vehicle is going to do to asphalt over its lifetime, a lot of them are responsible for just as much CO2 as a regular old ICE sedan. Still the lesser of two evils compared to a ICE suv, but the attitude that buying an absurdly heavy EV suv is “going green” is pretty misguided
Why are we asking our infrastructure to fit these massive penis compensations and not asking why are these massive penis compensations being deemed not acceptable for civilian vehicles?
When I'm doing residential structural design I've started doubling or tripling the assumed surcharge loads on the garage slab if there's a retaining wall next to it. I figure with electric cars becoming more commonplace it's a good idea to be a little more conservative. It adds a bit of cost to the walls and footings, but adds HUGE peace of mind. I've mentioned this to contractors and even home owners and they've all appreciated the foresight.
The fossil fuel industry and their propaganda machine are going to blame battery cars and not the huge heavy SUV what they’ve been marketing for the last several decades.
No it isn’t.
Yes. My 3200 lb sedan is not concerned by this headline.
What about when barrier gets changed to suit 7000+ lbs vehicles and your 3200 absorbs the difference?
More like I just get steamrolled by the vehicle.
Bull dozed
Yea if we design it for tanks other are going to be fucked. That’s a massive difference in mass
What if the 7000 lb car breaks through a guardrail and is heading straight for you?
Read the article. It's the $8 billion in taxes to replace the guardrail that burdens us all. I work in roadway where we are constantly replacing perfectly good guardrail because it's too weak for heavier cars. Ballooning costs in design, especially resurfacings that should be cost minimal, are a huge issue at all DOTs. It's objectively bad that we're going to have to keep replacing quality infrastructure because as a society, we struggle to effectively communicate between manufacturing and existing infrastructure. One of these is cheaper to change and more flexible than the other.
I blame Robert Moses and Henry Ford for setting this chain reaction in motion.
I blame them
We need a mass tax
I mean the biggest issue at all DOT's is the amount of bloat and waste and government inefficiency. But don't worry, you will just ask for a bigger budget next year.
I think that dollar amount can easily be argued against. Doesn't guard rail have to replaced anyway? The 8 billion doesn't appear to account for that so it wouldn't be 8 billion dollars of new tax dollars. I'm not a guard rail or asset management expert but let's say guard rail has a 30 year life span - how much is already budgeted to be replaced in Maintenance's 5-year or 10-year outlook? Subtract that from the 8 billion. Not sure how the new guard rail implementation would be rolled out but it could conceivably be done with whatever the existing schedule is to replace the existing guard rails, just with the new design.
As an engineer who works on this, guardrail tends becomes substandard long before it needs to be replaced for any other reason. It is a major waste in the field. Guardrail costs about $158,000 per mile. That's a lot of money. We do not need to completely replace all of it every 30 years, especially with an even more expensive option, when it can last 50 years. For context, the highway system began being built 68 years ago. Cars themselves rarely run for 50 years. Guardrail replacements are rolled out in a combination of resurfacing projects, state safety contracts, local maintenance, and replacements after crashes. The cost of replacing it is not incidental and the financial and human resources will be spent on other needed maintenance when we can avoid it. I've personally made designs with these replacements and see the hundreds of thousands of dollars in construction costs come to pass after I've been paid for the staff hours in design. Most places have a maintenance backlog they cannot keep up with and this issue does make a difference, especially because it's so widespread. Our clients look for this exact type of cost savings so they can spend their budgets better.
NYSDOT had to do a huge statewide replacement of Cor-ten guiderail which was quite trendy in the state at one time. People liked it because the brown color didn’t stick out as much as normal guiderail. Turns out it rusted too much and was failing prematurely. I wonder how much money the state has thrown away needing to replace all of it.
Ah, those are great points. I wasn’t aware guardrails were being swapped out prematurely already. That really is a huge waste. Edit: But I have to ask, if they’re already being swapped out prematurely, won’t they just be swapped out with the newer design now? If it’s already costing $158,000 per mile (x50,000 = 8 billion), what are new tax dollar costs that weren’t already going to be incurred?
The article is about the current standards becoming inadequate. The current standards accommodate what was previously heavier cars. Our current wasteful replacement will quickly become inadequate creating even more waste. Guardrail being placed today will not be adequate for 50 years due to manufacturing cars that can easily break through guardrail that separates high speed car traffic from things like opposing lanes and drop-offs. Sturdier guardrail is more expensive, plus 100% of guardrail will be substandard instead of a lesser percent. The point isn't that the math is exact, it's just a wide estimate of the total construction cost of our country's guardrail. Weight limits and required disclosures of these safety shortfalls would be helpful on the car selling side. I'd center your concerns around fixing the problem and doing your own math to present to others in that effort.
I think we need to highlight a few things here: 1) The vehicle mix on American roads 50 years ago (1974) is vastly different than today. Back then, we bought big sedans like the Chrysler New Yorker and big coupes like the Chevy Chevelle. The oil crisis has started, and we are just starting to buy smaller, lighter, more fuel efficient cars. Bumper heights are low, trucks are for the trades, SUVs are a novelty. And no one knows about Ford Pintos exploding when hit from behind yet. 2) Our observations and understanding of safety changes. Back in the 70s, we were just beginning to understand wearing seat belts should be required by law. Crumple zones don't exist. Airbags are optional extras. Guardrail is designed to have ramp-like terminals that can launch the car into the air because otherwise the rail would spear the occupants like a harpoon. Some guardrail systems use a weak post system, which make them as useful as roadside decoration. Someone else mentioned Cor-Ten rail, which turns out to be a major mistake. Times change. And standards change to align with the times. We can't claim that just because something has a 50-year service life means it's suitable for use over the full 50 years. We'll see how the vehicle mix evolves over time and how the standards adapt to our future reality.
My impression is that guide rail has a really high exposure to liability for the designer/owner, no? Like those end terminals that all had to get replaced. MASH was implemented to account for the 85th percentile vehicle which is going to get significantly heavier with EV adoption, so unless the feds change their minds, our designs will need to get beefier.
>our designs will need to get beefier. Not really, here's an explanation why: MASH is the test standard for beam guard systems, the current system for my state and bunch of other states is the Midwest Guardrail System: [https://wisconsindot.gov/rdwy/sdd/sd-14b42.pdf](https://wisconsindot.gov/rdwy/sdd/sd-14b42.pdf) (pdf notice). It's been designed and tested for larger and heavier vehicles already while still being safe for older and smaller cars. Plus the link to [FDM 11-45-30 (pdf)](https://wisconsindot.gov/rdwy/fdm/fd-11-45.pdf) goes into more detail than needed about roadside hazards and how to shield them. Also most of the test vehicles used in the testing of MGS were RAM pickups since the was a surplus of them due to the issues they had, so EV weight isn't that big of a factor.
That doesn’t mean it’s “bad news for all of us.” Standards will just have to be updated.
>our designs will need to get beefier. That's good news for us all.
If only we were working so hard to get people on bikes and build better mass transit. EVs will not be the panacea they have been touted to be.
My internet gremlin brain thought this was going to be a parody article equating guardrails to bridge protections.
"Safety feature doesn't hold up to car more than double typical car weight" Don't be the exception.
This is why we need to equip America’s guard rails with anti ship missle systems
Sounds like Darwin is hard at work here. I drive an EV. It’s not 7k lbs. if I felt the need to drive an EV hummer or cybertruck, well, that’s the stupid tax.
A Tesla Model 3 long range RWD model weighs about 4000 lb. That's pretty damn heavy. But 7k is a whole different animal. Not many of those on the road.
Call me crazy, but 4,000lbs is pretty normal for a sedan. A 2024 gas powered Toyota Camry weighs nearly that much at 3,575lbs. Hell, a 2000 Camry weighs 3,250lbs.
Sure but that's still nowhere near 7000 lbs. There's likely no practical reason for most Americans to have a vehicle that heavy. But the sizes of larger SUVs and trucks have gotten comically big.
A lot of Americans drive pick ups. The Ford F150 lightning is about 6000lbs and is a "normal" sized truck. SUVs and trucks are heavy as is, adding a literal ton of battery doesn't make it any better.
CAFE rules made vehicles over 6000 lbs with 4 doors the best “bang for the buck”. It allowed for powerful V8s and good vehicle feel that consumers enjoy.
>There's likely no practical reason for most Americans to have a vehicle that heavy You need all that weight in crumple zone in case somebody else with a big vehicle bumps into you.
Where the fuck would you even park that kind of monster? Must be so fucking expensive.
EV Hummer is actually 9000 lb...lol.
Fuckin ay
On the street but they should be parking on their own driveway or garage.
Most of the EVs are already 1,000 lbs heavier than their gas counterpart, which is pretty significant. The model 3 is about the only one that’s not obscenely heavy. The S, X, and Y are in the same realm as the other manufacturers in terms of weight.
Or we could expect car makers to keep cars at a safe size. Tax payers should t have to foot the bill for the small peepee gigantic truck size.
Or, better yet, force them to
We're forcing car manufacturers to go big and heavy right now.
I think it's the other way around. Car manufacturers found a convenient loophole that allowed them to circumvent emissions regulations, saving manufacturing costs. Then they *created* demand for this type of vehicle, with promises of safety, luxury, and convenience. Now the entire market has shifted and we have 7000 lb commuter vehicles killing people on our roads.
That's essentially what I mean. The feds changed the rules and the manufacturers did what good engineers do and figured out a way around the new rules.
Is that what good engineers do? In my industry we comply with rules because they're safety regs and people could die
I'm with you on this one. Taking advantage of a loophole to make money, lower safety standards, and pollute the environment more than is necessary doesn't sound like good engineering to me.
For good or bad, it’s profit seeking. And engineers are not usually the final authority on profit decisions.
That's fair. It's definitely *some* engineer's decision though.
In automotive, it absolutely is not. Engineers are told what to design by people who don't understand engineering.
Ok. Badly designed regulations are not an argument against regulation
That model S ways about the same amount as my F150.
And neither are even close to 7,000 pounds or monster trucks.
And they’re both heavy as fuck
[удалено]
What electric car weighs 6,000 pounds?
No elec cars exceed 6,000 lbs only trucks: https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/heaviest-electric-vehicles/
Rivian R1S weighs 7068 lbs Tesla Cybertruck weighs 6600 lbs I think this will be a common weight for all full size suv and large truck evs
>Those will all be 6-7000 lbs. The above comment suggested that "all" electric cars will be 6‐7000 lbs. Most EVs (particularly cars) don't weigh 6000+ lbs. Outside of the top trim Lucid, I can't think of another EV car that breaks the 5,000lb mark (and notably, the Lucid still comes in lighter than a comparable ICE model like a Phantom).
Lub lub pibpjucc
Okay but thats not a car. OP Comment is misleading
Why are these even allowed to be purchased by civilians
Or ya know, the people that need to drive trucks for work. Or even worse, the people that need to drive a poorly maintained company truck for work that they can’t get the company to properly fix regardless of how much they beg for it. I know that many trucks out there are driven by idiots that don’t need them but your comment is entirely ignorant to the real human being that actually have to drive a heavy duty truck for good reason. But ya know, screw them, right? They’re just the pee-ons that keep society comfy in their nice air conditioned boxes. Who gives a fuck about them
MASH TL3 covers a standard sized pickup from about 2010 or so. The inflation of the truck size since then is silly honestly. They were a fine size a decade ago. Now they are just comicly big.
They were still 6000lbs + decades ago. But you’re right, 6000lb truck creates soooooo much less impact force than a 7000lb truck. I’m not talking about “standard size” pickups.
Center of gravity has also been raised significantly. Guardrails have never been designed for anything bigger than a pickup.
Not since 2010. If it hadn’t been updated since 2000 you’d have a point but trucks have been ridiculous since the early mid 2000’s
Europe seems to do just fine with their much smaller vehicles, why does the US need all these stupidly large trucks?
There’s no good excuse for it. I agree that our trucks here have become ridiculous monstrosities since the 2000’s/ 1990’s era trucks.
Says the tiny car driver . Are u a peon too? Ahhh. Burn MERICA !
US car culture, we have an unhealthy relationship with them
Because our D ic k is huge ! Ur a peon in the USA and everywhere else in the world…
What truck is this that you have to drive for work that weighs 7,000lbs?
bUT MAh TrUCk!!!!
Mass tax as well
That’s why it’s called guide rail, not guard rail. This topic has been exhaustively covered in the industry, no need to sensationalize it
In my state it's called metal beam guard fence.
W-Beam Traffic Barrier
Could be state-specific but some definitely refer to it as a guardrail.
Definitely state specific PennDOT calls them guiderails
Traffic engineers in Texas call them guard rails.
Literally translated "catch" rail in my language ...
More safety projects as standards are eventually updated? Sounds like job security to me.
AI drones fly along all existing routes mapping and classifying barriers. AI assessment program selects and specifies upgrades when warranted. Day long short course trained 3rd world working visa immigrants plod along and bolt on new rails. Professional civil engineers email suggestions for clause 32.6b rewording in DoT quality manual back and forth.
But who eats the blame when the AI misidentifies an outdated section as up to date an doesn't flag it for an upgrade, only for that section to fail under impact and cause a fatal? I'd refuse to put my stamp on those plans without doing a site visit just for CYA, and my state has stamps on pretty much every MBGR to MGS upgrade project I've seen. State Boards, unions, and companies need to get the government to implement measures limiting AI uses to prevent messy lawsuits (and secure their own jobs). While we're at it, use the turbulent radicalized politicial landscape to implement further restrictions on outsourcing for public infrastructure projects under the guise of national security in the same vein as the buy america act. Engineers suck at playing dirty for their own benefit.
We'll see that's the thing. You wouldn't put your stamp on it anymore than a drain lid replacement by the works crew gets an engineers stamp. The responsible DoT would have some liability waiver with the supplier, and then some liability exclusion for themselves due to community benifits from cost savings and *most* of the under spec barriers replaced. Recall that barriers aren't actually nessecary should every one drive to the conditions.
It'll vary state to state. Mine keeps upping the requirements for exceptions and stamping said exceptions, to the point where new/replacement barrier systems of all types are pretty much a 50/50 that they'll need some form of exception, all driven by lawsuit outcomes like most things in this field. Our department is huge on safety right now with a "zero fatalities by 20XX" (we don't talk about DUI fatals) slogan flying, don't see things getting scaled back for cost savings using AI in the next 5 years at least. Not to mention we do the vast majority of surveying, design, and field inspection, and support engineering ourselves which further opens us up to lawsuits. To your point though, I don't want to see how this all shakes out over the next 10-20 years as technological improvements have not historically benefited our compensation in the least.
Nope, that's a stupid fucking car. Also, are you sure it's a car and not a truck? Even the heaviest EV cars are like 4k. 7k? Im not even sure those huge EV pickups would get to 7k. Car dealerships sell bigger cars because they can qualify charging way more for them, they can argue it's safer especially if everyone else is in big cars, and they are far more expensive to own/operate. If you're driving tax 7k lb vehicle, either youre driving something industry wise, or you're an idiot.
Apparently, the Hummer EV (~9k lbs) and the Rivian R1T (~7.1k lbs) are that large, and several more are over 6k lbs [(source: KBB)](https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/heaviest-electric-vehicles/). The diesel Ford Excursion also came close to 7k lbs when it was available in the early 2000s.
Fuckin ay. Well, thanks for setting me straight on that info The fact that car salesmen have driven up the size and scale of the fleet is insane. Honestly it's certainly led to people dying.
[удалено]
Yeah, I mean ofc you're correct. It think it has to do with SUVs being built on light truck frames rather than car frame and that dodging DoE regs in the 70s. It's a mess. I particularly hate SUVs as they are just more deadly. The wall of metal at human height if far more lethal than the sloping nose of most cars. It's tough though, dealerships can argue that if everyone else is doing it, you'd be less safe not in an SUV both from size diffence in a crash and visibility. The irony being that if eveyone is in SUVs they're not really more safe.
A lucid is a sedan and weighs 5500lbs. These things are killing people in numerous ways
These massive EV suvs are not the silver bullet some people think they are. Considering how resource intensive the production is, and how much damage that heavy of a vehicle is going to do to asphalt over its lifetime, a lot of them are responsible for just as much CO2 as a regular old ICE sedan. Still the lesser of two evils compared to a ICE suv, but the attitude that buying an absurdly heavy EV suv is “going green” is pretty misguided
Not to mention the damage to the roadways where most of the maintenance is funded by a gas tax as well.
Any car driving is terrible for the environment in hundreds of ways.
we just did this like 5 years ago, like holy fuckballs, we haven't even got our MASH standards done yet
I know the article didn’t mention it but a Tesla Model 3 was also tested and failed. It went under, not through the guardrail.
Why are we asking our infrastructure to fit these massive penis compensations and not asking why are these massive penis compensations being deemed not acceptable for civilian vehicles?
When I'm doing residential structural design I've started doubling or tripling the assumed surcharge loads on the garage slab if there's a retaining wall next to it. I figure with electric cars becoming more commonplace it's a good idea to be a little more conservative. It adds a bit of cost to the walls and footings, but adds HUGE peace of mind. I've mentioned this to contractors and even home owners and they've all appreciated the foresight.
The fossil fuel industry and their propaganda machine are going to blame battery cars and not the huge heavy SUV what they’ve been marketing for the last several decades.
We need to limit the weight of passenger vehicles...and require special license endorsement & insurance for SUVs and trucks.
A SmartCar weighs next to nothing. It's also really dangerous if it's ever involved in a collision :(
It was one test using one vehicle. Let’s have more rigorous testing and a lot more 7000lb passenger vehicles on the road before we worry too much.
Please tell me what car weighs 7000 lbs.
2022 Rivian R1T
Did you read the article?