Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
Allergic2BunnyEars wrote:Please post references/sources. Language used seems rousing but the evidence we have seen is that the cable barriers have in fact saved lives in contradiction to what is posted so far.
Team Loco wrote:taking the politics out of it, the barriers have been effective. but OP is pointing out that he thinks the most unsuitable type was used in order for constant expensive repairs.
WSDOT engineers analyzed 11,457 median barrier collisions on Washington State highways from 1999 through 2004.
Percentage of median crashes that resulted in injury or death
Cable barrier - 16%
Concrete barrier - 41%
W-beam guardrail - 41%
This is partly because cable barrier is far less likely to redirect an errant vehicle into a second vehicle in the collision. When additional vehicles are involved in a secondary collision, the risk of injury increases significantly.
Percentage of disabling and fatal crashes, the least frequent but most serious type of crash.
Concrete barrier - 2.1%
Cable barrier - 2.6%
W-beam guardrail - 4.4%
Statewide, cable barrier successfully restrained 95 percent of errant vehicles without involving a second vehicle. In comparison, W-beam guardrail and concrete barrier successfully restrained 67 to 75 percent of crashes without involving a second vehicle.
RBphoto wrote:I would think an energy absorbing barrier would save more lives than a fixed barrier. Just an opinion and the reason I am in support of the cable system (no pun intended).
sliderz1 wrote:what a ton of BS in the original post
cornfused wrote:A drive on the I95 from Ft Lauderdale to Miami would see not cable barriers but large jersey style barrier large and hard enough to stop a semi . However the cable system is a compromise for the safety of all parties in my view and more of any good dividers and rails needs to be added to our highway net work .
Have a read http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Maintenance/barriers/cable/WSDOT engineers analyzed 11,457 median barrier collisions on Washington State highways from 1999 through 2004.
Percentage of median crashes that resulted in injury or death
Cable barrier - 16%
Concrete barrier - 41%
W-beam guardrail - 41%
This is partly because cable barrier is far less likely to redirect an errant vehicle into a second vehicle in the collision. When additional vehicles are involved in a secondary collision, the risk of injury increases significantly.
Percentage of disabling and fatal crashes, the least frequent but most serious type of crash.
Concrete barrier - 2.1%
Cable barrier - 2.6%
W-beam guardrail - 4.4%
Statewide, cable barrier successfully restrained 95 percent of errant vehicles without involving a second vehicle. In comparison, W-beam guardrail and concrete barrier successfully restrained 67 to 75 percent of crashes without involving a second vehicle.
Trinbagoviews wrote:
That's because cable barriers are hardly ever used on freeways where fatal accidents occur the most.
BRZ wrote:YEARS ago I looked into the possibility of supplying Plastic water filled barriers, was informed since back then that they Concrete barrier "people" had politicians tied up so that there could be no replacement.
Not surprised- No government seems to care about its people....
RBphoto wrote:^^ and how many of those drivers who crash because of roadworks were actually obeying the speed limit? I am of the opinion that if you drive at the speed limit on all roads and exercise due caution and care, you will NEVER cause an accident. Of three major accidents I have been in, one was a person who rear ended me because he was following too close and on the phone. I should have slowed down instead of trying to put distance between him and I. The other two times I blame on fatigue and making terrible judgement (Expecting the other driver to be courteous) and falling asleep. Drive within the posted speed limit, stay alert, and drive defensively.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 guests