Hacker News Reader

Comment by Aloha | Hacker News Reader

I suspect all of this is wrong.

The maximum length of an articulated vehicle in Germany (and most of europe) is 16.5m or 54 ft. [1]

The maximum length of a vehicle in California is 65 ft. California is one of the more restrictive states when it comes to vehicle length simply because of the age of the road network.

The longest vehicle you'll see in the states are turnpike doubles, which are around 130 ft long, the longest total permitted vehicle length in Europe is 65 ft.

The US used cabovers before vehicle length rules were liberalized, and thats why we don't anymore, drivers prefer conventional trucks, the ride better, largely handle better, and are safer for the driver.

[1] https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/dimensions...

View on HN

"The maximum length of a vehicle in California is 65 ft. California is one of the more restrictive states when it comes to vehicle length simply because of the age of the road network."

Sort of.

https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/legal-truck-a...

The STAA (Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982) trucks can have unlimited length cabs but are primarily limited to interstates and marked state routes.

As someone who drove trucks and was licensed in California - California has other rules that limit, including axle to tandem limits, and not allowing triples or turnpike doubles (both of which are allowed elsewhere, but not federally required). The unlimited length of tractor has practical considerations too, there are reasons why 95% of the long haul fleet is conventional condo sleepers (notwithstanding the folks who drive a RV style sleeper, with a little living area in it) - and 95% of the local fleet are conventional day cabs, mostly driver preference.

So while yes, I used California's state limit as an easy from of comparison, because it is one of more restrictive western states - you're correct in that the STAA allows a longer tractor. In the end, the rules are lightly enforced - but the state limits guide the total length of combination. It's why (for example) you almost never see doubles being pulled by anything other than a day cab.

Bit of a shitshow of authorities for any given piece of road but generally speaking it's the city streets and town-level jurisdictions that get restrictive moreso than interstates and major highways.

There is also the weight factor - even if you could legally have 90ft trailers and 25ft cabs, it would probably put you over the weight limit for many roadways and negate the savings.

" drivers prefer conventional trucks, the ride better, largely handle better, and are safer for the driver." I drove truck in the 90's and the joke back then was "cabover driver's were the first to arrive at the scene of an accident".

Are they better for pedestrians, cyclists, bikers and other drivers, though? I imagine it's much easier to see things in front of you with the cabover design.

Personally I'd optimize a bit more for everyone else's safety, since you know, there's more of them. Plus a semi is a multi-ton missile going 90kmph.

Can you share evidence they aren’t better?

School buses typically have a large nose in front of the driver. Are they unsafe?

I can't really share any studies, but some people seem to have more info: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30195371

Intuitively it would make sense that being able to see in front of you with no obstruction would have an impact on safety. How much, I can't say ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

> School buses typically have a large nose in front of the driver. Are they unsafe?

Guess what, European buses don't have a nose, either :-)))

Those hunking blocks of sheet-metal in the US that you call school buses (alternatively, prisoner transport)? Well, yeah. European buses share much with their truck counterparts, except the massively better visibility all around:

https://www.mercedes-benz-bus.com/content/dam/mbo/markets/co...

Some school buses have a large nose, but many school buses are rear-engined and have flat fronts.

School busses have a regulatory carve out for pollution controls and seat belts. School busses are most dangerous new built passenger vehicles allowed on the road in the US with more than three wheels.

Yet fatal accidents involving school buses are vanishingly rare.

They do have higher standards for the drivers

The standards are basically the same as for a commercial truck driver. The edge cases of what they're willing to accept are slightly different.

School busses only rarely get on the highway, most collisions happen on low speed secondary roads, which are rarely fatal. Plus the sheer mass of the bus means it doesn't get thrown around as much as a car would in an accident.

How dangerous?

Truck accidents where the truck plows into another vehicle are relatively rare. We know because they're recorded by the DOT, and kept as statistics. You're more likely to take them our with the trailer than driving over the front of them.

I have seen four wheelers do all sorts of stupid shit around trucks, stuff that endangers everyones lives, I want that extra little bit of hood in front of me.

I agree that going to a hybrid model is good, where its a short nose conventional cab, like the Cascadia - rather than a long hood-high hood model.

> Truck accidents where the truck plows into another vehicle are relatively rare.

Interesting, in Germany there happen 4 truck accidents on highways every day, every third one of those is a truck driving into the end of a traffic jam [0], in total they apparently cause more deaths than speeding [1].

[0] https://www.autofahrerseite.eu/sicherheit/524-lkw-unfall-sta...

[1] https://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/lkw-unfaelle-fordern-...

Driving a cabover would seem to not help in those situations, somewhat obviously.

A cabover has better close up visibility, not distance.

These day even very cheap car (Nissan micra say) has auto brake and track alignment. Not e-car just normal one. If the stat is so bad in German can this help? Seems inexpensive technology now like abs etc.

It's there, but there are issues:

https://trid.trb.org/view/1756275

< California is one of the more restrictive states when it comes to vehicle length simply because of the age of the road network.

What makes the road network in CA so old compared to eastern states that had roads built so much earlier?

California has A LOT of roads given its size, and density is focused in the big cities, so you have a lot of country roads to maintain with limited revenue to maintain them.

A lot of highways in California have warnings like "no services for 100 miles" and you won't encounter a lot of other vehicles (similar to Nevada and Oregon adjacent).

California started building a state highway network before the east cost did - also it has mountainous roads that have restrictions on overall length, simply because of curve radius.

The first freeway ever was made in California. California is a huge state with widely dispersed population centers (since well before cars), and population growth only really took off around the time of WW2 and the widespread production and adoption of cars and trucks. It’s had a very road and car centric culture since then.

> The first freeway ever was made in California

What road is that? How about the Pennsylvania Turnpike?

That is a toll road and highway, not a freeway. Definitely some definition slicing going on - the 110 in SoCal was the first recognized freeway [https://www.motortrend.com/features/1804-americas-first-free...]

Differences are typically that a freeway is designed and constructed to allow maximum speed and no interruptions/stops (hence all the on/off ramps, lack of lights, lack of toll booths), and is available to the general public for use without significant restrictions or costs.

Which make it far easier to use, faster, etc. the interstate highway system was designed largely using the model.

AFAIK only in California are toll-free, multi-lane highways called "freeways," so there may be no end to the definition-jockeying. If maximum speed is a necessary factor then CA may have no freeways at all remaining.

Haha, yeah the whole ‘high speed’ thing is pretty much only at 2am on a Wednesday in many parts of California now.

One key thing at the time I believe was the grade separation/right of way stuff, which I think had only occurred on toll roads for any distance before.

Previously almost all highways ended up having to stop or intersect with other roads (and hence stop signs, or traffic lights, or whatever). Most highways are still that way, outside of major arterials.

Most major arterial highways are the same as freeways now everywhere of course, but I think that’s more about economic factors. California I think was just the first mover on it (and got exposed to those same economic factors earlier than most).

At the time (and still does, though it gets less press now), California was a huge oil state, and was at the forefront of designing and building refineries too.

Sweden and Finland allows up to 25.5 m.

I did indeed say, most of Europe.

Incidentally, Finland and Sweden constitute something like 20% of the EU's total area, and both have relatively small urban centres scattered all around the place.

It's pretty natural both have somewhat differing regulations in regards to transportation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com