Traveling below the speed limit is not the relevant safety criterion when going over a hill. Traveling at a speed where you are capable of stopping should something unexpected, like a bicyclist, turn up just over the hill is what should have been discussed in the news. If the hill really was the dominant factor in this collision, then the truck driver should be cited for traveling too fast for conditions.

From the Wisconsin Motorist's Handbook page 41:

"HILLS AND CURVES - You may not know what is on the other side of a hill or just around a curve, even if you have driven the road many times. If a vehicle is stalled on the road just over the hill or around a curve, you must be able to stop. Whenever you come to a hill or curve where you cannot see over or around it, adjust your speed so you can stop if necessary."

and also from the same page:

"SIGHT-DISTANCE RULE: Drive at a speed where you can always safely stop. To tell if you are driving too fast for conditions, use the "Four Second Sight Distance Rule." Pick out a stationary object as far ahead as you can clearly see (e.g. a sign or a tree). Start counting "one-thousand-one, one-thousand-two, one-thousand-three, one-thousand-four." If you reach the object before you finish saying "one-thousand-four," you need to slow down because you are going too fast for sight distance. You must not drive so fast that you cannot stop in your sight distance. If you do, you are not driving safely and could injure or kill yourself or others."

Paul T. O'Leary wrote:

The TV news said that the truck driver was traveling below the speed limit. Of course, 
the speed limit was probably established long before all the development out there, 
and given that it was the crest of a hill, the speed limit is probably too high for 
the current conditions.


_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies

Reply via email to