There has been a bad wreck on Ranger hill. 12 vehicles involved. I 20 shut down.
There has been a bad wreck on Ranger hill. 12 vehicles involved. I 20 shut down.
Wow, not good.
"There are two means of refuge from the miseries of life: music and cats." - Albert Schweitzer
You can go to Txdot and see the wreck on the Eastland County cameras.
Does not look good from the traffic camera.
Last edited by aa6660; 12-19-2011 at 12:39 PM.
Lake Country Sun is saying I-20 may be closed for the next 3-4 hours for cleanup.
I guess it's impossible to put service roads on each side of I-20 on the hill. Sure have been a lot of opportunities to use them if they were there.
What is the website that we can check all this out on?
I'm hearing there's a wreck on 207 now. So much for trying to get around it to the north. Son came through that way just a bit ago and said people were driving like maniacs.
If 207 is between Ranger and Strawn - I don't doubt there was another wreck. People were driving like they were on the Interstate. Trucks were flying by and cars were passing each other. It was crazy on that road.
When you get the chance to sit it out or dance......I hope you dance
wreck on I20 between cisco and eastland? traffic at a standstill
We passed under the bridge coming into Eastland and Ih 20 is stilled blocked off going east. That was about 6:00 pm. Lots of traffic on Seaman going towards town.
We went out south of Lake Leon earlier and met a long line of cars going north towards Eastland. When we came back about 20 minutes later the traffic had quit.
I-20 is open
I was fortunate... It opened in time for me to head towards Eastland about 5:00 p.m. Was moving slow but moving. East side was still blocked. However, coming home I-20 had opened up going east too. A semi truck was at the scene loading up whatever had come out of the back of the truck that was on it's side next to the highway.
Any reports of injuries/deaths? Were any local people involved?
I heard that there were no fatalities. There were some in critical condition. Have not heard of any of them being local but didn't hear that they weren't either.
Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured. ~~~Mark Twain
Speed kills, I'm thinking that there needs to be a slower speed limit from 1 mile west of the big hill to 1 mile east of it. Say 55mph? I would guess that the hill is the most dangerous rural spot on I20. It would be nice to have an access road along the south side and a third lane on the north, west bound, side. Prohibiting trucks in the passing lane. Slow and middle lanes for the big rigs.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum
I tend to agree with ya Spanky. Those rookie truckers are out of control and the cars unfamiliar with the hill are very dangerous. Both ways.
Never a stranger in Ranger! and I DO NOT SUPPORT gay rights
you could make the speed limit 20 mph i ya wanted to but do you really think people are gonna obey it there they dont anywhere else
If ya cant Dazzle them with Brilliance Baffle them with B.S.
Guess you could put the Ranger Interstate Highway Patrol out there. They might collect a little fine money.
The hill catches allot of people off guard. Once the 18 wheelers go off the top they don't always have enough braking power to slow down where the highway curves back to the right. It seems that is where a majority of the accidents happen on the east bound lanes. On the north bound lanes trucks that get slowed to 30 to 40 mph are being overtaken by trucks doing 50. They then change in to the passing lane with cars coming around the bend doing 70. It's pretty scarey for even those like me that know it's happening.
It amazes me that with the number of accidents on that hill (two big ones with in a week) and the number of times that weather has caused I20 to be shut down there, that something hasn't ever been done to fix or alleviate that problem somewhat.
There has been some improvements. If you call the Jersey wall and the headlight shades along the top. Remember when those coming down the hill and headlights would shine right into the eyes of those going up the hill. Still, the most economical quick fix would be to slow the traffic down. It wouldn't fix it completely but it couldn't hurt.
I remember in the early 80's driving a loaded water truck (well over weight and underpowered) up that hill on many occasions at about 12 to 15 mph, second gear, pedal to the metal, 2150 rpm hoping it wouldn't over heat or blow up. Man it took a long time to get to the top.
I can remember hearing Dad cussing & fuming if he got behind a truck on the old winding Ranger hill.
You need a gradual descent that you do not have unless you go to the old Wiles Canyon area.
After watching the rebuilding of countless mountain grades & passes in California, Oregon, Washington & Colorado. They had to go down the side of Mountains in a long gradual descent.
You need to lower the steep grade down on Ranger Hill, Some times I swear it is 8 % down grade at times. I only ran into that steep of grade in Castlegar, BC Canada.
It was my understanding the hill is a 6% grade. I thought to be considered Interstate ready that 6% was the max it could be.
Nearly 30 years ago I went down that hill right after an ice storm in a school bus. Slid down right beside a semi truck and trailer that had his wheels locked. We made it down. I still don't know how I got back up the hill, it hadn't been sanded yet.
Because you, Pianoman, are a school bus drivin maniac! Whoo Hooo..
Or is that all you can tell us without having to kill us for knowing too much? If that's the case, I will be happy not to press it further.
Just like a typical confused mad liberal with low reasoning ability.
If you are trying to make this old man look foolish, you need to just really stand back.
I do a pretty good job on my own trying to reason with you. Thank you.
TV32 will be broadcasting at 6:00 p.m. today, Friday, from an I-20 wreck near Eastland.
Maybe we could start a petition for some obamy stimulus money? HAHAHA. Man I crack myself up sometimes.
As usual, I wholeheartedly agree with Spankster. Slow down traffic. It is done at most mountain passes. That particular stretch is as steep and dangerous as many similar grades in Colorado.
Peace on earth
Walk softly and carry a big stick.
I guess you're right, Mingo. Again. So typical of a lib to suggest something so bureaucratic, unenforcible and restrictive of your God given right to zip down a steep and winding road at any speed you so desire to zip at.
How monumental it would be to set a 50 or 60 mph speed limit at that hill. Just think of the cost. The lives lost. The massive government regulation involved. But we did go to the moon! I think we could do this!
How about letting Ranger annex that stretch and then it can enforce a lower limit, since you seem to have no faith in the Highway Patrol doing so. According to you Spinsters, Ranger seems to do a pretty darn good job of pegging speeders on I 20.
How about polling law enforcement, the repair crews and the various emergency personnel that risk their lives every time that hill has a mishap, on their opinion of lowering the speed limit there? And we should include the opinions of families that have been affected by that stretch of road.
This would be an ideal place to set up speed detection cameras that work along the same ideas that red light cameras do.
Laws and regulations aren't always a bad thing, Mingo.
I have seen many places on Interstates where lower limits were/ are posted for safety reasons. This does need to happen here. Strawn Hill is too steep and on too much of a curve to not do something.
The problem with annexing that land into Ranger city limits would be the other services that would have to go with it. Sewer, water, and so on.
Put cameras up, with warning signs that they are in use, and they will get a ticket in the mail. Have it set up so that if the weather is bad (rain, ice or snow) that traffic fines double.
Has to be some solution. On I-45 going south from Dallas at some point the interstate goes around a town and has a pretty tight turn to do so. There are big yellow signs with speed limits and warning that there is a sharp turn ahead.
So seems to me more could be done to make this hill safer.
The hill has 1950 engineering this is 2012, any saftey improvements since then is just add-on.
You put a slower speed limit on a strip of road that has never had one. You had damn well better have strict enforcement with teeth of any such laws. And not depend on cameras.
You have taken the words out of my mouth when liberals pass a law you had better expect bad things.
In my opinion you have not added anything constructive to this conversation but hot air.
If people know there are cameras there that will and can take their picture if they are speeding then they will learn to slow down. And for the first few weeks there would need to be extra law enforcement there to get the point across. people know this hill form nearly all 48 states if they are a trucker. They will also find out soon enough that a new speed limit has been set and is being actively enforced.
I like the idea of a slower speed limit going down Ranger hill also. They do it for curves that are too sharp, construction areas, etc. Why not on that unique section of I-20 where you may not realize you are going too fast until you have started the decent and by then it could be too late. That curve you start into also keeps you from being able to see very far ahead, therefore, if an accident has happened, you may be right up on it before you find out there's a problem.
Strict enforcement? Why is that needed? Spotty enforcement will do just like they do for those road construction areas. Every once in a while there's a highway patrol waiting for you as you exit one of those areas.
Maybe Strawn could annex the downhill part of I-20 and grab them as they hit the bottom of the hill.
Would you then be willing to concede you have not identified the first stretch of road in the entire United States that cannot have a lower, then have enforced a lower speed limit by way of police, highway patrol or electronic equipment?
And please tell me why vehicles built in 2011 cannot drive down a hill at 50mph if the road on that hill was designed in 1950.
Huggy love ya, babe.
In part of a answer, most Western mountain grades with a reputation of wrecks & runaway trucks.
Have a strict enforcement of speed limits, that means Cops at the top & bottom of the grade.
I have had several close calls in rear-in collisions from inexperienced drivers going to fast.
While we were held at 25 mph they were going at 70, mainly from young Texas truck drivers.
When the idiots became aware of their predicament it was to late.
The North side of Grapevine Pass comes to mind, it has a 25 mph for trucks at the top.
If you have a loaded trailer you had better damn well slow down to 25mph.
Ranger Hill is not in Palo Pinto County, even if ticketed along the I-20 strip that is in Palo Pinto.
There is a good chance the JP at Strawn Texas will throw out the violation, according to the DPS.
This has been a long term problem between DPS & the JP.
Wind sheer has always been a problem with high cube trailers running empty, with any change in the wind speed it can be dangerous at a high speed.
Most long haul drivers are bored silly, the downhill grade is just recreation to them.
And flip if you don't know by now you are hopeless.
Oh by the way the old timers called it Thurber hill.
Since the hill in question is in Eastland County, wouldn't an Eastland County JP handle it?
I have heard that Ranger Hill is really Strawn Hill. That Ranger Hill is further up the road where the exit for Ranger is.
I foster dogs!!! If you have something your looking for, or just want a GOOD dog (we work with, and train some) let me know....
Right now, i have a Briard mix, and some kind of cattle dog/heeler/shepard mix. Both VERY intelligent. Have been teaching them basic commands. can get pictures if need be
I don't think they really have enough warning ahead of the hill though. Other places I have been have multiple flashing lights and signs indicating the danger ahead. But there isn't a lot of warning ahead of time about the down hill danger. Especially in slick weather. But then again, how many people would really pay attention to more signs and lights if they were there? So that idea may be nothing more than a waste of money.
Just how fast could a mule team and a wagon get up to on the downhill side of that road back then?
Lowering the speed limit would only back log traffic. I can tell you now that even in Weatherford where the speed limit is 55 people go through there like it's still 70 me included.
On trucks the weight is the problem going down hill.
The more momentum you have increases the braking distance even with engine brakes or exhaust brakes.
On most Western mountain grades you do not see the end of the grade until the very last due to the length.
That is the trouble with Ranger hill the drivers can see it is just a short drop to the end and get over confident.
The only thing that would help the hill is major reconstruction, it is just outdated 60 year old highway engineering
Not to mention there are lots o tunnels and bridges on comparable roads with much higher road counts. It is not uncommon to see those sites slow traffic down to 60 and even 50 mph. How on earth do they manage?
And how about those bottlenecks like the one that inspired this thread? I'll take a 55 mph stretch of I 20 any day.
And I'm in favor of slowing them down. I see way too many fire trucks, rescue trucks, police cars and ambulances heading to the big hill. I'll take a little traffic back log.
Last edited by Spanky; 12-28-2011 at 06:09 PM.
Color me confused, but I was responding to 'lucy' post #73, after she responded to my post #69. If she was using the term 'bottleneck' in reference to a post of yours, I was blissfully ignorant! Mingo will back me up on that.
Last edited by Julie; 12-28-2011 at 07:54 PM.
Construct runaway truck ramps.
The same way that overpasses do... build the runaway ramp up, over, and across the WB lane using concrete pillars instead of the fill material in the photo below.
I'm thinking that the biggest problem with trucks on Ranger Hill is the road conditions. The wrecks seem to happen most of the time when the hill is icy or wet. I wouldn't think those ramps would be much help in that situation. This isn't usually just about going too fast and not being able to brake.. it's about losing control and sliding... which would have less chance of happening if they were going down hill at a slower speed to start with. I could be totally off base with this since I'm not a truck driver or an engineer.
But, the runaway ramps work, save lives and are "shovel ready" options. You better turn in your card comrade.
If you look at the picture the ramps have the ability to kind of straighten out the curve allowing the vehicle to gain control while slowing the forward speed.
Especially on a mountain down grade, no matter what they may claim the hill is more then 6% down grade.
Just out of curiosity, what should a typical runaway ramp that would go up and over the westbound lanes of interstate set the taxpayers of Texas and indeed the entire US back? Any qualified guestimators out there?
My guesstimate is that it would save three or four lives per year. Translate that into dollars.
The amount of work and money to build a ramp would go a long way to straightening the curve some. On this particular hill I just don't see the viability of building a runaway ramp. Slowing the traffic down makes much more sense.
Move the caution signs about 200 yards up the road with lower speed limits
Put some hard headed troopers out on the hill with radar before & after with a pay as you go judge.
And you may have something, the State would make money plus the drivers would be alive.
Though it's not an interstate hwy, Hwy 175 that goes by Kaufman makes some tight turns and the speed limit there drops. There are some BIG yellow signs and lots of lights flashing to warn drivers of the danger and to slow down. This is just one example.
I'm not sure how a runaway ramp could be constructed on the turn of the hill and made to cross over the on coming traffic. I would think it would be about as simple to straighten the down hill curve some instead of a runaway ramp. But I'm no engineer.
Last edited by pianoman; 12-30-2011 at 09:12 PM.
Many bridges through the west and south also have reduced limits on a permanent basis.
A stretch of I 95 in New Jersey is 55 mph, as is all of I 95 through Pennsylvania. And these limits don't seem to impede traffic.
Traffic counts in the northeast are far greater than that of Ranger hill.
Also, many cities have toll roads with stations that still make some or all traffic stop to pay. Often these roadways have huge traffic counts. Houston is an example.
Right now, in the U.S., there are 47 million people without health insurance. And right now, patients have to wait several days or several weeks to get in to see their doctor. And hospitals have to wait for a bed to "open up" so that another patient can be admitted. In other words, we have finite professional resources in the medical field, and their caseload is getting worse by the hour.
So, all of a sudden, we provide 47 million more people with health insurance and add them to the doctors' caseloads, and add them to the waiting list for hospital admission. What is going to happen to the quality of care? You and I both know that it will decrease because the doctors will be seeing more patients and will have less time to spend with each of them.
We both know that the increased caseload will increase the probability of mistakes being made, leading to more fatalities.
Yes, more people will have access to a debilitated health care system. What is the advantage? I have long advocated opening up military hospitals to civilians and training military personnel in medical services so that more professionals would be available to handle the increased caseload. Simply providing people with health insurance does not solve our health care problems in this country. It only makes it worse.
Once the infrastructure is in place (more doctors, more nurses, more medical facilities), then I certainly would be in favor of making those services available to everyone. Socialized (nationalized) medicine, at this point in time, and under the present circumstances, would overwhelm our medical capabilities.
Agree or disagree?
And now, back to the OTHER wrecks!