What happened to the Tanker Truck?

Perhaps it was a failed "terrorist attack" and they had to use the backup plan of blaming it on an overturned truck. Just a thought and nothing more.

Originally posted by PhloydPhan
promomag, according to all verified reports of this incident, the driver was able to walk away from the crash and hail a cab to get to the hospital. It seems to me that there would be plenty of opportunity for drivers safely buckled into their cars to drive past/around the crashed truck.

The video provided as a supplemental to this LA Times Article includes some shots of what appears to be a truck on fire at 42 seconds and (possibly) 24 seconds.

Most of the pictures linked in this thread - as well as much of the linked video - are of aerial shots of the site. These shots are of limited utility, considering that the truck crashed into a pylon underneath the bridge - and, therefore, is UNDER the collapsed portion of the bridge.

My point is that the truck - or what is left of it - might not be visible in the available shots of the wreck, it might have been hauled away after it stopped burning (as part of an investigation, etc.), or - as other have stated - there might not be enough un-melted truck to be recognizable as a truck.

All I'm saying is that we're not necessarily dealing with a conspiracy here.

(Edited because the spell-check portion of my brain has negotiated for Tuesdays off...)

[edit on 1-5-2007 by PhloydPhan]

PhloydPhan - thanks for the link to the video, I still don't see a truck though. Right, so hailing a cab is like what you do in this situation. You don't call 911 and request paramedics and other emergency persons to the scene, you take a cab.

Oh right, because a person can get out of their truck means people can drive through the truck..... , BUT Now I understand it was under the freeway, it makes more sense..... I need to pay more attention.



[edit on 1-5-2007 by promomag]

[edit on 1-5-2007 by promomag]

[edit on 1-5-2007 by promomag]

promomag, I would appreciate it if you would stop putting words in my mouth. I didn't suggest that anyone drove through the truck. If you go back to my previous post and read it, you will notice that I said other drivers would likely have been able to drive past or around the crashed truck.

As for your comment about the driver hailing a cab instead of calling 911 or the paramedics, I wonder what you would do if you were in a similar situation and covered with 2nd degree burns? Considering that this accident occurred on a San Francisco highway I think it is a relatively safe assumption that someone driving nearby had a cell phone and alterted the authorities in relatively short order.

If you feel the need to respond to this post I would appreciate it if you would go to the trouble of actually reading it before you hit the "Post Reply" button.

Originally posted by racerzeke
I didnt read much about this story, but have they ever explained how the truck actually crashed? It was early in the morning so there are probably not that many cars... How do you just flip a truck with no other people? Possible I guess, but I havent seen how he crashed yet and was just curious

Probably speeding and missed the bend or something like that.

As to the Flyover collapsing. Depending on the fuel in the truck most petrol burns about 1500 degress Celsius (2732 Fahrenheit). data from MSDS data from BP. While working for a Foundry Company Steel (basic) melts at about 1300 Degrees ( 2372) . If Aviation Gas/Jet Fuel all the better.

So no mystery as to why the support bolts joining the spans failed. Tarsel/Ashphalt starts to melt on a hot sunny day. When we accidentlly dropped molten Steel on to the concrete the concrete did take a beating. Overtime it had to be replaced a number of times.

As to where is the truck
1: Most would have be destroyed in the fire. Sheet metal Cab, Fibreglass top.
2: Remander crushed in bridge span.
3: Removed already from sence.

www.sptimes.com...
i dont know if this helps but i wonder how many times this has happened lately.
is the government testing, are the terrorist planning, or are we all crazy.

i was reading this thread and it is just to wierd to me the crashes are the same but diffrent: they happened on major interstates, ect..
yet if you look at the st pete crash the fuel went everywhere took out drains other vehicles bushes and everything in that area the cali crash is very concentrated. weird

Originally posted by PhloydPhan
promomag, I would appreciate it if you would stop putting words in my mouth. I didn't suggest that anyone drove through the truck. If you go back to my previous post and read it, you will notice that I said other drivers would likely have been able to drive past or around the crashed truck.

As for your comment about the driver hailing a cab instead of calling 911 or the paramedics, I wonder what you would do if you were in a similar situation and covered with 2nd degree burns? Considering that this accident occurred on a San Francisco highway I think it is a relatively safe assumption that someone driving nearby had a cell phone and alterted the authorities in relatively short order.

If you feel the need to respond to this post I would appreciate it if you would go to the trouble of actually reading it before you hit the "Post Reply" button.

PhloydPhan if you bothered reading my posts you would have noted that it's only 3 lanes wide, throw down a tanker truck on the side of the road and on fire and tell me how it's remotely possible for people to casually and safely drive through or around it.

On other "Offtopic" message boards people were joking in a post about this event. People were saying steel does melt because of a fire! They were laughing at conspiracy believers

Is this event some way of legitimizing the steel weaking theory?

Steel and Iron are not interchangeable terms.

Iron is relatively soft and quite easy to bend, misshape, easy to distort with heat, even small amounts of heat will cause iron to warp.

Steel is another class. It is tougher, more resistant to heat and not so easy to warp under stress.


when people use the term Steel, and the actual item is Iron, then there is great difference as to what is occuring measured against what is expected.

How plausible is it that the 'tanker' fire has anything to do with the Nobel Resolve www.jfcom.mil...?

Could this be a test of some sorts to see how authorities handle the catastrophe and also how the public handles the ensuing chaos?

As for the "Concrete doesnt melt" thing, those pictures didnt show any concrete melted.

The road surface isn't concrete, it's a tar based substance, so it will warp and bend to whatever shape the underlying structure takes on.

The underlying structure is a mesh of metal bars, over a metal frame, which is THEN reinforced by concrete around that. The concrete under that overpass is likly crumbled away to dust and pebbles, as the photo clearly shows, whereas the tarmac on top is taking the shape of the frame. Which has both warped at certain areas, and the rest just couldnt hold the rest of the weight alone, and got twisted into it's current shape.

Where is the tanker truck? I dont know.
Maybe they removed it for CSI to study it before the pictures were taken.
Maybe it rolled off when the overpass came down, and is off camera.

Why isnt the grass burnt? That I definately cannot explain, but perhaps fire crews focused on keeping the fire contained rather than fighting the fire top down.

Why did the truck driver take a taxi? Becuase people are idiots... he may have been in light shock, and not able to think straight. Might have thought his injuries werent critical enough to warrant an ambulance, nor it's cost.