AMT lovers read this

ironeagle,that other driver came down the hill to fast.He didn't leave any margin for error.

 

Do you have any credible study or real numbers to back up your "expert" opinion?

 

Even coming down a "serious hill", it could be safer to continue down in gear with a dead engine than it would be stopping immediately. Will others coming down the hill be able to see you with enough time to react and avoid you? Or are you and your disabled truck going to be a sitting duck waiting to get plowed into? Is the shoulder going to be sufficient to hold the weight of the truck? Or will you be partially blocking a travel lane? Are you familiar with the hill? Might there be a BETTER (safer) place to stop a little farther down the hill?

Stopping "immediately" at the first sign of trouble isn't always the best option. In fact, there are situations where after taking into consideration all of the OTHER alternatives that might be available, stopping immediately might even be one of the WORST options you have given the specific situation you're in. That's the issue here. Not every situation is the same, and there is no such thing as a "one size fits all" solution. Are there situations where stopping immediately would be best? Absolutely...nice wide shoulder right where you are, with clear visibility so everybody can see you and you're 5-10' away from the travel lanes. But, that isn't always going to be the case, because this isn't a perfect world. So, you use your head and analyze the situation for what it is, weigh your options, and then do what you have to do in order to be safe. Even if that means continuing down the hill in gear with a dead engine.

 

Awful easy to be a Monday morning quarterback. I doubt he expected the engine to shut down or the transmission to take itself out of gear. If you're going to decend every hill preparing for that possibility...plenty of things in life are more apt to happen...getting struck by lightning, winning the lottery, etc...so it's pretty much wasted energy anticipating it happening. In the unlikely event that it does happen, I like knowing I have control over the operation of my transmission, and that what I want isn't going to be overridden by a computer programmed to save a vehicle component when I'm more concerned with saving myself and preventing harm to those around me.

 

I know this driver really well and have stayed in touch with him even after 15 years off the road. I asked him about that as he has the mechanic reports stored in his computer as to what the hell happened. He was coming Down Cajon at 25 MPH 2 miles away when he lost power. The transmission popped out of gear the second he lost power. What caused the issue the truck had a battery ground fail and shorted out the entire electrical system. He could not have prevented it at all. With the load he had on 45K lbs of frozen chicken he was screwed weight wise.

At the time he was a 10 year accident free 1.5 Million driver also had been a trainer at that carrier for 4 years. He knew how to drive a semi and how to handle an emergancy.

 

Since you're passively disagreeing, do you have any that says he's wrong?

 

I think it's funny how people can read one article and automatically assume all AMT's are junk.
This is the 1st article I've read about this kind of failure.
I drove a manual transmission for 21 years and just switched to a Volvo i-shift.
They're basically the same thing other than the computer will shift for you.
Yes it has a ton of electronics controlling it but ALL newer trucks have a abundance of computers/electronics.
So to each his own.

 

It isn't so much whether or not there are electronic controls, but rather WHAT those electronic controls are programmed to default to in the event of a problem. If that default is set to put the transmission into neutral without taking into consideration what the situation "on the ground" is, then it is a problem. Luckily, this sort of scenario is a rare occurrence. However, like is said so often to push legislation..."if it saves even 1 life...".