AMTRAK vs Bacon

[basementcalling]

Glad no serious injuries, but my main take away was that this board has members who would love knowing we live in a world with trucks carrying 70,000 pounds of bacon.

http://mashable.com/2015/06/05/amtrak-train-crash-bacon/

[jagged ben]

Wow, when I read the subject line, certainly the last thing I expected was that this would be about something real that actually happened.
 

[Ike the BN Freak]

Glad no serious injuries, but my main take away was that this board has members who would love knowing we live in a world with trucks carrying 70,000 pounds of bacon.

http://mashable.com/2015/06/05/amtrak-train-crash-bacon/

There is no way a truck can carry 70,000 pounds of bacon without being overweight.

Max weight for a truck is 80k, and tare weight of the tractor and trailer is over 35k.

[jagged ben]

There should still be enough bacon for all passengers on board to get a free 12 pack!

[nkalanaga]

Ike:  That's the limit for Interstates, but some states allow higher weights on state highways.  Kentucky allows coal trucks to exceed 100,000 in some places.

I agree that 70,000 pounds of bacon sounds a little high, and I'm not sure the truck would carry that much, in normal consumer packaging.  On the other hand, if it was packed in, it could easily exceed that.  A cubic foot of water weighs 62.5 pounds, a truck trailer is roughly 4000 cubic feet, so that would equal 250,000 pounds.  Pigs float, barely, so bacon should be about as dense as water.

[Missaberoad]

Perhaps the GVW was 70k and the news simply didnt consider tare...

I think this is a testament to the safety advantage of having a locomotive on the point!

[nkalanaga]

If their reporters are no more reliable than ours that's very possible.