Tractor-trailer goes off bridge near Old Mill Road in Chester County, Pennsylvania
A tractor-trailer went off the bridge on the Route 30 bypass near Old Mill Road in Sadsbury Township Thursday afternoon, Chester County dispatch said.
The driver of the tractor-trailer was taken to a hospital. Their condition is unknown at this time.
Sadsburyville Fire Company No. 1 said on Facebook that the Route 30 bypass and Old Mill Road will be impacted for several hours until the area can be investigated and cleared. They also urge drivers to avoid the area and respect the fire and police officials when traveling in the area.
Sadsburyville Fire Company No. 1 Facebook page.
A lane restriction is in place on U.S. 30 Eastbound between Lincoln Highway and three miles west of the Coatesville exit due to fire department activity.
The fire company said on Thursday that the Route 30 bypass is closed or will be closed in both directions, as well as Old Mill Road between Business Route 30 and Old Wilmington Road. Hazmat personnel are also en route to the scene, according to the fire department.
This is a developing story. Stay with CBS News Philadelphia for updates.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
42 minutes ago
- Forbes
Tesla Misses Robotaxi Launch Date, Goes With Safety Drivers
A vehicle Tesla is using for robotaxi testing purposes in Austin, Texas, US, on Friday, June 20, ... More 2025.. Photographer: Eli Hartman/Bloomberg Tesla's much-anticipated June 22 'no one in the vehicle' Robotaxi launch in Austin is not ready. Instead, Tesla has announced to its invite-only passengers that it will operate a limited service with Tesla employees on board the vehicle to maintain safety. Tesla will use an approach that was used in 2019 by Russian robotaxi company Yandex, putting the safety driver in the passengers seat rather than the driver's seat. (Yandex's robotaxi was divested from Russian and now is called AVRide.) Having an employee on board, commonly called a safety driver, is the approach that every robocar company has used for testing, including testing of passenger operations. Most companies spend many years (Waymo spent a decade) testing with safety drivers, and once they are ready to take passengers, there are typically some number of years testing in that mode, though the path to removing the safety driver depends primarily on evaluation of the safety case for the vehicle, and less on the presence of passengers. Tesla has put on some other restrictions--rides will be limited to 6am to midnight (the opposite of Cruise's first operations, which were only at night) and riders come from an invite-only list (as was also the case for Waymo, and Cruise and others in their early days.) Rides will be limited to a restricted service area (often mistakenly called a 'geofence') which avoids complex and difficult streets and intersections. Rides will be unavailable in inclement weather, which also can happen with other vehicles, though fairly rarely today. Tesla FSD is known to disable itself if rain obscures some of its cameras--only the front cameras have a rain wiper. The fleet will be small. Waymo started testing with safety drivers in 2009, gave rides to passengers with safety drivers in 2017, and without safety drivers in 2020 in the Phoenix area. Cruise had a much shorter period with passengers and safety drivers. Motional has given rides for years but has never removed the safety driver. Most Chinese companies spent a few years doing it. Giving passengers rides requires good confidence in the safety of the system+safety driver combination, but taking the passengers does not alter how well the vehicle drives, except perhaps around pick-up and drop-off. (While a vehicle is more at liberty to make hard stops with no passengers on board, I am aware of no vehicle which takes advantage of this.) As such we have no information on whether Tesla will need their safety drivers for a month or a several years, or even forever with current hardware. Passenger's Seat vs. Driver's Seat Almost all vehicles use a safety driver behind the wheel. Tesla's will be in the passenger seat, in a situation similar to that used by driving instructors for student human drivers. While unconfirmed by Tesla, the employee in the passenger seat can grab the wheel and steer. Because stock Teslas have fully computer controlled brake and acceleration, they might equip the driver with electronic pedals. Some reports have suggested they have a hand controller or other ways to command the vehicle to brake. There is no value to putting the safety driver on the passengers side. It is no safer than being behind the wheel, and believed by most to be less safe because of the unusual geometr20 November 2024, Berlin: A prototype of the Tesla Cybercab stands in a showroom in the Mall of Berlin. Photo: Hannes P. Albert/dpa (Photo by Hannes P Albert/picture alliance via Getty Images)y. It's hard to come up with any reason other than just how it looks. Tesla can state the vehicles have 'nobody in the driver's seat' in order to attempt to impress the public. The driving school system works, so it's not overtly dangerous, but in that case there's an obvious reason for it that's not optics. Tesla Cybercab concept. With only 2 seats and no controls, not very suitable for a safety driver. ... More These are not being used in Tesla's Austin pilot. That said, most robocar prototypes, including Tesla supervised FSD, are reasonably safe with capable safety drivers. A negligent and poorly managed safety driver in an Uber ATG test vehicle killed a pedestrian in Tempe, Arizona when the safety driver completely ignored her job, but otherwise these systems have a good record. The combination of Tesla Autopilot and a supervising driver has a reasonable record. (The record is not nearly as good as some people think Tesla claims. Every quarter, Tesla publishes a deeply misleading report comparing the combination of Tesla Autopilot plus supervisor to the general crash rate, but they report airbag deployments for the Teslas mostly on freeways and compare it without general crash numbers on all roads for general drivers. This makes it seem Autopilot is many times safer than regular drivers when it's actually similar, a serious and deceitful misrepresentation.) As noted, Yandex, now AVRide, has used safety drivers in the passenger seat, and has done so in Austin--also speculated to be mostly for optics, though there are some legal jurisdictions where companies shave made this move because the law requires safety drivers and they hope to convey an aura of not needing them. This has also been the case in China.) When Cruise did their first 'driverless' demo ride in San Francisco, they had an employee in the passengers seat. So Tesla has been ready to run with safety drivers for years. What's tested here isn't the safety of the cars, but all the complexity of handling passengers, including the surprising problems of good PuDo (Pick-up/Drop-off.) Whether Teslas can operate a safe robotaxi with nobody onboard, particularly with their much more limited sensor hardware, remains to be seen. Other Paths To Launch Tesla apparently experimented with different paths to getting out on the road before they are ready to run unsupervised. In particular, vehicles were seen with the passenger seat safety driver, and also being followed by a 'chase car' with two on board. Reports also came of Tesla planning for 'lots of tele-ops' including not just remote assistance (as all services do) but remote supervision including remote driving. We may speculate that Tesla evaluated many different approaches: Because Elon Musk promised 'nobody in the car' and 'unsupervised' in the most recent Tesla earnings call, there was great pressure to produce #1, but the Tesla team must have concluded they could not do that yet, and made the right choice, though #3 is a better choice than #4. They also did not feel up to #2, which is commonly speculated to be what other companies have done on their first launch, later graduating to #1 #5 just looks goofy, I think the optics would not work, and it's also challenging. Remote driving is real and doable--in spite of the latency and connectivity issues of modern data networks--but perhap Tesla could not get it ready in time. All teams use remote assistance operators who do not drive the cars, but can give them advice when they get confused by a situation, and stop and ask for advice. Even Waymo recently added a minor remote driving ability for low-speed 'get the car out off the road' sort of operations. I have recommended this for some time. It is worth noting the contrast beween Cruise's 'night only' launch and Tesla's mostly-daytime one. Cruise selected the night because there is less traffic and complexity. LIDARs see very well at night. Tesla's camera-based system has very different constraints at night and many fear it's inferior then. On the other hand Tesla will operate in some night hours and with more cars and pedestrians on the street. The question for Tesla will be whether the use of safety drivers is a very temporary thing, done just because they weren't quite ready but needed to meet the announced date, or a multi-year program as it has been for most teams. Tesla is famous for not meeting the forecast ship dates for its FSD system, so it's not shocking that this pattern continues. The bigger question is whether they can do it at all. Tesla FSD 13, the version available to Tesla owners, isn't even remotely close to robotaxi ready. If Tesla has made a version which is closer, through extra work, training and severe limitations of the problem space, it's still a big accomplishment. This will be seen in the coming months. Two robocar teams had severe interactions with pedestrians. Both those teams, and one pedestrian, are dead. Tesla knows they must not make mistakes.
Motor 1
an hour ago
- Motor 1
‘Can't I Just Use Carfax?' Man Lists His Car for Sale on Facebook Marketplace. Then He Spends $60 on a Vehicle History Report
Selling a car online already feels like a gamble. Now, scammers are using a sneaky trick involving fake history report sites and too-good-to-be-true buyers. The lesson in avoiding e-commerce scams comes at the expense of online creator Kris (@imkriswithhak). Kris says he got taken for $60 by a swindler who swooped in on his attempt to sell a vehicle on Facebook Marketplace. Get the best news, reviews, columns, and more delivered straight to your inbox, daily. back Sign up For more information, read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use . In a TikTok viewed nearly 59,000 times as of this writing, Kris says the scam began like many average interactions on Facebook Marketplace . He posted his car, a potential buyer reached out to express interest, and asked the usual questions about condition, title status, and availability. Nothing seemed amiss. 'Then they tell you go to this website,' he says, adding, 'And they're like, 'Hey, buy this report so I can see if the car's alright.'' Kris says he offered to get a Carfax report, but the potential buyer insisted it wouldn't be the same. They also said the other report only cost $60. 'So I buy the report, sent it to the guy,' Kris says. The man agreed to buy the car, and they set up a time to meet the next day. The man essentially vanished, Kris says. He'd blocked him on Facebook Messenger. That's when he realized what had happened. 'I look at the transaction, it's some Pakistani name, PayPal, something,' Kris laments. He captioned his post, 'Has this happened to anyone else?' Numerous people commented to share that they too have been scammed this way. A Clever Scam Sites like the vehicle history report site the alleged scammer recommended to Kris can appear professional, offering standard VIN lookup features and pricing that undercuts major services. This type of scam is effective because it leverages trust and urgency, which cybersecurity experts often call ' social engineering .' Trending Now 'He Wears That Little, Dangly Cross Earring:' Woman Says 'Car Guys' Are Major 'Red Flags' for Dating. Is She onto Something? 'Enjoy That Day Off:' Man Asks People to Photoshop a Video to Look Like He Crashed His Car to Skip Work. The Internet Complies Fraudsters understand sellers are motivated to close deals quickly and may be willing to jump through hoops to reassure buyers. By appearing cooperative and politely rejecting more familiar services like Carfax, claiming they need a 'different kind of report,' the scammer subtly redirects control of the transaction. It's a classic bait-and-switch disguised as a reasonable request from a serious buyer. According to the Federal Trade Commission, similar schemes have been reported for years, often involving fake report sites created solely to harvest payment information or collect referral fees. Avoid Getting Scammed The red flags in these cases can be easy to miss. A buyer insisting on using a specific website for a report, particularly one you've never heard of, is a clue that it may be a scam. It may also be suspicious if they make any request before you've spoken on the phone or met in person. Payments for these reports are often routed through platforms like PayPal or Venmo, where the recipient's name appears unusual or wildly incongruous to the buyer's identity. Some victims report foreign names or personal email addresses triggered suspicion only after the scam became clear. There are safer ways to handle used car transactions online, particularly regarding vehicle history reports. Sellers should stick to well-known services such as Carfax or AutoCheck. If a buyer truly wants a history report, they should be willing to buy it themselves or accept a standard one provided by the seller. The National Insurance Crime Bureau also offers a free VINcheck tool that flags theft or salvage status for vehicles registered in the United States. For added protection, sellers can attempt to verify the buyer's identity before investing money in any aspect of the transaction. A short phone call, FaceTime meeting, or even a basic LinkedIn or Facebook profile check can provide some peace of mind. When it comes time to meet, law enforcement agencies around the country often recommend designated 'safe exchange zones,' typically located in police department parking lots or other monitored locations. Follow this advice, and you might not end up like Kris. At the end of his post, he says, 'The moral of the story is: Don't do it.' Motor1 contacted Kris via TikTok direct message and Facebook parent company Meta via email. We'll be sure to update this post if either responds. More From Motor1 First-Time Shopper Buys Her 'Dream Car.' Then the Salesman 'Scams' Her out of Her Audi 'This Is, By Far, The Perfect Vehicle:' Mechanic Spots 2017 Toyota Sequoia Platinum Edition at Auction. Then He Sees the Price Someone Deepfaked Ferrari CEO's Voice and Tried to Scam the Company How I Was Scammed Out Of $200 Trying To Buy My Dream Porsche Share this Story Facebook X LinkedIn Flipboard Reddit WhatsApp E-Mail Got a tip for us? Email: tips@ Join the conversation ( )
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
EV U.S. Sales Lag Will Reprieve ICE, Boost Hybrids
ICE versus EV getty Every other new car bought by Americans in 2030 was supposed to be electric, but as the Trump Administration clears away EV incentives and targets, the total is likely to be less than half that and offer a lifeline to gas powered vehicles and hybrids That represents an unexpected new lease of life for the likes of GM , Ford, and Stellantis brands like Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep and Ram and their combustion technology. They were highly dependent on internal combustion engines and were either slow or reluctant to embrace EVs. A combination of tax credit rollbacks, emissions standards delays and the removal of the Biden Administration and its call for a 50% share for EVs in the new car market in 2030 is a boost for ICE. Manufacturers will also be busily raising production of hybrids, plug-in hybrids, and extended range electric vehicles*. Consultants Roland Berger put it this way in a recent report. 'Delayed adoption of BEVs (EVs) will have cascading effects on the entire automotive value chain, prolonging profitability challenges for electrification-focused players and extending the window of opportunity for ICE-focused legacy players,' the report said. Analysts have been scrambling to slash their forecasts for U.S. EV sales in 2030. Investment bank UBS says EVs will only reach 24% of the new car market or 2.7 million vehicles. Four months ago UBS was predicting 32%. U.S. EV market share is currently around 10%. BloombergNEF now predicts 27%, down from almost 48%. Investment researcher Jefferies is even lower at about 20% along with Roland Berger. Roland Berger was projecting around 40% under Biden's watch. 'Actions taken by the Trump administration to loosen light vehicle emissions standards have effectively halved our forecast for U.S. electric vehicle adoption by 2030 – We now only expect about 20% BEV sales by 2030,' said Brandon Boyle, Senior Partner and Americas Automotive lead at Roland Berger. This compares starkly with Europe's ambitions. The European Union has decreed EV sales shall reach about 80% of new vehicle sales by 2030 on the way to 100% by 2035. Given current market share is barely 20% in Europe, some major humble-pie eating is on the cards. The Mazda MX-30 R-EV is an extended range electric vehicle equiped with a small rotary gasoline ... More engine (Photo by Sjoerd van) Getty Images / Sjoerd van der Wal 'The U.S. market has different dynamics (than Europe): more rural driving, less dense urban cores, and a political environment that could shift depending on the 2028 (Presidential) election,' said Curt Hopkins, CEO of MCQ Markets . MCQ Market says it is a FinTech firm making high-value assets accessible and investable. 'I wouldn't call it a comeback for ICE, but it's not going away overnight either. Hybrids and plug-in hybrids are still very much part of the transition-especially for consumers who aren't quite ready for a full battery-electric experience. Expect those to play a meaningful but gradually shrinking role through the decade,' Hopkins said. Bernstein Research analyst Daniel Roeska said at some point EV demand will accelerate again. Maybe after the 2028 election or after 2030. 'It (the expectation) won't be 50% for a long while,' Roeska said in an interview. '(General Motors, Ford and Stellantis) agreed that U.S. electrification will take a lot longer. Even if the target picture of high EV share in the U.S. has not changed, (manufacturers) are waking up to the fact that they must improve EV profitability without significant volume growth and maintain investments into legacy products for longer,' Roeska said in a recent report. Hard to bet against Tesla Tesla is the current EV market leader and despite a huge increase in competition and lower expectations for the overall market, is expected to retain its ascendancy, said MCQ's Hopkins. 'It's hard to bet against Tesla. They're vertically integrated, have a dominant brand, and continue to lead on software and over-the-air updates. As long as they maintain that pace of innovation, they'll likely still be the U.S. leader in 2030,' said Hopkins. According to Kelley Blue Book , the Tesla Model Y led the U.S. EV market in 2024 with sales of 373,000 and a market share of 28.6%, the Tesla Model 3 was next with 190,000 (14.6%). Then came the Ford Mustang Mach-E with 52,000 or 4.0%. 'That said, keep an eye on some dark horses. Chinese automakers like BYD and NIO are getting serious about international expansion, and if trade policy allows, they could become a factor in the U.S. by the end of the decade.' The All-Electric Ford Mustang Mach-E (Photo by) Getty Images 'Among the legacy automakers, Ford, GM, and Volkswagen have all shown real progress. Their ability to scale EV production and leverage existing dealer networks could help them close the gap, especially as more affordable models hit the market,' according to Hopkins. Twice the power, half the weight, half the cost He doesn't expect any game-changing battery technology before 2030, just incremental improvements in battery design. The long- promised solid-state battery revolution – twice the power, half the weight, half the cost - isn't close as researchers stumble over mass production techniques. And the trouble is that as consumers hear about this huge, imminent improvement, they are likely to be wary of buying an EV, and risk having its residual value torpedoed by game-changing technology. That could put the skids on EV demand as 2030 approaches. More bad news for EV makers came this week, courtesy of a survey of 15,000 drivers around the world by oil-giant Shell. The survey showed drivers in America are becoming more reluctant to switch to EVs from ICE vehicles. Those considering switching fell three percentage points to 31% compared with a year ago. In Europe, the reluctance was more ominous given the massive EV targets set for 2030. According to the survey, 41% said they would consider switching to an EV, down from 48% last year. Shell operates 75,000 charging points around the world including the U.S., Europe and China. *(Hybrids use computer power to combine for maximum efficiency with gasoline engines, and have relatively small batteries. They provide maybe 1 mile of electric-only driving. PHEVs have bigger batteries which can be charged independently and can provide up to 75 miles of electric-only transport. EREVs, like the Mazda MX30 R-EV, use small combustion engines to charge the battery. The MX30 R-EV is always powered by electricity.)
