View Full Version : Bring on the juggernauts
buddyrich
31-May-09, 22:08
Interesting thing in the Groat about "super trucks". I think it's a superb idea. We wont see many up here but it's a great idea for moving freight between the major hubs down south. More realistic than rail freight.
The larger trucks will mean more pollution, even though new trucks now have to meet a Euro spec. on emissions. At present London is a Low Emission Zone,(I'm not sure of any others), so my employer can send only certain size trucks into the city, so to suggest that these trucks could be used to haul freight between large conurbations is a non-starter, they would only be useful to transfer freight between large industrial parks.
It's suggested that larger trucks will mean cost savings for operators but the larger engines will use more fuel and tyres will be more costly because of the weight increase, although I'm no maths genius so will leave it to someone else to work out the figures.
Will the consumer really save? The majority of roads all over the UK are in a poor condition so these heavier trucks will mean more damage to our already over-stressed network which means you and I, the taxpayer, will have to fork out to repair. As much as it would mean more work for my employer, Yeoman Asphalt, and give me job security for a while, it would put greater strain on our local councils having to maintain the roads.
All in all, I think it's a terrible idea.
buddyrich
31-May-09, 22:57
so to suggest that these trucks could be used to haul freight between large conurbations is a non-starter, they would only be useful to transfer freight between large industrial parks.
I can speak with a modicum of authority on this.
Who are the biggest operators of fleets and where are they based?
The supermarkets and the courier/delivery firms, which are almost exclusively moving goods between large out-of-town hubs.
Smaller goods vehicles like the ones we're familiar with would be used to move freight into the inner-city areas. As i said, we wont see them up here, in fact they wont be used in such enormous numbers as to make a difference to road surfaces in my opinion. I just think it's a good thing that operators would have the option of running bigger vehicles if a contract justifies it.
The larger trucks will mean more pollution, even though new trucks now have to meet a Euro spec. on emissions. At present London is a Low Emission Zone,(I'm not sure of any others), so my employer can send only certain size trucks into the city, so to suggest that these trucks could be used to haul freight between large conurbations is a non-starter, they would only be useful to transfer freight between large industrial parks.
It's suggested that larger trucks will mean cost savings for operators but the larger engines will use more fuel and tyres will be more costly because of the weight increase, although I'm no maths genius so will leave it to someone else to work out the figures.
Will the consumer really save? The majority of roads all over the UK are in a poor condition so these heavier trucks will mean more damage to our already over-stressed network which means you and I, the taxpayer, will have to fork out to repair. As much as it would mean more work for my employer, Yeoman Asphalt, and give me job security for a while, it would put greater strain on our local councils having to maintain the roads.
All in all, I think it's a terrible idea.
I agree 100% with you Jox and I believe none of these Lorries should be allowed on any British Roads.
buddyrich
01-Jun-09, 12:15
Also, the idea that enormous engines would be needed to pull such large vehicles is a bit ridiculous seeing as conventional trucks are currently running about 700 horsepower from a v8 engine which is really colossal. This massive over-power could easil cope with increases in weight. The same engine carrying more goods=more efficient use of the vehicle.
If increases in the cost of road maintenance become reality, which im not convinced of, then perhaps some of the taxpayer money Jox mentioned could be diverted from our obscenely over-subsidised, hideously-run rail network. The road haulage industry more than pays its way through fuel tax, road tax, business rates and the various wacky charges for things like operators licences.
Maybe in an ideal world there would be no trucks, but i prefer a world where we can buy goods that are transported to us and that means road transport doing the bulk of the work.
Bigger (and therefore heavier) trucks might sound like a good idea on paper but sadly 'supertrucks' don't travel on paper roads or deal with paper people.
The main routes round me are already suffering from the increases in road freight - huge potholes, tramlines and other surface damage. The local councils are slow to repair them and now being strapped for cash might even not bother (under some false illusion that holes in roads make drivers slow down...).
Increasing the weight of the trucks will just make this worse. And the accidents involving the current heavy goods vehicles are pretty horrific. Increase the size/weight and therefore momentum of these juggernauts and it will be a scene of carnage that greets the emergency services.
I go from day to day listening to traffic reports on the radio from this region of yet another accident causing huge delays down to the inability of truckers to keep their vehicles from hitting others. There has supposed to have been a reduction in freight traffic of late due to the recession but I certainly haven't see any less trucks on the roads. Well, maybe we need a deeper recession...
buddyrich
01-Jun-09, 12:53
I go from day to day listening to traffic reports on the radio from this region of yet another accident causing huge delays down to the inability of truckers to keep their vehicles from hitting others
Because all road accidents involving hgv's are caused by them. Aye right, car and van drivers are ultra-safe, responsible drivers.
Yet again im staggered at people's attitudes to the haulage industry. Perhaps a month long strike by the drivers would make you realise how important to your life they are.
The high proportion of accidents involving HGVs on the roads in this region are as a result of the HGV drivers. Either 'multitasking' while at the wheel instead of just driving, pulling out into flow of traffic when no gap exists, foreign drivers pulling out of lay-bys 'blind', drivers falling asleep at the wheel or just driving too fast for the traffic conditions.
I didn't say that van drivers or car drivers are angels on the roads. I usually find that HGV drivers are a bit less of a danger than 'white van man' but unfortunately when a truck has an accident the knockon effect is slightly bigger than other road users.
Your topic is about juggernauts and the introduction of even larger vehicles to a road system already over stretched by traffic levels.
I addressed your post about it being "...a superb idea" and "a great idea for moving freight between the major hubs down south" because
a) I live down here
b) you don't
c) who is more likely to be affected by these monsters?
d) having worked in the industry I feel I have some right to reply.
I've noticed as I overtake on the motorway that a lot of HGVs are swerving unexpectedly into the adjacent lane. They seem to have their eyes gazing downwards into their footwell and driving with one hand. I wonder what they are doing?:roll:[disgust]
It's them damn Yorkie bars - the wrapping is a sod to get off at 56mph while you're trying to balance a mug of steaming hot coffee on your left knee...
buddyrich
01-Jun-09, 14:29
Ummmmmm, you went off topic pal, not me.:lol: I addressed your post after you veered off into generalisation about what you percieve as the dangerous truck drivers we have on our roads etc etc etc. I dont agree and felt like saying so. ;)
Like i said, it's a vital industry that you depend on and you would be most put out it if the drivers/operators said enough is enough and stopped work. If you dont like hgvs on the road, and you sound like you dont, regardless of their size, then have the courage of your convictions and contribute to your idea of a perfect world by boycotting every business you buy from, because everything they sell was brought there in a truck that was driven by someone responsible enough to get it there without crashing-really!
Back to topic, i think bigger trucks will work for certain contracts and rail will never be the main form of haulage in this country due to management and infrastructure.
Cazart!
buddyrich
01-Jun-09, 14:32
And yes, Yorkies are pretty irresistable. I would just eat them with the wrapper on to be safe.
Don't think I went off topic pal, mate, chum.... :p
It's all related to the haulage business. Trucks have accidents ergo bigger trucks will have bigger accidents.
You suggested it would be a great idea. Fine. As I haven't read the article I won't comment further on it.
I fully recognise that the manner for moving freight today is heavily reliant on the roads. Ever since Beeching axed all the small local lines more and more goods have had to be sent by road. So I didn't say I didn't like trucks on the roads, I just dislike trucks driven by drivers who act in an inconsiderate way to other more vulnerable road users.
And why would I have an HGV licence if I was so anti-trucks? See, I can actually speak from both sides of the fence (or would that be carriageway?) and it's amazing what idiocy you can witness sat up so high...
Don't think I went off topic pal, mate, chum.... :p
Sorry, but you clearly DID:-
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i237/scorrie57/topic_chocolate_bar.jpg
And suddenly:-
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i237/scorrie57/21-76-nes-yorkie.jpg
I rest the case for the prosecution.
First "Magic Wick" now "Topic" and "Yorkie" - you're really Googling the old TM's!!
buddyrich
01-Jun-09, 19:02
Don't think I went off topic pal, mate, chum.... :p
You did a bit, amigo, hombre, ummmmmmm, freendy! I was on about new large truck legislation and you started on about irresponsible drivers. But your prejudices are your own lookout. I do think it's a bit unfair to concentrate on instances where a truck has crashed, considering how hard the majority work safely to keep industry literally moving.
I still think the first part of my original reply was on topic.
As for my reference to accidents being caused by truck drivers...
Do you live down here?
Ummmmm, not from your opening post, "We wont see many up here", so I'll take it you can't "speak with a modicum of authority on this" - when the traffic reports states the A1 (or other dual carriageway) has been blocked following a collison bewteen two HGVs that is all I need to know. Once again there will be miles of tailbacks and hours of delays (and ironically, an impact on the haulage industry of losses of thousands of pounds caused by other trucks sitting in the tailbacks!!).
Now if you don't mind I have to go and fold my tarps.....
Reading the posts on this subject makes me wander if brain is engaged before putting typing finger into gear with some of you - if the cap fits - wear it!
The general rule is 10 hp per tonne - and axle weights will remain the same - regardless of how many axles are used. Thus there is no more damage than any other vehicle with 10 ton axles...
They, are proposing one unit with two trailers between distribution hubs, the tests were done by DENBY using a normal unit with a 500 engine. The majority of Stevens units are over 500. The extra power giving better economy.
The chair you are sitting in came by truck, so did the computer you are using. Get wise people - we need trucks and the guys and gals that drive them.
If you want to knock the industry - take the trouble to learn a little about it.
Hmm, which hat shall I don.....
How about the "Google" hat? Works for others......
The Secretary of State for Transport (Ruth Kelly): The Transport Research Laboratory has today published a report, commissioned by my Department, on the subject of longer and heavier goods vehicles (LHVs). The report highlights a number of issues that make the implementation of large 25.25 metre LHVs, sometimes referred to as 'super-lorries', impractical either on a permanent or trial basis. I will therefore not be allowing them on UK roads for the foreseeable future.
The following issues highlighted in the report have been influential in arriving at my decision:
* There is a risk (substantial in the case of 60 tonne super-lorries) of increased CO2 emissions and other environmental drawbacks due to modal shift from rail to road if these vehicles were to be permitted, which would also impact on the viability of existing rail freight services and the potential for future growth
* There are serious implications for the management of the road network, as such vehicles would be unsuitable for many roads and junctions
* Substantial investment (in the order of several billion pounds) would be needed to provide for junction improvements, the protection of bridge supports, and the provision of parking infrastructure for statutory rest periods, particularly if a new nationwide network of dedicated facilities is required
* There is uncertainty about how efficiently such vehicles could be used, particularly when sourcing loads of sufficient size to make return journeys sustainable
* Such vehicles would introduce new safety risks
* It is not currently possible for us to mandate tougher safety or manoeuvrability standards that might address some of these issues because of European trade rules
The report does show, however, that there could be worthwhile benefits from permitting a modest increase in the length of current articulated vehicles. The Department will consider these further in the context of its ongoing strategic work on freight, on which I expect to publish a summary of progress this summer.
The report will help inform Member States and the European Commission who are reviewing the rules on lorry sizes as part of the Logistics Action Plan to improve the efficiency of transport and logistics in the European Union.
Copies of the report have been placed in the libraries of the House and can also be viewed at www.trl.co.uk
Delivered: 03 June 2008
A bottomless pit for taxpayers' money
Longer and heavier vehicles are not just a safety risk for road traffic, they will also be very expensive. Upgrading road infrastructure for LHVs would have to be paid for out of taxpayers' money.. Not just roads – bridges, tunnels and parking facilities are also a part of the highway infrastructure and will have to be upgraded at great expense.
At the very least, LHVs will speed up road wear and send repair costs rocketing. However, road maintenance is already being neglected today because of a shortage of money, despite some fairly serious current road damage. The main cause of the damage is trucks, with heavy vehicles being responsible for a disproportionate amount of damage. For example: a 40 tonne truck damages the road 160,000 times more than a car.
http://www.nomegatrucks.eu/the-facts/why-are-mega-trucks-dangerous/infrastructure/
Parked up for the night in a nice little layby - now where's me Yorkie....
Reading the posts on this subject makes me wander if brain is engaged before putting typing finger into gear with some of you - if the cap fits - wear it!
The general rule is 10 hp per tonne - and axle weights will remain the same - regardless of how many axles are used. Thus there is no more damage than any other vehicle with 10 ton axles...
They, are proposing one unit with two trailers between distribution hubs, the tests were done by DENBY using a normal unit with a 500 engine. The majority of Stevens units are over 500. The extra power giving better economy.
The chair you are sitting in came by truck, so did the computer you are using. Get wise people - we need trucks and the guys and gals that drive them.
If you want to knock the industry - take the trouble to learn a little about it.
Did you engage brain before typing? The thread was started because of a report in the John O'Groat Journal, click here (http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/6683/Backlash_over_mega-truck_plan.html) to read it. Nowhere in the report does it mention who conducted the tests. The newspaper published the story because of a general interest and also because it could affect their readers, not the in and outs of technical data which, quite frankly, would go over most peoples heads. Incidentally, do you think everyone is familair with the 'general rule of 10hp per tonne'? And not everyone has the same trucks as Stevens.
Thanks for digging up the link Joxville - my brain was 'wandering' as I tried to search for it on the JOG site but couldn't find it.
Now, the clandestines in the back of my truck have asked me when we're going, so best make them a brew before we set off....
buddyrich
02-Jun-09, 11:29
[QUOTE=MadPict;555775]so I'll take it you can't "speak with a modicum of authority on this"/QUOTE]
Modicum-From Merriam Webster "A small portion, a limited quanity". I've never driven a road train but i hold a full hgv licence, work in the industry and am a truck enthusiast. But im from caithness and we're learning your feelings on that, arent we! I clearly wouldnt know anything of what you speak as i am an ignorant northern knucklehead with no knowledge of what happens down south. A bit like the picts must have been.
On topic-Trucks are big machines and when it goes wrong it sure does go wrong. Accidents can be horrific. But what are you going to do? What other way is there to shift freight? And on the big big trucks, i mentioned a couple o times that i cant forsee a massive influx in them but i support the law allowing them. I dont think the number that would be on the road would contribute massively to the number of road fatalities if the thing is controlled properly. If it does then surely thats a problem with driver training and testing legislation, not truck size?
I would relish the challenge of working with one.
annthracks
02-Jun-09, 11:44
I agree 100% with you Jox and I believe none of these Lorries should be allowed on any British Roads.
Strangely enough :) I agree with Kodiak and Joxsville on this and I just have to add the question ... are there any EU countries already using big juggernauts that would like their "UK ignorant" drivers to be able to drive them over here?
buddyrich
02-Jun-09, 11:56
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/11_04/superlorry_468x120.jpg
Nice!
Im not sure if they run them in any other EU countries but i think not.
Modicum-From Merriam Webster "A small portion, a limited quanity". I've never driven a road train but i hold a full hgv licence, work in the industry and am a truck enthusiast. But im from caithness and we're learning your feelings on that, arent we! I clearly wouldnt know anything of what you speak as i am an ignorant northern knucklehead with no knowledge of what happens down south. A bit like the picts must have been.
Now let's not make out I am resorting to personal attacks - I never called you an "ignorant northern knucklehead". If that was the impression you garnered from my previous posts in this thread then I apologise.
I assumed you had a fondness for trucks. So do I as it happens. Have been to Truckfest a few times now...(Oh, and I have an HGV1 and PCV1 licence).
What has being from Caithness to do with this subject?
And what would my feelings be?
The prospect of supertrucks on the roads down here is bad enough - the thought of them negotiating the roads from Inverness north is a bit too much. Why not use the rail link to Wick/Thurso? It's in place, underused, reliable now we don't have proper winters, probably less polluting, able to haul more in one journey, will create more jobs if a freight hub is built in Inverness and connected distribution jobs in Caithness. Just some of my "feelings"...
As very little evidence of what the Picts actually thought (or wrote) exists I guess it would all be guesswork.
Unlike figuring out the impact on the roads the invasion of these Gigaliners will have...
On topic-Trucks are big machines and when it goes wrong it sure does go wrong. Accidents can be horrific. But what are you going to do? What other way is there to shift freight? And on the big big trucks, i mentioned a couple o times that i cant forsee a massive influx in them but i support the law allowing them. I dont think the number that would be on the road would contribute massively to the number of road fatalities if the thing is controlled properly. If it does then surely thats a problem with driver training and testing legislation, not truck size?
I would relish the challenge of working with one.
It would be nice to get freight back onto the rail network but I fear we are too far down the line to go back to the golden days of steam and freight trains. But creating road trains isn't the answer, in my very 'umble opinion.
The influx of LHVs from Europe driven by European trained drivers might well be a problem. Foreign drivers often flout the driver hours due to the distances they have to travel. Is a less than UK standard trained driver under pressure to 'deliver', tired due to lack of sleep, behind the wheel of a 60 ton 25m long behemoth a good thing?...
Now, would you like a nice bacon bap with your mug of tea?
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/11_04/superlorry_468x120.jpg
Nice!
Im not sure if they run them in any other EU countries but i think not.
It would be horrendous if one was trying to overtake the other on the A9 in the existing dualled stretches. No net gain at all for the hundreds of cars behind them then they are stuck when the dualled carriageway ends.
George Brims
02-Jun-09, 18:49
[What other way is there to shift freight?
Trains, for big amounts, over long distances. Big trucks for containers over moderate distances. Small trucks or white vans for local delivery. Of course this would require foreign concepts like organization, and planning, and foresight. Actually they aren't foreign. They're just historical.
buddyrich
02-Jun-09, 21:47
The bit about being "down there". I think it was implied as im "up here" i didnt have a clue what im talking about. Never mind. I think this topic's been wrung dry anyway.
Selah.
And theres always, Bigger trucks, more freight, less journeys, more unemployed drivers.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.