Super Lorries!!!

NWLondoner

A new super lorry s being tested on Britains roads today. It is 25mtrs long!!! Even the dreaded Bendy Bus is only 18mtrs :shock:

Do not fancy getting overtaken buy one of those in a hurry :?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8387143.stm

Pross

Don't fancy doing the swept path analyses for them when I design new junctions or service yards either!

markos1963

Keep freight on the rails I say

dd1

Its already been stopped by police. Quote from BBC website below :

A 25.25m (83ft) long so-called superlorry has been blocked from being driven on public roads by police in Lincolnshire.

The new longer vehicle was being driven from the headquarters of owners Denby Transport, in Lincoln, when it was stopped earlier.

Police said the vehicle was unlawful due to its length.

freehub

What's the point anyway if it has to respect the 44tonne limit and can't be then used to it's full capacity?

dd1

The lorry's owner, Denby Transport, wants to bring it to Britain's roads because it says that for lightweight goods such as cereals and aluminium cans, conventional lorries run out of space before they run out of weight.

The new lorry would be able to take more of these goods, even though it would still have to respect the UK weight limit of 44 tonnes.

The company has been working on the project for nearly eight years.

Denby's lawyers said it complies with all the current regulations.

The government disagrees, saying it is illegal and that it will not be allowing longer vehicles on the roads for the foreseeable future.

Dick Denby, from Denby Transport, said: "We're trying to clarify and test the law - we're not trying to flout it.

"If the law decides they are illegal we'll pull it off the roads. If the law decides they are quite legal, everyone who wants one can have one."

Woolfie

Apparently its for transporting lightweight goods so it can carry more volume up to the weight limit - cereals etc.

Although they are saying it takes up as much room as a normal truck in its movement I just can't think that it takes the same swept path when it turns corners - I would not like to be down the side of it on a bike when it turns :?

beverick

Woolfie wrote:

Apparently its for transporting lightweight goods so it can carry more volume up to the weight limit - cereals etc.

Although they are saying it takes up as much room as a normal truck in its movement I just can't think that it takes the same swept path when it turns corners - I would not like to be down the side of it on a bike when it turns :?

Why would you want to be on the inside of any vehicle as it turns?

Bob

Porgy

Odds on they will be a common sight on south london roads trying to back up in inappropriately narrow streets by this time next year. :evil:

Will Snow

Tsk. Disgraceful behaviour, trying to reduce the amount of traffic on the road.

Porgy

Will Snow wrote:

Tsk. Disgraceful behaviour, trying to reduce the amount of traffic on the road.

is that what you think will happen?

Will Snow

what, having larger lorries which can carry more? Why not?

TommyEss

They've already tried with the low-bed articulated lorries - they have smaller wheels at the back of the trailer, so have a greater volume for the same trailer height.

Just feels that these things are too big to be safe - from the pics it looks like two full length artic trailers together - which is a fair bit longer than normal two-trailer units (where you've got a regular non-artic lorry with the same sized trailer as the one attached to the cab)

markos1963

Will Snow wrote:

what, having larger lorries which can carry more? Why not?

Even better to let the goods go by rail to free up the roads. Go back to the old days and deliver in bulk by rail to distribution centres and then deliver locally by light goods vehicles. Oh no we can't do that- it would create loads of new jobs and we can't have that can we as the're not in call centres or customer services.

Will Snow

What, and put all the long haul lorry drivers out of jobs? Yeh rail probably does make more sense, but assuming thats not going to happen overnight, surely these big lorries are better? Even if you do get overtaken by one, surely its better to be overtaken by one of these than two smaller lorries? Admitedly I wouldnt want to drive one, but I dare say theyll only be driven on motorways and dual carraigeways, which are fairly out of the way for cyclists.

markos1963

Will Snow wrote:

What, and put all the long haul lorry drivers out of jobs? Yeh rail probably does make more sense, but assuming thats not going to happen overnight, surely these big lorries are better? Even if you do get overtaken by one, surely its better to be overtaken by one of these than two smaller lorries? Admitedly I wouldnt want to drive one, but I dare say theyll only be driven on motorways and dual carraigeways, which are fairly out of the way for cyclists.

Before the coming of the HGV there were tens of thousands of people working on the railways and a large majority of them were involved with freight and mail.

APIII

markos1963 wrote:

Will Snow wrote:

what, having larger lorries which can carry more? Why not?

Even better to let the goods go by rail to free up the roads. Go back to the old days and deliver in bulk by rail to distribution centres and then deliver locally by light goods vehicles. Oh no we can't do that- it would create loads of new jobs and we can't have that can we as the're not in call centres or customer services.

No offence, but I'm guessing you don't have any experience in distribution/logitics?

Will Snow

thats all very well and lovely, but kind of off topic. Arent these bigger lorries a good idea, or not? I think reducing traffic is a good idea personally.

i dont have any experience no. Still dont see how less, but bigger lorries can be bad though.

TommyEss

We did used to use the railways for a lot more freight distribution - and much of mainland Europe still does. When I was working in Basel we were right by the river port, where loads of containers would go straight from the Rhine onto trains - they also have trailers that'll take the lorries whole, tractor and trailer.

We can't really do that any more, after Dr Beaching closed down so much of the network.

Our roads also aren't big enough - remember how narrow and twisty a lot of the roads are - they're jut not designed for regular articulated lorries - let alone super-sized ones!

markos1963

APIII wrote:

markos1963 wrote:

Will Snow wrote:

what, having larger lorries which can carry more? Why not?

Even better to let the goods go by rail to free up the roads. Go back to the old days and deliver in bulk by rail to distribution centres and then deliver locally by light goods vehicles. Oh no we can't do that- it would create loads of new jobs and we can't have that can we as the're not in call centres or customer services.

No offence, but I'm guessing you don't have any experience in distribution/logitics?

No but I have experience of railways and the retail industry. I see that the big supermarkets use a similar system of central distribution centers and local deliveries, but using lorries, why can't that be done with a mix of rail and road to reduce road traffic and the need for such big lorries.

Porgy

Will Snow wrote:

thats all very well and lovely, but kind of off topic. Arent these bigger lorries a good idea, or not? I think reducing traffic is a good idea personally.

i dont have any experience no. Still dont see how less, but bigger lorries can be bad though.

Less a way of reducing traffic - more a way of increasing goods being carried in one load.

Supermarkets are getting bigger and bigger and this will accomodate the general expansion - bigger supermarkets - I'm not exactly in favour of that either.

the huge Tesco near me due to open shortly will probably be the nail in the coffin for the last few shops still surviving in the high street.

Will Snow

Porgy wrote:

Less a way of reducing traffic - more a way of increasing goods being carried in one load.

different means perhaps, but the same end?

Porgy

TommyEss wrote:

Our roads also aren't big enough - remember how narrow and twisty a lot of the roads are - they're jut not designed for regular articulated lorries - let alone super-sized ones!

ridiculous sized lorries come through south east London - both to deliver to the supermarkets and carrying freight down through the channel ports in Kent.

there's quite a few companies along the Thames who recieve frieght deliveries daily as well - so I suspect these super lorries will be clogging my local streets very soon.

They may save money for the companies who want to deliver or recieve the loads, but on our streets the wear and tear must be horrific, and the hold ups from the ones that get stuck, or in difficulty trying to reverse or navigate the narrow streets they oftne travel through must all add up.

I believe that corporations refer tio this sort of cost as externalities.

Porgy

Will Snow wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Less a way of reducing traffic - more a way of increasing goods being carried in one load.

different means perhaps, but the same end?

no i don't think so as i think it will fuel expansion rather than enable traffic reduction. Business just doesn;t work that way I'm afraid.

Will Snow

so you are saying the larger lorries will simply mean that more stuff get carried per journey? I suppose that could lead to more waste products, etc. good point.

cedargreen

Bigger lorries will mean even more stuff travelling by road as they will gain an even bigger advantage over other modes- an unfair advantage since heavy trucks do most damage to roads but pay only a fraction of their real costs, so this could well lead to more trucks, not fewer.
The trucking industry claims there is no alternative, but most stuff did go by rail and a lot more could again if there were a level playing field and trucks paid their true costs.
Logistics and distribution 'experts' will tell you it's wishful thinking, but it's hard to imagine a more inefficient system than trucking with even the biggest trucks (already far too big for most roads in the UK) carrying relatively small quantities. And if the distribution system is so efficient, how come it takes ages for shops to get hold of stuff.
The trucking industry has had it's own way for a long time but is now panicking because as fuel costs rise, rail is becoming more competitive.
Truck drivers would lose their jobs, but as a group they've never shown much sympathy for others in that situation- trucks were used to transport stockpiled coal during the miner's strike when rail workers refused to move it. And jobs would be created in rail and short distance deliveries from rail distribution centres. The current reliance on road transport is simply unsustainable for all sorts of reasons- climate change, energy use, damage to roads, congestion etc etc.

Will Snow

cedargreen

very good answer. I can understand why people were getting so irate about these super lorries - though in a non cycling sense.

Jez mon

Did anyone else here used to get the David Mitchell podcast?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1lpQ2SU8bM

Lorries just seem a poor way of moving stuff about, they wear roads out, can't move nearly as much stuff as a train and can't travel as fast as a train.

Headhuunter

TommyEss wrote:

We did used to use the railways for a lot more freight distribution - and much of mainland Europe still does. When I was working in Basel we were right by the river port, where loads of containers would go straight from the Rhine onto trains - they also have trailers that'll take the lorries whole, tractor and trailer.

We can't really do that any more, after Dr Beaching closed down so much of the network.

Our roads also aren't big enough - remember how narrow and twisty a lot of the roads are - they're jut not designed for regular articulated lorries - let alone super-sized ones!

I doubt we'd see these lorries on urban roads, they simply wouldn't be able to make turns on streets in London. I should they would be used on motorways to and from logistics depots etc rather than to actually deliver to end users like supermarkets etc.

I don't think you can blame Dr Beeching completely for the lack of freight on rail, Dr Beeching largely shut rural and suburban lines which weren't used in freight delivery anyway. I think the fall in cost of transport by lorry, containerisation of freight and investment in the road network (and lack of investment in rail), inlcuding the invention of the motorway has led to the increased use of lorries. Admittedly large artic lorries can get direct to the end user, however I think even with the Beeching cuts of the 60s, it would have been possible to continue to use main lines to deliver freight in bulk up and down the country and then transport on lorry to final destinations. The problem now is that logistics companies have invested enormous amounts in freight transport based around the motorway system, including massive fleets of artic lorries and depots situated at junctions of major motorways rather than near railways, so it would be expensive to reverse and get freight back onto rail, without some enormous initiative.