Carryfast:
No never driven a road train or even been to Oz.But I do know that the Stan Robinson design shown has a lot more load capacity than that Denby abortion.Or for that matter the Australian B double shown.
The specs for trucks are different here in Australia … but, you know that … you know that all the federal government state is a lie because you make the rules
No the laws of design weight combined with local laws ‘make the rules’.So with all your Australian expertise you’ll obviously have no problem in explaining exactly how you’d distribute 90t gross on a 9 axle B double and the resulting axle weights and where Australian ‘Federal law’ states that is legal.As opposed to the weights provided in the NSW example.
Well carryfast, maybe you need to ask the federal state, because NSW and the federal have different laws … and different plates on vehicles … now, I don’t care how they get the 90t all i know is that vehicles can carry 90t … I don’t pretend to know or care to know that’s what the RMS do, I just assist in the pulling for checks in joint ops … but, as you have been to Australia driven all the trucks know that the trailers run on different state and federal plates then you would know all that.
discoman:
I’m sorry, I do not believe you … when carryfats confirms or disputed your version of events then I may just may give you the benefit of the doubts … the regs say your trailers are 3mm to long … so not possible and they don’t make 52 ft 11 inches and 22 mm trailers in the USA. So has to be illegal.
The only dispute here is your bs idea that you can put 90t gross on a 9 axle B double anywhere whether it’s Canada or Australia.
While it’s also bleedin obvious that a double made up of two 53 ft trailers wouldn’t be practical on our roads and arguably just silly anyway when it’s still only got 9 axles as in the example shown.Thereby creating an equally silly contradiction between its volume and resulting road space requirement v its weight capacity.
However the Stan Robinson outfit might just work here given the right routing and nothing really compared to many STGO set ups which manage fine in that regard.While ironically also obviously actually having more weight capacity than a 9 axle B train,or for that matter that Canadian A train,which is ( would be ) the point.On that note remind us what the weight limit for a 9 axle outfit is on Canadian roads.Just as it is on Australian roads.
In which case as I said a decent drawbar outfit would be the most practical solution here,in providing the best of all worlds of the best compromise of road space requirement and weight capacity.Just as in Scandinavia,NZ and even many parts of North America
Meanwhile I’m still waiting for those figures which I asked you to provide as to how you’re going to distribute 90t on 9 axles and where Oz regs say it’s supposedly legal.Bearing in mind all of your obvious knowledge of Australian spec trucks and regs.
Not a quite a Road Train , but we run a sort of road train in the woods .
very similar to the set up they run on the roads in scandinavia .
it runs between forest sites and timber holding areas.
This set up is NOT road legal ( trailer even has to be low loadered between forests ).
Lucky when its OFF ROAD it can work away without any problems.
It can take a load of about 45 to 50 tons , so should gross about 65 to 70 tons.
The FMX is 500bhp and pulls fully loaded no problem .
The dolly was a drawbar trailer cut down and still runs CTI tyre inflation system .
And the trailer is a 42 foot skelly cut shorter , low ground pressure tyre fitted ( front axle is a single central mounted wheel )
this is to spread the weight across the whole road .
Although it is no where as long as the road trains pictured , its still a fair length and is very easy to turn.
We also have a dolly set up that works off road allowing our loaders to take trailer int the forest and load them .
saves waiting till a flatbed comes back.
Both these are not allowed on the road , but show that the road train set up is not as awkward as you would think.
Very impressive set up.
Heres a link to a road legal set up. 57 tons on 6 axles. [bison-fute.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/r ... rs2010.pdf](http://www.bison-fute.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/reglementation_bois-ronds_mars2010.pdf) It applies only to carriage of round timber. Road legal with correct permits etc. There was one of these rigs at the same diesel point as me last Friday. 540 Volvo with double drive, hub reduction axles, super singles on the steer. Trailer was a trombone with a 4 cylinder diesel powering the neck mounted crane. Trailer had first two axles with twin wheels the third had super singles. The cranes must have a self weighing device fitted. I asked the driver and he said it was 26 ton empty. He also said, with a wink, he had about 50tons on the back. It was 14 or 15 metre lengths of green pine going to the top of the goal posts. Im sure I dont know but it mustve been a bit… lumpy…
That’s a good example of the ideal type of 3/4 + 4/5 drawbar configuration which I was describing and which would provide the best compromise between road space need and weight capacity and the flexibility to haul standard semi trailers.That also obviously seems close to the type of configurations that are road legal in NZ and western US states and as said Scandinavia and not surprisingly seems to be the way that the Euro LHV developments are going.The problem being the rail freight interests blocking the plans at every opportunity.To the point where we’ve got abortions like the extended length semi trailers with silly overhangs,which just add pointless load deck space,running around as a fudge to appease the zb’s.
That’s Arocs (or is it an Actros?) with the crane is a fantastic looking bit of it. Impressed by these set ups. I used to work in forestry (as an engineer) and I don’t remember seeing anything like these at the time (20+ years ago)
Carryfast:
No never driven a road train or even been to Oz.But I do know that the Stan Robinson design shown has a lot more load capacity than that Denby abortion.Or for that matter the Australian B double shown.
The specs for trucks are different here in Australia … but, you know that … you know that all the federal government state is a lie because you make the rules
No the laws of design weight combined with local laws ‘make the rules’.So with all your Australian expertise you’ll obviously have no problem in explaining exactly how you’d distribute 90t gross on a 9 axle B double and the resulting axle weights and where Australian ‘Federal law’ states that is legal.As opposed to the weights provided in the NSW example.
Well carryfast, maybe you need to ask the federal state, because NSW and the federal have different laws … and different plates on vehicles … now, I don’t care how they get the 90t all i know is that vehicles can carry 90t … I don’t pretend to know or care to know that’s what the RMS do, I just assist in the pulling for checks in joint ops … but, as you have been to Australia driven all the trucks know that the trailers run on different state and federal plates then you would know all that.
Yep, I drove an old ‘83 Merc that was registered for 90 ton. It was a bogie drive prime mover with a tri axle trailer which could also pull an A and B trailer, both being tri axle. I think that adds up to 9 axles. BTW, I never drove it as a B dub, only as a semi with either a 40 or 45’ tri.
Carryfast:
No the laws of design weight combined with local laws ‘make the rules’.So with all your Australian expertise you’ll obviously have no problem in explaining exactly how you’d distribute 90t gross on a 9 axle B double and the resulting axle weights and where Australian ‘Federal law’ states that is legal.As opposed to the weights provided in the NSW example.
Well carryfast, maybe you need to ask the federal state, because NSW and the federal have different laws … and different plates on vehicles … now, I don’t care how they get the 90t all i know is that vehicles can carry 90t … I don’t pretend to know or care to know that’s what the RMS do, I just assist in the pulling for checks in joint ops … but, as you have been to Australia driven all the trucks know that the trailers run on different state and federal plates then you would know all that.
Yep, I drove an old ‘83 Merc that was registered for 90 ton. It was a bogie drive prime mover with a tri axle trailer which could also pull an A and B trailer, both being tri axle. I think that adds up to 9 axles . BTW, I never drove it as a B dub, only as a semi with either a 40 or 45’ tri.
If it’s a 3 axle unit and tri axle semi running as an ‘A’ double with another triaxle trailer by definition that means 11 axles not 9 assuming a two axle dolly or 10 axles using a single axle dolly.I’m guessing that the 90t design/permitted/registered weight of the unit would only be when it’s pulling an A double using a tri axle dolly and around 80-85 using a two axle dolly depending on local laws regards gross weights.
But as I said there’s no way that the 90t rating means just two tri axle trailers running as a B train.IE the gross train weight of an A double isn’t the same thing as the gross combination weight of a B double.Because the B train loses the axles and resulting weight capacity of the dolly coupling the trailers and the 90t obviously means max gross train weight pulling an A double therefore by definition more than 9 axles.Not the gross combination weight of a B double therefore by definition 9 axles.Unless I’ve missed something in which case as I said show all the respective axle weights for 90t on 9 axles and where that’s legal even under any Oz law.Doubtful.
As expected this seems to confirm that 90t gross relates to the GTW of a 12 axle A double as opposed to the 68t GCW of a 9 axle B double.While you need to go up to a B triple to get the 12 axles needed for 90t gross weight capacity.While a an 18 axle A triple provides 135t GTW.Which again proves the weight capacity advantage of the A train v B train.
Hey! Well its no real problem with b-double or what they called. We have had them here in Sweden a long time now and are werry comon specily in container hauling. No really problem to drive at al. Just a bit of challenge in tight spots but thats just part of the game
Here are a couple of pics of my units when doing b-doubels
Dirty Dan:
Hey! Well its no real problem with b-double or what they called. We have had them here in Sweden a long time now and are werry comon specily in container hauling. No really problem to drive at al. Just a bit of challenge in tight spots but thats just part of the game
Here are a couple of pics of my units when doing b-doubels
Danne
It seems obvious that it’s a flawed configuration v 3 or 4 axle rigid pulling a tri axle with a 2 axle dolly.IE what’s the max weight you can put on the second trailer for example without over loading the silly 2 axles of the lead trailer ?.
Dirty Dan:
Hey! Well its no real problem with b-double or what they called. We have had them here in Sweden a long time now and are werry comon specily in container hauling. No really problem to drive at al. Just a bit of challenge in tight spots but thats just part of the game
Here are a couple of pics of my units when doing b-doubels
Danne
It seems obvious that it’s a flawed configuration v 3 or 4 axle rigid pulling a tri axle with a 2 axle dolly.IE what’s the max weight you can put on the second trailer for example without over loading the silly 2 axles of the lead trailer ?.
Maybe you should write to the Swedish Ministry of Transport to let them know they are doing it all wrong. I’m sure they’d be honored at getting a letter from Surrys resident genius on everything
Dirty Dan:
Hey! Well its no real problem with b-double or what they called. We have had them here in Sweden a long time now and are werry comon specily in container hauling. No really problem to drive at al. Just a bit of challenge in tight spots but thats just part of the game
Here are a couple of pics of my units when doing b-doubels
Danne
It seems obvious that it’s a flawed configuration v 3 or 4 axle rigid pulling a tri axle with a 2 axle dolly.IE what’s the max weight you can put on the second trailer for example without over loading the silly 2 axles of the lead trailer ?.
Hi. Well silly? Dont know what your one about silly? Its two 10ton axl. Cant remember the max weigth one the second one but the one in the pics wernt the best you need to have the axls futher in under so u got a bit more overhang that worked like a pivo. And on the plus side you got in on mutch tighter spots. But back when i pulled them it was 60ton total weight here and with this set up i could load 43ton isch.
Carryfast:
It seems obvious that it’s a flawed configuration v 3 or 4 axle rigid pulling a tri axle with a 2 axle dolly.IE what’s the max weight you can put on the second trailer for example without over loading the silly 2 axles of the lead trailer ?.
Hi. Well silly? Dont know what your one about silly? Its two 10ton axl. Cant remember the max weigth one the second one.
Danne
As a rough guess,depending on the weight and weight distribution of the lead trailer,there’s around 10-15 t total already sitting on them ‘before’ you drop the nose weight of the second trailer onto them ?.Which leaves a max gross of around 30-35t with a rear weight bias at that for the second trailer ?. As opposed to around 40-45t gross for the the second trailer with little if any weight distribution issues if it was a two axle dolly behind a rigid.
I used to drive 3 trailer trains in the Northern Territory and that was back in the '60s. I don’t think we had B-trains then, certainly all of ours were A-trains.Had no difficulty on bad narrow tracks and also through a few towns as well.
Here in France we have had A & B doubles for a long time, especially on container work with 20 footers, but down in Spain I have seen a few B-trains with what appear to be 30 foot plus 40 foot trailers. It may be limited to a few chosen hauliers (I think Gefco was one) and may be an expeiment. I notice that they all have a single flashing light on the top of the rear trailer.
Most of the arguement on here seems to be about gross and axle weights. I think it is likely that the doubles I have seen in Spain are working mainly on space rather than weight. Gefco I always associate with light stuff like car parts, having seen them while loading at various Citroen factories.
Not sure what 3 trailers full of cows weighs to tell the truth, in the Territory in the '60s we didn’t seem to be bothered about any laws on the subject. There may well have been none, for all we knew.
Have to say that 8 wheeler rigid pulling the standard length tri axle with a two axle dolly as shown in the photo above seems like a case of if it looks right it is right.
Carryfast:
No the laws of design weight combined with local laws ‘make the rules’.So with all your Australian expertise you’ll obviously have no problem in explaining exactly how you’d distribute 90t gross on a 9 axle B double and the resulting axle weights and where Australian ‘Federal law’ states that is legal.As opposed to the weights provided in the NSW example.
Well carryfast, maybe you need to ask the federal state, because NSW and the federal have different laws … and different plates on vehicles … now, I don’t care how they get the 90t all i know is that vehicles can carry 90t … I don’t pretend to know or care to know that’s what the RMS do, I just assist in the pulling for checks in joint ops … but, as you have been to Australia driven all the trucks know that the trailers run on different state and federal plates then you would know all that.
Yep, I drove an old ‘83 Merc that was registered for 90 ton. It was a bogie drive prime mover with a tri axle trailer which could also pull an A and B trailer, both being tri axle. I think that adds up to 9 axles . BTW, I never drove it as a B dub, only as a semi with either a 40 or 45’ tri.
If it’s a 3 axle unit and tri axle semi running as an ‘A’ double with another triaxle trailer by definition that means 11 axles not 9 assuming a two axle dolly or 10 axles using a single axle dolly.I’m guessing that the 90t design/permitted/registered weight of the unit would only be when it’s pulling an A double using a tri axle dolly and around 80-85 using a two axle dolly depending on local laws regards gross weights.
But as I said there’s no way that the 90t rating means just two tri axle trailers running as a B train.IE the gross train weight of an A double isn’t the same thing as the gross combination weight of a B double.Because the B train loses the axles and resulting weight capacity of the dolly coupling the trailers and the 90t obviously means max gross train weight pulling an A double therefore by definition more than 9 axles.Not the gross combination weight of a B double therefore by definition 9 axles.Unless I’ve missed something in which case as I said show all the respective axle weights for 90t on 9 axles and where that’s legal even under any Oz law.Doubtful.
I don’t normally argue with idiots because they drag you down to their level and then you surrender, but here goes. My (being the bosses) old Merc had one steer and a bogie drive = 3 (three) axles, two of which had differentials and dual wheels. This prime mover was plated/registered to pull 90 ton as a B double where the A (or front trailer) was a tri axle with a turn table over the tri axles, NOT a dolly. The B (or second trailer) hooked up to the A (first trailer) by means of the pin in to the turntable. This trailer (the B trailer) was a tri axle. Once again if you count what I’ve just written there are 9, that’s NINE bloody axles. This may or may not be simple enough for carryfast to understand, but I do think that it negates any need for further explanation because if he doesn’t get this then he’s either nothing but a troll or shouldn’t be allowed out on his own.
Carryfast:
as I said there’s no way that the 90t rating means just two tri axle trailers running as a B train.IE the gross train weight of an A double isn’t the same thing as the gross combination weight of a B double.Because the B train loses the axles and resulting weight capacity of the dolly coupling the trailers and the 90t obviously means max gross train weight pulling an A double therefore by definition more than 9 axles.Not the gross combination weight of a B double therefore by definition 9 axles.Unless I’ve missed something in which case as I said show all the respective axle weights for 90t on 9 axles and where that’s legal even under any Oz law.Doubtful.
I don’t normally argue with idiots because they drag you down to their level and then you surrender, but here goes. My (being the bosses) old Merc had one steer and a bogie drive = 3 (three) axles, two of which had differentials and dual wheels. This prime mover was plated/registered to pull 90 ton as a B double where the A (or front trailer) was a tri axle with a turn table over the tri axles, NOT a dolly. The B (or second trailer) hooked up to the A (first trailer) by means of the pin in to the turntable. This trailer (the B trailer) was a tri axle. Once again if you count what I’ve just written there are 9, that’s NINE bloody axles. This may or may not be simple enough for carryfast to understand, but I do think that it negates any need for further explanation because if he doesn’t get this then he’s either nothing but a troll or shouldn’t be allowed out on his own.
No the tractor unit was plated to ‘pull’ a 12 axle 90t A double and possibly B triple.For the umpteenth time there’s no way that a 9 axle B double can handle 90t gross.
I think you need to retake whatever their version of the DCPC is and sort out the actual meaning of A and B.Here’s a clue it’s got absolutely zb all to do with identifying the lead or the second etc trailer/s.It actually denotes the difference between the type of contraption ( B ) which you’ve described v a proper ( A ) road train coupled with a dolly/ies.Meanwhile if you really think that you can put 90t gross on 9 bleedin axles then I suggest you dig out the relevant figures there to prove it.
Bearing in mind that’s exactly what I’ve done twice,confirming the max of 68t GCW of a ‘B’ double.As opposed to the 90t GTW of a 12 axle ‘A’ double and the GCW of a 12 axle ‘B’ triple.While maybe you can also explain why it is that even a 9 axle ‘A’ double,let alone 11 axle,also has a higher permitted gross than a 9 axle ‘B’ double.Oh wait you can’t obviously not knowing the difference between an A v a B train and therefore the finer points of the advantage of the former’s GTW over the latter’s GCW.On that note if there is any idiot here it isn’t me.
