I wonder what they were using to pull this trailer.
Vosa would have loved it of they had managed to stop it.
90 ton!!■■
REALLY■■? 
Goldfinger:
90 ton!!■■REALLY■■?
Why not ■■?
Looks to me like they have reloaded them 8 leggers with the load, it’s been weighed so
Nice Alpha 1,and even better number plate .
It is hoped someone working in logistics will recognise the distinctive vehicle, described as an old tri-axle steel waste hydraulic ejector trailer with a compactor.
Distinctive? not really we have 10 blue ones in our yard 
It must have been some job getting that weight in there, i think the heaviest i have been with an ejector trailer was about 56 ton including a double drive tractor unit.
That is a cracking effort though, i would imagine the culprits didn’t have to go up any hills to get to the dump site.
Punchy Dan:
Nice Alpha 1,and even better number plate .
Was thinking the same Dan 
quote
It is hoped someone working in logistics will recognise the distinctive vehicle, described as an old tri-axle steel waste hydraulic ejector trailer with a compactor.
unquote…
that should narrow it down considerably…they must be shaking in their shoes waiting on the knock at the door…with the reply,oh good,youve found our old trailer that we thought had went missing last week…
More like fifty at a guess. According to the blurb it held “more than twice the legal weight for a trailer of that size” which assuming payload to be 25 tonnes means the hacks have used the 44-tonne GVW for the outfit as a reference point. They’re either too dumb or lazy to get it right or more likely assume that ninety makes a better headline.
If it’s rubble or topsoil 50 tonnes would probably fill one of those.
Muckaway, any comment from you? 
That is a pretty cool looking JCB, I have never seen one of those before.
Sidevalve:
More like fifty at a guess. According to the blurb it held “more than twice the legal weight for a trailer of that size” which assuming payload to be 25 tonnes means the hacks have used the 44-tonne GVW for the outfit as a reference point. They’re either too dumb or lazy to get it right or more likely assume that ninety makes a better headline.If it’s rubble or topsoil 50 tonnes would probably fill one of those.
Muckaway, any comment from you?
I was thinking the same thing…
The Sarge:
Sidevalve:
More like fifty at a guess. According to the blurb it held “more than twice the legal weight for a trailer of that size” which assuming payload to be 25 tonnes means the hacks have used the 44-tonne GVW for the outfit as a reference point. They’re either too dumb or lazy to get it right or more likely assume that ninety makes a better headline.If it’s rubble or topsoil 50 tonnes would probably fill one of those.
Muckaway, any comment from you?
I was thinking the same thing…
So really they might as well of used a machine to lift the front of the trailer at put railway sleepers under the legs.
Typical media don’t realise that trailers don’t have their own registration plates, they also don’t get registered , so apart from chassis numbers mot disc they aren’t really traceable
Sidevalve:
More like fifty at a guess. According to the blurb it held “more than twice the legal weight for a trailer of that size” which assuming payload to be 25 tonnes means the hacks have used the 44-tonne GVW for the outfit as a reference point. They’re either too dumb or lazy to get it right or more likely assume that ninety makes a better headline.If it’s rubble or topsoil 50 tonnes would probably fill one of those.
Muckaway, any comment from you?
I have had a tipper with sides half the height of that trailer filled with brick rubble gross close to 60 tonnes on 5 axles, so it could be possible if the rubble is the old style clamp bricks that are far heavier than LBC bricks.
Sidevalve:
More like fifty at a guess. According to the blurb it held “more than twice the legal weight for a trailer of that size” which assuming payload to be 25 tonnes means the hacks have used the 44-tonne GVW for the outfit as a reference point. They’re either too dumb or lazy to get it right or more likely assume that ninety makes a better headline.If it’s rubble or topsoil 50 tonnes would probably fill one of those.
Muckaway, any comment from you?
I do think you are correct and it will probably be 50 ton for the reasons you give. however some back of the ■■■ packet calculations would mean that it would be very possible to get 90 ton in a big trailer.
trailer 13.6 x 2.4 x 3 metres = 3455 cubic foot
assuming brim full
dense rubble at 7 stone / cubic foot = 151 ton
concrete at 10 stone per cubic foot = 216 ton
water at 4.54 stone per cubic foot = 98 ton
and that would be load not gvw
the chap that sorted this said he took 5 loads out of the trailer before moving it which all went over a weighbridge they then moved the trailer which was still 43.5 ton gross, 92 ton in total
Sidevalve:
Muckaway, any comment from you?
He’s too busy at the moment with his spade 
Bluey Circles:
Sidevalve:
More like fifty at a guess. According to the blurb it held “more than twice the legal weight for a trailer of that size” which assuming payload to be 25 tonnes means the hacks have used the 44-tonne GVW for the outfit as a reference point. They’re either too dumb or lazy to get it right or more likely assume that ninety makes a better headline.If it’s rubble or topsoil 50 tonnes would probably fill one of those.
Muckaway, any comment from you?
I do think you are correct and it will probably be 50 ton for the reasons you give. however some back of the ■■■ packet calculations would mean that it would be very possible to get 90 ton in a big trailer.
trailer 13.6 x 2.4 x 3 metres = 3455 cubic foot
assuming brim full
dense rubble at 7 stone / cubic foot = 151 ton
concrete at 10 stone per cubic foot = 216 ton
water at 4.54 stone per cubic foot = 98 tonand that would be load not gvw
Certain companies have been doing it with hanging beef and steel plate for some years.
An ejector trailer very similar to that sat abandoned (filled to the gills with broken ejector ram) in a corner of a plastics recycling depot@ Chapehall near Airdrie Scotland for months. 
Place has been sold recently and totally cleaned up but would doubt they’d road the trailer that far to dump it 
Harry Monk:
That is a pretty cool looking JCB, I have never seen one of those before.
Scrap/waste handler. Tidy bit of kit.
if it was reported by the newspaper I would not believe them,lets face it reporters and newspapers rarely get it right when reporting stories on transport