For the Trainers.. Gears to Slow etc

bald bloke:

daftvader:

ORC:
If I drive a DAF it actually compliments me for saving the service brakes by predicting road conditions and using other methods to slow. That will include preferring the exhaust brake and its down-shifting through gears to slow the vehicle.

If the DAF computer thinks it is a good thing, who am I - a mere human - to disagree?

I too drive a daf…But we also have microlise in the trucks…I am struggling to get a good score on the microlise system though due to green band driving…As i have been using the exhaust brake for the most part of my braking…Of course the built in daf system compliments you on saving brake wear…But at the expense of taking the rev counter out of the green…So i’m now using the service brakes 99% of the time…

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Your company should take the green band driving off in that case because you shouldn’t get penalised for doing it properly, my old company used the microlise system and eventually they took the green band driving off the list .

Yeah i’m going to have a word when i get to see the driver trainer…They have been on the course for driving the new daf…Just slow in passing it down to the rest of us.I would of thought the savings on brake components would be better than the slight fuel savings they make on doing it the other way round…

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

And there you have it folks, the reason why new drivers have a vastly increased (if still remote) possibility of finding themselves in an overheated braking pickle.

Correct driving for a lorry means the driver being used, becoming second nature, in how that driving is done, to expect a driver who spends most of their time on the open road attending the steering wheel and using just the throttle and brakes for going then slowing, to suddenly become an expert in correct gear usage when severe hills are encountered is simply plain wrong.

Its no different to severe hill climbing, when the shortfalls of these auto boxes can lead to stall out, its no good the drive, who up until that point has been the perfect trained plant pot selecting D pressing the throttle to go and the brakes to slow, suddenly trying to learn their vehicle, the precise downshift points and how many block manual downshifts might be required to cope with the quite shocking deceleration of these modern lorries with their engines that can’t cope with stall revs, not forgetting it might be necessary to dump the mid lift/tag air once speed drops to 20mph or so if the road is slippery and possibly turn off traction control too…hows that going to work out in the dark when the driver hasn’t a bloody clue what i’m even talking about let alone learning all this for himself in 12 seconds flat…

Yes modern brakes are marvellous, far better than when i started driving lorries, however things can still go wrong, pipes can burst valves can seize anything can happen on the road and that steady hill descent can suddenly become an emergency stop…only if you have already hot brakes it won’t be an emergency stop it might become an emergency with possibly serious consequences due to brake fade out, and you have a hell of a lot better chance of stopping if the brakes you have left are still cool than if they are red hot and you’re sailing merrily downhill in the wrong, too high, gear.

We are not driving Corsa/Fiesta on a car driving course, we are supposed to be professional LORRY drivers, not plant pots who are only supposed to select D and press the loud pedal.

I am disappointed in the training fraternity that they are so in support of the easy option, they are not preparing new lorry drivers for the real world of lorry driving they are entering.

As for auto lorries and engine/exhaust braking…almost every new large vehicle will have a switch to press for automatic exhaust braking, once you press the button the exhauster will come on and the gears will drop in blocks of 2 or more to keep the revs high enough for worthwhile braking effort.
Are these makers all wrong, should our new driver not be using these expensive and well engineered systems, the makers obviously don’t think so or they wouldn’t be fitted in the first place.

Wear and tear.
We have three identical sister lorries, from new and one regular old school driver has put probably 60% of the mileage on one particular vehicle lorry X currently approaching 600,000, the others have done slightly less mileage due mainly to (considerably in one case) extra downtime :wink:

Of the three lorries X is the only one thats been driven in manual override continually for 60% of its life the revs as they should be both under power and braking, utilising the exhaust brake extensively at the correct revs for max deceleration and using the service brakes to assist that. Its half way through its second set of steer axle pads, just had the third set of drive axle pads fitted, and still only half way through the mid lift original pads, all discs are originals, and the wheels arn’t caked in brake dust unless the regular driver has been off a few days.
Lorry X also gets better overall fuel consumption on the same 44 ton when loaded work.

The other two have been driven normally by a variety of drivers, driven on the brakes, as modern training decrees.
Clutch release bearings went around 100k before lorry X, both have had around twice the brake relines on all axles and new discs front and rear once, plus they’ve suffered considerably more running problems.
The wheels are caked in brake dust that will never be shifted without shot blasting.

Just letting you know that this wear and tear issue suggested caused by downchanging using exhauster to maximum benefit and driving a lorry as a lorry is cobblers.

The training issue needs sorting, as i mentioned on the other thread on the main forum, where this issue has a bearing, i shall be writing to Ma’am Bell pointing all of this out, disappointingly the trainers are quite happy to carry on like this, maybe the engine driver will have something to say about it.

Learned to drive trucks a long time ago and just starting to get my head around auto’s and exhaust braking, but my approach is pretty well still the same bar an emergency: plan ahead and to try and keep the wheels moving, use exhaust brake and change down to match the right gear with the speed/ revs you’re at until you may have to come to a stop… more often than not, you’ll hit them lights/ roundabout etc. at the right time to get back on the accelerator peddle.

As for hills and auto’s. not a fan, if there is a manual option I’ll use it to hang on to the higher power band of a particular gear and take it up slow and steady in that gear and not risk changing… slipping a gear hauling 40 tonnes up a steep hill or the auto deciding it’s time to change isn’t pretty lol.

Advanced driving follows the principals I stated and that includes the LGV drivers who actually find it easier than car drivers - why? - because advanced driving and LGV driving are very similar

The only LGV and car drivers who seem to be against this, that I have come across, are the ones who have never seriously tried it for at least a week
It can often be the same drivers who say that they cannot stick to the speed limits or use pull push steering

This is all from my 18+ years as an advanced driving (senior) observer and a few years as a LGV instructor

I am completely against the gears to go, brakes to slow philosophy. Not just because I’m older and stuck in the past either.

I think that it encourages faster approach speeds, drivers tend to go directly from throttle to brake, rather than backing off first. It’s far better to be smooth when driving, better for the vehicle and better for the load. There’s a lot of energy involved when a loaded lorry goes down the road and allowing things to settle a bit before going from acceleration to deceleration takes a bit of that energy out of the equation. Imagine a load of soft drinks, you’re going to add the slosh of those to the energy you need to take out by braking if you come off the throttle and jump straight on the brakes.

From a fuel economy perspective, smoothness is the key, you may save a few milliliters of fuel by not going down through the gears and having the computer match the rpms in an autoshift, but that will be offset by the extra fuel used by keeping your foot on the throttle longer before braking.

Mechanically, Rog mentioned putting strain on the driveline from using engine braking, but that is wrong, the only thing you will wear out quicker are the drive axle tyres, but that is evened out by less service life from the brake’s friction materials and extra wear on the front tyres as the weight shifts forwards. The extra rpms the engine turns during engine braking have no effect on engine life at all, engine wear is caused by the combustion process and an engines service life is calculated by gallons of fuel burned and not how many rpms it does in its lifetime. Then we have the extra wear and tear on the wheel assemblies caused by the extra heat generated through braking, so in fact, brakes to slow is the more expensive way to do it.

The other thing is this, why do manufacturers fit powerful engine brakes? Why do they integrate them into the computer to bring up rpms for maximum retardation? Why do they fit them as standard and not an option if they’re only designed for use in severe terrain?

I would like to hear a definitive answer to that.

newmercman:
I think that it encourages faster approach speeds, drivers tend to go directly from throttle to brake, rather than backing off first. It’s far better to be smooth when driving, better for the vehicle and better for the load. There’s a lot of energy involved when a loaded lorry goes down the road and allowing things to settle a bit before going from acceleration to deceleration takes a bit of that energy out of the equation. Imagine a load of soft drinks, you’re going to add the slosh of those to the energy you need to take out by braking if you come off the throttle and jump straight on the brakes.

With you on that - better to plan better and ease off the throttle to slow down with brakes as a support when needed - THAT is the advanced/LGV way

Rog I would never be one to undermine your vast knowledge and experience and would agree LGV driving should be akin to advanced driving, extra forward planning, road conditions, road sign awareness, advanced hazard perception verging on precognitive and using the force.

But I cannot help feel ‘brakes to slow’ is the wrong technique to teach. Mainly because it’s simple.
Advanced engine braking and marrying brakes with secondary braking systems utilising gear change techniques to preserve the service brakes should be the way forward. Imho

Yes vehicle advances have negated this need but to have the ability to use a different style in non normal conditions could be the difference from a driver or just the nut holding the steering wheel.

A very good driver will not use gears to slow nor rely on brakes when there is the option is there to plan better and ease off early - this is one of the ‘games’ that some police traffic trainers do with new drivers to trafpol - they get them to do stretches of road and challenge them not to use gears of brakes - if they get too close or hit something they fail !!

Dipper_Dave:
Rog I would never be one to undermine your vast knowledge and experience and would agree LGV driving should be akin to advanced driving, extra forward planning, road conditions, road sign awareness, advanced hazard perception verging on precognitive and using the force.

That is what I was teaching when LGV instructing - except the force bit coz yoda was not available :smiley:

Many LGV instructors came from the advanced driving area but others do not have that experience - many come from using only DVSA/DSA styles

ROG:
A very good driver will not use gears to slow nor rely on brakes when there is the option is there to plan better and ease off early - this is one of the ‘games’ that some police traffic trainers do with new drivers to trafpol - they get them to do stretches of road and challenge them not to use gears of brakes - if they get too close or hit something they fail !!

Sounds like a good test but we do it all the time. Using nothing more than the terrain and forward planning to either gain or reduce momentum whilst at the same time staying in touch with traffic flow.
No brakes no gears just coastin scrubbing speed off naturally.

Autos switch to coasting/eco mode for this purpose.

The only difference we ain’t playin a game. :wink:

I did my IAM Advanced HGV for a piece I did whilst at TRUCK magazine, most of it was about observation and the best use of momentum to keep rolling steady. I borrowed an FM from Volvo to do it and it was a Geartronic version (the predecessor to ishift) and I would’ve driven it using gears to slow, I got my certificate, so have things changed since then?

newmercman:
I did my IAM Advanced HGV for a piece I did whilst at TRUCK magazine, most of it was about observation and the best use of momentum to keep rolling steady. I borrowed an FM from Volvo to do it and it was a Geartronic version (the predecessor to ishift) and I would’ve driven it using gears to slow, I got my certificate, so have things changed since then?

Roadcraft/advanced is clear that in normal driving conditions there is not need to use gears to slow down in a modern vehicle - years ago when drum brakes were still around it did not have that advice

If a driver was to do the AD test in a modern vehicle of any sort and used gears to slow down most of the time through the test they would not pass as they would not be using the system proscribed by Roadcraft

Is Roadcraft the organisation that determines training procedures, can they be contacted to look at the whole brakes to slow issue again.
Perhaps they have like minded individuals who weren’t quite fully onboard when brakes to slow was introduced.

I’m old enough to have started with vacuum brakes, air over hydraulic brakes, then poor air brakes, better air brakes and the superb brakes we generally have now. BUT, my driving style (and instruction) has barely changed. Ask most drivers how to slow a vehicle down and you’ll generally get 1 of 2 answers. Brake or change down. Not many will go for simple deceleration. I have a passion for using brakes only to bring the vehicle to a halt (apart from the obvious downhill situations). But, contrary to the “modern” way, I also teach a couple of gear changes as we’re slowing down. But these are NOT to slow the vehicle - merely to keep the vehicle comfortable in the process of slowing down.

Folks I have taught personally will know my passion on the subject and will have worked hard to get some way towards perfecting it. The worst thing anyone can do when I’m looking is straight off the accelerator to the brake. Shows a lack of forward planning and anticipation and, apart from extremely rare occasions, should never happen.

I’m not keen on the modern way of braking to slow down. IMO it’s amateur. But so is cramming it into a lower gear to slow it down. Using momentum is the best way IMO. Well worth taking the vehicle onto a quiet industrial estate, achieve around 30mph and lift off the throttle. It’s always a surprise just how far it will roll.

Using this method on the approach to a red light is perfect as there’s less chance of stopping - and that has to be good. Whereas the “brake to slow” method leaves too much to be done potentially if the lights change.

And, just out of interest, our trucks run from new for around 4 years before they have brake pads. Bearing in mind that they’re loaded and on “stop start” all day, every day, that’s not pad.

Perhaps I haven’t explained this quite as well as I’d like; been a long day!

Pete :laughing: :laughing:

Off to a tangent a little -

Had a few of my IAM car associates do this = start in 1st, change to 2nd then brake for a T junction which was in view when they set off …
When asked why they said - its habit

This is what AD/LGV is all about - THINKING about everything what is done and why it is done

Usually if it is planned in advance it will be safe and efficient

Its all moot though if your company has decided to lock out the manual overrides on these semi automated gearboxes we have now. Our lot have done that to our Scanias, once you above 25-30mph the computer will not respond to input from the driver. You are at the mercy of it and its whims. Couple this with all this eco crap they are shoving on trucks now as well as “just good enough” engines its no wonder that drivers just stick it in D and leave it. Last week, 10 ton on heading to NHS Runcorn. Going up Windy Hill from Huddersfield is infuriating. The computer will desperately try and hold onto the highest gear, the revs fall out of the green and you lose all momentum. A Euro 6, 450hp Scania with only 10t of tampons and I’m chugging up the hill.

" I’m sorry madam, but it appears that your husband and children were killed because the driver was practising the latest government recommended fuel saving techniques."

Radar19:
Its all moot though if your company has decided to lock out the manual overrides on these semi automated gearboxes we have now. Our lot have done that to our Scanias, once you above 25-30mph the computer will not respond to input from the driver. You are at the mercy of it and its whims. Couple this with all this eco crap they are shoving on trucks now as well as “just good enough” engines its no wonder that drivers just stick it in D and leave it. Last week, 10 ton on heading to NHS Runcorn. Going up Windy Hill from Huddersfield is infuriating. The computer will desperately try and hold onto the highest gear, the revs fall out of the green and you lose all momentum. A Euro 6, 450hp Scania with only 10t of tampons and I’m chugging up the hill.

Well written letter to the management stating and explaining all the safety concerns and increased likelyhood of accident due to the vehicle not having correct reasonable functions, get others to co-sign the letter if they want to, wait and see.
We did exactly that at my depot a few years back, within weeks the whole fleet of affected vehicles had been retrofitted with dump valves that should have been on from day one.
Once its in writing they are on notice that an accident is possible, and they could be held to blame.

Absolutely right Cav, my cynic antenna are raised because this issue was not apparently investigated fully in the Bath tragedy, it should have been and one might wonder why?

You only have to watch old episodes of Judge John Deed to get an idea of the pressure the executive puts on the judiciary to tow the line.