Carryfast:
B trains are compromised by the second trailer imposing a load on the axles of the first trailer so pointless for decent gross weigh capacity.While the Stan Robinson example shown was a proper A train type set up.While the double artic is probably excessive for general use here anyway with the Scandinavian type drawbar being the most practical LHV type set up.Which hopefully seems to be the way it might go if the pro rail lobby can be sorted out ( doubtful ).
You do talk some crap, they have these in Australia , the A and B trailer A , both have tri axle trailers and GVM 90 tonne … there is no impact on the overall load capacity over the B trailers axle.
excuse me Carryfast does not talk crap
Not getting back into this really, because my experience is of driving them rather than knowing anything about the law. Partly because my experience was a long time ago, but also because I was operating in a region where such laws would have been ignored and in any case, not enforced.
But. The comments above have set me thinking. How does the overall load not impact on the B trailer’s axles? When I was speccing drawbar trailers in England back in the 80s I insisted on a traditional A-frame set up to avoid the reducing load in a multi drop situation being adversely imposed on the rear axles of the prime mover. The manufacturer spent hours trying to convince me otherwise and to take his centre axle caravan type trailers instead. It was left unresolved apart from the fact that he didn’t get an order, and the next day he called to say that he had consulted his Swedish suppliers who confirmed that I was right.
Does this have a bearing on the B-train versus A-train controversy? I don’t know but I did pose a question on here a long time ago and got no answer, what is the point of a B-train? There must be some but I can’t see it, I look particularly at the A-train’s superior cornering abilities in tight situations.
All highly entertaining, but the facts of the matter are…
GCM is gross combination mass, the total weight of all vehicles (prime mover plus all trailers) and load.
GVM is each individual vehicle’s weight.
Rating is the designed SWL for want of a simpler term. A prime mover can be rated (dependent upon fitted components) by the manufacturer at (for example) 200 tonnes. This vehicle can then be registered to operate at 42.5 tonnes.
16.5 tonnes per axle is a transport operators ■■■■■■■■■. The reality is that 16.5 is the maximum on an axle GROUP in this case a bogie/tandem/two axle group. A tri group can weigh 22.5 tonne.
There is no way a tri/tri double (9 axle combination) could legally operate at 90 tonne, on road, legally.
Working on that theory a 130 tonne rated pm could load a single trailer to 130 tonne.
Yes curryfart, easily achievable on a 40 footer.
2x2x2 on dolly, a easier to manouver combination and generates a lot less tyre degradation by lateral drag. Even the 3x3 combination with steering axis doesn’t have the flexibility of a dolly when it comes to lateral dragging of tyres. Although when it come to reversing the dolly will throw you out for nothing but with patience and plenty of forward shunts is doable
Scraggy88:
Hmmm. . . What is this “web ■■■■” the product line speaks of?
Is a the Aussie version of adblu perhaps
190+T is quite a load of ■■■■ too lol, you must have quite the truck, mine strains to pull the 63.5t I’m stuck with
Hi Scraggy,Was gunna use my 175 HP(With 2 speed Diff!) 1981 JCR 500 Isuzu,but she wasn’t really upto it!
Hey there. . . Man I would love to give that sucker a run around the block, probably be like an amateur learning to drive a car again. Doesn’t those tractors that pull trains have like 30 odd gears or something daft like that? Think my Mack is around 500hp, 12 speed auto that is not meant to be running the rockies with 63+T. Only time I saw anything remotely like that over here was running rock and gravel around the diamond mines up in the Northwest Territories!
Fair play to you though for doing the job man, if I had no luck in Canada then I was gonna attempt to try my luck in Australia.
They add, “The engine delivers 606 hp (447 kW) at 2100 rpm, with peak torque of 1950 lb ft (2644 Nm) at 1300 rpm. Other key components include an 18-speed Fuller RTLO-22918B transmission, with a first gear ratio of 14.4:1 through to 0.73:1 in overdrive.
From Kenworth Australia,also Volvos,Scanias etc are used more on Highway Road Train work.
Very interesting, and I think I can rest my case re As versus Bs. Hardly any more cut in than with an ordinary artic. That Gilbert’s would have had to swing out almost as much if he just had a semi turning into that narrow side road.
