Carryfast:
Punchy Dan:
0Carryfasts new rig
An excellent example of the difference between GCW v GTW no worries about an over loaded puller or tail wagging the dog. 
Like this. 
http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel/Nuenen2011/Nuenen2011167.jpg
[/quote
]
Built and owned by a friend of mine, very nice inside but he sadly passed away a couple of years ago. 
Pete.
windrush:
http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel/Nuenen2011/Nuenen2011167.jpg
[/quote
]Built and owned by a friend of mine, very nice inside but he sadly passed away a couple of years ago.
Pete.
Would really like to have heard his reasoning for choosing that configuration.I can totally understand it.You wouldnât have known it was there other than in the mirrors as would be expected. 
Punchy Dan:
Carryfast:
elsa Lad:
muckles you no fun,you answering the question is ruining the on line punchupSo far we seem to have established that GTW ainât the same thing as GCW.Any decent noseweight will put a maxed out gross 3.5t puller over the category B drivers licence threshold, gross weight and possibly rear axle weight limits.
A 1020 kg unladen weight trailer limit is acedemic in terms of a 3.5t gross trailer regardless.Itâs obviously going to need to be built like the Forth Bridge.A glider hauler wonât cut it.
Possibly not a 1.5t gross trailer though.But what type of payload would a 1.5t gross trailer provide anyway other than a very light pony or a Smart car.
DCPC Iâd suggest that adding a category E trailer puts a 3.5t van into âvocationalâ licence territory.
So not exactly an online punch up.More like important semantics that could arguably ruin a van and trailer operatorâs day.The governmentâs advice seems more than vague in that regard.
4 pages itâs not rocket science,the reason you conclude the above is that you are not currently involved in any transport operations or have any experience of operating or driving such types of vehicles & trailers
.
We have a winner, But Googlefast will just keep going round and round, trying to wear you down, ultimately trying to prove that his theoryâs are correct. Even when his knowledge is 30 odd years out of date, and bears no resemblance to todayâs transport operationsâŚ
biggriffin:
Punchy Dan:
4 pages itâs not rocket science,the reason you conclude the above is that you are not currently involved in any transport operations or have any experience of operating or driving such types of vehicles & trailers.
We have a winner, But Googlefast will just keep going round and round, trying to wear you down, ultimately trying to prove that his theoryâs are correct. Even when his knowledge is 30 odd years out of date, and bears no resemblance to todayâs transport operationsâŚ
And yet Dan has had to agree that, barring semantics, Iâve got a case regards 1 and 2 and as yet Iâve seen nothing from the government which clearly says that DCPC requirement doesnât go with category E by default when added to B in the form of more than 3.5t GCW.
As for experience trailering my 1,900 + kgs Jag with a swb Landrover and a van before that, were just about the most evil handling outfits Iâve ever driven even though I had the sense to put the relatively heavy front end of the car at the front of the trailer.
Although the 2 + 2 close coupled POS, which I was luckily promoted from to 3 + 2 A frame, could get close, or even catastrophically worse, if not loaded perfectly. 
Great to see that long retired Carryfast continues to tell everyone actually doing the job how to do the job. Also you have a strange mind Carryfast that you fill it with all this sort of thing. I canât be bothered to think about these subjects that deeply when Iâm working, let alone when Iâm not. Maybe take up flower arranging, cooking or interpretative dance to pass the time. âAnd now we have new member Carry doing his 6x4 double drive danceâ
Carryfast:
windrush:
http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel/Nuenen2011/Nuenen2011167.jpg
[/quote
]Built and owned by a friend of mine, very nice inside but he sadly passed away a couple of years ago.
Pete.
Would really like to have heard his reasoning for choosing that configuration.I can totally understand it.You wouldnât have known it was there other than in the mirrors as would be expected.
He wanted living accomodation for himself and his wife plus space to carry his two large Ruston diesel engines and generators to exhibit at steam rallies etc. He was building a larger one when he sadly passed away, it towed well and in the pic he was ready to set off to an event in Holland.
Pete.
windrush:
He wanted living accomodation for himself and his wife plus space to carry his two large Ruston diesel engines and generators to exhibit at steam rallies etc. He was building a larger one when he sadly passed away, it towed well and in the pic he was ready to set off to an event in Holland.Pete.
Who would have thought it.
windrush:
Carryfast:
windrush:
http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel/Nuenen2011/Nuenen2011167.jpg
[/quote
]Built and owned by a friend of mine, very nice inside but he sadly passed away a couple of years ago.
Pete.
Would really like to have heard his reasoning for choosing that configuration.I can totally understand it.You wouldnât have known it was there other than in the mirrors as would be expected.
He wanted living accomodation for himself and his wife plus space to carry his two large Ruston diesel engines and generators to exhibit at steam rallies etc. He was building a larger one when he sadly passed away, it towed well and in the pic he was ready to set off to an event in Holland.
Pete.
Your not helping Pete ,shouldnât you be polishing an old engine or something 
Oh dear thatâs done you CF 
Punchy Dan:
Oh dear thatâs done you CF
When has something like that ever stopped googlefast!!!
stevieboy308:
0You cannot do your dcpc if youâve only a B or b+e.You need a C1, c or c+e / D1, d or d+e.
Ooo, Get you some of that. BangâŚ
Info on nose weights .
Evidence of unladen trailer nose weight .
Evidence of load position to get correct nose weight .
Punchy Dan:
Your not helping Pete ,shouldnât you be polishing an old engine or something
No shiny stuff here Dan! Just helping my pal CF out as he seemed to be wilting under extreme pressure, and I also needed to find something on google for myself while he regrouped. Itâs a very small window you must realise so I had to get in quickly before he needed it again! Sorry. 
Pete.
Punchy Dan:
012
Just to back my earlier statements.Info on nose weights .
Evidence of unladen trailer nose weight .
Evidence of load position to get correct nose weight .
Good luck with a 140 kg nose weight with a laden 3.5t gross trailer bearing in mind the 7% rule.
I should have reversed the Jag on the trailer that would have fixed it. 
As for no DCPC needed for B + E for I actually put a question mark and caveat along the lines surely the government wouldnât be that bleedin stupid.
DCPC needed for a 7.5 tonner box van.But no DCPC needed for a 7t GCW flat van and trailer outfit needing more loading skills.All also subject to the same drivers hours and tacho regs and obviously knowledge.Then you say itâs all my fault.
Carryfast:
Punchy Dan:
012
Just to back my earlier statements.Info on nose weights .
Evidence of unladen trailer nose weight .
Evidence of load position to get correct nose weight .
Good luck with a 140 kg nose weight with a laden 3.5t gross trailer bearing in mind the 7% rule.
I should have reversed the Jag on the trailer that would have fixed it.As for no DCPC needed for B + E for I actually put a question mark and caveat along the lines surely the government wouldnât be that bleedin stupid.
DCPC needed for a 7.5 tonner box van.But no DCPC needed for a 7t GCW flat van and trailer outfit needing more loading skills.All also subject to the same drivers hours and tacho regs and obviously knowledge.Then you say itâs all my fault.
I donât think I need luck in this area after 25 yrs experience day in day out umpteen loads a day different makes / wheelbases / trailers ,U.K. / Europe but thanks for the thought
Carryfast:
biggriffin:
Punchy Dan:
4 pages itâs not rocket science,the reason you conclude the above is that you are not currently involved in any transport operations or have any experience of operating or driving such types of vehicles & trailers.
We have a winner, But Googlefast will just keep going round and round, trying to wear you down, ultimately trying to prove that his theoryâs are correct. Even when his knowledge is 30 odd years out of date, and bears no resemblance to todayâs transport operationsâŚ
And yet Dan has had to agree that, barring semantics, Iâve got a case regards 1 and 2 and as yet Iâve seen nothing from the government which clearly says that DCPC requirement doesnât go with category E by default when added to B in the form of more than 3.5t GCW.
As for experience trailering my 1,900 + kgs Jag with a swb Landrover and a van before that, were just about the most evil handling outfits Iâve ever driven even though I had the sense to put the relatively heavy front end of the car at the front of the trailer.
Although the 2 + 2 close coupled POS, which I was luckily promoted from to 3 + 2 A frame, could get close, or even catastrophically worse, if not loaded perfectly.
Carryfast, 't is 't stuff of nightmares, I tell theeâŚ
Punchy Dan:
Carryfast:
Punchy Dan:
012
Just to back my earlier statements.Info on nose weights .
Evidence of unladen trailer nose weight .
Evidence of load position to get correct nose weight .
Good luck with a 140 kg nose weight with a laden 3.5t gross trailer bearing in mind the 7% rule.
I should have reversed the Jag on the trailer that would have fixed it.As for no DCPC needed for B + E for I actually put a question mark and caveat along the lines surely the government wouldnât be that bleedin stupid.
DCPC needed for a 7.5 tonner box van.But no DCPC needed for a 7t GCW flat van and trailer outfit needing more loading skills.All also subject to the same drivers hours and tacho regs and obviously knowledge.Then you say itâs all my fault.
I donât think I need luck in this area after 25 yrs experience day in day out umpteen loads a day different makes / wheelbases / trailers ,U.K. / Europe but thanks for the thought
Iâve heard Google fast is looking for a Job as aTM in the Derbyshire area, and thereâs a Specialist Company who might consider taking him on because of his wealth of experience. 
biggriffin:
Iâve heard Google fast is looking for a Job as aTM in the Derbyshire area, and thereâs a Specialist Company who might consider taking him on because of his wealth of experience.
Might be a while until he can fill that position, the poor lad is still trying to design an engine for Denisâs (Bewick) proposed âsupertruckâ against strong opposition to his plans from both Anorak and Ramone and also he has âBrexitâ to sort out at the same time. I think that Punchy Dan will just have to struggle on doing everything wrong for a while longer yet, there just isnât enough of him to go around alas. Now if he only had a twinâŚ
Pete.
the nodding donkey:
Carryfast, 't is 't stuff of nightmares, I tell theeâŚ
I think I can see its problems but a decent nose weight doesnât look like it will be one of them.
