Soaring price of diesel is idling more big rigs - At 5.5 miles a

[Guest guest]

>It is about time to get a bigger load, an American truck can only

carry 36 tons...total. That is ridicules.<

 

It's actually 40 tons, but- Do you want to be the one in front of him when

he has to slam on brakes? Especially if the road is wet, it's dark and he's

sleepy? Do you want to pay the taxes for the road damage done by heavier

rigs? Have you ever watched a road bed closely as a rig rolls by? Do you

want to be beside or behind him when a tire blows from a heavier load?

Daddybob

 

 

Checked by AVG.

Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1333 - Release 3/18/2008

8:10 AM

[Guest guest]

No, not interstate it is 78,000 pound......or 80,000 pound.....no I do

not want to be in front of 40 tons......or 36 tons........or 1 tons

for that matter. I do not pay taxes for the rigs....the rigs does, and

more than plenty. Sure I have seen the road bed, when a rig rolls by,

but what got the tons to do with that...it is the size of the rig. Do

you want to be beside the tire, when it blows now......you add more

load....you add another axle.

 

Kenn

 

Den 18/03/2008 kl. 21.48 skrev ransley:

 

>> It is about time to get a bigger load, an American truck can only

> carry 36 tons...total. That is ridicules.<

>

> It's actually 40 tons, but- Do you want to be the one in front of

> him when

> he has to slam on brakes? Especially if the road is wet, it's dark

> and he's

> sleepy? Do you want to pay the taxes for the road damage done by

> heavier

> rigs? Have you ever watched a road bed closely as a rig rolls by? Do

> you

> want to be beside or behind him when a tire blows from a heavier load?

> Daddybob

>

>

> Checked by AVG.

> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1333 - Release Date:

> 3/18/2008

> 8:10 AM

>

>

>

> ---

>

> «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»

>

> § - PULSE ON 21st CENTURY ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE! §

>

>

> Subscribe:......... -

>

> «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»

>

> DISCLOSURE:

>

> Any information here in is for educational purpose only; it may be

> news related, purely speculation or SOMEONE’S OPINION. Always

> consult with a qualified Medical Doctor before deciding on any

> course of treatment, especially for serious or life-threatening

> illnesses.

>

> SUBMISSION POLICY & CONDITION OF MEMBERSHIP:

>

> By becoming a member of this group you AGREE to hold this group its

> members, list owners, moderators and affiliates harmless of any

> liability for any direct, consequential, incidental, damage incurred.

>

> Anything going to this list may eventually be posted on another list.

> If you post a piece to the list. We reserve the right to attach your

> name and email address to the piece, as well as to keep them on

> record.

> You should NOT post copyrighted material unless proper attributions

> to the source of the material are made.

> Submissions are gladly accepted. Please feel free to post material

> that

> you think is worthy.

>

> YOU AGREE; to accept responsibility and liability for your own

> actions and to contact a licensed Medical Doctor before deciding on

> any course of treatment, especially for serious or life-threatening

> illnesses.

>

> IF YOU DO NOT AGREE; you must :

>

[Guest guest]

At 05:55 PM 3/19/2008, you wrote:

Not to mention, the heavier the rig, the more difficult to handle. The

longer it takes to brake, the more difficult to corner,and so on....as it

is, a number of independent truckers have gone out of business - they

can't afford the gas. A lot of those rigs cost more than many houses do.

But, weight does have something to do with road damage. It's only logical

that the heavier the load, the more potential damage to the road. But, if

the laws governing trucking become any more restrictive and/or expensive,

even more drivers will hang up their keys. Then, what will people do when

they realize they can't get the goods in the same timely fashion as when

the truckers were bringing them? The US is very dependant on big rigs.

Much more so than the average person realizes....

Lynn

 

No, not interstate it is 78,000

pound......or 80,000 pound.....no I do

not want to be in front of 40 tons......or 36 tons........or 1 tons

 

for that matter. I do not pay taxes for the rigs....the rigs does,

and

more than plenty. Sure I have seen the road bed, when a rig rolls

by,

but what got the tons to do with that...it is the size of the rig.

Do

you want to be beside the tire, when it blows now......you add more

 

load....you add another axle.

Kenn

Den 18/03/2008 kl. 21.48 skrev ransley:

>> It is about time to get a bigger load, an American truck can

only

> carry 36 tons...total. That is ridicules.<

>

> It's actually 40 tons, but- Do you want to be the one in front

of

> him when

> he has to slam on brakes? Especially if the road is wet, it's

dark

> and he's

> sleepy? Do you want to pay the taxes for the road damage done

by

> heavier

> rigs? Have you ever watched a road bed closely as a rig rolls by?

Do

> you

> want to be beside or behind him when a tire blows from a heavier

load?

> Daddybob

[Guest guest]

Here's one I can answer, with a yes...

 

Have you ever been on a road construction crew to see just what goes into

making a road that the trucks roll over?

Um, yes I have!

And a lot of times the company (at least the one I workED for) tries to

cheat and not use the right type of asphalt.

 

Kenneth T

 

-

" ransley " <ransley

 

Tuesday, March 18, 2008 4:48 PM

Re: Soaring price of diesel is idling more big

rigs - At 5.5 miles a

 

 

>It is about time to get a bigger load, an American truck can only

carry 36 tons...total. That is ridicules.<

 

It's actually 40 tons, but- Do you want to be the one in front of him when

he has to slam on brakes? Especially if the road is wet, it's dark and he's

sleepy? Do you want to pay the taxes for the road damage done by heavier

rigs? Have you ever watched a road bed closely as a rig rolls by? Do you

want to be beside or behind him when a tire blows from a heavier load?

Daddybob

 

 

Checked by AVG.

Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1333 - Release 3/18/2008

8:10 AM

 

 

 

---

 

«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»

 

§ - PULSE ON 21st CENTURY ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE! §

 

 

Subscribe:......... -

 

«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»

 

DISCLOSURE:

 

Any information here in is for educational purpose only; it may be news

related, purely speculation or SOMEONE’S OPINION. Always consult with a

qualified Medical Doctor before deciding on any course of treatment,

especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses.

 

SUBMISSION POLICY & CONDITION OF MEMBERSHIP:

 

By becoming a member of this group you AGREE to hold this group its members,

list owners, moderators and affiliates harmless of any liability for any

direct, consequential, incidental, damage incurred.

 

Anything going to this list may eventually be posted on another list.

If you post a piece to the list. We reserve the right to attach your

name and email address to the piece, as well as to keep them on record.

You should NOT post copyrighted material unless proper attributions

to the source of the material are made.

Submissions are gladly accepted. Please feel free to post material that

you think is worthy.

 

YOU AGREE; to accept responsibility and liability for your own actions and

to contact a licensed Medical Doctor before deciding on any course of

treatment, especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses.

 

IF YOU DO NOT AGREE; you must :

 

[Guest guest]

They have 60 tons in Sweden and 60 ton in eastern Australia.....140 tons in Western Australia, and so have some state and provinces, and that makes no problem. That is not the problem, the problem is the railroad, they got the people on their side.....and they want to limit the competition. No this is logical......the axel limit is 17500 pound you have two axels trailer....you add another axel....you have a three axel trailer....you can load 17500 more pounds....with the same axel weight on the road, and the same brake power per pound. Lets say you are trucking two trailers.......how does that cause more damage to the road.....? than one truck....one trailer.Den 20/03/2008 kl. 02.02 skrev Lynn Ward:At 05:55 PM 3/19/2008, you wrote:Not to mention, the heavier the rig, the more difficult to handle. The longer it takes to brake, the more difficult to corner,and so on....as it is, a number of independent truckers have gone out of business - they can't afford the gas. A lot of those rigs cost more than many houses do. But, weight does have something to do with road damage. It's only logical that the heavier the load, the more potential damage to the road. But, if the laws governing trucking become any more restrictive and/or expensive, even more drivers will hang up their keys. Then, what will people do when they realize they can't get the goods in the same timely fashion as when the truckers were bringing them? The US is very dependant on big rigs. Much more so than the average person realizes....LynnNo, not interstate it is 78,000 pound......or 80,000 pound.....no I do not want to be in front of 40 tons......or 36 tons........or 1 tons for that matter. I do not pay taxes for the rigs....the rigs does, and more than plenty. Sure I have seen the road bed, when a rig rolls by, but what got the tons to do with that...it is the size of the rig. Do you want to be beside the tire, when it blows now......you add more load....you add another axle.KennDen 18/03/2008 kl. 21.48 skrev ransley:>> It is about time to get a bigger load, an American truck can only> carry 36 tons...total. That is ridicules.<>> It's actually 40 tons, but- Do you want to be the one in front of > him when> he has to slam on brakes? Especially if the road is wet, it's dark > and he's> sleepy? Do you want to pay the taxes for the road damage done by > heavier> rigs? Have you ever watched a road bed closely as a rig rolls by? Do > you> want to be beside or behind him when a tire blows from a heavier load?> Daddybob

[Guest guest]

Well this is corruption, so you are saying because of that......you

got cut back to 20 tons.......or 10 tons.

 

 

 

Den 20/03/2008 kl. 12.11 skrev Kenneth:

 

> Here's one I can answer, with a yes...

>

> Have you ever been on a road construction crew to see just what goes

> into

> making a road that the trucks roll over?

> Um, yes I have!

> And a lot of times the company (at least the one I workED for) tries

> to

> cheat and not use the right type of asphalt.

>

> Kenneth T

>

> -

> " ransley " <ransley

>

> Tuesday, March 18, 2008 4:48 PM

> Re: Soaring price of diesel is idling

> more big

> rigs - At 5.5 miles a

>

>

>> It is about time to get a bigger load, an American truck can only

> carry 36 tons...total. That is ridicules.<

>

> It's actually 40 tons, but- Do you want to be the one in front of

> him when

> he has to slam on brakes? Especially if the road is wet, it's dark

> and he's

> sleepy? Do you want to pay the taxes for the road damage done by

> heavier

> rigs? Have you ever watched a road bed closely as a rig rolls by? Do

> you

> want to be beside or behind him when a tire blows from a heavier load?

> Daddybob

>

>

> Checked by AVG.

> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1333 - Release Date:

> 3/18/2008

> 8:10 AM

>

>

>

> ---

>

> «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»

>

> § - PULSE ON 21st CENTURY ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE! §

>

>

> Subscribe:......... -

>

> «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»

>

> DISCLOSURE:

>

> Any information here in is for educational purpose only; it may be

> news

> related, purely speculation or SOMEONE’S OPINION. Always consult

> with a

> qualified Medical Doctor before deciding on any course of treatment,

> especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses.

>

> SUBMISSION POLICY & CONDITION OF MEMBERSHIP:

>

> By becoming a member of this group you AGREE to hold this group its

> members,

> list owners, moderators and affiliates harmless of any liability for

> any

> direct, consequential, incidental, damage incurred.

>

> Anything going to this list may eventually be posted on another list.

> If you post a piece to the list. We reserve the right to attach your

> name and email address to the piece, as well as to keep them on

> record.

> You should NOT post copyrighted material unless proper attributions

> to the source of the material are made.

> Submissions are gladly accepted. Please feel free to post material

> that

> you think is worthy.

>

> YOU AGREE; to accept responsibility and liability for your own

> actions and

> to contact a licensed Medical Doctor before deciding on any course of

> treatment, especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses.

>

> IF YOU DO NOT AGREE; you must :

>

[Guest guest]

At 09:47 AM 3/20/2008, you wrote:

OK - a US ton (called a short ton) is 2000 lbs. If it's a metric ton

(long ton), it's 2240 lbs. So, in Western Australia they can pull up to 4

trailers, with a total gross weight (which includes the cab and the

weight of the trailer(s)) of 140 metric tons . That's a lot. Here

in the US, they are only allowed to pull 2. It takes a hell of a lot of

skill to pull 2, let alone 4 trailers. And, they become even more

difficult to control. Not so much of a problem in a straight-away, but

going downhill and/or having to brake - especially a hard brake. Many, if

not most rigs will jackknife under those conditions - especially if

they're pulling multiple trailers.. Which is probably one of the reasons

they have limited the number of trailers in the US. People over here, for

the most part, don't like driving next to or behind a rig with one

trailer - let alone 2 or more.

At some level, what you're saying is true - obviously, if you spread out

the weight, each trailer has less impact on the road. OK, maybe I'm way

off here, but it seems to me that when a truck travels across the road,

there is a certain " rebound " if you will. The road

" rebounds " somewhat after the trailer, or anything really heavy

like that travels across it. Smooshes down some, then comes back up.

Weather conditions also make a difference. Seems to me (and this is just

a guess) that with a heavily laden truck - say with a couple of trailers

- the road wouldn't be able to " rebound " within the limits they

have determined are ok for that road. Even though it's spread out, and

the weight is distributed between several trailers. Seems to me, the same

problem would be there on roads which are heavily trafficked, where one

truck after another drives over it. Or, where they get stuck in traffic.

I'm not an engineer, though, so it's all really speculation on my

part.

I can see why you don't think it would make a difference, as long as the

weight is spread out over a couple of trailers. But, they are connected.

I don't know. I wonder if it's like the experiment where one drops things

of like weight, but different stuff (like a 1 lb cannon ball and a 1 lb

sack of feathers) from a tall building. Of course, we know that 1 lb is 1

lb. But, on the face of it, people often think the cannon ball will drop

faster - that the feathers will take a longer time to hit bottom. But,

they don't. They fall equally, because they both weigh the same. So, when

I said weight would make a difference, I was thinking more along the

lines of just adding weight to the current set-up. Which would make a

difference. Even if there was an additional axle. I don't really know if

it would have the same impact if the weight was spread over another, or

two, trailers. I do know that roads that are frequented by a lot of

trucks break down faster. (which is one of the reasons they pay so many,

and such high taxes)

Even if the railroad was more heavily used, they would still need big

rigs to transport from the railroad to wherever. Some companies load the

full trailer onto a flat car, and it gets to where it needs to go via

train. Kinda sorta. They still need trucks to transport the trailer from

the rail yard to where ever it needs to go. So, whatever restrictions

apply to rigs that transport things from one end of the country to

another, still apply to the rigs picking something up from the rail yard.

 

Something else you need to consider - here in the US, it being so spread

out and all, trains aren't accessible to everyone and everywhere. Plus,

not that many would want to have a train running through their town, if

it was even possible. If anything, a conspiracy would be on the other end

- for the truckers. Besides, have you ever heard of the Teamsters?

They're pretty strong. Don't know if you've been over here, but it's a

lot different than most places in Europe. The sheer size of it, for one.

The thousands of acres with nothing on them for another. After living

over there for as long as I did, and being used to the great

transportation, and being able to get from one place to another without a

vehicle, it was a shock when I came over here, where there are so many

places it's difficult to get around if you don't have a vehicle. Things

are usually fine if you live in a city - but it's when you live in the

suburbs or the country where the problem comes in. Even though some

people may not like them, trucks are a lot more important to the American

economy than many realize.

Lynn

 

They have 60 tons in Sweden and

60 ton in eastern Australia.....140 tons in Western Australia, and so

have some state and provinces, and that makes no problem. That is not the

problem, the problem is the railroad, they got the people on their

side.....and they want to limit the competition. No this is

logical......the axel limit is 17500 pound you have two axels

trailer....you add another axel....you have a three axel trailer....you

can load 17500 more pounds....with the same axel weight on the road, and

the same brake power per pound. Lets say you are trucking two

trailers.......how does that cause more damage to the road.....? than one

truck....one trailer.

 

Den 20/03/2008 kl. 02.02 skrev Lynn Ward:

At 05:55 PM 3/19/2008, you

wrote:

Not to mention, the heavier the rig, the more difficult to handle. The

longer it takes to brake, the more difficult to corner,and so on....as it

is, a number of independent truckers have gone out of business - they

can't afford the gas. A lot of those rigs cost more than many houses do.

But, weight does have something to do with road damage. It's only logical

that the heavier the load, the more potential damage to the road. But, if

the laws governing trucking become any more restrictive and/or expensive,

even more drivers will hang up their keys. Then, what will people do when

they realize they can't get the goods in the same timely fashion as when

the truckers were bringing them? The US is very dependant on big rigs.

Much more so than the average person realizes....

Lynn

 

No, not interstate it is 78,000

pound......or 80,000 pound.....no I do

not want to be in front of 40 tons......or 36 tons........or 1 tons

 

for that matter. I do not pay taxes for the rigs....the rigs does,

and

more than plenty. Sure I have seen the road bed, when a rig rolls

by,

but what got the tons to do with that...it is the size of the rig.

Do

you want to be beside the tire, when it blows now......you add more

 

load....you add another axle.

Kenn

Den 18/03/2008 kl. 21.48 skrev ransley:

>> It is about time to get a bigger load, an American truck can

only

> carry 36 tons...total. That is ridicules.<

>

> It's actually 40 tons, but- Do you want to be the one in front

of

> him when

> he has to slam on brakes? Especially if the road is wet, it's

dark

> and he's

> sleepy? Do you want to pay the taxes for the road damage done

by

> heavier

> rigs? Have you ever watched a road bed closely as a rig rolls by?

Do

> you

> want to be beside or behind him when a tire blows from a heavier

load?

> Daddybob

[Guest guest]

Right, I meant tonne......but a long ton is a English ton.....a metric tonne is 2204......I do not think you can pull two trailers interstate, when they have two wagon, it is called something else, do not know the name....but it is still 78000 poumd. And that is what I mean, you have a 53 foot trailer with less than 60000 pound, it is all standing in one corner of the trailer, or about 3 foot hight. I do not know about the rebound either, but it is obviously the road should be made for it. Railroad or trucks....it is politic, there are people there hate trucks, they want it on rail......those people are in power here in Europe, but not so much in the state yet. I know your land is big....but tell that to those people, they do not give a shit.Den 20/03/2008 kl. 22.33 skrev Lynn Ward:At 09:47 AM 3/20/2008, you wrote:OK - a US ton (called a short ton) is 2000 lbs. If it's a metric ton (long ton), it's 2240 lbs. So, in Western Australia they can pull up to 4 trailers, with a total gross weight (which includes the cab and the weight of the trailer(s)) of 140 metric tons . That's a lot. Here in the US, they are only allowed to pull 2. It takes a hell of a lot of skill to pull 2, let alone 4 trailers. And, they become even more difficult to control. Not so much of a problem in a straight-away, but going downhill and/or having to brake - especially a hard brake. Many, if not most rigs will jackknife under those conditions - especially if they're pulling multiple trailers.. Which is probably one of the reasons they have limited the number of trailers in the US. People over here, for the most part, don't like driving next to or behind a rig with one trailer - let alone 2 or more.At some level, what you're saying is true - obviously, if you spread out the weight, each trailer has less impact on the road. OK, maybe I'm way off here, but it seems to me that when a truck travels across the road, there is a certain "rebound" if you will. The road "rebounds" somewhat after the trailer, or anything really heavy like that travels across it. Smooshes down some, then comes back up. Weather conditions also make a difference. Seems to me (and this is just a guess) that with a heavily laden truck - say with a couple of trailers - the road wouldn't be able to "rebound" within the limits they have determined are ok for that road. Even though it's spread out, and the weight is distributed between several trailers. Seems to me, the same problem would be there on roads which are heavily trafficked, where one truck after another drives over it. Or, where they get stuck in traffic. I'm not an engineer, though, so it's all really speculation on my part.I can see why you don't think it would make a difference, as long as the weight is spread out over a couple of trailers. But, they are connected. I don't know. I wonder if it's like the experiment where one drops things of like weight, but different stuff (like a 1 lb cannon ball and a 1 lb sack of feathers) from a tall building. Of course, we know that 1 lb is 1 lb. But, on the face of it, people often think the cannon ball will drop faster - that the feathers will take a longer time to hit bottom. But, they don't. They fall equally, because they both weigh the same. So, when I said weight would make a difference, I was thinking more along the lines of just adding weight to the current set-up. Which would make a difference. Even if there was an additional axle. I don't really know if it would have the same impact if the weight was spread over another, or two, trailers. I do know that roads that are frequented by a lot of trucks break down faster. (which is one of the reasons they pay so many, and such high taxes)Even if the railroad was more heavily used, they would still need big rigs to transport from the railroad to wherever. Some companies load the full trailer onto a flat car, and it gets to where it needs to go via train. Kinda sorta. They still need trucks to transport the trailer from the rail yard to where ever it needs to go. So, whatever restrictions apply to rigs that transport things from one end of the country to another, still apply to the rigs picking something up from the rail yard. Something else you need to consider - here in the US, it being so spread out and all, trains aren't accessible to everyone and everywhere. Plus, not that many would want to have a train running through their town, if it was even possible. If anything, a conspiracy would be on the other end - for the truckers. Besides, have you ever heard of the Teamsters? They're pretty strong. Don't know if you've been over here, but it's a lot different than most places in Europe. The sheer size of it, for one. The thousands of acres with nothing on them for another. After living over there for as long as I did, and being used to the great transportation, and being able to get from one place to another without a vehicle, it was a shock when I came over here, where there are so many places it's difficult to get around if you don't have a vehicle. Things are usually fine if you live in a city - but it's when you live in the suburbs or the country where the problem comes in. Even though some people may not like them, trucks are a lot more important to the American economy than many realize.LynnThey have 60 tons in Sweden and 60 ton in eastern Australia.....140 tons in Western Australia, and so have some state and provinces, and that makes no problem. That is not the problem, the problem is the railroad, they got the people on their side.....and they want to limit the competition. No this is logical......the axel limit is 17500 pound you have two axels trailer....you add another axel....you have a three axel trailer....you can load 17500 more pounds....with the same axel weight on the road, and the same brake power per pound. Lets say you are trucking two trailers.......how does that cause more damage to the road.....? than one truck....one trailer.Den 20/03/2008 kl. 02.02 skrev Lynn Ward:At 05:55 PM 3/19/2008, you wrote:Not to mention, the heavier the rig, the more difficult to handle. The longer it takes to brake, the more difficult to corner,and so on....as it is, a number of independent truckers have gone out of business - they can't afford the gas. A lot of those rigs cost more than many houses do. But, weight does have something to do with road damage. It's only logical that the heavier the load, the more potential damage to the road. But, if the laws governing trucking become any more restrictive and/or expensive, even more drivers will hang up their keys. Then, what will people do when they realize they can't get the goods in the same timely fashion as when the truckers were bringing them? The US is very dependant on big rigs. Much more so than the average person realizes....LynnNo, not interstate it is 78,000 pound......or 80,000 pound.....no I do not want to be in front of 40 tons......or 36 tons........or 1 tons for that matter. I do not pay taxes for the rigs....the rigs does, and more than plenty. Sure I have seen the road bed, when a rig rolls by, but what got the tons to do with that...it is the size of the rig. Do you want to be beside the tire, when it blows now......you add more load....you add another axle.KennDen 18/03/2008 kl. 21.48 skrev ransley:>> It is about time to get a bigger load, an American truck can only> carry 36 tons...total. That is ridicules.<>> It's actually 40 tons, but- Do you want to be the one in front of > him when> he has to slam on brakes? Especially if the road is wet, it's dark > and he's> sleepy? Do you want to pay the taxes for the road damage done by > heavier> rigs? Have you ever watched a road bed closely as a rig rolls by? Do > you> want to be beside or behind him when a tire blows from a heavier load?> Daddybob

[Guest guest]

At 06:28 PM 3/20/2008, you wrote:

 

Well Kenn, you're right...My bad. They are different, but from what I can

see, people pretty much use them interchangeably. English and metric ton

I mean. Went to a Math Forum discussion, where they were talking about

this very issue (in regards to explosives as it happens.) The consensus

seemed to be that an English ton equaled a metric ton. They used an

equation which I think would be a bit boring for this group, but if

you're interested, here's the link:

 

http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?threadID=1467958 & tstart=0

There are some rigs here in the US who do pull two trailers and

drive on the parts of the interstate where rigs are allowed. I'm not up

on the laws anymore, so I don't really know where they're not allowed to

drive. Some states limit the tonnage on certain roads, and I've even seen

a couple of places that limit the hours rigs can run. Thing is, you

really notice them, because it's not the usual thing to see double

trailers.

As far as the loading goes - I don't know where you get your info, but

I've seen a lot of trailers either loaded or getting loaded. And, believe

me, they don't just fill up a corner. Most of them are jam packed

..........that's one of the reasons they have all the Weigh Stations - to

ensure drivers don't overfill the trailers. As far as I know, if it's

somewhat over, the driver has to pay a fine. If it's a lot over, I've

seen where drivers have had to call someone to take some of whatever it

is they're hauling. But, I don't know if that's standard practice. Many

drivers don't get paid just for driving - they get paid for what they're

hauling. So, it only stands to reason that they will haul as much as they

can possibly get in the rig. It's far too expensive to make a long haul

with a half-empty rig.

As far as the roads - the only thing I really know, is that

" rebound " is one of the reasons they use asphalt in many areas.

I'm sure you've noticed it's kind of springy. Apparently they figure out

what is a safe weight per sq. inch, or something like that. Don't quote

me on that, though. I'm sure some would prefer the rail to trucks - but

doubt if it would ever happen here. That's why I mentioned how far apart

and how spread out many areas are. The railways would have to be so

complex and so expensive in order to get to all the places - I just don't

see it as feasible. It would be a mess. Of course, I suppose it could

happen some time far in the future - anything is possible.....

Lynn

 

Right, I meant tonne......but a

long ton is a English ton.....a metric tonne is 2204......I do not think

you can pull two trailers interstate, when they have two wagon, it is

called something else, do not know the name....but it is still 78000

poumd. And that is what I mean, you have a 53 foot trailer with less than

60000 pound, it is all standing in one corner of the trailer, or about 3

foot hight. I do not know about the rebound either, but it is obviously

the road should be made for it. Railroad or trucks....it is politic,

there are people there hate trucks, they want it on rail......those

people are in power here in Europe, but not so much in the state yet. I

know your land is big....but tell that to those people, they do not give

a shit.

 

Den 20/03/2008 kl. 22.33 skrev Lynn Ward:

At 09:47 AM 3/20/2008, you

wrote:

OK - a US ton (called a short ton) is 2000 lbs. If it's a metric ton

(long ton), it's 2240 lbs. So, in Western Australia they can pull up to 4

trailers, with a total gross weight (which includes the cab and the

weight of the trailer(s)) of 140 metric tons . That's a lot. Here

in the US, they are only allowed to pull 2. It takes a hell of a lot of

skill to pull 2, let alone 4 trailers. And, they become even more

difficult to control. Not so much of a problem in a straight-away, but

going downhill and/or having to brake - especially a hard brake. Many, if

not most rigs will jackknife under those conditions - especially if

they're pulling multiple trailers.. Which is probably one of the reasons

they have limited the number of trailers in the US. People over here, for

the most part, don't like driving next to or behind a rig with one

trailer - let alone 2 or more.

 

At some level, what you're saying is true - obviously, if you spread out

the weight, each trailer has less impact on the road. OK, maybe I'm way

off here, but it seems to me that when a truck travels across the road,

there is a certain " rebound " if you will. The road

" rebounds " somewhat after the trailer, or anything really heavy

like that travels across it. Smooshes down some, then comes back up.

Weather conditions also make a difference. Seems to me (and this is just

a guess) that with a heavily laden truck - say with a couple of trailers

- the road wouldn't be able to " rebound " within the limits they

have determined are ok for that road. Even though it's spread out, and

the weight is distributed between several trailers. Seems to me, the same

problem would be there on roads which are heavily trafficked, where one

truck after another drives over it. Or, where they get stuck in traffic.

I'm not an engineer, though, so it's all really speculation on my

part.

I can see why you don't think it would make a difference, as long as the

weight is spread out over a couple of trailers. But, they are connected.

I don't know. I wonder if it's like the experiment where one drops things

of like weight, but different stuff (like a 1 lb cannon ball and a 1 lb

sack of feathers) from a tall building. Of course, we know that 1 lb is 1

lb. But, on the face of it, people often think the cannon ball will drop

faster - that the feathers will take a longer time to hit bottom. But,

they don't. They fall equally, because they both weigh the same. So, when

I said weight would make a difference, I was thinking more along the

lines of just adding weight to the current set-up. Which would make a

difference. Even if there was an additional axle. I don't really know if

it would have the same impact if the weight was spread over another, or

two, trailers. I do know that roads that are frequented by a lot of

trucks break down faster. (which is one of the reasons they pay so many,

and such high taxes)

Even if the railroad was more heavily used, they would still need big

rigs to transport from the railroad to wherever. Some companies load the

full trailer onto a flat car, and it gets to where it needs to go via

train. Kinda sorta. They still need trucks to transport the trailer from

the rail yard to where ever it needs to go. So, whatever restrictions

apply to rigs that transport things from one end of the country to

another, still apply to the rigs picking something up from the rail yard.

 

Something else you need to consider - here in the US, it being so spread

out and all, trains aren't accessible to everyone and everywhere. Plus,

not that many would want to have a train running through their town, if

it was even possible. If anything, a conspiracy would be on the other end

- for the truckers. Besides, have you ever heard of the Teamsters?

They're pretty strong. Don't know if you've been over here, but it's a

lot different than most places in Europe. The sheer size of it, for one.

The thousands of acres with nothing on them for another. After living

over there for as long as I did, and being used to the great

transportation, and being able to get from one place to another without a

vehicle, it was a shock when I came over here, where there are so many

places it's difficult to get around if you don't have a vehicle. Things

are usually fine if you live in a city - but it's when you live in the

suburbs or the country where the problem comes in. Even though some

people may not like them, trucks are a lot more important to the American

economy than many realize.

Lynn

 

They have 60 tons in Sweden and

60 ton in eastern Australia.....140 tons in Western Australia, and so

have some state and provinces, and that makes no problem. That is not the

problem, the problem is the railroad, they got the people on their

side.....and they want to limit the competition. No this is

logical......the axel limit is 17500 pound you have two axels

trailer....you add another axel....you have a three axel trailer....you

can load 17500 more pounds....with the same axel weight on the road, and

the same brake power per pound. Lets say you are trucking two

trailers.......how does that cause more damage to the road.....? than one

truck....one trailer.

 

Den 20/03/2008 kl. 02.02 skrev Lynn Ward:

At 05:55 PM 3/19/2008, you

wrote:

Not to mention, the heavier the rig, the more difficult to handle. The

longer it takes to brake, the more difficult to corner,and so on....as it

is, a number of independent truckers have gone out of business - they

can't afford the gas. A lot of those rigs cost more than many houses do.

But, weight does have something to do with road damage. It's only logical

that the heavier the load, the more potential damage to the road. But, if

the laws governing trucking become any more restrictive and/or expensive,

even more drivers will hang up their keys. Then, what will people do when

they realize they can't get the goods in the same timely fashion as when

the truckers were bringing them? The US is very dependant on big rigs.

Much more so than the average person realizes....

Lynn

 

No, not interstate it is 78,000

pound......or 80,000 pound.....no I do

not want to be in front of 40 tons......or 36 tons........or 1 tons

 

for that matter. I do not pay taxes for the rigs....the rigs does,

and

more than plenty. Sure I have seen the road bed, when a rig rolls

by,

but what got the tons to do with that...it is the size of the rig.

Do

you want to be beside the tire, when it blows now......you add more

 

load....you add another axle.

Kenn

Den 18/03/2008 kl. 21.48 skrev ransley:

>> It is about time to get a bigger load, an American truck can

only

> carry 36 tons...total. That is ridicules.<

>

> It's actually 40 tons, but- Do you want to be the one in front

of

> him when

> he has to slam on brakes? Especially if the road is wet, it's

dark

> and he's

> sleepy? Do you want to pay the taxes for the road damage done

by

> heavier

> rigs? Have you ever watched a road bed closely as a rig rolls by?

Do

> you

> want to be beside or behind him when a tire blows from a heavier

load?

>

Daddybob