New EU Commission lorry proposals: heavier/longer trucks, easier cross-border travel

MGWR

European Voice (from 15 April):

Lorries in Europe would be re-designed to be safer and more fuel-efficient under a proposal put forward today (15 April) by the European Commission. The changes to the Weight and Dimensions Directive would allow cabins to be designed with a rounded shape and would also allow the use of aerodynamic flaps at the back of the trailer. ...

The proposal also contains a provision which would explicitly allow new ‘megalorries', extra-large vehicles that are currently being used in some member states on a trial basis, to cross borders. ... Under EU law lorries may not be longer than 18.75 metres or heavier than 40 tonnes, but member states are allowed to use larger ones if they so wish as part of temporary trials. ...

Environmental groups, which say the megalorries cause more pollution and discourage a modal shift to rail, said they will try to convince MEPs to reject the change. ...

Lorries represent just 3% of the vehicle fleet but they cause 25% of road transport emissions and are involved in 18% of fatal crashes, which kill approximately 7,000 people annually. ...

dowlingm

Maybe the proposal should specify they should have forward pointing gizmos to let them know when they are going to hit an overbridge for the umpteenth time (sometimes because the County Council has resurfaced six times since they updated the accompanying bridge sign)?

Victor

I thought that it had long been increased to 42 tonnes.

They recently increased it to 46 tonnes here, but I think that only applies to 6 axle vehicles.

Davy

Victor wrote: »

They recently increased it to 46 tonnes here, but I think that only applies to 6 axle vehicles.

http://www.rsa.ie/en/Utility/News/2013/New-Regulations-On-Vehicle-Weight-Limits/

22 March 2013
New Regulations On Vehicle Weight Limits

From 1st April 2013 owners / operators of six-axle articulated vehicle combinations will have the option of operating at 46 tonnes, instead of 44 tonnes, which represents a 2 tonne increase over the current national weight limit.

Tractor units & semi-trailers already in service on 1st April 2013 will require EBS. Anti-lock Braking Systems (ABS) are not sufficient. New tractor units first registered on or after 1st April 2013 (in addition to requiring EBS) will also need electronic stability control (ESC); and semi-trailers first licensed in Ireland on or after 1st April 2013 (in addition to requiring EBS) will also require Roll Stability Control (RSC). These requirements are summarised in the Table below.

Note that rigid truck and drawbar trailer combinations are not included in this weight limit increase; it only applies to articulated vehicle combinations.

corktina

it's good news for the Consumer. More fuel efficient trucks means cheaper transport of our goods (and less pollution), bigger trucks means bigger payload, less cost per unit. I can't see the accident rate is relevant, a truck can only crash once at any time and is no more likely to crash just cos it's bigger.

Victor

corktina wrote: »

it's good news for the Consumer. More fuel efficient trucks means cheaper transport of our goods (and less pollution), bigger trucks means bigger payload, less cost per unit. I can't see the accident rate is relevant, a truck can only crash once at any time and is no more likely to crash just cos it's bigger.

Flip side, depending on axle arrangement, would be that higher axle loads would cause more damage to roads.

corktina

less lorries would equal less road damage in my view.

btb

"Flip side, depending on axle arrangement, would be that higher axle loads would cause more damage to roads"

no increase in axle loads, just roadtrains like they have in us canada oz and in some european countries, i.e. extra trailer means double the load for small fuel comsumption increase

Victor

btb wrote: »

"Flip side, depending on axle arrangement, would be that higher axle loads would cause more damage to roads"

no increase in axle loads, just roadtrains like they have in us canada oz and in some european countries, i.e. extra trailer means double the load for small fuel comsumption increase

I get the impression that it is more than just axle loading, but also axle positioning that affects road wear.

Equally spaced axles result in less damage than grouped axles, although grouped axles probably are a tiny bit more aerodynamic.

MGWR

Victor wrote: »

I get the impression that it is more than just axle loading, but also axle positioning that affects road wear.

Equally spaced axles result in less damage than grouped axles, although grouped axles probably are a tiny bit more aerodynamic.

All those extra axles are not maintenance-free either. Not to mention that the more axles and tyres are added, the lower the heat efficiency gets due to friction; and you need to really add those axles to distribute weight properly in order to nullify the infamous "crack-the-whip" effect. Road traffic is far more prone to congestion than rail traffic as well, no matter how many lanes you put on a motorway.

Con Logue

Hauliers and bus operators need to make a greater contribution to the cost of the infrastructure they use as they are being subsidised by the taxpayer.

If heavier trucks are introduced then the quid-pro-quo must be that hauliers who use them pay for the upgrades and repairs to the road network that are needed as a consequence.

corktina

there wont be heavier trucks, this is only providing a frame work to regularising the 46 tonne limit we already use and improving the efficency of the trucks. Improving trucks is an on-going process, engines are much less polluting now than they were even a couple of years ago and safety too is being improved by compulsory better braking sytems etc.

I would suggest that road hauliers already contribute to the upkeep of the roads through the tax take, both directly through Motor Tax and indirectly through the VAT they generate by facilitating trade.

Victor

Con Logue wrote: »

Hauliers and bus operators need to make a greater contribution to the cost of the infrastructure they use as they are being subsidised by the taxpayer.

If heavier trucks are introduced then the quid-pro-quo must be that hauliers who use them pay for the upgrades and repairs to the road network that are needed as a consequence.

One would have to look at total economic situation, not just the financial one.

On one side, car-related congestion is a much greater burden to wider society than the cost of repairs to roads and bridges after trucks.

In the middle is the argument of Irish Rail being bashed for costing money, but the total cost of roads is ignored somewhat.

On the other, trucks are useful economically.

Markcheese

Is it , or would it be possible to run road trains in Ireland, ?
I assume each route would hAve to be rated separately , and have assembly yards at key points ....
I couldn't see a problem with a 3 or 4 trailer truck going up and down the motorways .... Possibly only at night ....
But would it really save that much in fuel ... ?

corktina

There would be a saving in manpower if hauliers were allowed to trunk several trailers at a time like this, and there is capacity on the motorways to allow for it. Not sure if it's a good idea though.