Tractor NCT

boardsuser1

So it's official.

They are planning to bring in an NCT for tractors.

http://www.thejournal.ie/nct-for-tractors-3656881-Oct2017/

The part time boy

I actally don't see a problem here . If my wife and child meets a tractor pulling a go Mac on a blind corner I be glad that tractor has been tested for road wordnrss

boardsuser1

The part time boy wrote: »

I actally don't see a problem here . If my wife and child meets a tractor pulling a go Mac on a blind corner I be glad that tractor has been tested for road wordnrss

I’ve come across some sheds on the road, I agree with you though.

judeboy101

I'd like to see that stats on the number of tractor related fatalities, otherwise sounds like a cash grab.

Del2005

judeboy101 wrote: »

I'd like to see that stats on the number of tractor related fatalities, otherwise sounds like a cash grab.

There doesn't need to have been a fatality to take dangerous vehicles off the road. Also it's for tractors being used for haulage not farm work, why should a HGV be tested and a tractor pulling similar loads not?

boardsuser1

This was highly dangerous

https://twitter.com/gardatraffic/status/833983691974176768?lang=en

judeboy101

Del2005 wrote: »

There doesn't need to have been a fatality to take dangerous vehicles off the road. Also it's for tractors being used for haulage not farm work, why should a HGV be tested and a tractor pulling similar loads not?

How can it be "dangerous" unless there is an established link between its condition and facilities. Hence the need to back it up with stats.

boardsuser1

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

This was highly dangerous

https://twitter.com/gardatraffic/status/833983691974176768?lang=en

judeboy101 wrote: »

How can it be "dangerous" unless there is an established link between its condition and facilities. Hence the need to back it up with stars.

Look at the above link and tell me that isn't dangerous?

judeboy101

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Look at the above link and tell me that isn't dangerous?

Again, without FACT based analysis how can any logical person determine the safety or lack thereof. Try to leave the Helen lovejoy school of panic aside and deal with the facts. And the facts are that the govt have not provided any stats to back up the need for nct's for tractors.

boardsuser1

judeboy101 wrote: »

Again, without FACT based analysis how can any logical person determine the safety or lack thereof. Try to leave the Helen lovejoy school of panic aside and deal with the facts. And the facts are that the govt have not provided any stats to back up the need for nct's for tractors.

Why should it have to result in a fatality to have it brought in?

GM228

judeboy101 wrote: »

Again, without FACT based analysis how can any logical person determine the safety or lack thereof. Try to leave the Helen lovejoy school of panic aside and deal with the facts. And the facts are that the govt have not provided any stats to back up the need for nct's for tractors.

People forget that the whole point of vehicle testing is simply to establish if a vehicle is up to the required safety and emission conditions at the time, past history of something being safe or not has nothing to do with it. Basic vehicle standards (including for tractors) have long been established.

Del2005

judeboy101 wrote: »

How can it be "dangerous" unless there is an established link between its condition and facilities. Hence the need to back it up with stats.

So unless someone is killed we can't test vehicles being used on the roads?

I was drawing silage years ago in a tractor with no brakes, granted I never killed anyone but it was a dangerous vehicle.

The only people this will affect are the cowboys as any responsible owner/operator is already making sure that their vehicles are safe.

_Brian

So we should only do something to improve safety after a certain number of people have been mamed and killed.

I’m curious, exactly how many shoukdnbe seriously injured before something is a good idea, is it one injury or one fatality??

kevthegaff

I'd be more interested in lads texting on the phones while driving 50k on a byroad with a heavy load

judeboy101

_Brian wrote: »

So we should only do something to improve safety after a certain number of people have been mamed and killed.

I’m curious, exactly how many shoukdnbe seriously injured before something is a good idea, is it one injury or one fatality??

You do know we withhold life saving and life changing medicines from people because they are not economically viable? When it becomes economically viable to nct tractors due to the negative impact they have on the state coffers, that's when you do it.

tomwaterford

I would be fully in favour of this and bring in trailer testing aswell on the larger trailers used for silage etc

cute geoge

tomwaterford wrote: »

I would be fully in favour of this and bring in trailer testing aswell on the larger trailers used for silage etc

The problem is where will it finish ,fully agree 40km tractors hauling 14+ bale loads should be tested but then could we also end up where a 135 hauling a butt of turf from the bog will have to be tested.If trailers are tested ,then should slurry tanks and silage wagons be also tested better not forget about cattle trailers then .. and then what about cow boxes????

tomwaterford

cute geoge wrote: »

The problem is where will it finish ,fully agree 40km tractors hauling 14+ bale loads should be tested but then could we also end up where a 135 hauling a butt of turf from the bog will have to be tested.If trailers are tested ,then should slurry tanks and silage wagons be also tested better not forget about cattle trailers then .. and then what about cow boxes????

I do fully agree with testing all these.....at best a compromise/lower braking stamdred on anything that can't go above 35kph...to allow for lads at turf,but be metilous on weight limits

.how much weight is in a full 1600/2000 gallon tanker and we all know lads that deffo never have the brakes working on them/have had close escapes that brakes would've helped (tbh I do think the first day brakes on these should be pads and not drums)


It's not a big job to put brakes working on anything or massively expensive,you've only to be unlucky once for an accident

newholland mad

I think it's a farce. The fact that it's only 50 k tractors means it's the newest section of the tractor fleet being tested. The 30 year old pile of dung that has feck all brakes and you'd want to be a genius to steer is ok. Test all or test none I say

boardsuser1

newholland mad wrote: »

I think it's a farce. The fact that it's only 50 k tractors means it's the newest section of the tractor fleet being tested. The 30 year old pile of dung that has feck all brakes and you'd want to be a genius to steer is ok. Test all or test none I say

The one's with the front wheels wobbling so much they're ready to fall off?

tomwaterford

newholland mad wrote: »

I think it's a farce. The fact that it's only 50 k tractors means it's the newest section of the tractor fleet being tested. The 30 year old pile of dung that has feck all brakes and you'd want to be a genius to steer is ok. Test all or test none I say

Be in favour of putting air brakes on anything over 40kph

newholland mad

tomwaterford wrote: »

Be in favour of putting air brakes on anything over 40kph

Virtually all have anyway. Off the top of my head I can't think of any 50 that I've seen that hasn't air. Plus if your trailer's are air only it rules out the neighbours without air getting lends

Bass Reeves

newholland mad wrote: »

I think it's a farce. The fact that it's only 50 k tractors means it's the newest section of the tractor fleet being tested. The 30 year old pile of dung that has feck all brakes and you'd want to be a genius to steer is ok. Test all or test none I say

Most older tractors are on the road only for a few hours a week. Some lads insure tractors as they may only have to cross a road with it or travel a few miles to an out farm a few times a month. A risk analysis by the RSA or the department of transport would show where the risk with roads are regarding tractors. There is a lot more risk of a tractor doing 40+K driven by a contractor or a really busy farmer at full tilt being involved in a serious accident compared to a farmer pulling a cowbox 3-4 cattle to an out farm or having a bit of fertlizer in a spreader.

There is no point in adding cost to farm sectors just for the sake of it. As well it would be virtually impossible to carry some of these small older tractors to test centers. Bigges issue for the RSA it seems was trying to get to a scale where testing was half viable. This seems to be the reason why the limit was dropped from 40k to 35k.

lakill Farm

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Look at the above link and tell me that isn't dangerous?

That tractor is 40k. Wouldn’t be tested

boardsuser1

lakill Farm wrote: »

That tractor is 40k. Wouldn’t be tested

Something that size can't do more than 40k even on 4 wheels? :eek:

lakill Farm

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Something that size can't do more than 40k even on 4 wheels? :eek:

Mostly them TM are 40k

mickdw

There is currently testing in place for stuff like forklifts etc used commercially.
It is a very sensible setup. Engineer travels to machine. Does some basic inspections re condition of the lifting equipment and does a brake and steering test etc using nothing more than experience and common sense.
This would be adequate for tractors imo. With testing like this, all tractors could have been brought into net and a good basic standard could be achieved across the board.

revsperminute

This is just what it is a money grab and bending over to vested interests. If there was any inclination that this was about safety or saving lives then Motorbikes and Scooters would be required to have a test. Currently neither are required to have a test and both travel at a lot higher speeds than tractors. I don't have the stats but I would say the percentage of fatalities on the roads involving motorbikes and scooters is a lot higher than tractors.

tomwaterford

revsperminute wrote: »

This is just what it is a money grab and bending over to vested interests. If there was any inclination that this was about safety or saving lives then Motorbikes and Scooters would be required to have a test. Currently neither are required to have a test and both travel at a lot higher speeds than tractors. I don't have the stats but I would say the percentage of fatalities on the roads involving motorbikes and scooters is a lot higher than tractors.

I can only think of 1 case where a motorcycle killed a car owner

A tractor pulling 15-20 ton of grass/grain and no one looking into quality of each/checking brakes is a diaster waiting to happen

Virtually everyone I knows that drives for Contractors has/knows of very close escapes where people only been injured in road crashes

White Clover

tomwaterford wrote: »

I can only think of 1 case where a motorcycle killed a car owner

A tractor pulling 15-20 ton of grass/grain and no one looking into quality of each/checking brakes is a diaster waiting to happen

Virtually everyone I knows that drives for Contractors has/knows of very close escapes where people only been injured in road crashes

I would bet that driver error was the reason for these close escapes in 99% of cases.

emaherx

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Look at the above link and tell me that isn't dangerous?

It is, but irrelevant to an argument on annual or bi-annual testing as it is someone dealing with a flat wheel. (Not in a fashion that I could recommend). No amount of testing can test for stupid things someone might try to get a broken down machine off of the road.

Unfortunately though I would like to say that all the low speed tractors should not need testing either. But there are far too many old machines on the road where owners can't even keep the basic lights, brakes and steering in order.

There will even be a few on here shortly claiming it's too expensive..... And sure we only drive a mile up and down the road.... Even one lad on here thinks it's perfectly exceptable to just pull a hard left and ditch a tractor if it needs to stop in an emergency!

revsperminute

towwaterford: I suggest you do a quick google of motorbike related fatalities on irish roads compared to tractor fatalities on irish roads.

oneten

emaherx wrote: »

It is, but irrelevant to an argument on annual or bi-annual testing as it is someone dealing with a flat wheel. (Not in a fashion that I could recommend). No amount of testing can test for stupid things someone might try to get a broken down machine off of the road.

Unfortunately though I would like to say that all the low speed tractors should not need testing either. But there are far too many old machines on the road where owners can't even keep the basic lights, brakes and steering in order.

There will even be a few on here shortly claiming it's too expensive..... And sure we only drive a mile up and down the road.... Even one lad on here thinks it's perfectly exceptable to just pull a hard left and ditch a tractor if it needs to stop in an emergency!

I agree with what you are saying, stupid people will find a way to display their stupidity regardless of regs or training, but if you have a closer look at that picture the wheel hub came away from the axle , is it a case of the wheel is wobbling but "she'll be grand " or , unexpected mechanical failure, would it be picked up at a test ??

tomwaterford

revsperminute wrote: »

towwaterford: I suggest you do a quick google of motorbike related fatalities on irish roads compared to tractor fatalities on irish roads.

Motorbikes drivers only kill themselves

...tractors and heavy trailers are surly a bigger risk to other road users??

emaherx

oneten wrote: »

I agree with what you are saying, stupid people will find a way to display their stupidity regardless of regs or training, but if you have a closer look at that picture the wheel hub came away from the axle , is it a case of the wheel is wobbling but "she'll be grand " or , unexpected mechanical failure, would it be picked up at a test ??

Ah..... I see that now...

But have seen many tractors recovered that way over the years, mostly for flat front wheels.

emaherx

tomwaterford wrote: »

Motorbikes drivers only kill themselves

...tractors and heavy trailers are surly a bigger risk to other road users??

Ever see a bike hit a car at 100Km/h? And if car traveling in opposite direction at similar speed?

What about pedestrians?

There has been talk of bike testing in the past and they will likely need testing in the future, especially if they become the only machines on the roads without some form of testing.

newholland mad

Anyone that thinks that testing only concerns fast tractors has their heads in the sand. This will come in and in a few years another sector of tractors will be included and then after that every tractor on the road will need a doe. Give it 5 year's . Money racket and a great way to generate employment. The rsa are a law to themselves.

Limestone Cowboy

newholland mad wrote: »

Virtually all have anyway. Off the top of my head I can't think of any 50 that I've seen that hasn't air. Plus if your trailer's are air only it rules out the neighbours without air getting lends

Plenty of 50k deutz with just hydraulic brakes as standard, have drove them a few times and to be honest never felt completely safe. Think air brakes should be mandatory on all 50k tractors. On the accident front I think a young lad of 16 being able to hit off with a 200hp tractor and 32ft bale trailer or the likes without doing any practical driving test is ridiculous compared to what truck drivers have to do and is a lot more of a safety issue than the tractors themselves.

boardsuser1

Someone mentioned something about NCT testing for bikes.

It’s being introduced in 2022.

http://amp.breakingnews.ie/ireland/motorbikes-will-need-an-nct-from-2022-624820.html

The final paragraph can be ignored as the article is from 2014.

selectamatic

newholland mad wrote: »

Anyone that thinks that testing only concerns fast tractors has their heads in the sand. This will come in and in a few years another sector of tractors will be included and then after that every tractor on the road will need a doe. Give it 5 year's . Money racket and a great way to generate employment. The rsa are a law to themselves.

Most likely.

But we can pretty much guarantee that any machine over 40 years old (a rolling 40) will never need a test especially since the outcome of the recent classic car and commercial vehicle testing criteria review.

The long and the short of it is; this is purely down to lobbying by the hgv/haulier industry. They see fastracs as the reincarnation of Satan and the reason for all their woes so this was inevitable.

They'll learn soon enough that if time was spent getting their own house in order and sorting out the shocking conditions and demands drivers are put under it'd have been time better spent. But then again such actions wouldn't increase top down profits so therefore it wouldn't be on their radar.

tomwaterford

newholland mad wrote: »

Anyone that thinks that testing only concerns fast tractors has their heads in the sand. This will come in and in a few years another sector of tractors will be included and then after that every tractor on the road will need a doe. Give it 5 year's . Money racket and a great way to generate employment. The rsa are a law to themselves.

It's hardly unreasonable to want vehicles on the road to be roadworthy?

lakill Farm

tomwaterford wrote: »

Motorbikes drivers only kill themselves

...tractors and heavy trailers are surly a bigger risk to other road users??

Know of a motorbike that hit a tractor at 90 degrees. Split tractor in half.

The temporary citizen departed and tractor driver seriously hurt.

lakill Farm

The RSA are a joke I think.

The BE test is stupid. They encourage you to brake hard and accelerate hard. How is that safe. That’s their standards

Add into that the rsa levy they have on a DOE test now. Why is it commercial only

cvrt is E111For 1 year
Ncts. E55 for mostly 2 years.

It’s not all safety if you ask me.

boardsuser1

lakill Farm wrote: »

The RSA are a joke I think.

The BE test is stupid. They encourage you to brake hard and accelerate hard. How is that safe. That’s their standards

Add into that the rsa levy they have on a DOE test now. Why is it commercial only

cvrt is E111For 1 year
Ncts. E55 for mostly 2 years.

It’s not all safety if you ask me.

Bike test is similar.

lakill Farm

Cork Truck Driver wrote: »

Bike test is similar.

No idea, I’ll take your word. But even unladen that’s unsafe. Nice and steady is the way to go.

When loaded , especially cattle or liquids like a 1/2 empty bowser acting to rsa guidelines you would want the fire station on speed dial

emaherx

lakill Farm wrote: »

It’s not all safety if you ask me.

Perhaps not, but testing has seriously increased the safety standards of the cars and commercial vehicles in the country.

If all the tractors in the country were maintained to a reasonable standard we would have a better argument against it but........

lakill Farm

emaherx wrote: »

Perhaps not, but testing has seriously increased the safety standards of the cars and commercial vehicles in the country.

If all the tractors in the country were maintained to a reasonable standard we would have a better argument against it but........

I would agree that testing has increased safety. But why did Doe fee double? It’s not about safety

I agree with the tractor maintenance. Some tractors are in poor order but in fairness they are normally only out to draw a load of turf or run a haybob. They aren’t belting down the road with 20t behind them.

PeterCasey

No body looks after a tractor here in Ireland I admit it is not as bad as it was you never see them been washed down greased or maintained, its no harm to see the road worthiness coming in. That man in Tipperary should get jail or banned for having only three wheels on a tractor.

lakill Farm

PeterCasey wrote: »

No body looks after a tractor here in Ireland I admit it is not as bad as it was you never see them been washed down greased or maintained, its no harm to see the road worthiness coming in. That man in Tipperary should get jail or banned for having only three wheels on a tractor.

I know a few who look look after their Tractors’s better than their spouses.

Limestone Cowboy

lakill Farm wrote: »

I know a few who look look after their Tractors’s better than their spouses.

You mean you know Reggie

lakill Farm

Limestone Cowboy wrote: »

You mean you know Reggie

Am I allowed to say unfortunately

But Ye him