Safe Speed Forums

Just on the news, the Government is relaxing the driving hours rules for lorries to allow essential goods to reach the shops.

Now, either it is dangerous for drivers to exceed hours or not. If not then why is there a limit? Why not leave it to the self judgement of these professionals - like the safe speed at which to travel.

IMO the hours limit was a politically motivated law introduced at the behest of unions to prevent "Victorian" bosses "exploiting the workers". As most drivers are self-employed this is daft.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Pardon ?
Professionals ?
It's professional to watch tv while driving ?
It's professional to watch dvd's while driving ?
It's professional to drive while tired, and wipe-out a young woman by crushing her car to half its length because the driver did not see her car ?
It's professional for you and you mate to be so involved in a laptop on the dash that you drive into a car wiping-out a family ?
Really, I could go-on for some considerable time about the poor driving of truckers.
Having a VERY large distribution depot a few miles away gives me more than ample knowledge of just how bad their driving really IS.
if YOU hit someone in your CAR you may well kill a person.....trucks do it in multiples.
40 mph on S/C roads.....right...as if....more like nearly 60...for every truck.
Hours...let me see...that would also be an EU requirement....which individual governments cannot change.
Rather like the limiters....and the tachos'....and the fitting of gps loggers to tachos'.....and soon all trucks must be retrofitted with digital tachos'....all EU
They're not professionals, they're ordinary drivers driving a very large, very heavy vehicle, usually badly and usually faster than THEIR maximum legally-allowed speed.
They overtake each other on m/ways....well, they try....for endless miles.....and with a three-lane dual carriageway they fill all three lanes with the same CRAP driving for endless miles.
Look at their tailgating...legendary....so close they cannot see the road by looking down....
Many are so useless at driving and looking they do not even see the smoke from their own burning tyres...
Look at an accident involving a truck and you're looking at many dead and injured......and they want to let them drive for days at a time with no mandatory rest ?
The hours were introduced BECAUSE these "professionals" cannot be trusted to do it themselves.
The CHANGE is being pushed forward by big companies to make more money....sod the rest of us when these tired, bad, incompetent idiots make a sandwich of our cars, and us.
I noted a cop show on tv a while ago.....our tv...where one TRAFFIC cop said: "many of these guys I wouldn't trust to drive a wheelbarrow.....and I can spot an hours fiddler a mile away....then I arrest them"
KEEP the hours as they are.
ENFORCE the MANDATORY speed limits for trucks.
KEEP PEOPLE ALIVE.....



At least something on the truck is intelligent then.

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

jomukuk, you have seen a small fraction of the truckers on our roads, yet you make such sweeping statements. As a retired HGV driver myself, I can assure you it does go on, but not to the extent you may think. Perhaps the depot near you can only attract the lower echelon of drivers? As for falling asleep at the wheel and the length of time it takes to overtake, you can blame nearly all of it ON the speed-limiters! As for tachographs, they are the shittiest things ever brought into the industry. Think of them as your boss standing behind you every working minute!

The other things you mention, and far more obscene ones, are much more prevalent amongst car drivers. (We can see them from up there! )

I'm on the roads every day.
I drive the A11-A14 route regularly, the driving I described is there 24/7/365....
As for the tacho...tough.
EU regulations, no way out (yet) (the EU may not last long)
And the gps logger is EU as well.
One large fleet operator (s/mart) has had trackers fitted to the trucks....saves them a fortune in fuel, now the drivers go where they're told, not where they want. It keeps them out of certain laybys (I'm sure you know what I mean)
What you forget is that most people have their boss behind them....and they are not driving several hundred thousand pounds worth of truck/trailer/fuel/load.
I hear from one trucker (Some are quite sociable) that they cannot even fiddle fuel anymore...the truck electronics are so good that they can tell exactly how much is used....and the filler cap opening is recorded.
Rigid enforcement of hours....now exists due to the digital tacho (no way out since the data HAS to be downloaded to VOSA...and they are not slow to report problems)...no way to fiddle it.....the card inserted gives all the info needed....and stops out-of-hours driving too....since ALL hours are recorded on the drivers digital tacho licence. Thats' probably why they drive the old trucks for extra cash....but that fiddle is going to be stopped by retrofitting.
I know of one driver who disconnected the tracker unit to divert for a private job....problem: Internal power. Driver now employed elsewhere.
40 tonnes is slow to stop, especially when the driver of it is watching telly.
40 tonnes plus one car equals dead people.
In any case, we need less trucks and more loads carried on rail...which is also coming as diesel is nearly at its all-time-high price again......

Edit:
It's an extra hour a day....so that's 10 hours....hmmmmm...
And then there was this:

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

Totally agree with the road/rail transfer, but off the top of my head, I cannot think of any other job that is supervised by management and the authorities for every second of the working day. THAT's enough stress to cause accidents!!!!

And one can always cherry-pick figures.......

And when I started, it was 14 hours a day 7 days a week and without the home comforts of todays home-from-homes! Used to stand up to get an 8-legger round a roundabout! No power steering on 4-wheel steer...

Aaah, such fun.

Lets disect this from the other side of the fence, but bearing in mind that there is bad drivers across all sectors (including the beloved rail network).



Is it safe for the boy racers in their saxo's with dash mounted DVDs to do the same?
As stats have it the people that cause most fatigue crashes are the middle-aged sales rep types running to the next meeting, its just when its a truck the media band-wagon picks up on it



30 seconds on you tube will find you proportionally more videos showing hand brake turns, diffing, speeding, racing, and all sorts of terrible driving from cars and bikes; not all lorry drivers are angels but from the other side of the fence your average car driver is very dangerous due to their ignorance of whats around them.



Ah right so that explains it all. One of the NIMBY brigade that wants shops on their doorstep but doesnt want dirty smelly trucks delivering to it.


Well thats just a lie. Well in fairness if your judging it by your car speedo then the 56 limiter would be 60 to you, seeing as cars do not have to be calibrated every 2 years. And what happens when you stick to the 40? Cars overtaking on blind bends across solid white lines, plenty of videos on youtube of that!



Also a lie, in the UK alone there is 2 sets of rules EU and domestic.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but thats another lie.

As its their 'profession' then yes they are professional.



So trucks arent entitled to overtake slower trucks after paying over a thousand pounds road tax, incase it holds up auntie Bessie going to sainsburys? A 44-tonner looses momentium on a hill and its a crawl, a car can lift of for a few minutes and then go on after really takes nothing more than a little common sense.


So Mr. 5 series on the way to his next meeting doesnt do the same

Burning tyres? More lies I'm afraid.


Very true about the accidents, but again more lies about the rules, can raise the max 9 hours driving time to 10 once a week and reduce daily rest from 11 to 9 hours and when its back to normal on the 7th there's a mandatory rest of 45 hours. But of course you knew that.
Between that and unscruplus employers undercutting rates and leaving it to the driver to run bent or find a new job. End of the day its up to the driver but employers have a part to play.
More lies. Its being pushed by consumers complaining that the shops have run out of daily mail papers.

And just yesterday in thick fog in my area visibilty down to 30 ish yards, there's a police car driving without ANY lights on. does that mean all police drivers are as poor as that?



Educate people about trucks, you'll find most the time a lorry is struggling to overtake on a motorway its because Maurice in his Metro doing 45 speeds up when the lorry is along side holding him out (though ignorance of his own speed). Or Mr Caravan doing the same. Or better yet the numpty usually in a German car bombing down lane 3 only to cut across all lanes at the last minute at a slip road just to be in front. If you find yourself being held up all the time you are not leaving enough time for your journey.


We all have to share the same overcrowed roads people, give lorrys a bit of room at junctions, leave plenty of time for your journey and we can all co-exist happily

and remember, "Without trucks, Britian doesn't move"

MORE lies I'm sorry to say.

And its harder to stop when Mr Rep need to cut accross both lanes on a busy roundabout just to be 1 car in front.


And trains run on fairy dust? Oh wait no they run on diesel that is subsidised by your and my taxes just to make the antiquated rail network try and compete, ableit unsussessfully. The only reason Steady Eddie is doing it is because WE paid for the trains, its a joke.

end of the day its YOU that wants a shop at every corner stocked daily with goods from all corners of the globe, so its YOU that has to learn to live with the lorries that deliver it.

They country is too small for rail transport to be a viable option otherwise there would be no need for government money to subsideise it!!!!!!!!!

And who pays for the roads that the lorries (and cars) drive on. The same people who pay a small part of the cost of operating the railways - the taxpayer.


I certainly don't want a "shop on every corner" - which is just as well considering the speed at which small retailers are going out of business.


The country is quite large enough to support a viable rail network. History demonstrate that. That fact is that road transport is subsidised far more than rail. If road transport had to operate on the same basis as rail - the operators providing, maintaining and policing their own track - road transport would be a non starter. It is only because the haulage industry is parasitic on the taxpayer provided road infrasturture that it is viable.



New User


Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:18
[/quote]

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

And where does the ~£40-billion pa which we pay in road and fuel tax go to then? And is the 'taxpayer' some mythical beast that never uses the roads in any way, shape or form?

But, the real point is that moving goods from road to rail probably won't make any significant difference to the number of lorries on the roads - even if you somehow managed to double the goods capacity of the railways.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

It goes to the same place that the ~£8bn raised in tobacco excise duty or the ~£6bn raised in alcohol excise duty or the ~£150bn raised in income tax.


No, which is why the government builds and maintains roads.



There is some merit in that statement but it is not entirely true. Twenty years ago the bulk of the limestone taken from the quarries near Buxton was moved by road. Judicious investment in the railways saw virtually all of that traffic moved to rail,

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Why then do you try to create the impression that the 'taxpayer', or even worse, 'rail transport', somehow subsidises 'road transport'?



That's like a drop in the ocean. Doesn't prove the rule.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

In fairness to you thats the only use for rail freight, and coal to power plants and the likes; but since the majority of "goods" needing moved are consumer goods rail is no good, never has been never will be. In history the rail freight industries boomed because there was no viable alternitive - now there is. Fact of the matter is if rail transport was a better alternitive, goods would be on rails. Hauliers dont buy lorries for fun you know.

Steady Eddie wants to buy a lorry thats out of his pocket, as is fuel duty, massive road tax, the works. He wants to buy a train he gets duty free diesel, and big grants to buy it, the rolling stock and build terminals. Stobart & Tinkler are not idiots, as soons as their government money stops so will the Tesco rail service to Scotland, mark my words.

The problem is people stuck in the past that want to revert to a pre-Beeching rail service, costing the tax-payer thousands for a service that has a very small place in the 21st centuary. Rail has had its moment in the sun time to move over.


[quote=dcbwhaley]New User


Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:18[/quote]Whats your point, new members aren't allowed an opinion?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9lmCpIz ... B&index=39

The taxpayer "subsidises" everything from the road infrastructure to bottled water for councillors.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

I will concede that for movement of freight, other than bulk freight such as coal and road-stone, road transport does offer a more flexible means of distribution. But when it comes to moving people, several million commuters are voting with their season tickets in favour of rail over road. And in Europe and Japan high speed railways are proving very attractive to passengers.

It would be interesting to see how the economics panned out if we had pay-for-use charging on the roads in the same way we do on the railways.



You are more than welcome to share your opinions with me .

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

But not in a pejorative sense.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Where on earth do you get your figures from? Outside of London, only around 10% of commuter journeys are by public transport - which includes buses and taxis. And the London figure is only substantially higher because of the underground.
And even if more people wanted to travel by rail, the capacity simply isn't there. Even at 3 intercity trains per hour, the same number of people could be accommodated by just one lane of one motorway or trunk road, even at 1 person per car.



If you really think that road charging (which is over and above what we already pay) is going to alleviate congestion, just look at the wonders it's done for overcrowding on trains.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GBR_rail_passenegers_by_year.gif


Which is a sufficiently high figure to deny the statement that there is no place for public transport in the modern world. And the figure is higher in London because they have an intra-city railway system.

But with a larger use of fuel and with more KSIs


Please explain to me how road charging has affected overcrowding on trains?

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Using the logic of Historical precedent would suggest that we should be able to meet all our transport needs using canals! Or even pack horses!

However, since this is clearly not the case I suspect that the analysis is slightly diferent.

The railways in the 19th and first half of twentyeth century provided a comprehensive national transport system not because of any inherent superiority, but simply because it was the best system at the time and, despite all the considerable drawbacks, it was made to work because it had to!

Roads alway have been the beginning and the end of every journey. What the oil fueled ICE has done is fill in the bit in the middle in a manner that is superior to all preceding transport technologies.

Abandoning self propelled vehicles would require a far greater social and economic shift than simply getting people to use public transport instead of their cars!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

~1300 million rail journeys per year, amounts to <quick mental calculation> ~20 journeys per person per year. </qmc>
Compared to how many road journeys? (which was my point) Your graph doesn't state that.



I didn't say that, nor, as I recall, did anyone else here.
However, it does put lie to the widely-held belief that PT is the panacea to all our transport ills.



As I said:



If you transported a similar amount of goods and number of passengers as on the roads, you'd probably get similar casualty figures. But we'll never know for sure, because we'll never get there.
As for fuel use, trains aren't as fuel-efficient as you may think - especially when average occupancy is taken into account.



You were talking about pay-per-use on the railways. The equivalent for road is road-charging. Pay-per-use did nothing for train overcrowding. Neither will road charging do anything for road congestion.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

We already have Pay-per-use!

Its called fuel excise duty!

And if all the tax collected on fuel was hypothecated to road construction and maintenance we would have very good roads indeed!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"