I’m reading a Trains editorial from 20 years ago that talks about new competition to railroads by “Longer Combination Vehicles” (LCV’s). These are the semi-trucks that have double and triple trailers connected with draw bars. It mentions that a twin-trailer combination is 120 feet in length. The vice president-intermodal from the Santa Fe is quoted in the article, saying that LCV’s are, “the single most critical threat to the national rail system.”
That was 1991. So I wonder, today, 20 years later, what was the outcome of that LCV competitive threat? What happened?
Short answer: The government in I believe 1993 or so froze lengths at the current maximums. Have not heard anything on efforts to unfreeze them.
I personally do not like double and triple A-trains, get behind a set of triples on the Indy and Ohio turnpikes in bad weather, you will see why. I would rather see the adoption of Super B-trains, less pivot points to me means easier to keep in line.
Doubles are resitricted to certain roads, triples restricted more. A lot of drivers refuse to handle them, too. Threat still? Yeah, probably. Realisitcally? Trucking companies find putting the trailer on a flat car is cheaper and makes better sense. Still I see trains on the Interstates and turnpikes. Just don’t see enough cars on tracks.
Basically Pres Clinton in 1993 Froze all Vechile Lengths and Weights were they are. Why because he wasafarid of making the Left Wing mad then. We as a Nation are the only ones that still restrict a 5 axle combo to 80K most other nations allow 84K with no problems. So he also helped kill the Competivieness of the Transportation Industry of the USA at the same time.
I don’t think the decsion was political as you say, edbenton, but more pragmatic. Our highways won’t take the load without massive rebuilding, i.e. public money to build roads for private enterprise truckers to earn a living; cost is too much, no percieved, physical, return on investment for the taxpayer. That was not an act that killed the competitiveness in the transportation industry at that time. It has been argued successfully however, that earlier acts and federal commissions did restrict competitiveness giving truckers the edge with public roads and rate rulings favoring them. No, not political, not much. Just different than you state.
The link above might be of some value here as to when the Federal Government rule making process
started allowing LCV Trucks and what the reasoning was.
FTL: "…The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (STAA) required States to permit tractors to pull two trailers, each up to 28.5 feet long, on Interstate highways and on other routes recommended by the States and designated by the Federal Highway Administration. In some States, no doubles were allowed before the STAA. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 defined an LCV as “any combination of a truck tractor and two or more trailers or semi-trailers which operates on the Interstate System at a gross vehicle weight greater than 80,000 pounds.” The legislation also provided that no State could permit multi-trailer trucks longer or heavier than those operating on National Network (NN) routes under existing State laws as on June 1, 1991, thus “freezing” State weight and length limits for these trucks. Since different State laws allowed various size and weight limits on NN highways, State highways, and local roads before 1991, ISTEA froze the existing variation among the States on the Interstate system and other NN routes…"
This link as well might answer some questions and provide some information on the Legislative push for longer and heavier road vehicles:
I read the second article you linked. Very interesting. The issue of LCV’s is alive and well.
The article says:
“A group of 19 Western governors backed a resolution passed by the Western Governors’ Association, to allow further use of longer combination vehicles (LCVs). Use of such trucks has been frozen since 1991 and only allowed on such roads where they were allowed prior to 1991.”
It will be interesting to see what happens in the next Congressional term (which begins 1/5/2011).
So why didn’t the Repubs. increase the limits when they controlled the Congress and Whitehouse?
I thought most of Europe had more restrictive rules on truck size (although I understand that their regulations have allowed for larger vehicles in recent years).
I can’t say I’m unhappy that railroads have captured more of the long distance market from the truckers (who have adapted by doing more intermodal ventures with the railroads)…
I would like to interject a suposition on my par about the LCV’s and their integration into the picture.
LCV’s have been around for some time, they exist in pockets to address more or less regional situations.
The ‘Rocky Mountain double’ essentially a 45’ tlr and a shorter trailer ( poss 29’6?) was used in that region.
The ‘Turnpike double’ appeared on the Indiana and Ohio turnpikes and originally would be broken up at the Penna border pulled to NY and re-hooked for travel across the NY Thruway and later went as far as Framingham in Mass ( across the Mass Pike. In NY the Double bottoms were sometimes pulled as ‘Triples’ and Double and Triple pups ( approx 28 footers) were operated in the same area. At times the primary benefactor of these multi trailer ops was UPS some regular freight carriers with a lot of traffic on the specific lane.
Point being that hooking up and pulling multiple trailers requires a level of skill in the individual driver and patience (occasionally another driver to lend a hand (ie:: with a tandem axle dolly(?) with the hooking up or breaking down of the units. These operations require a recognition of a level of misery for the individuals performing these tasks in all kinds of weather conditions. One might read skill as a factor in the pay of the driver(s) preforming the necessary tasks in hooking and unhooking; one might read that as a pay scale prescribed by a UNION, and therefore prescribed by specific work rules.
My second point is that over the last few years drivers within the trucking business have become somewhat harder to find and keep on some jobs. Some of those being: Driver Unloads, Multiple stop driver unloads, short hauls and drop and swap regional runs. Many drivers consider the longer haul with ‘no touch’ to be the prime kinds of trips to have. This is where the TOFC operations and Container traffic has an impact. The biggest selling point is the driver is kept in the area of his domicile and thus is a
Owner-operators who can afford 750 or higher HP rigs like them fine as long as the rate differential makes sense for their haul.
It’s the fleet drivers with the “economy” 650 HP rigs that do not like them. The NY State Thruway had massive traffic problems with tandem trailers in the late 1980s and 1990s. I saw triples then, too, but they disappeared quickly.
At the NY/NJ border on the Thruway there had been a large tandem trailer wheel exchange area. Since the massive I-287 interchange was built a much larger tandem trailer area with an overpass was built about a mile and a half north of the old one.
Oddly enough I haven’t seen tandems on the Thruway despite this new area.
Better look under the hood, my company truck is only 425hp, biggest one can order from Cummins now is a 600hp, one can get more, but shells out big bucks in aftermarket mods at places like Pittsburgh Power.
425hp on an 80,000lb rig equates to about 25mph pulling up a 5% grade in the Appalachians…
In the past year I believe I have seen one or two triples and quite a few doubles on the NYS Thruway and/or Mass Pike. Despite my years of driving I felt a little uncomfortable having them pass me in exess of posted speed limits. I am sure those who drive or have driven less than me felt that way if not more so. It is already uncomfortable to be driving 70 and having a regular truck and trailer overtake you or often see the wind bring a trailer toward you at speed without having to deal with a train without track guidence. If we don’t want passenger trains in this country, then we must protect the automobile driver and take all trucks off the highways. If we want more trucks, bigger trucks, multiple trailered trucks, then lets build more for rail passengers.
LCVs are making inroads albeit very slowly. Here in Ontario they’ve been allowed on certain major highways for about a year now. Services are restricted however. They cannot pass other than under unusal circumstances, and they are not allowed to operate in the winter.
LCVs aren’t as versatile as a tractor trailer combos and often require shunting at either end due to having to break them up when they come off the highway. This limits their use to carriers who have yards and the added infrastructure that would allow that…so your average small mom and pop carrier would be at a disadvantage here.
LCVs are also in the public spotlight alot more…and thus on the DOT audit radar…many carriers don’t want to increase their exposure to risk and DOT audits and fines, and the LCVs would thus not be as attractive for that reason.
Most carriers…especailly the smaller ones… operate “irregular route” type services…LCVs don’t fit that mold either and can only be used on certain restricted routes…
LCVs require additional training for drivers…these added costs and the aforementoned limitations mkae LCVs unattractive for the average fleet…
If you are complaining about the spray coming from the multiple bottom truck trains in bad weather I’ll offer one word…Rain-X. Let’s you see through the spray like it wasn’t there.
Henry are you aware that we are already Restricted on Hours we work the Medications we can take Including OTC stuff we are Required to get MORE REST than an Airline Pilot is required to get before they fly EACH DAY. Also any look at the FDOT Motor Vechiles crash Reports will show that 91% of the time we are not in any Motor Vechile Crashes and of the 9% we are in 70% of the time the Car that hit us was at Fault. Here is a Question anyone aginst the Trucking industry Name One Product in your house that a Truckplays No Part of getting to the Stores or Into your House at somepart of the Logistics Chain.
There is only one thing we do not bring to your stores and houses directly that being the Air you Breathe. The food you eat came by Truck. Your Powerlines were delivered by Trucks. Your Gas lines will I can tell you this the RR’s do not go into the Gasfields we the OTR guys haul the pipe out to the Drillers and then we deliver the Pipelines to where they are being built. Lumber we haul it. The Plumbing in the house We Brought it. Your Furniture W
And the above has nothing to do with irresponsible truck drivers.
I’ve seen plenty of truck drivers going 70-90 mph on the highways (Speed limit 55-65). Just because truck drivers are integral in society does not mean they should be given free pass to drive in any manner they see fit, or operate trucks of lengths that are not compatible with current roads.
Same applies to railroads. Only we seem to have better enforcement of rules and laws.
Zugman into your post above. I highly doubt anymore your seeing drivers doing 70-90 MPH. Not when FUEL COSTS would Kill THEM at over 3.50 a gallon. How would I know this even the Boss that let us roll has restricted all his trucks to 68 NO MOREfor one reason the Fuel Costs were way to high at 70 mph. Also we just go hammered with CVSA 2010 were any ticket for 15 over is an Automatic 6 month Vactation UNPAID you think we are going to risk our paychecks on speed. The ENforcement of Rules on the RR employees. Name the one place were you can Run a Red signal do 3 Million in damage to Freight and Locomotives and still have a Job. You do that as an OTR Driver your gone forever. We still are restricted on HOS to a Better degree than RR Employees. At least when I got tired on the ROad I could stop and go to BED. I had a Fatal accident that was not my fault and I still had to start with a bottom feeding company that made swift Schiendor look great. However I got my foot in the door with him and was able to move on from there.
Ed, I’m not lying to you. If I drive 70-75mph on these interstates I STILL get passed by many trucks - mostly independents, but still trucks.
And of course it’s easy to do $3 million in damage on a train. Look at the price of the equipment. Even a simple derailment can cause hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage. So that is not a fair barometer.
On my railroad, you run a stop signal - you are fired. Terminated. Gone. Even without damage. Now maybe you can get back on, but that is getting harder and harder to do… I’ve seen plenty of trucks run a stop light this week alone. I bet they are still working.
The point is, there are idiots in both jobs that have no business operating a piece of machinery larger than a roller skate. Just because trucking is essential does not mean we should grant the industry its every desire. And the whole RR vs/ trucking thing is stupid. Neither one can exist without the other.
The Comprehensive Safety Analysis (CSA) which was launched this year and will be rolled out in full force in 2011 is going to go a long way to curb those speeding trucks. Carriers will no longer be able to employ drivers who act recklessly, nor will drivers be so ready to accept a carrier’s 90 mph dispatch…because that driver knows that if he gets ticketed it goes in to his record and he becomes an industry untouchable.
CSA is probably the biggest change that the trucking industry has seen in 30 years, since deregulation. The mickey mouse management antics that have become so commonplace in trucking and which would never be tolerated in any other industry will need to be replaced by professional management that ensures drivers are well rested and can make a living within the law. Bending the logbook…not counting wait times at shippers/receivers, running around scales…all of that nonsense is going to be gone because the folks who don’t learn and don’t adapt will no longer be able to work within the industry. BTW…this is an opportunity for the railroads to pickup some business…because the labor shortage that has plagued the trucking industry for some 25 years now is about to get alot worse before it gets better…