6 January 2013

B-Triples on the Hume Highway

| bobmac
Join the conversation
37

Having read in the Canberra Times (December 30, page 10) that the NSW and presumably Victorian governments are proposing to trial B-Triples on the Hume highway in 2014, you have got to wonder how such an idiotic decision could be made.

Bill McKinley of the Australian Trucking Association is quoted as saying “we have an excellent understanding of how they handle” and “the safety and productivity case for bringing them in is compelling”. That might be his views, but as a regular traveller between Canberra and the Central Coast of NSW on the Federal Highway, Hume Highway, M7, M2, Pennant Hills Road, and F3 I would like to comment on the danger 90% of the idiots calling themselves professional truck drivers pose to motorists.

These clowns continually exceed the speed limit (including roadwork areas and recently resealed sections of dual carriageways where they will, without compunction, move to the outside lane and shower everyone with stones) , tailgate slower cars, wait until you are in the process of overtaking them, then indicate and pull out straight away in many cases to spend the next umpteen kilometres blocking the highway whilst trying to overtake another truck doing about 1/2 kph less.

And this is with the existing semis and B-doubles!

Imagine these galahs let loose in the B-triple monsters!! Not to mention the dangers of excessive spray from these vehicles obliterating the road ahead when it is raining.

One wonders whether any of these decision makers/politicians actually drive on these roads to experience the conditions first hand.

Whilst this trial is supposed to be for the Hume Highway (what about getting from their depots to the Hume Highway??), I bet it won’t be long before they worm their way onto the Pacific Highway. Imagine having to deal with this lot on Pennant Hills Road between the M2 and F3 – there is supposed to be a plan to build a link road between these two, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Obviously the likes of Lindsay Fox etc have a strong influence with the federal and state governments, but instead of encouraging the use of these oversized missiles on our roads, we should be investing in upgrading and modernising the existing rail system to carry this freight. If they let these things loose on our highways, what next – road trains??? (or perhaps B-Triples already qualify as such!) In that case why not take the proposal (as mentioned in the above CT article) to review parking on major roads used by trucks a step further and review the driving of cars on those roads – then the trucking lobby would have it all their own way.

Join the conversation

37
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest
Rigger Davidson1:58 pm 27 May 19

Driving B Doubles my self I would not recommend B Triples on Pennant Hills Road either. The new tunnel height permitting, yes.

Also if allowed to travel to Brisbane and return there would have to be suitable parking for B Triples every 4 hours including parking for 200 or more units in or around Sydney also a new bypass and bridge at the end of the expressway north of Sydney, that’s a lot of construction to do, also splitting areas north and south of Sydney, Northern Melbourne and Southern Brisbane.

The interstates are not really the cowboys it’s the wannabes, they give the industry a bad name. I can’t stand them either… company training is the problem, here’s the keys, not in my world.

NoImRight said :

Wouldnt allowing the triples actually reduce congestion on the roads? Two tripes = 3 doubles?

Truck sizes have been increasing since the first one rolled out of the stable. Haven’t noticed any decrease in congestion.

NoImRight said :

Wouldnt allowing the triples actually reduce congestion on the roads? Two tripes = 3 doubles?

That is the argument of the lobby group, though one needs to consider at what ‘cost’ the extra length comes at.

PS A B double isn’t actually 2x a single, it is more like 1.5 times as the front trailer needs a 5th wheel (the turntable thing where the trailer attaches) on the back which takes up available cargo space. Likewise a triple has two “short” trailers with a 5th wheel with the rear being full sized, so a triple ends up being about double the capacity of a single.

NoImRight said :

Wouldnt allowing the triples actually reduce congestion on the roads? Two tripes = 3 doubles?

Please stop making so much sense.

Wouldnt allowing the triples actually reduce congestion on the roads? Two tripes = 3 doubles?

Hey Bobmac if you read the article you would see that it is not, repeat not the government wanting to trail B tripples, the ‘proposal’ is coming from the trucking industry/lobby. Like all proposals the government should consider it and then decide on merit.

As for Victoria B tripples have been allowed and used for a number of years, restricted to the Hume Freeway as well as parts of the freeway to Geelong and part of the ring road. Unless things have changed the only user is/was Ford for shipping parts from their Geelong plant to the Broadmedows factory.

Personally I don’t want to see trucks any bigger than B doubles on the Hume in NSW. The doubles are bad enough as it is. If road traffic is as bad as the trucking lobby is making out then more money should be spent getting more traffic onto rail.

Diggety said :

On rail, yes it does make a lot of sense in many ways, but the economic case needs to be made for it to be a viable alternative.

Whatever for?

There are much more important issues than money.

I only do long trips on the Hume at night these days. There are minimal passenger vehicles, and mainly b-double trucks which I find are the most safe to share the road with.

Your made up stats on truck drivers are way off the mark in my observation.

On rail, yes it does make a lot of sense in many ways, but the economic case needs to be made for it to be a viable alternative. It appears the case cannot be made at this stage.

Felix the Cat8:58 am 07 Jan 13

Sandman said :

Zan said :

I wonder if the roads have been made strong enough for the triples. Already the highways are deteriorating due to the heaviness and number of trucks, plus the drying out of the subsoils. I wonder what will the highway look like in a few years.

Source of the assumption that trucks are doing the damage? More likely it’s shoddy construction or just harsh Australian conditions.

Look at Macs Reef Rd from the Federal Hwy to Bungendore Rd. Its a shocking piece of Tarmac, constantly sprouting new corrugations and potholes. No truck over 10 tonnes is allowed on it though.

We don’t want facts, they get in the way of a good whinge.

If peeps are uncomfortable or outraged by policy decisions made by farktards then don’t be apathetic, send an email to the relevant minister expressing your opinion.Could one imagine a scenario where ministers received hundreds of thousands or a million emails demanding an immediate upgrade to the rail network rather than B-Triples.Unfortunately the problem is and always has been APATHY,yeah have a whinge but make sure the farktards in power get the message!

Zan said :

I wonder if the roads have been made strong enough for the triples. Already the highways are deteriorating due to the heaviness and number of trucks, plus the drying out of the subsoils. I wonder what will the highway look like in a few years.

Look, correct me if I’m wrong but I’m assuming a B-triple is a semi with 3 trailers attached instead of 2. So it’s not like the actual weight on the road is going to be increased by a third, more that the time that a single stretch of road will be under the weight of a single trailer will go up by a third. I don’t see how that leads to catastrophic damage. Now I’m just working off of what I’ve inferred from reading this article, I’m not an engineer nor a truck-driver so I’m happy to be told that I’m in the wrong, but to me this seems like a bunch of people looking for something to bitch about.

screaming banshee10:12 pm 06 Jan 13

Lazy I said :

You can’t back a freight train into your local Woolworths and start unloading palettes, there is double handling at a local transport depot and distribution by smaller vehicles required… that’s more people to feed and infrastructure to support in your supply chain.

You can’t back a b trailer up to a Woolworths loading dock either

Lazy I said :

switch said :

gasman said :

Trucks are extremely inefficient ways to carry large volumes of cargo. Rail is far more efficient (by a factor of at least 3), and once the infrastructure is in place, far less expensive. More goods on rail means less trucks on the roads.

No argument with any of that really, but B triples on the Hume are not going to be used for transporting >10k tonne loads of coal or iron ore. Instead they’ll be used for packages, petrol and containers, loads where rail failed and withdrew from years ago thanks to all the double handling and delays involved. People want their stuff NOW, not in two or three weeks like the old mail trains used to provide.

This.

It’s the double (and triple if the source warehouse / factory isn’t located near rail) handling that really does kill it.

You can’t back a freight train into your local Woolworths and start unloading palettes, there is double handling at a local transport depot and distribution by smaller vehicles required… that’s more people to feed and infrastructure to support in your supply chain.

Exhibit A:
Failed rail freight distribution depot http://goo.gl/Zq3JG

I’m a huge supporter of rail personally, but direct comparison between the two when one provides an end to end delivery solution while the other only provides arterial links doesn’t really show anything.

They can probably unload palettes at Eckersleys though…

Zan said :

I wonder if the roads have been made strong enough for the triples. Already the highways are deteriorating due to the heaviness and number of trucks, plus the drying out of the subsoils. I wonder what will the highway look like in a few years.

Source of the assumption that trucks are doing the damage? More likely it’s shoddy construction or just harsh Australian conditions.

Look at Macs Reef Rd from the Federal Hwy to Bungendore Rd. Its a shocking piece of Tarmac, constantly sprouting new corrugations and potholes. No truck over 10 tonnes is allowed on it though.

Zan said :

I wonder if the roads have been made strong enough for the triples. Already the highways are deteriorating due to the heaviness and number of trucks, plus the drying out of the subsoils. I wonder what will the highway look like in a few years.

It’s just a second B trailer, the weight is distributed over 3 additional axles (12 total, including the truck).

I wonder if the roads have been made strong enough for the triples. Already the highways are deteriorating due to the heaviness and number of trucks, plus the drying out of the subsoils. I wonder what will the highway look like in a few years.

Get rid of Robyn Archer and Jeremy Lasek and build an f-cking train for our 100 year birthday.

Richard Bender6:41 pm 06 Jan 13

As a former frequent visitor to the NT, I never had any problems sharing the Stuart Highway with trucks pulling four trailers behind them. Sure, the Stuart Highway doesn’t see anywhere near as much traffic as the Hume, but it’s also not a dual carriageway so you have to think about overtaking, especially in the days when oncoming traffic could be moving at 160km/h+. What’s the problem with B-triples on the Hume?

Switch is on the money.

The double handling required to transfer from road to rail and back again ensures goods transport for distances less than a couple of thousand k’s are cheaper by road.

Hence the move to almost universal road transport down the East Coast.

However, there is no way the heavy transport industry pays anything like the costs they impose on the road system. If nothing but cars used our roads, they would never need maintenance.

A charge per tonne/kilometre would solve the problem, but would be political suicide.

switch said :

gasman said :

Trucks are extremely inefficient ways to carry large volumes of cargo. Rail is far more efficient (by a factor of at least 3), and once the infrastructure is in place, far less expensive. More goods on rail means less trucks on the roads.

No argument with any of that really, but B triples on the Hume are not going to be used for transporting >10k tonne loads of coal or iron ore. Instead they’ll be used for packages, petrol and containers, loads where rail failed and withdrew from years ago thanks to all the double handling and delays involved. People want their stuff NOW, not in two or three weeks like the old mail trains used to provide.

This.

It’s the double (and triple if the source warehouse / factory isn’t located near rail) handling that really does kill it.

You can’t back a freight train into your local Woolworths and start unloading palettes, there is double handling at a local transport depot and distribution by smaller vehicles required… that’s more people to feed and infrastructure to support in your supply chain.

Exhibit A:
Failed rail freight distribution depot http://goo.gl/Zq3JG

I’m a huge supporter of rail personally, but direct comparison between the two when one provides an end to end delivery solution while the other only provides arterial links doesn’t really show anything.

gasman said :

Trucks are extremely inefficient ways to carry large volumes of cargo. Rail is far more efficient (by a factor of at least 3), and once the infrastructure is in place, far less expensive. More goods on rail means less trucks on the roads.

No argument with any of that really, but B triples on the Hume are not going to be used for transporting >10k tonne loads of coal or iron ore. Instead they’ll be used for packages, petrol and containers, loads where rail failed and withdrew from years ago thanks to all the double handling and delays involved. People want their stuff NOW, not in two or three weeks like the old mail trains used to provide.

milkman said :

A most Canberran of whinges.

You’re wrong. This is not about Canberra per se. It is about safety and utility of our road system.

Yes, the OP certainly over-egged his story, and like many, I believe that the vast proportion of truckies are safe and diligent drivers.

But none of our governments have the balls to take on the extremely powerful trucking lobbies and do something about our rail systems.

The greatest mistake Australia has made, in the widest possible way of looking at things, is neglecting our rail networks. Even the NBN is a pimple on the bum, compared with the productivity, safety, and other economic and social gains of maintaining a viable rail system.

So the OP is right, if somewhat misguided in the way in which he has presented his arguments.

I’m with the OP on this one, although I wouldn’t say it was 90% of truck drivers that are nongs. I’ve seen plenty of supposedly professional drivers do dumb things out there. It’s by no means all of them, or even more than half, but any percentage of poor driving behind the wheel of any vehicle – especially a freaking big vehicle – is a scary thing. It only takes one substandard driver behind the wheel of a b-double to do a hell of a lot of damage. Now imagine that guy behind the wheel of a b-triple.

My other objection to this insane proposal is that it’s just stupidly inefficient.What is a b-triple? It’s an engine with a bunch of freight carriages behind it. Uh, guys, we have those already – they’re called TRAINS, and they run on tracks which they don’t have to share with lots of other vehicles. What’s next, b-quadruples? B-pentuples? Until we have actual truck-trains on the roads with us? Sheesh.

This proposal is about bigger profits for the guys who run big trucking companies – this way they move more freight using less drivers is all. Why pay two guys to ship your freight when you can pay one? They’ve been using the term ‘productivity’ in the media any time this topic comes up, and that has become code for paying people less to do more. The freight companies don’t give a bugger about efficiency or public safety; it’s a profit motive pure and simple.

I suggest we all get off our lazy arses and start harassing the government and private companies to get behind the railways. It’s more efficient to run freight on rail and we are a pretty stoopid country if we can’t see that – as well as being a sh*tload safer for everyone involved.

“you have got to wonder how such an idiotic decision could be made. “

Not at all. Successive governments have been wholly-owned subsidiaries of the transport industry for a long time.

PrinceOfAles said :

I do agree with you that rail is the best solution for freight and people, however the political will to spend on rail is just not there.

Political will = public will.

We have no political will to get rail as a major form of transport in Australia because there is no public knowledge or support.

Trucks are extremely inefficient ways to carry large volumes of cargo. Rail is far more efficient (by a factor of at least 3), and once the infrastructure is in place, far less expensive. More goods on rail means less trucks on the roads.

As an added side benefit, once the infrastructure is in place for rail goods transport, it can be used for commuting as well, at a fraction of the cost and carbon of car and plane travel.

Of course, its that huge initial infrastructure expense that is the stumbling block for governments. Its something that can’t be put in place within one government term. And something that reaps benefits in the long term, not short term. Our system of government and voting patterns are rigged against large infrastructure projects.

Europe is putting in more and more rail systems, recognising the long-term cost benefits, improved road safety and decreased carbon emissions.

Infographic: http://thumbnails.visually.netdna-cdn.com/the-environmental-benefits-of-freight-rail_5029199255978.png

A most Canberran of whinges.

460cixy said :

PrinceOfAles said :

Your experiences with “idiot” truck drivers are very different from mine. 99.9% of the time I find them to be professional, safe and courteous. The only thing you will notice when b triples are introduced is that there will be fewer trucks on the highway at any one time. Or to put it another way you will not have to overtake a truck as often. You`re getting your panties in a twist over nothing. I do agree with you that rail is the best solution for freight and people, however the political will to spend on rail is just not there.

+1.

Dont let the truth get in the way of a good yarn. I used to see a chick down in Albury and was driving down every week for two years and had zero run ins with truck drivers

What about the chick, any run ins with her?

farnarkler said :

The worst will be when some underpowered sh*tbox with four passengers tries to overtake a B triple on the Hume whilst going up a hill. It’ll take the car half an hour to get past the truck.

this happens already

farnarkler said :

The worst will be when some underpowered sh*tbox with four passengers tries to overtake a B triple on the Hume whilst going up a hill. It’ll take the car half an hour to get past the truck.

Or a triple passing another triple…

You make some good points but ruin your argument with made up statistics. 90% Really?? 9 out of every 10 trucks are reckless maniacs? You might have been better off going with 5 or 10%.

I think the Hume Hwy would need to be 3 lanes the entire way for this to happen. Have you ever tried to pass a B Triple in high wind? It’s hard but doable out on a quiet outback road but in heavy traffic would be a nightmare. It’d be even worse if it was raining as well.

The worst will be when some underpowered sh*tbox with four passengers tries to overtake a B triple on the Hume whilst going up a hill. It’ll take the car half an hour to get past the truck.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd1:06 pm 06 Jan 13

Can we get another convey 😀

>> what about getting from their depots to the Hume Highway??
The same way as many B-doubles get to their destination, there will be a point somewhere near the end of the freeway where they can uncouple their trailers, and take them in to town one at a time.

PrinceOfAles said :

Your experiences with “idiot” truck drivers are very different from mine. 99.9% of the time I find them to be professional, safe and courteous. The only thing you will notice when b triples are introduced is that there will be fewer trucks on the highway at any one time. Or to put it another way you will not have to overtake a truck as often. You`re getting your panties in a twist over nothing. I do agree with you that rail is the best solution for freight and people, however the political will to spend on rail is just not there.

+1. Dont let the truth get in the way of a good yarn. I used to see a chick down in Albury and was driving down every week for two years and had zero run ins with truck drivers

In 18th Century England they were faced with the problem of supplying coal from the northern fields to a growing population in London. The problem was solved not by bigger wagons over inadequate roads but, realising that bulk supply was achieved best by developing a “pipeline”. Their pipeline was a system of canals which could, even at slow speeds, provide a continuous supply as input matched output. The canals were replaced by railways (leaving by the way, a superb recreational facility) which fulfilled the same purpose. Passengers were always an added glamorous extra. Until our freight movers can think of something better than the railways for bulk movement then let us not let the boys loose with their big toys.

Bobmac:

Like you, I don’t relish the idea of triples on the Hume as I also believe that it will be the start of them appearing on other roads, and, in particular, on roads that would only be marginally capable of handling them.

Unlike you, I have found truckies to be decidedly non-threatening and a damn sight more aware of what’s going on around them than a lot of motorists. Then again, I’m a regular driver between Canberra and Melbourne, and maybe the truckies on that run are better than the truckies on yours.

PrinceOfAles12:07 pm 06 Jan 13

Your experiences with “idiot” truck drivers are very different from mine. 99.9% of the time I find them to be professional, safe and courteous. The only thing you will notice when b triples are introduced is that there will be fewer trucks on the highway at any one time. Or to put it another way you will not have to overtake a truck as often. You`re getting your panties in a twist over nothing. I do agree with you that rail is the best solution for freight and people, however the political will to spend on rail is just not there.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.