From: Kev on 9 Jun 2007 13:38
Daryl Walford wrote:
> Noddy wrote:
>> "Daryl Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message
>>> If true thats bloody stupid, IMO it would be better to have make
>>> vehicles slow down when approaching a level crossing.
>>> I don't know if the rule still exists but passenger coaches used to
>>> have to "come to a complete stop and engage first gear" before
>>> entering a level crossing, IMO thats a bit extreme but its got to be
>>> safer than going through a crossing at 100kph.
>>> There are better technologies around these days like GPS tracking, at
>>> any time who ever is controlling the system can find out where a
>>> vehicle is, how fast its going and even what gear its in and the
>>> engine rpm.
>> Yeah, but do they give you a past history like a data recorder?
> I believe they can although I've never seen one working apart from a
> demo I saw on the net a while ago.
>> My understanding of tachographs is that they log data for 24hours, and
>> the disks can be pulled out and read by handheld reader.
> The one in my DAF looks like a CD player, I know its connected into the
> system somehow because you need to use the buttons on the it to adjust
> the clock display in the tacho.
> They are probably standard on Euro trucks but I don't recall seeing one
> in any of the other trucks I've driven.
We have them in the Volvos
they are a cassette type deal
you load up 7 cards(one weeks worth) into the cartridge and push it in
it will record things like speed, engine revs, brake activation against
time over a 24hour period per card
they need someone trained how to read them and it's very time consuming
so they are not very widely used and are limited in their use, mostly
we had sat tracking at Caltex and at my previous company
it's a satellite system that can record what ever you like and even send
messages back and foward if the optional console is fitted(caltex)
the probelm with these systems are that they can be used in evidence
against you but they can't be used in your defence(in a law coart)
as for the 1800rpm limit
Troncs Carrying used to have a 1900prm limit, which was against the
manufacturers limits, like using the engine brake on steep hills, the
engine manufacturer states to run the engine up to 2100rpm to achieve
max engine braking
and also the 1900rpm limit meant staying in a lower gear(opposite what
the company wanted to save fuel) when climbing steep hills because you
needed to go higher so that after a gear change you still have enough
revs to pull away
From: hoot on 9 Jun 2007 13:45
> Yes I said 60,000, care to prove me wrong???? look it up, you have access
> to the net, if you don't have the time say so and I will do it for you,
> atm I have the time.
> I know it seems amazing at first glance, but when you some factors into
> account it isn't so hard to believe, remember the square law from high
> school for a start, eg 10^2 = 100, 1000^4 = 10000000
Could you please show your working for this "1000^4 = 10000000"
> Mick C
> Remember my name, yes that is my name, and never accuse me of posting
> without understanding what I am saying again, at your own peril.
> Please beware of the dog.
From: Clockmeister on 9 Jun 2007 19:32
"DJ" <mrjay1(a)bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> clockmeister wrote:
>> Slamming into the side of a train was certainly effective but didn't get
>> the load to it's intended destination.
>> Fuckwits shouldn't be on the road, fullstop. Truck driving is supposed to
>> be a professional occupation after all...
> One of the biggest problems is that there is a major shortage of drivers
> in the fastest growing industry in Australia and many companies will
> overlook discrepancies of driving records even though one of the major
> requirements is a current driving record from the relevent departments
> eg.RTA, and medicals. proving you have a HC or better still an MC licence,
> you are usually snapped up by an employer these days as nobody wants these
> jobs any longer due to the mad and confusing legislations and over zealous
> law enforcement officers wanting to UP his tally.
> Secondly, you have a very powerful retail sector as some of those have
> been mentioned here that are involved with retail and they want their
> stuff yesterday,not today, so therefore the rail is no where near
> efficient in many cases when you can have a B-double deliver goods to a
> wharehouse say from Syd- Melb or Syd- Bris and especially melb - Bris, as
> a train will usually take about 2-3 times longer to get to the
> destination.then it has to be sorted and distributed.
> Now given that about 95-99% of stuff you'll find in supermarkets,variety
> stores and dept stores are imported, as soon as the container is released
> from the wharves, it will go by truck and the trailers are generally
> unhitched and left at a customer's dock till it has been emptied then the
> trailer will be taken away again and taken to a container park to be
> de-hired or the container willl be taken to a transport wharehouse, will
> be hand or forklift unloaded, stored untill needed by customer then sent
> via curtainsider (tautliner) or other trailer types to be delivered to
> customer who in turn uses product themselves or distributes their own.
> A friend of mine who has his own shipping and frieght forwarding company
> in Sydney has told me that some customers are willing to pay up to $3k to
> have a 1 x 40' container brought up from Melb to Syd by truck rather than
> train due to the time it takes so they can keep their customer as
> sometimes the ship may not stop at Syd from the containers origin.
> So, yeah...when they say without trucks, Australia stops, it's not too far
> off the mark!!
All very valid points, but no judge is going to buy that as a defense for
slamming a truck into the side of a train.
> It's just the way it is and probably will be for a long time to come.
Yep, the culture of "She'll be right, mate", feet dragging and red tape
creating is catching up with Australia...
Time to kick some arsses are raise the efficiency of the workforce in
general, there are simply too many people doing too little IMO.
From: Clockmeister on 9 Jun 2007 19:53
"Diesel Damo" <Diesel_4WD(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> On Jun 9, 11:20 am, Stuart Naylor <n...(a)none.invalid> wrote:
>> The sort that has the sun in their eyes?
> Didn't this happen some time between 1 and 2 pm? Why was he looking up
> at the sky and not at the road?
On drugs looking for the bright light?
He couldn't see it so he used a train to turn his rig into an open top.
From: XR8 Sprint on 9 Jun 2007 20:07
> Hey mate, there is more to Australia than your suburb, ever been past
> the city limits?
> This is where the accident occurred.
> Where I live is three hours from Melb, now tell me that you couldn't
> service that with rail.
> And if you read my earlier post I *did* mention that most traffic is
> between capital city's.
> Mick C
Whilst you are a strong advocate of rail transport, there are a number
of factors that need to be considered when looking at rail and road
transport. I spent 11 years as a transport officer within a rail
organization so have a fair idea what I am talking about. One of the
issues with rail transport is that lack of duplicated lines due to cost
factors therefore trains often sit at sidings waiting to cross other
trains, which takes time and makes them inefficient.
Secondly there are numerous times when due to weather conditions trains
cannot run or can only run at reduced speed. Eg in North West Queensland
when the temperature reaches above 35 degrees most trains are reduced to
running at 60km/h or lower depending on how badly the track is buckling.
The issue occurs due to the fact that the ground temperature can often
reach above 60 degrees, and traditional wooden sleepers were partially
replaced with steel sleepers due to the prevalence of termites in the
areas which chew through wood at a great rate. The steel sleepers
themselves start to buckle in the high heat. Nowadays most sleepers are
being replaced with concrete sleepers, however there are still issues
with those as well. This does not even take into account that when there
is flooding, track damage can be quite severe and take days to repair.
Thirdly when there is an derailment with a train which can occur due to
any number of factors, the time taken to restore the track to working
condition can be anything from a few hours to several days. In this time
nothing can move on that line.
Fourthly, because of the stupidity of early governments, we have the
situation that between Queensland, NSW, and Victoria are three different
size rail systems. Queensland uses 3 foot six, New South Wales uses 4
foot eight, and Victoria uses Five foot two. Queensland has one line
from New South Wales that uses 4 foot 8 to allow traffic between the
states, however once the containers reach Brisbane they have to be put
onto wagons that run on the 3 foot 6 guage.
I think that gives a fairly clear idea why our rail system is so
inefficient and is unable to be used for time dependent transport, the
amount of transhipping between the states is ridiculous.
It is also the reason why long haul road freight is so prevalent in this
country as it is able to be moved much faster and if one road is closed
due to an accident or is in need of repair there are many ways to get