train crossing truck driver
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: Daryl Walford on 9 Jun 2007 09:46 jonz wrote: > was NOT a b double The clueless media fuckwits seem to be calling all large trucks B doubles these days. A quote from his boss said he was carrying 14 tonne of chipboard which wouldn't even overload my single drive DAF. Daryl
From: Daryl Walford on 9 Jun 2007 10:25 Michael wrote: > Daryl Walford wrote: >> Noddy wrote: >>> "Daryl Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message >>> news:136k3cmqv8uhrcc(a)corp.supernews.com... >>> >>>> Is that what the driver is saying caused the crash? >>>> If so I don't buy it, I can understand not seeing the actual train >>>> but not seeing the flashing warning lights because of the sun is >>>> difficult to believe. >>> >>> It is indeed. >>> >>> Given the geography it's difficult to believe that Ray Charles >>> couldn't have seen the train coming five minutes before it got to the >>> crossing. >>> >>>> My guess is he wasn't concentrating enough but that said a truck >>>> driver needs lot of distance to stop so IMO there should be extra >>>> warning flashing lights at least 200mtrs before crossings like that >>>> where the speed limit is high or alternatively speed limits on the >>>> approach to level crossings should be reduced or maybe a combination >>>> of both. >>> >>> The story in this morning's paper (Herald Sun) seemed to be >>> suggesting that he presumed he was going to beat the train over the >>> crossing but bailed out at the last minute when he realised he wasn't >>> going to make it. There's also been plenty of suggestion recently >>> that such practices are relatively common in country areas as some >>> truck drivers would rather take the risk than have to stop and waste >>> ten minutes going through 18 gears to get back up to speed. >>> >> 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. >> >>> It's *way* over time for tachographs to be mandatory in all heavy >>> vehicles. >> >> 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. >> The DAF has some sort of tachograph system fitted as standard but >> AFAIK no one looks at the data, I don't know if it even works. >> A lot of the trucks in our fleet, especially the interstaters have the >> GPS system fitted, the older DAF I used to drive has it but for some >> reason mine doesn't. >> One of our drivers does weekend work for Linfox doing supermarket >> deliveries, apparently they have been told they are not allowed to >> exceed 1800rpm in the MB Actross's, they must have a tracking system >> or tachograph installed because the fleet controllers know if the >> drivers disobey the no more than 1800rpm rule and they get a warning >> if they do it too often. >> >> >> >> Daryl > They couldn't do that from the oil usage? Please explain? Daryl
From: Michael on 9 Jun 2007 10:42 hoot wrote: >> Uh, missed the point, well, simply, you have what is called a depot, call >> it for sake Big W. Now the telly's get delivered by rail to Big W. Ok the >> product is at Big W. Now you either get the customer to pick up the tv >> from the store, or, use a small delivery truck to deliver it, locally. >> I think you missed my point, or am I being obtuse? >> Mick C > > Uh, yes missed the point, or just ignored it because it doesn't fit your > argument. > > There are three Big W stores within half hour drive of my house and not one > of them has a train line running past thier loading dock. > > You wrote "Ok the product is at Big W" > How did it get there? > > H > > > 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
From: Michael on 9 Jun 2007 10:48 Noddy wrote: > "Michael" <mickpc(a)bigpond.com> wrote in message > news:D8rai.10865$wH4.8747(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... > >> Uh, missed the point, well, simply, you have what is called a depot, call >> it for sake Big W. Now the telly's get delivered by rail to Big W. Ok the >> product is at Big W. Now you either get the customer to pick up the tv >> from the store, or, use a small delivery truck to deliver it, locally. >> I think you missed my point, or am I being obtuse? > > You're being ignorant. > > Very few department chains have depots with cooee of rail yards, and despite > what you or anyone else thinks it *ain't* cheap to run rail networks all > over the place to alleviate road transport. > > The real short answer is that if rail transport was a viable alternative it > would be used more often than it is. The reality is that it's not cheaper at > all, is slower, and involves more handling & cost than simply loading a > truck at one end and unloading it at the other. > > -- > Regards, > Noddy. > > Ok I will really spell it out to. From port (containerization)>warehouse(rail)>rail to local depot>by light truck to store>from store to customer via light truck. See any need for a semi? What is needed to fill in the gaps is the proper used of logistics. I didn't say it would be easy, but could you build a car easy? Australian cars are a hell of a lot better than they used to be. We need to do this for the rail network, passenger as well. Mick C
From: Noddy on 9 Jun 2007 10:49
"Michael" <mickpc(a)bigpond.com> wrote in message news:TMxai.11037$wH4.1330(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... > Comical, I doubt many trains drivers would be hopped up on crack, or > whatever you think they might be on. > I have never taken drugs when working for someone. The risk of loosing > your job is to great. > The same cannot be said for owner drivers unfortunately. I'm sure it can't. > I cannot tell if you are being overly sarcastic, utterly obtuse or just > plain arrogant, perhaps you should post and tell us why your being smart? I didn't think I was. I'm just finding it a tad bizarre that some people are intend on defending a bloke who seems to me to be so obviously guilty of an act of incredible stupidity. If that offends you (or anyone else), then so be it, but I can't see it any other way. -- Regards, Noddy. |