Here's a heads-up on an interesting news story in the next edition of Commercial Motor out on Thursday. It relates to Longer Heavier Vehicles (or 25.25m long modular trucks as the Swdes insist on calling them). It seems that following a pan-European research project commissioned by the European Commission an official review of the greater use of LHvs throughout the EU will be conducted later this year. Why? Because, surprise, surprise, the researchers found that 25.25m long 60-tonners are more cost-effective than current HGVs---transporting more tonnes per km with fewer vehicles. Well blow me down. It also adds that the increased use of LHVs would also reduce CO2 emissions too (on the grounds that the level of C02 emissions/per tonne carried drops when you increase gross weights). Well that''s probably why the super green Swedes like them---and are prepared to put on even more weight too (See previous Biglorryblog posts on the Super Logger 'One more Pile' concept currently being tested by the Swedish logging industry.)
You'll find the full story in this week's CM. Although naturally even if the EC wants to extend the use of LHVs it will require the approval of the EU Council of Ministers and the European Parliament. So expect the UK to throw a spanner in the works or at least demand a pathetic 'derogation' as the DfT (then the DTp) did back in the late 80s when it came to adopting the EU harmonised 40-tonne weight limit for trucks---which kept heavier trucks off our roads for 10 years. But in the end we got them, just like we got 44-tonners and the reason why? The more you can put on a single truck the greater the efficiency of it. But then we all know that don't we.... Now click through here for more....
Naturally the railfreight lobby has kicked up a stink about the report---you'd have thought it would have bigger things to worry about. Like the problems it faces competing for UK track space against the passenger train operators! And as for the DfT? Well it's still foottling about over longer semi-trailers but as for 25.25m LHVs----crickey no! Yet I suspect it's not the DfT's civil servants who are the thrombosis to LHVs...it's ministers. But then why do anything that might upset the voters..even if it's good for them? And if you don't think LHVs can provide the benefits that BLB and other think they can provide...simple. Let's prove it in limited practical trials as the Dutch have done. As the great Boeing test pilot Tex Johnstone said: "One test is worth 1,000 expert opinions." You said it Tex!
Meanwhile what do other BLB readers think. Should we trial LHVs or leave well alone?
Bring on the trial I say! If they stick to the main trunk routes there is no issue with them that I can see. As a hub to hub method I think they would be very successful.
Surely any idiot can see that in certain applications these could be beneficial.
I'm sure they could invent plenty of red tape to regulate there usage and restrict operators.