AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

LETTER OF THE WEEK

16th June 2011, Page 18
16th June 2011
Page 18
Page 18, 16th June 2011 — LETTER OF THE WEEK
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Calm down, longer semi trailers are no big deal

IT WAS interesting to read in CM of the scare mongering and paranoia emanating from various corners of the industry and country regarding longer semi-trailers, so let’s try to apply a little common sense and quell the lames of hysteria.

Firstly, if introduced, they are not compulsory, so if operators don’t want to use them they don’t have to, but it doesn’t mean that they should not be available for those that wish to.

Secondly, the age old moans and groans about job losses and redundancies every time there is a hint of increased weight or length never materialises.

Thirdly, although they are longer, they will have the same turning circle as current 13.6m semi-trailers, and therefore will not require any more road space for turning. They will only require marginally more room for manoeuvring when reversing.

We should all learn from Dick Denby (pictured) and embrace this proposal as a positive move for the haulage industry. It would go some way to addressing the commercial imbalance being experienced by UK hauliers by the invasion of the foreign hauliers plying their trade on the UK road network, who will in the interim still be restricted to 13.6m trailers on international journeys.

And inally, don’t forget that included in the proposal is an increase in the overall combination length to 18.75m, which opens the window of opportunity to inally allow ‘conventional’ (bonneted) tractor units to be used with 13.6m trailers.

This would beneit those hauliers who do not want or need to use longer trailers, as the aerodynamics of these tractors will offer some fuel eficiency beneits and aesthetics if nothing else.

On this issue, my feet are irmly in the Dick Denby camp and I will continue to provide a voice in favour of the ‘Denby’ combination, as the weights and lengths that are being proposed are already in operation in North America, Australia and closer to home in the Scandinavian countries.

Surely, it’s only a matter of time before our domestic and European legislators inally see common sense?

Kevin Buck Essex


comments powered by Disqus