AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

1. Loads, costs and revenue factors

5th February 1971
Page 74
Page 75
Page 74, 5th February 1971 — 1. Loads, costs and revenue factors
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?

by David Lowe, MInstTA The operational pros and cons of drawbar outfit versus artic; the problem of obtaining bigger revenues if bigger vehicles are allowed; the likelihood that operating costs of 6s 6d a mile would make the 44-tonner a rare beast; the caution needed in specifying vehicles plated above the present limits—these are among the planning factors examined in this article

WITH no early prospect of an increase it the 32-ton-gcw permitted maximum fo commercial vehicles (and no 30-ton eight wheelers or 24-ton six-wheelers) operator must now concentrate on achieving OD most efficient and productive results unde existing legislation, and can also take mon time to plan for the eventuality of highe legal weights.

There has been altogether too glib al assumption in some quarters that the whol industry was panting eagerly for 44-tonner and could make economic use of their In fact the overwhelmingly greater pre portion of operators are not directl interested in higher maxima, and the tor weight rise would have been of value t only a small section of the industry.

All the evidence available (to which will return later) suggests that to think c operating at up to 44 tons for artics an 56 tons for lorry-and-trailer combination would in any case demand a far mot cautious approach than was necessary whe naximum weights were upped to 16, 22 and 12 tons gross respectively for rigid four;lid six-wheelers and multi-axled artics in 1964.

The increases at that time did not demand oo much in the way of engineering changes, aid it was largely a case of the operator oaying a little extra for new vehicles, which oe was probably glad to do, to keep up with as competitors and gain the advantage of ncreased payloads. This was particularly rue of the rigid fourand six-wheeler operators, a lot of them tipper owners who umped at the extra two tons gross which lave them a legal ton or more's worth of evenue for every load carried.

Jnaccustomed as they were Operators of articulated vehicles were, in ;eneral, a little slower off the mark, many of hem taking tentative steps to the top weights ria 28-ton and 30-ton vehicles first. Some still .hoose to run vehicles at 26, 28 or 30 tons, me reason being that neither the operators nor their customers have been accustomed to thinking in terms of the new, larger load sizes. Customers in particular took a long time to become educated to think in terms of providing 10 tons for four-wheelers instead of 6 to 8 tons, and 20 tons for artics instead of 15 or 16. In the middle range of vehicles there was less of a problem because 22-ton gross six-wheelers simply began to carry loads very similar to those of the 24-ton eight-wheeler.

This load problem obviously did not affect those engaged in bulk traffics such as excavated materials, grain and liquids etc, as it did those offering individual consignments of steel, machinery, packed goods and sacked loads, for example. But the problem was understandable to a point, because the customer was not used to selling in these quantities either.

It has taken a long time to achieve this customer education—and until the customer is prepared to offer the compatible loads the operator may well not get full payload How profitable today?

Where operators are using maximumcapacity vehicles, they have today, at least in theory, a substantial revenueearning capacity in return for not-tooexhorbitant total operating costs. But all too often trade fluctuations, or poor forecasting of traffic, can cause reduced utilization and when a big vehicle is not earning, its standing costs can be a frightening drain on a firm's finances. Another too-common failing is the purchase of vehicles which are not really up to the arduous nature of the job, a false economy which usually results in high maintenance and running costs—and unco-operative drivers.

Driver attitudes can make the difference between profit and loss, even in fleets with little or no reliance on tramping revenue. They may also be the rock on which doubleshifting founders, however attractive that means of increasing utilization of capital may be.

Relatively few hauliers or own-account Operators make widespread use of the full principle of articulation by having two or three semi-trailers to each unit, so for most practical purposes the costing of artic operation relates to an articulated outfit that is seldom uncoupled.

Present-day maximum-capacity articulated vehicles need to' earn, according to the current edition of the CM Tables

Tags

People: David Lowe

comments powered by Disqus