48 tonnes HGV's for road-rail freight - good or bad?

[Cyclome]

Gov is proposing to trial 48 tonne HGVs for deliveries/collections of freight within 50 miles of rail terminals, using suitable routes. Normal limit is 44 tonnes.

Heavier intermodal freight trial: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/heavier-intermodal-freight-trial

It could encourage more long distance freight to be carried by rail rather than road (reducing pollution; reducing road danger).

But would heavier lorries pose an increased danger if cyclists share these routes?

Could it set a precedent for wider adoption of heavier vehicles?

[Cyril Haearn]

Madness, just an idea to help the motor industry

[Bmblbzzz]

I don't think weight alone would pose an increased danger to cyclists. Increased length or width would but that's unlikely to happen for intermodal traffic unless shipping containers change dimensions.

[Mike Sales]

Unless this extra weight is distributed between more axles it would cause considerably more road damage. Damage goes up as at least the fourth power of axle weight. From 44 to 48 would more than double the impact, if my rusty maths is correct.
Potholes etc. are complained of by drivers as well as riders, and I have read that HGVs do not cover their track costs at the moment.

[ANTONISH]

Unless this extra weight is distributed between more axles it would cause considerably more road damage. Damage goes up as at least the fourth power of axle weight. From 44 to 48 would more than double the impact, if my rusty maths is correct.
Potholes etc. are complained of by drivers as well as riders, and I have read that HGVs do not cover their track costs at the moment.

Your rusty maths is correct.
This gradual increase in overall weight and inevitably axle weight has been going on for decades.
There is usually some drivel from the authorities about overall benefit from reduced lorry journeys etc.
Given the state of the roads which has much to do with HGV damage we can look forward to many deeper and wider potholes.
The has never been any attempt by any government to limit HGV traffic to roads that have a substructure capable of withstanding their axle weight - in fact we don't seem able to build a new road to that capability.

[John Holiday]

Madness, as has already been pointed out .
Damage from these huge vehicles has been clearly proven.
Get more heavy distribution on rail, not road.
The poor visibility in many trucks has still not been addressed.

[Bmblbzzz]

Madness, as has already been pointed out .
Damage from these huge vehicles has been clearly proven.
Get more heavy distribution on rail, not road.
The poor visibility in many trucks has still not been addressed.

The idea, or at least supposed idea, is that this increased weight limit will apply only to intermodal traffic - containers transferred between rail and road. So the heavier lorries will be doing the first or last mile of a rail journey. Mode shifting causes delays and expenses so is generally only done where distances and loads are large, mostly between ship and some form of land transport. Finishing a rail journey by road is generally not worthwhile, at least in UK where distances are not so long. So you send stuff the whole way by road. It's cheaper and quicker. But by making transshipment easier, you increase the attractiveness of "road + rail" v "road only".

Of course it might also lead in the future to a general increase in permitted weights. However, it has not done in Netherlands and a few other countries where it's applied for several years.

[Pebble]

When we went from 38t to 44t (back in the late 90s) it was the same story, an increase introduced only for containers either going to or from a ship or rail head, within a year it became the standard for any journey. To operate at 44t wagons needed 6 axles and road friendly suspension (riding on air not steel springs) to meet the new regulations back then

Be interesting to see what they change this time to allow 48t. An automatic steering axle on the trailer? I doubt we will see a 7th axle so they will have to increase axle weights or become very clever at loading them. More road damage is a given.

[Cyril Haearn]

Best to apply the law to truck drivers, there would not be many left then
Did see one today not on the phone
She was eating

[tim-b]

Hi

When we went from 38t to 44t (back in the late 90s) it was the same story, an increase introduced only for containers either going to or from a ship or rail head, within a year it became the standard for any journey. To operate at 44t wagons needed 6 axles and road friendly suspension (riding on air not steel springs) to meet the new regulations back then
Be interesting to see what they change this time to allow 48t. An automatic steering axle on the trailer? I doubt we will see a 7th axle so they will have to increase axle weights or become very clever at loading them. More road damage is a given.

I'll also be interested to see how this one works. You could add another axle but this has various problems including an increase in empty weight, i.e less freight, especially if you make it a lifting axle to save fuel when underweight. Maybe they'll go to full air suspension and specified routes only
Regards
tim-b

[Cyril Haearn]

Trouble is, there is no enforcement to make sure they stay on designated routes, if those routes are closed they go anywhere else
Best to reduce maximum weight to 20 tonnes I think

[PH]

The idea, or at least supposed idea, is that this increased weight limit will apply only to intermodal traffic - containers transferred between rail and road. So the heavier lorries will be doing the first or last mile of a rail journey. Mode shifting causes delays and expenses so is generally only done where distances and loads are large, mostly between ship and some form of land transport. Finishing a rail journey by road is generally not worthwhile, at least in UK where distances are not so long. So you send stuff the whole way by road. It's cheaper and quicker. But by making transshipment easier, you increase the attractiveness of "road + rail" v "road only".

Yes, I agree with all of that, was about to write something similar.
It's a consultation and I'll be interested to see where it goes. Not sure if the extra weight of a container is restricting rail freight, many come from overseas and are collected from the port by road. As you say it is the transfers that are time consuming, there would have to be a financial advantage to using rail and even then I'm not sure we have the infrastructure to deal with it. I've also read that any rail infrastructure project has to demonstrate a cost benefit over a timescale that isn't applied to road building. Near me they're a huge new distribution park, East Midlands Gateway, most of the big players are already there, including Amazon, and they're still building. It has it's own rail freight depot, but my casual observation, from riding past it twice a day for three months, is that only a tiny percentage of the goods are coming in that way, despite the number of containers arriving at the warehouses.

[Pebble]

Hi

When we went from 38t to 44t (back in the late 90s) it was the same story, an increase introduced only for containers either going to or from a ship or rail head, within a year it became the standard for any journey. To operate at 44t wagons needed 6 axles and road friendly suspension (riding on air not steel springs) to meet the new regulations back then
Be interesting to see what they change this time to allow 48t. An automatic steering axle on the trailer? I doubt we will see a 7th axle so they will have to increase axle weights or become very clever at loading them. More road damage is a given.

I'll also be interested to see how this one works. You could add another axle but this has various problems including an increase in empty weight, i.e less freight, especially if you make it a lifting axle to save fuel when underweight. Maybe they'll go to full air suspension and specified routes only
Regards
tim-b

They're all on air suspension now, can't run at 44t without being on road friendly suspension and the vast vast majority of that is air.

We may well be just going to 48t to make up for the ever increasing unladen weights. Back when when top weight was 32t pay loads were around 21t Now at 44t they are struggling to carry much more than 25t. 12 tonne more wagon for 4 or 5 ton more load.

Unladen weights are forever increasing - Tag and mid lift axles are heavy but save big on fuel when unloaded , then there is the sheer power, engineering and safety features that goes into modern lorries, all of which have a weight penalty, then the anti pollution devices, I read recently some of the big V8s have 620kg of anti pollution devices attached to the engine.

I do hope they improve the design of lorries to accommodate heavier gross vehicle weights , hopefully with self steer axles on the tri-axle trailers. But in reality they may not need do anything. You could easily run a current 44 tonner at 48t and not exceed any max axle weights. In fact with a 6x4 unit pulling a tri-axle trailer you could possibly get to 54t (7t steering axle + 23t over the drive + 24t on the triple trailer axles) and not be overloaded on any single axle.

Trouble is, there is no enforcement to make sure they stay on designated routes, if those routes are closed they go anywhere else
Best to reduce maximum weight to 20 tonnes I think

We would nearly need to triple the amount of them on the road - what we need is to stop consuming as much as we do, the haulage industry is only meeting the demands of our excessive and greedy lifestyles.

totally agree with you on the lack of enforcement, I think we have stopped policing our roads, speeding of HGVs in this area is just the norm, we're still at 40mph for HGVs in Scotland, but many just drive on their limiters at 56.

[Cyril Haearn]

I thought Eddie Stobart revolutionised the industry by getting loads on the way home as well as the way out

[Bmblbzzz]

We may well be just going to 48t to make up for the ever increasing unladen weights. Back when when top weight was 32t pay loads were around 21t Now at 44t they are struggling to carry much more than 25t. 12 tonne more wagon for 4 or 5 ton more load.

Unladen weights are forever increasing - Tag and mid lift axles are heavy but save big on fuel when unloaded , then there is the sheer power, engineering and safety features that goes into modern lorries, all of which have a weight penalty, then the anti pollution devices, I read recently some of the big V8s have 620kg of anti pollution devices attached to the engine.

I do hope they improve the design of lorries to accommodate heavier gross vehicle weights , hopefully with self steer axles on the tri-axle trailers. But in reality they may not need do anything. You could easily run a current 44 tonner at 48t and not exceed any max axle weights. In fact with a 6x4 unit pulling a tri-axle trailer you could possibly get to 54t (7t steering axle + 23t over the drive + 24t on the triple trailer axles) and not be overloaded on any single axle.

Sounds like the best way to reduce unladen weights - not yet viable except for urban goods, but give it time - is going to be electric propulsion. Electric motors plus batteries tend to be lighter than diesel engines plus fuel for the same output and it removes at a stroke all the anti-pollution devices (while still being much cleaner).