daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old July 6th, 2009, 03:44 PM   #221
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

European trucks for city distribution usually have steering real axles to prevent that

More axles / wheels = less damage to the pavement.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old July 6th, 2009, 05:26 PM   #222
Jeroen669
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 787
Likes (Received): 13

Quote:
Originally Posted by nerdly_dood View Post
That truck's trailers have so many tires... There should only be two sets of tires, with a stout under-frame if necessary, because going around curves like that wears down the extra tires much more quickly than having only sets of 2 like we use in the USA.

That particular truck has 3 sets of tires in the cab, 3 sets of tires on the first trailer (including the joiner-gadget linking it to the second one - the connector thing isn't articulated so i count it as part of what it doesn't bend relative to), and FIVE!! sets of tires on the last trailer. American tractor-trailers with multiple-trailer setups usually have 2 or 3 axles on the tractor, one axle on each trailer and one on the joiny-thing (which IS usually articulated relative to both trailers.) True, this is likely a result of most toll booths charging trucks by the number of axles, but it still saves a LOT of wear on the tires, which in the end saves a lot of wasted rubber.
It's not as inefficient as it looks. It's difficult to see on this video, but the middle 2 axles on the last trailer are torn up, so there are actually "only" 9 axles driving.

Normal sea container chassis' have 3 axles here, but they can be added with one or two extra axles, allowing it to have a total weight (including truck) of 60 tonnes with one 40ft container. (watch the back of a sea container, there's always a payload on it) Since this combination has an extra 20ft container, that weight won't be allowed. But it makes the chassis more flexible, and explains the high number of axles. Also since there's an extra difficulty with sea containers: you can't see if it's well loaded (truck driver isn't allowed to open it before he is at the customer).

Normal 25 meter combinations have only 7 or 8 axles. Like this one:


Last edited by Jeroen669; July 6th, 2009 at 05:39 PM.
Jeroen669 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 6th, 2009, 05:58 PM   #223
Jeroen669
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 787
Likes (Received): 13

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo View Post
On long distances and on with routes with a lot of traffic. This should be the domain of trains instead.
Trains are for the majority of goods too slow, too expensive or too inflexible.
Jeroen669 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 6th, 2009, 11:30 PM   #224
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

Here's a double tanker on I-80 in Nevada.


tankers do not always carry dangerous goods though, they can also carry milk or other food products.

You will find these number combinations on the back and front of ADR trucks (Hazardous Materials). 33 means highly inflammable.

1203 means the good carried, I believe 1203 is gasoline, but I'm not sure. 1202 is Diesel I believe
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old July 8th, 2009, 10:42 PM   #225
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

Long trucks are occasionaly used to distribute goods to supermarkets. Usually, these trucks cannot reach supermarkets due to narrow and winding streets, but some Jumbo's are on good locations.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old July 16th, 2009, 12:48 PM   #226
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

two news items from the Netherlands

* Theft of trucks and cargo went up 40% in the first half of 2009
* Fraud with the digital tachograph is increasingly common + 1/3rd of the trucks had some amount of overweight.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old July 16th, 2009, 05:23 PM   #227
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 768

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeroen669 View Post
Trains are for the majority of goods too slow, too expensive or too inflexible.
Too expensive because...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Fraud with the digital tachograph is increasingly common + 1/3rd of the trucks had some amount of overweight.
...trucks don't pay all their costs.
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2009, 03:58 PM   #228
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 768

Modal split for freight transport, metric ton*km, in %.

Country Road Rail Boats* Pipelines
Italy - 88 - 8.2 - 0.1 - 3.7
Sweden 61.8 - 38.2 - -
The Netherlands 47.3 - 3.9 - 42.7 - 6.1
Austria 39.9 - 37.2 - 5.6 - 17.3

(*) = internal waterways (rivers, canals, etc), without short sea shipping
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2009, 04:03 PM   #229
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

I think it might also be interesting to look at the modal split for different goods. Bulk (commodities like coal, grain, fuels etc.) is often transported by large vessels or trains, but other stuff is usually transported by truck.

That's why you can't just simply state that the amount of trucks can be reduced by stimulating rail freight.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2009, 05:19 PM   #230
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 768

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
That's why you can't just simply state that the amount of trucks can be reduced by stimulating rail freight.
No, it can't. But often european railways have lost traffic for their inefficency, not because road is better.

Intermodal transport should be more used, and if possible the amount of goods reduced. Because of the crisis, road traffic between Italy and Europe fell down by 20-25% on average from the beginning of 2009.

http://www.hupac.com/en/index.php?p=pubb_depliant&ml=2
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2009, 08:19 PM   #231
Jeroen669
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 787
Likes (Received): 13

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo View Post
Too expensive because...

...trucks don't pay all their costs.
You think trucks aren't expensive enough already?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo
Modal split for freight transport, metric ton*km, in %.
So what does that say? Some countries are just more fit for certain ways of transport than the others. Switserland/Austria is more of a political issue, though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo
But often european railways have lost traffic for their inefficency, not because road is better.
Efficiency is something that is attached by companies. If companies think it's the most cost-efficient way to transport products by a certain kind of way, why want to block that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo
Intermodal transport should be more used, and if possible the amount of goods reduced.
Intermodal transport is often not efficient since overcharge is too expensive, especially when it has to be charged on trains. You could think it should be more used, but that says nothing. Overcharge only works on transports for very long distances and with huge volumes. (e.g. sea ship/barge or sea ship/truck)
Jeroen669 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2009, 10:24 PM   #232
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 768

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeroen669 View Post
You think trucks aren't expensive enough already?
Yes I do:
http://www.uvek.admin.ch/dokumentati...t&msg-id=18667
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/e...default_en.htm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeroen669 View Post
So what does that say? Some countries are just more fit for certain ways of transport than the others. Switzerland/Austria is more of a political issue, though.
It is exactly what I wanted to say: each country I listed has more traffic of one type than the others: Sweden use a lot its railways, The Netherlands its waterways.

38% of rail share in Sweden and Austria, or 42 by waterways in The Netherlands, cannot probably be reached in other countries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeroen669 View Post
Efficiency is something that is attached by companies. If companies think it's the most cost-efficient way to transport products by a certain kind of way, why want to block that?
The cheapest way is not always the best (also for environmental reasons) ==> in the last 30 years freight traffic exploded, with a lot of useless transports (like Italian rubbish recycled in egrmany or Austrian rubbish burnt in Switzerland) ==> transalpine traffic (rail&road) was 98 million of tonnes in 1986, and 173 millions in 2007.

Anyway, road is not always the cheapest choice: I know of a traffic going from France to Spain by road via the Somport tunnel, after wich is charged on trains because it is cheaper.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeroen669 View Post
Intermodal transport is often not efficient since overcharge is too expensive, especially when it has to be charged on trains. You could think it should be more used, but that says nothing. Overcharge only works on transports for very long distances and with huge volumes. (e.g. sea ship/barge or sea ship/truck)
Sorry, what do you mean with "overcharge"? The extra cost to transfer goods?

Intermodal transport is not adapted to transport over short distances (that form usually the greatest par of traffic), but would be a good option also for environmental and traffic reasons over long distances (Spain-Germany, Italy-Benelux, ...).
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2009, 11:09 PM   #233
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 768

From http://www.alpine-initiative.ch/:

Quote:
Absurd transport
We increasingly consume products which come from further and further afield. The transport of these goods causes traffic that could very often be avoided. Scandinavian shellfish that are peeled in Morocco and then sold in our supermarkets, or Italian waste that crosses the Alps to be burned in Germany are only two examples from an endless list. Moreover, the many empty lorry trips across the Alps also cause unnecessary traffic.
Quote:
November 2005 - Red Devils Stone for Trimmis incineration plant
In Eastern Switzerland, waste trucks cross each other heading in opposite directions. A number of trucks transport waste from Southern Germany to Trimmis in the Swiss canton of Graubünden. At the same time, the Oberengadin Waste Management Association exports its waste from Graubünden to Niederurnen, in the canton of Glarus. The Trimmis incinerator also burns waste from Ticino.
Quote:
October 2004 - Red Devil’s Stone for Délifrance SA
The Alpine Initiative regularly draws the public’s attention to absurd transport by awarding the “Red Devil’s Stone”. In 2004, this little-coveted prize is awarded to Délifrance SA. Délifrance bread is produced in the Netherlands and then transported to Swiss shops where it is baked.
Quote:
October 2003 - Red Devil’s Stone for Nestlé Waters
On 6 October 2003, activists of the Alpine Initiative present Nestlé Waters (Switzerland) with the Red Devil’s Stone at the company’s headquarters in Gland VD. Nestlé Water is a worldwide leader in the marketing of water and generates vast quantities of absurd transport by making profits out of water.
Quote:
October 2002 - Award of the Red Devil’s Stone
The Swiss supermarkets Migros and Coop transport their whipped cream up to 2,000 km to have it packaged into spray cans (to Italy and Belgium). This nonsensical transport wins the Alpine Initiative’s first “Red Devil’s Stone” award.
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2009, 11:26 PM   #234
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

Apparantly, even with the high fuel prices in Europe, it's still profitable.

I agree though, that empty drives should be avoided at all cost. That's why they invented the "cabotage". That way, a Dutch trucker can transport goods within France, or Belgium, or whatever country to optimize efficiency, and reduce empty mileage. Some countries are against cabotage though, to protect their domestic trucking industry.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2009, 08:13 AM   #235
mgk920
Nonhyphenated-American
 
mgk920's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Appleton, WI USA
Posts: 2,583
Likes (Received): 68

Another big thing with the difference between rail and truck in Europe vs North America is the extreme inefficiency of the railroad car coupling standards used in Europe. European 'buffer and chain' couplers are extremely labor-intensive to use and severely limit the effective length and weight of trains - requiring much more time and labor to operate in order to handle the same volume of freight compared with the AAR couplers used here.

It is not unusual at all for freight trains, including fast intermodal (trailers and/or containers) trains, here in North America to approach *3 km* in length.

Mike
mgk920 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2009, 08:42 AM   #236
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 768

American railways are (mostly) freight only, or with only 1 or 2 passenger trains per day. European mainlines have usually more than one passenger train per hour, that usually have precedence on freight, so that they run slowly.
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2009, 09:12 AM   #237
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

Exactly, there is no room for an significant expansion of rail freight. You would need a secondary network in many places, just like the High Speed Rail.

To give you an idea of the cost; the 150km Betuwe railroad (freight only) cost 5 billion euros for only 150km through flat and mostly open and non-populated terrain.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2009, 02:50 PM   #238
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

This is the Scania assembly plant in Zwolle, the Netherlands (my hometown). Over half of all Scania's produced in the world are build here, over 20,000 per year. The plant has 1,500 employees and is the largest industrial employer in the region. 2006 saw the 400,000th Scania being assembled here.

image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2009, 02:55 PM   #239
x-type
con los terroristas
 
x-type's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bjelovar [HR]
Posts: 13,474
Likes (Received): 3449

and DAF's? they are partially< Dutch company, right? but i don't know where are they assembled
x-type no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2009, 03:04 PM   #240
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

DAF was originally Dutch, but has been taken over by American paccar in the 1990's. Their main plant is in Eindhoven.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium