Truck Driver Shortage

[jeaton]

And after all this fun, you might make 30k after expenses. Should we be surprized that the line of qualified applicants doesn't extend around the block?

[Anonymous]

Actually less than 30K. Ill ponder the subject and get back on this. It's time we talked pay. It is NOT what the recruits seem to think it would be.

[Anonymous]

Trucker pay for long haul is based on mileage pay. There are additional money generated by the truck that goes to the company. I believe tarriffs and negotiated rates per mile via contract to shippers and recievers apply here.

Trucking companies do a good job of keeping the drivers out of the room where rates are set on the loads. I suppose if a trio of Aluminum coil pays 2.30 a mile from Kentucky to Virginia they dont want the driver to know this rate. (HE probably made about .27 cents of that.)

Trucks are expensive to operate. Wanna own one and drive it too? Wal.. Insurance, fuel, payroll, permits etc etc etc infinite nasuem.... reckon about 1.10 a mile if you wanna keep solvent. Then you add in the profit margin you will make and then the driver's pay.

So I think most loads run 1.50 or so a mile. However time in the truckstops reading load boards for adhoc delieverys convinced me that loads sometime sell for maybe .78 cents a mile to the O/O (Owner operator) I could be wrong.

You will be expected to drive 500 miles a day. Sickness, persnal inability to sleep less than 8 hours, time management and other issues on the driver's part better not interfere with the strength or desire to run 500 miles a day.

Teams can do 1000 miles a day. I am being very conservative here. I have put away miles so high it is difficult to log it legal both as a single driver and as a team driver.

YOu probably will run about 7600 miles to 15,000 miles a month. Feast and famine as a single driver. Teams will put away at least 150,000 a year. My last full year as a team with the wife put about 230,000 on the truck which was less than 2 years old. This was in 10 months.

You will be paid according to Houshold Miles. Rand McNallys mileage guide the entire industry agrees to use.

Forget everything you know about how far it is from scraptown USA to Bumtown USA. According to the Household Guilde.. these two "Fantasy" destinations are 1000 miles apart.

Actual travel from the truckstop empty to the customer might get paid. Very little if any. The customer is 30 miles north of Scraptown. You dont get paid the mileage inside and around scraptown. You may find yourself running 1200 miles to get to Bumtown.

"Hey! You show me 1000 pay miles on my payroll check!! My truck shows 1500 miles on this trip!? You owe me 500 miles worth of PAY!!"

Sorry. You will be paid 1000 miles for the trip. If you have to unload boxes out of the truck on that delievery, you probably will be paid 40 dollars. 45,000 pounds require a good man with a strong back several hours to unload. (5-9 hours) You could hire two people called lumpers to do it.

Better keep them down as close to 60.00 as you can. Companies pay out "Lumper rates" at about .05 cents a case. If you have 1200 cases total weighing 45,000 pounds then the lumpers should accept a rate of about 60.00

Lumpers know these rates. They know what your company will pay. They have gotten more money than that out of your company before.

Pffth. Hire the darn lumpers and MAKE SURE dispatch says "OK" AND... get a Purchase ORDER number for that money. So they can make a comcheck, pay the lumpers and keep your pay safe.

If YOU cannot get OK for that money from dispatch and YOU hire the lumpers at 80.00 or whatever they ask for YOU will pay them. Not the company. You could try to redeem the lumper fee but the company probably will not reimburse you.

The best companies hire lumper companies on contract. You find the lumper office and say here is my load, unload me please. And it gots done. No money involved on the driver's part.

Dont get me started on walmarts. That is worth a whole another thread.

Food.

MMM...MMM..MMM nice eggs, bacon, omlette, sauage gravy, buscit, coffee, pretty waitress and everything is right with the mawning.

12.00 please. WHAT!? For BREAKFAST!? (20 years ago it was 2 bucks with bigger portions)

You drive 4 hours or so, get hungry. Stop for lunch. Salad, Cheeseburger and fries in gravy. (That stuff is nasty but soo good) and soda.

6.00 please. Now you have 6 hours to go and need a nap to sleep this off.. getting a tad tired are we?

You struggle thru your tired afternoon thru two cities worth of rush hour and fighting cut thorat commuters who dont give a *** about your big slow, smokey rig that is in thier way.

Tired and shaking from exhausting you stagger into the truckstop restruant for a evening of food, coffee and fellow ship.

One pound steak, salad, taters, greens and ice cream as well as finger food and 3 hours later you stumble to your truck fat, happy and 15.00 short.

Total for the day in food: 33.00

You will be allowed to deduct your expense at a flat rate come tax day. But need to show your time away from home.

That 33.00 in food is = to about 66 miles at .25 cents per mile. But since you drove 600 miles today, you did pretty good.

7 days later you have spent about 225.00 in food. Your 600 miles a day comes out to $150/day or $1050 gross pay. Taxes will take about 40 cents of every dollar you make. Then your benefits will take away even more.

so. Net pay approx 600.00 Food bill 225.00 remaining $375.00

You will need 225.00 for next week's 7 days of food.

Take home $150 for 60+ hours **no.. make that 90 hours of work.

If you dont make the mileage then you will probably get a comcheck for next week's food placing you at the mercy of the company which just became your friendly short term lender and will recoup thier money from your paycheck the following friday.

It is quite possible to go negative and see your debt climb weekly until they cut you loose as a liablitiy.

That food aint so good now is it?

Reality sets in.

Breakfast.. coffee, biscuts sausage gravy and some coffee. Hardly any green, meat or real protein 4.00

Skip lunch. maybe eat a candy bar or a bag of chips and a soda.

Dinner you eat a bowl of chili. Perhaps a Mc donalds.

That mcdonald's food will last you an hour if you are working hard.

Total maybe 12.00 a day. But you are shorting yourself on calories a day.

When you are at work you need about 3,000 calories a day. In Winter storms throwing chain and fighting man killing cold your calorie requirement will top 8,000 per day.

That driver pay has improved somewhat. But it is far better to stop at walmart, buy 2 week's food at once store it in a cooler and a rack. Cook it yourself. You need a pots and pan situation just like home and time to cook the meals. You will learn to use the waiting time that is soooo long and tiring in doing house work tasks about your rig and resting.

You will spend less, be free from the truck stop and if a team show dispatch the ability to be ready to go 24/7 at a moment's notice. No need to stop to eat breakfast for a couple hours. Your spouse can cook as you drive. That is the best of trucking. You better do the dishes when it is your spouses's turn to drive.

I kept things very simple with this post on pay. There is many ways to get paid in trucking and there is a great deal of money involvoed in this business. I am talking as if you are a company driver who is unmarried.

If you have a house, cars, kids and other things to pay on like maybe child support etc... that pay check may be insufficient to cover it all. In the mean time your body get tired and weak from lack of nutrition.

Be careful out there.

[edbenton]

You don't need to tell me about lumpers I drove for a company that has maroon trucks and trailers out of WI. They paid you to unload a trailer a grand total of 15 bucks IF you had to unload. I had multiple loads where the reciver did not allow drivers to unload you had to hire a lumper the lumper wanted 50 bucks to unload either you paid them or did not get unloaded. My dispatcher aka the SLAVE DRIVER refused to authorize the payment of said bill and just took it out of my pocket instead turned him in since corp polilcy was any and all requests for a lumper are to be approved.

He starved me out of there within 6 mos. I was lucky if I got 1200 miles a week after I turned him in The worst thing he did to me was gave me a load to eastern PA total of 1300 miles and I had 5 days to do it in tried to get to come home HE SAID IF YOU GO HOME I WOULD HAVE TO PAY THE OUT OF RTOUTE MILES talked to his supervider who had the backbone of a jellyfish he agreed with the dispatcher. LAst load i pulled for them.

[MP173]

Really fascinating stories.

I was asked if I pulled pups in LTL....no. I was not a driver, but was in management and I never learned to drive. After 13 years in the industry, I saw the light and realized it was time for a career move.

I worked in the traffic dept, which for this company also included sales and claims. So, I wore a number of hats. Looking back, I stayed too long, but it was a very fascinating industry. LTL trucking, such as Yellow, Roadway, USF Holland, is a very interesting business. I compare the railroad's carload business to it. Very similar with consolidation points (yards / LTL terminals) in which either trains or line haul loads are built. An LTL terminal at night is a very interesting and dynamic place.

Have any of you ever delivered to either the Fulton District or old Water Market district in Chicago?

The Fulton (meat market) is still around, although the loft and condo folks are making inroads and do complain about the noise at 2am!!! Buyer beware, they should have done due diligence before moving in. The old Water Market district sounds like Hunts Point in NYC. That place was wild. I would be interested in your stories about it and how it compared to HP.

Water Market is in the process of converting to housing condos believe it or not. The fruit and vegetable folks have scattered. One of the nicest locations is not too far away on Ashland, a company called Anthony Marano has an absolute palace of a produce warehouse. The offices are incredible.

The entire transportation industry seems at this time in a position of strength for the first time in ages. Rates are improving. Many of my customers are trucklines. I respect them as very smart businessmen. They know their company, their customers, and the competitors very well.

Walmart...as a salesman, dont get me started either! I lost the last bit of respect (and it was small) over the last fiasco regarding the Vice Chairman who was resently fired....along with the VP who reported him for his indescretions.

ed

[Anonymous]

Here's a thought: If you are a husband and wife team, wouldn't you make twice as much if you each drove a separate rig? Ideally, regarding what greyhounds was pondering, if trucks were mostly relagated to out and back day hauls between origin and the railhead instead of these long hauls, a husband and wife team driving separate rigs with loads originating in their general locale, and only going as far as the rail terminal and back home that evening, could really rake in the dough, right? Two 53' trailers pay twice as much as one, right?

The other side of that coin is the idea of allowing a single rig to pull tandem 53's on certain Interstates, and then separating them for the local haul in the warehouse district, or the rural roads, or the run from the distribution center to the store, etc. This assumes the trucking companies would actually pay more per mile for pulling multiple trailers. Or the idea of replacing the GVW limits with a per axle max, thus allowing more payload per rig while keeping the total weight spread out over the multiple axles to reduce road damage.

Either way, make it more profitable to drive trucks (regardless of whether it's a short haul to the nearest rail terminal, or a long haul with more trailers and/or payload per rig), and more people will sign up.

[MP173]

Dave:

I am not a driver, but I think I can answer that one, or at least start the discussion. Trucking is very asset dependent for an OO. the trick is to keep the unit moving as much as possible.

Generally speaking, short haul trucking is a very difficult proposition....just look at the stories that are being told of loading and unloading. Granted, quite a bit of the freight is palletized, but on intermodal (particularly container loads) it will not be palletized and the loading/unloading would really be tough.

The drayage of intermodal is generally handled by specialized carriers that deal with that sort of business, know the ins and outs of it and have contracts to handle larger volumes of trailers.

ed

[greyhounds]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Here's a thought: If you are a husband and wife team, wouldn't you make twice as much if you each drove a separate rig? Ideally, regarding what greyhounds was pondering, if trucks were mostly relagated to out and back day hauls between origin and the railhead instead of these long hauls, a husband and wife team driving separate rigs with loads originating in their general locale, and only going as far as the rail terminal and back home that evening, could really rake in the dough, right? Two 53' trailers pay twice as much as one, right?

The other side of that coin is the idea of allowing a single rig to pull tandem 53's on certain Interstates, and then separating them for the local haul in the warehouse district, or the rural roads, or the run from the distribution center to the store, etc. This assumes the trucking companies would actually pay more per mile for pulling multiple trailers...

OK, I want to be very clear here. I do not, in any way, shape, or form, support government economic regulation that would limit what types of freight hauls could be done by trucks. The government can not possibly do this with any chance of success. Let the free market place sort things out.

Any of you drivers want to take twin 53's over Donner in January?

I did work in marketing for International Harvester/Navistar when it was the largest truck manufacturer. We took a good look at "Turnpike Doubles" (what they call one tractor pulling two full sized trailers). We concluded it would hurt tractor sales. (That was tough to figure!). I'm open to correction by a driver - but there are a lot of problems with them.

When a heavy truck starts, something has to slip. The engine is turning, the wheels are not. Either the clutch or the wheels has to slip during starting. What was demonstrated was that a tractor pulling two 48's up a curving on ramp could have problems. If the driver had to stop, and that's going to happen, he couldn't get the highway train moving again. He was stopped with a heavy load on an up grade on a curve. Throw in some ice/snow, whatever and the vehicle isn't going to move.

"Turnpike Doubles" are allowed in certain states on certain routes. As are three 28 foot trailers behind one tractor. It's not going away, and it's not expanding. Heavy trucks beat the Hell out of the highways. From what I know, these routes for the "Turnpike Doubles" are toll roads that charge proportional to use. Unless the states do that, they're going to dig themselves into a big financial hole maintaining their highway networks.

[Anonymous]

greyhounds,

I really enjoyed the story about that Iowa trucker and how he moved three loads to Chicago with one line haul move and then back hauled three more loads back to Iowa with one move. He was a smart cookie!

QUOTE: Any of you drivers want to take twin 53's over Donner in January?

Can't speak for back east, but in Nevada its only twin 48's that are allowed. In the western states anytime chains are required these extra length combinations are not allowed. In the case of triples the 3rd box and second con-gear must be dropped, the same with the rear 48 ft trailer and its con-gear. With a "Rocky Mountain" set (48' trailer and con-gear and 28' trailer) the same is true in Nevada and Utah.

If it was legal, I would not mind triples or twin 48's over Donner, but never with chains. With wet or dry roads it wouldn't be much different than a set of doubles with the exception of the much higher gross weight.

Its interesting to note that CalTrans along with the California Highway Patrol tested triples on I-5 during the late 1970s - early 1980s, can't remember the exact year. The tests results were positive, but the California Automobile Association lobbied very successfully to keep these combination off of California freeways. And in my opinion probably best for California.

QUOTE: I'm open to correction by a driver - but there are a lot of problems with them.

From my experience they are no more problematic than a set of doubles.

QUOTE: When a heavy truck starts, something has to slip. The engine is turning, the wheels are not. Either the clutch or the wheels has to slip during starting. What was demonstrated was that a tractor pulling two 48's up a curving on ramp could have problems. If the driver had to stop, and that's going to happen, he couldn't get the highway train moving again. He was stopped with a heavy load on an up grade on a curve. Throw in some ice/snow, whatever and the vehicle isn't going to move.

My bid truck at work is a two axle 1987 GMC Brigadier with a 240 hp Cummins matched to a 7 speed transmission. I like to call it my "18 year old, single owner, low mileage classic!" Many times taking this tractor up to Stead on the 6% of US 395 during traffic with a set of "Triples" its stop and go, the grandma gear gets it going every time after a stop on grade. And a "heal and toe" on the fuel peddle, without clutch, gets it into 2nd, and so on...

QUOTE: "Turnpike Doubles" are allowed in certain states on certain routes. As are three 28 foot trailers behind one tractor. It's not going away, and it's not expanding. Heavy trucks beat the Hell out of the highways. From what I know, these routes for the "Turnpike Doubles" are toll roads that charge proportional to use. Unless the states do that, they're going to dig themselves into a big financial hole maintaining their highway networks.

In Nevada these over-length combination are allowed on most highways and streets where regular heavy duty commercial traffic is permitted.

This just for fun, for most people in the trade a "Rocky Mountain" set is configured as follows: truck-tractor, 48' trailer, con-gear, then the 28' pup. Where I work, none of our 48' trailers have pintel hooks. So are "Rocky Mountain" sets are configured as truck-tractor, 28' pup, con-gear, then the 48' trailer.

Another just for fun; I get a buck - yes, that is one dollar, a "Washington" if you will, for pulling one of these over-length combinations. But, before anyone gets excited, I get paid by the hour. More trailers...more drop and hooks, and the longer it takes.

Jim - Lawton, NV

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by passengerfan

To all those drivers running I-80 west of Larimie over El Mountain in the winter their is a much safer way and the old timers know it. That is the old route 30 that parallels the UP main and stays down in the valleys. And if you are a train watcher you will see plenty of action along the route. First starting running this route before I-80 was completed it was the only route. After one trip over Elk Mountain in blizzard i reverted to the old route and found I made just as good a time. Just because it looks shorter on the map doesn't mean that it safer or any faster. This is just one case of where older is better.

I don't know if this is true or not, but I was in a truck stop at Rawlings, WY in 1972 and overheard a rancher from that Elk Mountain area state that the Union Pacific once had its mainline run over this region and some twenty years later (1880s) realigned its track to that route that you mentioned running through Medicine Bow rather than over the grade at Elk Mountain.

Then, must have been 1973, heard that because the feds didn't take the advice of the Wyoming DOT, all snow removal on I-80 through the Elk Mountain area was from then to now paid for by the feds. Again, don't know if there is anything to this, or if its just rural-myth?

Also, although I-80 was not completed through Elk Mountain, it was opened for traffic without its finish layer of asphalt, the top coat. This during late fall of, I think 1973 - I could be off, plus or minus a year. Anyway, deer and elk are great jumpers, but antelope are not. Well, I come around a bend to see the largest heard of antelope I'd ever seen, they were caged-in a meadow by the newly installed I-80 fencing.

Well, I spied a pickup truck with driver and two hunters in the back, road hunting this herd from I-80, pissed me off! The hunters were about to take their shots. I laid down on my air horn and sent that heard back up ELK Mountain. I think I'd wrecked those road hunter's shot.

Before anyone jumps to a conclusion, I have no reservation about hunting. I do have a conceived idea of how it should be done, and certainly not from the back of a moving pickup truck on I-80!

Jim

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton

And after all this fun, you might make 30k after expenses. Should we be surprized that the line of qualified applicants doesn't extend around the block?

This is what an industry expert said and I quoted (reposted):

"One expert that was quoted in this article said churn would continue to be a problem until pay for long haul drivers was ratcheted up to $60,000. As a non-expert I’d add the benefit packages might need sweetening too."

The TL portion of the industry, first driven by the Swift model created during 1979 or 1980, was sell them training, endenture them from one to three years and the low wages will offset the churn.

If income in the TL protion of the trucking industry was repersented by fair wages, most longhaul loads would hit a ramp for a trip over a railroad between origin and destination.

Only the most valuble or time sensitive loads would be trucked nationwide by highly paid teams. Think I full of it?

Read a past issue of Trains Magazine or was it Pacific Rail News... about JP Hunts response to driver shortages more than ten years ago. Its good reading, long haul driver's wages went from 32 cents a mile to 42 cents a mile. The bulk of the low margin traffic that would not support higher wages went to intermodal.

Jim - Lawton, NV MP 236.0

[Anonymous]

ed: Regarding shorthaul, if not by truck, then by what? It's my understanding that trucking owns 99.9% of all shorthual moves. (The 0.1% is accomplished by shortline railroad here in the PNW, where several companies run shorthaul grain shuttles between elevators and barge ports, in hauls under 100 miles). You are correct that if the driver is responsible for loading and unloading the cargo, it takes away from the number of shorthaul trips per day or per week that pay the per mile wages. But if the loading and unloading is done by other labor, then all the driver is doing is taking the trailers from one locale to the next. Or if the driver is heading to or from the intermodal yard, he's not burdened with that requirement on the terminal end. In that aspect, the more the driver can handle in terms of trailers or payload per day or week, the more productive he is to the shipping company. If the company is wasting the driver's high demand skills by having him load and unload cargo while other trailers are just sitting there waiting for a driver to take them where they need to go, then the company is wasting their own assets. I just wonder how much of this truck driver shortage is being caused by these high demand drivers being forced to do something other than driving, something that is better done by lesser skilled labor?

Labor tends to be more productive when it is divided into specifications rather than jack of all trades, at least in theory. The point is to provide enough work hours to make sure each labor division is getting the full 8 to 10 hours per day, and not just sitting around after the specific job have been met, while other work goes begging. If the work requirements are too small to justify labor divisions, then the dual job roles make more sense.

greyhouds: Remember, it isn't the number of trailers so much as it is the total payload burdening the cab unit. I would bet the average 53' dry van trailer plying the Interstates weighs half of the average grain trailer plying the backroads of rural America. If you can keep the total GVW of two 53's under 150k, you should be okay in terms of what the rig can pull.

In terms of handling, it's my understanding that the "b-train" combo design allows for better driver control than the drawbar pulled trailer design. It shouldn't be too hard to design a b-train combo for double 53's.

In the future, if longer and/or higher GVW units are allowed, you might see the concept of the DPU used in trucking. Putting a cabless engine unit as the 5th wheel base between the first and second trailer, and remotely controlled by the cab unit, could have some of the same benefits for trucking as it does for railroads.

[Anonymous]

As too the double 48 foot trailers,they have pulled them on the Ny thruway for years,along with triple 28 footers.I wish my tractor at the time had the horsepwer those guys had.Live and let live,stay safe no matter rail or road.,Jim

[Anonymous]

Dave,

You have just sliped a new term under the table:

QUOTE: In terms of handling, it's my understanding that the "b-train" combo design allows for better driver control than the drawbar pulled trailer design. It shouldn't be too hard to design a b-train combo for double 53's.

Is this a Canadian thing? When talking about a b-train combo, why did you bypass 48's and go right to double 53's.

Don't you owe it to the readers to explain b trains and Canadian doubles, or are you just wanting to impress all of us?

Jim

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by foureasy

As too the double 48 foot trailers,they have pulled them on the Ny thruway for years,along with triple 28 footers.I wish my tractor at the time had the horsepwer those guys had.Live and let live,stay safe no matter rail or road.,Jim

I don't want to shake your universe, but we out west where doing this triple thing long before anyone in New York could count to three!

And of course the whole idea came from Australia and its road trains....

Jim

[Anonymous]

B Trains to me here in the usa run about Michigan. They are the only state allowed to run them. They get quite heavy on the gross weight. Much heavier than regular 40 tonners.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SP9033

Dave,

You have just sliped a new term under the table:

QUOTE: In terms of handling, it's my understanding that the "b-train" combo design allows for better driver control than the drawbar pulled trailer design. It shouldn't be too hard to design a b-train combo for double 53's.

Is this a Canadian thing? When talking about a b-train combo, why did you bypass 48's and go right to double 53's.

Don't you owe it to the readers to explain b trains and Canadian doubles, or are you just wanting to impress all of us?

Jim

Not quite sure what you're getting at in that last sentence, but..........

B-trains are a trailer combination set up in which the 5th wheel for the following trailer is embedded into the frame of the leading trailer, in contrast to the drawbar pulled 5th wheel unit where the 5th wheel is located on the drawbar wheelset. The advantage of the b-train is that there is only one pivot point between the 1st and second trailer, compared to the drawbar unit which has two pivot points, one where the drawbar connects to the lead trailer's hitch and the other in the 5th wheel itself. Therefore, the b-train allows for better control by the driver. It's comparable to the difference between an articulated railcar set and a drawbar connected railcar set.

I'm not sure if the Canadians invented the b-train, but they sure have taken advantage of the concept. This is probably due to the fact that the Canadians have allowed higher GVW's on their highways, and this led to the quicker adoption of the concept for the control factors. Compare most Canadian grain trailer combos vs the standard U.S. grain trailer combo's. We have mostly used the drawbar unit, while their trailers incorporate the b-train. The Canadian truckers are allowed to pull two fully loaded 20' containers, and the 5th wheel is located at the rear of the slider chassis, a natural fit. Our GVW regs only allow one fully loaded 20' container per cab unit, so there has been no real incentive to install a 5th wheel in our 20' container slider chassis.

The downside of the b-train concept for a dry van or other rear discharge trailer is that you need an extension in the trailer frame past the rear doors of the trailer to allow room for the 5th wheel and the front of the trailing trailer. Since our trailers are limited to 53' in most states, you could only have a 48' box on the 53' trailer frame, unless the feds allow an exemption to the 53' limit for use of b-train technology. Also, this dead space between the rear doors of the lead trailer and the trailer's rear frame doesn't allow a dry van to park the box flu***o a loading dock, possibly exposing cargo to weather while loading or unloading.

The solution to this dead space is to use a separatable 5th wheel dolly that can fit solidly (e.g. acts as a solid extension of the lead trailer's frame) to the rear of the 53' trailer when in b-train mode yet can be removed easily to allow the box to fit flu***o a loading dock. I'm not sure if such a dolly exists, but I have seen air adjustable dollies that are used to help spread the lead trailer's load over more axles, and I believe these dollies are solid connections rather than pivoting connections.

Here's a good link for pictures of b-train chassis:

http://www.max-atlas.com/eng/train.html

[Anonymous]

Dave,

Thank you for that great posting defining B trains. My only experience with them was seeing them operated by Canadian Freightways (Consolidated Freightways's Canadian LTL company) on a 1972 trip to Canada. At that time the trailers where I think about 30' in length.

My wife tells me all the time my tongue is to sharp. Please forgive my sharp replies. I was wrong.

Jim

[chad thomas]

There are quite a lot of b trains combinations hauling wood chips in Washington these days. The biggest advantage I see with this setup is the ease of backing them up. It's nearly impossible to do that with a converter dolly in between (although I have seen it done for short distances).

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by chad thomas

There are quite a lot of b trains combinations hauling wood chips in Washington these days. The biggest advantage I see with this setup is the ease of backing them up. It's nearly impossible to do that with a converter dolly in between (although I have seen it done for short distances).

Chad,

An additional advantage is there is one less veichle to register and pay taxes on, which in some states can be a big deal. Also the chain laws between a standard set of doubles with con gear and b trains might make a significat difference durring winter.

Depending on the equipment and famility with such, I can back a semi with dolly just about anywhere...But to back that semi with dolly-and trailer, NO from here...But, I've seen a handful of drivers back a rear box to a dock door located between spotted trailers.

The UPS driver handling the unsorted south pull out of MSC at Fernley, NV does it daily. A fellow that I worked with at Thrifty Drug durring the 1980s and now with Central can do it on comand, either over a dirt lot or paved lot.

Jim

[Anonymous]

Dave,

If you want to read the funny papers, you can't pass up on Transport Topics. Now this is a trade publication, and many articles really need to address the advertisers and sales, I understand that. But unlike trade publications of the past there is no editorial high ground here, its all sell-sell-sell.

From what I've seen, you got a good grip on the industry, HighIron2003ar is also very honest about the Truck_Load position of the industry.

You guys need to get them fellows at TT aligned with the real world!


Jim

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by chad thomas

There are quite a lot of b trains combinations hauling wood chips in Washington these days. The biggest advantage I see with this setup is the ease of backing them up. It's nearly impossible to do that with a converter dolly in between (although I have seen it done for short distances).

Chad,

I haven't seen the b-train combo used to haul wood chips yet, but I know it's possible. I live in an area of North Central Idaho where chip trucks by the hundreds are plying U.S. 95 down to the Potlatch pulp mill in Lewiston Idaho. I've seen a few drawbar pulled doubles hauling chips, but most are single 53' and 57' trailers. Maybe one reason they aren't using b-trains is that the unloading lifts may not be able to fit a 75' combo at once, and if the front trailer of a wood chip consist is dumped singly, there would have to be something over the 5th wheel to keep chips from plugging it up as they slide out.

I'm still waiting for someone to invent the b-train dry van combo, using an accordian-style connector between the boxes to make one basic trailer space. You can see such accordian-style connections used on some transit buses, so using them in tight cornering shouldn't be a problem. A dry van interior space of 68' in length and 5700 cubic feet, able to be backed to a dock and loaded at one time, could be a valuable time and effort saver.

I'm less convinced of translating the b-train design into current bi-modal technology. The need to use the tongue and pin connector between the trailers for rail transit conflicts with the need to keep space above the 5th wheel free for the second trailer while in highway mode.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, I dont see any value in the Van or reefer B trains except in ternimal to ternimal operation.

80% of grocery warehouses and industry docks will NEVER accomodate these things.

[Anonymous]

So, when is enough enough! I'm a LTL driver - got good medical, retirement...

Jim

[passengerfan]

Having myself been a driver for many years when each winter rolls around I sympathize with all the drivers running between Reno and Sacramento who have to chain up so many nights to get across. This winter has been particularly difficult do to the amount of snow that has fallen in the high Sierra's.
Remember one instance while travelining westbound on I-70 from Denver as I exited Eisenhower tunnel about halfway down the grade was an overturned tractor and set of doubles in the median. There were about four or five other rigs stopped and the drivers were clambering up the sides of the overturned trailers and all were putting chains on the two trailers and the tractor. About a month later when I returned to denver i remembered seeing the overturned trailers and the chains being installed. I asked what good would it do to put chains on an overturned tractor and set of doubles. I found out that the chain controls had been in effect when he started his discent and if the company finds out he did not have them on he gets suspended for thirty days but if the chains are on then nothing happens to the driver by the company they just mark it up as an accident. Apparently the Colorado troopers who know most of these company drivers would keep mum about wheteher the driver had chains on or not. I really thought it was funny that morning seeing everyone scrambling around on the overturned trailers putting on the chains.
Often thought when I was driving that California required chaining up many times when it wasn't really necessary.
Good thing trains aren't required to chain up imagine chaining up a 100 car freight to get over Donner. Ta Ta for now.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SP9033

So, when is enough enough! I'm a LTL driver - got good medical, retirement...

Jim

Enough of you was enough when you made your first post. GET LOST.

LC

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SP9033

So, when is enough enough! I'm a LTL driver - got good medical, retirement...

Jim

I'm ever so glad you are proud of being an overpaid delivery man. Not what I'd want for my son.

LC

[greyhounds]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SP9033

So, when is enough enough! I'm a LTL driver - got good medical, retirement...

Jim

When an individual decides that he/she has enough, that's when it's enough.

You can't decide what's enough for me, nor can I decide what's enough for you. It's a concept called "freedom" and/or "liberty".

[Anonymous]

passengerfan, You just learned a secret in trucking.

Companies fire on sight for any number of rules if they are broken. So there is a little bit of "Juggling" so to speak to make the incident acceptable to the company.

If they could get them chains on there before a company official arrives then that driver might have a chance still.

I am going to tell you a story here. The point of the story is when to require chains.

Coming out of Knoxville several years ago into a light winter storm going west on I-40, there was a few inches of snow on the grass but none on the road. The higher we got into the plateau it turned to hard packed snow and eventually to a little ice as the humidty levels got wet.

I was the lead truck and we come around upgrade to a 40 degree bend that also increased in grade. 5 inches of packed snow turned to a patch of ice halfway thru the turn. The Rig stumbled and went into a tractor skid towards a jackknife while being pulled by gravity towards the median divider.

A authoritive yank on the steering wheel broke the skid and happened early enough before a fatal jack knife angle was reached.

Number two had the exact same behavior in my rear view mirror.... in the mean time....

Numbers 3 thru 8 all saw the first two of us slide and knew that curve is going to be a problem.

Number 3 slid and went off the road trying to stay out of the dreaded jackknife. Number 4 was a flat bed the last I saw of him was his trailer dragging the whole unit backwards into the divider and down into the ground as the driver used the last of his interlocked traction to keep the whole rig straight.

When it was over the interstate was blocked at that point. The drivers were NOT happy. No blame anywhere, just a icy patch on a compound curve.

This being in tennessee they really dont require chains like the western states do.

But if this happened in a western state, I believe the chain law would be placed into effect when the first semi (Me) started to spin out. That means the tires have reached thier limits of traction. From that point on all should have chain.

I hold that as long as you can walk on it, you can drive on it as ground pressure is very similar. But... if big trucks are looking for a place to chain up and or wait out the remainder of the storm... dont you be going out there in your little 4x4 or car.

Many a time I see doubles turned completely around in storms near chicago. Usually they would be chaining at that point because it is the only way to get traction.

Many a time I come across 7 mountains near state college without chain and see many drivers who wind up into the shoulder or barriers because they were in a hurry.

When your interlock is activated and you are plowing 2 feet of dry snow in 3rd at 8 mph... that is NOT the time to be concerned about arrival time or speed.

All this talk of mountain driving in winter should help you keep in mind that there are alot of drivers and very good trucks out there doing a dangerous job. To me mountain driving holds no fear as I go up or down them the exact same way every time. What I do fear is the man killing cold that reaches close to -90 (Including wind chill) some nights in the far northern states.

Eisenhower tunner is a hoot on I-70. But try Tuscacora or Allegheny in a roaring storm on the PA Turnpike sometime. I think the Alley is the one that has 7 miles of 5% eastbound and additional grades westbound combined with super elevation and wind chutes created by the mountains around you.

But Mount Eagle is the one that will get ya east of the mississippi.

[passengerfan]

Probably would never have happened in the west as most of the states have sanders out when the road starts to get slick.
Northern Ontario used salt when I drove don't know if they still do or not but the province of Ontario owned several large salt mines.
Salt works well down to about fifteen but doesn't do much for the enviroment. or wildlife I understand it damages even the hoofs of deer.
As the state of Nebraska redid sections of I-80 they would not use sand on the areas of new concrete for two years and put signs up warning drivers to that effect where the new concrete was laid. This apparently was done to assure the curing process.
In almost thirty years of driving big rigs I never found chains to be much help on ice and very early in my driving career made the decision when the roads were icy their was nothing in that trailer that was worth my life or anyone else's so I parked and found a motel until the conditions changed. In turn I was never late with a delivery because I always allowed myself extra time in the winter months. I never had a dispatcher get on my case for operating that way when I was an owner operator or when I drove for someone else. When the road was like a washboard from drivers with chains it was no time to be hauling glass showcases blanket wrapped. It was better to park which i did get a motel and wait it out. I don't remember it ever being more than twelve hours until the road was clear enough to travel. And the plows and sanders had worked their magic in that time frame. It would not have done any good to deliver a load of broken glass to a and damaged cabinets to a new store that was opening and would have to wait another six to eight weeks for showcases.
Advise I have for young drivers starting out can be summed up in one word Patience!