# Slowing down the white van man



## Don_Madge (May 1, 2005)

There's an article, in Auto Express, which indicates that from next year speed limiters set at 56mph (90 kph) must be fitted to vans weighing more than 3.5 tonnes.

It does not apply to Motorhomes only goods vehicles see http://tinyurl.com/y7ux4u (thanks Keith)

Don


----------



## autostratus (May 9, 2005)

That's a lot more vehicles sitting in and blocking the middle lane of the motorways then!


----------



## Enodreven (Aug 29, 2005)

On a similar subject, I noticed in France between Biarritz and Bordeaux there is a section of the road where vehicles over 7.5 ton are not allowed to overtake and I think it last for 30/40 km, I do think this would help if they introduced it here on sections of the motorway where there is a incline that is known to slow lorries down, as it appears the introduction of speed limiters has lead to a lot of problems for lorries wanting to pass one another.



autostratus said:


> That's a lot more vehicles sitting in and blocking the middle lane of the motorways then!


----------



## JockandRita (Jun 1, 2005)

autostratus said:


> That's a lot more vehicles sitting in and blocking the middle lane of the motorways then!


Hi there,

The speed limit for HGV/LGV here in the UK is 60 mph on the motorways, however, due to a European directive, these vehicles are limited to 90 kph, ie, 56 mph. *Any vehicles over 7.5 tonnes, or any vehicles towing a trailer, are not permitted in the outside lane of a three or four lane carriageway*.

The majority of vehicles that I come across, "hogging the middle lane" are usually driven by drivers who are too inconsiderate to move back in to the nearside lane (after overtaking), or are too frightened to use the outside lane to make progress.

You have to remember that everything that you eat, wear, sit on, write with, clean with, heat with, etc, etc, came off the back of a lorry. And without them, the supermarket shelves would be empty, so to speak.

So, the next time you are on a motorway and you see a 60 foot, 44 tonner with it's right hand trafficator on, please give some consideration that he /she is trying their best to make progress, and do their job efficiently. A lot of their work involves "timed drops", ie, if they are not at their destination within 30 mins either side of the booking time, they will lose their slot, and have to wait for hours to be unloaded.

That usually means, not getting home to your own bed, again!!!

Jock.


----------



## bognormike (May 10, 2005)

quote from Jock&Rita

"with it's right hand trafficator on"

good grief Jock, it's a while since I heard that term - my Dad used to use it when those old orange light-up semaphore signals were about. I remember his old Standard 10 had them!


----------



## geraldandannie (Jun 4, 2006)

bognormike said:


> "with it's right hand trafficator on"


Good spot, Mike :lol: It was my dad's Austin A35 van that I remember.

Gerald


----------



## badger (May 9, 2005)

Er!....Excuse me Mike.....I had those traficator thingies on my first car if you dont mind... 8O :lol:


----------



## bognormike (May 10, 2005)

Showing your age, there Badger. My first car (in 1968) was a 1961 Ford Pop (new style with flashing indicators!)


sorry Don, going off topic a bit.....


----------



## bognormike (May 10, 2005)

anyway getting back on topic,

But most of the white van men drive (sorry thrash) vans under 3500kg?


----------



## 88927 (May 10, 2005)

JockandRita said:


> The majority of vehicles that I come across, "hogging the middle lane" are usually driven by drivers who are too inconsiderate to move back in to the nearside lane (after overtaking), or are too frightened to use the outside lane to make progress.
> Jock.


Couldn't agree more Jock... I call them The Center Lane Cruisers Club :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: 
Some of the dimmer ones actually believe that the inside (or first) lane is for lorrys and the second lane has a 50 MPH speed limit on it :roll: :roll: Some ding-a-ling explained this to me some time ago at a party...... I was speechless (I know, it is hard to believe :lol: :lol: ), but it just goes to show the level of competence that is allowed to drive vehicles on the roads....

Keith


----------



## Pusser (May 9, 2005)

bognormike said:


> quote from Jock&Rita
> 
> "with it's right hand trafficator on"
> 
> good grief Jock, it's a while since I heard that term - my Dad used to use it when those old orange light-up semaphore signals were about. I remember his old Standard 10 had them!


My first car had those although once out, a passernger had to bang the bodywork to get them in again. It had 3 gears for forwards although 2nd gear did not like being engaged and used to come out on its own and it cost me £27 from one old lady owner although I didn't realised at the time she was a Formulae 1 fanatic hence car expired a few months later. I wish I could remember what it was. It was tall and all black and was definately FOrd and may have been a Prefect. When it died I got it pushed, by a load of Raf and Navy bods from RAF Stanmore, to a small lane by the church so it could be used by courting couples on their way back to camp. It proved very successful until the Council did me for £5 for disposing of litter.


----------



## JockandRita (Jun 1, 2005)

bognormike said:


> quote from Jock&Rita
> 
> "with it's right hand trafficator on"
> 
> good grief Jock, it's a while since I heard that term - my Dad used to use it when those old orange light-up semaphore signals were about. I remember his old Standard 10 had them!


I am happy to be corrected, but I am sure that the term "trafficator" is still used in legal speech. However, it may have been more appropriate to have used the term "indicator". 

Mind you, they appear to be optional extras on a lot of vehicles nowadays, judging by the amount of drivers who won't, or don't know how to use them. :evil: :evil:

As Rita often says, "Oh look, there's another one of those cars that doesn't have the optional indicators. :roll: :roll:

Jock.


----------



## Rapide561 (Oct 1, 2005)

*56 mph*

Hi

So a motorhome is not classed as a HGV for this purpose but for the purpose of driving a motorhome in excess of 7500 kg, it is a HGV!

What a load of cobblers

Russell


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

Like you I am not really a friend of the typical white van man who often leaves me close to a nervous wreck but I feel we are being a bit hard him/her.

What about the moronic car drivers that drive continuously in the middle lane or outside lane when lanes to the left are empty, oblivious of the fact that there is a long queue behind them and then get upset when others "undertake" them. Why should they be allowed to block 2 or 3 lanes.

We need to get back to the idea that one uses the leftmost available lane. Having said this I am not advocating that everyone continually dodges from lane to lane and need not move to left at every tiny break in the traffic.

many people still believe that there are fast and slow lanes on a motorway but this is not true.

The left lane is the correct lane for those doing 70 mph on an empty motorway.

The right hand lane is the correct lane when doing 40 mph if the inner lanes are full of traffic moving more slowly.


----------



## Steptoe (Nov 8, 2005)

This thread seems a good place to repeat a post that I originally put up on a motoring forum; incidentally no-one could come up with a reasonable explanation except that it was due to human nature :roll:

<<The thread on motorway lane discipline brought to mind a phenomenon that I experience on the rare occasions that I venture on the network.

I am invariably in my motorhome which is based on a 2.5TD, so easily capable of the legal limit, however as I am usually on holiday and rarely in a hurry I am quite content to sit in the inside lane rather than mix it in the overtaking lanes.

Naturally and inevitably I will come up behind a convoy of lorries and am quite happy to stay behind this for the above reasons, and in the interests of safety and the absence of stress I allow a safety zone of one and a half to two lorry lengths gap. Equally inevitably the occasional slowing of the preceding convoy means that I will be caught up by a following lorry which then attempts to overtake me and eventually pulls into my safety zone. My slight speed reduction to restoring this zone encourages the next lorry to overtake me and so on, ad infinitum. I have no hang-ups about being overtaken but it is disconcerting to constantly have a juggernaut alongside with a speed differential of only one or two miles an hour, also there is the consequent road block in lane 2.

The puzzlement is that the overtaking lorry is then following the lorry that I was following at the same speed that I was travelling at so I fail to see the gain. I could of course prevent these manoeuvres by reducing my safety zone to less than a lorry length or travelling in lane 2 but am naturally reluctant to take either of these steps.

This isn't meant to be a trucker bashing thread, and if I am annoying anyone I would like to know, but it just seems that the truckers resent me travelling in 'their' inside lane.>>


----------



## JockandRita (Jun 1, 2005)

Steptoe said:


> This isn't meant to be a trucker bashing thread, and if I am annoying anyone I would like to know, but it just seems that the truckers resent me travelling in 'their' inside lane.>>


Hi Steptoe,

I certainly don't regard your comments as "trucker bashing", and I can assure you that truckers do not resent you being in "their "inside lane,
*A*... because it's for everybody's use, and, *B* ...so long as you don't hold them up. If you do, they will overtake as would normally be expected.

You have created a sensible safety zone, unfortunately however, not everyone's interpretation of a sensible safety zone, is the same as yours.

Most large commercial vehicles are fitted with cruise control as standard, (and have been for some time), which helps firms to increase fuel economy, as well as helping to relieve driver tension. Most lighter vehicles are not fitted with this equipment. Therefore, unless you are meticously conscientious about maintaining a constant speed, you will always experience the "rare phenominon" that you mentioned.

I hope this may be of some way towards an acceptable explanation.

Jock


----------



## tonyt (May 25, 2005)

Perfectly acceptable to stick in the motorway middle (or outside) lane at 70mph?

If not, why not?


----------



## JockandRita (Jun 1, 2005)

tonyt said:


> Perfectly acceptable to stick in the motorway middle (or outside) lane at 70mph?
> 
> If not, why not?


Perfectly acceptable......when overtaking. 

Jock.


----------



## bognormike (May 10, 2005)

tonyt said:


> Perfectly acceptable to stick in the motorway middle (or outside) lane at 70mph?
> 
> If not, why not?


because you are supposed to return to the left hand lane when you have finished overtaking. It's in the highway code, and frankly I think it's stating the blindingly obvious. 8O The fact that somebody else may be travelling faster than 70mph and wants to overtake you is not your problem.


----------



## tonyt (May 25, 2005)

bognormike said:


> tonyt said:
> 
> 
> > Perfectly acceptable to stick in the motorway middle (or outside) lane at 70mph?
> ...


You're right Mike, it's not my problem - I see no sense in dipping in and out of the nearside lane at 70mph just because I'm "supposed to". In fact, changing lanes is the most dangerous and accident prone manoeuvre. If there's intermittent traffic in the nearside lane and a clear outside lane then I will sit in the centre lane and anyone who wants to exceed 70mph to pass me can do so. To me it seems blindingly obvious that it's the most sensible and safe thing to do.


----------



## RichardnGill (Aug 31, 2006)

I use to be a white van driver, I use to spend most of my time in the 3rd lane going as fast as it would go :twisted: either the traffic or the van. But now I am older and wiser (I Think) I now drive a company car and always drive keeping to the near side lane exept when over taking and never go over 80mph, what I find is that 

A: I don't get a stressed out as I use to 
B: It only takes me very slightly longer to get where I am going, even if its a 200+ mile journey
C: I hardly have to use the brakes and use much less fuel.

Does that mean that I am a good enough driver now for my fist M/H now I given up white van man driving?  

Richard...

Ps > I quiet often drive early in the morning (05:00) start and find that driving standards are much better then, until after 07:00 when the idiots get up....


----------



## klubnomad (Mar 6, 2006)

Erm, I am a White Van Man at the moment. Need to earn a few bob to fund the Euro trip for next year. :lol: 

dave

656


----------



## Enodreven (Aug 29, 2005)

Hi, 

Just to clarify what I was saying, firstly its not just lorry drivers who keep this country moving the vast majority of car drivers during the day are engaged in some form of business that has a major effect on the economy of this country and there ability to travel is just as important as lorries, But more to the point I wasn't knocking all lorry drivers, Just the ones who quiet clearly haven't enough speed to pass and who should appreciate other road users by pulling back into the inside lane, rather than just sitting there causing the majority of the traffic to slow down and bunch up, while they just sit in the middle lane along side of the vehicle they are trying to overtake until they have reached the brow and then hopefully have sufficient momentum to pass. My suggestion was that if we copied the French on the known inclines where this happens then it would in my opinion allow the flow of traffic to increase, which would be of benefit to all road users, this is over and above the no lorries in the 3rd lane rule.


----------



## bigfoot (May 16, 2005)

Back to the nostalgia trip, I remember when we had goods trains, my grandparents remember when goods were taken by canal no middle lane there then.
A canal boat can shift twice the load for a quarter of the fuel, non perishables only.


----------



## vicdicdoc (May 14, 2005)

bigfoot said:


> Back to the nostalgia trip, I remember when we had goods trains, my grandparents remember when goods were taken by canal no middle lane there then.
> A canal boat can shift twice the load for a quarter of the fuel, non perishables only.


Ahh, nostalgia - my first car in 1963 was a £15 1947 Austin and had those yellow stickly out indicators . . one never worked but it didn't matter 'cause way back then EVERYONE used to give their intentions by winding down the window & giving hand indications [I don't remember any one finger salutes either] - and the AA man used to give you a salute as you went by.A bit farther back ? . . there waz a time when we lived in a cardboard box on side of t'road . . go on say it:- "you were lucky to have a cardboard box . . . "


----------



## rod_vw (May 10, 2005)

It's an interesting concept, an HGV driver putting a trafficator (or flasher for the younger ones amongst us) on BEFORE making his manoeuvre. The times I have been approaching a line of lorries in the nearside lane considerably faster than them and with even faster traffic in the lane to my right only having to stand on the brakes because a lorry driver with 'faulty mirrors' and has simply pulled out in front of me! My alternative would have been to do the same thing to those in the faster lane 3 and NO I won’t unless I have no alternative.

Do HGV drivers not understand the mirror - signal - mirror - manoeuvre routine??

Whilst on the subject of HGV / HGV overtaking, if it takes 2 miles to complete the manoeuvre is it really necessary in the first place?

Sorry to bash HGV drivers but there are a significant number of them that are downright dangerous.

Yes, I am a White Van Man, it's a White VW Camper that often has to be at its destination at a particular time. I'm happy to cruise (with cruise control) at 70mph, I do use the nearside lane as often as possible and I don't consider lane changing particularly dangerous if mirrors and confidence are used correctly.

By the way it’s noticeable how much worse the lane 2 hogging is the further South you drive. The M40 South of Oxford being particularly noticeable.
But of course using the nearside lane often falls foul of the driver who thinks entering from a slip road is his / her right of way. In France there is a ‘Give Way’ (Vous n’avez pas la priorité) sign on slip roads maybe we need them here too as our rules are the same as theirs.


----------



## bigfoot (May 16, 2005)

Nostalgia ain't what it used to be!
Life is full of many mysteries like why do taxis have stop lights
And the trucks driven properly have the 'how's my driving' signs on the back. I long for the day when being carved up I or my passenger could call the number and say"like a tw**!
Also why do people spend £50,000+ on a fancy motor and don't spend £10 on a hands free kit? I saw a new Bentley(well VW really) yesterday driving past 2 primary schools whilst the driver was holding his mobile up to his ear and having quite an animated conversation.


----------



## 94055 (May 1, 2005)

A few suggestions
Lorries should onlybe allowed in the first two lanes, no matter how many lanes in total. 
They have a boost which takes them from 56mph to 60 mph, this is limited by a timer and can only be used for a specific time.
It is the drivers responsibility not to use it in 56mph countries.
Nearside lanes are closed off from the rest of the lanes 1 mile before and after a motorway junction, in other words you must be in that lane if you are turning off or joining a motorway. Lorries are allowed to use this or the 2nd lane.

I have given explanations for some but not all suggestions as I think some are obvious.

Before replying please look closely at what I am trying to propose, it does make sence and could be implimented.

Steve

ps
I travel 150mls most days to work


----------



## gotago (Sep 14, 2006)

I am sure I once heard of a nine second overtaking rule that was used in Europe. I think something like that would be a great help on motorways.

Anyone else hear of it?


----------



## Invicta (Feb 9, 2006)

The main motorway I drive on is the M2 which in my opinion is one of the worst motorways in the UK. For those who are not familiar with it, there are parts where there are only two lanes. Where there are inclines going up, lorries regularly cause the traffic to slow down as invariably there is one without sufficient power to complete the overtaking manouvre blocking the outside lane. 

I can appreciate that the overtaking lorry does't want to drop back, especially if it is being driven on cruise control. There is no answer surely to this one? Just shows the need to have at least three lanes and not just two. 

Referring to the ages of cars members have driven, I think so far I am in the lead! I learnt on a 1935 Austin 10 with those yellow arm indicators. I stalled it during my driving test but quickly recovered doing all the right things at the time I suppose (!)- handbrake- into neutral then turned off the ignition key. 

My husband was a very hard up police officer at the time he bought that car. He didn't tell me till some time later that he had borrowed the £25 with which to purchase it from the local Undertaker!


----------



## devonidiot (Mar 10, 2006)

A year or two ago ( at my age it feels like lat week ), I remember reading about a place in America where the local law stated that any slow moving vehicle which had more than seven vehicles held up waiting to pass had to pull to one side at the earliest opportunity.

How many times have you been held up by a JCB travelling at twenty MPH, or as quite often happens hereabouts a slow moving tractor which refuses to allow anyone to pass. My record is fifteen miles travelling at under twenty MPH behind a tractor, which was bad enough but he was pulling a container full of cow slurry. :roll:


----------



## rod_vw (May 10, 2005)

Yes Steve, solid lines marking out lane 1 before and over junctions just like many continental motorways. The authorities admit most motorway accidents are near junctions, maybe bringing in these rules here would help to prevent them. If of course drivers bothered to observe the rules. Maybe a few b******ings from a police motorway patrol would remind a few!
They have tried it on the M6 ate J6 (Spaghetti Junction) but didn't have the sense to use the same markings as main land Europe they are diamonds on the M6. Typical Britain 'get it right first time next time'.


----------



## teemyob (Nov 22, 2005)

*Vans And Motorcaravans*

Hello everyone,

The law applies to all Goods Vehciles over 3.5t
The law also will apply to Motorcaravans who are using the vehicle for carrying or transporting goods, regardless of weather they are for personal business or otherise. What the law or moreover the officer deems as "goods" is another matter.

Say for example you are collecting a job lot of tools for you to sell on ebay or you are collecting a batch of 20 tyres for mate. If the officer sees these "goods" you may well need to prove that you are carrying these items as personal and not for business etc.

I think most of us will get away with it if we get stopped!

I used to drive a white van and there were often awkward drivers who knew you did not have the power to pass them and would doften hogg lanes for fun, speeding up when they moved to the inner lane so you can not pass!. This has all changed however, as I now drive a Silver Van. This has a 5 cylinder 174ps engine under its belt and when the other daft driver start playing silly games, I catch them out with a simple swift tap of accelerator. Sometimes a downchange from 6th to 5th is required for awkward drivers of very fast cars. By the time they realise I have the power and torque it is to late for them to use their high reving petrol engines to prevent me doing so.

To the person who stated that changing lanes is a dangerous manouver. I think frustrating a driver even more by sitting in his path and being obstinate is far worse is it not?. Furthermore, just because your speedo is reading 70 are you doing 70?, how fast is he going?, what is his speedometer reading? Can you see it? Your speedo may be reading 10% over so while your sat there doing your 70 (that may well be mid sixties) he or she for that matter could have a more accurate reading.

Get a life, save a life MOVE OVER

Trev


----------



## 94055 (May 1, 2005)

Ok ,
Thanks Rod a good response. If it was permanent bollards then hey, sorry go to the next junction.
How about a permanent.... Not speed radar but a lane jumper radar?


Steve

By the way the worst road to drive on is the A1, delays galore through the irresponsible driving of?


----------



## rod_vw (May 10, 2005)

Sounds like a nice VW T5 that you drive Trevor, keep the camouflage stay silver.

Like you I don't advocate dangerous driving but hey lets all get on with where we are going, roads were created for trade, commerce and military use they really are no place for sight seeing. If you want to look around find a lay-by!


----------



## RichardnGill (Aug 31, 2006)

> Get a life, save a life MOVE OVER


Thats exactly it, well said Trev.
I to can relate to cars pulling over and speeding up by 5/10mph so you can not pass them, when I had a slow van. I you are pleased with the new Merc? Van drivers are spoilt these days, That days on an old 2.5 none TD tranny trying to keep it upto 90mph...

Ar well I am away out in my car for another 450 miles today on the A1 M18, M1, M6, A66...

Richard...


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2006)

JockandRita said:


> You have to remember that everything that you eat, wear, sit on, write with, clean with, heat with, etc, etc, came off the back of a lorry. And without them, the supermarket shelves would be empty, so to speak.


Only because successive governments have pandered to the requirements of supermarkets and road haulage companies. If companies were made to use local produce wherever it was available and to use rail transport where long distances were unavoidable then the need to use those over-large lorries would be massively reduced.

A few years ago my Dad was in hospital in Tameside in Greater Manchester and we were amazed to find that the sandwiches in the hospital restaurant were produced on Teesside, a two hour road journey away. It may have been cheaper up front for the hospital to buy them from that company but that wouldn't take into account the environmental cost to the country as a whole caused by the need to transport them that far.

Remember as well, it isn't only on motorways that juggernauts operate, they also cause all sorts of problems by using roads through villages and narrow streets laid out in towns centuries ago.

Use railways for long distance transport and smaller vehicles for ferrying between goods depots and towns and it would benefit us all.

Graham


----------



## sallytrafic (Jan 17, 2006)

GJH said:


> JockandRita said:
> 
> 
> > You have to remember that everything that you eat, wear, sit on, write with, clean with, heat with, etc, etc, came off the back of a lorry. And without them, the supermarket shelves would be empty, so to speak.
> ...


Good points GJH and we know which goverment should get most of the blame and just for once its not the current one.

Regards Frank


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2006)

sallytrafic said:


> Good points GJH and we know which goverment should get most of the blame and just for once its not the current one.


I've yet to find one that's any better than the others 

Seriously, I was born & brought up in Glossop in Derbyshire and remember the local railway stations being threatened by the "Beeching Axe". Happily, after a long campaign, the passenger services were saved but the large goods yards (originally built to serve the cotton and paper industries) have disappeared.

If you compare a modern road map to the original OS maps it's obvious that the main roads which serve the area (A57, A624, A626, A628) have hardly changed. Roads built for horse drawn traffic are now regularly used by juggernauts with inevitable congestion.

One of the reasons for building the M62 was to relieve roads like this but because is saves a few minutes and/or a few pounds in fuel costs lorries still use them. Whether this is the decision of the drivers or of the companies which employ them I don't know. I've argued for weight limits on those roads for many years - but local councils are in favour of bypasses so it looks like more local beauty spots will disappear because of the short-sightedness of governments over the last 50 to 60 years.

Graham


----------



## devonidiot (Mar 10, 2006)

When complaining about large lorries on the roads should one consider two points.

First if moving goods by rail there will be the cost of loading a lorry, transport to nearest rail goods depot, unload lorry to rail, move by rail to nearest rail goods depot to customer, most likely meaning delays whilst moved to shunting yards to make up train to that destination, then unload from train to lorry, then to customer and unload. The amount of handling (increasing possibility of damage), the costs and the time taken.
Transport costs would increase, instead of a few hours in transport, it would be days.

Secondly if most of the heavy lorries and buses were removed from the roads there would be as significant decrease in traffic. Would the roads system be improved, new rods be built, bypasses be built. We would still be trying to drive through town centres.


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2006)

devonidiot said:


> First if moving goods by rail there will be the cost of loading a lorry, transport to nearest rail goods depot, unload lorry to rail, move by rail to nearest rail goods depot to customer, most likely meaning delays whilst moved to shunting yards to make up train to that destination, then unload from train to lorry, then to customer and unload. The amount of handling (increasing possibility of damage), the costs and the time taken.
> Transport costs would increase, instead of a few hours in transport, it would be days.


I don't have the figures but I'm pretty sure up front costs might well increase - but against that there would probably be environmental and other savings.



devonidiot said:


> Secondly if most of the heavy lorries and buses were removed from the roads there would be as significant decrease in traffic. Would the roads system be improved, new rods be built, bypasses be built. We would still be trying to drive through town centres.


With the reduction in damage to roads and the reduction in required capacity we probably wouldn't need new roads, improvements and bypasses. The vast majority of vehicles can move around most town centres relatively easily (think buses, ambulances, refuse vehicles). It's the juggernauts that cause the problems - IMHO anyway 

Graham


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

What annoys me the most is that I will be happily toddling along the motorway or a dual carriageway at just over 60 mph and a car/van will overtake me doing about 10 mph faster than me. It will then pull in front of me a reasonable distance ahead but then it will slow down to about 55 mph.


Why?


----------



## passionwagon (Nov 13, 2005)

8O What do you al think of the current request to DoT from a couple of haulage companies to run road trains of 80 metre length and increased weight on UK roads! In their proposal they say the vehicle will only use specific roads under a special licence system. Well the 44 tonne vehicle was introduced under a similar system- either the rules have been changed or they are ignored. Perhaps our VOSA mole can clarify :?:


----------



## passionwagon (Nov 13, 2005)

Sorry I should have said 80 feet! --twice the current trailer length. :roll:


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2006)

passionwagon said:


> 8O What do you al think of the current request to DoT from a couple of haulage companies to run road trains of 80 metre length and increased weight on UK roads!


B****y selfish of the companies and b****y stupid of the DoT if they allow it.

Graham


----------

