Bewick:
I recall back in the 70’s three motors belonging to my Old long gone pal Curly Cargill were “Platooning” coming of the M/way on the slip road one day. The first one stopped at the roundabout entrance, the middle one just managed to stop ( Phew !) but tail end Charlie stuffed into the middle one who was a “■■■ paper” distance away from the front one ! Oh! dear “crunch” and the one in the middle was one of Curly’s first two LV ERF’s he bought which he had just “lovingly” refurb’d not long before this incident ! and apparently he was not a happy Bunny mainly because all his many hours of careful work had gone down “the toilet” as the old “D” reg was in a right [zb] state I gathered. Platooning ! it’s already been tried and failed Cheers Bewick.
The painful issue here is it relied on the reactions of the driver
Spud1960:
The systems will no doubt include many fail-safes for example when the lead driver applies the brakes the following combinations brakes will be applied it will be a wireless connection it won’t need to wait for the vehicle in front to slow down for the following ones to brake. the speed at which canbus electronics work is mind blowing with sensors monitoring systems and making adjustments thousands of times per second.
Back in July Coomsey asked how long before we see driverless trucks ? and I guessed 5 - 7 years
My guess is 5 - 7 years before we see platooning. The technology is already there and I believe a couple of years ago a number of trial vehicles travelled across Europe to a technology summit. There is not only the drivers wages to be considered, there is also an improvement in fuel consumption as the following vehicles can travel much closer and take advantage of the leading truck’s slipstream thereby creating less drag. Obviously there will need to be infrastructure changes and these vehicles will be only allowed on certain motorways to start with. But given the standard of some of the clowns out there it can’t come soon enough. I’ll get me coat
Well if there are trials starting next year I think a further 6 years it not out of the ballpark
It’s unstoppable the technology is here and will be used. Some of the arguments against it could just as easily have been used about the hoss n cart or the steam engine. Companies that embrace it will thrive those that don’t will go under and like you say spud1960 very soon cheers Paul
A couple of things I don’t see working;
1, As has been mentioned, a few years ago Stan Robinson & Dendy International were up for trying pulling doubles, 2 40’ trailers with 1 tractor. This would obviously save the fuel of the 2nd tractor, also save the wages of the 2nd driver, & while increasing it’s fuel consumption maybe not increase the wear & tear on the single tractor too much nowadays with the 700bhp etc engines that are out there now for road tractors which makes them easily capable of hauling these loads. But where are the real savings in Platooning? These type of outfits could only realistically be used for Inter-depot Trunking, so you will have 3 outfits, 2 of them rolling along on tickover but the lead tractor burning just as much fuel as ever, you still have 3 drivers wages to pay, yes if they only went to a certain point then split up there may be some savings on the 1st part of the outward trip during platooning, but would the savings really be that great? And regarding costs, has anybody asked the Insurance companies what kind of premiums they would charge to insure vehicles used in this type of operation? Because no matter how clever these computer bods are, there is no escaping the enormous risks 1st to human life & 2nd other collateral damage resulting from this if it went wrong.
2nd. I’m no mechanic/engineer so I stand to be corrected, but if these wagons are as was said on the radio the other day to run at a 1 second gap, this to me throws up 2 immediate questions. If something went badly wrong with the lead Lorry, eg driver suffering heart attack/stroke etc, or a puncture, no matter how quick we may think we are it will take 2-3 seconds at least for the drivers of lorries 2 & 3 to react to this if they were that quick, considering also they would be virtually blind due to the closeness they are travelling! Also in the future if the plans are to do away with the 2nd & 3rd driver, surely wherever the lead wagon goes the other 2 will follow, be it through the central reservation or down the embankment? They could maybe say that if something happened the lead driver could hit a emergency button & break communications with the other 2 outfits, so what would then happen? the 2 rear outfits would apply emergency braking & stop? On the M6, ouch! It also says the lead Lorry will do the breaking for the other 2, would this then not require all 3 outfits to be loaded to exactly the same weight? We all know the breaking effort to stop 44 tons is a lot less than to stop 32 tons, so if the rear outfits weighed more than the front 1, with a 1 second gap? Maybe this could be organised at the Depot while the outfits are hooked up, so the outfits are put in weight order heaviest at the front, but this would rely on human beings, in a busy Transport yard, working under sometimes extreme pressure to get it right! Have you that much trust in the human race? I know I haven’t.
The drivers in Lorries 2 & 3, sitting there for mile after mile, with nothing to do, & they can’t do anything because they still have to maintain full concentration in case of emergencies, particularly thinking about night-shift when realistically I think these outfits could only really be viable, do you honestly imagine those drivers are going to be able to stay awake?
Also there is a possible darker side to this. We all know Terrorism is never that far away, & lately they have used vehicles to kill, now we may think these people are mad/misguided or whatever, but they aren’t stupid, so maybe they could stand on a bridge or drive alongside these outfits with a Lap-top & break into the inter Lorry communications between the outfits &…we can all imagine the rest!!!
adr:
A couple of things I don’t see working;
1, As has been mentioned, a few years ago Stan Robinson & Dendy International were up for trying pulling doubles, 2 40’ trailers with 1 tractor. This would obviously save the fuel of the 2nd tractor, also save the wages of the 2nd driver, & while increasing it’s fuel consumption maybe not increase the wear & tear on the single tractor too much nowadays with the 700bhp etc engines that are out there now for road tractors which makes them easily capable of hauling these loads. But where are the real savings in Platooning? These type of outfits could only realistically be used for Inter-depot Trunking, so you will have 3 outfits, 2 of them rolling along on tickover but the lead tractor burning just as much fuel as ever, you still have 3 drivers wages to pay, yes if they only went to a certain point then split up there may be some savings on the 1st part of the outward trip during platooning, but would the savings really be that great? And regarding costs, has anybody asked the Insurance companies what kind of premiums they would charge to insure vehicles used in this type of operation? Because no matter how clever these computer bods are, there is no escaping the enormous risks 1st to human life & 2nd other collateral damage resulting from this if it went wrong.
2nd. I’m no mechanic/engineer so I stand to be corrected, but if these wagons are as was said on the radio the other day to run at a 1 second gap, this to me throws up 2 immediate questions. If something went badly wrong with the lead Lorry, eg driver suffering heart attack/stroke etc, or a puncture, no matter how quick we may think we are it will take 2-3 seconds at least for the drivers of lorries 2 & 3 to react to this if they were that quick, considering also they would be virtually blind due to the closeness they are travelling! Also in the future if the plans are to do away with the 2nd & 3rd driver, surely wherever the lead wagon goes the other 2 will follow, be it through the central reservation or down the embankment? They could maybe say that if something happened the lead driver could hit a emergency button & break communications with the other 2 outfits, so what would then happen? the 2 rear outfits would apply emergency braking & stop? On the M6, ouch! It also says the lead Lorry will do the breaking for the other 2, would this then not require all 3 outfits to be loaded to exactly the same weight? We all know the breaking effort to stop 44 tons is a lot less than to stop 32 tons, so if the rear outfits weighed more than the front 1, with a 1 second gap? Maybe this could be organised at the Depot while the outfits are hooked up, so the outfits are put in weight order heaviest at the front, but this would rely on human beings, in a busy Transport yard, working under sometimes extreme pressure to get it right! Have you that much trust in the human race? I know I haven’t.
The drivers in Lorries 2 & 3, sitting there for mile after mile, with nothing to do, & they can’t do anything because they still have to maintain full concentration in case of emergencies, particularly thinking about night-shift when realistically I think these outfits could only really be viable, do you honestly imagine those drivers are going to be able to stay awake?
Also there is a possible darker side to this. We all know Terrorism is never that far away, & lately they have used vehicles to kill, now we may think these people are mad/misguided or whatever, but they aren’t stupid, so maybe they could stand on a bridge or drive alongside these outfits with a Lap-top & break into the inter Lorry communications between the outfits &…we can all imagine the rest!!!
Regards Chris
Sorry, the braking effort to stop 44 tons is obviously ‘more’ than to stop 32 tons (It is late, been a long day )
cav551:
Even if the front vehicle could transmit ABS data about wheel slip to the rest of the Platoon, by the time ABS on the lead vehicle has come into play it is too late.
The lead vehicle, I am guessing, would transmit its own deceleration data to the others. If its ABS system is activated, its own maximum retardation would be reduced, so the chance of the lorries colliding would not be increased by the front lorry coming across a slippy bit of road. Of course, if it is so slippy that the front lorry ends up hitting an obstacle, then it is probably inevitable that the others in the platoon hit it.
jmc jnr:
The answer,surely, is to sort out the railway. The canadians run long trains with distribution networks at either end. Admittedly our distances are much shorter but “Platooning” will only tie a load of trucks together and provide another mobile road block. I can see it working on the M6 at night, but how for example do you get the eastern europeans to play ball? They represent a huge percentage of lorries on our roads now. When a Lithuanian Volvo creeps past a platoon the road will be blocked for even longer than it is now. Jim.
No disrespect, but you mustn’t have been on the M6 at night recently. Road closures are a nightly feature with miles and miles of diversions. I run 3 night trunks between Trafford Park and Newmarket and the drivers never know when they set off which way they will end up going. If there are no diversions it’s a 630 Km round trip, one night last week they did 702 Km and maxed out on a 10 hour driving duty. These roadworks and diversions are scheduled for the next 3 years at least, then no doubt another programme will commence.
Quite right Gingerfold. It is several years since I drove north. The A14 is my local dual carriageway too, and that is no picnic at certain times. The answer has to be Scottie’s Transporter Beams. Bet Turners are front line in trying Automation though. Was in France / Belgium in 2011 and every other tanker seemed to be one of yours. Jim
Why ■■ why do we need it when we already have a system in place, it’s called a railway. Look in Europe, freight down the Rhine Valley, long distance trains where the whole lorry goes on and gets transported big mileages, hell, look at the Channel Tunnel (drive on drive off). Only one train driver required.
I am sure that what we are going to see here is a generational division. Us old ■■■■■ who know, from all those years of experience, that this is a stupid and ill thought-out idea that wont work, on our roads anyway, and yoof who will be enchanted by the technology.
why do we need it when we already have a system in place, it’s called a railway
Dead right GOM. Oh, and can somebody explain to me why we are spending countless billions on HS2, 3, 4 & 5 which is not even intended to carry goods let alone HGVs on low-loader wagons?
Wow, another wheeze from the experts taken up by the look- at- me politicians.
Dead right again.
The lead vehicle, I am guessing, would transmit its own deceleration data to the others. If its ABS system is activated, its own maximum retardation would be reduced, so the chance of the lorries colliding would not be increased by the front lorry coming across a slippy bit of road.
Now there is an award winning bit of 21st century thinking. I have somehow managed an accident free driving career with only my eyes wirelessly transmitting information to my, admittedly small, brain and it transmitting instructions to me right foot. Ain’t technology wonderful.
Now what we really need is carryfast drawing on his boundless experience to tell us all where we are wrong.
Dinna fret Yersel David, when The Great Man frae Leatherhead gets a “sniff” of this thread have no fear he will be piling in with all the various technical issues that will make your teeth itch ! He may still be confined to his cell at the moment, sorry secure accommodation, due to the recent “Eclipse” which can have a funny effect on some individuals, no doubt Matron will be letting him out of his straight jacket once she is confident he wont hurt himself or damage the contents of his cell, sorry room ! Cheers Dennis.
I wonder what would happen if this ‘convoy’ was tootling along at 56mph and (say the middle lorry) had a front wheel blowout and set off across all lanes by itself. I can guess what would happen, it would be b loody carnage that no amount of electronic wizardry and witchcraft could handle.
David Miller:
I am sure that what we are going to see here is a generational division. Us old ■■■■■ who know, from all those years of experience, that this is a stupid and ill thought-out idea that wont work, on our roads anyway, and yoof who will be enchanted by the technology.
That’s how I see it. I do not think freshly-qualified LGV drivers will balk at the idea of platoon driving on the motorway. Personally, compared to the present situation- 50-100ft vehicle spacing, with the responsibility to brake/swerve/stop at the drop of a hat- I think I would prefer it, travelling 20 ft behind the vehicle in front, knowing that that vehicle’s driver’s right foot operates my brakes as well as his own. On a sparsely=trafficked motorway, it might be different, but passing through the Midlands on a Monday morning, I would be the first to press the “Platoon” button, and aim for the back of the lorry in front, as per the instructions on the head-up display.
David Miller:
The lead vehicle, I am guessing, would transmit its own deceleration data to the others. If its ABS system is activated, its own maximum retardation would be reduced, so the chance of the lorries colliding would not be increased by the front lorry coming across a slippy bit of road.
Now there is an award winning bit of 21st century thinking. I have somehow managed an accident free driving career with only my eyes wirelessly transmitting information to my, admittedly small, brain and it transmitting instructions to me right foot…
David
You can drive the “front” lorry if you want. We trust you.
grumpy old man:
I wonder what would happen if this ‘convoy’ was tootling along at 56mph and (say the middle lorry) had a front wheel blowout and set off across all lanes by itself. I can guess what would happen, it would be b loody carnage that no amount of electronic wizardry and witchcraft could handle.
Again I’m guessing, but I imagine that, if a vehicle “breaks ranks” for whatever reason, the following lorries’ drivers will be warned to resume full control of their vehicles, possibly after an automatic brake application, to ensure vehicle spacing safe enough for them to run with autonomous control.
grumpy old man:
I wonder what would happen if this ‘convoy’ was tootling along at 56mph and (say the middle lorry) had a front wheel blowout and set off across all lanes by itself. I can guess what would happen, it would be b loody carnage that no amount of electronic wizardry and witchcraft could handle.
Yes! Or that classic scenario on modern lorries (that could never occur on old technology) where a car bounces off something in another lane and nose-dives into the steering axle of an artic, totally disenabling its ability to steer, thus rendering it a loose canon veering at 44-tonnes / 56 mph across four lanes of traffic. They’re having a laugh! Robert
We’ve already got cars that can park themselves, tractors and combine harvesters that operate autonomously whilst talking to each other, no reason why in technical terms the simple act of connecting three trucks wirelessly cannot be a success but no doubt the luddites thought it couldn’t happen as well
Bewick:
Dinna fret Yersel David, when The Great Man frae Leatherhead gets a “sniff” of this thread have no fear he will be piling in with all the various technical issues that will make your teeth itch ! He may still be confined to his cell at the moment, sorry secure accommodation, due to the recent “Eclipse” which can have a funny effect on some individuals, no doubt Matron will be letting him out of his straight jacket once she is confident he wont hurt himself or damage the contents of his cell, sorry room ! Cheers Dennis.
Don’t tempt fate Dennis I can feel a migraine coming on already
Bewick:
Dinna fret Yersel David, when The Great Man frae Leatherhead gets a “sniff” of this thread have no fear he will be piling in with all the various technical issues that will make your teeth itch ! He may still be confined to his cell at the moment, sorry secure accommodation, due to the recent “Eclipse” which can have a funny effect on some individuals, no doubt Matron will be letting him out of his straight jacket once she is confident he wont hurt himself or damage the contents of his cell, sorry room ! Cheers Dennis.
Don’t tempt fate Dennis I can feel a migraine coming on already
He’s already “logged on” I see, must be “boneing up” still so you’d better reach for the paracetamol Spud because he will be launching in very soon !
He’s “done one” Spud, must have gone to Bully’s Truck Stop ! Cheers Bewick.
PS No he’s on the Professional site so he must have said ■■■■ it why should I give those Old ■■■■■ the benefit of my years of valuable expertise and knowledge !
I reckon the great man has been quiet because he’s been doing his research- video hosting sites, Wikipedia, anything will do. When it is ready, he will unleash a firestorm (I think that is the right word) of perfect sense in this direction.
Hi all,
My turn !!!
Many years ago Volvo and more recently Iveco carried out fuel usage on heavy trucks and it was found to have changed little, apart from the obvious indevidual m p g figures which were of no interesr on this test.
About 75% of fuel is used bringing a truck up to speed, round-a-bouts, lights, juntions and hills.
It is slightly better in slow moving traffic but it is at its best on a duel carriageway or better still on a motorway.
Motorways change a little on North/South and East/west and with wind and rain but it is safe to say motorways are when they are at thier most efficient.
I am open minded as to why any organisation would target the most efficient part of an organisation to try and make improvements. Harvey
Cheers Bewick.
)
