Undercover Police Lorry!

[Elroy Blue]

spaximus said:

It is another case of "I want one too". Like every force you must have a helicopter now or at least a share in one otherwise where will Alistair Stuart sit, soon it will be everyone needs a truck.
Yes it is a problem but how much does this cost to catch the odd driver who is doing wrong?

Apart from the fact Police don't own or maintain the truck. Its borrowed for a few weeks for a purpose, then given back.

[grumpy52]

My post was to try and stear some to the point that the weight governs the speed limit for most ordinary trucks (under/over 7.5) many will not know that you don't need a class 1 to drive a tractor unit.
A de-restricted artic tractor is quite a handfull .the tweeked scania 113-450 unit I drove a couple of times made my bum twitch a few times powering out of corners.

[Grenoble]

GC8 said:

For police purposes the limiter can be removed.

Out of interest, how fast would a destricted average artic go? Would it be ultimately limited by gearing?

[covboy]

Grenoble said:

Out of interest, how fast would a destricted average artic go? Would it be ultimately limited by gearing?

This fast enough ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx4EJX73soY

[Rovinghawk]

grumpy52 said:

My post was to try and stear some to the point that the weight governs the speed limit for most ordinary trucks (under/over 7.5) many will not know that you don't need a class 1 to drive a tractor unit.

Is it true that removal of the 5th wheel means it can be driven on a car licence?

RH

[grumpy52]

No. Its all on weight .

[spaximus]

Elroy Blue said:

Apart from the fact Police don't own or maintain the truck. Its borrowed for a few weeks for a purpose, then given back.

Then they should make it clear that is what is happening otherwise it seems to many that this is an extravagance for a small problem.

[Elroy Blue]

HGVs are involved in a significant number of fatal or very serious RTCs, so its not a 'small' problem

[R0G]

Elroy Blue said:

HGVs are involved in a significant number of fatal or very serious RTCs, so its not a 'small' problem

car crashes and most will survive without major injury
LGV crashes and its more likely that someone will be killed or very seriously injured

This is why the responsibility is that much greater on drivers of large vehicles and why they have a second tier of licence enforcement covering the C & D categories - the TC

[GC8]

Grenoble said:

GC8 said:

For police purposes the limiter can be removed.

Out of interest, how fast would a destricted average artic go? Would it be ultimately limited by gearing?

I think so, yes, as theres no shortage of torque/horsepower.

[FFSport]

My step dad is a lorry driver & he was telling me about these on the motorway over a year ago, They are there too see what drivers of hgv are doing good idea imo, If a driver is using his iPad and driving could of been a mahoooosive accident, we wouldn't want that to happen now would we...

So I say good on them.

[spaximus]

Elroy Blue said:

HGVs are involved in a significant number of fatal or very serious RTCs, so its not a 'small' problem

I never said lorry crashes are a small problem,they clearly have the potential to be fatal, but how many accidents are simply caused by falling asleep at the wheel as many seem to take place in the early hours. I was asking or suggesting that lorry drivers reading i pads is not a huge issue. If I am wrong I apologise.

[chilistrucker]

streaky said:

chilistrucker said:

speeding aswell then, 56mph on a dual carriageway.

The other vehicle was probably a car, certainly something the officers could see down into, so not speeding on a DC - if not a 50 or lower limit.

The other vehicle might have been passing the police lorry, so the lorry might not have been "speeding" either.

Streaky

your right.
i looked again, and it doesn't state, "lorry"
i wrongly assumed because, "lorry" was the theme and they caught the offender at "56mph" it was a lorry.
2+2 and got 5