Driving Standards – Just What is Happening?

Whilst this blog article is not actually CV related, it is something that affects all motorists, professional or not, and that is – Driving Ability.  Now although the vast majority of HGV drivers are very professional and experienced road users, from time to time you will come across someone who could be considered a danger to other road users.  Fortunately the number of drivers like this is relatively small compared to the number of light commercial van drivers who seem to be in a hurry, usually flying down the outside lane of the motorway.

However, by far the largest group who commit stupid and frequently dangerous manoeuvres are car drivers.  In my opinion, the two most likely reasons for this are laziness and a general lack of consideration towards other road users.

Despite assurances by the government to the contrary, I have noticed falling driving standards for years despite a more rigorous test.

Take one incident I was witness to on early Friday evening and another that almost caused me to collide with a car on Sunday morning.

In the first incident on Friday evening, I was sitting in the left hand filter lane at a ‘T’ junction leading onto a major A road.  Two further lanes to my right were positioned for traffic to turn right onto the ‘A’ road.  To my complete amazement, two cars turned into the outer of the two lanes I was adjacent to, into oncoming traffic, through the red light where stationary traffic was waiting for the lights to change.

The reason – well, they wanted to do a ‘U-turn’.  Instead of turning into the correct lane and travelling a mile to the closest roundabout and turn around, they decided to head into oncoming traffic at a set of traffic lights, on the wrong side of a dual carriageway to turn round!

The second incident was on a roundabout.  I was preparing to enter the junction I wished to turn into using the outside lane because a Mercedes was turning left ahead of me into the inside lane of the same turn-off.  But, too latethe driver obvioulsy decided he was turning into the wrong junction because he promptly slowed down and started to drive out of the junction he was already committed to.  He was now positioned in the junction side on to me, blocking all traffic into the junction.

Fortunately I stopped and the the driver drove off with a wave.  Not only was this a stupid manoeuvre, it was dangerous.  Another roundabout was no more than 300 metres away where he could have turned around safely.

With over 30 years driving experience and hundreds of thousands on motoring miles under my belt, I see this kind of stupidity all the time, but it is getting worse.  The drivers I see are from all age groups (the Mercedes driver was over 50), sexes and types (both business drivers and general motorists), so this is not just a problem with young drivers.

The Police and Local Governments appear to be obsessed with speed, and I agree that inappropriate speeding is dangerous but, just because you are driving slowly, it does not necessarily follow that you are driving well, or safely.  I believe a crackdown in poor driving would decrease the number of accidents on our roads more than just prosecuting those who speed.

I also believe a re-think is required as far as possession of a driving licence is concerned, and those that are caught performing stupid and/or dangerous manoeuvres should have to re-sit their driving test and not just merely face a driving ban, points and/or a fine.

Trying to rectify a driving mistake with an even greater (and more dangerous) manoeuvre is insane.  Too many drivers are relying on the speedy reactions and experience of other road users to avoid accidents.

Please feel free to comment on any stupid manouevres you have witnessed.

Adblue Sabotage Warning

Businesses with vehicles using Adblue are being warned about companies claiming they can reduce their consumption of Adblue.  Some of these back-street companies claim to be ‘re-mapping specialists’ but this could not be further from the truth.

Vehicles fitted with SCR are designed to be used with Adblue and should not be modified merely to save, on the face of it, relatively small amounts of money.  The damage that this tampering can cause far outweighs any potential savings, or the possiblility of prosecution.

Owners whose vehicles are within their warranty period or those who lease vehicles, are particularly vulnerable and would probably be forced to pay for any repairs out of their own pocket should problems occur.  Also, in all probability the the main dealer would recognise a chip that’s been tampered with anyway.

What is worrying many maufacturers is the use of their logo on websites offering this service.  They are understandably worried that it appears they’re endorsing the service being provided, which is obviously not the case.

A spokesperson for Mercedes stated that Adblue is approximately 4% of the diesel used, so it would be relatively easy to ascertain from records if the vehicle operator was using the correct amount of Adblue.

In any case, the potential consequences of trying out a service like this could be very costly, and not just financially.  And, in addition to this, you won’t have any guarantee from the company supplying it.  You have been warned!

Truck power has increased in leaps and bounds over recent years and Volvo’s new FH16-750 is an excellent example of this.  Due to begin manufacturing in early 2012, it will boost the already impressive 700hp, to 750hp; fuel consumption remains unchanged!

Available in two versions with this power output: The Euro-5 and the EEV or ‘Enhanced Environmentally-Friendly Vehicle (providing even lower emissions and smoke). As a standard fit, to handle the additional torque, Volvo’s I-Shift automatic gear change system will be fitted.

Peak torque of 3550Nm is reached at a low 1050rpm, levelling out at 1400rpm; designed to maintain speed on even the hardest uphill routes.

So why the extra power?  With the demands of current vehicles increasing (as does their range), the FH16-750 is now capable of towing up to 250 tonnes, maintaining speed on undulating and hilly climbs.  Less strain on the engine means fuel economy is also improved under these condtions.

Looking back, when the Volvo F16 engine was first introduced in 1987, the engine produced  a meagre 470hp (by today’s standards that is).  This is how the power increases look since then:

1993 – Power rises to 520hp

2003 – Rises to 610hp

2009 – Rises to 700hp

2011 – Increased to 750hp

Other outputs of the 16-litre engine can also be specified: 540, 600 and 700hp.

Go to ‘Volvo’s Flagship Celebrates with 750hp‘ at HGV.com to read more.

UK Hauliers Still Feeling The Pinch

I know it might appear that my sole topic of conversation recently has been rising haulage costs, but to be honest, this is merely a reflection of the concerns coming from most hauliers.  There is little else on their minds at the moment and other industry news that may be of interest, is scarce.

With fuel, tyre and overheads all on the rise [12%, 7.3% and 5% respectively from 1st Jan to 1st July 2011], and with their customers pushing for reductions or no increase in prices, it’s not surprising that hauliers are feeling the squeeze.

Those that may have planned to upgrade their fleet are now waiting to see what happens; this is not a good time to invest heavily into an area which will probably experience further increases in operating costs.

Unfortunately, this obviously has an impact on the commercial vehicle market despite the continual upbeat message that is portrayed by manufacturers in trade journals and the web.

This is not a recession we can spend our way out of, and haulage companies cannot hold back passing on price increases to their customers forever!

There are many things about road users that irritate me and I while I could blame it on my age – you know, the Grumpy Old Git syndrome, these are things that have annoyed me since I was young.

On this occasion it is people who litter our roads.  Now after my minor rant about the Highways Agency yesterday, today I find myself in full agreement with them over their anger at roadside litter-bugs.

Whilst their anger is at people who litter our motorways, it really should refer to any road user.  The H.A. currently collect 240,000 bags of rubbish from the motorways each year.  Using the current figure for the number of motorway miles in the UK, it means they collect 109 bags of rubbish per mile per year or one bag every 3.34 days per mile.

Why did I break down the figure like this…well just to illustrate how much rubbish is being left at the roadside or worse still, thrown from a moving vehicle.

The H.A.’s message is to ‘Bag it, Bin it’; i.e. take your rubbish home with you.  They state that this would free up resources elsewhere and not contaminate the countryside, possibly cause floodings, harm wildlife and create an eyesore.

I agree with them entirely but my concern is this… We shouldn’t need to tell people this, it should be instinctive.  We now live in a society where large numbers of people need to be told to do everything that should be done as a matter of course.

Do I feel this will make a difference? Well, no, I don’t.  Two points to clarify this:

1/ If you need to be given this very basic instruction on how to behave then you should be ashamed.

2/ If you are someone that really couldn’t care about dropping litter, then it will make no difference anyway because you will continue to leave rubbish whenever you stop by the roadside (or in service areas) or throw it from your vehicle.  

After all, it keeps someone in a job doesn’t it – and yes, I have heard this excuse used!

Stop – Start, Stop – Start

Transport for London are now urging Bus and Commercial Vehicle drivers to switch off their engines stopped in traffic as a way to reduce emissions.  On the face of it this is nothing new – many car manufacturers have installed stop-start technology to models within their range for many years and it normally works well.

Reducing the emissions from stationary traffic is a great idea and I applaud it.  I just hope it doesn’t cause problems for larger vehicles that are not designed for the constant switching on and off of the ignition.

This is an area of a vehicle  that sees a great deal of wear and tear – but only time will tell because at the moment it is being requested as a voluntary measure.  Someday it might be required by law that all vehicles that use London (and other cities perhaps) will have to have this technology fitted before they are allowed onto our crowded roads.

The Shape of Things to Come

I may be cynical – no, I am cynical, because I rarely believe the reasons large companies/organisations give us for their actions – at least not the main reasons they put forward.  Take for instance the switching off of motorway lighting between junctions 10 (Luton) and 13 (Milton Keynes) on the M1.

The primary reason given by the Highways Agency is to reduce CO2 emissions, closely followed by a reduction in Light Pollution for residents who live close to the motorway.  Now don’t get me wrong, both of these are admirable reasons but let’s face it, it’s really about saving money, both for the energy motorway lighting consumes and maintenance costs.

Although they state they will be saving a considerable amount of money and investing it into other worthwhile areas, strangely, no definte figures (at least non I could see) were offered nor what precisely, they would be spending the savings on!

Personally, I am very much in favour of turning off lights during certain hours when the vast majority of people are asleep as the benefits are definitely there; for example:

• Reduced energy consumption
• Less maintenance
• Lower CO2 emissions
• No light pollution (for those of us that like to see stars)

Obviously safety & security are issues but unlit main roads are nothing new, and people should drive according to the road conditions, so it might mean they slow down a little; and, as far as security is concerned, most modern CCTV systems are able to operate in low to zero light conditions.

I know that CO2 is an area of concern but these days it’s reduction is used as an excuse for almost every piece of legislation or action from companies and organisations everywhere.

Yes of course we want to protect our climate and the figures provided by the Highways agency of 810 tonnes of CO2 are impressive BUT…. stop treating everyone as stupid.  We are all aware why this, and for other measures which are being taken around the country – to save money.

Lower Oil Prices Should Mean Lower Pump Prices -
Shouldn’t They?

Well commonsense would suggest yes, but it ‘s very rarely the case, is it?  Forecourt prices appear to change constantly (usually up), irrespective of the price of oil.  Oil companies state they must buy it in bulk and this charge is passed on to the forecourt, usually immediately, but reductions can take weeks to take effect.

Now I would agree that if the price per barrel rises, and it’s purchased in bulk then it’s only fair to pass this on, but (and it’s a big but), oil companies can’t have it both ways, (although they invariably do).  If the price has to go up immediately, even when not every service station is re-fuelled every day then it’s only fair that if there is a drop in the price of the barrel that it comes down equally fast.

Oil companies cannot say the price needs to rise immediately because they make regular deliveries (even though they are probably using existing supplies of petrol and diesel), and then delay lowering the price when oil prices fall, using the argument that they are using existing supplies that they paid a higher price for.

Do you see my point?

Currently, the reason given is the poor state of Sterling, but there is always an excuse. Since 2009, the average price of petrol has risen by a massive 56%!

Nevertheless, the RHA is stating that the cost of oil has reduced by 13% since the end of July on the world market, but forecourt prices (not those of supermarkets to quite the same degree) have not come down noticeably.

Assuming that it takes two weeks for the price to fall whenever there is a reduction in the cost of oil, they are expecting to see a 5 pence drop in forecourt prices by the end of next week – 26/8/2011.

We shall see, because every day the oil companies delay dropping the price, means huge profits for them and despite protestations to the contrary, none of them appear to be suffering because of the poor economy, even though most of their customers are!

With the cost of many raw materials rising, most hauliers are constantly looking for ways to save money on operating costs.

Tyres, for example, are an expensive item especially with recent price increases (which is partly down to poor supply), therefore the prospect of using retreads has become an attractive option for those operators that work to very tight margins.

Of course the downside to this increase in interest is that the availability of retreads has decreased slightly. However, a number companies, Goodyear Dunlop for instance, has incresed it’s retreading facilities and invested heavily into this area in France, the UK and in Germany, who alone are expecting to turn out 150,000 retreads a year very soon.

As far as costs are concerned, they are anything up to 60% less than a brand new tyre and for those who like to be green whenever they can… retreads are more environmentally friendly as they are using existing casings which would otherwise have to be disposed of.

Fair Fuel Campaign Increases Momentum

With over 180,000 signatures so far and another 18,000 registered (as of 8th August 2011) on the Government’s own e-petition site, the Fairfuel Campaign is increasing momentum and doesn’t look like it going to go away.

To have a full debate in Parliament, it will need to have 100,000 e-signatures on the site, but this should assure it of even greater publicity.   And, it will need to put on the pressure if it’s going to be successful in getting the Government to scrap the planned 4p fuel duty increase planned in January and August 2012.

Without any concrete alternatives for fossil based fuels, the vast majority of us have no alternative but to use petrol and diesel to power our vehicles.   There’s no point in the Governent and environmentalists preaching about using fossil fuels when the majority of Electric cars are over £25,000 (figure does not include the government’s rebate) and are really designed for short journey’s only. You can fuel an economical supermini (petrol or diesel) for many years before you spent as much on an electric car.   Then by the time you caught up, the electric car would be needing new batteriesanyway, at a cost of £1,000′s.

More importantly, all these additional ‘Environmental Taxes’ merely seem to be swallowed up by the treasury.  So, like it or not, in the real world we are stuck with the system of transport we have but if it continues to increase in cost, and let’s not forget that currently, 60% of the cost is fuel duty and VAT (which is added on after the fuel duty, thereby taxing a tax), then the situation for private individuals and businesses is not going to improve.

The problem is that the oil supply problem has not just appeared but how many governments have actively planned for the future to reduce dependency on fossil fuels.   Perhaps when eventually the whole planet grinds to a halt then something will have to be done.   But for now we are being controlled by successive governments that just react to problems and not plan for them.

So for now, if you want have this debated by Parliament, click on the FairFuelUK e-petition link