Hello There!

We are moving to our new domain at etruck.com.au

It’s an opportunity to provide more of the same industry comment but with the bonus of more flexibility to develop the site and provide the Australian transport industry with an online resource it can use and a forum to discuss ideas.

CLICK THROUGH HERE 

The latest moves in the Volkswagen, Scania and MAN saga leaves the Swedish truck maker in an uncertain position. After the relative stability following the takeover of Scania by Volkswagen and the decision by the German carmaker to adopt a hands-off approach to the Swedish company the latest developments are posing questions without clear answers.

When Porsche bought Volkswagen at the end of 2008 the luxury carmaker made it very clear they were not interested in producing and marketing trucks. As a result, Volkswagen hived off their commercial vehicle operation in South America to MAN. Swedish share ownership laws stated Porsche needed to make an offer for all of Scania’s shares before the end of January because of the high percentage of shares they already owned. Now the Scania board is recommending shareholders do not accept the Porsche offer.

The question must then be asked, whither Scania? They are currently in a position where their majority shareholder is not interested in being an active participant in the business. In their position there is no opportunity to become part of a larger global organisation to match the other big players, Daimler, Volvo and Paccar.

Scania CEO Leif Ostling

Scania have always insisted upon taking an independent, individual course for the development of their business. However, there has been considerable consolidation in truck making globally and Scania are in danger of becoming a small niche player when compared with most of their competitors in Europe.

Statements coming out of Scania headquarters in Sweden are playing down the situation, stating the Porsche offer is purely mandatory, made because the company was obliged to make it.

What is not mentioned is the abandonment of plans originating in Volkswagen for a global truck manufacturing operation consisting of Scania, MAN and Volkswagen’s South American commercial vehicle operations. These plans have disappeared from the radar and Scania’s long-term intentions remain unclear.

They are fast running out of potential partners with which to form a global alliance. There are also in danger of falling behind their rivals who can spread development funding across a global range of trucks while Scania need to do the same development work for trucks with a much smaller market, sold only in Europe, South America and some smaller markets, like Australia.

With the release of a new 16 L engine Volvo Trucks can now claim to produce the most powerful production truck in the world. The new improved to FH16 pumps out a massive 700 hp and has been unveiled for the European market. How long the engine will take to arrive here for sale in the Australian market is a matter for conjecture.

Although the company is describing this as a major development for their engine and for their range, it is difficult to believe the extra power will make much difference to the driver or to the load on the road.

It could be that the most important thing is the fact there is a 700 painted in big numbers on the door and the driver or the truck’s owner can boast they have the most powerful truck in the world on the road. Quite often it is simply a status thing with little discernible productivity improvement from a higher power figure.

The figure we should be looking at instead is the torque rating. Torque is what gives an engine it’s oomph and, as such, is actually a more important figure when gauging how well a truck goes. Horse power always gets the spotlight, but it it is in fact a torque which is doing all the work. When we look at the torque on this new 16 L engine from Volvo we see there has been an increase of just 50 Newton metres in the torque rating. In normal highway running with a single trailer or B-double it would be difficult to discern the difference from the driver’s seat or from trip times.

What we will see this year from Volvo is the new look for the FH and FM ranges, a modernising of the style coupled with some specification improvements underneath. We can expect to see these changes later this year, most probably at the Brisbane Truck Show. At first glance these changes don’t look to be that different but I have been lucky enough to get a sneak preview of the new trucks in the metal and can say that the difference is striking and it makes the trucks look, stylistically, much more modern.

Getting back to the new 16 L engine, another number will be of great interest to Australian truck buyers. In the information released so far in Europe about the truck the SCR system is described as being larger than the current model fitted here in Australia. This may, or may not, impinge upon the chassis space available for fuel tanks on this next-generation FH model.

So the number we will be looking for is how many litres of fuel it is possible to fit into the chassis of a standard semi or B-double prime mover for major linehaul highway work. You can be sure the Volvo engineers will be working hard right now on the chassis layout of the new trucks, for release in a couple of years time, to ensure they can shoehorn enough diesel into the truck to satisfy the Australian operators’ needs.

The power of some of the new technologies available in trucks is awe inspiring. Having driven trucks fitted with stuff like proximity radar it is possible to see how much safer trucks could be on the roads if there was enough money in the transport game to make it possible to afford some of the latest gadgets.

These two videos simulate a dangerous situation on a bend with and without proximity control and the difference is astounding.

A Truck Industry Council survey last year gave motorists a list of some of the state-of-the-art electronic safety technologies on the market today, in Australia, things like proximity control, stability control, video cameras etc. When asked to comment some of the respondents said it would be a good idea if someone could invent technologies like this!

This stuff is here and its available and the whingeing car drivers don’t have any idea about both the problems bigs trucks can get into and the technology available to get them out of trouble.

Here is a great video on YouTube, it’s one of a series of adverts for a Dutch insurance company looking at the funnier side of life as a truck driver.

This particular video has great resonance for me as, sometime ago, I woke at 4:30 AM started my truck and set off down the road in Southern Spain and it was 20 minutes before I met a car going the other way fla Offshing his lights at me to get over to the right side of the road.

It took about 20 minutes before my heart stopped trying to get out through my rib cage. Luckily, we do not have this sort of problem on Australian roads.

etruck would like to thank Brian Weatherley’s BigLorry Blog for drawing our attention to this particular video.

Isuzu’s Director and Chief Operating Officer, Phil Taylor. is drawing the industry’s attention to the yawning gap between the public perception of trucks on the road and the actual facts as they stand today. On reading the report from a recent survey into the public attitude towards the transport industry there is a very obvious lack of understanding in the public at large.

When presented with a list of all the latest safety features available as standard or as an option on a modern truck, many respondents to the survey thought the list was a wish list of desirable systems and thought they should be fitted if they had been invented.

This was probably the most surprising finding of the entire survey although much of the other data  collected will provide the truck manufacturers and the transport industry with useful food for thought and leave them better informed about how the general public perceive them and their industry.

Taylor said that the latest range of trucks boasted active and passive safety features comparable to passenger vehicles and were a far cry from the heavy vehicles of only a few short years ago.

“Many of the trucks now available on the market are well equipped with safety devices such as ABS brakes, traction control, hill start aid and SRS airbags, not only does this equipment help protect the driver and cargo, but all road users,” he said.

“Australia further benefits from some of the most professional truck drivers in the world, boasting plenty of experience driving in a wide variety of conditions, while our more novice drivers are subjected to comprehensive licensing regimes prior to being handed the keys.”

Taylor alludes to recent research conducted by Dr Susan Dann on behalf of the Truck Industry Council (TIC), which found that the public perception of trucks was generally negative.

“The respondents mainly focused on the negative aspects of heavy vehicles – noise, environmental concerns and traffic congestion. There is considerable ignorance amongst the wider general public as to the important role trucks play in our society in transporting just about every consumer product imaginable,” Taylor said.

“Many respondents were also oblivious to the safety features and technology of present day trucks.”

Taylor said that despite the advances in heavy vehicle technology leading to safer trucks, it was the responsibility of all road users to take extra care over the Christmas holidays.

“The summer holiday period is traditionally a time when families pack the car and head off to visit family and friends or travel to their favourite holiday destination for a few days’ break,” he said. “Unfortunately it’s also a time that is synonymous with carnage on our roads.

“During busier periods, it’s essential that all road users remain patient and allow extra time to reach their destination.  Drivers of passenger vehicles should also change their driving habits around trucks.

“Trucks require a much greater stopping distance; when cars cut in front of a truck and then swiftly apply the brakes, it can cause considerable problems for the truck driver to stop his larger and heavier vehicle in time to avoid a collision.

“Car drivers should also keep in mind that when travelling behind a large truck their presence may not be noticed by the truck driver as they won’t be able to sight them in the mirrors. A simple rule to remember is that if the driver of a trailing vehicle can’t see the truck’s mirror, the truck driver will not be able to see them.

“Sharing the road with trucks requires commonsense, some additional care and a little courtesy – this will go a long way to ensuring greater safety on our roads in the coming weeks.”

The repositioning of Volkswagen has begun with the German carmaker selling off its truck and bus manufacturing capacity in Brazil to MAN, a company of which they still own 20%. The sale, worth US$2.4 billion, has been announced this week and will take effect in the first quarter of 2009.

As a result of this move it is still not clear how Volkswagen envisage the final structure of all of the companies they own. By divesting themselves of their South American interests in the truck and bus market they appear to have stepped away from the plan they were talking about last year of creating a global truck manufacturer using the assets of both Scania and MAN plus their own commercial vehicle interests in both South America and Europe.

Now, they are clearly defining a line between their light commercial vehicle interests i.e. their van ranges and the manufacture and sale of larger heavy duty vehicles. In this statement about the sale of  VW trucks the company made it clear they will continue with Volkswagen commercial vehicles, based out of Europe and concentrating on the van market in which they have already been quite successful.

The question is what they intend to do with both Scania and MAN. Scania have, historically, been a very independent company and would wish to continue as such. VW appear to have listened to the advice of Scania CEO Leif Ostling and seem likely to leave well alone as long as the Swedish truck maker continued to make large profits.

This leaves German truck maker MAN as the joker in the pack and they appear to have been told by Volkswagen they are to be a global truck maker.

The question remains about what Volkswagen intend to do about two companies competing head-to-head in the heavy duty truck market in Europe. There do not appear to be many synergies available between the two companies, but also, there does not appear to be much value in allowing the two of them to fight it out for market share in a very tight West European truck market.

The transport industry in the USA is trying to catch up with something the rest of the world has been doing for many years. They have decided to to lobby hard to get an increase in the allowable GCM on the roads of the United States.

Nationally, the maximum mass allowable is 80,000 lb or just over 36 tonnes. The heaviest trucks given general access throughout the country are semis, consisting of a 6 x 4 prime mover and a tandem axle trailer.

Initially, the American trucking industry will be pushing for a limit of 100,000 lb, over 45 tonnes, on a six axle combination. Currently, trucks like this are up able to travel around on specified routes on state-by-state basis and are not allowed on the major interstate freeways used by the vast majority of US freight.

Hamstrung by the strength of the driver unions, with transport industry in the USA had been unable in the past and to get acceptance of more productive vehicles. However, with a combination of a severe driver shortage and fuel prices increasing exponentially, notwithstanding recent decreases in prices, more productive vehicles have become an imperative for an industry struggling to keep up with the current freight task on US roads.

How it has taken so long to reach this point remains a mystery to every other transport industry across the globe, for most operators the need to improved productivity has driven change in just about every first world country.

Even the, normally extremely regulated, European Union has made concessions to operators allowing more productive vehicles on the roads. This recent example, from Sweden, shows timber hauliers taking up ideas developed here in Australia to increase productivity without compromising safety.

This particular combination used for hauling logs in Sweden will look a little strange to Australian eyes, but the load on the prime mover will be possible because of the much higher front axle weights allowed in Europe.

Two separate surveys released in recent months appear to contradict each other with the results contrasting strongly in terms of the pressure trucking people are under when going about their work.

The Australian Safety and Compensation Council (ASCC) have released their National Hazard Exposure Worker Surveillance (NHEWS) survey and the results appear to be good news. The transport and storage industry workers surveyed included 33% drivers but did not reflect the long hours and pressure from consignors highlighted by a survey earlier in the year.

The survey, by the Queensland Centre for Mental Health Research was part of a project, seeking to improve employers understanding of the value of having healthy employees. Truck drivers in New South Wales were surveyed for the project with funding coming from the National Transport Commission, the Transport Workers Union and the Australian Rotary Health Research Fund.

The truck drivers said they were working an average of 62 hours per week and 6.3% were reported to work over 100 hours each week. Over 17% of survey respondents reported mental health symptoms, with 3.4% of the total suffering from all three major mental health symptoms, depression, anxiety and stress.

However, when approached for the NHEWS survey the average hours worked per week was said to be just over 41 per week and only 14% said they were pressured to work long hours. Even more surprisingly, only 10% said they were given unachievable deadlines.

These two sets of results are clearly incompatible and anyone with a close link to the transport industry is going to regard the mental health survey as ringing more true, confirming anecdotal evidence garnered out on the road.

More worryingly, it is likely the NHEWS survey is the more likely to influence any policy devlopment. It is a good news story telling us industry is doing something about the pressure drivers are under.

Yet again, nothing is going to be done and the truckies of Australia are going to feel even more isolated and ignored while the primary contractors, the big companies, get a pat on the back for improving working conditions.

Blissful ignorance for the lawmakers, a recipe for disaster on Australia’s roads and more work for the admirable Transhelp Foundation trying to help those on the road cope with the ongoing problems.

Fatigue issues hamstring operators

Inconsistent fatigue rules introduced in a mish-mash of forms and then delayed because neither the authorities or the operators had been correctly informed or prepared are causing consternation in the transport industry.

In principle, the laws and the changes they were intended to implement would have been acceptable to the industry. Operators could choose between three levels of compliance and get real productivity gains from strict adherence to complex acredditation and com pliance procedures.

The ability of the individual states to amend the legislation state by state introduces further complexity into the equation. National operators have to deal with up to four different scenarios in Victoria, NSW, Queensland and South Australia and set up compliance for each.

as the deadline approached in September 2008 the industry discovered a total lack of preparedness in the regulators camp with drivers unable to get access to the new work diaries due to replace the current log books.

At the eleventh hour implementation was delayed to allow time for everyone to catch up but again the delays are of differing lengths and the industry remains confused.

“It’s clearly evident from the criticism these laws have attracted, that greater dialogue and consultation between the states, transport operators and industry groups was needed prior to implementation,” said Isuzu Director Phil Taylor this week.

“Unfortunately, trucking operators are dealing with a new set of laws, which exhibit inconsistency from state to state; accordingly some clemency and more time should have been given to allow operators to adjust to the requirements under the laws.

“The government should have given the industry and operators at least 12 months to ready themselves for the new reforms rather than just announcing a compliance date. Owner operators and fleets are facing some complex issues across many areas of operation to comply with the new requirements at short notice.”