Coquihalla Carnage????

[stuphoto]

With a lot of experienced drivers retiring due to age, it must be difficult for trucking companies to hire experienced drivers. By experienced drivers I mean drivers that have driven thousands of miles under all weather and terrain conditions.

Not thousands of miles on flat terrain where there is little actual winter.

I have never driven truck but have seen the results of many inexperienced drivers attempting to "learn on the road". To me it is an art requiring significant knowledge, experience and ability.

You are pretty much spot on with everything, and the main reason why the industry isn't attracting new, highly skilled drivers is wages.
Although I won't state my actual wage, to drive a tour bus with 56 passengers on board I make a fair amount less than $20.00 per hour.
Oh, one of my co-workers in his bus making the same wage as I do was almost the next one hit. I can only imagine the fancy driving he did to keep all his passengers safe.

I also still drive big rigs, up to 6 weeks a year but only on the iceroads. Even working in the worst conditions in the world we make less than $900.00 for a 2 day run. That is driving for 30 hours, and putting in 2 additional hours to load and unload.
After the 6 week period we are all too exhausted to do anything, and our employeers often won't even allow us to return to work for a month.

The only reason why I work in either job for the wages is because I like the people that I work with.

[LoneWolf_53]

I've lost track of how often I've observed a logging truck, that simply put, was loaded weird, and certainly not in a fashion conducive to driving on the highway and negotiating curves safely. The heaviest logs should be loaded first and the lighter stuff up top, yet I've seen the opposite countless times. Were it up to me I'd also not allow them to load as high as they do, since when push comes to shove, gravity always wins.

Bhahahah. Too funny its right up there with the person that said the see brake smoke from every truck coming into Kamloops. Complete hog wash and false information.

Hogwash my butt, I'm not blind and quite capable of relaying what I see. I happened to follow a logging truck yesterday that was loaded three feet higher on the drivers side than it was on the passenger side. You want to tell me that's normal too?

I've observed plenty that are loaded properly, but was simply sharing that at the same time, I've observed quite a few that weren't.

[LoneWolf_53]

they don't load top heavy take a closer look next time they also don't load by height they load by weight if you look next time you will notice the logs staggered front to back that's why you see big butts at the top and some tops at the bottom but a pro like you already knew this

Please don't insult my intelligence. If the truck I followed, that I was referring to, had loaded his load that way, then there should have been a fairly even mix of big butts and smaller tops visible, and on that load there was not. Everything you could see from the back was approximately 12-14" in diameter except for this one gigantic wet log that was at the very top, and about 3' in diameter.

Just out of curiosity you say they load by weight, so how do they manage that? I'm genuinely curious as I can't quite picture how the guy knows the weight of the trees, particularly since that could change with weather.

[Gixxer]

Sorry you're wrong. Logging trucks have to be loaded certain ways and must complie with DOT rules and regulations. If they dont they will be fined, and parked until the load is corrected, which means down time, and calling out of equipment to move the logs.

What you may have seen was low at the back on the passenger side but high at the front. It all has to be balanced. It could've been light wood as well.

[dieseluphammerdown]

.

Just out of curiosity you say they load by weight, so how do they manage that? I'm genuinely curious as I can't quite picture how the guy knows the weight of the trees, particularly since that could change with weather.

Most trucks have on board air scales that give load and axel weights, or go simply by air gauges at each axel.

[Dizzy1]

Most trucks have on board air scales that give load and axel weights, or go simply by air gauges at each axel.

I'm thinking that he means heavier product on top/lighter product on bottom so the COG is lower, not the overall weight.

[LoneWolf_53]

Interested in both actually. Thanks for sharing that info.

[stuphoto]

Lonewolf,
just so you know the air scales are not 100% accurate, but do give us an idea where we stand.

Having pretty much only hauled liquids, I don't know how a logging truck should be loaded. However I can say that some drivers will break the rules and overload their rigs.
For the most part the trucks are actually overbuilt, and as a result still safe. However the roads deteriorate faster, so that's why we have the wait limits.
Under certain circumstances truckers are actually issued special permits just for the extra weight. While running the iceroads we are permited at 105% for the 70km of public roads we do travel.

[Gixxer]

I use to log off highway up in Fort Nelson. We would haul 58000kg on a 6 axle truck.

[LoneWolf_53]

Lonewolf,
just so you know the air scales are not 100% accurate, but do give us an idea where we stand.

Having pretty much only hauled liquids, I don't know how a logging truck should be loaded. However I can say that some drivers will break the rules and overload their rigs.
For the most part the trucks are actually overbuilt, and as a result still safe. However the roads deteriorate faster, so that's why we have the wait limits.
Under certain circumstances truckers are actually issued special permits just for the extra weight. While running the iceroads we are permited at 105% for the 70km of public roads we do travel.

Thanks for sharing.

So with what has been posted, I can see that those scales assist the log hauler, to know when he's reached his capacity, but I don't so far see a method by which he ensures that the heaviest items are on the bottom, to maintain as low as possible center of gravity.

I realize if he's done it long enough I'm sure simply looking at what he's loading would help a lot, but that theory isn't supported by some of the loads I have observed.

Speaking just theoretically, it is possible that one could load all dry timber on the bottom, and then wet stuff on top which would pretty much guarantee that the result would be the opposite of what one would want to be hauling.

[stuphoto]

we hope that doesn't happen, but it could. Logging truck drivers are not alone. Look at all the car carriers with no cars on the bottom deck, but 2 - 4 on the top. At times it's because they can't fit on the bottom, however I think that it's often a shortcut. In their defence I have never seen a car carrier on it's side.

I had supper with my co-worker tonight, and he said the truck just stopped moving right before he would have been hit.
I can't say much, but am suddenly wondering if the driver just dozed off for a moment.

[LoneWolf_53]

Glad he didn't get hit.

I've always figured stuff like cows must be a pain to haul because they can move. Probably why they are generally packed in pretty tight.

[stuphoto]

Most people say that hardest item to haul is hanging meat. However I don't know if anyone still hauls hanging meat.
Next is like you guessed Livestock.
Then is bulk liquids.

There are always exceptions to the rules, like Bulk Milk which is often partial loads in a tanker with no baffles ( also what I started hauling ) however very few truckers will ever deal with them.

[60-YEARS-in-Ktown]

Not sure why some dont realize this. But in general if its the same species, say Fir,
A cubic foot of wood from a small log, should weigh the same as a cubic foot of wood from a big log..
Bigger wood takes up less space...say a 3 ft log vs a 3 foot bundle of peckerpoles...it has a lot of air in between.
Many times they used to load butts ahead, but it probably depends on the number of axles.

[Gixxer]

Loggers cant be overweight on any axle group. Plus overnight fines are huge.