STGO, Recovery Vehicles & Weights (Grumpy goes off Road)

[antarmike]

Also, if the Valentine did weigh 18 Tons, and is loaded centrally on the trailer, that equates to 9 tons per axle extra weight. If the front axle of the Rubery Owen is aready carrying 4 Tons 1 Cwt unladen then the result will be 13 Tons 1 cwt. Which would be over axle weight for Cat 2. I accept you may have loaded the Valentine further back to put more weight on the lighter loaded when empty axle, but the amount of lee-way in these figures doesn't leave a lot to play with (as I will show later in this post). All I am saying is I personally wouldn't risk being taken to a weigh bridge, Ultimately though only you know the weight Of a DD valentine (and surely the PTO, Drive shaft, propellor and floatation screens are going to be similar in weight to the Ammunition that is not there,) and and only you know how that weight was distributed front to rear.

 

But I also admit you might know that the Valentine to be less than this weight and that is why you are sure you are not over axle weight. I cannot comment on it's actual weight, I simply do not know. I am making a guess as to it's weight and hypothesesing the results.

 

We must remember that we are talking about trailer capacity and tank weight in Imperial tons and that STGO axle weights are in Metric Tonnes.

 

However if you assume that the load is possitioned on the trailer in such a position as to get the stated maximum axle weights, front and rear (which without a weighbridge is virtually inpossible) , the Maximum load that can be carried to stay on 12.5 Tonnes axle weights (which is 12.376 Imperial tons per axle or roughly 24 Tons 15 Cwt max gross wieght of the trailer) is 24.75 - 7.75 = 17 English Tons.

 

Is the DD Valentine really as light as 17 Tons and can you guarantee you got it in exactly the right position on the trailer to acheive exact axles weights? A quarter of an inch forward or back from the exact position you would have to find to carry 17 tons at 12.5Tonnes axle loading, would cause one or other axle to go overweight.

Edited June 15, 2008 by antarmike

[antarmike]

It also occurs to me that if you are running your Rig under special types as a recovery vehicle, then the vehicle you are recovering has to be broken down. It would be hard to argue that driving a working tank onto a trailer, taking it to a show, presumably, once there, driving it around there, then taking it back home where it is able to drive off the trailer under it's own power, is within the scope of the permissions given under STGO to recovery vehicles

Edited June 14, 2008 by antarmike

[antarmike]

"The rig is authorised by its construction and design for a train weight of 60 tons and axel weights not exceeding 12.5 ton per axel @ 40 mph."

 

If by Rig you mean the Militant towing the trailer in question, then, I do not understand "60 Tons" since the Militant Mk3 weighs in at 21,000 Kgs Are you saying the trailer can carry 39 Tons?

 

What does the 60 tons you quote mean in the context of the Millie and this recovery trailer? Perhaps I am wrong but I can't see how you can even start to approach that figure.

Edited June 15, 2008 by antarmike

[younggun]

ime not to sure on the rules on drawbar trailers but i do know that it is now illeagle to run STGO axel loadings on less than 6 axels on artics just woundering if u aware of this mike ?

[Degsy]

21000kgs plus 49 tons equates to over 70000kgs

[antarmike]

In this month's Windcreen, Issue 110, shows two Pictures of Diamond T's moving Cents.(page 37) One picture shows a Cent on a FV3601 50 Ton Tank transporting trailer with 4 axles, which is within the designed capability of the trailer. The second photo shows a Cent on the 40 ton , 3 axle Dyson Tank transporting trailer. This trailer was designed during the War to carry Churchill, and was re-designed post war and re-classified as a fifty ton trailer when Cent came into service, by the addition of an extra axle to the turntable..

 

Putting a Cent on the 40 ton trailer is overloading it by ten tons.

 

I have seen pictures of Conqueror on the 50 ton Dyson FV3601 trailer. This is overloading it by almost 15 Tons.

 

Just because the Army , in the past, has chosen to exceed designed maximum weights of trailers is no excuse for us as responsible owners to do the same when alternative solutions are readily available... or am I wrong?

Edited June 15, 2008 by antarmike

[antarmike]

21000kgs plus 49 tons equates to over 70000kgs

Your are right... Typo error...meant 39

Edited June 15, 2008 by antarmike

[Grumpy]

This may go on a bit but please be patient and I’ll try to clarify all of the queries raised:

 

I don't know whether a movement order was booked for this trip but the trailer is 2.74Metres wide. The maximum permitted width for a trailer (not being a refrigerated trailer) is 2.5Metres..

 

This statement is incorrect – notification is only required if you are over 2.9 metres and operating under the C&U regulations or 3 metres operating under STGO conditions. Over these widths you start getting into notification procedures with the police. Similarly if you operate over 44 ton gross then notification and indemnity is required with the local authority. There is a very good DTI diagram here: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/drs/drivingforwork/largeorheavyloads/guidance/policeailloadwidthdiagram

 

My comments related to tyre loadings and Axle weights, and I know that tyres are exempt under STGO, but in order to run under STGO for more than the width of the trailer, you have to demonstrate that the load you are carrying cannot be split into smaller parts, or that it cannot be carried on a trailer that does comply fully with C and U.

 

Tyres are not exempt from regulation under STGO, it is possible to up-rate their loading at a reduced speed but only if authorised by the manufacture or via an engineers report. In response to your other point, the trailer is wider than our load, therefore more suitable by eliminating an overhanging load.

 

It is also my understanding that the minimum number of axles for Cat 2 is 5.

I know the Millie has 3 axles and the trailer has 2, but I don't think VOSA would accept that only 2 axles carrying the load is acceptable for Cat 2

 

I welcome a knowlegable answer to this point since I admit I might be wrong.

 

Good point Mike – VOSA have previously accepted this but only verbally. Can anyone else shed light on this?

 

This is a copy of the Army manual for the trailer. It does not say it is for carrying a laden 10 ton truck. It says the trailer is designed to a carry a load (wheeled or tracked) that is limited to 10 tons.

I have included the Bridge Classification in the copy from the manual because I beleive this is relevant to how the Army intended the Trailer to be used.

 

Unfortunately I can not open your pictures using the server I am on at present (3G card on BT). It would be interesting to see the latest amendment date. I am not sure if you are aware that a large number of these trailers were modified and up-rated to 14 ton classification by the Army in the late sixties / early seventies to transport the FV430 series vehicles. The modifications were very minor and amounted to about half a dozen additional gussets being welded into the main frame of the trailer. If your manual is up to date with the amendments these modifications should be listed.

 

Also, if the Valentine did weigh 18 Tons, ……………………………………………………………………………………….

 

But I also admit you might know that the Valentine to be less than this weight and that is why you are sure you are not over axle weight. I cannot comment on its actual weight, I simply do not know. I am making a guess as to it's weight and hypothesising the results.

 

I have trimmed your post here a little, but yes you are making a guess and hypothesising the result and trying to hang me on this result. Again I will not divulge the weight on an open forum of a vehicle that does not belong to me. I will confirm that I was and always will operate within axel limits, this way I operate safely and keep my licence.

 

It also occurs to me that if you are running your Rig under special types as a recovery vehicle, then the vehicle you are recovering has to be broken down. It would be hard to argue that driving a working tank onto a trailer, taking it to a show, presumably, once there, driving it around there, then taking it back home where it is able to drive off the trailer under it's own power, is within the scope of the permissions given under STGO to recovery vehicles

 

Again another misconception, a breakdown vehicle can tow a trailer, however it ceases to become a breakdown vehicle. The DETR has stated that, until such time as they can come up with a Construction and Use definition of a breakdown vehicle, in legal terms a heavy breakdown vehicle towing a trailer has to be seen as a Locomotive. The courts have already made this interpretation (DPP v Yates). In practice you have to allow for sufficient train weight to comply with C & U regulations or STGO.

 

"The rig is authorised by its construction and design for a train weight of 60 tons and axel weights not exceeding 12.5 ton per axel @ 40 mph."

 

If by Rig you mean the Militant towing the trailer in question, then, I do not understand "60 Tons" since the Militant Mk3 weighs in at 21,000 Kgs Are you saying the trailer can carry 39 Tons?

 

What does the 60 tons you quote mean in the context of the Millie and this recovery trailer? Perhaps I am wrong but I can't see how you can even start to approach that figure.

 

As you are aware Mike, the train weight is determined by the design of the Tractor Unit or Locomotive which is where my 60 ton figure comes from. This falls within the STGO Cat 2 and this determines the 12.5 ton per axel. No I can’t gross my trailer at 40 ton (round figures) but as the Militant is classed as a Heavy Locomotive in this usage I can tow two trailers together. Not really recommended as the Militant is slow enough with one trailer let alone two.

 

Just because the Army , in the past, has chosen to exceed designed maximum weights of trailers is no excuse for us as responsible owners to do the same when alternative solutions are readily available... or am I wrong?

 

No you are quite right Mike, however in summery I feel you are trying to defend statements that were made without the correct information or full knowledge of the regulations that apply to the movement of large / heavy vehicles. You’re constant “And but…. And but… And but…” postings demonstrate this. I have taken your accusations personally and I am offended by your innuendoes that I have bought the movement into disrepute based on guesses and hypothesis, although you are probably quite a nice bloke as most are in our movement, perhaps just a little misguided at present.

 

Keep smiling as life is far more precious than we realise at times, and our time is far too valuable to be falling out over problems that do not exist.

 

Best regards, Scott

 

Mods can you please move these threads from the AEC Militant Mk 3 Gallery as people who look here dont want to get boged down with this lot, perhaps to the other chatter bit. I also have no objection if you wish to re-instate the pictures that were posted by Poptop and Simon Stolly, all of them were taken on private property and not on the public highway.

Edited June 15, 2008 by Grumpy

[antarmike]

Ok the trailer is over the maximum permitted width for C and U approval,, It is narrower than the max load width before you have to notify the Police,

 

What is your understanding of how you set about using a trailer that is over the maximum permitted width of a C and U trailer, but under the max width of a heavy indivisable load?

 

I always assumed that seeing as the trailer is overwidth for a trailer, even empty some form of notice should be given.

[croc]

It would be a pity to lose these comments as they have provided interesting reading. I will not pretend to understand the fine print of STGO regulations and Construction and Use, which seems to change depending on what you call something.

I must admit that when you do the maths it must be a pretty close call.

If the Milly is 21 ton, the trailer is 8 ton and the Valentine is around the 16/17 ton mark (according to Wicipedia) it is well within the stated train weight of 60 ton but the axle weights for the trailer must be tight, 8 + 17 = 25. 25 / 2 = 12.5. If the Trailer is only rated at 10 ton or even 14 ton load, the Valentine would be over at 16 ton.

As to widths I assume that if the Milly is classed as a Locomotive when pulling a trailer the 2.75 meter limit comes into play?

That said, from the pictures of it loaded it looks ok. ie it fits on the trailer and nothing looks overloaded or insecure so would be unlikely to attract the wrong type of attention. It is only likely to cause a problem when something goes wrong, either mechanicaly or due to other road users, hence the importance of making sure everthing is in order.

[antarmike]

"I have trimmed your post here a little, but yes you are making a guess and hypothesising the result and trying to hang me on this result. Again I will not divulge the weight on an open forum of a vehicle that does not belong to me. I will confirm that I was and always will operate within axel limits, this way I operate safely and keep my licence. "

 

If the trailer you have has had the mods to bring it up to 14 tons capacity in order that the Army may carry a 432 are you saying that this Valentine DD is only 14 tons.

 

The lowest of the figures you quoted for the published weight of a Valentine in full fighting trim is 16 Tons. This Valentine though has the extra equipment to make it Duplex drive. Does the ammunition it is not carrying weigh 2 Tons plus the Weight of the DD maodification? I can,t see that.

 

All the figure I can find list it at a tad over 17 Tons.

 

If the actual weight of the Valentine in fighting trim is 19 tons( the higher of the figures you quote) ,then the ammunition it is not carrying would have to weigh 5 Tons plus the weight of the swimming gear to keep this Valentine at the uprated 14 ton capacity of the trailer.

Edited June 15, 2008 by antarmike

[antarmike]

Scott, I am not trying to get at you or "Hang you", Equally I do not think it is fair to say I am "uninformed."

 

I do not feel the following comment to be justified either,

 

"I feel you are trying to defend statements that were made without the correct information or full knowledge of the regulations that apply to the movement of large / heavy vehicles. You’re constant “And but…. And but… And but…” postings demonstrate this. I have taken your accusations personally and I am offended by your innuendoes that I have bought the movement into disrepute based on guesses and hypothesis, although you are probably quite a nice bloke as most are in our movement, perhaps just a little misguided at present."

 

If you want me to speak with full information then tell us the true weight of the DD Valentine.

 

I do not know what you mean by And but...And But .... And but postings. I do not want to go over your lengthy reply (post#33) to my points but I am prepared to if I have to, however I do not see how some of your answers relate in anyway to the point I had raised.

 

To give just one example, I said in one post "It also occurs to me that if you are running your Rig under special types as a recovery vehicle, then the vehicle you are recovering has to be broken down. It would be hard to argue that driving a working tank onto a trailer, taking it to a show, presumably, once there, driving it around there, then taking it back home where it is able to drive off the trailer under it's own power, is within the scope of the permissions given under STGO to recovery vehicles"

 

My point being that you cease to be a recovery vehicle in these circumstances, therefore you cannot claim STGO permission by virtue of being a recovery vehicle .

 

Your response to this comment is " Again another misconception, a breakdown vehicle can tow a trailer, however it ceases to become a breakdown vehicle."

 

I am sorry but why is what I said a misconception. You are saying exactly what I was saying. I did not say that in these circumstances there is no other way in which you can use a trailer as STGO, eg as a locomotive, I only said you could not be classed as a recovery vehicle if the vehicle on the trailer wasn't broken down.

 

Earlier in a previous post I said " Armed forces are still exempted from complying when they run under STGO."

 

You replied "Our armed forces are NOT exempt from the C & U regulations unless they are operating under STGO or at war."

 

I am sorry but isn't what I said contained more or less word for word in your reply. I did not say that the Army were only exempt when running under STGO, I did not think being at war was relevant so I left that out, but why do you say "NO" to my statement?

 

You seem to want to disagree with everything I say but you seem to agree that you cannot run STGO Cat2 on a 2 axle drawbar trailer and that is the crux of my arguement.

 

Originally Posted by antarmike

"It is also my understanding that the minimum number of axles for Cat 2 is 5.

I know the Millie has 3 axles and the trailer has 2, but I don't think VOSA would accept that only 2 axles carrying the load is acceptable for Cat 2"

 

Your reply being

"Good point Mike – VOSA have previously accepted this but only verbally."

 

I regularly operate under STGO, and regularly talk to others who do,

 

OK I don't often refer back to the Statutes, I tend to use as my bible "The Traffic Officers Companion" written by Superintandant Gordon Wilson of the Warwickshire Constabulary, A book intended for roadside reference by serving Traffic Officers. Although not Gospel, I have found it a generally accurate source of information. If I have used information from that source and it is incorrect then I would like to know.

 

It is my opinion that putting A Valentine on the 10 Ton recovery trailer will exceed it's designed weight and even if the trailer is modded to carry the 430 series, A valentine , particularly a DD version has to be heavier than the 432's by a considerable margin and the trailer will be technically overloaded.

 

You are right, My manual does not have the ammendmants to which you refer. it may be helpful if your manual has them, that for the benefit of everyone, we can see what the designed weight of the modded trailer is listed at in the ammended manual. Is it possible for you to post the ammendments that show it's new designed weights or load carrying ability?

 

I re-affirm that I do not think that The Light Recovery trailer can be operated at STGO Cat2 so I do not think you can load it to 12.5 tonnes axle weight.

 

If the trailer cannot be used at STGO Cat2 (by virtue of only having two axles) then I believe the trailer to limited to an axle weight of either 9,200 Kgs or more likely 10,170 Kgs. Again this requires careful reading of the rules, I am not sure of interpretaions. My money would be on Max axle weight of 10.17 Tonnes. Giving a max trailer weight of approx 20 Tons 2 3/4 Cwt.

 

If you take from this the unladen axles weights of 7 Tons 15 Cwt your available capacity is 12 Tons 7 3/4 Cwt.

 

I also see from the pictures that you appear not to be carrying the standard flimsy ramps these trailers were built with. Yours look more heavily built. If this is so it still further reduces your payload, and I have not included in the above calculation the weight of the extra gussets added if your trailer has been upgraded.

 

I am sorry, but nothing you have said has led me to believe that the weight of a DD Valentine can be legally carried on the Light recovery trailer.

 

If you know better and are prepared to disclose the actual weight of the DD Valentine then I will retract all my comments. (maybe a copy of a weighbridge ticket??) (PM it to me if you like, I will keep it to ourselves and I will shut up if the Valentine is really much lighter than it appears to be...)

 

If not I think we had better leave the discussion at this point, because neither of us seems to be able to understand where the other is coming from on this one.

 

"I am not sure if you are aware that a large number of these trailers were modified and up-rated to 14 ton classification by the Army in the late sixties / early seventies to transport the FV430 series vehicles. "

 

I may be nit picking, but did you say whether your trailer is one of those that was modded, or one of those that escaped the system?

Edited June 16, 2008 by antarmike

[antarmike]

Scott Re the comment about the ramps.. they look very much like the ramps I built for my Recovery trailer. I am wondering if just by chance you have ended up with the one I owned. I sold it in about 1997-8 (I seem to recall) to Carl Brown. How long have you had it and where did you get it from? do you know it's Military serial, I have a photo of the trailer I owned that shows it's serial.

I have better photo's but this is the only one to hand right now.

Edited June 15, 2008 by antarmike

[antarmike]

on closer look I dont know that the ramps are similar, and obviously yours is far better painted. I can't find the shot of the ERM or serial.

[Marmite!!]

 

Mods can you please move these threads from the AEC Militant Mk 3 Gallery as people who look here dont want to get boged down with this lot, perhaps to the other chatter bit. I also have no objection if you wish to re-instate the pictures that were posted by Poptop and Simon Stolly, all of them were taken on private property and not on the public highway.

 

Done :-D

[simon stolly]

Light blue touch paper and run away!!!!!

 

 

The ramps where made by me in 2006, a Wednesday if remember right.

Would anyone like the exact specification for their calculations?

Maybe the stress/strain moments?

How about the mill the steel came from?

 

I am not going to pretend to know the rules governing the movement of heavy loads, however, as I helped load this tank, I can positively state that in no way did the trailer appear to be over loaded.

[antarmike]

Whether or not the trailer was upgraded to carry the 430 series by the army with a new capacity of 14 tons is irrelevant.

 

The army vehicles if they are

 

a) Combat vehicles or trailers constructed for training or in connection with combat

 

b) Constructed for use in connection with the instruments of war

 

c) Motor vehicles or trailers constructed for the carraige of tanks

 

are exempt from all construction and use regulations.

 

Their exemption is not one that is available for civilians since the vehicles and trailers must be under the control of the secretary of state for defence or industry, or any contractor or sub contractor making such vehicles for the secretary of state,

 

It is not an exeption under STGO for heavy indivisible loads, nor is it an exemption for recovery vehicles. It is an exemption purely for Military vehicles owned and run by the State.

 

In civilian ownership a light recovery trailer cannot be used under STGO Cat 2 because it has insufficient axles,

 

It was not being used as a recovery trailer because the tank was live and driveable.

 

It's axle weights are therefore limited to 10.170 kg or 10.17 Tonnes.

 

The trailer cannot therefore be used at a gross weight of greater than 20tons 2 3/4 Cwt

 

If you deduct the published axle weights for this trailer from that figure you are left with the maximum permissable load it can carry i.e 12 tons 7 3/4 cwt.

 

Perhaps Grumpy would like to write to VOSA and ask for a definitive judgement as to whether it is lawful to exceed this load, under civilian ownership, and maybe he would be good enough to publish the response on this site together with a weighbridge ticket for this particular DD Valentine tank.

 

I really feel I have nothing more to say. Forgetting everything that has been said before, would Grumpy like to respond to purely the contents of this post? Am I right or am I wrong. If I am wrong, why exactly am I wrong, What do you believe your max axle weight limit to be and why?

Edited June 16, 2008 by antarmike

[Grumpy]

 

In civilian ownership a light recovery trailer cannot be used under STGO Cat 2 because it has insufficient axles

 

The frightening thing about this is, I have today spoken to 3 different people in 3 different offices @ VOSA and non were aware of the changes made by the latest regulations – namely “The road vehicles (Authorisation of Special Types) (General Order) 2003” The main changes we have to consider here are: it revokes the 1979 Order and now calls for Cat 2 ALIV or ALIV-Combinations to have at least six axles. All @ VOSA confirmed verbally that only five axles are required, however the new regulations conflict with this. I finally found a very helpful chap at the DTF who actually understood the changes. Yes the new regulations require six axles for Cat 2, but, and here is the grey area, The previous regulations (STGO 1979) continue to apply to any AILV or AILV-Combination manufactured before 1st October 1989 in relation to axles and weights. He also confirms that the entire combination is classed as load therefore a two axle trailer c/w a three axle locomotive that is Pre October 1989 can be used at Cat 2 so long as the relevant limits are complied with, although he didn’t understand why anyone would want to. But lets face it, that’s the most common question we receive from normal people; WHY?

 

 

It was not being used as a recovery trailer because the tank was live and driveable.

 

It's axle weights are therefore limited to 10.170 kg or 10.17 Tonnes.

 

The trailer cannot therefore be used at a gross weight of greater than 20tons 2 3/4 Cwt

 

If you deduct the published axle weights for this trailer from that figure you are left with the maximum permissable load it can carry i.e 12 tons 7 3/4 cwt.

 

The above statement is incorrect, to comply with the C&U regulations you calculate the gross weight for a standard draw-bar trailer with two spread axles by using the formula “T x 6,000 Kg” where T is the distance between the centres of the two axles in metres, up to a limit of 18 Ton. A standard two axle drawbar trailer CAN NOT gross at over 20 Ton.

 

Perhaps Grumpy would like to write to VOSA and ask for a definitive judgement as to whether it is lawful to exceed this load, under civilian ownership, and maybe he would be good enough to publish the response on this site together with a weighbridge ticket for this particular DD Valentine tank.

 

I really feel I have nothing more to say. Forgetting everything that has been said before, would Grumpy like to respond to purely the contents of this post? Am I right or am I wrong. If I am wrong, why exactly am I wrong, What do you believe your max axle weight limit to be and why?

 

Mike I certainly hope you do not have much more to say on this subject. I have no need or inclination to justify my actions to you or anyone else who will not listen to reason. I have been involved in heavy vehicle recovery and movements for far too long now to be concerned with misinformed comments and gossip. Throughout this thread you have made numerous comments to regulations covering the design and use of heavy / wide motor vehicles, which you appear to not quite understand. Any one reading your comments could quite easily get into trouble with the authorities by taking on board your comments. Some are minor offences, others are far more serious, such as thinking tyres ratings are exempt under STGO or how to calculate the maximum gross weight of a trailer, certainly both would probably end with an immediate prohibition order (PG9). I have merely responded to correct your mistakes, not to justify my actions.

 

Enough said, please enjoy your hobby as I enjoy mine, life is far too short to spend time and energy on dross like this. If we bump into each other at a show this year I’ll buy you a pint if I’ve got any money left after filling my fuel tank. Let’s agree to disagree.

 

Very best regards

Scott

[antarmike]

"A standard two axle drawbar trailer CAN NOT gross at over 20 Ton."

 

Hoist by your own Petard I believe.

 

In trying to make me look an idiot you have made a statement that most people would take as showing you know you are breaking axle weights...

 

I hope nothing I have said leads people astray, I have trimmed what a said and spoken in general terms for clarity and that means I may not have covered all the bases all the time and yes there may be minor aspects of what I have said that may be misundersttod as a result

 

But I feel people are far likey to get into trouble if they listen to you when you say that With a valentine DD on a ten 10 light Recovery you are not exceeding Axle loadings, is fully above board and acceptable.

 

In defending what I said and wrote. Initially I said I thought the trailer must be over axle weight. I would have left it at that if at the start you had accepted that a twin axle trailer like the Light Recovery trailer was overloaded with the Valentine onboard.

 

I expected when I first posted, that you would come back with a comment such as " yes you are right, I had not really thought about axle loadings, in hindsight I was wrong, I won't do it again."

 

Instead you tried to defend an indefensible statement "that you always run within legal axle weights" or something to that effect..

 

You decided you wanted it all done in public and you wanted the thread on the board.

 

I never posted with a view to telling other people what they could do. I had been accused of ignorance by you. You refused to accept that the trailer was overloaded.

 

When I say Axle weight limit of 10.17 means the trailer cannot exceed 20Tons 2 3/4 " that statement is correct. I did not sat that the Maximum gross weight you can run the trailer at is 20Tons 2 3/4 Cwt. There is a subtle difference. I only set out to show, by the simplest use of facts, that the trailer was overloaded. The fact that other aspects of the law may further lower the Gross trailer weight was not important.

 

I think most poeple will agree that the way you used the light Recovery trailer when putting a live drivable tank on it was as a standard 2 axle trailer.

 

And you yourself have written "A standard two axle drawbar trailer CAN NOT gross at over 20 Ton." and that it can only gross "to a limit of 18 Ton."

 

QED

Edited June 16, 2008 by antarmike

[antarmike]

Scott,When It comes to misleading statements, maybe you should look at some of your own.

 

You said "My Militant and recovery trailer are operated under Special Type General Order CAT 2 (STGO)" Really, do you still want "and trailer" to be part of that comment?

 

You said "Our armed forces are NOT exempt from the C & U regulations unless they are operating under STGO or at war."

 

I never said they were but in all circumstances

 

a) Combat vehicles or trailers constructed for training or in connection with combat

 

b) Constructed for use in connection with the instruments of war

 

c) Motor vehicles or trailers constructed for the carraige of tanks

 

are concidered as STGO and are therefore exempt from all construction and use regulations. at all times

 

Their exemption is not one that is available for civilians since the vehicles and trailers must be under the control of the secretary of state for defence or industry, or any contractor or sub contractor making such vehicles for the secretary of state, or they were at the time your trailer was in use with them.

 

You said I was wrong for thinking "such as thinking tyres ratings are exempt under STGO"

 

I did not say this, I said tyres where exempt. I was thinking of section 24 of the act which applies to Trailers

 

I said "I don't know whether a movement order was booked for this trip but the trailer is 2.74Metres wide. The maximum permitted width for a trailer (not being a refrigerated trailer) is 2.5Metres.."

 

Your response is "This statement is incorrect –.."

 

People may think you are saying that you can use a light recovery trailer willy nilly. The point is it isn't and can't be STGO and it is too wide by law to be used on the roads because the only trailers allowed to be used over 2.5 M wide are STGO trailers for indivisible loads, refrigerated trailers at 2.6M wide , or agriculural implements and a few other exeptions. (Recovery trailers WHEN USED FOR RECOVERY)

 

My point was that the trailer is technically illegal because of its width, if it being used for moveing a vehicle that isn't broken down. I suggested it would be a good idea to notify the police. Movement orders are for Motor Vehicles over 9' 6" or Loads over 9' 6".

 

One of the hardest things to understand is how your words have changed ...

"I feel this forum should be open and uncensored, allowing members to defend themselves against accusations made on this public forum"

 

"I have no need or inclination to justify my actions to you or anyone else..."

 

Anyhow should you decide to move the DD on that trailer again, that is down to you. I know I wouldn't

Edited June 16, 2008 by antarmike

[antarmike]

Thanks to everyone who PM'ed and supported me throughout this discussion, I don't think the discussion has any further to run.

[antarmike]

 

I am not going to pretend to know the rules governing the movement of heavy loads, however, as I helped load this tank, I can positively state that in no way did the trailer appear to be over loaded.

 

It is not easy loking at A vehicle or trailer to see if it is overloaded.

 

That is why Vosa use weighbridges.

 

I was not trying to hang anyone, rather I was trying to open eyes before someone finds themselves on A DoT Weighbridge. I was trying to be helpful

[Marmite!!]

Thanks to everyone who PM'ed and supported me throughout this discussion, I don't think the discussion has any further to run.

 

On that note this thread is now locked as we will just end up going round in circles, if anyone wishes to continue this discussion please do so via PM's.

 

Thank You.