Marmite!! Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 If you have taken out and paid for insurance, the insures have to honour third party claims even if you have lied through your teeth about which licence you have, but only third party claims. When you take out insurance you fill in a proposal which you sign... part of the proposal states that you must have valid licence for class of vehicle to which the insurance applies too... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.O.S. Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 If not a goods vehicle what classification would such a vehicle fall into?Certainly not a mobile crane looking at the very tight wording for their definition. I belive the definition of a mobile crane has been tightened up to reduce the amount of vehicles running around on red diesel. Special Vehicles - (it is a winch truck) - would cover it well don't you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmite!! Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Any information on HMVF must be regarded as members personal opinions & not as fact, it's up to the individual to check their legal position whith regards to Licences, Insurance & MOT's.... HMVF will not be held responsible if you get thrown in the slammer for following incorrect advice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Cheers Grumpy. So if you have a post 1960 vehicle (which therefore be subject to MOT) you can tow, but not if it is pre 1960 and thus not MOT'd......... I tried to tax a pre 1960 truck as special types for work purposes, but was told by local DVLA office that it could be historic class. I wasn't convinced I had been given the right advice but didn't argue with them at the time!! You can use a pre 1960 vehicle to tow but if you are driving it on a car licence the towed vehicle has to be unladen, if you have the correct licence you can tow a laden vehicle but not for hire or reward if using Historic Tax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Any information on HMVF must be regarded as members personal opinions & not as fact, it's up to the individual to check their legal position whith regards to Licences, Insurance & MOT's.... HMVF will not be held responsible if you get thrown in the slammer for following incorrect advice... :tup:: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.O.S. Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Any information on HMVF must be regarded as members personal opinions & not as fact, it's up to the individual to check their legal position whith regards to Licences, Insurance & MOT's.... HMVF will not be held responsible if you get thrown in the slammer for following incorrect advice... Accepted absolutely, Lee - the idea of a forum discussion on these topics should be to try to guide ourselves to where we can get a definitive answer from the relevant authority. It is very useful to hear how others get on before considering whether one has been given the right advice by those in authority who should know :-D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 When you take out insurance you fill in a proposal which you sign... part of the proposal states that you must have valid licence for class of vehicle to which the insurance applies too... But not everyone is as honest as the good people on HMVF, the insurance company have to pay out third party claims if they have accepted the proposal form and taken the dosh, even if the driver is only 12 years old. Its common practice for those do-gooder solicitors to advise their scum of a client to get insurance even if they are not old enough to hold a licence. :argh: Sorry rant over Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gritineye Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 If not a goods vehicle what classification would such a vehicle fall into?Certainly not a mobile crane looking at the very tight wording for their definition. I belive the definition of a mobile crane has been tightened up to reduce the amount of vehicles running around on red diesel. I feel sure that an explorer has enough cargo capacity outside of the tool boxes to count as a goods vehicle. As far As I can work out an Explorer is a 'Road Recovery Vehicle' described as: Special types-road recovery vehicles A road recovery vehicle is a vehicle that is; a locomotive; an N3 motor vehicle; or a combination of an N3 motor vehicle and an O4 trailer; which is A specially designed and constructed vehicle for the recovery of disabled road vehicles, fitted with a crane, winch or lifting system for recovering another vehicle. Heavy Locomotive, described as: Mechanically propelled vehicle itself not constructed to carry load other than equipment for propulsion, loose tools and loose equipment, UW exceeding 11,690 kg. They are not designed to carry goods, so are not HGVs, as locomotives they can tow up to 3 trailers. Unless anyone knows different of course Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrtcrowther Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) Do you need a full arctic licence to tow a full load with a 1950 explorer?:??? and do you have to couple the air lines to dead vehicle by law? If it breaks away from the tow vehicle this would apply the brakes. All modern goods vehicles have couplings on the front tractor unit so the wreaker can couple up to the brake system. I know i would'nt think about towing another lorry without it's brakes coupled possibility of jacknife trama is too great. even at slow speeds:eek: Edited January 15, 2009 by rbrtcrowther speling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
julezee001 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 If not a goods vehicle what classification would such a vehicle fall into?Certainly not a mobile crane looking at the very tight wording for their definition. I belive the definition of a mobile crane has been tightened up to reduce the amount of vehicles running around on red diesel. In the past before my brother bought PSY 974 (an Explorer), it was registered as a mobile crane for many years. When the 25 year tax exempt (Historic) vehicle class was brought in the previous owner changed it, possibly to save money on the Road tax? Not such a help when a tank full of white diesel is almost twice the cost of a mobile crane RFL! I've no idea if the DVLA can force a change of class if it has already been established? Explorers seem to have been registered under a number of classes over their post forces life! Jules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
julezee001 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 (edited) Do you need a full arctic licence to tow a full load with a 1950 explorer?:??? and do you have to couple the air lines to dead vehicle by law? If it breaks away from the tow vehicle this would apply the brakes. All modern goods vehicles have couplings on the front tractor unit so the wreaker can couple up to the brake system. I know i would'nt think about towing another lorry without it's brakes coupled possibility of jacknife trama is too great. even at slow speeds:eek: I have considered towing my Militant to shows with my Explorer, using an a frame and the airline connections. If I were ever short of a volunteer driver, which seems less likely as the years go by! If the worst happened and it did break away it would not stop!! The air brakes are operated by air pressure applied to the cylinders when the brake pedal is depressed. On modern trucks and trailers the brakes are applied by springs when the air pressure is removed from the cylinders. If the air lines came off the Militant there would be no way to stop it unless someone was in the cab! If the air fails on the Scammell you have the rear 4 brakes mechanically operated by the pedal, or handbrake. On the Militant you only have the handbrake on the rear pair of axles, not something I have ever tried, or want to try! Jules Edited January 15, 2009 by julezee001 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrtcrowther Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Still I don't fancy trying to stop a scammell with an un braked millitant wanting to play on the back!:eek: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantGraham Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 "If it breaks away from the tow vehicle this would apply the brakes." No it wouldn't. You're thinking of the breakaway valve on trailers which uses the air stored in the trailers air tanks to apply the trailer brakes when the supply pressure in the red line drops. Disconnecting the air lines to the front of a vehicle being towed will have no immediate effect on the towed vehicles brakes. "All modern goods vehicles have couplings on the front (of the) tractor unit so the wreaker can couple up to the brake system." No they don't. Normal practice when towing a modern HGV is to connect an airline to a test point near the compressor or air drier to keep the tanks full and the spring brakes released. I've never seen an external method of applying the brakes. Devices are available that connect to the yellow line of the towing vehicle and clamp to the steering column of the towed vehicle and physically press the brake pedal in response to the towing vehicle braking. They are rarely used. Recovery drivers generally rely on their truck being heavier than the one they are towing. "On modern trucks and trailers the brakes are applied by springs when the air pressure is removed from the cylinders." Yes, but only the parking brake. The service (foot) brake is applied by air pressure. If you were towing a modern truck and the connection broke, you would still need someone in the cab to apply the brakes. I don't mean to sound picky or critical here, but if you're towing trucks it's important to understand what is happening with the brakes. When suspend towing with the Militant, I will usually connect; Red line. Supplies air to the towed vehicles tanks and releases the spring brakes on a modern truck. If it breaks the towed vehicle will gradually lose air due to natural leakage or use of the brakes. Eventually the spring brakes will come on. Long before that happens, one of the three gauges in the Militant will drop and the low air buzzer will sound. Yellow line. Provides the braking signal to the towed vehicles brake relay valves. It's the air stored in the towed vehicles tanks that actually does the braking. If it breaks the towed vehicles brakes will not be applied, however there would be a sudden loss of air from the broken pipe when applying the Militant brakes. Dropping air gauge and buzzer again. I also usually connect a safety chain. If the lifting eyes and front tow hitch are both on the front bumper, there is a possibility that if the bumper became detached that's all I would be left with. A safety chain from the Militant rear tow hook to the towed vehicles front axle will at least keep it somewhere near under control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 (edited) And as another system, my Antar has red and yellow connectors on the front, but they feed foward, not back. When I apply my brakes it puts proportional air through to my front yellow coupling. My Air compressor fills my Airtanks, and these feed through to the red connector on my front end. My sytem also means that it is designed to nose a trailer, when reversing is imprcatical, and still have full command of its brakes. (and seeing as the trailer is 70 tons gross keeping the brakes working is a very good idea.) My Antar was built to work double heading, and as a pusher tractor. My front couplings are designed to connect to the rear of a trailer it is pushing, and the Antar can then brake and trigger the trailer brakes when it it at the back pushing. If I had to be recovered there would be no point whatsoever in connecting the yellow Airlines between me, the casualty, and the recovery vehicle. Feeding Air to me along that line does not trigger my brakes. The red can be connected if I could not run the engine to make my own air. And the Antar driver would have brakes, fed from air taken from the recivery vehicle. But the Antar driver has to use the footvalve to trigger them. As I Graham says, you have to know exactly what is happening and how the system is designed. If I am coupled up to the front of a trailer, my rear connectors work as any other Tractor, But if a second tractor comes on the front of the load ahead of me, I connect my red front connector to his, and provided that vehicle does not have a non return valve I can feed air to him, or receive full pressure air from him, depending on whose system runs at the higher pressure, But when it comes to braking the trailer, its brakes are triggered by my brakes, not by the leading tractor. I therefore have to react to his brakelights to know when to help him, by braking myself and the trailer. Edited January 19, 2009 by antarmike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 (edited) Another point to remeber is that Wartime British vehicles with say a Westinghouse aircompressor probably run at a max pressure of 85 - 95 PSI. A modern recovery vehicle, (or a post war vehicle with Clayton Dewandre air brakes run at up to 120 PSI.) Connecting a broken down wartime vehicle to a modern recovery tractor will put the air sytem of the recovered vehicle under conciderably more strain than it was intended to run at.. Depending were the Safety blowoff valve is mounted (ie if it is on the air tank) it may cause this Safety valve to open, which will result in the recovery vehcle being unable to reach its normal, full, cut off pressure, because this safety valve will constantly be trying to dump air to get the system down to a safe figure. This will impair the effeciency of the recovery vehicles system. If the safety valve on the recovered vehicle is on the air compreesor, before the non return valve, then there will be no way of the system dumping excess pressure fed into the tanks via the front connectors. I doubt whether an insurance company would payout if you wrote off a pedestrian with an exploding airtank in this situation. Edited January 19, 2009 by antarmike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantGraham Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 As far as I can remember, the Foden Recovery is the only vehicle I have seen with six air line couplings on the front. Red, yellow & blue, in & out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrtcrowther Posted January 19, 2009 Share Posted January 19, 2009 Many thanks for clearing things up. Just checked my manual again and it all makes sense now. Acording to scammell when double heading the front vehicle can controll all the the brakes. I wonder why they didn't use this system on the antar with its huge load towing power. No need for brake light watching:sweat: Rob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 (edited) Vehicles like the Scammell Contractor, normally have both couplings that feed forward, and ones that feed backwards, so they can both be towed by another vehicle which can work their brakes, and push a trailer from the front coupling and work the trailer brakes. The Mk 2 and Mk3 Antar as used by the Britsh Army had the system that fed back so that a tractor in front of them can work there brakes. As far as I know the Antar R6, (C6T), and the Antar R8 (C8S) are the only two models of Antar that have couplings feeding forward. I don't know what system was fitted the Pakistan Army Antar R6 (C6T)'s. The C6T Antar is basically a civilian export model, and most heavy haulage operators work with a pushing Tractor and a Pulling Tractor. The Snowy Mountain Antars were somewhat odd to have been almost exclusively used as paired towing tractors. This is probably why it has the system is has. It is expected to be able to work pushing a trailer and working the trailers brakes. I think the Diamond T's were occasionally used by the Army, double heading heavier tanks, (Tortoise, Conqueror), Maybe when the spec for the Antar was laid down they expected it to work double heading, as it predecessor had done, but as far as I know its superior performance to the Diamond T meant it was never used in this way. That will put the cat amongst the pigeons with the Dizzy affectionados.....Oh well I have been accused of winding people up before.... Edited January 20, 2009 by antarmike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 That will put the cat amongst the pigeons with the Dizzy affectionados.....Oh well I have been accused of winding people up before.... :nono: :rofl: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 (edited) Many thanks for clearing things up. Just checked my manual again and it all makes sense now. Acording to scammell when double heading the front vehicle can controll all the the brakes. I wonder why they didn't use this system on the antar with its huge load towing power. No need for brake light watching:sweat: Rob. The Antar user handbook says they have used that system. However the vehicle doesn't match that description. It does however match the Air braking circuit diagram in the same handbook. You will see that according to the circuit diagram, feeding air down the front service palm coupling (17) from a leading double header, or a recovery vehicle , takes the air first to the Brake light pressure switch, (20) and then to a Shuttle valve (Change over valve) (10). Air from the first double heading tractor (or recovery vehicle) will be arriving at this valve from the wrong direction. Air should be fed to a change-over valve from either of the in-line ports, and it exits via the port that forms the vertical stroke of the letter T. If air is applied to either one of the inline ports, it moves an internal shuttle, closing the other inline port. It allows either one of two brake control valves ( normally this will be a hand valve and a foot valve) to feed along a common line to the next stage of the braking circuit (whilst isolating the other valve) . As plumbed on this diagram air comes from the Front service palm coupling (17) it arrives as I said on the vertical stroke of the letter T (what should be the delivery port of the shuttle valve.) The air cannot move the shuttle across, but either one or both of the inline ports will be open be open depending on how the valve has come to rest, so the air passes through the shuttle valve, and arrives at the delivery port of the Trailer brake hand control valve, and or via another shuttle valve (again from the wrong direction) to the outlet port of the rear section of the dual foot valve. When the driver of the second Antar isn't operating either the hand valve or the dual foot valve, both of these ports will be vented to atmosphere and the air coming from the leading tractor to apply the towed Antars brakes will simply escape to atmosphere. If the back tractor of a double headed pair, or a recovered vehicle has the same Air braking piping as my Antar has, then It is not only ineffective (in repect to applying the back tractors brakes from the front one), it is also highly dangerous to connect the yellow line between the two vehicles, Note well the priviso that qualifies this statement. The air escaping to atmosphere through the yellow line whenever the leading tractor tries to brake, will prevent the leading tractor (or recovery vehicle) from building up pressure in its own service lines, so it won't be able to even apply its own brakes properly. It will also be emptying at least one of its reservoirs. In fact it is the same as trying to brake a lone tractor with the rear yellow palm coupling tap open. Why the Circuit diagram and the physical circuitry on my Antar do not match the description of the way the system works I do not know. The manual is a Thornycroft manual, not one written by the military, so it ought to be right, but I am afraid it isn't. Comments on my analysis if the circuitry appreciated. Edited January 20, 2009 by antarmike trying to get the techincal description correct and error free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrtcrowther Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 Very interesting and worthy of further invertigation when my eyes are up to folowing the lines. Will try and compare with both of the scammell systems. Early ones had a shutoff valve under the dash that was only opened when pushing trailers and closed at all other times. Later scammells did away with this valve. I will have to look into it in greater detail as they also did away with an air tank for trailer brakes. There must be some simalarity beetween the air systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrtcrowther Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 :coffee:Well it would seem the first conteact explorers were able to push a trailer with the brakes coupled so long as shutoff valve no17 is opened permitting normal application using hand or foot controlls. When double heading the hoses are crossed the same as trailer coupling letting the first tractor apply the trailer brakes without loss of air through the second tractor controlls via the change over valve no12 and relay valve no 13 on the second tractor. the brakes on the second tractor will be applyed through the timing valve no 18 and change over valve no15.:sweat: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrtcrowther Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 They did away with the tractor service tank for some reason? And there is no mension of pushing trailers on later scammels so perhaps the need to push trailers was deemed unessasery and the provision was done away with. Perhaps the need to double head Antars was so small the provision was done away with too.:??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gritineye Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 When Forcefuls second Meadows engine self destructed at W&P my mates Mack NO towed us home, with hoses coupled up as per double headed. Down the A21 there are some big hills and the whole lot really held back on the brakes very well I was surprised how good it all worked. When we got home I remarked on this only to be told "It was all done by your brakes with the reaction valve on the dash, you didn't expect me to wear mine out did you!" I have never had need to brake very hard whilst driving, and didn't know they were that good, but he had no mercy, maybe his pressure was a bit higher! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrtcrowther Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Nice to see tou coupling up nice an safe, You can never have too many brakes. Perhaps with all the grief he gave your brakes he polished up the drums nice and clean for you, what are they like after? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.