On the way back from Swindon I spotted this

[Rover8FFR]

Travelling very slowly but a MASSIVE vehicle. Unfortunately without an MBT :-D

[utt61]

Not so long ago I met a convoy of these coming towards me on the narrow windy stretch of the A31 just west of Wimborne, presumably en-route to Bovington. Very imposing, especially when they are 3 feet or so wider that their half of the carriageway. There were (as I recall) five of them carrying sheeted loads which appeared to be Challengers.

[woa2]

When I worked in Newbury a couple of years ago I frequently saw these vehicles travelling along the A34. Looked like they were going from/to Ludgershall to Southampton delivering Tanks & other tracked vehicles.

[Rover8FFR]

The photo probably doesn't show the massive scale of these vehicles, especially next to a Smart Car!

 

The driving position is certainly a good one, especially at that height.

 

It was a nice treat to see after a long day in Chelmsford doing meetings.

 

:cool2:

[antarmike]

Travelling very slowly but a MASSIVE vehicle. Unfortunately without an MBT :-D

 

Without the MBT there it has a much better chance of staying on its wheels...and it won't be delivering a Challenger into someones front garden....

[N.O.S.]

Without the MBT there it has a much better chance of staying on its wheels...and it won't be delivering a Challenger into someones front garden....

 

Are you suggesting this is a real possibility? Difficult to imagine a more stable load platform than this (compare it with the WW2 Pioneer and trailer :shocked:).

[AndyFowler]

Someone has posted a pic on here showing one on its side and commented that they may have a problem with the trailer hydraulics Tony ! :embarrassed:

[sirhc]

Without the MBT there it has a much better chance of staying on its wheels...and it won't be delivering a Challenger into someones front garden....

 

I live near to Chetwynd Barracks, formerly known as MoD Chilwell. I remember when a Challenger 1 fell off a trailer into someones garden a few years back.

[antar]

What you have to remember is that this outfit is actually only the same width as any normal HGV due to the requirement for it to meet C & U when travelling unladen. The vehicle it replaced was a Scammell Commander and Cranes trailer which was a 10'6" wide tractor and 12' wide trailer. Now that was an imposing vehicle to meet coming the other way down a country lane !!!

 

The current Oshkosh / King outfit has to open its trailer outriggers to carry MBT's ect greatly increasing the overhang on the trailer which obviously creates stability issues. The cranes trailer had no such issues due to the wheel track bieng about 11' wide. There were no fancy hydraulics on the Crane Trailer to go wrong just plain old walking beams giving the most stabillity possible.

 

If you ever pass King Trailers in Market Harborough you will see at least 3 of the "new" trailers in for modification or repair.

 

All the old Commander / Cranes outfits were "sold" to the Jordanian Army with the Challenger 1's and are enjoying their second life in the sunshine after spending over 25 years in UK, Germany, Gulf war 1 and Bosnia in their first life.

 

We call it progress ???

[N.O.S.]

Thanks for that explanation John - difficult to get an idea of how comparatively narrow it is from photos - the shape of the Oshkosh is quite deceptive when it comes to width.

[extrogg]

Looks like one operated by FTX Fasttrax.

 

http://www.ftxlog.com/index.html

 

Very impressive vehicle!!

[antarmike]

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-7917143_ITM

[recymech66]

Someone has posted a pic on here showing one on its side and commented that they may have a problem with the trailer hydraulics Tony ! :embarrassed:

 

[AndyFowler]

 

Now that takes some explaining to the guvnor ! :blush:

[recymech66]

Now that takes some explaining to the guvnor ! :blush:

 

 

Well boss, it was like this:blush:

 

[AndyFowler]

Well boss, it was like this:blush:

 

Very interesting pics mate ! Thanks for sharing them !:nut:

[N.O.S.]

OK stop!!!! Sorry I asked!!!!

[AndyFowler]

OK stop!!!! Sorry I asked!!!!

 

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[radiomike7]

What you have to remember is that this outfit is actually only the same width as any normal HGV due to the requirement for it to meet C & U when travelling unladen.

 

Width for the tractor is 2.59m, trailer is 2.89m with inriggers, 3.47m with outriggers so wider than an LGV and not conforming to C&U regs. They run under STGO cat 3 with civilian drivers.

 

Although the older artic trailers were lower and more stable they suffered from tyre problems and often were followed by a Land Rover to spot overheated or punctured tyres.

[antarmike]

Width for the tractor is 2.59m, trailer is 2.89m with inriggers, 3.47m with outriggers so wider than an LGV and not conforming to C&U regs. They run under STGO cat 3 with civilian drivers.

 

Although the older artic trailers were lower and more stable they suffered from tyre problems and often were followed by a Land Rover to spot overheated or punctured tyres.

 

I understand that they comply with C&U Axle loadings whereas the Commander and its trailer had not. but although now within normal legal axle weights, they are indeed too wide to run under C&U regs.

Edited May 9, 2010 by antarmike

[Desert Rat]

Width for the tractor is 2.59m, trailer is 2.89m with inriggers, 3.47m with outriggers so wider than an LGV and not conforming to C&U regs. They run under STGO cat 3 with civilian drivers.

 

Although the older artic trailers were lower and more stable they suffered from tyre problems and often were followed by a Land Rover to spot overheated or punctured tyres.

 

Nothing much has changed since WW2 as the Rogers trailers in Italy suffered constant blow outs when hauling plant over the mountains and normally had a Bedford QL (sometimes a Matador) full of spare wheels and tyres.

 

There is discussion at high level at present concerning the future of the current Oshkosh/King outfits.

 

DR

[recymech66]

I'm not a user but have recovered a few, in my view I would say the Oshkosh unit itself is an extremely good bit of kit, possibly let down by the Kings trailer obviously the trog users could varify either way.:cool2:

[radiomike7]

 

 

 

I'm struggling with this one, what exactly are we seeing here?

[antar]

I'm struggling with this one, what exactly are we seeing here?

 

Looks like a container handler (USA) which has fallen off a transporter ?

[antar]

Width for the tractor is 2.59m, trailer is 2.89m with inriggers, 3.47m with outriggers so wider than an LGV and not conforming to C&U regs. They run under STGO cat 3 with civilian drivers.

 

Although the older artic trailers were lower and more stable they suffered from tyre problems and often were followed by a Land Rover to spot overheated or punctured tyres.

 

Ok I stand corrected. Should I ever be given the choice of driving either outfit fully laden I would still jump into the Scammell.