Payload, who cares?

[flicka]

Tracker - 2012-11-21 7:55 PM

 

To accuse someone with 100 kg of overweight of playing dice with the lives of others is also a bit over the top and when steps are taken to ensure that every other road vehicle is properly MOTd and serviced and every driver young or old is capable of stopping within the distance stated by the vehicle maker when it was new there might be some grounds for ensuring that every vehicle is within its design weight limit - not it's plated weight - it's design limit.

 

I don't think we will ever agree but at least I hope we can continue to discuss it like normal people.

 

Me thinks design limit is not applicable, there is always a tolerance between design & operating limits.

How many vehicles on the road are only designed to achieve 70mph & NO MORE.

 

Likewise would you want to be near a Crane opertaing at it's DESIGN limits instead of it''s Safe Working Load. ??????????????????

 

Or would posters condone travelling well in excess of Speed Limits also ????????????????

[WildBill]

flicka - 2012-11-22 9:53 PM

 

Tracker - 2012-11-21 7:55 PM

 

To accuse someone with 100 kg of overweight of playing dice with the lives of others is also a bit over the top and when steps are taken to ensure that every other road vehicle is properly MOTd and serviced and every driver young or old is capable of stopping within the distance stated by the vehicle maker when it was new there might be some grounds for ensuring that every vehicle is within its design weight limit - not it's plated weight - it's design limit.

 

I don't think we will ever agree but at least I hope we can continue to discuss it like normal people.

 

Me thinks design limit is not applicable, there is always a tolerance between design & operating limits.

How many vehicles on the road are only designed to achieve 70mph & NO MORE.

 

Likewise would you want to be near a Crane opertaing at it's DESIGN limits instead of it''s Safe Working Load. ??????????????????

 

Or would posters condone travelling well in excess of Speed Limits also ????????????????

 

Now that opens another debate. When I am poodling up the A30 at 60 MPH, it is quite amazing how many motorhomes come thundering by. Some legaly, some illegaly.

[Guest pelmetman]

flicka - 2012-11-22 9:53 PM

 

Or would posters condone travelling well in excess of Speed Limits also ????????????????

 

I wish *-)...........it takes me all day just to get to the legal limit :D

[Brian Kirby]

So many posts, so much heat! :-) Maybe Henry was a bit provocative with his title, but surely not that provocative!

 

The law states that a vehicle must not exceed its MAM, nor its individual axle weights. These are stamped on the VIN plate, so we should all know what the limits are.

 

There will inevitably be small variations between one weighbridge and another, so VOSA state that providing the overload does not exceed 5%, enforcement action will not be follow. Most motorhomes are plated at 3,500kg, so the margin is 175kg/3.5Cwt. Surely it can't be that difficult to keep the laden vehicle within its plated weight, when there is such a relatively generous tolerance?

 

It would be very unwise to seek to use the tolerance, because it is to account for weighbridge tolerances. However, it does mean that one can, if necessary, load to the plated limit and proceed without fear of being fined. One only has to visit a weighbridge, and at the same time check both axles.

 

Those who prefer not to do this take risks with their own, and other's, safety. Vans are not that scientifically designed. The base vehicles are, but the converters don't have the same sophistication. So, quite a few vans have limited payloads, making it critical that they are correctly loaded, and of them quite a few have tyres that are already at their maximum recommended loads. Overloading under these circumstance creates real risk, especially if a tyre has lost pressure un-noticed.

 

Having said all the above, insurance premiums indicate that motorhomes are not particularly high risk vehicles, and are not that often involved in accidents. To a large extent, I suspect that is because their owners (us :-)) are mature, experienced, responsible, drivers. Of course overload can make a van unsafe under certain road conditions, but so can bad loading within the MAM. As has been said above, legal is not necessarily safe, not illegal unsafe. However, illegal is illegal, and it is that which will get you into trouble if caught, safe or not. Common sense?

 

Same with speed. High speed in good conditions, within the vehicles limits, is not dangerous, but it is illegal where the limit is lower. One may argue with these limits, speed or weight, but one ignores them at one's own risk. Try arguing that the law is silly, if charged with either offence, and see how the judge responds! :-D

[Tracker]

Brian Kirby - 2012-11-23 7:25 PM

 

There will inevitably be small variations between one weighbridge and another, so VOSA state that providing the overload does not exceed 5%, enforcement action will not be follow. Most motorhomes are plated at 3,500kg, so the margin is 175kg/3.5Cwt. Surely it can't be that difficult to keep the laden vehicle within its plated weight, when there is such a relatively generous tolerance?

 

D

 

Unless the same 5% tolerance also applies throughout the EU and the rest of Europe it would seem risky to rely upon it as a defence for overloading if called upon to explain why you were 150 kg over the 3500 kg limit in another country just because it is OK in the UK?

[Guest pelmetman]

Tracker - 2012-11-23 7:43 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2012-11-23 7:25 PM

 

There will inevitably be small variations between one weighbridge and another, so VOSA state that providing the overload does not exceed 5%, enforcement action will not be follow. Most motorhomes are plated at 3,500kg, so the margin is 175kg/3.5Cwt. Surely it can't be that difficult to keep the laden vehicle within its plated weight, when there is such a relatively generous tolerance?

 

D

 

Unless the same 5% tolerance also applies throughout the EU and the rest of Europe it would seem risky to rely upon it as a defence for overloading if called upon to explain why you were 150 kg over the 3500 kg limit in another country just because it is OK in the UK?

 

Agreed it does appear to be surprisingly generous.....175 kg is 8 bags of cement 8-)........but least it puts my 30 kg over weight into perspective ;-).............although will probably still move the spare into the trailer :D

[Tracker]

I thought a bag of cement was 25kg?

 

Well it was the last time I carried 4 of 'em out to my car!!

[Guest pelmetman]

Tracker - 2012-11-23 8:09 PM

 

I thought a bag of cement was 25kg?

 

Well it was the last time I carried 4 of 'em out to my car!!

 

I thought they'd been reduced to 21 kg for elf & safety reasons :-S

[rupert123]

Brian Kirby - 2012-11-23 7:25 PM

 

So many posts, so much heat! :-) Maybe Henry was a bit provocative with his title, but surely not that provocative!

 

! :-D

 

Well it got some attention but was not meant to be provocative, well not much. It really was the attitude of the people I was speaking to and as I have said I suspect a hell of a lot of m/h owners especialy in mainland europe. Not recommended or clever but hardly crime of the century either given all the factors pointed out in the thread. I reckon I speed somewhere almost every day, reckon most others do to, not intentional but it happens, breaking the law. All this 'nit picking' over a few kgs is rubbish, how much differance can it make?

[Tracker]

rupert123 - 2012-11-23 8:28 PM

All this 'nit picking' over a few kgs is rubbish, how much difference can it make?

 

Not a lot I suspect - unless you are a gendarme, politzei or policia in a bad mood operating a money making machine - aka mobile weighbridge!

[Brian Kirby]

Tracker - 2012-11-23 7:43 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2012-11-23 7:25 PM

 

There will inevitably be small variations between one weighbridge and another, so VOSA state that providing the overload does not exceed 5%, enforcement action will not be follow. Most motorhomes are plated at 3,500kg, so the margin is 175kg/3.5Cwt. Surely it can't be that difficult to keep the laden vehicle within its plated weight, when there is such a relatively generous tolerance?

 

D

 

Unless the same 5% tolerance also applies throughout the EU and the rest of Europe it would seem risky to rely upon it as a defence for overloading if called upon to explain why you were 150 kg over the 3500 kg limit in another country just because it is OK in the UK?

But that is why I added "It would be very unwise to seek to use the tolerance, because it is to account for weighbridge tolerances. However, it does mean that one can, if necessary, load to the plated limit and proceed without fear of being fined. One only has to visit a weighbridge, and at the same time check both axles."

 

My fault, I think. I was not advocating a lax attitude to MAM, but pointing out that if folk need to load their vans to the hilt, because they have limited payloads, they can reasonably safely do so, because the potential for variability in weighbridges is recognised by VOSA.

 

If your MAM is 3,500kg, and the weighbridge near you says you weigh 3,500kg exactly (and you have a ticket to prove it), and the one VOSA use says you weigh 3,650kg, a) they will be unlikely to do anything other than possibly advise you to use a different weighbridge, and b) possibly get weights and measures to check the station you used.

 

For practical reasons, the same would have to be true pretty much everywhere. The only workable alternative would be to load to 95% of MAM to ensure you would never breach your plated limit if checked, which would potentially rob a 40 tonne HGV of some very valuable cargo.

 

Legally, there is no latitude, if a vehicle weighs more than its MAM it is overloaded. There is a scale of fines that starts at £60 for being between 0 and 10% overweight and increases for greater infringements. There is an upper limit if 1 tonne/20%, beyond which the serious stuff arises!

 

The 5% tolerance is an "unofficial" VOSA latitude in recognition that the world is not quite ideal, and not all weighbridges give the same answer. It just makes the law commercially practical and workable.

[crinklystarfish]

rupert123 - 2012-11-23 8:28 PM... All this 'nit picking' over a few kgs is rubbish, how much differance can it make?

Hi Rupert, I've tried and tried to get over by simple analogy how 100kg can make a huge difference. One last attempt, as simply as possible:

In our problem the following are given:

m = 1200 kg – mass of the car,

v₁ = 50 km/h – initial speed in the first case,

D1 = 20m – stopping distance in the first case,

v₂ = 100 km/h – initial speed in the second case.

We are suppose to find:

F = ? – magnitude of breaking force,

t = ? – the time required to stop,

D₂ = ?

We write down formulas which involved the unknown quantities,

F = ma         (1)

a = v₁/t        (2)

D₁ = v₁t –(1/2) a t²        (3)

Some explanations:

Formula (1) is simply Newton’s Second Law of Motion,

formula (2) – the speed decreases from v₁ to 0 during time t. Assuming constant breaking force means constant acceleration (deceleration or acceleration directed opposite to direction of motion in this problem), and (2) is the definition of such acceleration.

We have three equations with three unknown – that is what algebra requires.

From (2) _{http://www.physics-tutorial.net/graphics/M3/P4/image001.gif}

t = v₁/a    (4)

 

substituting (4) into (3) we get

_{http://www.physics-tutorial.net/graphics/M3/P4/image002.gif}    (5)

and after a little algebra we get

_{http://www.physics-tutorial.net/graphics/M3/P4/image003.gif}        (6)

The only unknown in (6) is acceleration a,

_{http://www.physics-tutorial.net/graphics/M3/P4/image004.gif}           (7)

Substituting (7) to (1) we get

_{http://www.physics-tutorial.net/graphics/M3/P4/image005.gif}        (8)

Substituting (7) to (4) we get the time required to stop

_{http://www.physics-tutorial.net/graphics/M3/P4/image001.gifhttp://www.physics-tutorial.net/graphics/M3/P4/image006.gif}            (9)

And the question (3) from our problem.

From data given in the problem we see that

v₂ = 2 v₁     (10)

Using formula (6) for distance required to stop the car, we have

_{http://www.physics-tutorial.net/graphics/M3/P4/image007.gif}     (11)

The ratio of distances required to stop the car traveling at these two speeds is

_{http://www.physics-tutorial.net/graphics/M3/P4/image008.gif}         (12)

 

So as you can see, an increase in mass of 100kg could mean you don't have sufficient time to stop or steer in the event of an emergency.

 

Hope that clears it up once and for all.

[Tracker]

Well at least that explains why CSF has been quiet for so long!!

 

Very clever - well almost apart from a few flaws!!

 

So as long as your van only weighs 1200kg and you don't add 100 kg - or 8% of its weight - you should be theoretically safe - unless the road is wet , icy or covered in the wrong sort of leaves - another variable?

 

Now where can I get a coachbuilt motorhome weighing sufficiently less than 1200 kg to add a 400kg payload please!

 

[Guest pelmetman]

Cor Crinkly that looks impressive B-)

 

 

 

What's it mean? :-S

[Tracker]

pelmetman - 2012-11-24 12:38 PM

 

Cor Crinkly that looks impressive B-)

 

What's it mean? :-S

 

Nothing! It's a wind up!!

[rupert123]

Nice one Crinkly but a 100kg still makes no differance, give it up.

[crinklystarfish]

OK dude, you repeatedly say a 100kg increase in mass over an arbitrary 3.500kg legal threshold makes no difference. You don't offer any explanation or evidence, so I assume it's just something you think sounds about right.

But you also acknowledge a 1000kg increase would make a difference.

At what exact point does extra weight over the plated limit of your average 3,500kg 'van actually become a problem then, and why?

[Guest pelmetman]

crinklystarfish - 2012-11-24 7:01 PM

At what exact point does extra weight over the plated limit of your average 3,500kg 'van actually become a problem then, and why?

 

According to VOSA 5% :D

[Tracker]

An extra 100 kg on a vehicle weighing in at 3500 kg equates to under 3%.

 

Add an extra passenger weighing say 75 kg to a car weighing say 1500 kg is an extra 5%.

 

So on that basis as long as we ensure that we only ever drive our cars without any passengers all the kids in 30 mph zones who run out in front of us should be safe and hopefully that might just see a big white motorhome coming whereas they might miss a dark coloured low slung hatchback?

 

The driver of a motorhome in his lofty perch stands a better chance of seeing the kid on the pavement before he/she runs out well before the driver of the car and that alone may well save a child's life?

 

In this as with all things - lets keep risk perception in proportion please shall we?

[Brian Kirby]

Tracker - 2012-11-24 7:42 PM...........So on that basis as long as we ensure that we only ever drive our cars without any passengers all the kids in 30 mph zones who run out in front of us should be safe and hopefully that might just see a big white motorhome coming whereas they might miss a dark coloured low slung hatchback?.................

Disagree! You left the driver in. Huge risk! :-)

[goldi]

Evenining all,

 

 

there two aspects to over loading that vosa takes into consideration

 

 

1safety and secondly

 

level playing field for hauliers.

 

take for example . A haulier with 600 trucks overloading one ton per load per day. How much does that wok out at ? Then multiply h at by six days per week per fifty two weeks pr year, x £15 per tonne , now do the maths. So what you encounter should be as much about advisory shall we say legality as any thing.

I reiterite my concern about continental enforcfement as before in which we should endeavour to conforn as much has possible.

To go back to the original post , Yes I do think you should take particular car if you are travelling abroad.

 

 

 

norm

 

 

 

 

errors must be accepted ! it is Saturday night

[Tracker]

Brian Kirby - 2012-11-24 7:50 PM

 

Tracker - 2012-11-24 7:42 PM...........So on that basis as long as we ensure that we only ever drive our cars without any passengers all the kids in 30 mph zones who run out in front of us should be safe and hopefully that might just see a big white motorhome coming whereas they might miss a dark coloured low slung hatchback?.................

Disagree! You left the driver in. Huge risk! :-)

 

Sorry Brian - I never thought of that!!

 

I'm now looking for a remote control driverless motorhome with a 360 degree camera like wot Google Maps use so that I can enjoy my virtual holiday on a 42" tv from the safety of my armchair with the smugness of knowing that every child along my route is that much safer!!

 

Come to think of it, the van won't need any payload, water, or anything else so think of how many lives I can save?

 

And there's more - I won't need travel insurance or a passport and the van will be more economical on diesel and gas etc.

 

Therefore I propose that we share all royalties from those who take up our concept and I commend the concept to the house as the new 'green' way to enjoy a motorcaravanning holiday!

[Brian Kirby]

Ah, but now you don't need the van either! So an even greater potential saving. To carry just a camera, all you really need is a drone. Then, apart from enjoying the view from the pilot's seat (at home), you could use it's other attributes to anonymously eliminate those you see infringing good motorhoming practise, thus converting it at will into an entertaining computer game, at no extra cost except for the odd rocket! :-)

[Robinhood]

Brian Kirby - 2012-11-25 12:01 PM

 

Ah, but now you don't need the van either! So an even greater potential saving. To carry just a camera, all you really need is a drone. Then, apart from enjoying the view from the pilot's seat (at home), you could use it's other attributes to anonymously eliminate those you see infringing good motorhoming practise...........

 

........always assuming that he avoids the children! 8-) ;-)

 

 

(You might have found an appropriate vehicle for the Eldiss "Firestorm" tag, Brian).

 

Edit: correction

[rupert123]

crinklystarfish - 2012-11-24 7:01 PMOK dude, you repeatedly say a 100kg increase in mass over an arbitrary 3.500kg legal threshold makes no difference. You don't offer any explanation or evidence, so I assume it's just something you think sounds about right.

But you also acknowledge a 1000kg increase would make a difference.

At what exact point does extra weight over the plated limit of your average 3,500kg 'van actually become a problem then, and why?

654.3 kgs.