Sunday, 23 February 2014

LHVs and What They Might Mean for the A303 and the West of England

LHVs - Longer, Heavier Vehicles - have been back in the news again this week, with an interesting story in the Western Gazette of Friday 21st February 2014 with the suitably emotive title of "A303 DUAL IT: New Laws Could See Monster Trucks Wreak Havoc on the A303".

The article begins: "...Mega trucks measuring up to 82ft in length could be allowed into Britain under new EU laws. Draft legislation being considered by the European Parliament would permit lorries longer than two double decker buses, and weighing up to 60 tonnes, to cross international borders for the first time..."



We thought we'd better take a look, and then take a position on this story.  Clearly, the A303 as it stands, is already unsuitable for the types of HGV loads already being carried - especially on the single-carriageway sections which despite Highways Agency bleatings, are too narrow to accommodate the current generation of HGVs.  Roundabouts on the A303 regularly have HGVs overturning on them because they fail to negotiate them at speed.

So, what is the truth about these Mega trucks?  We all know the danger of relying on newspapers of accurate information - on just about anything - so we went back to try and find the origins of this story from some more reputable sources.  We found two interesting reports.  The first "Longer and/or Longer and Heavier Goods Vehicles (LHVs) – a Study of the Likely Effects if Permitted in the UK: Final Report" written by the UK's Transport Research Labs in 2008:

This makes clear that this whole story is nothing new.  In fact, two UK companies pressed to be allowed to trial LFVs in the UK as long ago as 2005, but were refused.  As interest in LFVs was growing in the UK and elsewhere in Europe, the DfT commissioned TRL and Herriott-Watt University.  It's a very long report, but if you are interested, it is well worth reading the Executive Summary and the prĂ©cis of the findings.  As might be expected, the findings are bit of a curates egg, but overall, it seems to come out in favour - but there were problems anticipated by both the length and the weight of these vehicles.

One interesting finding is reproduced here:

"...If LHVs were to be permitted then European legislation would be very likely to substantially constrain the UKs ability to permit only those specific types of LHV with characteristics considered desirable to protect the UK infrastructure. The current European legislation would also be likely to make it difficult to require the fitting of specific additional safety equipment that could mitigate any increased accident risks. Suitable amendments to the European legislation would be required to be certain of the outcome. The UK regulations on speed limits for multi-trailer combinations would also be likely to require amendment, even if such vehicles were to be permitted by Special Order, because their speed would otherwise be limited to 40 mile/h on motorways and 20 mile/h on all other roads..."

Reading between the lines, we think this is really an admission of it being a case of when it happens and not if it happens.

Another concern was that introducing LFVs might precipitate a shift of freight traffic from rail to road.  Given the loss of the main rail link to the West Country in recent weeks, the pressure to provide a credible alternative can only grow.



The second paper, written for the European Commission in 2009, "Longer and Heavier Vehicles for Freight Transport" is also of interest to us as it begins:

"The European Commission is considering the implications of allowing the use of Longer and Heavier Vehicles a for road freight transport (abbreviated as LHVs in this study), measuring up to 25.25 m and weighing up to 60 tons, for the whole of the European Union transport system. Such trucks are already in circulation in Finland and Sweden, while several Member States are considering their introduction".

So, as we suspected, the Western Gazette is hyping this aspect of their story a wee bit; this is far from a new plan and the EU have been considering it for at least 5 years.  As far as the plan to use them, eventually, in the UK as a whole, it really shouldn't be a surprise.

However, where we would agree with the Western Gazette is in the likely impact on the A303/A358/A30 corridor.  It would be an unmitigated disaster with, we suspect, some dire consequences in terms of lives lost and blighted by accident - all the evidence suggests more accidents per km travelled than for existing HGVs.  They would be horrendous on any of the single carriageway sections of the A303 such as that past Stonehenge and through Winterbourne Stoke, but imagine them trying to negotiate the bends and steep climbs of the Blackdown Hills.

Lest anyone believe that no-one would even consider putting these things on West Country roads as they stand, then this diagram from the report should shatter that illusion:


See the little red dots in Cornwall!  Enough said.

So what is our position on LHVs?  Well, in the short term, even with the rail problems that the West Country now faces and is likely to face in the foreseeable future, we should be robust in keeping them off the A303, the A358 and the A30.  The risk to life and limb is simply too great.

In the longer term. the government has to look at an integrated traffic infrastructure plan for the west of England - providing a sustainable rail link to the tip of Cornwall as well as dualling the A303.  If this can be done, then there may be less of a need for LHV's - though we fear the economic and environmental case for doing so may be hard to overturn. 

No comments: