Letters: Wheel Corrosion, Truck Fatalities, Deregulation Nafta & Driver Safety
These Letters to the Editor appear in the Jan. 2 print edition of Transport Topics. Click here to subscribe today.
Wheel Corrosion
Thank you for the p. 1 article on wheel corrosion in the Dec. 5 issue (“Harsh Road Chemicals Clear Ice and Snow, but Increase Wheel Corrosion, Experts Say”).
I have attended several meetings of American Trucking Associations’ Technology & Maintenance Council where participants have stated they simply want to know how many years a component will last. The article highlighted very well that this is a difficult question to answer because of the difference in corrosion rates based upon geographic region of operation.
With the support and cooperation of a couple of different companies and a few fleets, the Society of Automotive Engineers Truck and Bus Corrosion Committee is in the final stages of implementing a study to measure the corrosion rate in seven different geographic regions. The rates will be measured for the chassis and body exterior regions of a truck as outlined in SAE J2721, Recommended Corrosion Test Methods for Commercial Vehicle Components. This test will take three years to complete, but with the cooperation of TMC, it will be possible to report on initial results at the February 2013 TMC meeting.
It is a goal of the Truck and Bus Corrosion Committee to give the industry an effective tool to help — relatively quickly — answer the question, “How long will this last?”
With the different corrosion zones, test methods, multiple salts, deformation/damage and heat and dry cycles, it is believed SAE J271 is that means. We are gathering data and encouraging test labs to use this test specification so that all of us truckers will have another tool in our belt in our common battle against corrosion.
Dennis Winn
Manager of New Product Development, Patents and Trademarks
Orscheln Products and Elisha Technologies
Moberly, Mo.
Editor’s Note: Dennis Winn is also chairman of the Society of Automotive Engineers Truck and Bus Corrosion Committee.
Truck Fatalities
Your Dec. 12 p. 1 article was very compelling, and I have no doubt you will be hearing lots of theories on the cause of this uptick in fatalities (“Truck Fatalities Rise 8.7%”). Here’s one of mine: Has anyone looked into how many of these accidents happened in construction zones?
I could barely find my way to work with all those “shovel-ready” projects last year that were part of the stimulus.
Great paper! Keep up the good work.
Jim Parison
Principal Systems Engineer, Research
Bose Corp.
Framingham, Mass.
Cellphone Ban
People, people — where is your critical thinking faculty?
According to the National Transportation Safety Board, 19% of accidents were caused by distracted driving — so they want to totally ban all cellphone use.
Excuse me? Just how much of that 19% is actually cellphone related?
If you drive the highways often, you see people eating, shaving, applying makeup and reading books and/or newspapers — among other things.
How about watching a driver turn his head when speaking to his passenger(s)? Talk about scary.
I am getting really irritated every time I hear generalities like this. Give me accuracy; don’t just throw out numbers and expect me to go along with more regulations that curb my personal freedoms.
Properly set up with a headset or speaker, cellphone use is less distracting than talking to a passenger actually sitting in your vehicle. Don’t let the NTSB convince you to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Judy LaFleur
Bookkeeper
Selland Auto Transport Inc.
Seattle
Deregulation
Hey, folks — remember the Motor Carrier Regulatory Reform and Modernization Act, more commonly known as the Motor Carrier Act of 1980? People back then were saying deregulation would put everyone out of business. Well, it almost did.
Where are Associated, Hemingway, Smiths and Hennis? Has anyone seen the remains of Mason-Dixon, Jones Motor, Yellow, Preston, PIE and Poole Truck Lines? Some of these giants are just a shadow of what they used to be. Some can’t even cast a shadow.
Truckers then and now were — and are — their own worst enemy.
Truckers blamed deregulation for their demise, and there was a lot of truth to that. Many truckers refused to accept deregulation and adjust to that new market.
Now, the Department of Transportation and its Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration are doing all they can to help you increase your rates and profit margins, and a lot of you are calling for these safety-minded people to back off and let the economy grow.
Give me a break!
In my 43 years of running trucking companies and brokerages, I never have had anyone prove to me that deregulation helped keep one single shipper in business.
Ladies and gentlemen, stop and smell the roses the safety advocates are offering you.
You can blame the increase in your costs and the rise of rates on Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways, FMCSA, DOT, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety to name a few.
What a perfect world we live in.
For us “old school” truckers, the old saying, “What goes around, comes around,” is coming true.
I know there will be some who will say I am un-American for suggesting that truckers should profit from regulations that increase safety.
Give me another break!
The Motor Carrier Act of 1980 was the start of this “safety snowball.” Is everyone un-American who took advantage of deregulation?
I think not.
Bob Hart
Owner
Virginia Transportation Consultants Inc.
Fincastle, Va.
Nafta, Driver Safety
In regards to Michael Card’s Nov. 28 op-ed “Nafta Works,” there was one item that the author did not discuss, and that is driver safety. Nafta was intended to be a two-way street. In addition to Mexican trucks being allowed to deliver international loads in the United States, our trucks were to be allowed to deliver our products in Mexico.
Any trucking company in the United States that chooses to allow its drivers to cross the border is neglecting to protect its most valuable asset: those drivers. Until the Mexican government can seize control of its own border from the drug cartels, I would have to say there is no way Nafta can work — or at the very least function — as it was intended to 17 years ago when it was implemented.
Also, as to the out-of-service criteria for Mexican drivers operating with only a 1% out-of-service rate compared with a 7% out-of-service rate for U.S. drivers, this truly is a case of comparing apples and oranges. The Mexican carriers have been operating only in the border zones, and that means most are exempt from having to use logbooks. That makes it pretty easy to avoid a large majority of the potential violations that would place a driver out of service.
Scott Jensen
Safety Manager
Texas Star Express
Rockwall, Texas
