Subject:
|
Re: This doesn't look right
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:39:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
473 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.technic, Steve Lane writes:
> Surely this trailers to big?
>
> http://www.mujweb.cz/Zabava/trucker/
Nah, it looks like a pretty standard tank transporter
to me. The bed needs to be that meaty, first of all
because the tank is that wide, but also because tanks
are hideously heavy and need a very structurally sound
trailer. (Why don't they drive the tanks? Because
the tanks eat fuel way too quickly, the engines are far
more expensive to maintain, and they're so heavy they
will damage the road. Most tanks [1] also can't keep
up with the flow of traffic, but I'll let *you* get
angry at them first...
...I will wait over here for you.)
best
LFB
[1] Only the very latest generation can break 50mph--
with concomitant loss of what little fuel efficiency
they have. That tank on the transporter is a lot
older.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: This doesn't look right
|
| (...) My point was that compared with European/US equipment I've never seen a tank transporter where the trailer is twice as long as the tank. It also seems to dwarf the tractor unit. Surely this size would impede off-road ability? Steve (23 years ago, 3-Aug-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
Message is in Reply To:
5 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
