Subject:
|
Re: This doesn't look right
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Fri, 3 Aug 2001 23:03:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
368 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.technic, Steve Lane writes:
> In lugnet.technic, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes:
> > 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.
>
> 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?
It doesn't dwarf the tractor unit. Look in the photo gallery--
there's one of the vehicle with tank and trailer, in profile. The
trailer is indeed twice the length of the tank, but the cab isn't
THAT much smaller than the tank itself. The length of the tractor
section is greater than the length of the tank, and not that much
less than the trailer. It *is* a very meaty vehicle, I agree.
I'd assume that the trailer can handle (by weight) only one
tank, but knowing Soviet-bloc transport philosophy, the system
might have been meant for hauling other things around too--
mobile missile launchers, CBE machinery, and so forth. The
drive-off, however, is really widely spaced, so it's not very
likely for anything without a wide wheelbase and (reaching here)
treads. It's clear the tractor is purpose-built for its role,
though.
As regards offroading: Look at a good road map of Europe, and
note the quality of road cover east of Germany, Austria, and
Italy. "Offroading" quality may, in fact, be on the road--the
roads just suck. (The dirt it's driving on is pretty character-
istic.) If you look at the tech data, it's in the left column
with the tank "module" in place--a V-12, 21,930cc engine! Ack!
Since it's going to be hauling around 90+ tons, I can understand.
Top speed's still cruddy, though--85kph, with a range of 1000km.
best
LFB
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
