Re: [MV] I-70 Federal study

From: m35products (m35prod@optonline.net)
Date: Sat Feb 14 2004 - 11:02:01 PST


Very well put, David.

I might immodestly point out that one of the many benefits of the
Air-O-Matic steering modification is that in the event of engine failure,
the power steering continues to provide safe, continuous operation, for as
long as air remains in the system. Additionally, even after exhausting all
available air, the steering simply reverts to Armstrong steering. This
allows a driver to manuever the truck into a safe zone, without steering
wheel lock up. Instead of fretting about steering lockup, our government
should have taken a look at their own steering modification recommendations,
from a previous generation of trucks.

A P Bloom

----- Original Message -----
From: <DDoyle9570@aol.com>
To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: [MV] I-70 Federal study

> I am not familiar with the report Ron referred to regarding the safety of
the G-742 (M35-type)trucks, however I am familiar with one critical of the
M939. That report can be found at:
>
> http://www.gao.gov/archive/1999/ns99082.pdf
>
> It states that the M939 is 21 times more likely to be involved in a fatal
accident than a M35A2. This reports states that in December 1995, the 939
family was limited to 40 MPH on road, or 35 MPH off-road, pending resolution
of hte safety issues.
>
> The trucks, when ordered, were intended to operate off-road 80 % of the
time, and the NDT was a good tire for this, given the initial premise of one
tire for use in snow, mud, dirt, sand....rather than matching the tire to a
known terrain as off-roaders do. However, in practive the trucks on and
off-road uses were reversed, and the NDT is NOT a good on-road tire during
rain. This is not a new revelation, I have a WWII training film on this
subject. Nevertheless, given the increased on-road use of the trucks, it
was decided to try new tires. The result of this was the super-single
radials.
>
> It was found that a lightly loaded truck, under heavy brake application,
had a tendency for wheel lock up, and ENGINE STALL, with inherent loss of
power steering, loss of control and roll over. The suggested remedy was a
change to the brake proportioning, AS WELL AS the installation of anti lock
braking systems. These changes, including tires, were expected to cost
$3800 per truck.
>
> At the same time, it was decided to modify the accelerator linkage on
M939A2 trucks, and add Roll over Protection as the cabs were replaced during
normal maintenance. This was expected to cost about $3600 per truck.
>
> Something that is overlooked in almost every posting about towing trucks
is that NONE of us follow the military procedure. By reading the TM that
accompanies the military towbar, we find that if we are flat towing another
vehicle with the tow bar, there is to be a driver in BOTH vehicles. This
solves the steering, lighting, and brake lighting problem. None of us do
this, and in most areas it would be illegal for us to do this. And the
military, at least in this area, seems to RARELY flat tow anything, rather
we always see a wrecker (5 ton or HEMMT) towing with one end of the towed
vehicle supported by the wrecker shipper.
>
> With respect to the legality of amber beacons in some states. My position
is, the police may stop me, the judge can fine me, but that trucker in
Illinois executed these two fellows. I'll take my chances with the fine.
>
> My .02,
> David Doyle
>
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:28:33 PDT