The guy driving the car is crazy! Big rig - Tractor Trailer

[MxnRainmaker]

I'd love to do it, as a matter of fact is safer downthere than it is driving around that big rig

[ModeraterX]

Bet theres a great view under there..

[Brat4ever]

thats funny you say they copied that jerry bilt from van dyke when you can buy them i worked for a company that had 2 of them built back it 1969 so learn your facts before your called stupid oh ya wait i just did

[1965cuda273]

its the bandit

[woofan11k]

why is he crazy?

[killer2600]

I wonder what kind of license one has to have to drive/steer a trailer :D

[QualityKush]

Only in WA:D

[geniemist]

DARPA -.-

[fowleriva]

first time ive ever c'n dat

[chaise91]

I don't see how the driver of the steer car is crazy. The chance of every single wheel giving out, and the frame of the car itself giving out is much less than the load toppling over and leaving the driver perfectly safe....just on his side.

[TheHevquip]

That thing looks so damn cool, I want one!

[trucker006302]

this truck is old, seen it in 85' while in Seattle

[kilobitti]

That's cool, but I don't get what's crazy about the guy doing the job? 

[signal44]

I have driven oversized and then some for 20 years and NEVER seen anything like that.

Wonder if it have radio and ac

[signal44]

I have driven oversized and then some for 20 years and NEVER seen anything like that.

[sikofu2]

I want one. never mind I want 2.

[puremaplesyrup22]

Midget mobile.

[TheLargecars]

thats cool

[ATCRyderX]

I turned my head away from the vid sayin "wtf is so special about this?" and then "Holy fuck!!"

[bashue69]

I want one!

[1966omc]

Boeing hauls the main wing spar with those and he was heading to the Everett planet so its probably a wing spar for a 767, 777 or maybe a 747

[togood2222]

wdf

[inspktr51]

i see them everyday on hwy 167

[Kamidake83]

Wait....Is there a driver under that? zomg that is funny cool.

[GMCMan29]

i WANT that job lol

[coolhandcanada]

I don't think hes crazy, hes actually in a really safe place.

[justforever96]

LOL...look at some of the names you see on YouTube...makes you wonder what they were thinking when they made it up...

"gangesex"

"kdraper"

WTF? I sure hope the 2nd one is supposed to mean "K. Draper", not something else....0.0

[miazizdragon2]

@justforever96 sure you don't comment on my name just trucking at the end of the day and up a big hill. LOL

[justforever96]

@miazizdragon2 -LOL, oh, jeez...I didn't even get that. I thought it meant dragons or something! LOL, that's a good name, man. And as for waiting for the growing season for produce, I'm not saying that's what I WANT, and that I'd enjoy it, but this country is coming apart. Personally, I think Americans really shine the best under adversity...we seem to become jerkoffs when we have whatever we want. We've gone downhill since WWII; we're too damn rich and comfy, in the "big picture" anyway.

[draculascoffin]

Just reading some of the comments, Trains suck, and airlines suck. This country was built by trucks delivering goods all accross this country.

[joshuwa88]

Your stupid. Trucks came AFTER trains and Trains are far more efficient at moving large freight.

[miazizdragon2]

except for the fact that they still can't deliver your freight let alone how your produce would  look after a few weeks on a train.

[TheRetiredtrucker]

but modern freight cant move with the volume and speed industry demands by rail. As I pointed out before, most companies have eliminated most of their warehousing space. (Taxed on invetory, cost of building ect) Pretty much ever large manufacturer have turned to just in time delivery. comes off the truck straight to assembly line,,,trains cant do that

[justforever96]

@draculascoffin Um, actually, that is patently INCORRECT. It is well known that this country was built using TRAINS, and this country in particular, as there's a lot more space between the pop. centers. Ever heard of the Transcontinental Railroad? The trains allowed the country to build up industry and population, allowed trade BETWEEN cities, not just within them. BECAUSE of the trains, we became rich enough to build the Interstates, without which trucks are zip. You're just biased, that's all!

[interstate5trucker]

That is old technology, modern long load haulers have hydraulic steering that is controlled from the cab for the rear of the load. Still, it is a crazy cool job to drive a steer car.

[justforever96]

I was wondering why it said "Boeing" until I read that it's a 747 main-spar. They must have good communication between the two drivers, probably video too. I'd guess it takes good coordination to maneuver that thing around even mild corners, although I'm sure that they have the route figured out to minimize the difficulties. That's one thing to be said for huge companies; they have the capital to get things done! Bet they'd PAY to rebuild parts of the route, and still make mad profit.

[kdraper2007]

I'd imagine they C.B. radios to communicate. just like the pilot cars use. as for the turns, I'd imagine that the driver's are experienced enough that they don't need to communicate too much.

[HummerRecovery]

holy shit!

[jakeywakey912]

id love to be the driver in the little cart

[eddvoss]

Not really it is bumpy and either very hot or very cold depending on the Temp. If the load breaks free it is coming down on YOU. Hope if it does that the driver will hit the throttle and pull it off of you before he stops. I'll stay in the big truck thank you. Most of this kind of thing is done by remote control now though.

[jakeywakey912]

damn tht sux

itd be fun drivin one of them

[countrymusicgtavboy2]

@jakeywakey912 so would i. being around trucks all day.traveling. stiing and doing nothing till you go to turn

[RoMaNiANpRIdEe]

wat the fuk

[JOHNzaSickNASTYBeast]

thats cool except if the load were to collapse on that tandem car.

[zomgbbqwth]

no it wont~ :)

[ruberduck13]

Boeing copied those steer cars from Van Dyke out of south Seattle. Their located under the 1st ave bridge at the Duwamish river. I used to haul concrete bridge girders like this for Van Dyke. My biggest load was 195,000 lbs GVW over lost trails pass on the Montana/Idaho border. 13 mph up the hill, 13 mph down. The transmission temp was 365 degrees and boiling out the breather at the top. It was lot's of fun driving that big stuff around. We got a lot of funny looks on the road and in rest areas.

[75Robert]

That sounds like a cool job. Of all the jobs to have that one has character

[eddvoss]

I think Boeing has been around longer than Van Dyke. I used to pull for T and T out of Sumner doing those concrete girders out of Port of Tacoma up to Everett

[justforever96]

@ruberduck13 - 365 Degrees? Ouch! I sure hope it wasn't an automatic! In fact, I'm pretty sure it wasn't, since it never would have survived. (If they even make torque converter trannys for trucks...I doubt it). I still hope they remembered to change the gear oil afterward...I don't think even synthetic can take that kind of heat for long. Still, that DOES sound like fun. Probably as fun as you can get at 13mph! What kind of tractors did you use? Was this long ago, or more recent?

[HalomasterA69]

@ruberduck13 how do i drive something like this?

[snowboundtruckers]

@ruberduck13 they didnt copy Van Dyke. its a company that makes those and Van Dyke and Boeing bought those steer cars from them.

[kdraper2007]

that whole thing was the load, it's a wing spar for the 747 jumbo jet. the little car thing on the back holds a driver who steers the rear end around corners.

[beaman220]

Or maybe it was the new MinuteMan III peace keeper?

[gangesex]

thats a interesting looking load setup. It would be interesting to know what it was for a load. Thats a great truck video, thanks a lot, Boeing clearly does not fuck around! :)

[kdraper2007]

wing spar for a 747 jet.

[cuttingwoodnow]

what is part?

[75Robert]

I have no idea

[kdraper2007]

that is a wing spar for the 747 jumbojet.

[kdraper2007]

@75Robert That is one of 4 spars that go into the wing of a 747 jumbo jet. these pieces carry the weight of the aircraft fuselage to the wings & are the beefiest structural members in the airplane.

[kdraper2007]

Wing spar for a 747 jumbojet airliner, it is so long the rear end needs to be steered around corners.

[kdraper2007]

@cuttingwoodnow Wing spar for the 747 jumbo jet.

[vettedog]

@cuttingwoodnow

plane fuselage

[AgentHog]

What plant was it going to. The everet and renton plants should get stuff like that on the trains. :S

[75Robert]

This was headed North from Seattle area

[kdraper2007]

that is too big for a train, besides trains can't provide the just in time delivery required for this. you don't want your 747 wing spar-the main load bearing structuretying the wings to the airplane fuselage to sit out in the weather too long. besides railroads suck, they can't provide good service that's why they are all broke. they've been on government assistance since the late 1960's.

[AgentHog]

Then why are all 737 fuselages delivered to the renton plant on trains? That sit outside until they get in the factory.

[kdraper2007]

747 wing spars are longer then 737 fuselages, the 747 uses 4 spars per plane.

[justforever96]

Trains COULD be more efficient. Airlines are surviving on govn't subsidy too. The issue with US rail is that the infrastructure isn't modern enough. The rails are still too curvy to get real high-speed. The comanies are broke, they can't fix it. IF they could afford to lobby for a bill to modernize, it would be VERY expensive, and would involve lots of govn't taking of property. Not many politicians will risk loosing votes unless they have a good incentive; "eminent domain" ain't real popular.

[kdraper2007]

you ever seen a Walmart, supermarket, mall, or any other store with a rail spur? can the train pull up to a factory & in a matter of 5 minutes decouple the cars & spot them in a dock? no.

[justforever96]

I never said we should get rid of trucks; trucks are very useful for distribution, delivery, etc., but for transporting goods (particularly bulk cargo) cross country, it is (or could be) far more efficient to use rail, and then distribute with trucks. Of course, it's a bit more complex in the US, 'cause we're a big, spread out country. That's why trucks are important. But the only reason people haul X-country with trucks is that it's cheaper, and it's only cheaper because our rail system sucks.

[TheRetiredtrucker]

Big problem with rail is if your not a huge company with a large account it just takes too long to deliver freight, I would haul paper from Thunder Bay Ont to Dallas Tx in less then 3days at the most, same load on a train takes weeks to arrive.(can give some examples i know of) most industry is working on "just on time" delivery schedules now to cut down on warehousing stock. trains cannot offer that

[justforever96]

Yeah, all true, but half of my point was that the rail system in the US really sucks! If it was modernized and everything, I'll bet it would be a lot quicker and cheaper than it is now. Part of the problem is that most railroads aren't really big money makers (a good thing in some ways). But there's a reason that big,m rich companies can be so competitive. It basically comes down to the whole "economies of scale" idea, but more complex. A rich company can do things cheaper (if they want to!).

[TheRetiredtrucker]

Think a huge problem they would have expanding the rail system is just acquiring the land required for the new routes. Not too many people would willingly sell their homes to make way for the new tracks required. Railways are fine for the large bulk shipments, but for most finished manufactured goods not really a great option. Most of the companies are working on just on time delivery systems and aer trying to eliminate as much warehousing as possible......continued

[justforever96]

@TheRetiredtrucker - Yes, I also see land accquization as the biggest problem with building an ultra-modern high-speed rail network. I'm not some pro-train-fanatic (although I do find them fascinating to see in action), but I just think it's a fact that IF we had the right rail infrastructure, it is a lot safer and efficient to use trains for long-hauling. But what will happen when fuel becomes a REAL issue? You can make a train electric...a lot harder to do with 10M semis on the road. CONT.

[justforever96]

@TheRetiredtrucker -Pt.2-There ARE ways to power 10M individual trucks, but it will be harder...I won't get into our nations future energy issues though. There's also the whole emissions thing, as well as the fact that a huge part of our traffic congestion is from trucks on the road. I just think that if our population keeps growing, we'll either have to make the roads bigger (and have even MORE accidents), OR we can make a new rail system, and run trains off the grid.I'll miss trucks though. =(

[miazizdragon2]

not to forget perishable foods imagine produce on a train for weeks.

[TheRetiredtrucker]

Yes....was many decades ago in Canada they stopped shipping cattle on trains. Some cattle cars were dropped on a siding and the railway "forgot" about the dropped cars. Few days later they went to hook up and all the cattle were dead. No more cows on train. Hauling produce from Salinas California to Toronto Ont takes just over 3 days with a solo driver, 2 with a team. You really dont want to keep perishables on for much longer then that

[justforever96]

@miazizdragon2- Perishable foods? Well, honestly, that would fit in nicely with the greenie "local economy" idea, which I won't discount just because it's a hippy idea. Maybe it WOULD be better to start growing our own produce, etc, closer to where it's consumed. A hundred years ago, we never would have DREAMED about buying produce that was grown 2,000mi. away. It would have sounded ridiculous. I see change coming, unfortunately, but in some ways it may be for the better. Things aren't perfect.

[miazizdragon2]

@justforever96 great idea...um when you wait till local growing season is here for your produce you will say not such a great idea .

[miazizdragon2]

if trains are so efficient and viable why does the federal government have to subsidize them every year?

[RobertGary1]

Take a look at a real time image of the number of airliners in the air over the US on any given day. There is no way a train system could handle a fraction of that traffic.

[justforever96]

@RobertGary1- I wouldn't be so sure about that. With computer controls you could run train over a track every ten minutes. And think about how much more an entire train can carry than the average plane. Besides, I'm mostly talking about cargo, not people. Jets work okay for that (although trains would be safer). The biggest thing is efficiency. A jet takes a LOT more fuel to fly 100,000lbs than a train does, mostly because jet fuel has to LIFT the stuff AND carry it. Energy comes from somewhere.

[RobertGary1]

You may be able to carry the total number of passenger. I just don't think you can offer the number of routes. If you look at the number of planes in the air flying frequent routes from hundres of destinations; that would be hard to do with a train running on a mainline/branch line system. I think you'd have to scale back the variety (destinations frequency of flights) to make trains viable. Probably works better for very specific routes (SF/LA, Chicago/NYC, etc).

[Griffencph]

Never seen a setup like that before, but I've seen several where the trailer is uncoupled from the Ringfeder and put under steel or concrete bars, making the trailer plus load work as a semitrailer.