TerraLiner:12 m Globally Mobile Beach House/Class-A Crossover w 6x6 Hybrid Drivetrain
- Thread starter biotect
- Start date
biotect
Designer
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
[video=youtube;ZB016gMDAAk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZB016gMDAAk [/video] [video=youtube;a7ejJfpJ61g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7ejJfpJ61g [/video]
The Piranha series of armored personnel carriers has as long history, and was first designed and developed by MOWAG in Switzerland in the 1970's -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mowag and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mowag_Piranha , http://www.gdels.com/products/wheeled_4.asp?id=1 , http://www.gdels.com/products/pc3_1_gallery.asp?n=1 , and http://www.gdels.com/brochures/wheeled_piranha8.pdf . The Piranha has gone through many iterations since then, with the Piranha V first shown to the public in 2010. MOWAG is now part of the General Dynamics European Land Systems group.
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
[video=youtube;ZB016gMDAAk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZB016gMDAAk [/video] [video=youtube;a7ejJfpJ61g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7ejJfpJ61g [/video]
The Piranha series of armored personnel carriers has as long history, and was first designed and developed by MOWAG in Switzerland in the 1970's -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mowag and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mowag_Piranha , http://www.gdels.com/products/wheeled_4.asp?id=1 , http://www.gdels.com/products/pc3_1_gallery.asp?n=1 , and http://www.gdels.com/brochures/wheeled_piranha8.pdf . The Piranha has gone through many iterations since then, with the Piranha V first shown to the public in 2010. MOWAG is now part of the General Dynamics European Land Systems group.
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
The German "Boxer", Finnish "Patria", Austrian "Pandur", and American "Stryker" armored personnel carriers are roughly similar to the Piranha; indeed, the American "Stryker" is actually a variant of the Piranha III, but manufactured in Canada -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stryker . Hence I took some liberties above, when I mixed in some photos of Strykers with photos of Piranhas.
[video=youtube;HEFNiiIIQM8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEFNiiIIQM8 [/video]
[video=youtube;uViv28kRwW8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uViv28kRwW8 [/video]
For some good Stryker playlists, see https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLdGhy0BNdEeM9QJk70QqLqiGRD7reLEDv and https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLdGhy0BNdEeMvw6YKqDL_w-0VNQnynvkP .
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
The German "Boxer", Finnish "Patria", Austrian "Pandur", and American "Stryker" armored personnel carriers are roughly similar to the Piranha; indeed, the American "Stryker" is actually a variant of the Piranha III, but manufactured in Canada -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stryker . Hence I took some liberties above, when I mixed in some photos of Strykers with photos of Piranhas.
[video=youtube;HEFNiiIIQM8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEFNiiIIQM8 [/video]
[video=youtube;uViv28kRwW8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uViv28kRwW8 [/video]
For some good Stryker playlists, see https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLdGhy0BNdEeM9QJk70QqLqiGRD7reLEDv and https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLdGhy0BNdEeMvw6YKqDL_w-0VNQnynvkP .
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
Here a few more videos of various other makes/brands of armored personnel carriers. First, the German "Boxer" -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_(armoured_fighting_vehicle) , http://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/...ems/armoured_wheeled_vehicles/boxer/index.php , http://www.military-today.com/apc/boxer_mrav.htm , http://www.army-technology.com/projects/mrav/ :
[video=youtube;eLLbo2c_pZo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLLbo2c_pZo [/video]
[video=youtube;V86B0BfW_OE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V86B0BfW_OE [/video]
Next, the Finnish "Patria" -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patria_AMV , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patria_(company) , http://www.military-today.com/apc/patria_amv.htm
[video=youtube;CZzWjE4WNzo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZzWjE4WNzo [/video]
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
Here a few more videos of various other makes/brands of armored personnel carriers. First, the German "Boxer" -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_(armoured_fighting_vehicle) , http://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/...ems/armoured_wheeled_vehicles/boxer/index.php , http://www.military-today.com/apc/boxer_mrav.htm , http://www.army-technology.com/projects/mrav/ :
[video=youtube;eLLbo2c_pZo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLLbo2c_pZo [/video]
[video=youtube;V86B0BfW_OE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V86B0BfW_OE [/video]
Next, the Finnish "Patria" -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patria_AMV , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patria_(company) , http://www.military-today.com/apc/patria_amv.htm
[video=youtube;CZzWjE4WNzo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZzWjE4WNzo [/video]
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
And finally, the Austrian "Pandur" -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandur_I , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandur_II , http://www.military-today.com/apc/pandur_2.htm :
[video=youtube;UDJGSya2kAU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDJGSya2kAU [/video] [video=youtube;EyDATgmHRKM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyDATgmHRKM [/video]
Clearly, there is quite a difference between these kinds of dedicated armored personnel carriers, and the Kamaz Typhoon.
Indeed, armored personnel carriers of the kind just shown are often called "Infantry Fighting Vehicles", to underscore their combat-ready capability. They are much more low-slung, for instance, so that they present the lowest and most minimal profile to potentially lethal adversaries, such as tanks or hand-launched missiles. Furthermore, when a vehicle like the "Stryker" is fitted with a substantial gun turret, in effect it becomes a very light-weight, nimble, "wheeled" tank.
Last but not lease, although the Kamaz Typhoon's windows are not exactly huge, truly dedicated armored personnel carriers do away with windows completely. They are driven either via closed-circuit TV, or periscopes, or both. Here are some more interior images of the Piranha V, showing the driving station:
So the Kamaz Typhoon is not a full-blown armored personnel carrier as such, even though it has some interesting features in common with these, for instance, hydro-pneumatic suspension (more on this in a later series of posts....:wings: ).
Instead, I would classify the Typhoon as roughly equivalent the Oshkosh FMTV line of medium-weight trucks -- see post #330 on page 33 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page33 . The Typhoon is certainly an armored troop carrier, there is no question about that. But the Typhoon is still not as heavily armored, offensively equipped, and combat-capable, as a Piranha, Stryker, Boxer, Patria, or Pandur.
In short, "amoured troop-transport truck" seems the best description for the Typhoon.
Or once again, one could say that the Typhoon is really just an MRAP: a Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle, whose main purpose is to deliver troops safely to their destination -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP .
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
And finally, the Austrian "Pandur" -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandur_I , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandur_II , http://www.military-today.com/apc/pandur_2.htm :
[video=youtube;UDJGSya2kAU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDJGSya2kAU [/video] [video=youtube;EyDATgmHRKM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyDATgmHRKM [/video]
Clearly, there is quite a difference between these kinds of dedicated armored personnel carriers, and the Kamaz Typhoon.
Indeed, armored personnel carriers of the kind just shown are often called "Infantry Fighting Vehicles", to underscore their combat-ready capability. They are much more low-slung, for instance, so that they present the lowest and most minimal profile to potentially lethal adversaries, such as tanks or hand-launched missiles. Furthermore, when a vehicle like the "Stryker" is fitted with a substantial gun turret, in effect it becomes a very light-weight, nimble, "wheeled" tank.
Last but not lease, although the Kamaz Typhoon's windows are not exactly huge, truly dedicated armored personnel carriers do away with windows completely. They are driven either via closed-circuit TV, or periscopes, or both. Here are some more interior images of the Piranha V, showing the driving station:
So the Kamaz Typhoon is not a full-blown armored personnel carrier as such, even though it has some interesting features in common with these, for instance, hydro-pneumatic suspension (more on this in a later series of posts....:wings: ).
Instead, I would classify the Typhoon as roughly equivalent the Oshkosh FMTV line of medium-weight trucks -- see post #330 on page 33 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page33 . The Typhoon is certainly an armored troop carrier, there is no question about that. But the Typhoon is still not as heavily armored, offensively equipped, and combat-capable, as a Piranha, Stryker, Boxer, Patria, or Pandur.
In short, "amoured troop-transport truck" seems the best description for the Typhoon.
Or once again, one could say that the Typhoon is really just an MRAP: a Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle, whose main purpose is to deliver troops safely to their destination -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP .
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
2. A parenthetical remark about the Piranha V's all-wheel steering
*********************************************
In the second set of pictures of the Piranha V immediately above, notice the variety of turning angles of the wheels:
Much like all-terrain cranes of the kind made by companies such as Liebherr, Grove, Linkbelt, Tadano, and Terex, the Piranha V armored personnel carrier has all-wheel steering -- see post #34, page 4, and post #44, page 5, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...xpedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page4 and http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...xpedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page5 :
But as opposed to all-terrain cranes like those pictured immediately above, nobody would ever claim that the Piranha V is not a "true" off-road vehicle. Recall that very early in the thread egn and grizzlyj suggested that all-terrain cranes are not truly "off-road". They suggested that this is mostly just marketing hype. Furthermore, when/if these very heavy cranes do go off-road, they do so at very slow speeds:
No doubt these were correct statements about "all-terrain" cranes of the kind made by Liebherr, Grove, etc.
But again, at the beginning of the thread I merely introduced all-terrain cranes to illustrate just how "interesting" all-wheel steering can get, thanks to ZF industries. And in the case of the Piranha V, clearly we have all-wheel steering combined with true off-road capability, at high speed, demonstrating that such a thing is possible. Literally more than 9,000 Piranhas have been built for the world's various armed forces, including the "Stryker" for the United States -- see http://www.army-technology.com/projects/piranhav/ . So presumably the engineering challenge was worked out decades ago, i.e. the specific challenge of creating very reliable all-wheel steering for a vehicle that must drive truly "off-road", at very high speeds.
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
2. A parenthetical remark about the Piranha V's all-wheel steering
*********************************************
In the second set of pictures of the Piranha V immediately above, notice the variety of turning angles of the wheels:
Much like all-terrain cranes of the kind made by companies such as Liebherr, Grove, Linkbelt, Tadano, and Terex, the Piranha V armored personnel carrier has all-wheel steering -- see post #34, page 4, and post #44, page 5, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...xpedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page4 and http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...xpedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page5 :
But as opposed to all-terrain cranes like those pictured immediately above, nobody would ever claim that the Piranha V is not a "true" off-road vehicle. Recall that very early in the thread egn and grizzlyj suggested that all-terrain cranes are not truly "off-road". They suggested that this is mostly just marketing hype. Furthermore, when/if these very heavy cranes do go off-road, they do so at very slow speeds:
.....everything possible is done on a building site to try to ensure [these all-terraiin cranes] do not experience anything like offroad. The rep will nearly always visit to check before his precious crane arrives, and if more hardcore needs putting down beforehand at your cost then that's what you do. From what I've seen these have as much off road capability as a normal RV
No doubt these were correct statements about "all-terrain" cranes of the kind made by Liebherr, Grove, etc.
But again, at the beginning of the thread I merely introduced all-terrain cranes to illustrate just how "interesting" all-wheel steering can get, thanks to ZF industries. And in the case of the Piranha V, clearly we have all-wheel steering combined with true off-road capability, at high speed, demonstrating that such a thing is possible. Literally more than 9,000 Piranhas have been built for the world's various armed forces, including the "Stryker" for the United States -- see http://www.army-technology.com/projects/piranhav/ . So presumably the engineering challenge was worked out decades ago, i.e. the specific challenge of creating very reliable all-wheel steering for a vehicle that must drive truly "off-road", at very high speeds.
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
3. The Kamaz Typhoon's Dimensions. And, Is it Fully Integrated?
*********************************************
The Typhoon has a great “breakover” angle, i.e. virtually none whatsoever:
But that’s because the Typhoon is a bit shorter than the projected length of the Terraliner.
Depending on which website you believe, the Typhoon is either:
(a) 7.8m long, x 2.52m wide, x 2.75m high – see http://www.army-technology.com/projects/kamaz-63969-typhoon-mrap-armoured-vehicle/
(b) 8.2 m long, x 2.5 m wide, x 2.93 m high – see http://www.armyrecognition.com/russ...ruck_technical_data_sheet_pictures_video.html .
(c) 8.2 m long, x 2.55 m wide, x 3.3 m high – see http://www.deagel.com/Tactical-Vehicles/Kamaz-63968_a002964002.aspx .
(d) 8.99 m long x 2.55 m wide x 3.3 m high – see http://www.military-today.com/apc/kamaz_taifun.htm and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamaz_Typhoon
Whichever combination of measurements is correct, the Typhoon is still about 1 – 2.5 m shorter than the projected length of the Terraliner, i.e. 10.5 m.
In the videos of the Typhoon crossing rough terrain, it seems pretty clear that the driving cab versus the cabin for the soldiers behind are mounted separately. Even though they are connected by a passageway, in the videos it's quite clear that they move and hence are mounted separately. So one could not really call the Typhoon a “fully integrated” design, although externally it first appears as much.
The Typhoon also still has a forward-tilting cab, which is undesirable if one wants a "fully integrated" design:
And the Typhoon's engine is located very high and to the side, directly behind the driving station, and behind the horizontal air-intakes in the following photographs:
So the Typhoon could never be the basis for a “one room”, fully integrated motorhome design.
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
3. The Kamaz Typhoon's Dimensions. And, Is it Fully Integrated?
*********************************************
The Typhoon has a great “breakover” angle, i.e. virtually none whatsoever:
But that’s because the Typhoon is a bit shorter than the projected length of the Terraliner.
Depending on which website you believe, the Typhoon is either:
(a) 7.8m long, x 2.52m wide, x 2.75m high – see http://www.army-technology.com/projects/kamaz-63969-typhoon-mrap-armoured-vehicle/
(b) 8.2 m long, x 2.5 m wide, x 2.93 m high – see http://www.armyrecognition.com/russ...ruck_technical_data_sheet_pictures_video.html .
(c) 8.2 m long, x 2.55 m wide, x 3.3 m high – see http://www.deagel.com/Tactical-Vehicles/Kamaz-63968_a002964002.aspx .
(d) 8.99 m long x 2.55 m wide x 3.3 m high – see http://www.military-today.com/apc/kamaz_taifun.htm and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamaz_Typhoon
Whichever combination of measurements is correct, the Typhoon is still about 1 – 2.5 m shorter than the projected length of the Terraliner, i.e. 10.5 m.
In the videos of the Typhoon crossing rough terrain, it seems pretty clear that the driving cab versus the cabin for the soldiers behind are mounted separately. Even though they are connected by a passageway, in the videos it's quite clear that they move and hence are mounted separately. So one could not really call the Typhoon a “fully integrated” design, although externally it first appears as much.
The Typhoon also still has a forward-tilting cab, which is undesirable if one wants a "fully integrated" design:
And the Typhoon's engine is located very high and to the side, directly behind the driving station, and behind the horizontal air-intakes in the following photographs:
So the Typhoon could never be the basis for a “one room”, fully integrated motorhome design.
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
4. The Kamaz Typhoon: Why Tandem Axles in Front?
*********************************************
The Typhoon has a “front double axle” or “tandem axles in front”. This is somewhat unusual, and deserves extended consideration.
First off, it’s well worth noting that on the web, the vast majority of cargo-carrying military trucks that one sees with this axle arrangement are Tatras. But old Tatras specifically. In its most recent military catalog, Tatra does not offer even one model with this kind of axle configuration – see http://www.tatra.cz/underwood/download/files/tatra-military-vehicles_en.pdf . Not one.
It then seem worth asking, why? If there are distinct advantages to “tandem axles in front”, then why is not more standard? Why do the vast majority of 6x6 trucks, military and civilian, have just one axle in front, and the second and third axles in tandem in the rear? And yet old Tatra 6x6s with tandem axles clustered in front figure very prominently in truck trials. Why are they so popular in that specific context? What advantages does this axle arrangement give a 6x6 truck in rough terrain?
*********************************************
5. Old Tatra 6x6s with Tandem Axles in Front: Ballast Tow Tractors
*********************************************
According to one website, the tandem-axles-in-front Tatra 6x6s that one sees used in Czech truck trials on YouTube were once load haulers, “ballast tow tractors” designed to pull a drawbar trailer in back, moving loads of up to 120 tons – see http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/expedition-vehicles/1296873-tatra-6x6-adventure-trialtruck-build.html , http://www.thedieselgarage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125314 , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tractor_unit , andhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballast_tractor . Czechsix made the same point .
For a veritable gold mine of images of old tandem-forward 6x6 Tatras performing this function, see http://s865.photobucket.com/user/sean999r/media/TP6/88F87634-2B09-491C-9C60-95F55DFFA2B5.jpg.html , and just scroll backwards or forwards in the image stream. Here are some of the best images:
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
4. The Kamaz Typhoon: Why Tandem Axles in Front?
*********************************************
The Typhoon has a “front double axle” or “tandem axles in front”. This is somewhat unusual, and deserves extended consideration.
First off, it’s well worth noting that on the web, the vast majority of cargo-carrying military trucks that one sees with this axle arrangement are Tatras. But old Tatras specifically. In its most recent military catalog, Tatra does not offer even one model with this kind of axle configuration – see http://www.tatra.cz/underwood/download/files/tatra-military-vehicles_en.pdf . Not one.
It then seem worth asking, why? If there are distinct advantages to “tandem axles in front”, then why is not more standard? Why do the vast majority of 6x6 trucks, military and civilian, have just one axle in front, and the second and third axles in tandem in the rear? And yet old Tatra 6x6s with tandem axles clustered in front figure very prominently in truck trials. Why are they so popular in that specific context? What advantages does this axle arrangement give a 6x6 truck in rough terrain?
*********************************************
5. Old Tatra 6x6s with Tandem Axles in Front: Ballast Tow Tractors
*********************************************
According to one website, the tandem-axles-in-front Tatra 6x6s that one sees used in Czech truck trials on YouTube were once load haulers, “ballast tow tractors” designed to pull a drawbar trailer in back, moving loads of up to 120 tons – see http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/expedition-vehicles/1296873-tatra-6x6-adventure-trialtruck-build.html , http://www.thedieselgarage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125314 , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tractor_unit , andhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballast_tractor . Czechsix made the same point .
For a veritable gold mine of images of old tandem-forward 6x6 Tatras performing this function, see http://s865.photobucket.com/user/sean999r/media/TP6/88F87634-2B09-491C-9C60-95F55DFFA2B5.jpg.html , and just scroll backwards or forwards in the image stream. Here are some of the best images:
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
Here are two videos, of the Tatra 813 6x6 Ballast Tow Tractor in operation, actually towin' very heavy and very large stuff. These videos should serve as useful reminders of the original purpose of these vehicles, before they became re-purposed as premiere 6x6 truck-trial machines:
[video=youtube;HD_m6qjL7ls]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD_m6qjL7ls [/video] [video=youtube;8tAkQNHrlbA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tAkQNHrlbA [/video]
[video=youtube;RNSaB5Riht0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNSaB5Riht0 [/video] [video=youtube;HakwJpmSXrk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HakwJpmSXrk [/video]
Here are some more examples of old Tatra 6x6 813's that have tandem axles in front, but these are more "static" images, without their towed trailers following behind:
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
Here are two videos, of the Tatra 813 6x6 Ballast Tow Tractor in operation, actually towin' very heavy and very large stuff. These videos should serve as useful reminders of the original purpose of these vehicles, before they became re-purposed as premiere 6x6 truck-trial machines:
[video=youtube;HD_m6qjL7ls]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD_m6qjL7ls [/video] [video=youtube;8tAkQNHrlbA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tAkQNHrlbA [/video]
[video=youtube;RNSaB5Riht0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNSaB5Riht0 [/video] [video=youtube;HakwJpmSXrk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HakwJpmSXrk [/video]
Here are some more examples of old Tatra 6x6 813's that have tandem axles in front, but these are more "static" images, without their towed trailers following behind:
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
6. Why Tandem Axles in Front on these Tatra 813 Ballast Tow Tractors?
*********************************************
These Tatra Ballast Tow Tractors functioned as the "prime-movers" lugging very heavy or oversize loads. So their axle-configuration seems somewhat understandable.
But not completely understandable.
For instance, the standard modern configuration of a truck that pulls a semi-trailer is one axle forward, two axles in the rear, whether European COE, or American CBE:
This makes sense, of course, because these trucks are designed to pull semi-trailers in which part of the weight of the trailer rests on the back of the truck.
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
6. Why Tandem Axles in Front on these Tatra 813 Ballast Tow Tractors?
*********************************************
These Tatra Ballast Tow Tractors functioned as the "prime-movers" lugging very heavy or oversize loads. So their axle-configuration seems somewhat understandable.
But not completely understandable.
For instance, the standard modern configuration of a truck that pulls a semi-trailer is one axle forward, two axles in the rear, whether European COE, or American CBE:
This makes sense, of course, because these trucks are designed to pull semi-trailers in which part of the weight of the trailer rests on the back of the truck.
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited:
biotect
Designer
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
Now granted, a standard semi-trailer truck is not a "Ballast Tow Tractor".
But even in the more "vintage" images of Ballast Tow Tractors that one finds on the web, things are no different. Below are some vintage images of Ballast Tow Tractors, doing some extreme haulage during the same era as the Tatra 6x6s shown above. And yet they have just a single axle up front, with additional axles clustered in the rear -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballast_tractor :
For the Flickr "Heavy Haulage" photo stream, with hundreds of images of images of vintage Ballast Tow Tractors, see https://www.flickr.com/photos/62532775@N03/sets/72157631653130434/ . Aside from the Tatras, almost all of them follow the standard one axle up front + more axles in the rear configuration.
*********************************************
7. Some Contemporary Heavy Haulage Ballast Tow Tractors
*********************************************
Moving up to the present, things have not changed. The souped-up "heavy haulage" Actros and Man trucks configured by Titan Gmbh and others all tend to follow the standard format of one axle forward + additional axles in the rear -- see http://www.titan-sf.com/index.php/en/ and http://www.titan-sf.com/index.php/en/vehicles/gallery , http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_Spezialfahrzeuge , http://www.ditzj.de/html/en/trucks/mercedes/actros4165etra.html :
**
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
*********************************************
Now granted, a standard semi-trailer truck is not a "Ballast Tow Tractor".
But even in the more "vintage" images of Ballast Tow Tractors that one finds on the web, things are no different. Below are some vintage images of Ballast Tow Tractors, doing some extreme haulage during the same era as the Tatra 6x6s shown above. And yet they have just a single axle up front, with additional axles clustered in the rear -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballast_tractor :
For the Flickr "Heavy Haulage" photo stream, with hundreds of images of images of vintage Ballast Tow Tractors, see https://www.flickr.com/photos/62532775@N03/sets/72157631653130434/ . Aside from the Tatras, almost all of them follow the standard one axle up front + more axles in the rear configuration.
*********************************************
7. Some Contemporary Heavy Haulage Ballast Tow Tractors
*********************************************
Moving up to the present, things have not changed. The souped-up "heavy haulage" Actros and Man trucks configured by Titan Gmbh and others all tend to follow the standard format of one axle forward + additional axles in the rear -- see http://www.titan-sf.com/index.php/en/ and http://www.titan-sf.com/index.php/en/vehicles/gallery , http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_Spezialfahrzeuge , http://www.ditzj.de/html/en/trucks/mercedes/actros4165etra.html :
**
*********************************************
CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.
Last edited: