So, I’m sitting in this cavernous meeting room cheek-by-jowl with reporters and fleet managers at the Technology & Maintenance Council’s annual meeting, trying to make sense of what I’m hearing about a series of onboard diagnostic (OBD) requirements that are going to be implemented starting in 2010 through 2019.

Truth be told, 90% of what’s being discussed is going straight over my head at VERY high altitude, like a B-1 bomber going supersonic. All the speakers I’m listening to – such as Keith Doorenbos, manager of electronics and electrical engineering at Kenworth Truck Co., Greg Gillham, Detroit Diesel’s manager-OBD for heavy engines, and Ben Zwissler, chief engineer-OBD systems for Cummins Inc., just to name a few – are talking in a language I can barely grasp.

There are charts and graphs displaying rates of emission flow, electronic degradation, and other extremely technical data that used to give me nightmares back in college as I struggled through the most basic of coursework in physics (how I, a lowly history major, managed to pass at all is still a mystery to me.)

Despite the jargon and the math, however, these experts were explaining something that’s going to have huge ramifications to the trucking industry. Cummins’ Zwissler put it this way: “What’s being required of us is to develop extremely sensitive sensors that can detect excessive NOx [oxides of nitrogen] and PM [particulate matter] at very low levels. That means these sensors are going to be more complex – and thus have a higher risk of faults. That’s going to make the maintenance folk’s life more challenging.”

(Now THERE is an understatement!)

What’s going on is that, starting in 2010, specific rules kick in dictating “good” and “bad” thresholds for the pollutants NOx and PM in the exhaust system of trucks. In 2010, the feds want these “detections sensors” to indicate when those emissions reach five times the acceptable level. In 2013, that threshold gets ratcheted down to three times the acceptable level – with these thresholds continuing to drop through 2019.

(A diesel particulate filter [DPF] that’ll be host to these new sensors)

Yet right now, the industry only has sensors capable of detecting an eight- to 10-time overage – meaning there’s a long way to go in terms of meeting the technological standards the federal government (and California, for that matter) has established.

What these sensors are going to do is trip the “MIL” light on the truck’s dashboard – an acronym for “malfunction indicator lamp.” If the emission levels get too high, that light comes on, telling the engine to start slowing down and eventually stopping over a period of time, since it’s producing too much pollution.

(There’s new things going on engine-wise, too: here’s a video update on Detroit Diesel’s new DD15 engine, which is the platform it’ll use to comply with 2010 emission regulations.)

DD15 Update

Now, you know what comes next – a sensor fails, the light comes on, and BOOM! You have a truck stranded on the side of the road due to an electrical failure. That’s the concern these engineers have and one they are working very hard to eliminate.

“How we detect a sensor failure is going to be crucial,” said Tim Gundrum from International Truck & Engine Co. “They control the emission system, so we’ll need diagnostic strategies that will correct sensor errors yet not allow excessive pollution.”

Now, these rules won’t be applied to all diesel engines at once. Rather, they’ve go into effect by engine “family” in progressive fashion, starting with the lowest displacement and finishing with the big bore models (13 and 15 liter, and up.) Hopefully, that slow application will give the engineers time to correct technological glitches that crop up along the way.

(A view of Detroit Diesel’s new DD15 engine)

But make no mistake: these little sensors are going to complicate things for truckers of all stripes. “These rules are truly game changing,” said Kenworth’s Doorenbos. “We’re dealing with a whole range of issues here, from sensor reliability to diagnostic accuracy and development timelines. It’s going to make things very challenging.”

I met with Mark Roush recently at the Technology & Maintenance Council (TMC) annual meeting a week back to talk about advances in trailer engineering. He’s a favorite contact of mine – an engineer always thinking outside the box, aiming for new and different ways to build the products the trucking industry relies on day in and day out to deliver freight for customers.

Three years ago, Roush – director of engineering for Vanguard National Trailer Corp., Monon, IN – and I sat down to talk about future concepts for trailers: how could they be built differently to reduce weight, improve longevity, reduce use of wood, etc. One of the more innovative things turning over in his mind back then revolved around gluing trailers together with “super adhesives.”

Today, that concept is a reality – he showed off two 28-foot “pup” trailers to me at TMC with sidewalls literally glued together, with rivets only used along the top and bottom. It took three guys just 15 or so minutes to put a sidewall together using adhesives, he told me – something that took three times the amount of workers to achieve in the same time frame using rivets.

(To watch a video report on Vanguard’s ‘glue trailer,’ just click on the link below)

Vanguard’s glue trailer

Roush reminded me, though, that this is only the start of the process: after TMC, those two trailers are set to undergo some serious durability test track trails to see if they’ll hold up under real-world stresses. In the meantime, he’s got a 53-foot trailer model with glued-together sidewalls being prepped for the Mid America Trucking Show.

“Glue doesn’t rust and it holds just as well on brackets as rivets do — even better in some cases,” he told me. “What people don’t realize is that the glue we’re talking about has a sheer strength of 2,000 psi [pounds per square inch], whereas your average rivet has a maximum sheer strength of 1,200 psi. So you’re using something that theoretically has a much stronger bonding force between the sidewalls of a trailer and its structure, not less.”

(Vanguard’s 28-foot pup glue trailer on display at TMC)

And again, by using glue, trailers can be manufactured faster and cheaper, without compromising strength and durability. “One of the most costly parts of manufacturing a trailer is the man-hours it takes to rivet the sidewall to the frame, and every rivet represents a metal-on-metal contact point where rust and corrosion can develop over time,” Roush says. “With glue, you’re using one single sheet of aluminum sidewall without rivets. You’re taking a tremendous amount of hours out of the production process, yet giving the trailer more durability in terms of corrosion prevention.”

Reducing the number of weld points on a trailer is another benefit to using adhesives, he explained to me. “Welds create a weak point where corrosion can gain a foothold,” Roush said, “We pre-assemble as many components as possible and try to maximize corrosion protection by taking the pieces of the trailer with the most weld points and galvanizing the entire section. But if you can go to adhesives, you totally eliminate that problem.”

Roush is no stranger to this kind of innovation, as over his engineering career he’s designed and tweaked a wide variety of trailer models, from flatbeds at Dorsey Trailer to refrigerated and insulated units for Kidron.

Finding ways to make trailers less expensive yet more durable has been a challenge wherever he’s worked. And Vanguard is no exception, where the focus is now on finding ways to better protect cargo and minimize corrosion while reducing weight and maintaining durability.

That’s not all he’s cooking up in his research lab, either. Right now he’s working on a trailer floor made with a “pultruded” composite material – lightweight yet durable resins “pulled” into specific shapes with specialized machines before they harden. The benefit here is that Roush could slice 700 pounds out of a standard 53-foot dry van using a composite floor, while also improving traction and longevity.

The perennial problem with wooden floors is that over time, they get wet and start to rot. While Oak is the best in terms of resistance to rot, it’s also one of the most expensive woods on the market. Roush is already addressing that by using metal flooring at the trailer door end, with less-costly Maple wood flooring for the rest of the interior.

He’s even starting to visualize making an entire trailer via pultruded-style materials, with sidewalls, floors, and doors built separately and then combined mainly with adhesives, with bolts and rivets at major connection points. That would really save on trailer unit weight, he believes.

But Roush also cautions that there is a limit to how far you go in reducing trailer weight. “When you are trying to save weight, you usually have to give up something — either take something out of the structure, which can compromise the integrity of the unit, or change the design,” he explains.

Still, it’s great to see all these innovative ideas being applied to what truckers have long considered just plain old boxes on wheels. Whether they work out or not in the long run, one thing is for certain – it’s a sign that trailer engineering isn’t playing second fiddle anymore to anything in trucking these days.

I take the corner a little too fast, forcing me to widen the arc of my big rig’s turn to prevent a rollover. The wheel is heavy by this point, sluggish from the full weight of the 53-foot trailer behind me. I get my tractor-trailer straightened out all right, but sideswipe a bobtailing tractor coming in the opposite direction. I do the same thing again to pickup truck further down the road as I try to navigate around a work zone that takes up most of the right lane. Hoo boy, this isn’t a good day.

I hit the brakes too hard at a stoplight then gun the engine aggressively to make a left turn ahead of oncoming traffic, continuing to accelerate quickly down the road. Wait a minute: there’s a bus parked up on the right. Is it a school or city bus? I jam on the brakes again, worried that children might start crossing the road – heck, I nearly ran over a guy earlier that darted into traffic to retrieve a wayward garbage can. The air brakes give out several loud hisses – doesn’t help that I am speeding – as my rig jolts to a halt.

“OK, let’s see what we got,” says Bill Graham, monitoring my progress on his laptop just over my right shoulder. Needless to say, my driving record is pretty poor as his computer lists all my hard braking events, aggressive acceleration, accidents, near misses, plus innumerable hit curbs and lane violations. On top of that, my average fuel economy hovered somewhere around 2.71 miles per gallon – pretty grim stuff all around.

And I forgot to set the parking brake, too. Good thing this is just a simulator.

Watch a video report on MPRI’s Simulator.

You knew that was coming, of course – no way would any trainer keep me behind the wheel after not one but TWO sheet metal crunches a couple of minutes apart. But this wasn’t a video game-style experience, either: not by a long shot. Though I got a tractor-trailer equipped with an automated transmission (just push ‘D’ and go), the wheel didn’t turn easily and my seat tilted and vibrated when I hit things.

(Bill Graham at the ‘wheel’ of MPRI’s TranSim simulator)

The wrap-around screen of the TranSim VS IV simulator – built by MPRI, a division of the L3 Companies – also fooled my eyes into thinking we were actually moving, as it completely encompassed my peripheral vision. Electronically generated side view mirrors reflected all the events going on behind the trailer, to make backing up a very realistic enterprise.

In many ways, this is the wave of the future for truck driver training. Just like airline pilots must accrue thousands of hours worth of simulator time to retain their license to fly, so too will truck drivers one day be required to log simulator time to keep their CDLs. That’s my belief. But there’s more to it. Simulators are just such an easy way to quickly gauge a new driver’s skill level, or help an experience hand switch to new kind of rig – going from a dry van trailer to say a tanker or flatbed. MPRI’s simulator can quickly be reprogrammed for various trucks, too – school buses, trash trucks, medium-duty package vans, double trailers, you name it – depending on the software package.

Everything is realistic – from the other vehicles on the road, to the buildings, traffic signals, even the people (though MPRI’s engineers stopped short of including screams and blood when a pedestrian gets hit). That is, of course, the point – to put truck drivers on the road without the risks to life, limb, and tractor-trailers that worth a big six figures.

Truckload carrier Schneider National started using these simulators back in 2004 and by its own estimates, the company figures it’s lowered new driver dropout and termination rates by 10% and accident severity and frequency by nearly 20%. “Overall, the implementation of simulator-based training has saved us millions of dollars,” says Don Osterberg, Schneider’s vice president of safety.

Graham, who watched my every move, told me simulator training is not just about making truck drivers safer, though that is the main point. “I showed you your mpg hovered around 2.71 – there’s an area we could work on, in terms of how you brake, accelerate, and drive, whether you’re using an automated or manual transmission,” he told me. “We can sit here and practice backing a truck up to a loading dock on a crowded city street for an hour – without tying up traffic, without exposing the trailer to damage. We can even unhook and re-hook the trailer. That’s all about fine-tuning technique.”

(Bill Graham smoothly navigates his virtual rig around a digital corner)

Yes, simulators are expensive, costing several thousand dollars – again, it’s no video game – but just compared that to the cost of accidents. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the cost of fatal crash is $3.6 million, and $195,000 for one involving non-fatal injuries – not to mention the hit you take in terms of vehicle damage and higher insurance premiums. If simulator training can prevent even one accident, you’re probably way ahead in the cost-saving arithmetic.

The there’s the cost of turnover, hovering around $8,000 per driver today (that’s all the advertising, training, and administrative dollars a fleet loses when a driver walks away). If these devices can help you cull applicants before they get behind the wheel in real time, helping you figure out who has the necessary skills and is cut out for the stresses of the road, suddenly simulators can seem to be a pretty cost effective retention tool.

It’s fascinating technology, to be sure, with some big payoffs for truckers. It’ll be interesting to see how many fleets start using them down the road.

“The artist is nothing without the gift, but the gift is nothing without the work.” –Emile Zola.

Pictures just don’t do justice to “The Godfather.”

One of the last 1,000 Peterbilt 379 highway tractors (No. 27 to be precise – a number emblazoned on this truck’s nose), the Peterbilt of Louisiana dealership ordered it from the factory on a monstrous 320-inch wheelbase, equipped with a 600-horsepower Caterpillar engine and 18-speed Eaton Fuller manual transmission featuring TWO sticks. Lean, low, and clean, “The Godfather” is a sleek machine styled with a 1930s gangster look, with deftly rounded wheel wells and subtle black and tan paint job.

This artistic truck is the brainchild of Scott St. Germain, one of the many unseen designers that work for the famous “Chrome Shop Mafia” out of 4 State Trucks in Joplin, MO, whom you’ve probably seen on TV. I talked with him and fellow chrome hand Gailand Johnston at the Technology & Maintenance Council last week about this latest example of their “rolling art” handiwork.

(Left to right: Scott St. Germain, Gailand Johnston)

“The Godfather” is meant to promote the talents of the CSM at trade shows and other public venues (like they really need it – doesn’t EVERYONE know who they are by now?) even though, in comparison to the many other trucks they’ve tricked out, this one features a much more low-key design. Ah, but it’s packed with details, if you spend a few moments looking for them.

On the back of the sleeper, for example, Bryan “The Don” Martin (known as the “Bossman” on the show) is portrayed in the middle of his “gang” attired in a three piece suit while flipping a coin. Look closely at the coin, and you’ll read “In The Boyz We Trust.” The pin striping down the nose and side of the cab is also unique, crafted by Ryan “Ryno” Templeton, the TV show’s acknowledges paint master.

“The Godfather” doesn’t lack for gizmos, either – the long-slung front bumper can be raised with the flip or a switch, as can the chrome-plated cover on the chassis between the sleeper and the fifth wheel – opening up like a coffin, though the CSM crew decided at the last minute not to go the distance with that graveyard touch by adding a fake body inside the cover.

It’s a classic piece of work, but one that almost didn’t come to life due to the backlog of work at the CSM shop. “This truck sat in our shop for weeks, wrapped up as we were in other projects,” Johnston told me. All told, it took about eight weeks of work to bring “The Godfather” to life – time accumulated in fits and starts. That includes the unusual design for the truck’s trailer, supplied by Monon, IN-based trailer maker Vanguard.

St. Germain told me that the best thing about “tricking” out trucks versus cars is that there’s simply so much more room to work with. “With a car, you’ve got to force everything down into this small interior space; then you have limited exterior area for the paint and art you want to do,” he said. “Trucks are just so big, you can really do almost anything you want. It takes a lot longer because of its size, but the end result just pops.”

St. Germain also did the lead design work for BP Castrol’s truck makeover contest last year, and will probably repeat that effort again in 2008. Both he and Johnston also epitomize truck chrome and flash fabricators, too – laid back, gregarious, yet modest about their accomplishments. They take obvious pride and joy in their line of work, getting paid to do what originally started out as a VERY expensive private hobby, and they also relish the opportunity to get out in the public eye to show off what they can do.

You’ll see this truck around in 2008, at truck stops and other trucking events – keep an eye out for it and make sure you to talk to St. Germain and Johnston if you can, for half the fun is getting a backstage view, if you will, about how these designs come to life.

“When someone says that the free market isn’t working, what he means is that he doesn’t like the way the free market is working.” –Nicolas Martin

OK, OK. Faithful reader Bob Inderbitzen already took me to task for using the ‘R’ word in reference to the U.S. economy. Sure, the economy is still growing, albeit at a snail’s pace, meaning that it’s (of course) not receding. Still, the economic climate out there is far from promising, especially in the freight world, with volumes down and fuel prices still on the high side. So how trucking companies – especially the smaller ones – plans to keep its head above water is going to be critical should things go further south.

Rather than bore you with my own blather on this subject (I’ve already been told NOT to be an economist – and that’s good advice, actually, since adding and subtracting still aren’t my strong points) I am going to let Professor Jerry Osteryoung from the college of business at Florida State University share a few points. Now, he thinks a recession is already taking place – whether you agree or not, however, isn’t what he’s aiming to discuss. He wants to point out that businesses of all stripes – even trucking – need to face the unpleasant realities foisted on them by economic declines.

Now, from my point of view as one of many worker bees out there, I absolutely loathe the word “layoff.” From what I see, there are always places to cut costs before you reach the folks doing all the work. But sometimes it’s necessary. Look at the automotive giants GM and Ford, for example. Yes, they helped dig their own graves to an extent by building ugly products of poor quality. Yet there’s also the glaring fact that factories simply don’t need as many people any more due to wider use of robotics – and that it’s simply safer to use robots, too.

Still, it’s an ugly discussion when talk turns to shrinking the workforce. That’s why I am going to let the good professor take a stab at it. Professor Osteryoung, the floor is yours:

“As most things in life are cyclical, our economy is in the process of going through a downward cycle. I am seeing evidence of this starting to happen in many types of businesses, not just in housing. Automotive sales are off as well, and even many thrift stores are seeing declining revenues from potential customers. This recession is starting to affect all income levels, and many entrepreneurs are starting to feel the effects of this right now. Furthermore, when the states start personnel cutbacks to account for the deficit in state budgets, local economies and entrepreneurs are going to undergo the effects even more dramatically.

The Federal Reserve reduced the rate it charges banks by ¾ of a percent, and then reduced it again. In addition, the federal government is in the process of passing a large tax rebate for all taxpayers. The bottom line is that we are going into a recession, which just happens with our type of economy.

With a recession coming or already underway, you must have a way to deal with declining sales. I like to tell entrepreneurs that they must have a plan to withstand a fall in sales of 30% to 40%. Hopefully this will not occur, but just in case, a plan must be in place for this coming year.

Time and again I have seen businesses make the mistake of waiting too long to cut back in the face of falling sales. They spend too much time hoping things will improve. This is a very costly error and can risk the financial viability of the business. The sooner you cut back, the better.

In terms of cutting costs, you need to evaluate labor, communications, insurance and all costs. Nothing should be sacrosanct as you look for ways to reduce costs. However, it is not a good idea to cut advertising, as this activity is critical for your continued existence.

Like most things, cutting costs is a very traumatic process. However, you must do it, and it must be done before it is too late to recover from the financial impact. I have assisted many firms that are going through this process, and each has a hard time, especially when it comes to laying off workers. However, without exception, they come out of the economic decline saying that cutting costs not only helped them get through the rough times, but it also allowed them to flourish in the future.”

Want to get in touch with Profesor Jerry Osteryoung? He can be reached by e-mail at jostery@comcast.net or by phone at 850-644-3372.

I’m sure you’ve seen or at least heard about the “Share the Road” campaign organized by the American Trucking Association (ATA) and funded by industry suppliers such as tire maker Michelin, Mack Trucks, Volvo Trucks North America (sure, Volvo owns Mack – but let’s give out the props equally, I say). It essentially takes a group of seasoned truck driving veterans with spotless safety records and puts them on the road to criss-cross the country, speaking at elementary schools, public events, and driver safety meetings, to emphasize the importance of safe driving – especially around big rigs.

These drivers are nominated by their peers in the industry to serve as “captains” of what the ATA calls “America’s Road Team” for one year – and the ATA’s been doing this for over two decades.

“The public face of the trucking industry is our drivers,” said Scott Kress, Volvo’s senior vice president – sales & marketing. “Given the challenges our industry sees today, it is critically important that the U.S. trucking industry once again come forward with its best people.”

I got to talk with three such captains this week by lucky chance at the Technology & Maintenance Council annual meeting here in Orlando, Florida: Clarence Jenkins Jr., a driver for UPS freight; Rich Scholl, a driver with Roadway; and Wayne Crowder, a driver for FedEx Freight. Gregarious, funny, and plainspoken, they each jumped at the chance to represent their chosen profession and their peers before the public – even if they weren’t exactly thrilled with the idea of speaking before large crowds, which they are called upon to do.

(Left to right: Clarence Jenkins, Rich Scholl, Wayne Crowder)

“It’s a little daunting, to say the least,” Jenkins told me. He should know – a few weeks back he took part in safety event held on the steps of the state capitol in Charleston, West Virginia with the Governor, no less. It might not compare to the pressures faced on the highway every day, but Jenkins said that came awful close.

“But this is important – we need to be before our fellow drivers and the general public to talk about safety,” he told me. “It can be dangerous out on the road, especially if you don’t know the basics, like where a truck’s blind spots are.”

“It also helps dispel the stigma about driving trucks for a living,” added Scholl. “It’s good career – my wife and I have seven kids and this job allows me to put food on the table and take care of them. It’s also important to take pride in what we do.”

Many drivers might dispute their experiences – lord knows, there are lots of truckers living on the edge of financial ruin these days, faced with high fuel prices and little freight – but I still think taking pride in doing a dangerous job well, in being a professional and not just a seat warmer, is a very good thing.

Tell you something else: we need more drivers like these guys.

Got a chance to spend some time with Eric Smith this week: Eaton Corp.’s chief engineer for special projects and hybrid-electric systems. Right now, he’s working on the second generation of Eaton’s parallel hybrid system, used on medium-duty commercial trucks right now usually in conjunction with diesel engines.

“What we’re trying to do now is expand hybrid technology into other trucking applications,” he told me. “That means we’re not only refining the technological package as a whole to lower its cost and produce better fuel economy, but also make it a more ‘multi-purpose’ system, so we can use the hybrid’s batteries for tasks other than just propulsion.”

Smith pointed to Eaton’s involvement with the HTUF hybrid truck project back in 2004 as an example of that expansion. That effort resulting in a utility bucket truck that could tap into the hybrid system’s battery to run the boom lift at a work site, allowing for “engine off” operation for up to two hours at a time before the diesel motor had to fire up for five to 10 minutes to recharge the batteries.

“The biggest challenge we have with hybrids is ROI [return on investment] for fleets,” Smith told me. “It’s all about how we justify the extra cost of a hybrid to them. One part is fuel economy: fleets are feeling the pain of diesel fuel prices up over $3 a gallon. The other is capability; that helps expand the ROI. We’re looking at putting a 110-volt generator on the truck, tapped into the hybrid batteries, providing power for a contractor’s tools. Another thing we’re looking it is powering refrigeration systems, to give refrigerated carriers ‘engine off’ capability when making deliveries.”

Expanding a hybrid’s capabilities drives costs savings – and that’s critical to getting fleets to buy more of them. For the higher the production volumes, the lower the manufacturing costs – and thus the lower the premium for a hybrid truck, said Smith.

Eaton is also looking at other vocations where hybrid systems could play a wide role. Delivery vans and utility trucks were an obvious – and ultimately successful – market to start in. Eaton formed its hybrid power systems business unit back in 2000 and quickly landed a contract from FedEx and public interest group Environmental Defense in 2002 to build 18 hybrid step vans. That contract has grown significantly, with FedEx subsequently ordering 75 more of the E-700e hybrid vans in 2005 that will start entering its fleet by the second quarter this year.

UPS and the Department of Energy quickly followed suit in 2004 with an 18-vehicle order of their own, and those demonstration units are still going strong, with the oldest truck – now four years old – still plying hilly routes in San Francisco. UPS is also moving to beef up its hybrid fleet, with 50 more of those vans on order.

Eaton partnered with China bus maker Foton in 2006 to built hybrid transit buses – rolling 30 of them out of the factory and onto the streets of Guangzhou at the end of last year – and has entered into deals with Peterbilt, Kenworth, International, and Freightliner to build more medium-duty hybrid trucks. It also has an exclusive deal with Paccar to build Class 8 hybrids as well.

Right now, fuel economy savings and a tax credit to offset the purchase price are what’s attracting fleets. While the $12,000 tax credit is universal, the fuel savings differ by vehicle type and operation, Smith stressed. For example: a hybrid medium-duty utility truck can see a fuel savings of 60% and reduced idle time of 87%, while a city delivery van posts a fuel savings of 50% and a city bus gets a fuel savings of about 20% to 30%.

In the Class 8 world, the fuel savings are trickier to achieve because of its steady-state, highway-driving environment. But with the hybrid system aiding with acceleration and on hills, while reducing idling, a fleet could save up to $9,000 in operating costs per truck per year, according to Eaton’s laboratory and road tests.

“The thing is, driver habits vary so widely in the real world,” he told me. “We use dyno testing in the lab to provide us consistent data in terms of what the potential fuel savings are. Then you perform field tests to see how the truck really gets used. For example, does the driver shut off the diesel engine when he or she stops to make a delivery? That really impacts the final fuel savings result you’ll see.”

Despite those challenges, though, Smith is confident that hybrid commercial trucks will continue to come down in cost, while returning more savings to fleets. “We’re improving cost efficiency, reliability, and durability with each successive generation of hybrid system,” he said. “We’ll still have a lot of room to really ‘tune’ hybrid trucks to their particular work environment so they save fleets as much as possible across the board.”

“Courage is being scared to death … but saddling up anyway.” –John Wayne.

You can hear the tires scream as we corner around the orange cones at a shade over 35 mph. Looking in the rear view mirrors perched on the cab’s nose, I can see the tanker we’re pulling keel over sharply. The only reason it doesn’t kiss pavement – taking myself and the driver of our tractor with it – are a long pair of outriggers that keep us upright. The G-forces push me out of my seat nonetheless, my stomach giving a sickening lurch, my heart rate hits the stratosphere, and my body tightens involuntarily – expecting the worst to come.

“Whoa, pretty aggressive on that one,” the driver said. (Talk about understatements.)

Yet the next time we take the corner, it’s a whole different story. This time, the truck’s engine de-throttles in a hurry, the air brakes pulsing in rapid succession, keeping us level with all 18 tires on the rough asphalt beneath us – showcasing the wonders of electronics stability control (ESC). My body still stiffens, again instinctively readying itself for trouble … but the moment passes much easier this time, the violence of our turn removed by active safety systems.

“That’s better,” the driver noted, almost to himself. (Oh, you can say that again.)

It was all part of a comprehensive safety technology demonstration put on by ArvinMeritor here on a wide patch of sandpaper-like blacktop scant feet from the runways of Orlando, Florida’s Executive Airport. Test drivers demonstrated the capabilities of trucks equipped with roll stability control (RSC), the aforementioned ESC, and the company’s newest safety product, called OnGuard: a forward-looking, radar-based adaptive cruise control system with active braking, which improves vehicle safety by automatically using the vehicle foundation brakes to alert the driver and decelerate the vehicle when a pre-set vehicle following distance is compromised.

Pursuing a pair of chase vehicles – a bobtailing tractor and a Chrysler minivan – drivers demonstrated how OnGuard would automatically cut engine power and activate the brakes to prevent a rear-end collision. And this isn’t prototype technology either: OnGuard is currently installed on nearly 200 vehicles and is targeted to become a factory-installed option on several truck brands by the third quarter this year.

(That’s Jon Morrison on the left, talking with Jean-Christophe Figueroa, VP-vehicle dynamics and controls for Meritor WABCO, on the right.)

“It’s designed to equip drivers with automated features that help ensure safe following distances and provide active braking as needed,” said Jon Morrison, president and general manager, Meritor WABCO Vehicle Control Systems. “The driver is still the most important element in maintaining vehicle safety; however, the system can provide the additional split-second deceleration needed to maintain control of the vehicle in an emergency situation.”

Meritor Wabco GM on collision mitigation

Description: Jon Morrison, president and general manager of Meritor Wabco, talks about how the company’s new collision mitigation system is built off proven technology.Listen here!

What a safety net for the commercial driver. You get distracted so much in heavy traffic – watching cars merging from the right, coming up on the left – that you can get caught by surprise by a sudden stoppage in front of you. Now here’s a technology that can cover you: providing 500-feet worth of constant forward vision, able to literally “see” around corners due to a gyroscope incorporated into the radar device itself. However, OnGuard’s algorithms are most effective at “locking in” on relevant objects at distances of 275 to 325 feet—a three-second following distance at highway speed. Not only does it warn you of an impending collision; it can actually step into the breech and start stopping the truck for you. (Can I please get this installed on my minivan?)

OnGuard collision mitigation podcast

Description: Alan Korn, chief engineer-vehicle dynamics and control for Meritor Wabco, explains how the OnGuard collision mitigation system is built off existing technology, making it easier to incorporate onto today’s heavy-duty trucks.Listen here!

This is a big deal for the trucking industry. According to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), such rear-end collisions account for over 20% of all heavy-truck crashes, with the truck the striking vehicle in 60% of those accidents. Inattention or poor decisions (e.g. driving too fast for the conditions or following too closely) are the primary factor in 66% of the collisions where fault is assigned to the truck driver, NHTSA noted.

(Alan Korn, Meritor WABCO’s chief engineer)

Yet … will fleets buy it? It’s not cheap, for starters (list price is $4,500). Second, insurance companies still don’t seem willing to give any discounts to fleets that step up and buy such technology, nor for RSC (list price $700) or ESC (list price $1,700). “We’re trying to work all the angles, especially when it comes to insurance discounts,” Morrison told me. “We’re all trying to show them where the benefits are versus the costs.”

Melletat explains safety benefits

Description: Mark Melletat, senior manager-marketing and communications, explains why driver acceptance of collision mitigation technology is a critical step for fleets, so carriers can gain the safety benefits this technology offers.Listen here!

One fleet even brought its insurance agent to the demonstration, to show them just how revolutionary this technology can be in terms of improving highway safety.

Yet, as Joe Plomin, vice president for ArvinMeritor’s truck components group, told me at some point it’s got to be about more than just the cost of this technology. “It can’t just be all about cost savings, though that’s important,” he explained. “At some point, it has to be about doing the right thing, about improving safety for the fleet, the driver, and the public. The focus has to be on what we can do to make trucking safety.”

Sure, making active safety systems more affordable is critical – trucking is a business after all – but with all the new safety systems now readily available from ArvinMeritor, Bendix, Eaton, and other suppliers, it’s foolish to relegate them to a dusty shelf entirely based on a dollars and cents equation. This technology can save lives – a lot of them. It’s time we find a way to get it to take a more active role in this industry.

So New York City is gearing up to be one of the first U.S. cities (I think – if anyone knows different, please correct me!) to try out “congestion pricing.” It’s not a done deal yet – the plan is in limbo for now and must be approved by March 31 or disappear, probably for good – but I’m betting it will eventually get the green light.

Here’s why: based on the proposed $8 charge for entering Manhattan south of 86th Street every day during peak traffic hours (6 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday-Friday), annual revenue should roughly add up to $400 million in the first year and up to $900 million by 2030, according to rough figures compiled by public policy group Transport Alternatives.

The group notes that most delivery vehicles will be charged a flat $8 per day, regardless of how often they enter and exit this “congestion zone” in lower Manhattan, but it points out NYC has not yet defined the term “trucks.” So far, the definition does NOT include delivery vans and other two-axle vehicles with a maximum gross weight under 7,000 lbs — meaning trucks with a GVW of over 7,000 lbs. and more than two axles will get charged more than $8 a day. What fun.

I am sure truckers are getting pretty steamed about the whole idea by now, but they’re not alone: many local politicians, representing NYC boroughs that lack adequate access to bus routes and the subway, are none too happy with it, either. They see this as a burdensome tax on low-income workers that must commute downtown every day.

However, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg takes issue with that view. For one, he thinks reduced traffic congestion will significantly lower the amount of time trucks spend stuck in traffic, so the productivity increase will make up for (and in many cases, exceed) the congestion charge. A $1 fee added to taxi fares is also being considered, to provde an “offset subsidy” for commuters with jobs below a certain income level.

Mayor Bloomberg anticipates that this congestion pricing plan – dubbed “PlaNYC” – should foment a 6.5% reduction in the number of vehicles entering Manhattan south of 86th Street overall, with an 11% traffic reduction during peak hours – resulting in a 20% to 40% reduction in time loss to traffic delays.

So, here’s the big question: how will the congestion fees be collected? Is NYC going to ring its streets with tollbooths? Well, no – at least that’s the hope. The plan calls for using a combination of EZ Pass technology, combined with a camera system that’ll scan license plate numbers, so cars and trucks don’t have to slow down. The congestion fee then either gets assessed to a driver’s EZ Pass account, or can be paid electronically, by mail, or at designated retailers — based on that snashopt of your license plate, just like with red light cameras. (Probably not a comparison many like.)

Sounds crazy on the outside, I know, but London implemented a similar system a few years ago with few ill effects (so the news wires tell me) and at a higher cost — $13 instead of $8. A 2006 Partnership for NYC study forecast traffic reductiosn similar to what London experienced by using congestion pricing. According to that study’s estimates, traffic would drop in downtown Brooklyn (by 29%), Williamsburg/Greenpoint (by 24%), Long Island City (by 7%), Harlem (by 14%), the South Bronx (by 5%) and Flushing (by 3%).

Why NYC is doing this is no surprise. According to Environmental Defense, a national non-profit organization, even though only 5% of commuters drive into Manhattan’s central business district (CBD) to work, the city suffers from some of the worst traffic congestion rates in the country, costing workers and businesses billions a year in lost time and heavily contributing to poor air quality.

Andy Darrell, regional director for Environmental Defense, said the congestion fees should guarantee that nearly half a billion dollars in annual revenue will be invested in mass transit expansion – helping cut a $30 billion backlog in capital investment needs. It’s interesting to note that this is also an environmental group calling for the creation of a transit “lockbox” that guarantees revenue from these fees only goes to new transit expansion (wish some of these “green” folks would call for a similar lockbox for highway funding!)

But for now, we wait: the clock is ticking to see if all the vested interests in NYC can be wooed by the mayor to sign off on this plan. If it works, we may start to see similar efforts take root in other major metropolitan efforts. Yet ‘if’ is a big word, despite it’s small size – we’ll have to see how it all plays out.