“ I started building these when I was 15 or 16 years old … and I haven’t stopped.” –Paul Agustin, implementation specialist with PeopleNet

Now, a ton of interesting things are coming out of the 6th annual PeopleNet Users Conference being held down here in Naples, FL – and you’ll be reading about them in this space very soon, everything from the economic outlook for trucking, different tactics for improving fuel efficiency, plus why leveraging technology will be a much more vital strategy for fleets in order to save money and be more profitable in the future.

We’ll get to all of that – but first you’ve got to see the 14.5-inch scale model remote control truck Paul Agustin built.

(Paul Agustin at the controls of his motorized replica, as Tom Anderson of Brown Trucking looks on.)

A good three feet long and called the “Knight Hauler,” it sports a Freightliner Coronado-styled tractor and stainless steel trailer, with PeopleNet graphics applied separately. Servomotors in the cab allow Paul to “drive” it with ease, but that’s not all it features.

Inside the cab are sound and motion control devices that realistically simulate the bark and shake when a diesel engine turns over, along with acceleration and deceleration noises, back up beeps, even an air horn. It’s not cheap, either – all told, the tractor-trailer and graphics cost $1,500, with Paul putting in 65 hours of labor on his own time to put it together – including miniature DOT numbers he hasn’t had time to put on yet.

“It comes to you unassembled in kit, with directions that are … let’s say ‘poor’ in this case,” he explained to me. “You use just screws to put it together – no glue or soldering is required.”

Paul noted that the “Knight Hauler” could be purchased with a tanker, flatbed, reefer or dry van trailer (the one he selected), but he says “lowboy” trailer replicas cost way too much as far as he’s concerned. “They cost $1,500 alone – as much as the whole tractor-trailer package itself,” he said.

Paul’s been building these motorized replicas since his teenage years, and race cars to an 18-inch scale monster truck sit in his work room back home, among other vehicles. He saw the “Knight Hauler” package in the hobby shop one day and told Craig Dillon, PeopleNet’s new chief technology officer, about it. Craig promptly went out and bought it, handing to straightaway to Paul with the simple words “build this.”

While everyone attending the conference obviously got a kick out of seeing this one-of-a-kind motorized replica tooling around the convention hall floor, several fleet managers viewed the vehicle with other thoughts in mind.

“It would be a great prize for one of drivers,” Jeff McKinney told me. “We hold a drawing every quarter for fewest days lost to workman’s comp, and a truck like this painted in our colors would thrill our drivers, let me tell you.”

“Full-stability technology works, it’s affordable, and it will help us continue our track record as an industry leader in accident reduction.” –Jeff McCaig, chairman, Trimac Transportation

You’ll be hearing about Bendix Commercial Vehicles Systems LLC a lot this week. The company is not only playing host to John H. Hill, head of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), for a speech he’s giving on the U.S. Department of Transportation’s new plan for reforming the federal approach to the nation’s highway and transit systems, but is also releasing a new white paper – entitled “Road Map for the Future” – that touts the safety benefits of advanced safety systems, such as its electronic stability program (ESP).

(A concrete mixer test truck equipped with Bendix’s full stability control package.)

More than a few commercial fleets decided to add Bendix’s stability control package to their trucks, with bulk commodities carrier Trimac Transportation being the latest back in May to green light this technology for its Kenworth tractors.

And as Jeff McCaig, Trimac’s chairman, noted above, the reasons are very compelling for buying such systems just from the monetary standpoint alone. That’s because U.S. government studies show that vehicle accidents involving injury can cost an average of more than $200,000 per event, while the cost of accidents involving fatalities can average more than $3 million per incident.

Yet Bendix – like its competitor ArvinMeritor, which offers similar safety systems – is finding full-stability control technology and new air disc brakes, designed to vastly reduce the stopping distances for tractor-trailers, remains a tough sell.

I bumped into one such reason earlier this year at an ArvinMeritor safety demonstration, where a fleet manager literally had to bribe his insurance agent with a round of golf in sunny Florida to get him to witness the potential benefits these kinds of technologies can provide – the greatest being not only the reduction in accidents, but in their severity as well. Yet it is still proving to be a tough sell to the insurance industry – giving fleets discounts based on their adoption of safety systems.

(A compelling Bendix braking demonstration showing the benefits air disc brakes offer in terms of shorter stopping distances.)

Why is this? Insurance companies should be able to see the benefit these systems bring to the table for truckers. I’ve included several clips from Bendix that show how stability control systems plus new brake designs improve vehicle handling and maneuvering in emergency situations. For without some sort of incentive, fleets are hard pressed to commit ever-scarcer dollars to adopt these technologies.

A telephone survey conducted by FMCSA back in August 2003 with 19 different fleets – both private and for-hire – starkly illustrated that conundrum.

The three most important safety technology issues for the motor carriers FMCSA interviewed were the accuracy and reliability of the system, the cost to install and maintain the technology, and proven effectiveness to improve safety. Calculating a return on investment (ROI), in particular, stayed uppermost in the minds of most of the carriers, according to FMCSA’s survey.

(This fast-moving Bendix video shows how stability control improves the handling of tractor-trailers, vocational trucks, even buses, in all sorts of bad weather.)

“ROI is a factor unique to carriers, but almost all carriers emphasized its importance in their deciding to adopt on-board safety technology,” the agency reported. “They want quantifiable data on costs and benefits. One carrier presented the following scenario: To install an $800 item into a fleet of 3,000 vehicles, costing $2.4 million, requires breakeven payback in six to eight months – and there must be ongoing payback as well. Other carriers stated that they looked for payback in the 12 to 18-month timeframe. None indicated a payback greater than 24 months as being acceptable.”

A wrote a story about this issue a few years back and talked with David Melton, director of transportation technical services for insurance firm Liberty Mutual, to get some insight as to what’s holding things up.

“Payback analysis in terms of [truck] safety systems isn’t so much a science but an art form,” he told me. “That’s because the biggest problem is that payback analysis misses the entire point. In order to calculate payback by traditional means, you only look at crash costs and these are ‘lagging indicators’ – you’re waiting for something bad to happen so you can justify the investment.”

The real key to payback analysis, said Melton, is to measure changes in driver behavior: what is and is not occurring behind the wheel. “In this case, you do not get the bottom line figures business owners want to see, but you are doing something far more important: you are lowering your level of risk,” he noted. “Because as the level of safe driver behaviors go up – slower speeds, greater following distance, less aggressive braking – the severity and frequency of crashes go down. That must be included in your payback analysis in addition to measuring reduced crash costs.”

(The outriggers you see on these test trucks prevent rollovers from occuring when the Bendix stability control systems are turned off.)

Still, one would think after looking at the videos I’ve included here that fleets and their insurance providers could see some real benefits to adopting new safety systems, from new brake designs all the up through full stability control packages. Maybe it is an “art form” to calculate the fiscal incentive – but I still think “seeing is believing” when you look at how tractor-trailer operations can become much safer with new technology on board.

“The climate issue and increasing fuel prices make energy use and energy efficiency some of the most important societal issues of our time.” –Leif Johansson, CEO of Swedish truck maker Volvo Group.

There is no doubt that with diesel fuel nearing a $5 per gallon average in the U.S. and roughly $10 equivalent per gallon in Europe, just about any technology designed to improve vehicle fuel efficiency is getting vetted like never before.

Topping the list is hybrid technology – the by now familiar system wherein a gasoline or diesel motor exists side-by-side with an electric motor and battery pack, working as a compete unit to improve fuel economy by operating the vehicle part of the time (usually in urban stop-and-go environments) on electricity alone. Hybrid cars and light trucks are now legion across the landscape, with hybrids making steady inroads into the medium-duty arena along with prototypes now being tested for heavy trucks.

(An early version of Volvo’s medium-duty hybrid truck, the ‘I-Sam.’)

Just this week, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the Swedish Energy Agency agreed to jointly expand financial cooperation with Volvo to fund research and development of advanced drivelines for commercial trucks, for both hybrid systems and alternative fuels.

The DOE and the Swedish Energy Agency are providing a three-year grant to the Volvo Group worth a combined $18 million for the development hybrid technology and drivelines for alternative fuels – extending a one-year research and cooperation agreement signed between the Volvo Group and the Swedish and U.S. governments back in June 2007. Volvo is chipping in $18 million of its own money into the project, pushing funding up to $36 million total.

“This cooperation is aimed at reducing the use of fossil fuels by heavy vehicles through research and development projects in the areas of energy efficiency,” said Leif Johansson, CEO of the Volvo Group, in a press statement. “The transportation industry has a special responsibility and this research and development co-operation with the U.S. Government is crucial in our efforts to develop the drivetrains and technology required by both our customers and society as a whole.”

However, there’s still a big question to be answered in all this: can hybrids provide cost-effective fuel efficiency for the long term, with no adverse environmental impact? For while the fuel savings are definitely there, the extra cost of the electric motor, driveline, and batteries coupled to the eventual disposal issue of the batteries themselves raises several thorny problems that still need to be worked out.

New York based consulting firm ABI Research took a look at this issue and found that while hybrid technology has the ability to deliver efficiency, fleet managers and operators need to evaluate in careful detail the costs and benefits of hybrids.

“The main fuel economy benefit from hybrid technology comes from the capture and reuse of kinetic energy,” says ABI Research principal analyst David Alexander. “Two central forms of storage under development and available at present are hydraulic and electrical. Both require significant investment in additional systems, so realistic evaluations and estimations must be made as regards fuel savings in order to calculate the benefits.”

As the cost of oil and related fuel products – especially diesel fuel – continues to rise, owners and drivers are looking for new technology to get more miles per gallon, period, Alexander notes. With daily media coverage over oil prices and global warming, together with the marketing messages from the largest consumer vehicle manufacturers, it is easy to assume hybrids are the solution. The facts, however, suggest something else, he warns: that the return on investment can vary dramatically depending on factors such as the type of hybrid, cost of fuel, and the typical usage cycle.

For example, full hybrid powertrain systems for commercial vehicles are not normally designed to be retrofitted to existing vehicles, though there are some that can be installed as a complete replacement for an existing engine and transmission. Conversely, depending on the technology, the cost of parts and installation can be close to purchasing a new vehicle – so this approach generally is only used to produce low numbers of vehicles for evaluation. New options becoming available include mild hybrid idle-stop systems that can be retrofitted to particular vehicles, Alexander says

“Fleet managers should beware of the hype and stick to cautious testing to ensure that fuel economy improvements occur for their typical drive cycles,” he continues. “Drivers with the most to gain will be operating on a frequent stop–start cycle, and, depending on the existing powertrain, may benefit from a mild hybrid retrofit. Otherwise, the better option may be simply to factor-in the purchase of some hybrid vehicles for specific applications as the fleet ages over time.”

(More of his thoughts are available in ABI’s Commercial Hybrid Electric Vehicle report.)

Yet fleets should also take heart that other issues related to the cost of hybrids – especially insurance – are now being addressed.

Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co. for example, recently introduced new vehicle replacement coverage for commercial fleets – insuring the full replacement cost of vehicles that are total losses for up to their first three model years – with a key additional “hybrid upgrade” endorsement as well.

The hybrid endorsement enables policyholders to upgrade to a hybrid model (or its equivalent) during the first three model-years in the event of a total loss. This is an attractive choice for those businesses that want to protect the value of their assets, reduce their energy costs, and protect the environment, says Bob Steele, product director-commercial business for Fireman’s Fund, with both of these coverage enhancements applying without a deductible.

“If a policyholder’s two-year-old pickup truck is stolen from his delivery fleet, or crushed by a fallen tree, he can replace the truck with a new one. If he chooses the hybrid option he can upgrade to a more environmentally friendly hybrid model,” Steele noted. “Many fleets are opting for hybrids and alternative fuel vehicles to reduce fuel costs and pollution. This helps them keep doing that.”

More information is available from Fireman’s Fund on their website.

So while a lot of questions still need to be answered about hybrids, the technology is gaining rapid acceptance among vehicle operators of all shapes and sizes – and may indeed prove to be a vital piece of the fuel efficiency puzzle in the long term if the cost and battery-disposal issues get worked out. We’ll see how this all plays out in the coming year.

“The driver is still the most important element in maintaining vehicle safety. However, [safety] systems can provide the additional split-second deceleration needed to maintain control of the vehicle in an emergency situation.” –Jon Morrison, president and general manager, Meritor WABCO Vehicle Control Systems.

With fuel prices out of sight and freight volumes sluggish at best, it’s easy to take a dim and grim view of the trucking industry’s prospects right now. But one thing that gets overlooked pretty consistently by the motoring public these days, much less the mainstream media, are the huge advances in commercial vehicle safety technology going on right under our collective noses.

It’s not something that’s just happened overnight, either. All the systems now in play – from Eaton’s VORAD radar system and similar offerings from Delphi, up to anti-rollover technology made by Bendix and ArvinMeritor – to new products waiting in the wings add up to a vastly improve working environment for truck drivers and the motorists surrounding them on the highway.

For example, I got the great opportunity to see ArvinMeritor’s OnGuard collision avoidance technology in action earlier this year ahead of the Technology & Maintenance Council meeting in Orlando, FL. [The slideshow below illustrates the kinds of vehicles involved, including some of the participants – especially the ubiquitous David Kolman, editor of our sister magazine Refrigerated Transport.]

Though expensive right now – list price is $4,500 – the system’s forward-looking mono-pulse radar sensor can detect multiple moving and fixed objects at distances up to 500 ft., “locking in” on relevant objects at distances of 275 to 325 ft., which is a three-second following distance at highway speed. If a moving object is detected, OnGuard automatically engages the throttle, engine retarder and service brakes when it senses a likely collision without immediate action from the driver.

Think about that – automatic braking! Just getting all the technology to work properly is a concern, of course, but this system is already on the road in some 200 trucks operated by refrigerated carrier Prime Inc.

ArvinMeritor’s competitor Bendix is hard at work on similar product, a new active cruise control (ACC) system it plans to roll out in the fourth quarter this year. The ACC system ties a truck’s brakes, engine, transmission and the company’s electronic stability program system together with radar sensors so a truck can automatically slow down and come to a full stop if it detects a slowing vehicle ahead. Bendix won’t offer ACC without its full stability control system because it is needed to prevent further control loss issues from developing in emergency braking situations, the company noted.

(Bendix’s electronic stability program or ‘ESP’ is in use on all kinds of trucks, including mixers. This one was available for test drives at MEMA’s safety summit in Washington D.C. last year.)

Yet it’s important to look outside the pure competitive nature of these companies to truly appreciate how far we’ve come in terms of boosting truck safety. All of these firms are working hand-in-glove with the Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association (MEMA) to get the attention of Congressional lawmakers firmly fixed on the subject of enhancing commercial vehicle safety.

MEMA is holding an annual safety technology demonstration on Capitol Hill next week on June 24, which I’ll unfortunately miss since I will be on vacation. All of these systems, plus many more for the car and light truck arena, are made available for hands-on testing by congressmen and women, along with their various aides. Seeing all of this technology in action is awesome, yet it’s still an uphill battle to get any support for fiscal incentives to get truck owners to invest in it.

(Volvo has made Bendix’s ESP standard equipment on its tractors.)

“Over the next 10 years, we feel there’s going to be a growing appetite for active vehicle safety systems in the U.S.,” Joe McAleese, Bendix president & CEO, said recently. “We believe the best way to drive adoption of safety technology is through incentives, not mandates, because we believe there is substantial payback fleets can achieve from them. And once fleets see that payback, such technology will become ingrained.”

That’s one reason Bendix strongly supported the Commercial Motor Vehicle Advanced Safety Technology Act of 2007 (H.R. 3820) on Capitol Hill last year. That bill offered tax credits of up to $1,500 per system, $3,500 per vehicle and $350,000 per fleet for installing a variety of safety technologies on commercial trucks, but sadly gained no traction among lawmakers.

“Our primary focus is to deliver cost-effective solutions that make the roadways safer,” said McAleese. “H.R. 3820 was just one example of a congressional initiative that could make critical vehicle safety technologies even more accessible for today’s safety-conscious fleets. It is our hope that our participation in MEMA’s legislative summit and similar events will increase the visibility of these important issues.”

As I’ve been in the truck cabs, watching these kinds of safety systems in action first hand, I’ve no doubt they can do an awful lot to improve highway safety for everyone. The tough part is convincing Congress and other major players, like insurance companies, to support them.

I mean, at the ArvinMeritor event in Orlando, one fleet manager actually browbeat his insurance representative into attending so he could witness first hand how new safety technologies could lower the carrier’s risk profile – thus qualifying them for a break on their premiums. It still proved a hard sell, but hopefully it won’t remain so much longer.

OK, so we all know I like show trucks, big sleepers, custom paint projects, you name it. So I’ve collected a few that I’ve encountered on the road — as well as some stellar submissions from several OEMs highlighting trucks created to honor our military veterans — for your viewing pleasure below.

Always feel free to send photos in of your own “glam” trucks by the way to me — even if your pride and joy only has a wee bit of chrome, it still makes your rig a unique item on the highway. Safe travels everyone!

“Somewhere out there is a guy who’s sure his truck looks better than yours. Here’s a chance to kick him right in the spread axle.” –Motto of Mercer Transportation’s monthly show truck competition.

Ah, the show truck: all that polished chrome, the high-dollar paint schemes, the countless hours spent cleaning every single square inch, including the unspeakably filthy underside of the chassis.

(Photo by Tom Schoening, Peterbilt of Norfolk)

It may indeed be an anachronism in this day and age of five-dollar diesel, environmental consciousness, and concern over profits, but man do they look SHARP. And truck shows are springing up everywhere to help celebrate the enduring passion for chrome in this industry, sponsored by truck stops, radio stations, even carriers themselves.

I love show trucks myself and get to really binge on them at the Mid America Trucking Show every year, collecting countless digital images for my files – some that never even get used in print or on the Internet. It’s really a rolling work of art, the show truck, and I just wish someone with some seriously deep pockets would one day build a museum to house a good chunk of them.

(Lynn Bierschenk of Molt, Montana, touches up the tires of his big rig in preparation for the truck show. Photo by Tom Schoening, Peterbilt of Norfolk.)

Tom Schoening, communications director for Peterbilt of Norfolk, Nebraska, sent me some shots from the second annual “Pride and Polish Truck Show” sponsored by the Prime Stop truck stop off I-81 in Nebraska and co-sponsored by local radio station US 92. You’ll see four of them in here, including a good one of a bunch of “future drivers” climbing all over a show truck minitaure.

More than 2,000 people enjoyed looking at about 100 customized working rigs at this particular show, held May 31 at the DeVent Center in Norfolk. The show also featured the by-now famous Chrome Shop Mafia, a team of top-notch designers working out of 4 State Trucks in Joplin, Missouri, whose work has been chronicled by the Country Music Television (CMT) network over the last several years on the series “Trick My Truck,” raised the profile of show trucks and the trucks that own and operate them to new heights, giving national exposure to a great subculture within the trucking industry.

(Youngsters play on a miniature 18-wheeler during the truck show. Photo by Tom Schoening, Peterbilt of Norfolk.)

Sadly, the Chrome Shop Mafia and CMT are going their different ways after 41 episodes and three seasons, parting over the usual creative differences that occur when a show like this becomes a hit, with all but two members of the original cast choosing not to be part of future episodes. The biggest concern raised by 4 State Trucks centered on how the program began drifting away from ‘big rigs’ to feature more small trucks, pickups, service trucks, etc. – all very worthy of attention, but definitely not in a show dedicated to showing off show trucks.

”One of our main objectives this past few years is to promote the image of the trucker and the trucking industry in a positive and respectable way,” 4 State Trucks said. “Our goal … is to offer the best selection and widest range of truck parts and accessories in the nation. We are committed to maintaining an inventory of quality products that allows us to achieve this goal and, in conjunction with this effort, we also intend to promote the awareness of ‘custom trucks’ within our industry.”

(Leroy McRoberts judges the big rigs on May 31 during a truck show in Norfolk. After taking home top prizes in last year’s contest, he was appointed as one of the judges in the second-annual truck beauty contest. More than 2,000 people enjoyed looking at the customized and polished work vehicles under a warm sunny sky. Photo by Tom Schoening, Peterbilt of Norfolk.)

These guys also like to stress that show trucks and their owners are part of what they like to call “real-working America … not Hollywood,” which is ever so true. It’s not cheap to turn a commercial Class 8 tractor into a show rig by any means (the paint job along can cost $40,000 or more in some cases) and all that money comes out of the trucker’s pocket. Yet show truckers do it not only for themselves but also as a way to show off their pride in what they do for a living.

“What customers really need when it comes to their trucks are dependable, qualified technicians.” –Vaughn Allen, vice president-product and customer support for Navistar Truck Group.

Finding technicians these days, much less training and keeping them at trucking dealership and fleet maintenance depots for the long haul, is getting harder all the time. That’s one reason we’re seeing a lot more “technician rodeos” designed to raise their collective profile and give them some much needed public props.

Last week, for example, Navistar held its second annual Service-Technician Rodeo at the Universal Technical Institute (UTI) in Glendale Heights, IL, to compete in air conditioning, brakes, drive train, electrical and preventative maintenance scenarios for a range of commercial trucks, along with issues involving Navistar’s I-6, V-8 and V-6 engine lines.

(Navistar’s tech rodeo winner, Per Meling, with his game face on.)

To compete in eight key areas of commercial truck and engine service, Navistar dealer technicians had to have Automotive Service Excellence (ASE) certification for the U.S. or Canadian Provincial Licensing for Canada, along with company certifications as well. Out of a population of 8,004 Navistar dealer technicians (a number that does not include the 5,000 or so body shop and Idealease techs that fall under Navistar’s large maintenance umbrella) only 342 were eligible, according to Vaughn Allen, vice president-product and customer support for Navistar.

From those 342, about 250 took the rodeo online qualifying exam on March 6 and out of that group, eight technicians got the chance to compete at Navistar’s rodeo this year. “Only an elite group are allowed to participate in this event,” Vaughn told me in a phone conversation last week. “It’s a head-to-head, hands-on test of their technical skill and speed. The competition tests not only their practical know-how but their theoretical knowledge as well.”

(Close inspection is part of the trade.)

Per E. Meling of White’s International Trucks in Greensboro, N.C., won the top honors at Navistar’s rodeo this year and he exemplifies what Vaughn believes the truck technician for today and tomorrow looks like.

“Today, it’s all about situational awareness,” he told me. “It’s a different game, because you learn something new, a new technique, every day in this business. So much of a truck is electronically controlled that it’s a much more ‘point and click’ type of solution-finding environment. It’s more about following the processes and becoming a specialist in certain key areas. Like hospital doctors today, there are no real ‘generalists’ anymore – everyone becomes an expert in a specific area, like spinal surgeons, radiologists, etc.”

Etienne Van Niekerk, service education manager for Navistar, added that the learning really never ends anymore for technicians. They are constantly getting new information via the Internet, DVDs, and the classroom, plus it’s broken down into what he calls “just in time” and “just in case” information.

“’Just in time’ information is situational – delivered as a technician works on a particular problem, when the repair isn’t going like it should be,” Van Niekerk explained to me. “’Just in case’ information is more broad, addressing different areas outside the specific skill set of the technician, should the repair issue widen into new areas.”

Either way, Van Niekerk said that the ever-increasing complexity of trucks is making technicians much more reliant on information sorting like this than ever before – creating a shift from turning wrenches to a more ‘point and click’ type of work mode.

“It’s impossible for one person to know every system on a truck; that’s creating information resources available at the technician’s fingertips is so vital,” Vaughn added. “And it’s why following the process and sifting through the layers of a repair issue to find the root cause is so important today. Recognition of those challenges and the ability of out technicians to overcome them is but one reason why we are holding these rodeos.”

I spent some time with Dan Arcy from Shell Lubricants a few weeks back at the Technology & Maintenance Council’s annual meeting, talking about how the concept of “lubricant management” is getting some legs within trucking circles. In essence, lubricant management is about looking at all the engine oils, greases, coolants, and other fluids a trucking fleet uses not so much as individual products but in terms of goals: reduced wear and longer life for engines and components, longer drain intervals to lower overall maintenance costs, etc.

“It’s more than just looking at products individually – it’s also about dialing in the services behind them as well, such as oil analysis, benchmarking results against our collective database, etc.,” Arcy told me. “It’s about getting the whole package.”

Now, obviously, Shell is biased towards this concept, because they see it as a way to secure more of their customer’s business: for the end result of “lubricant management” should be a fleet going with one supplier for all of their greases, engine oil blends, etc.

Yet if you look beyond that bias for a second, the concept of “lubricant management” does make a lot of sense. Lubricant suppliers are compiling tons of detailed data from individual customers on the performance of various oils, greases, and fluids, adding them to a massive internal database. I can see a lot of benefit for fleets to benchmark their results against those of operations similar to their own. For example, that could help them better determine drain intervals and other details that can help save money over time.

(Dan Arcy, at left, and Jonathan Ubil conduct a demonstration of Shells’ Video Check service for engines … more on that farther down in this entry.)

“We can look at everything in great detail: the impact of engine idle time, stop and go operation versus over-the-road, and other variables,” Arcy said. “We can roll the engine oil, transmission fluid, and other lubricants all into one model and look at performance metrics. We can analyze the whole maintenance impact from this kind of data.”

“Lube Match” is one of Shell’s newest services in this arena: comparing the lubes used by a particular customer against data gleaned from hundreds of fleets worldwide in similar operations, using a variety of engines. “It takes a lot of the guesswork out when a fleet is looking to change lubricants and engines,” Arcy explained. “And they can also look at a variety of blends, too, from ‘premium’ down to low-cost products, so they can factor in price as well as lubricant performance in their decision-making process.”

Shell also offers its own unique twist when it comes to engine oil analysis, through its “Video Check” service. Introduced two years ago, Video Check uses a miniature digital camera to inspect the interior components of an engine to spot problems, reducing the need for a costly and time-consuming physical breakdown.

(Shell’s Video Check service in action).

The camera is fed into the diesel engine through the cylinder fuel injector port using a fiber optic cable, illuminating the inside of the engine and transmitting the images to a monitor. The service can inspect the piston crown, combustion chamber, cylinder wall, valve seats and head, Jonathan Ubil, one of Shell’s skilled Video Check operators, told me.

“During routine maintenance, it is virtually impossible to inspect the internal components of an engine to identify damage and prevent failures that can lead to greater expenses,” he said, noting it takes about 20 to 30 minutes too look at an engine this way, versus the many hours needed for a physical inspection. “This is a valuable tool to help identify engine problems and cut down the cost of diesel engine maintenance.”

And it’s not just about getting a “snapshot” of the fleet’s engine health, added Arcy. This system can also be used to look at used trucks pre-sale or verify the impact of extended oil drains on pilot test trucks. There’s many different ways to use this technology to save fleets money when it comes to maintenance, he stressed – again, a service that’s part of Shell’s lubricant management package.

“If we can maximize lubricant life across the fleet, then we save them money.” Arcy told me. “And we use all the other tools we have – our laboratories for lubricant analysis, our database, and Video Check, among others – to verify the results they are getting. That’s what getting the whole package is all about.”

“We need to encourage fleets to invest in safety systems. We need to make the decision to purchase this technology easier.” –Stephen Campbell, executive director, CVSA.

No doubt by now you’ve heard of the growing push to get Congress to pass H.R. 3820, a bill known as the “Commercial Motor Vehicle Advanced Safety Technology Tax Act.” This bill offers tax credits to trucking fleets larger and small worth 50% of the purchase price for various safety systems: up to $1,500 per system, with a maximum of $3,500 per vehicle and a maximum of $350,000 per fleet per taxable year. Technologies covered by the bill include collision warning, lane departure warning, blind spot warning, vehicle stability, and brake stroke monitoring.

The “fiscal encouragement” proposed by this bill and being pushed hard by the Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association (MEMA) and the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) really is a “no brainer” for trucking in my estimation. I mean, seriously: doesn’t this make sense? Give fleets a tax break for installing a set of safety technologies with well-established track records – systems that’ve proven to reduce commerical truck accidents of all sorts.

We need to do this, too, because as Stephen Campbell – a longtime highway safety advocate for this industry – noted so directly above, fleets need help getting over the “cost hump” if you will. “Unfortunately, many fleets look at safety technology just from a dollars and cents perspective,” he said during a press briefing held with reporters this week. “They don’t invest in this technology when times get tight.” And as we all know, times are tight right now.

But we need to look at the larger picture here: the number of people being killed in truck crashes every year in this country. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) paints a pretty grim picture where that’s concerned in its latest dissection of roadway crash statistics for 2006, the latest year for which details are available.

According to NHTSA, in 2006, 385,000 large trucks (with a gross vehicle weight rating greater than 10,000 pounds) were involved in traffic crashes in the U.S.: killing 4,995 people and injuring 106,000. That means one out of nine traffic fatalities in 2006 resulted from a collision involving a large truck.

Of the fatalities that resulted from crashes involving large trucks, said NHTSA, 75% were occupants of another vehicle, with 76% of the occupants in the other vehicle suffering the injuries.

NHTSA also found large trucks were much more likely to be involved in a fatal multiple-vehicle crash – as opposed to a fatal single-vehicle crash – than were passenger vehicles (82% of all large trucks involved in fatal crashes, compared with 60% of all passenger vehicles), with the truck was struck in the rear 2.7 times as often as the other vehicle (19% and 7%, respectively).

Now, the technologies covered under H.R. 3820’s tax credits can definitely help reduce and probably even eliminate many of these numbers, but they’re not an “automatic” panacea by any means. Truck drivers need to be retrained in many ways so they fully understand how these systems affect the vehicle – especially in terms of their limitations.

At one safety demonstration I attended recently, for example, I talked with some engineers about driver reaction to electronic stability control – a system that cuts the engine power and selectively applies the brakes to prevent rollovers if a driver takes a turn too fast. Many drivers at one fleet using this technology complained that their new trucks didn’t have the power they used to have. In reality, they’d been taking turns way too fast, activating the safety systems.

Speed management is a critical issue here. According to NHTSA, nearly one-fourth (24%) of all large truck drivers involved in fatal crashes in 2006 had at least one prior speeding conviction, compared to 19% of the passenger car drivers involved in fatal crashes.

Drivers are a critical component to getting the full benefit of this technology. They must “buy in” to all this stuff and use it properly – and frankly, they can be won over simply by applying incentives, such as bonuses for safety records. And don’t pooh-pooh that idea out of hand – look at drunk driving rates as an example of the truck driving community’s eye on safety. Less than 1% of commercial trucker drivers involved in fatal crashes in 2006 were legally drunk, compared to 23% of passenger car drivers, according to NHTSA’s figures.

We also need the insurance industry to get off its duff, too. All the technologies promoted by the tax credit bill have been around for years now – lots of real-world data exists backing up their ability to reduce accidents. I mean, come on – the insurance industry gives passenger car and light truck owners a break on premiums if they install car alarms, for goodness sake – one of the truly worthless pieces of technology around. Everyone ignores them today due to their high rates of false alarms. The kind of technology we’re talking about for trucking actively steps takes a role in preventing crashes – the kinds of accidents that cost millions of dollars, especially when someone gets killed. The insurance industry should be falling over itself to help out here.

Then there’s the final point CVSA’s Campbell eloquently illustrated at the briefing: if this stuff is so good, why not just mandate its use by the industry?

“It’s perfectly legitimate to suggest a mandate for these systems,” he said. “But we’re painfully aware that it can take from two to five years for the federal rulemaking process to put such a mandate in place. In the meantime, people will be dying. We need to do something now that will improve safety faster than the rulemaking process can.”

I can think of no stronger argument in favor of H.R. 3820 than that.

To make hybrid technology even more viable for commercial vehicles – especially for Class 8 trucks – it’s all going to come down to the batteries. They are the make-or-break lynchpin for hybrid vehicle growth in the commercial market.

Develop a battery that’s lighter and can hold more electricity for longer intervals between re-charging – as well as one that can do double-duty by not only helping propel the vehicle but also providing power for heating, cooling, and other onboard needs – and hybrid systems will really catch fire with fleets.

So, what kind of battery will fit that bill? We know tried-and-true lead-acid batteries are just too heavy and don’t hold enough juice. Lithium-ion seems to be the frontrunner, but there’s a spate of other technologies out there, too, such as absorbed glass mat (AGM) batteries, which are getting close attention for anti-idling systems.

And things are moving fast in the battery arena. In an effort to jump-start the mass production of lithium-ion batteries, Nissan Motor Co., fellow Japanese firm NEC Corp. and subsidiary, NEC Tokin Corp., formed a special joint-venture company in April last year called Automotive Energy Supply Corp. (AESC). Nissan said it expects the joint venture to begin mass-producing lithium-ion batteries for vehicle applications by 2009.

Milwaukee, WI-based Johnson Controls-Saft Advanced Power Solutions (JCS) got the green light in 2006 to start work on developing longer-life lithium-ion batteries for hybrids, part of a 24-month contract partially funded by the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC), a group that includes the Dept. of Energy, Daimler AG, Ford and General Motors.

Then there’s the new joint venture between truck maker Paccar and component supplier Eaton Corp. to develop a Class 8 hybrid truck by 2009. Eaton is providing the hybrid drivetrain system — a traction motor married to a Fuller UltraShift 10-sp. automated transmission and four lithium ion batteries — while Paccar subsidiaries Kenworth and Peterbilt provide the chassis, diesel engine and engineering assistance to integrate everything.

(For a video report on Paccar’s Class 8 hybrid, developed with Eaton, click on the link below.)

Paccar’s Class 8 hybrid prototype

Todd Graham, Eaton’s account manager for Peterbilt, explained to me last August that hybrid technology would only add about 300 lb. to a Class 8 tractor, mainly from the traction motor and power electric carrier (PEC), which holds four lithium ion batteries and replaces the standard batteries normally used to power the starter. Eaton is shooting for a five-year life cycle for the lithium ion batteries, he added.

Eaton’s heavy-duty hybrid electric power system will be built using an automated manual transmission with a parallel-type “direct” hybrid system, incorporating an electric motor/generator located between the output of an automated clutch and the input to the transmission.

One benefit of this approach, Graham told me, will be that braking energy captured and then stored as electric energy in the batteries can be used to provide torque from the electric motor and blended with engine torque to improve vehicle performance, operate the engine in a more fuel-efficient range for a given speed, or run the truck with electric power only, said Graham.

The other trick here is to make sure the batteries used on a Class 8 hybrid can withstand trucking’s at-times extremely harsh operating environment. That’s the challenge John Duffy, Kenworth’s manager of advanced technology, faced when developing factory-built battery-based auxiliary power units (APUs) on his company’s trucks, know as the “Clean Power” system.

“We deliberately developed our Clean Power System to run on batteries to totally eliminate any issues with emissions,” he told me during a special ride and drive held at the Paccar Technical Center in Mount Vernon, WA, last year.

“The first stage of that challenge is to improve the efficiency and life cycle of a battery-powered system operating in the harsh environment of trucking,” said Duffy. “The bar we have to meet as an OEM is much higher in terms of reliability and durability, since we are the ones putting this into the vehicle. The actual concept of integrating an all battery-powered APU into a Class 8 tractor took just six months; the other 18 months were spent hardening it.”

Duffy feels that the battery-powered APU not only allows the vehicle to burn less fuel but also to stay ahead of state or local diesel emission restrictions. He said the system uses roughly a gallon’s worth of fuel to be fully recharged by the truck’s engine over the course of the day and consumes energy at about 1/10th of a gallon per hour, compared to 3/10th to 5/10th of a gallon per hour of a traditional diesel-fired APU.

It’s a tricky issue, developing batteries that can do all of this yet be as cheap as possible so the price tag to truckers doesn’t get too extreme. But we’ll be seeing the fruits of all that research very soon, I expect.