I confess I am stumped by one thing about our hobby. How do we as bus nuts justify driving illegal, blatantly unsafe vehicles on public roads, just because we can and we probably won't have an accident and won't get caught? I've read stories recently about driving buses with a missing brake chamber, stories that are almost legend about pulling a bus out of a field, getting it running and driving it a thousand miles home on 20 year old tires and who knows what kind of brakes, stories about air systems that leak so bad the air compressor runs almost constantly - how do we as a community justify that?
I just don't understand, I guess.
Brian
I hear you Brian. I'm afraid we're one dead schoolgirl with a cute kitten away from having to follow a commercial inspection regime. And that would mean that at least half of the coaches represented on this site would be off the road the next day.
I think you take things a little too far Brian. The moving of a bus 10 miles without one brake chamber is not that drastic especially when the driver knows he has a limited amount of braking. All he is doing is taking his bus to a safer spot. Lets put it another way. You blow out a brake diaphram on the interstate. Can you cap it off and drive to the next exit or do you call a wrecker or landall to haul it to the next exit? I have read a lot of your posts and am aware of what you state as a limited budget. So are you going to pay a wrecker $500 to $1000 to get your bus to the next exit or are you going to pinch the line off and limp there? You know you are breaking the law and endangering lives. Your call!
a troubling topic, for sure!
You can be sure that posts from these boards will be read into the transcripts of a court eventually...
and not in the defense of a busnut!
And then the boards will go viral in a most unpleasant way.
perhaps the only difference is between premeditated and heat-of-the-moment? Murder or manslaughter?
Many of us have boldly gone with less knowledge than maybe we should have had?
Some of us continue to do so?
Stories of well planned, carefully repaired and compliant trips of new to us old coaches heading home come across as boring?
Bob's got it, after the sweep, we'll be up on blocks.
happy coaching!
buswarrior
I agree with BOTN. The whole world rotates around one dumb $hit and a lawyer. Throw in a cute kitten and we would be completely out of business.
I am sure that we FEEL safe when we are driving (otherwise we wouldn't be doing it) but feeling safe and being in compliance are two different things
Melbo
Yup, those commercial bus inspections are intense. The Georgia DOT does a lot of their inspections here at the Choo Choo Garage so they can use the pit. They check everything with a fine tooth comb and anything that doesn't pass must be repaired. Even a cracked side window is enough to put it out of commercial service.
Last week at the Idaho DOT station on I 84 in Boise I saw 2 brand new H-45 there with those windshield tags where they failed inspection I told my wife sure glad we don't have to run the Eagle bus through that.
No way one of these old buses we drive would pass inspection.
good luck
Me thinks that if you get on a BB and ask if you should ...... you probably shouldn't ....
Chopper Scott, I do a commercial level inspection on my bus before it rolls for a trip, although I do skip on the dailys if I am driving it every day for a while. I comply with commercial regs as they exist in Ontario as far as under chassis inspections are concerned. My bus passed a full DOT inspection by a licensed shop less than 10,000 miles ago. I subscribe to a recovery service so that if I am disabled I can, with no financial penalty, be recovered off that freeway.
I guess I learned how to be a commercial driver, both in the Forces as a driver by trade and as a driver trainer, and as a school bus driver, so long ago that I forget not doing things the way I was taught. I'm not under any budget limitations to any extent, if the bus needs it it gets it, or I just wait for a while for a trip. I treat my bus as though it was a commercial vehicle in revenue service. I feel quite bad if I am on a trip and one of the clearance lights burns out, for Pete's sake! quite anal about it to be honest... :-\
Edit - I'm not trying to be all preachy, I'm just sharing how I seem to be doing things. Maybe it's down to early training and maybe to my more current work building and preparing racing cars. That's another area of mechanical endeavour where close enough sometimes doesn't cut it, you really do strive for perfection as opposed to good enough.
Brian
It's a pretty weird area with old buses sometimes. Before bringing my bus home, I adjusted all slacks, got all my marker lights etc working, went over a ton of stuff. Drove it home, but my bus was made in '53 so it had no spring brakes/DD3s whatever. I adjusted the hell out of my handbrake until I knew it could stop me from 60 mph (eventually). Getting spring brakes on that puppy was definitely top of the list. Could I have done more before the trip home? Yes (change bushings, spring brakes, various small details) did I have enough time (=money) to do so? No.
So there was a risk, but I kept things slow, checked all systems continuously, and got home in one piece, and my gas milage was awesome! Would I do it again? Yup, with one important caveat, I had a breaker trip and I lost my headlights in the middle of a moonless night for 5?-30? very long seconds. I have no idea how long as it was terrifying. If I ever do this again, I will hard wire the headlights to a known good circuit....that is never happening to me again! BTW it was a worn bit of insulation shorting out the lights, definitely didn't show up on pre-trip inspection.
Would I drive 10 miles with one rear can missing? Yup, but only after checking that all the other brakes were fully operational, and doing some test stops in a safe (ish) enviroment. And not if there were any steep hills to navigate. Oh yeah and I wouldn't drive back to the shop, I would change the can at my place.
My 2 cents.....but then please note I also drove a 65 volvo for 6 years that had a single line hydraulic brake system and no warning light system for low brake fluid. Brand new hard and flex lines all around and new e brake cables.....still was glad when I graduated to a modern ("68) with 2 line system. These old rigs keep you on your toes.
Brian, here in the US DOT inspections vary from state to state.
I have had my trucks pass in OK only to fail in KS.I was told Idaho was very strict with the weights and length allowed there a truck pullling 2- 53 foot trailers loaded with 200,000 pounds of potatoes or sugar beets is a comman sight during harvest season.
good luck
It appears I have upset several members of the board by driving my bus while it was a little handicapped. I was only trying to make sure there wasn't something that would cause the brakes to lock up or something mechanical that I should know about with the can missing. I was not asking about your thoughts about the wisdom of doing it. After thinking about it, I realize it might be unwise for someone to recommend or even comment on driving a handicapped bus, because if something did go wrong then that would put you on the wrong side of the fence so I understand not getting too many comments.
But the truth be known, I still think most of us would have driven their bus home in the same situation. As I mentioned I had the bus in the shop to have the brakes checked and adjusted. The remaining 5 brakes are in great shape and I am guessing that gives me 70% to 80% of my full braking power and after driving it in the truck lot it was apparent it had plenty of stopping power for my 10 mile trip. I thought I had read of buses chaining up their tag axle for what ever reason and it seems like that would take away one axle worth of braking power and if that is correct it seems like that would be the same thing as I did as far as braking. If my logic is wrong it wouldn't surprise me but I am an old man and I am easily confused.
I hope that by being branded as foolish for driving the handicapped bus, I hope I don't get black balled when I have other questions as there is obviously many things that I don't know and have used this board in the past to get that valuable information.
Bob
Bob,
No worries about being black balled! We have members here who've done much worse we still adore! (and are amazed they/we survived to tell it! ;)
;D BK ;D
Quote from: bcaddel on May 19, 2010, 06:34:24 AM
I hope that by being branded as foolish for driving the handicapped bus, I hope I don't get black balled when I have other questions as there is obviously many things that I don't know and have used this board in the past to get that valuable information.
Bob
Bob,
Don't worry about getting blackballed. Post like yours stimulates a very good conversation among the many knowledgeable people on this BB. Although you got many "answers", ultimately, it is your decision, based on information you received here. Some topics always bring a lot of opinions (don't ask what kind of wire to use for AC wiring LOL). This is a good thing. Jack
You don't need much brakes in your part Nev anyway Bob not like driving in downtown Dallas or Houston I never use mine there don't worry about it LOL
good luck
Driving in Boston, you either need brakes or a good horn, but not both.
Sometimes we do things that we would rather not do. The main thing is to be in a position to make a well informed decision - as opposed to a misinformed decision.
We also don't want to be cavilear when endorsing 'risky' behaviour either. (Yes, driving with part of the braking system disabled is risky behaviour.)
To get a feel for the level of risk, I'd need to run some numbers so I would have a better idea as to what to expect.
If braking effect is proportional to axle weight,
If the axle weights are-
front = 11,000
drive = 18,000
tag = 5,000
total = 34,000
Based on that, the drive axle provides 18,000 / 34,000 % of the braking (~53%)
So, if you remove half of that, you remove a bit over 1/4 of the available braking capacity of a perfect system.
I would have to consider the route & other traffic before I decided to make that trip. But, if normal stops on the planned trip were only light pedal application, I'd probably take the chance - but, I'd have a chase car to make sure things went as safely as practical.
Kyle, this is part of what I don't get. Given that it's illegal to operate the bus with whatever is broken still broken (I really had no intent of making this all about a missing brake chamber), and given that whatever is broken is non-trivial in nature, why is our collective attitude that it's ok to perform an illegal act if we probably won't get caught, die, kill someone else, or otherwise have a catastrophe? Why isn't our attitude that the bus is out of service, parked, until it's fixed? Why is it OK to make some "calculation" that convinces us it's OK to go?
This has really bothered me for some time. I'm all about innovation and McGyvering things, but not on the public roads. Maybe it really is just me. I didn't even take my bus for a test drive until I had my upgraded drivers license in my hand (we need Air Brake endorsement up here). I could have, I wouldn't have gotten caught (90% of the guys who drive the big MH's up here don't have anything close to the correct license, at least the one's I've asked) and if I got caught the fine would have been trivial. But it's illegal so I didn't do it. Maybe I am just a big wuss... ???
Brian
If it was a choice of driving with one less brake a short distance on dry roads or driving with full brakes in the snow, i would opt for not driving in the snow. How many of you drive in snow? On any given day you might see a wreck of two or you might go for months without seeing one. On a snowy day, especially the first snow of the season, there is a good chance you will see dozens if not hundreds of crashed rigs, i know i have. I won't take the chance of driving my bus in snow even though i am comfortable driving my car in the snow. We all take a risk every day when we get out on the roads with any vehicle. To be perfectly safe you better stay at home. Everybody has to figure out what their comfort level is......ever see the pictures of the plane in Alaska that got torn up by a bear and the guy patched it up with duct tape and flew it back out of the bush? ??? ;D
Brian is right, illegal is still illegal, but at what point do we all make adjustments to our morals on a daily basis, I'd be willing to bet that we've all crossed the street in the middle of the block at one point or another, what we do each day is weigh the risk and danger of most of what we do before we make our choice, another factor that may come into play is cost. Yesterday I didn't have my 5 servings of vegetables but yet I didn't lay awake worrying about it, my choices are normally based on many factors which include cost, danger, legality and yes sometimes it's even the chance of getting caught. Laws are written to protect us and sometimes that means protecting us from ourselves, I resent the requirement that I wear a helmet on the bike but I also see the logic behind it, I guess we all do things that we probably shouldn't from time to time. Michigan has thousands of laws involving motor vehicle codes, I couldn't possibly be familier with even a fraction of them so I probably break a lot of them each day, I just try to operate in as safe a manner as I can and hope I do alright in the long run.
Brian,
I'm all for understanding the machine one is operating, but just because you are 'legal' does not ensure 100% success, just as being 'illegal' does not ensure 100% failure.
I'm more concerned for safety (myself & others) than strict adherence to the law. 8)
The fact is each trip (bus, car, walking, etc) poses potential dangers & we need to consider them before we leave (like Cody said).
Taking a bus with a known problem & driving it a short distance on familiar roads with minimal traffic is a VERY DIFFERENT thing than embarking on a long trip over unfamiliar roads with sometimes heavy traffic with unknown problems. - Of course, this assumes you modify your driving style when you know about a problem.
To take it to the extreme, your stance could support the argument that old vehicles shouldn't be allowed on the roads at all since so much of the aluminium structure is not inspectable & we all know that aluminium does not have an endurance limit & as a result will eventually fail in fatigue unless it is re-annealed. Sure, you can pass all the DOT inspections - but what about the hidden problem that no one could see - (the air tank that ruptures, the diaphragm that ruptures, the tire that blows out . . . .)
I think there should be a distinction between 'limp home' vs. standard operating procedure. BTW, I don't think 'limp home' includes continuing a vacation. :o
While ignorance is not an excuse, many use it as a reason.
These discussions are good reminders to the full scope of what is involved in operating a heavy commercial vehicle.
One factor not mentioned so far is how it is driven at times like that (well, Kyle just beat me to it). Under normal driving conditions, you "expect" the brakes to work and drive normally, at normal speed and with normal practices. When in "limp home" mode you are highly sensitive to whatever problem is noted. You are likely to drive much slower and maintain substantially larger clear space ahead of you.
That is of course more of an "ethical" consideration than a "legal" one because from the legal perspective, the bus doesn't move down the road under its own power until the problem is fixed. Also keep in mind that by law, it is not legal to drive 75 in a 70 zone, 70 in a 65, 60 in a 55 or 35 in a 30. The legal speed limit for trucks at night in many places is 55. When you approach a curve that is marked 45mph, it is not legal to go 55. In many states it is not legal to drive in the rain without your headlights on. In Tennessee it is not legal to drive with a cracked windshield. How about that U-Haul trailer that can't be towed over 45mph? It isn't legal to drive without your properly secured seatbelts latched. In many places it is not legal to have a loaded handgun on board. In state or federal parks it is not legal to have a gun on board period, no matter how secured or removed from its ammo. It has been cynically said by many that every citizen is a criminal in today's heavily legislated society.
Well, I got it off my chest, at least. Thank you for the conversation about this, I feel better now... :)
Brian
Quote from: kyle4501 on May 19, 2010, 07:55:54 AM
These discussions are good reminders to the full scope of what is involved in operating a heavy commercial vehicle.
That's the key phrase - "heavy commercial vehicle". And its not just us owners of wore out busses. All the bulgemobiles riding around on Freightshaker chassis are just 10 or 15 years away from joining our ranks.
We maintained a fleet of worn out trucks which we used in seasonal service. We thought anything less than 10 years old was a new vehicle. Its not impossible to keep the old equipment in compliance but you have to keep on it. If you let it slide for several years and then try to bring it into compliance the bill can easily be more than the vehicle is worth. The problem is that this stuff is so heavily built that it can go a long time before it absolutely lets us down. I've seen brake cam bushings on bus conversions so badly worn out that you can literally move the slack adjuster over an inch side to side. That's an automatic failure and a huge legal problem if something bad (think little schoolgirl with a cute kitten) ever happens. Is it "dangerous"? I dunno but the people who write the regs think so and that's all that really matters.
Its a daily occurance for us to assess risk and assume risks that are technically illegal. Exceeding the speed limit is the most common example. Most of us are more able to accurately assess the risk of that kind of "dangerous" behaviour because we are familiar with it. Most of us are not commercial equipment operators so our ability to assess the risk of non-standard behaviour with commercial equipment is impaired.
The posts here keep referencing "buses" but in reality we mostly drive RV's for the purpose of inspections and licensing. If every rv on the road was weighed and inspected I think our "Bus / RV" would be safe to operate long after all the old winnebagos and toyota truck campers were taken off the road. We compare our "Bus / RV" to commercial vehicles and that is an apples to oranges comparison. As a commercial vehicle our "Bus / RV" would / could be out of compliance however I think that we a group are MUCH more aware of the safety factors than most people who jump in their motorhome and drive across the country.
Melbo
Guys anyway you slice this pie we are driving a unit that was taken out of revenue service because they were too old and mainatince was to costly like Meblo says they are on their 2nd life as a RV.
I read some where cities have a 10 or 12 year limit on years of service for transit operations and here in AZ they have a 10 year on school buses.
good luck be safe
Removed
Dallas, that is funny I had a brand new Pete (1000 miles) me and my driver went from Tulsa to Coffeyville Ks 3000 bucks and 2 days later we were on the road back to Tulsa I thought that only happens to me.
good luck
Removed
Quote from: bobofthenorth on May 18, 2010, 07:58:37 PM
I hear you Brian. I'm afraid we're one dead schoolgirl with a cute kitten away from having to follow a commercial inspection regime.
Nope.
If the thousands of people who have died as sticks and staples broke up around them, fallen on them, or been unable to stop because the truck chassis they're built on couldn't handle the extra two tons of toad haven't forced a change in safety standards for RVs, nothing that WE can do would have any effect.
Up here the DOT and OPP regularly ( in fact, I'll be looking for serious looking TV reporters standing in a field talking about how many vehicles they put OOS on Monday since it's a long weekend up here and they always do a recreational vehicle blitz on long weekends) do highway side safety inspections on RV's, campers, you name it. As far as I know, private vehicles are subject to identical safety regulations and fines as commercial vehicles, that may be unique to Ontario, I don't know. I do know people who have been parked for incorrect licenses, overweight vehicles, etc, and gotten the multi-thousand dollar fines to fight in court. Heck, several years ago there was a serious run on DOT certified hooks and chains to replace the chintzy S-hooks that came on trailers that weren't legal. And trailers got parked until the hooks were changed! I heard just a month ago that they had started pulling the big RV's over to check drivers licenses on the QEW near Niagara, since so many RV's were crossing over back from the winter in the south. I guess it looked like a decent revenue opportunity! In Ontario, over 24K lbs or air brakes, you can't drive with a normal passenger car license. And we make no distinction between private or commercial operation.
In general, in the US aren't private vehicles subject to DOT safety regs? If you have a privately registered vehicle, don't you have to comply with brake pushrod extension, and operating lights and such stuff? Or are you legally exempt as a private, non-commercial operator?
Brian
As the economy falters I'm sure we'll find far more drivers being cited for offenses that we hadn't given a second thought too in the past, there are far more regulations on the books that are available to officers as tools for revenue enhancement now than at any time in the past. About all we can do is try to comply with what we're aware of and drive as safely as we can, if we can avoid many of the red flags that alert officers to a potential windfall, I'm sure we can get thru the day with a minimum of anguish, I know that there are fewer warnings being given now for relatively minor infractions. My career started in the State Police as a road officer and we went thru many cycles where we were cautioned on the ratio of warnings to citations, the old idea of a quota system where officers were expected to write a certain amount of tickets was an old wives tale with our post but I can't speak for other posts or other states. Shortly after our wreck I transfered to the dept of corrections, so I can't speak for their policy in later years but knowing how the state of michigan likes to operate I'm sure it hasn't changed to any great degree from what I was used too.
Brian,
Interesting info on Canada DOT. In the US, you can drive any RV with a mere standard license. Would we be in violation of Canadian law if we cross over there? Also, it would seem that we would need your approved chains on our toads. What do approved safety chains look like?
Brian,
What does that mean for when we come to Ontario? Does that mean that we need air brake endorsement, or does Ontario honor Kansas requirements.
God bless,
John
DOT approved hooks and chains are needed for loads of varying sizes, they are usually gold in colour. the thing on the hooks is that over a certain weight they are forged or high tensile steel and they always need a spring loaded snap closure, the old style S-hook that just hooked back onto the chain is what they got rid of. I don't know if out-of-province people would have a problem, and most newish stuff I've seen just looking around complies anyway. It just seems that every few years they go on some rampage against recreational stuff, which is otherwise ignored. For a while it was horse trailers at horsey shows. They are often overweight, and they don't have annual inspections on their trucks or their trailers, and their trucks aren't licensed for the weight. Toyhaulers and horse trailers with living quarters are a grey area up here. A trailer intended for carrying a car, or motorcycles or horses, that happens to have living quarters, isn't always considered an RV up here. RV's get all sorts of exemptions. My bus is exempt from annual inspections, for example, even though if it was still a bus and not an RV it would be required, along with real monthly chassis inspections with paperwork, instead of what I do, which is take all the wheels off and inspect things every 10,000 miles or annually.
On the drivers license, if you are legal in your home state you are legal here, drivers licenses are reciprocal. Which I guess means that I have the equivalent of a CDL commercial license in the US. I have to rewrite the air brake test every three years, but I don't need a medical for my D license. If I upgrade to a C (commercial buses), B (school buses) or A (tractor trailer, trailer over 10K lbs) I would need medicals I think every three years.
Brian
Quote from: Lin on May 19, 2010, 01:22:04 PM
Brian,
Interesting info on Canada DOT. In the US, you can drive any RV with a mere standard license. Would we be in violation of Canadian law if we cross over there? Also, it would seem that we would need your approved chains on our toads. What do approved safety chains look like?
In SC, if your RV is over 26,000 lbs, you are required to have a special license class above the standard one required for a car, but not quite a CDL tho.
Kyle,
Even though it would really make sense to require a higher skill license to drive these things (I always joke that it is a good thing the vehicles around me don't know how dangerous I am), I have not gotten one. Would SC expect compliance from out-of-staters?
Brian,
If it is only the S-hook that is the issue, couldn't one just add a shackle to be legal. I currently have safety cables that has S-hooks with a slip-on, rubber retainer to keep them in place. I am not 100% confident in them anyway, so I may want to shackle them.
It depends on what you call a shackle. the links that you get with a threaded nut to close the loop are not approved for trailer chain use from what I've been told. It's more that they aren't rated for a specific weight than any thing else, the hooks and chains have to be rated for the weight of the trailer. What I buy are forged hooks that have a spring loaded closure, I attach them to the chain with a bolt. Here, called clevis slip hooks http://www.ontheball.com/chains.htm (http://www.ontheball.com/chains.htm) I buy the grade 70 ones. If nothing else the plating is better, they don't rust as quick, and it's not like they are expensive.
Now, this info is from trailer manufacturers local to my house (there are two or three that I talked to when buying a light landscaping trailer a few years ago) and a couple of people that got tickets for different things. Not exactly the ideal source for accurate information. I think that depending on the weight of the trailer, under 2000 lbs is still ok with the S-hook with no closure.
Brian
The issue with fastening devices and load security in general moving forward is a displayed rating.
If it does not have a classification or rating of some sort, it has become junk in the eyes of the commercial world.
Reputable manufacturers have been moving to imprinting on their product for many years now. Even the small ratchet tie downs are starting to come with labels.
Safety chains and all their hardware need to match the rest of the towing system and the weight of the towed stuff.
For instance, 1/4 chain with those 1500 lb wind up "C" loops does not cut it on a 5000 lb hitch system. Using an unmarked bolt and nut (maybe grade 3?) to fasten those chains to the drawbar... you get the drift.
For a little more, get your towing hardware at the commercial supplier, not at the big box store. The enforcement types will take one look, be somewhat surprised to see the familiar stuff, compliment you and send you on your way.
happy coaching!
buswarrior
Quote from: Lin on May 19, 2010, 02:03:53 PM
Kyle,
. . . . Would SC expect compliance from out-of-staters?
Usually, SC will defer to the visitor's home state requirements.
QuoteIn state or federal parks it is not legal to have a gun on board period, no matter how secured or removed from its ammo.
Carry with pride my friends:
Right-to-Carry Takes Effect In National Parks (http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=5488&issue=)
National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.