b101uk

If it’s a agri tractor (on the logbook) and because it legality exceeds 20mph (like Fastrac) it would be category “F” BUT you would have to be >17 with a category “B” pass due to the restrictions in place for with category “F” if you have NO category “B“, there is also a school of thought that says 18 or 21 because of the speed element because they are referred to as class 2 tractor (high speed). If its down as an agricultural machine that is NOT an agricultural tractor on the logbook then if its <3500kg it is 17 with a category “B”, if its <7500kg its 18 with a category “B” and if its >7500kg it is 21 with a category “B” (also hence the school of thought above) FYI: what it says on the tax disk “agri machine” is the main class that ALL agricultural machinery vehicles are taxed under, the logbook gives the sub-class like “agri tractor” or other which is what counts with respect to driver licensing. Also bear in mind you also have a duty of care to employees not to let them drive things they have insufficient training or capability to operate this included knowing the laws of the road in respect to vehicles of specific weights, widths, lengths, projections etc. Also if it ever gets stopped and VOSA view its USE as NOT being agricultural, horticultural or forestry task then the driver WILL require a category “C1” (<7500kg) or “C” (>7500kg) in order for them to avoid prosecution for not having the correct driving licence category, a category “+E” for “C1 or C” would then be required for trailers which them selves could move a vehicle out of “C1” into “C+E”, there for what the driver says when stopped can mean the difference between VOSA letting you on your way and VOSA dragging both the driver and yourself as the vehicle owner threw court.

Its like the people who somehow think that willow wont burn

I have pushed over a few trees like that, though you have to be extremely dumb to have forks etc on yet alone have them either side of the tree!

The Xerion are a good tractor but unless your on a ring-fenced UK farm they will be close to being a waste of time if you or your drivers want to stay within the law on the road because of the UK 24390kg GTW, so by the time you have hung a Xerion sized implement off the back and ballasted it up you are well over the 24390kg GTW/GVW, or if you want to tow a trailer and the Xerion has all its weights removed your still left with a pitiful payload, as we just don’t have the 40000kg+ GTW that the Germans can have on the roads. Also dependent on tyre/wheel equipment fitted (overall width) you may well require police notification or need a letter of dispensation from the abnormal load officer in each force district you wish to use it on the road within (which can be refused which means you would have to appeal to the secretary of state for transport!)

correct if you don’t have an ALB/s valve. BUT if you have ALB/s valve like most lorry & trailer air brake/air over systems then brake force ramps up with weight, hence maximum braking force is available threw the payload range.

In a word, no. Your MB-Trac shares its brake system with mogs, same callipers/disks, you also have the added advantage of your brakes being much easer and cheaper to service being external and easer to visually check I would imagine you notice very little difference in stopping distance between the unit on its own, the unit and trailer empty or fully loaded if everything is working correctly?

anyone connected with that should be given a clip around the ear, handed there P45 then swiftly given a good kick up the arse out the door.

Stump grinders are all well and good, but if you need to do a proper job that requires no maintenance after you have left then you have got to bring soil onto the site to replace the same volume as the stump was anyway and take away the mulched remnants of the stump, or it rots away causing the ground to drop ware the stump was after 6 months to 1 years requiring further maintenance, especially in the case of formal lawns etc. There is no point in proclaiming stump grinders to be the total all in one “silver bullet” and it can sometimes be quicker, easer and less messy with a digger.

I don’t

you can beg to differ all you like, I was quite specific in the type of trailer axel and brake type etc, you then have the rest of the farmer etc running trailers doing 40kph & 50kph+ with oil brakes on there trailers WHICH IS THE PROBLEM. the fact remains that the tractors to which you refer are deficient in braking anyway and lack fail-safes, the >25% braking efficiency required by law only apply to tractors and trailer etc used beneath 20mph, if it is used above 20mph it is a minimum of >50% braking efficiency is required, but all the regular tractors with 40kph or 50kph road gears DON’T meet the 50% criteria so even with an air braked trailer that manages 50% braking force the brakes on the tractor still end up getting shot that way as they cannot cope with the speed and don’t do there part in matching the trailers braking force - deficient trailer brakes will cause excess ware on tractor brakes, like wise deficient tractor brakes and correctly working trailer brakes will cause excess ware on tractor brakes. also if I recall from the test they were all oil braked trailers and if you read the txt within it even though they were “properly specced trailers” as far as the farmer etc was concerned in most cases they left the factory with the wrong brake pipes on contributing to significant brake lag or had brakes fitted that were on the small side so even when new brake parts were fitted and correctly adjusted and the correct brake pipes fitted by VOSA mechanics they were still not able to meet the 25% minimum efficiency!

In most cases of farming with modern equipment its not the trailer with fail-safe twin line air brakes, suspension on every axel/wheel and 80kph >50% efficiency brakes holding things back from a legal point of view, it’s the piece of crap you attach at the front that tows the trailer that’s holding things back!

the manufacturing rights etc for the MB-trac were sold to "Werner Forst und Industrietechnik" who were the people who made all the Werner winches and forestry equipment who were/are one of the official suppliers of preferred equipment for MB-Trac and Unimog. The MB-trac became the WF-trac of which the early ones looked just like MB-Trac though they normally had all the forestry guarding and which etc as they were mostly sold into forestry or for utility/line work, the new WF-Trac has moved on a bit but ist still mainly for forestry. werner-trier.com - WF-Trac Merc still make most of the parts for MB-Trac given there are lots of them in full time use around the EU.

the rear axel was fixed on most MB-Trac so lacked rear suspension. However it was the Unimog that was technically the first as it started out as a tractor for German farmers post WW2, given they couldn’t afford both a tractor and a car or a lorry hence the Unimog, it only went into production because it was granteed that they wouldn’t be put into military production which is why the earliest ones from late 1947 had 3pt linkage and PTO’s, because of there speed they always conformed to suitable regulations as per lorries of there day.

towed or tracked?

true, but you would still have the same idiots doing in excess of 20mph which is ware it ALL falls apart with normal tractors - they are NOT by any stretch of the imagination safe above 20mph with big loaded trailers or implements behind them, they often don’t have the required minimum weight on the front axel, if you lose hydraulics you lose both steering and hydraulic brakes and in some cases servo boost on the tractors brakes, if you stall on a hill you have then just lost the trailer brakes and effective steering so hopefully the tractors brakes will hold, tractors for the most part are totally devoid of failsafe which every car or truck and most other forms of transport have if they exceeded the magic 20mph. If they were to attach speed limiters to all the tractors restricted by law to 20mph then it would be very little problem to implement higher GTW wile making things much safer than they are now just with the addition of the speed limiter.

Have you ever thought that most people don’t want anything to do with self appointing tin pot organisations that proclaimed to represent XYZ group merely for the lining of there own pockets wile hiding behind the guise of being a charity who then imply anyone who is not in there group is somehow “substandard” wile also implying any one in there little group is somehow whiter than white because we have audited them. PS: I like the picture of the arb related roadwork’s, to my non Arboricultural Association approved eye it looks wrong, unsafe and there appears to be a lack of 3-way traffic lights or suitable number of persons directing traffic, yet it seams good enough to put in your literature to somehow depict what paragons of safety etc you are.

that would have to be one of the jokers used as a wildcard

But then if the marines had some backbone they would have said that the injuries to the assailant happened as a result of them restraining him and individual to had already stabbed one of them and was posing a risk to the others and members of the public. As it stands, saying it was a result of slipping and falling off the curb smacks of something to hide and that the marines as well as the police involved had something to hide which would indicate an inappropriate amount of force, it also brings into question the rest of the story because if lies are tolerated then who is to say that the shop employee didn’t secrete the laptop as a plausible excuse for the marines given the marines & the police have potentially lied and concocted a story of slipping and falling off the curb. After all what US court is going to convict 4 marines who were collecting toys for tots minding there own business when suddenly one of them gets stabbed by a knife wielding assailant fleeing from a shop which they then grab and throw to the ground face down and hold in arm and leg locks for the safety of themselves and the wider public until the police arrive, had they have used that story not a single question would be raised about the facts nor their or the polices honesty would be impugned and the perpetrator would have almost certainly been convicted.

A dangerous tree in a public place (or place in proximity to people/property) then “wildlife” obviously take second place to the safety of life and the limitation of liabilities.

yes but the fault lays with you should you hit anyone wile your braking the law going threw a red light, just the same as if you overtake with your blue lights on and hit an oncoming vehicle/person, or enter an island and hit someone because you failed to give way or fail to stop at a stop sign or force someone to stop or take evasive action to avoid you. So don’t lose sight of the fact that the buck stops with you as the driver every time you contravene traffic law.

£16 Get your self to the garage

if he climbs or NOT height is still the definitive risk even if you omit "higher for you to fall, higher for you saw to fall" wood can still fall out of a trees from high up even if your just felling if from the ground

yes but we all know so that’s because the training provider makes more money that way, but in the grand scheme of things height affects risk more, more exposed to wind, higher for bits of wood to fall so have more energy, higher for you to fall, higher for you saw to fall, etc, etc ergo more risk, going by hight automatically encapsulates tall trees with thin trunks and tall trees with big fat trunks.

45lb/ft or ~61Nm for TW150 i will think you may find