kscarbel2

Owner/Driver / October 20, 2016 After narrowly avoiding an accident jillaroo Jess Edwards made a Facebook video reminding drivers not to overtake turning trucks. Over one million people have seen the video Outback jillaroo Jess Edwards made headlines this month when her impromptu Facebook video about truck safety went viral. Jess is assistant manager at a cattle station in the Pilbara, Western Australia, and drove a three-trailer road train during the mustering season from June to September. She loves the Outback scenery she sees from the 2012 Kenworth T659. But she is always conscious that truck driving is "one of the most dangerous jobs in the world". Recently a 4WD attempted to overtake Jess on her left as she was turning left. Pumping with adrenaline after the near-miss, she pulled the Kenworth into a farm gateway to collect her thoughts. Before her heart rate returned to normal she pressed record on her mobile phone to make a video of what she would have told the 4WD driver if he or she hadn’t continued along the North West Coastal Highway without so much as an apologetic wave. To Jess’s amazement, support from her Facebook followers and the trucking community helped the two-minute video go viral. It has been viewed more than a million times. In the video, Jess shows us the "bloody big whoppin’ tyre" and "bloody big whoppin’ bull bar" and assures us we don’t want to be hit by either of them. Then she kneels down at the back of the trailer. "I don’t know how they do it but these things – indicators – magically show you where we’re going to go," she says in a Play School voice, reminding cars not to overtake turning vehicles. Jess uploaded the video to her Jillaroo Jess Facebook page and was amazed by the response from truckies and their families. "They loved it. I think they were happy to hear someone standing up for them." You can see the video here and follow Jess’s adventures on her Jillaroo Jess Facebook page.

Prime Mover Magazine / October 18, 2016 Reflecting on six decades at the helm of one of Australia’s most successful transport businesses, Victorian trucking magnate, Lindsay Fox, has declared he would only retire when he died. According to the Herald Sun, the 79-year-old used a recent industry function at Linfox’s Australian Automotive Research Centre near Anglesea to point out he was still fit and enthusiastic about his company, which has also seen his sons David and Andrew rise to management roles. “We now have 36,000 people working for us in 11 countries,” he told the newspaper. “You look back and wonder how the hell did I do it.” When asked about his thoughts on retirement, he replied: “When I’m dead. I’m so proud of my family and the whole enterprise.” According to the Herald Sun’s Ian Royall, Fox also used the occasion to comment on infrastructure policy in Victoria. He reportedly called for the completion of a Melbourne ring road and said not enough was being done to beat gridlock. “Mr Fox said governments suffered from ‘paralysis by analysis’ and questioned why they did not seek advice from transport companies when making big decisions,” Royall summarised. “At Linfox, we do 260 million kilometres a year and are the largest payer of tolls in all of Australia – but no one from state or federal government, Labor or Liberal, spoke to us about the infrastructure of the country. It’s ludicrous,” he quoted Fox. Fox started out with one truck, a Ford F500 V8, and now has a fleet of more than 6,000 vehicles to his name. .

Have patience with electronic brake suppliers: ATA Steve Skinner, Australasian Transport News (ATN) / October 20, 2016 Trucking body warns that operators should not tamper with electronic braking and safety systems Truck owners are being warned to spare a thought for electronic braking and stability suppliers and not to muck around with the technologies. This includes changing configurations, for example. "We’re a market of fiddlers, we like playing with things, we like tampering, we all think we can do better," says the Australian Trucking Association’s Chris Loose. "But if there is an issue, go see an expert." The ATA’s senior engineering advisor was speaking at this year’s Comvec technical conference in Melbourne, organised by Heavy Vehicle Industry Australia. It was in the context of a draft guide, yet to be released, on maximising the compatibility of braking and roll stability systems between trucks and trailers. "This guide is only one level," Loose says. "The second level is where you need the Knorrs, the Wabcos, the Haldexes, the BPWs, and all those other guys to step up and look at the combinations." Loose also advises having patience with these electronic systems suppliers, because they have a tougher job in Australia than probably anywhere else in the developed world. For one thing, the incompatibility problem is going to be around for many years to come because of the slow turnover in trucks and trailers. "It’s not going to be easy to solve because our fleet age is getting older. It’s 11 ½ years for prime movers." As we constantly hear, Australia is a unique market, taking a mis-match of technologies from all over the place. "We are going to have to build up an experience base that doesn’t exist anywhere else in the world," says Loose. "We have got trucks from Europe, we have got trucks from America, we have got trucks from Japan and we have got our own home grown stuff; and we’re doing combinations that are longer and heavier. "Everything is going against them, and we are trying to do something fairly unique in this marketplace, so compatibility is not going to go away, and the guys on the ground servicing these units are going to struggle. "They’re seeing stuff that is not being seen in Europe, they’re doing stuff that’s not being done in North America, so it’s not easy, so bear with them, help them, communicate with them." Have confidence Despite the warning against tampering, Loose says most truck workshops are capable of routine servicing of electronic systems, with technology supplied by the OEMs (original equipment manufacturers). "And the key thing with any of this technology is regular service," he adds. "Seems simple, but it’s amazing the number of people that won’t actually go and check their wheel end sensors. "In particular if you’re running off road, those sensors are one of the most exposed items on the vehicle, so they will get caught, sticks will hit them, the electrical lines will be crimped, all that sort of stuff will happen and they do need regular check-ups. So after a long trip, make sure the sensors are checked. "This technology is great, but if you’re operating off road, if you’re operating remotely, you will have higher operating costs, there’s no doubt about it, but there are benefits too." Whether it’s foundation or electronic braking systems: "It seems obvious, but it doesn’t always happen, and that’s making sure that equivalent safety critical service parts are used, and this has happened time and time again, bottom line wins out." .

KrAZ Trucks displays new MRAP at Arms & Security '2016 International Exhibition Center, Kyiv (Kiev), Ukraine .

Volvo's India R&D developing trucks for global market Business Standard / October 19, 2016 India is the third biggest R&D centre for Volvo after Sweden and France in headcount Bengaluru is gaining a distinct identity on the global map of Swedish bus and truck maker Volvo. About 800 engineers, mostly Indians, are busy developing a truck the company’s Bengaluru research & development (R&D) centre that will be sold only outside India. India is the third biggest R&D centre for Volvo after Sweden and France in headcount. “We design global trucks in India. A lot of R&D work on truck technology is done here. We are very proud that India is involved in a big way there. Volvo also has an IT wing that has 1,500 people doing global IT work for the Volvo group. There is also an accounting team of 300-400 people,” said Kamal Bali, managing director, Volvo India. The R&D centre, started with 100 engineers seven years ago, can add 200 more. Volvo India forms only four or five per cent of the group’s global revenue of $42 billion, but Bali said India is much more important than this turnover. The Indian R&D team has a global responsibility to develop value segment trucks. For any value truck that is to be designed or improved, the responsibility lies with the Indian team and the product will be owned by the Indian side. “Concept to design to execution is done by the Indian team. Of course, they may take some help when it comes to engines. But, they are leading the show. Some of the products this team will do will never be sold in India,” said Bali. The Indian centre has successfully developed the Pro 8000 heavy-duty truck platform that was also launched in India (with Volvo’s JV partner Eicher) and in Indonesia and Thailand a couple of years ago. The next mandate is medium duty truck (10-15 tonnes) exclusively for the overseas market. “It will go into production next year,” said Bali. Bali said the group finds the product gap in its portfolio and decision is taken to develop new products. A particular centre is awarded the responsibility to develop a product based on competencies and past experiences. Volvo, which produces trucks, buses and construction equipment, is looking to grow India revenue from $1.5 billion to $2 billion in next couple of years. “We are going to be aggressive. India is looking very bullish and all categories will grow in double digits for us. We want to improve market share and need to grow faster than the industry,” said Bali.

The Economic Times / October 20, 2016 Swedish commercial vehicle maker Volvo AB has mandated its Indian R&D team to take the lead in developing medium duty trucks for global markets scheduled to go into production in 2017and it would be conceptualized and designed by the Bengaluru unit. “In terms of contribution to the group, we are critical because we do a lot of other jobs apart from sales. The site in India has over 800 engineers and has been entrusted with the responsibility for developing a value truck. This is a global responsibility. So any value truck which is to be designed, improved, the responsibility will lie with the Indian side,” said Kamal Bali, managing director, Volvo India. The team is currently working on a medium duty truck in the 10-15 tonne segment – positioned globally at price points between the mainstream ‘Eicher’ brand and the more premium ‘Volvo’ brand — which will be introduced in an overseas market next year. “The whole product is owned by them – from concept to design to execution is being done by the Indian team. Of course, they take help from Lyon (France) and Gothenburg (Sweden) but they are leading the team. This truck could be not for India. Some of the products this site does may not be launched in India,” Bali said. The product under development in the medium duty segment will not be launched in India as JV partner Eicher, through VE Commercial Vehicles, has about 33% share in the category with its own products.

Commercial Motor / August 22, 1996 As predicted in Commercial Motor, Renault will fit the 12-litre Mack E7 engine in its European product range (CM 6-12 July 1995). The four-valve-per-cylinder E7 will make its debut at the Hanover Show next month in a Magnum and will replace the 12-litre Renault engine offered in 385 and 420 ratings. This will mean the Magnum is powered exclusively by Mack engines— the 520 and 560 Magnums use the Mack E9 16-litre vee-eight. The electronically controlled E7 is available in the US with a range of power outputs between 250hp (187kW) and 454hp (339kW). The most likely ratings for the E7-powered Mili,.111.1111S would be 4 0 0 hp (298kW) and 427hp (319kW) or 454hp (339kW). Both the higher-rated variants produce identical torque, 1,5601bft (2,115Nm) at 1,250rpm, while the 400 variant produces 1,4601bft (1,980Nm) also at 1,250rpm. The E7 weighs in at 975kg. All variants use the Mack V-MAC electronic engine management system. In addition to the listed E7 variants, the V-MAC system enables Mack to offer a range of lower-powered E7 models with enhanced torque outputs tagged the Maxidyne and Maxicruise series. These engines in the 250-350hp range are unlikely to be used this side of the Atlantic. V-MAC (Vehicle management and control system) also offers a range of engine, vehicle and fleet management functions. These include speed limiter, cruise control, self diagnostics and fault logging plus engine protection shutdown. In addition, vehicles can be fitted with V-MAC Co. Pilot, a dash-mounted data display system similar to Cummins RoadRelay. CoPilot can display a range of information including fuel consumption data, trip information, data monitored by engine sensors and faults recorded. Vehicle data can be downloaded to a PC for further analysis. .

Transport Engineer / October 19, 2016 New Horizon Logistics says its new Fuso Canter Eco Hybrid diesel-electric 7.5-tonner is returning up to 24 mpg – double that of equivalent diesel vehicles. The Warwick-based same- and next-day parcel deliveries and palletised distribution operator says it has also achieved “significant” productivity gains, thanks to the Canter 7C15’s high payload capacity. And director Craig Hutchings says his company has also won praise from some of its most important customers for its emission-busting stance. The Canter Eco Hybrid is powered by a 150bhp diesel engine working in parallel with a 40 kW (54bhp) electric motor, and has Canter’s Duonic dual-clutch automated transmission. From stationary it uses electric power only, then switches to a combination of diesel and electric once reaching 6mph. Depending on the power demand, the electric motor also supports the diesel at higher speeds, while an idle start-stop system also reduces fuel consumption. Hutchings concedes that there is some payload penalty, but adds that, because of the low weight electric motor and lithium-ion batteries (covered by a 10-year, unlimited mileage warranty), it’s just 160kg more than the diesel-powered Canter. The result is a 5.0 tonne body and payload allowance – in this case optimised by a curtainside body from JC Payne, of Walsall, fitted with a roller shutter rear door and a 1,000 kg DEL column tail-lift. “The Canter can carry cargo up to 3.3 tonnes,” states Hutchings. “That’s a major improvement on our traditional 7.5-tonners, which offer a payload of around 2.5 tonnes.” And he adds: “If the driver stays in auto we can get anything up to 24 mpg, while in manual the returns drop to around 18 or 19 mpg. By contrast, our other vehicles of the same size are doing about 12 mpg.” New Horizon Logistics’ vehicle is the subject of a CharterWay contract hire agreement from Mercedes-Benz Financial Services, and is being maintained at Midlands Truck & Van’s Coventry workshop. .

SPEED LIMITERS: OOIDA Call-To-Action urges members to contact THUD committee Land Line Magazine (OOIDA) / October 19, 2016 The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association is sending out a Call To Action urging members who oppose a proposed speed limiter mandate to contact members of the Transportation, Housing, Urban Development subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. Committee members include Republicans: Mario Diaz-Balart, Florida, chairman David Joyce, Ohio John Culberson, Texas Kevin Yoder, Kansas, vice chair David Jolly, Florida David Young, Iowa Evan Jenkins, West Virginia And Democrats: David Price, North Carolina, ranking member Mike Quigley, Illinois Tim Ryan, Ohio Henry Cuellar, Texas The Call To Action was sent out to OOIDA members who live in the subcommittee members’ Congressional districts. “On Sept. 7, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would mandate speed limiters on heavy-duty trucks. The proposed regulation seeks to require that truck manufacturers activate speed limiters at the time of manufacture and all trucks already on the road with engine control modules (ECUs) capable of restricting speed have the devices activated. “In the coming weeks, Congress will be deciding whether to include a Senate amendment passed earlier this year requiring the Secretary of Transportation to issue a final rule mandating speed limiting devices on trucks in a bill funding the Department of Transportation. At this time, OOIDA is urging our members to call their lawmakers and educate them about the real dangers of speed limiters.” OOIDA’s website, FightingForTruckers.com, has more information about the Association’s opposition to the proposal, as well as ways for truckers to contact their lawmakers via letter and oppose a mandate. The FightingForTruckers website also includes a link to a list of talking points members can reference when filing comments for NHTSA and FMCSA to consider during the rulemaking process. Drivers who currently drive or have driven speed-limited trucks are encouraged to share their personal experiences and real-world, on-the-road problems they’ve faced when using such devices. OOIDA encourages its members to submit comments via Regulations.gov at Docket FMCSA-2014-0083 or Docket NHTSA-2016-0087 (All comments received will be duly considered by the joint NHTSA and FMCSA team; comments only need to be posted to one docket). The public comment period will be open until Monday, Nov. 7. Before you start through the electronic process on the internet, be sure you have the correct Docket ID. This is how the docket management system knows what you are specifically addressing in your comments. The Docket ID identifies a regulatory action the agency is putting in the record for public view and possible comment. It contains a series of letters and numbers separated by dashes; for example, FMCSA-2014-0083 and NHTSA-2016-0087 are the dockets related to speed limiters. You can comment on one or the other. It is not necessary to submit comments to both. The dashes are critical when looking up a particular rulemaking. When you’re searching for a specific document to comment on, if you use the dashes incorrectly, or not at all, you won’t find the document you’re looking for. The following steps will walk you through finding the docket that is open for comments and into the comment process. Go to Regulations.gov: Fill in the “Search” field with the Docket ID and either hit enter or click on “Search.” On the search results page, you will see the title of the docket you want to comment on and there will be a comment icon below it. Click on the icon. The comment page will load, and all you need to do is scroll down until you see the form for you to fill in and submit your comments to the agency. You only have to fill out the field with the red asterisk beside it. All other fields are optional – so you can file comments anonymously if you want to. Once you have filled out all fields with the personal information, if you choose to provide it, and have typed your comments in the “General Comments” box, you simply scroll down and hit the “Next step” button. You will then be able to scroll down, preview your comments and either click on the “Cancel/Exit,” “Edit,” “Print” or “Submit” button. Of course, submitting comments electronically via the internet isn’t your only option. You can still: Fax comments with the Docket ID number, not the Document ID, to 202-493-2251; Mail comments with the Docket ID number, not the Document ID, to: Docket Management Facility U.S. Department of Transportation Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE Washington, DC 20590-0001 Or hand deliver comments between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday except on federal holidays to the ground floor of the U.S. Department of Transportation building, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, D.C. The Association opposes mandatory speed limiters because they are dangerous for all highway users. The federal proposal is based on unfounded data that will likely detract from highway safety. In actuality, highways are safest when all vehicles travel at the same relative speed. If you still have questions after you’ve reviewed the info at FightingForTruckers.com, feel free to call OOIDA at 800-444-5791 if you need additional assistance.

Editorial: The Speed Limiter Debate Transport Topics / October 17, 2016 It looks as if the comments on the speed-limiter proposal for heavy trucks will give the federal government plenty of reading material this winter. Nearly [a mere] 3,000 comments have already been sent in to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. And that does not include comments from many larger groups, such as American Trucking Associations, which have said they will respond prior to next month’s deadline. The proposal, published Sept. 7, does not specify a speed that could be adopted in a final rule but suggests that setting limiters at 60 mph, 65 mph or 68 mph would save lives and reduce fuel use. It also comes about a decade after ATA and other groups initially called for a mandate. When factoring the combination of the delay in issuing a proposal — and the confusion of a proposal with three separate speeds mentioned — it should be no surprise that people have not shied from sharing their opinions. “I already drive a governed company truck. It is hard to try to stay out of the way of the flow of traffic,” Christopher Rickbrodt of Riverview, Florida, wrote. “In the Western states, where some speed limits are as high as 85 mph, running at 65 mph is really dangerous to other drivers who can’t judge the closing rate. I hate to say it, but either slow everyone down or leave it alone.” Said Robert Jewett, a retired truck driver and chairman of the New Hampshire Professional Drivers Association: “I have over 42 years of commercial driving, and from what I hear and have seen is trucks at a lower speeds will be in the way of motorists, therefore causing more accidents making motorists at times take more chances.” These are not people looking for ways to cut safety corners and make a few more bucks by putting the “pedal to the metal.” The majority are truly concerned with the unintended consequences of having trucks and cars traveling at different speeds, especially when the limit on a highway is above 70 mph. All of this comes a week after ATA President Chris Spear expressed similar concerns about what he called a “flawed” proposal. It unfortunately sounds like it still will be a while before there is a final mandate. We can only hope trucking’s voice will be heard and a final mandate will reflect their serious safety concerns.

Anger Over Speed Limiters Voiced in Comments to DOT Transport Topics / October 17, 2016 Some motorists said they favor the idea of slowing trucks down on the highway, but the overwhelming majority of the nearly 3,000 comments filed thus far on a federal heavy-truck speed limiter proposal came from truckers calling it a recipe for disaster. In written comments to federal regulators, truck drivers also said the proposed requirement would cut their productivity, cause “rolling road blocks,” increase instances of road rage, create an uneven economic playing field and keep them from their families longer. The proposal, published Sept. 7 jointly by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, does not specify a speed that could be adopted in a final rule but suggests that setting limiters at 60 mph, 65 mph or 68 mph would save lives and reduce fuel use. The comment period closes Nov. 7, but the agencies are pondering extending the deadline, according to FMCSA Administrator Scott Darling. “I already drive a governed company truck. It is hard to try to stay out of the way of the flow of traffic,” wrote Christopher Rickbrodt of Riverview, Florida. “In the Western states, where some speed limits are as high as 85 mph, running at 65 mph is really dangerous to other drivers who can’t judge the closing rate. I hate to say it, but either slow everyone down or leave it alone.” The proposal requires the devices eventually would need to be capable of verification by regulators or law enforcement via onboard diagnostics. It does not require that the limiters be tamper­-proof. Earlier this month, American Trucking Associations President Chris Spear sharply criticized the proposal as “flawed,” largely because it would create differential speeds on the nation’s highways. ATA and other large associations are expected to file comments before the deadline. John Boyle of Marlton, New Jersey, said he owns and operates a fleet of about 40 Class 8 trucks and has been using speed limiters for more than 10 years. “I applaud your efforts to make the roadways safer,” Boyle wrote. “However, your selective approach to enforcement is curious. Why selectively legislate speed-reducing devices for trucks but not for cars? … Why are you only looking to limit speed on trucks when your own data clearly indicated that speeding in passenger vehicles is the more significant problem?” While there were many comments in favor of speed limiters, primarily from noncommercial motorists, most of the strong opposition came from independent operators and drivers for small companies. Robert Jewett, of Weare, New Hampshire, a retired truck driver and current chairman of the New Hampshire Professional Drivers Association, said, “I have over 42 years of commercial driving, and from what I hear and have seen is trucks at lower speeds will be in the way of motorists, therefore causing more accidents making motorists at times take more chances.” “If you’ve ever driven in Canada, where their trucks are limited to 65, you’ve seen how long it takes for one semi to pass another,” wrote Thomas Stoddard, who did not list his address. “You will have traffic backups for miles.” “I have been driving CMV’s for 44 years with 4.4 million safe miles behind me,” wrote Bob Ciaccia of Conshohocken, Pennsylvania. “When two or more speed-regulated trucks are trying to pass each other, you get a moving road block! This causes cars that are stuck in this road block to get impatient, and once the block is ended, the cars will speed up past the trucks sometimes cutting us off like they are upset.” Valerie Heinonen, of New York City, who supports the speed limiter rule, said that as a noncommercial driver she often observes speeding trucks when she travels the New England Thruway and Long Island Expressway. “Truckers, forced to speed by their customers looking for profit and cost-cutting, are at more risk when the speed limit is over 65,” Heinonen wrote. “Everyone suffers. There is no need for such high speed on public roads — people can speed at raceways!” Marc McComb, address not listed, said truck crashes cause more damage than most car crashes simply due to the mass of trucks, and that adding speed only makes things worse. “While the technology is available to prevent trucks from excess speed, it should be required on all trucks,” McComb wrote. “Truckers are trying to make a living by getting their loads to their destinations as quick as possible, making speeding abuse more likely. The chance of speeding should be taken out of the equation for the good and safety of everyone.” Eric Robertson of Olympia, Kentucky, asked why aren’t cars’ speed restricted? “A significant percentage of accidents involving commercial motor vehicles are caused by the illegal and dangerous driving of people in private, noncommercial vehicles,” Robertson wrote. “Speeding needs to be addressed in the industry, but not by governing vehicles. This will be a business killer for smaller companies and independent drivers.” An array of safety groups including Road Safe America, the Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, and the Truck Safety Coalition, said they opposed the proposed rule. “It is critical that this rule apply to all trucks on the roads, not just new trucks. Implementing a heavy-vehicle speed limiter rule that applies to all trucks equipped with the technology, including those that have it now, will enhance public safety now,” the groups wrote.

From the white star on the front and what looks to be registration numbers on the side of the hood, it appears to be Army surplus.

Cummins is warming up to reducing the depth of Cummins' U.S. engine production and bringing in product from China (TPP) and other overseas locations. NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement) was signed in 1994 between the US, Canada and Mexico. Post-Nafta, the US lost nearly 700,000 jobs, and over 60% of the lost jobs were in manufacturing. The sales pitch for NAFTA to the gullible masses was a complete fabrication, a brilliantly played out distraction from the truth. NAFTA was the idea of big business (the Bilderberg Group), a way for them to produce in low-labor-cost Mexico, and then import to the US without tariffs (which would otherwise evaporate the labor savings). I can appreciate US companies searching for a solution to rising US labor costs. But the government should craft a solution that keeps production in America. Obama feels we need an agreement like TPP, before China creates a similar agreement (first man there wins). What's the point of the WTO (World Trade Organization) membership if countries are allowed to, at the same time, bypass it and create FTAs (free trade agreements). We can only do one OR the other.......we can't have both because one short-circuits the other. If America once more has broad-based industry, again becoming the global industrial leader, the benchmark for innovation and technology, the world will once more come to purchase our goods (not just iphones).

Cummins Chairman & CEO Tom Linebarger on the benefits of the Trans-Pacific Partnership to the U.S. economy and American businesses of all sizes. .

Trade Agreements Offer Benefits for U.S. Employers and Employees The following op-ed was authored by Tom Linebarger, Chairman and CEO of Cummins Inc. and Chair of the Business Roundtable International Engagement Committee; and Mike Bertsche, the President & CEO of Camcraft. After years of negotiations, the 12-nation trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership is facing its toughest challenge yet: election-year politics. The fact is, TPP and U.S. trade agreements overall, offer tremendous benefits for U.S. employers and employees alike. Consider a few numbers: trade-related jobs grew 3.1 times faster than overall employment between 2004 and 2014, and nearly half of all U.S. goods exports to the world in 2014 went to just the 20 countries that the United States has free trade agreements with. Unfortunately, the facts are being distorted by rhetoric on the presidential campaign trail, with candidates alleging that U.S. trade agreements like NAFTA have suppressed wages and cost American jobs. In fact, U.S. trade with NAFTA partners Canada and Mexico supports nearly 14 million U.S. jobs, according to a U.S. Chamber of Commerce study. Moreover, contrary to the campaign rhetoric, U.S. jobs tied to trade also pay more than other jobs. According to a report by the Commerce Department, manufacturing jobs pay 18% more on average when tied to exports. The report also notes that foreign tariffs — like those TPP will eliminate — reduce the earnings of U.S. workers by as much as 12%. We have to put politics aside and recognize TPP as an opportunity to support U.S. economic growth and high-quality American jobs. The agreement will create opportunities to sell more U.S. goods and services to 11 Asia-Pacific countries. This region is already critical to America’s exports: TPP nations accounted for some 45% of all U.S. exported goods in 2014. All told, TPP will eliminate more than 18,000 foreign tariffs on U.S. goods, opening markets to U.S. export growth. And because five TPP countries currently lack trade agreements with the United States, the deal will also open entirely new markets for American firms. Just as important, the trade pact will put in place strong, enforceable rules for fair trade that actually improve on NAFTA and other past U.S. trade agreements. TPP is the first modern trade agreement that addresses the realities of our interconnected global marketplace. For example, it will establish intellectual property protections for American companies and inventors and raise foreign labor and environmental standards. It also will discourage other countries from using government procurement and state-owned companies to put American firms and workers at a disadvantage. In short, TPP will open access to millions of customers for U.S. goods and services while boosting foreign investment throughout the United States. The resulting U.S. exports and international investment here will expand U.S. economic growth and jobs. To understand how trade supports companies of all sizes, consider the relationship between our two companies. Headquartered in Columbus, Indiana, Cummins’ 25,000 U.S. employees design, manufacture and distribute engines and related products that are powered by diesel and natural gas. In 2014, we exported approximately $3 billion in U.S.-made products. These foreign sales don’t just benefit Cummins and its U.S. employees; they also help our 2,500 domestic suppliers, such as Camcraft. Camcraft is a small company based in Illinois. Its 330 employees manufacture high-precision components used in Cummins engines. As leaders of manufacturing companies large and small, we know how important trade and U.S. trade agreements like TPP are to the success of our companies and to businesses and farms across the United States. The relationship between our two companies shows how exports ripple through the U.S. economy in a supply chain generating billions of dollars in revenue and thousands of jobs. Previous U.S. trade pacts offer evidence: America’s current trade partners purchase 13 times as many U.S. goods per capita than countries with which we don’t have trade agreements. Those purchases support U.S. jobs. When Congress takes up TPP, members should look beyond the divisive campaign rhetoric and seize the opportunity to support growth and jobs in their home states. By approving TPP this year, Congress will enable American workers, businesses and farmers to sell more in international markets — reaping the benefits before our foreign competitors do. Editor’s Note: The op-ed above also appeared in the following publications The Indianapolis Star – Trans-Pacific Partnership is good for U.S. workers The New York Daily News – TPP is good for American manufacturers and the people they employ The Post and Courier – Election Rehtoric Sells Trade Agreements Short

Navistar Extends Engine Supply Agreement with Power Solutions International School Bus Fleet / October 19, 2016 Navistar has extended its engine supply agreement with alternative-fuel power systems supplier Power Solutions International Inc. (PSI) to run through 2021. The agreement, originally set to run through 2018, covers PSI's supply of 8.8-liter propane and gasoline engines for Navistar's subsidiary, IC Bus. "We're very excited that Navistar has chosen to extend our supply agreement well into the future," said Gary Winemaster, PSI's chairman and CEO. "We look forward to a long and successful partnership as bus fleets and local school districts continue to embrace the growing market trend towards alternatives to diesel engines." Navistar began partnering with PSI in 2014 in an effort to expand its IC Bus product line with alternative-fuel offerings to meet growing market demand. In November 2014, IC Bus launched its PSI-powered, CE Series Type C propane school bus at the National Association for Pupil Transportation (NAPT) Summit in Kansas City, Missouri. Since production started, IC Bus has over 450 in-service units powered by PSI's propane engine, according to PSI. Deliveries of note include 149 buses to Waterbury (Conn.) Public Schools and 100 buses to Indianapolis Public Schools. Additionally, 63 buses have been operating in Tuscaloosa (Ala.) City Schools since early 2016. "We are mindful of the many operational needs of our school bus customers and we take pride in offering them powertrain options that meet those needs while delivering on our promise to build reliable, safe, and efficient buses," said Persio Lisboa, president of operations at Navistar. "We are excited to continue our partnership with PSI in providing high-performance, alternative-fuel engines in our buses." In July, IC Bus showcased a PSI-powered, CE Series Type C gasoline school bus at the School Transportation News (STN) Expo in Reno, Nevada. The gasoline-powered CE will also be on display at the upcoming NAPT trade show in Kansas City, Missouri, on Nov. 8. Full-scale production of the CE gasoline school bus will be announced at a later date. Both school bus models are powered by customized PSI 8.8-liter engines, designed to deliver diesel-like performance and drivability with savings on fuel and maintenance, according to PSI.

Chicago Daily Herald / October 19, 2016 Navistar has extended its engine supply agreement with Power Solutions International to run through 2021. The agreement, originally set to run through 2018, covers PSI's supply of 8.8-liter propane and gasoline engines for Navistar's subsidiary, IC Bus. "We're very excited that Navistar has chosen to extend our supply agreement well into the future," said Gary Winemaster, PSI's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. "The decision not only demonstrates the strength of our relationship, but also the satisfaction and confidence Navistar has in our ability to deliver high-performance products that help them achieve their strategic goals. "We look forward to a long and successful partnership as bus fleets and local school districts continue to embrace the growing market trend towards alternatives to diesel engines," he added. Lisle-based Navistar began partnering with PSI in 2014 in order to expand its IC Bus product line with alternative-fuel offerings to meet growing market demand. In November of that year, IC Bus launched its PSI-powered, CE Series Type C propane school bus at the National Association for Pupil Transportation Summit in Kansas City, MO. Since production started, IC Bus has over 450 in service units powered by PSI's propane engine. Significant deliveries include 149 buses to Waterbury Public Schools in Waterbury, CT, 100 buses to Indianapolis Public Schools in Indianapolis and 63 have been operating in Tuscaloosa City Schools since early 2016. "We are mindful of the many operational needs of our school bus customers and we take pride in offering them powertrain options that meet those needs while delivering on our promise to build reliable, safe and efficient buses," said Persio Lisboa, Navistar president of operations. "We are excited to continue our partnership with PSI in providing high-performance, alternative fuel engines in our buses."

Medium-Duty Orders Rise 19% in September Heavy Duty Trucking / October 18, 2016 Customers ordered 20,400 medium-duty vehicles in Classes 5 to 7 in September, which represents a 19% increase from August. Medium-duty ordering strength continues in contrast with a softening Class 8 market, which booked 13,900 units during the same period. Analyst say that because of its limited exposure to the freight economy, the Classes 5-7 market continues to distinguish itself from the Class 8 market. Rising 2% year-to-date, medium duty net orders are exemplifying the solid, sustainable growth that has been typical of the consumer during this economic cycle. .

Fleet Owner / October 19, 2016 Meritor announced an expansion of its wheel-end portfolio to include Opti-Lite brake drums. The Opti-Lite drum is designed for linehaul and weight-sensitive applications such as tanker/trailer and freight. “Developed on the same platform as our established STEELite X30 brake drums, the Opti-Lite drum maintains the high quality associated with its genuine product heritage and offers similar weight and fuel savings,” said David Reid, senior product manager, aftermarket for Meritor. “The lower price of the Opti-Lite will appeal to customers in search of an economical drum option produced in the United States.” “Opti-Lite drums do not require welded-on weights and offer an optimized balance spec for smoother performance on the road,” Reid added. For ease of identification and ordering, the Opti-Lite brake drums will carry the same base nomenclature as the genuine STEELite X30 offering with the number 50 included as a prefix for product clarification. The prefix 50 is associated with all Opti-Lite series part numbers. Opti-Lite brake drums are covered by Meritor’s standard aftermarket warranty. For more information about the drums and specification details, visit Literature on Demand on meritor.com and search for publication number SP-16169. .

Transport Topics / October 19, 2016 Josh Switkes, President and CEO of Mountain View, California-based truck platooning system designer Peleton Technology, talks about the concept. . .

Navistar Simplifies Core Exchange Process Management Heavy Duty Trucking / October 19, 2016 Navistar has launched the Core Advantage Program, which is designed to help fleet owners reduce costs by helping them manage their core and remanufacturing activity. Through new tools like the Navistar Core Management System software, fleets can streamline the process of tracking the turning in of used cores, such as engine blocks. “Core [return] is a key part of the business and the Core Advantage Program demonstrates our commitment to provide the best tools in the industry for our fleet customers and help them reduce their operating costs,” said Joel Larsen, vice president, parts product management, Navistar. “The program will increase our product and service offerings, including Navistar’s private label brand Fleetrite parts and our OnCommand suite of value-added services. A good ‘core return’ program is key to a successful ‘reman’ program.” Cores are employed to remanufacture a returned part and restore it to a “like new” condition. Remanufactured parts have the features and functionality of a new part and come with a warranty. Navistar said that with its Core Advantage Program, fleets can have an account number and location codes within CMS, allowing it to see and run reports on purchases, return history, core eligibility, and core fallout rates across multiple locations. Fleet owners can use the system to answer questions that include: Which locations have the most fallout? Are we buying the correct part? Which core eligibility will expire soon? “The Core Advantage Program was built and designed by Eddie Wessler and his team, who run Navistar’s core operations and have over 100 years of combined experience in remanufacturing and core,” said Chintan Sopariwala, general manager of core and remanufacturing operations, Navistar. “The whole idea is to reduce the burden of managing cores for our customers." To learn more about this program, fleets can contact Navistar Core Operations at 1-800-758-3771 or email corecustomerservice@navistar.com.

Fleet Owner / October 19, 2016 Navistar announced the launch of the Core Advantage Program, a new approach for core life cycle management. The Core Advantage Program helps fleet owners reduce their overall costs by helping them to manage their core and remanufacturing activity through new tools like the Navistar proprietary software Core Management System (CMS), Navistar said. Cores are used or failed parts that have been returned by the customer at the end of its product life. “Core is a key part of the business and the Core Advantage Program demonstrates our commitment to provide the best tools in the industry for our fleet customers and help them reduce their operating costs,” said Joel Larsen, vice president, Parts Product Management, Navistar. “The program will increase our product and service offerings, including Navistar’s private label brand Fleetrite parts and our OnCommand suite of value-added services. A good ‘core return’ program is key to a successful ‘reman’ program.” Cores are employed to remanufacture a returned part and restore it to “like new” condition. Remanufactured parts carry the same features and functionality as new parts and come with the same warranty. “Remanufacturing is great for the environment and great for business,” said Chintan Sopariwala, general manager of Core and Remanufacturing Operations, Navistar. “Remanufactured parts offer a low cost alternative to new parts without sacrificing on product quality or warranty. Last year alone, Navistar recycled over 70 million pounds of used truck components and we have even more aggressive plans to increase this number.” With the new Core Advantage Program, fleets can now have their own account number and location codes within CMS, which streamlines their ability to see and run reports on purchases, return history, core eligibility and core fallout rates across multiple locations, according to Navistar. Estes Express Lines Parts Manager Jim Cliborne, who was part of the pilot program, added, “The new program from Navistar has worked well for us. It’s been instrumental in increasing recovery on end-of-life trucks and reducing our maintenance costs.” Sopariwala added, “The Core Advantage Program was built and designed by Eddie Wessler and his team, who run Navistar’s core operations and have over 100 years of combined experience in remanufacturing and core. The whole idea is to reduce the burden of managing cores for our customers and the Core Advantage Program does just that.” Under this new program, Navistar will also work with fleets and end customers to help manage end of life, wrecked trucks, buses and surplus components. To learn more about this program, fleets can contact Navistar Core Operations at 1-800-758-3771 or email corecustomerservice@navistar.com. .

I agree, if it's a glider kit. Do you have the MH's model and serial number?

Merriam-Webster defines the word arrogance as the "the demeanor of people at Caterpillar, Allison and Paccar".