This photo provides a clue about the probable reason for the demise of this drop-frame design. The lift pads are eccentrically located, the front at conventional level, the rear at least 18" lower. I think this sort of lift would be difficult to achieve, and creates an extreme tilt which could cause the load to shift. The close-to-the-ground position of the rear may have also caused it to snag at some circus ramps. In any event, the increasing prevalence of mechanized ramps rendered the design impractical. In contrast, the UPS drop-frame van had a tandem well at conventional height (with full-size wheels) which is where the rear lift pad engaged, so the trailer could be lifted without a tilt. The incompatibility of the UPS design with palletized loads made it unique to the parcel carrier. Paul B From: Mike Oravec <MOEL_@_paonline.com> Subject: Re: (erielack) ELZ 200052 NOTE: This message had contained at least one image attachment. To view or download the image(s), click on or cut and paste the following URL into your web browser: http://lists.railfan.net/listthumb.cgi?erielack-01-04-09 B_O_Gindy_HiCube.jpg (image/jpeg, 800x510 114795 bytes, BF: 3.55 ppb) Some further notes on this HiCube Van. Here is B&O's version of essentially the same Gindy HiCube. They leased theirs from REAZ. The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List http://EL-List.railfan.net/ To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html ------------------------------
This HTML page is © 2000-2009 Blue Moon Online System and The Railfan Network
This page and the data contained therein may not be reproduced
for any form of commercial use without the explicit permission
of J. Henry Priebe Jr. or his duly authorized agent.