Expedite With Tractor and Pup Trailer?

[jmlaber]

Has any company thought about expediting with a tractor and short trailer? It seems to me that this would offer some advantages over a straight truck, such as larger/heaver loads, and letting solo drivers prosper since they could drive 500 miles and then swap the trailer to another driver. I know it would be more difficult to drive than a S/T, but easier than pulling a 53 foot trailer. Anyone have any thoughts on doing this as an independent since no companies offer it?
Justin

 

[paullud]

Why wouldn't they just use a 53 foot trailer like Panther? It offers more opportunities than a pup trailer and both face the same regulations.

 

[Monty]

Justin, I proposed just this set up to Landstar, they seemed to think it was "doable", it would just be classified as "D" unit. Even though it would have a minimum of 3 axles and could possibly haul some heavier freight.

I seriously considered doing it with the tractor I had, but decided to do the van thing instead with a Sprinter.

 

[zorry]

Fedex is doing it now.

 

[jmlaber]

Pallud, I would want to do it because I don't want to pull a 53 foot trailer. I tried that, I never got comfortable with that size equipment.
Zorry, are you sure about that? I can't find any info on their website. Would I have to call their recruiters to find out?

 

[Rocketman]

The thing is, in order for it to work as you say, it would almost have to be a carrier level endeavor. The carrier would need to own the trailers. It wouldn't be practical for o/o's to be supplying trailers where they would have turn their trailer over to somebody else at the swap and then pull the other guy's trailer. It could take months before you actually get back under your own trailer...then it's just until another swap.

I personally like the idea of swapping trailers with expedite freight and I think that one day it may be the answer, especially for cross country loads. The problem is...as has been mentioned... I think the carriers would do it with 53'ers, not pups.

Panther and ABF could do it pretty easy. Just start putting tractors under some empty pups and expedite!

 

[paullud]

Pallud, I would want to do it because I don't want to pull a 53 foot trailer. I tried that, I never got comfortable with that size equipment.
Zorry, are you sure about that? I can't find any info on their website. Would I have to call their recruiters to find out?

It just takes a little time to adjust, once you get experience the confidence follows. The pup trailers are used by FedEx, UPS, and ABF now but if you think 53 feet is to much try pulling doubles or triples. A straight truck would be a better option than a pup trailer for an individual.

 

[usafk9]

Pallud, I would want to do it because I don't want to pull a 53 foot trailer. I tried that, I never got comfortable with that size equipment.
Zorry, are you sure about that? I can't find any info on their website. Would I have to call their recruiters to find out?

Zorry's right. Last info I received was there were 26 remaining trailers (yet to be used) parked in Green. Best bet IS to call a recruiter.I believe the intended idea was lower cost of entry to do "D" sized work.....used tractor versus used straight.

Good question.

 

[jjoerger]

Are those pup trailers or 53's?
Reefer or dry box?

Sent from my EVO using EO Forums

 

[zorry]

Dry box. Freight has an abundance of pups. They scrapped FREIGHT off the side and cut them loose.
Hopefully they'll haul large LTL shipments.

 

[Bruno]

This is nothing new, back in the Roberts Express days there was a team that owned a pup trailer and used it for years as a D unit. I would always see them over at the Flying J in Indianapolis and they said did great pulling a pup trailer.

 

[Moot]

Panther and ABF could do it pretty easy. Just start putting tractors under some empty pups and expedite!

I ran that by the Director of Operations at Con-Way Now after dinner at the annual meeting. He made some mumbling noises, snorted and changed the subject. I never got a chance to explain my idea.

Pups in addition to D units would allow for solo drivers to swap trailers, no need to crossdock and break a shippers seal. Con-Way had the trailers, although the trailers were not air ride. Swaps could be done almost anywhere, similar to their LTL meet and turns.

 

[Rocketman]

I ran that by the Director of Operations at Con-Way Now after dinner at the annual meeting. He made some mumbling noises, snorted and changed the subject. I never got a chance to explain my idea.

Pups in addition to D units would allow for solo drivers to swap trailers, no need to crossdock and break a shippers seal. Con-Way had the trailers, although the trailers were not air ride. Swaps could be done almost anywhere, similar to their LTL meet and turns.

I've always thought this was where the expedite industry as a whole made a wrong turn. I see lots and lots of advantages to it myself.

 

[TeamCaffee]

The pups are in a beta test with FXCC. They are 28' dry boxes pulled by T/T and there are few on the road now testing. Time will tell how this works out for the O/O as well as FXCC.

It is not at all what you remember Bruno with that team and I believe there had been a couple teams pull pups that were called D's.

 

[Moot]

Time will tell how this works out for the O/O as well as FXCC.

I believe it should work out well for both the company and the O/Os. Companies wouldn't have to rely so heavily on teams. Class 8 tractors are cheaper than a class 8 straights and more plentiful on the used market. FedEx has the terminals for securely storing and staging trailers. If this works for FedEx, they could even do the refer thing.

 

[layoutshooter]

I believe it should work out well for both the company and the O/Os. Companies wouldn't have to rely so heavily on teams. Class 8 tractors are cheaper than a class 8 straights and more plentiful on the used market. FedEx has the terminals for securely storing and staging trailers. If this works for FedEx, they could even do the refer thing.

Not sure how this would work with secure loads. Each switch is a security risk. Many reefer loads are secure loads. They would still require teams unless there was not going to be a refuel. That end of the business is a bit different. I could still see some advantage to a pup as a "D" unit, even a reefer.

 

[Bruno]

It is not at all what you remember Bruno with that team and I believe there had been a couple teams pull pups that were called D's.

I wasn't sure on how many there was, but the first one I seen was around 1996. Those were the days back then.

 

[Rocketman]

Not sure how this would work with secure loads. Each switch is a security risk. Many reefer loads are secure loads. They would still require teams unless there was not going to be a refuel. That end of the business is a bit different. I could still see some advantage to a pup as a "D" unit, even a reefer.

It would be just as secure as any team load... if that team stops for any reason. There are always going to be two people there and they will both be in on duty status, so both are actually "watching" the secure load. The swap trailer...the empty one... doesn't require guarding, so the secure load could easily have at least one set of eyes on it at all times...same difference.

 

[layoutshooter]

It would be just as secure as any team load... if that team stops for any reason. There are always going to be two people there and they will both be in on duty status, so both are actually "watching" the secure load. The swap trailer...the empty one... doesn't require guarding, so the secure load could easily have at least one set of eyes on it at all times...same difference.

I guess I am used to a much higher level of security. My concern is swapping teams in route. Every swap is a security risk. Once loaded and hooked to a tractor it should ALWAYS remain on that tractor barring an emergency or breakdown. It was not allowed on our shipments when I worked with the government. Too big a security risk.

The rest would be the same as you say.

 

[Rocketman]

I guess I am used to a much higher level of security. My concern is swapping teams in route. Every swap is a security risk. Once loaded and hooked to a tractor it should ALWAYS remain on that tractor barring an emergency or breakdown. It was not allowed on our shipments when I worked with the government. Too big a security risk.

The rest would be the same as you say.

I guess I don't understand...other than the actual swapping, the security would be the same ....given equal training. I guess it could be a risk at the moment that there is no tractor under the trailer. In a swap, that would be a very, very short time though. With a company the size of fedex or any of the other LTL carriers, they could easily do the swap at a company facility.

I just see it as very "do-able". I had not actually considered secure loads. Regular surface freight doesn't see as much of that. But, if they wanted it to happen with secure loads too, I believe it could.