Copyright © 2001 FleetWatch magazine and FleetWatch On-Line.

No part of this publication may be reproduced without the prior written permission from the publishers. Views published are not necessarily those of the publishers.

Come out of those 'technical' pigeon-holes

I recently received a letter from Paul van Heerden, GM, trailer products for Meritor Automotive which spurred some interesting thoughts. He started off by commending FleetWatch on Dave Scott's article on diesel fuels and then went on to point out that when he first started reading FleetWatch, the angle of the magazine was very much an issue related publication which, being a technical person, did not really interest him. "However, I see that you are now including technical issues such as fuel, overloading and weight saving. There is so much scope here on the technical side," he wrote.

While I'm thrilled FleetWatch is getting the 'technical boffins' interested in the subjects we carry, I must point out that there are also 'issues' surrounding technical subjects that need addressing. It burns me that anything not involving a slide-rule or some form of measuring instrument is of little concern to the technical people. My challenge to the 'technical' people is to step aside from the drawing board, open the mind and see the issues that need addressing in your field.

Take overloading as one example mentioned by Van Heerden. An 'issue' which fully embraces 'technical' input revolves around the question of whether or not overloading damages trucks. We know it damages roads but does it damage trucks - and to what extent? And where is the voice of the engineer or 'technical' man on the question: Are brakes designed for the overloads being carried or do we have an irresponsible road safety risk being propagated here? Aaah! Silence is golden! Not in this case, however. It is tacit consent. Let's hear from the engineers on this one. You've designed the brakes now tell us if they're being used within the design parameters.

I point to fuel as another example: the technical side is what we carried in the edition to which Van Heerden refers, namely, facts and fiction surrounding diesel. The issue side of fuel is, for example, the mixing of paraffin with diesel to effect cost savings. On this issue, the 'engineering/technical' types have been conspicuously absent from the debate on whether or not a paraffin/diesel mix will destroy engines. Is this true? I have heard the claim yet I have still to receive comment from the engineering fraternity - independent or via a manufacturer - backing or giving substance to this claim.

I hate it when people pigeon-hole themselves - or others - into little focussed boxes depending on their title or position and then limit their contribution to within the confines of that box. I'm not into titles or positions. I'm into the contribution the man or woman behind the title or position can make to society - and often that contribution can extend dynamically beyond the pigeon hole. In fact, it must extend beyond that confine for the sake of qualified comment. Let me give an example. The new man in President George Bush's administration who holds the position of Chief of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is Andrew Natsios. His is an important position for South Africa seeing that one of his agency's prime tasks is dealing with the scourge of AIDS in Africa - and we all know the impact HIV/AIDS is having on the trucking industry. So, given his title and the position, you'd expect this Natsios guy to be a real winner - someone you can expect great things from. Don't believe it. He's a twit.

An article I read in the International Herald Tribune while on a recent trip overseas quoted Natsios as saying that the problem with giving anti-retroviral drug treatment to the millions of Africans infected with HIV lies not with his agency but with the African AIDS patients themselves who "don't know what Western time is." Ask Africans to take their drugs at a certain time of day, he said, and "they do not know what you are talking about." He then went on to say that the problem with delivering anti-retrovirals in our region "is that there are no roads or the roads are so poor." He shoved his foot further down his gullet by stating that the drugs have to be "kept frozen - and all that". Where does this man come from?

Constructive input on HIV/AIDS is an issue which is so vitally important to our region - and his input is hardly constructive. So what do we need here to counter his inane ramblings? We have to go in search of the 'technical experts' for comment on the 'issue'. And that's exactly what the International Herald Tribune did. They got qualified doctors to point out to this silly man that there is not a single anti-retroviral drug on the market today that needs freezing. In fact, some bear warnings not to freeze them. On his points relating to the quality of our roads, let me be the 'technical expert' and point out to Mr Natsios that I was tempted to stop and buy a kidney belt while riding - in a limousine nogal - over some of those bumpy, cracked roads in Chicago. The quality of our roads is just fine to get the drugs delivered - and where they're not suitable for a vehicle, head-borne and bicycle transport will do the trick. It's worked in Africa for years and will continue to do so. As for being able to tell the time. Well, here's the simple way Mr Natsios. For those of us who don't have watches or clocks, morning is when the sun comes up and night is when it goes down. I think it's the same in America but that's how it works down our way. Simple.

The point I'm trying to demonstrate is that engineers and technical types must realise they are also involved in the 'issues' side of the industry. FleetWatch is not a text-book and the trucking industry certainly does not operate to text-book principles. This makes the contribution of the text-book types absolutely essential. Hark! Is that the voice of a technical engineer I hear in the distance?

Patrick O'Leary
Managing Editor
FleetWatch