They are 24ft longer than a bendy bus, as heavy as a fully-armoured Challenger 2 tank and could be coming to a road near you next year.

The 60-tonne superlorry is the road-haulage industry’s latest plan to reduce costs by squeezing 60 per cent more goods onto one vehicle.

Drivers will be advised to stay well clear of them on roundabouts and to take care when overtaking because it will take more time – at least a fifth longer – to complete the manoeuvre.

The cab drags two trailers, each of which swivels on a pivot and sweeps out into the next lane when turning.

The Government is considering allowing a trial of several hundred of the LHVs – longer, heavier vehicles.

A study commissioned by the Department for Transport has found that LHVs would deliver significant benefits in terms of lower costs and carbon dioxide emissions without compromising road safety, The Times has learnt.

The study considered various options, including an 83-tonne, 105ft (32m) “road train”. The vehicle most likely to be approved for a trial has a maximum weight of 60 tonnes and is 83ft long. Existing limits for articulated lorries are 44 tonnes and 54ft.

Rail freight companies are bitterly opposed to a trial because LHVs would be the first lorries capable of carrying more than one shipping container and would result in freight transferring from rail to road. But the study, by Heriot-Watt University and the Transport Research Laboratory, found that LHVs could reduce the overall number of lorries: two LHVs could do the job of three existing lorries.

While the weight carried would increase by only 30 per cent, the volume would rise by 60 per cent. This would particularly benefit companies that move light but bulky goods. DHL and Kimberly-Clark, which makes Andrex toilet paper, are among those expressing interest.

LHVs already operate in the Netherlands, Sweden and Finland. Denmark is considering whether to allow them.

A trial in the Netherlands found that LHVs slightly reduced road casualties and congestion because they reduced overall lorry mileage. They did attract some goods that had previously travelled by rail, but the trial found that a maximum of 2.7 per cent of the rail freight market was at risk.

The DfT has adopted a cautious approach towards LHVs because of concern about public hostility and doubts about whether Britain’s ageing, highly congested road network could cope. But under pressure from the haulage industry – and aware of European Commission research into LHVs – the DfT decided to commission its own study.

It was delivered this month to ministers, who will use it to decide whether to allow trials on public roads. Alan McKinnon, professor of logistics at Heriot-Watt and the main author of the study, is understood to be in favour of holding a trial to confirm whether the theoretical benefits were confirmed in practice.

A source close to the study team said: “Ministers will have an eye to public opinion but if they adhere to their policy of evidence-based decision making, they ought to allow a trial.”

The greater turning circle of LHVs used abroad had been thought to pose a problem in Britain, where there are a large number of tight roundabouts on which the rear trailer could cut in sharply.

But this issue has been largely resolved by a device developed by Denby Transport, a haulage company based in Lincoln. The front wheels of the rear trailer are linked to computer that calculates how much they have to turn in order to follow the same arc as the front trailer.

Denby Transport’s trials on private land found that LHVs reduced by up to 15.7 per cent the amount of fuel consumption per tonne carried.

It also claims that the stopping distance of a fully-loaded LHV is 20 per cent shorter than for an existing articulated lorry because the two extra sets of wheels allow more braking power.

However, the company admits that, in an accident, the impact force of an LHV would be much greater for any given speed.

Freight on Rail, the lobby group opposing LHVs, released an opinion poll during the Labour Party conference in September that found that 75 per cent of the public did not want them on British roads.

It also commissioned research that suggested many haulage companies would buy LHVs, because they wanted the biggest available vehicle, but would operate them half-empty.

Freight on Rail said: “Previous increases in lorry dimensions have led to an increase in HGVs driving around less full, which is the absolute reverse of what was claimed would happen. Over a quarter of lorries are running around empty.

“LHVs have huge road-safety implications and could in effect become travelling warehouses.”

LHVs in Sweden and Finland are banned from residential areas. A similar ban could be imposed in Britain but Freight on Rail says that there is no mechanism for enforcing it and predicts that some would end up following sat-nav directions onto narrow country roads.

Times Recommends

• Lies and cover-up at MG Rover exposed by report
• High oil prices push manufacturing costs up
• Primark founder steps down as chief executive