OPINIONS FROM OTHERS.
Page 26
Page 27
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Editor invites correspondence on all subjects connected with the lase of commercial motors. Letters should be on one side of the paper ow), and typewritten by preference. The right of obbnoiatiOn is reserved, and no responsibility for views
expressed is accepted,
Stekur Vehicles for South Africa, The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2418] Sir,—For many years steam vehicles have followed the main principles that were introduced into steam practice 20 years or more ago, and, relatively, have not made progress equal to that made by their greatest competitor, the petrol-motor vehicle.
Having had, perhaps, a greater experience than most men, with both the steamer and the petrol-motor vehicle in South Africa, where the roads outside the towns are in a most primitive state, with very heavy gradients miles in length instead of yards, I think that my experience and views should, and will, receive the attention and consideration that are their due.
For the steamers I base my observations from the following under and over-type steam vehicles :—Yorkshire, Sentinel, Foden, Clayton, Leyland, Garrett, and Fowler. For the petrol-motor vehicles my observations cover the following:--Tilling-Stevens, Albion, Leyland, ThornYeroft, Guy, White, Reo, Graham, and Ford.
In many ways the petrol vehicle has advantages over the steamer, except in running costs over three tons and upwards. The design and improvements introduced by the petrol-motor industry are far in advance of the steamers over a corresponding period. The Clarkson, Yorkshire, Mann, Foden and Fowler have, during the past few years, made efforts at improving their design by incorporating the shaft transmission with a final worm, or double-reduction bevel and spur e.12
drive, which is at least a break-away from the proved and tried chain drive.
Of the shaft drives, the worm appears to be the most suitable, but for really heavy and rough usage experience favours the chain drive as being resilient and better able to stand sudden shocks and stresses.
My main object in writing up my observations is not to commence a controversy as to the merits of steam v. petrol, or vice versa, or as to the merits of chain, worm or bevel drives, but to suggest certain improvements that can be incorporated, into future steam vehicles.
I wish to emphasize again that steam practice ia still behindhand in design and sadly needs bringing up to date and into line so far as possible with the best petrolmotor practice, so as to compete on equal or better terms with other mechanically propelled vehicles. six-ton three-way tipping steam wagon, unloaded, weighs about sevan tons, or three tons over the front wheels and four tons over the rear wheels, as against a six-ton three-way tipping petrol lorry, unloaded, which weighs about five tons.
The advantage in weight is in favour of the petrolmotor lorry, and it is obvious that the lighter vehicle will negotiate soft ground more easily than will the steamer, especially on South African roads, as the extra two tons deadweight is a handicap, also a drag on the available engine power.
A steam wagon is limited by its fuel and water carrying capacity, averaging about 20-25 miles of water to a tank, when it requires refilling. A petrol lorry can travel a much greater distance without requiring a replenishment of petrol.
Furthermore, it takes 30 to 00 minutes to start up and get a head of steam, as against an almost immediate start by a petrol lorry.
My suggestions to overcome these disadvantages and place the steamer again in the forefront of mechanical vehicles are as follow :— (a) The present heavy and clumsy boiler to be replaced with a Mall and light flash-point boiler with a working pressure of 300 lb. to 500 lb. per sq. in. Such a boiler has been proved efficient by the White and Stanley makers years ago. Crude oil could be used as a fuel.
This type of boiler will give a great saving in weight alone, and will be a reduction of weight off the front wheels and a saving with rubber tyres.
(b) A condenser or some type of radiator to conserve the water supply, together with a small water-circulating tank. This will increase the range of service enormously, and a unit of this nature would be no heavier than. an ordinary vehicle water tank with water.
(c) The engine could be modelled on the same compact lines that have been adopted for the petrol engine, together with enclosed gears and clutch. The balanced engine can be a double high-pressure, compound, tripleexpansion or double-compound.
(d) A standardized steamer modelled on these lines and constructed by mass production, in consultation by the associated British steam wagon manufacturers, would undoubtedly prove an advantage over the many present varied types, and, furthermore, open the field for steam practice in other directions.
Vehicles built on these lines would have the following advantages over present types :— (1) A. lighter and more efficient vehicle, with a corresponding increase in engine efficiency and power, as there would be less deadweight for the engine to work.
(2) Easier and quicker to start up and a very much increased range of service.
(3) An economical boiler and engine, with equal speeds to the lorry.
(4) Faster service and less delays in starting up would result In extra work being done, (5) More mobile on both good and had roads, also less upkeep of tyres and general wear and tear.
(6) No objectionable smoke or sparks.
(7) A standardized steamer built on thefl foregoing lines and suggestions would be suitable for both goods and passenger services.
I am severing my connection with mechanical transport, as I am about to Interest myself in another direction, and for this reason I am placing my considered observations before you, in the hope that British steam practice will go ahead, as it has been in the melting-pot long enough, and competition with America and the Continent can be overcome only by unison of British manufacturers.—Yours faithfully, D. GIFFORD. Johannesburg.
Is the Covered-in Double-deck Bus Wanted ?
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2419] Sir,—Your article in the issue of October 20th was very interesting, but .1 am rather wondering whether it would really be found praltable-, in London, at any rate, to replace the present type of bus by vehicles having totally and permanently enclosed top decks.
One gathers that so many people use buses in London solely for the purpose of "getting the air," as they say, that it seems rather questionable whether, if closed vehicles came into use, takings would not drop very considerably on routes served by the tubes, and on all routes during the summer months, particularly those extending into the country. Windows, I know, can be lowered, but that does not give the passenger by any means what he obtains with an open deck. Of course, in really bad weather the closed bus scores, but it does seem to be debatable whether it would do so over a year's average running.
On the face of it, it would seem possible, at any rate, that the open bus, equipped with a hood and some form of dropping windows, might offer the most satisfactory compromise. Very great progress has been made in the last few years by the makers of private cars in the matter of all-weather equipment, and one would think that it should be possible to evolve some satisfactory design for use on public-service vehicles.—
Yours faithfully, L. F. JONES. London, S.W.3.
Reliability of Running Recorders.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR,
[2420] Sir,—We would like to refer to the editorial in your issue of September 15th, "Are gunning Recorders Satisfactory?" in which you appear to throw doubt upon the reliability of recorders generally, particularly in regard to the possibility of their being tampered with by the drivers. We fancy that in making these remarks you have overlooked the fact that the Servis recorder is 100 per cent. tamper-proof. We would point out to you the following facts in connection with it :— • (a) The recorder is locked, with holding-on bolts inside, so cannot be removed unless the qese can be opened.
(b) Opening the case is impossible without the key.
(c) Even if the instrument could be removed, the fact of its removal would be shown on the chart and the driver would have to explain the readings.
(d) As the instrunient is operated by the two movemerits of a clock and a pendulum, and records always stopping or running, it is not possible for a driver, if he opened the case, to tamper with the charts, as he could not possibly efface running time and it would require a much higher degree of delicate finger manipulation than the average driver possesses to convert standing time into running time.
Seeing that the recorder does not make any other sort of record and has simply two facts to record and has no complicated working mechanism beyond the ordinary movement of the clock, there is nothing to go wrong and it is not only 100 per cent. tamper-proof, but as near 100 per cent. trouble-proof as possible, and the "fact that, for the past five years, a very large proportion of our business has been in the supply of additional instruments to firms who have adopted this system of checking up on the work their wagons do, speaks for itself.-----Yours faithfully, Brumeo (1920), LTD. Coventry.