AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Nationalizing Transport: the Dangers. T HE SOMEWHAT BALD statement by Mr.

19th December 1918
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 1, 19th December 1918 — Nationalizing Transport: the Dangers. T HE SOMEWHAT BALD statement by Mr.
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Winston Churchill, definitely forecasting the nationalization of railways, seems to bring much nearer the possibility of the early nationalization of main roads. Mr. Lloyd George very clearly indicates that his policy in respect of transport is not limited to any one branch of the subject, but is governed by the same principles throughout.

The real difficulties in the way of the nationalization of roads, as distinct from artificial difficulties connected with the susceptibilities of local authorities, are by no means 'comparable with the difficulties in the way of nationalizing the railways. The roads can:not possibly be maintained by private enterprise, and it would be obviously better to centralize the whole • responsibility than to leave it divided amongst comparatively small authorities.

• Moreover, the nationalization of roads does not necessarily involve the nationalization of transport vehicles using the roads. On the other hand, the nationalization of railways would inevitably make public property of any motor vehicles owned by the railways.

The activities of the railways as public carriers on the road would thus come into direct competition with the activities of independent carriers, and the position would be open to the serious disadvantage that the carrying trade, as we know it to-day, would be faced by competition supported by the taxpayer. When once we begin to nationalize motor transport vehicles we cannot say where the movement will stop.

In the matter of canals, Mr. Lloyd George points to a very big development of mechanical transport. With a reorganized and modernized canal system, the ex_ ten sive use of motor barges would follow as a matter of course. In this sphere, however, it is conceivable that the canals themselves might be nationalized, but that the vessels plying upon them might remain private property.

On the other hand, the waterways system must be so closely co-ordinated with the railway system that, if the latter be nationalized, it is almost inevitable that, before long, the nation will become the possessor not only of the canals but also of at least the great majority of canal barges. Here, again, we should have tax-supported competition against motor transport concerns, and it is quite conceivable that we should all be carried a great deal further in the direction of the nationalization of industry than most of us care to contemplate.

Were it possible, the ideal would probably be the nationalization of the ways, whether they consist of iron, of road material, or of water, but a continuance of private ownership of the machines awl vessels utilizing those ways. Any such ideal is, however, unattainable in practice.

New and Lighter Motorbuses.

HE PUBLIC of the Metropolis is becoming not a, little interested at the paragraphs which have recently appeared in the columns of the daily Press, as well as, of course, in those of our own journal, with regard to the intentions of the various London transport authorities as to the new types of motorbus which post-war conditions will undoubtedly introduce to the Metropolis and more than probably also to other great centres of population. Londoners are prone to regard the motorbus, and especially the double-decker, as a type particularly their own. In the manner of such machines, it is indeed true that what London does to-day other capitals and great provincial centres are more than likely to copy later. The London General Omnibus Co. can certainly be credited with setting the fashion to the motorbus world.

London's present convenient and eminently practicable "B-type " motorbus has, up to the present time, undoubtedly served its purpose very well, both from the point of view of the passenger user and of that of the company owner. With the exception of the Tilling-Stevens petrol-electric type, and the unique Clarkson steamer, the " B " type is the standard type for Greater London. Owing to the combined endeavours of Scotland Yard—the competent licensing authority—and of the expert technical staff of the L.G.O.C., this machine has undoubtedly gone far to prove that it is not only possible but desirable to employ an exceptionally light chassis structure for public-passenger service in such highway conditions as prevail in most big centres of population.

It is surprising how little it is realized by the public that the London bus is not by any means the same machine as, for instance, the 3-ton lorry. As a chassis it is really little more than a 2-tonner on the rating that is more or less common in commercialvehicle practice. It is generally too light for those provincial services which call for part of the mileage to be carried over ordinary country roads and gradients. In grave national emergency a number of these machines were, it is pretty generally known, taken over to th6 Continent, but that they were altogether too light for active service work very soon became evident. They were designed for high-grade urban-district service only, and for such work were a very excellent achievement. They taught the builder of the ordinary commercial chassis much in respect of simplification, interchangeability, accessibility, cheapness of production, lightness and economical operations.

Now we have reached a stage when the B-type itself is quite likely at an early date, to be outclassed,. it is no secret that the Metropolitan licensing authorities have, for some while, in conjunction with the technical authorities of the L.G.O.C. and of the other smaller interested concerns, and presumably, too, of the Associated Equipment Co., which last organization boasts by far and away the largest heavy commercial-vehicle plant in this country, been contemplating the desirability of still further development in motor transport for urban public passenger service. The new machine has to be still lighter than the present types which are now well above the originally determined weight; they will almost certainly embody a. better general distribution of the tare and load. The acceptable new models are not to exceed 3 tons 10 cwt. empty, but with petrol and water on board, or six tons full loaded. This will necessitate a reduction in present practice of over 6 cwt. It is rumoured, too, that experiments are to be attempted with pneumatic tyres. The daily Press has already nick-named these newcomers the whippets of London traffic.

We hope to afford our readers an early opportunity of becoming familiar with the outstanding features of the new designs—the A.E.C., the Tilling-Stevens, and the National—all of which are under way. Designs and tests of the new L.G.O.C.'s model are not likely to be complete for a, few months owing to the preoccupation of the A.E.C. factory, whence they will come, with the duty of continuing and maintaining a huge war output of the standard A.E.C. 4-tonner and of the L.G.O.C.'s management with its gigantic task of maintaining, on as near the pre-war basis as may be; its huge if reduced London motorbus fleet. Work is well in hand with the new Tilling-Stevens petrol-electric vehicle.

It is not as yet revealed as to whether these manufacturing and using groups of greatly war-increased output capacity will be devoted to other requirements than those of the purely Metropolitan services, but we are probably not far wrong in our surmise that the obvious objective ultimately of the great Walthamstow output for instance will be for other urban districts than London, both at home and overseas.

The London General and A.E.C. organizations are very considerable assets to the British commercialvehicle industry. They have already proved their national utility, in our days of great emergency. They will undoubtedly assist to preserve the paramount position of British manufacture of industrial motor chassis in the coming great world markets. The indications which are already apparent of this particular group's intention § to be well in advance of current design, are therefore of very great moment to the industry as a whole, and naturally to all the. readers of THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR. The A.E.C. factory is certain to be producing before long for the open market, and not as hitherto only for the L.G.O.C. and the Government.

Post-war Programmes Wanted. , W.

E SYMPATHIZE with the manufacturer who for one reason or another cannot or does not, as yet, reveal the outlines of his postwar programme. At the same time we feel it incumbent upon us to urge, from the user's standpoint, the importance of some prompt indication of what the manufacturer intends to do.

The main trouble, of course, is that, until a very recent date, the great majority of manufacturers have not even been permitted to prepare experimental vehicles of post-war models. Many such vehicles are now under test, and their makers hesitate to put forward any announcement until they are convinced that all the new features incorporated can be finally approved for inclusion in the standard vehicle.

C22

Great care in this respect is, of course, necessary, for the purpose of protecting the manufacturer's goodwill. He cannot afford to market or even to announce a vehicle that is not known to be capable of sustaining his established reputation. We could wish, however, that manufacturers would at least indicate at once their intentions in the matter of the road-carrying capacities of the models to be turned out.

There has been much talk about the reduction in the number of types manufactured in any one factory. Such reduction is desirable in the interests of economy and manufacture, but the prospects of a general adoption of the principle leave the user uninformed as to where he can go to get a vehicle of given carrying capacity. We do not press for premature details, but we Lope that manufacturers will not hold back broad statements as to the underlying principles of their postwar policies. We think that caution in this respect may. be carried to such an extreme as to be positively detrimental to the manufacturer's own interests, on account of the irritating effect which ;t has on the potential user.

The L.G.B. Committee's Report on Heavy Motor Cars.

HE REPORT of the Committee formed in 1915 by the Local Government Board to consider laws and 'regulations relating to the construc tion and use of heavy motorcars, has now been pubs lishecl. Its recommendations are reproduced in this issue, and they will be reviewed in some detail in a subsequent issue. Meanwhile, we must confine oueselves to comments on a few of the principal points. The recommendation in favour of an increase in the maximum unladen weight of a heavy motorcar will be welcome, particularly to manufacturers and users of

steam wagons. The increase suggested is from 5 to 6 tons, and the combined unladen weight of the vehicle and trailer together will, if the Committee's recom? mondations are accepted, be increased from si to 3 tons. In neither ease is it suggested that the maximum laden weight shall be altered.

Before going further, we must particularly draw the attention of our readers to the fact that we are dealing at the moment not with any actual present charfge in the law, but only with proposals which may, and probably will, subsequently lead to change. At pre-:, sent there is no alteration in the law as it has stood for years past, and we do not want anyone to get into trouble through misapprehending the situation by believing that the alterations contemplated havo actually been made.

The Committee does not favour any change in exist-. ing speed limits. Neither does it propose any altera tion as regards laden axle weights. Some time ago we expressed fears -to the effect that influences were at work which might encourage a reduction of legal axle weights. These fears wore, in fact, well grounded, but the arguments against any such restrictive legislation were put forward in good time,' and were conclusive, on the ground mainly of the urgent necessity for good economy in inland transport.

An altogether new proposal favours the limitation of the over-all length of a heavy motorcar. The sug

gested maximum is 26 ft., and there are very fesfe

instances in which,. in our opinion, the imposition of 'such a maximum is at all likely to interfere :with

natural progress. Coupled with this proposal is -another to the effect that overhang behind the driving axle shall not exceed seven twenty-fourths of the overall length. The term "driving axle" is unfortunate) in view of the possibility of the frontedrive or fourwheel drive. The principle laid down is one to which very few !reasonable objections can be made. In stating that no change in the present speed limits is suggested, we should add the qualification that the Committee does not favour the use of any iron-tyred vehicles at a speed exceeding five miles an hour. This

regulation, in practice, affects only the lighter forme of steam lorry, and, if it becomes law, the consequence will be to encourage the extended use of rubber tyres, which is certainly, from almost -everyspoint of view, desirable. Further encouragement in the same direction is to be found in the suggestion that rubber-tyred vehicles, drawing rubber-ty-redftrailers, shall be permitted to travel at eight miles an hour instead of five. We have for a long time advocated a change in this direction, sinceithe law, asiit at present stands, certainly-prevents many motor users from securing economies rin transport which‘would otherwise be possible. Any change of the .kind indicated snarbe.e.xpected to result in a distinct increase in the use of trailers which, properly employed, are certainly con ducive to high. economy. The use of a trailer has the effect of increasing the tonnage that can be hauled un...zer most conditions, but the advantage thus obtainable is neutralized if the maximum Legal speed of the combination is unduly-restricted. Reverting for an instant to the question of over-all length, this is a point which should be noted particularly by prospective purchasers of chars-a, banes, which are sometimes rather bad offenders in the matter of overhang and which are occasionally made undulylong with the object of increasing seating accommodation. If the recommendations of the Committee are accepted, any new limitations imposed will not apply to existing vehicles, and a reasonable interval of time will presumably be allowed to elapse between notice and application of fresh regulations. It is, of course, important that a provision of this kind should be made, so that no confusion shall exist in the mind of the user.

This very brief comment does not profess to be in. any way final or comprehensive. It deals only with a few points, and particularly with those as regards which some reasonable anxiety.was felt. This anxiety was not occasioned by thefeeling that restrictive legislation would be in any way justified, but rather by the fear that, adverse influences might lead to the proposal of restrictions detrimental to-the public interest, which is all on the side of securing the greatest possible ecmnamy:of transport consistent with safety and with a reasonable but not-excessive amount, of consideration for the roads of the country.


comments powered by Disqus