Opinions and Queries
Page 34
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
WHO SHOULD BE IN CONTROL OF FREIGHT BUREAU?
WITH reference to the paragraph on page 106 of your VV issue dated September 13, I should like to make it clear that the Scottish Carriers' and Haulage Contractors' Association approves the plan to establish a freight bureau, but considers that it should be in the hands of sub-district managers and not district transport officers.
Glasgow. HAMISH MACDOITGALI., Secretary, The Scottish Carriers and Haulage Contractors' Association.
REPRESENTATION OF ROAD TRANSPORT INTERESTS IN the leading article in your issue of September 6 you 'discuss road-transport representation. Rejecting the HitIerian method of repressing all disagreeing elements, you declare for the democratic method by which the opinions of all can be put forward.
The British Road Federation, which is the umbrella organization formed to voice the views and promote the interests of all concerned in the use of the roads, is just that democratic organization on which all road interests are represented and whichcan, therefore,' effectively present the case for road transport as a single industry, vital to the economy of the Nation.
There is a wide range of problems on which all road operators can speak with a united voice, and in all matters affecting road transport as an industry vis-a-vis other forms of transport, it is highly desirable that a single organization should speak on its behalf. This the B.R.F. claims to do; it has already done so in the past, and proposes to continue to do so in the difficult days that lie ahead. Both the haulier and the ancillary user enjoy representation in the B.R.F. through the associations of which they are members, and the B.R.F. gives their views public expression.
Many times has the B.R.F. spoken for all sections of commercial-transport operators and users, and has given evidence on their behalf with the weight of its collective representation. A notable example is'the evidence given to the Transport Advisory Council on the railway claim for freedom in rate-fixing in January and February, 1939.
It is natural that more importance should be attached to opinion expressed through such channels.
London, S.W.1. F. G. BRISTOW, Hon. Secretary, British Road Federation.
SUBSIDY SUGGESTION IN CONNECTION ' WITH PRODUCER GAS lUTAY I be allowed to reply to Mr. John Stewart's letter
which appeared in your issue of August 3? Despite the fact that the figure I gave (190 vehicles running on producer gas) has now (according to a Ministry report) been increased to 605, I still maintain that producer gas has failed to "catch on," although this greatly improved figure is encouraging.
I would like here to counteract any impression (I rather gather that Mr. Stewart has this impression) that I intended to convey that producer gas would never be a success in our haulage industry. On the contrary, I sincerely hope that this—or, indeed, any other good and efficient alternative to liquid fuels—will be a success and "catch on" quickly, because no Briton desires more than I do to help our splendid airmen and the Fighting Forces geperally with all the liquid fuel that they may require, also because I want to see our haulage industry working 100 per cefit. I still maintain, however, that producer-gas plants were rushed out on to the market in the early days before the proper and necessary groundwork—research and experiment—had been carried out, which was both unfair to the hauliers and short-sighted on the part of the manufacturers. One proof of this is that one concern has changed the design of its plant two or three times in a few months, and even replaced early purchases with the new plant free of charge—a very costly undertaking which could have been avoided. This, of course, caused considerable delay, trouble and annoyance to purchasers. Such an occurrence also must result in a want of confidence.
I also still maintain that before any serious and rapid progress can be made each engine maker must carry out the necessary experimental work to ascertain how to get the best out of his power unit with the least expense, using producer gas. It is impossible to avoid this work, but who is going to pay for it? Certainly not the engine builder, who will reap no benefit from the conversion of the vehicles. Only a few transport concerns can afford the time and expense to do this work—even if they had the facilities. This is definitely a Government subsidy proposition and should be tackled immediately. It is a real case of "Go To It." Even if Mr. Stewart can produce for us a much improved producer plant, this argument still holds good. He cannot alter the nature of the carbon monoxide gas or increase its calorific value.
Leeds. NORTHERN ENGINEER.
CHARGES FOR THE HAULAGE OF COAL
COULD you recommend a list of charges per ton for the hauling of coal, in 5-ton loads, to distances of 1-3 miles, 1-10 miles, 1-20 miles and 1-30 miles? The coal to be loaded by us at the oolliery and tipped at destination.
Thanking you very much for the useful articles, etc., which have appeared in your most valuable paper.
Wrexham. E.C.S.
[The following are fair rates for the haulage of industrial coal, over the mileages stipulated:-3 miles, 2s. 6d. per ton; 10 miles, 3s. 11d, per ton; 22 miles, 6s. per ton; 30 miles, 8s. per ton..--s.r.R.]
TAXATION AND FUEL RATION FOR GAS VEHICLE
I AM about to put on the road a van fitted with a gas-producer plant. I shall be glad if you could help me with the following points :— Do I have to make any fresh declaration when taxing this vehicle at the end of this month? Will I get the same standard basic ration on the van as I was getting when I took this van off the road a month ago?
London, N.18. C.E.G.
[There will be no need for you to make a fresh declaration when taxing your vehicle when it has a gas producer fitted, provided that it does not exceed the normal weight, plus the additional 10 cwt. allowed for the producer. Your basic ration will be halved.—En.]