OPINIONS and QUERIES Problems of Agricultural Transport.
Page 70
Page 71
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Editor, TEE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2988] Sir,—We were very much inter.ested in your recent article on the subject of agricultural transport, being ourselves engaged almost exclusively in the various branches of this work.
There is no doubt whatever that there is a very wide field of opportunity for the transport man in providing the services the farmer requires, and that at the moment this field is only beginning to4be explored. Even so, two directly opposed results have been attained. In the first place, the farmer is, admittedly, benefiting more from the activities of the road-transport concerns than from any assistance be has received from Government intervention. In the second place, we are, unhappily, afflicted with more of the optimistic rate-cutting fraternity than almost any other branch of the industry.
In view of the depressed state of the farming industry to-day the first result is of paramount importance, and is one which is not fully appreciated by responsible persons, and on this ground alone there appear to be excellent reasons against the imposition of an additional petrol tax, of which we hear rumours, in part replacement of the existing vehicle duty. Even the complete abolition of the vehicle tax could not counterbalance the imposition. of a further 4dh per gallon to the man who is engaged in the transport of milk, for instance, from the home and neighbouring counties to London. 'A tax of 4d. per gallon on petrol represents an .additional transport cost of from onetenth to one-fifth of a penny per gallon of milk.
At the time of the imposition of the existing 4d. per gallon tax we ourselves were contemplating a rate reduction on milk of one-eighth of a penny per gallon, hut owing to the tax were unable to carry out our intention. At the moment there is little prospect of any reduction, and a further tax of 4d. per gallon on petrol would necessitate an immediate increase in rates of at least one-eighth of a penny per gallon, representing to the farmer an extra annual expenditure of from £10 to £35, according to the quantity of milk produced.
Needless to say, this is an ordinary economic fact which cannot be overlooked, and every concern engaged in this work would have to make some similar increase or run at a loss, as there cannot be many making a profit of more than one-eighth of a penny per gallon carried, at the low rates ruling to-day.
This brings us to the second point, that of the ratecutter. It is a thousand pities that there should be this class in such a field of work where there is plenty of business for all at good remunerative rates, if only a little brain and initiative be used in planning out a new field for starting operations. This is written in no spirit of personal bitterness, as our,own business is probably too far from London for these gentry to "try their luck," and we have only normal' healthy competition to face, which is always welcome. But we are very interested in this class of work, as we were one of the first companies in the field, and we watch with the greatest regret the endeavours of some of the smaller, concerns to hang on to the ,business which they have built up in parts of Hampshire and Berkshire within, say, 40 miles of London, as they are, one by one, being forced below the economic limit.
3344
It is all very well to argue that the rate-cutter does not live long. We know that to be true, but he can and does make it very unpleasant for the small man with one or two vehicles—which are probably held under hire-purchase agreements—during his meteoric career. Further, there seems to be an almost inexhaustible supply of other optimists to rise in his place.
We would mention that we know of two men who are running 30-cwt. vehicles daily to London, seven days a week, with milk. One charges Id. per gallren, the other 1/d. per gallon. Their maximum capacity per vehicle is about 260 gallons, their average all the year round probably nearer 240 gallons. Their total daily mileages would be about 90 in the first case, and 105 in; the second, for Which the first receives £1 and the second 25s. All this is done from a wild endeavour to drive each other and everyone else off the road, when, as stated above, there is plenty of work to be:liad for everyone at decent, sensible rates.
Trusting that we have not too largely encroached on your valuable space, and thanking you for the help and advice of your costing department, as well as your excellent paper.--Yours faithfully, G. BnvAN Gusn, Traffic Manager, For Gush's Road Transport Services, Ltd. Thatcham.
The Cost of Hauling Coal.
The Editor, TliE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2989] Sir,—As a regular reader of The Commercial Motor I should be obliged if you would forward me a copy of your/Operating-cost Tables. Your journal has been most useful to me and at a critical time (contract time) I should like your advice if possible and if not taking up too much of your time.
I have the chance of a 12-month contract for the haulage of coal with two wagons, a five-tonner and a 30-cwt. The distance is 31 miles each way, the five-ton wagon taking five loads per day and the 30-cwt. vehicle taking seven to eight. Previously the five-tanner has been overloaded to seven tons and the 30-cwt. machine to two tons. I still propose to do this as it is nearly all down hill. The price -offered is 2s, per ton.
I might say that the five-ton wagon requires two men and the baSis is a five-day week. Wages paid : Driver of live-ton wagon, 13 5s. per. week ; mate of five-ton wagon, £2 5s. per week ; driver of 30=cwt. vehicle, £3 per week.
Shall I be right in accepting this price; if not, could you detail the costs to present to the management of the colliery as they are willing to talk the matter over if I have proof that I am underpaid.—Yours faithfully, REGULAR READER. Yorkshire.
[Persistent overloading of any commercial vehicle has unforeseen and incalculable effects on the operating costs. Whilst therefore I am willing to do my best to advise you, I do so with the reservation that the course you adopt is not one which, in my opinion, will prove to be profitable in the long run. Your five-tonner will cost 7d. per mile to run and n per week ,standing charges. Assuming a 5i-day week, you will carry 28 loads in that period, totalling 196 tons and covering approximately 200 miles. The cost per week of operating the vehicle will be £7 standing charges and 1'5 16s. 8d. running cost—total,
£12 168. 8d. Add £1 for establishment costs and £5 for prolit—topl„ £18 16s. 8d. That must be your revenue for the covveyance of 196 .ton. Two shillings will bring you £10 12s.,. sri-that, considering only the large vehicle, the rate is satisfactory.
As regards the 30-cwt. machine. I assume you will carry 40 loads per week, which is 80 tons, and cover 280 miles. The standing charges amount to £4 10s. per week, the running costs, at 4d. per mile, to, £4 13s. 6d. Add 10s. per week for establishment charges mid £3 10s. for profit and you arrive at your minimum revenue, £13 3s. 6d. To bring this revenue you must charge 3s. 4d. per ton.
Considering the problem from another angle, your total revenue for the two vehicles, according to the foregoing, should he £32 and your total tonnage is 276. To obtain that revenue you must be paid a flat rate of 2s. 4d, per ton.
At 2s. per ton the total revenue is £27 12s. Your total cost, including allowance for establishment charges as above, is £23 9s. 8d.
The profit on the two vehicles is therefore only 14 2s. 4d., which, in my opinion, is not suffieient.—S.T.R.]
Haulage Association Essential.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2990] Sir,—The suggestion made in your issue of January 7th as to the necessity for "local organizationS for improving the status of the haulier" should be welcomed by all haulage contractors, and not only welcomed but acted upon.
The crying need of the road-haulage industry to-day is not only better organization but also control of what you describe as the " cheap-jack-" hauliers. It cannot be too strongly stressed that haulage contractors in all districts should band themselves together by the formation of local associations, as such action in clue time will lead to stabilization of the industry.
Steps should also be taken to combat the irresponsible and small type of agency that is offering traffic to the haulage contractors at ridiculous rates. I have certain knowledge that this is being done to a very large extent, but in the absence of effective organization the haulage contractors are helpless.
Generally speaking, the trading community does not desire a cheap rate, but a reliable service on organized and economic lines. This fact points to the need for sound organizations being established in every centre.
I trust that this matter may be pursued farther and I shall be glad at any time to offer any assistance that may be necessary.—Yours faithfully, W. DONALDSON WRIGHT.
Transport Manager, Chamber of Commerce. Nottingham.
[We are pleased to receive this strong corroboration from such an enterprising section of the industry, and it encourages us in the belief that a large proportion of the members of the haulage business would welcome and join such associations. It might well he possible to arrange for them to form branches of the Commercial Motor Users' Association, which is already well organized and represented in many parts of the country, but which has not,
hitherto, concerned itself with this vital matter of rate co-ordination. We commend this suggestion to the association in question—both it and the hauliers concerned would undoubtedly benefit by close co-operation.—En.]
Transporting Beet in Ireland.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2991] Sir,--I have read with great interest the article on beet transport in last week's issue of The Ommercial Motor, as my concern has supplied a very large amount of transport to the Irish Sugar Manufacturing Co. at Carlow for the haulage of beet supplies in this district, utilizing a special six-ton trailer and a Fordson commercial tractor.
Considerable difficulty was experienced in transferring the beet from the field to the roadside dump, as in wet weather it was exceptionally slow work with horses, as shown in photograph No. 1 on page 784. This has now been overcome by substituting an ag-ricultural-type Fordson tractor for the horses, but still using the farm cart. The shafts of the horsed carts have been temporarily removed and a draw-bar substituted for attachment to the tractor, so that it is now possible to haul the carts with a large load of beet without any difficulty even in very wet weather, as the tractor wheels do not sink to the same extent as the horses, and the tractor, being faster, the cart is not inclined to become bogged.
Of course, this method is only possible where a farmer employs a number of tractors, but most of the beet around here is grown by large farmers who have several tractors available; one farmer in this district is using seven tractors, four hauling from his farm to the factory and three hauling from the field to the roadside dump.
I may add that practically 75 per cent, of the beet grown for the Carlow factory is transported by road. Every type of mechanical transport vehicle is used, but mainly Fordsons and Universal trailers.—Yours faithfully, H. J. HONE, Director.
Athy. For Industrial Vehicles (Ireland), Ltd.
Seasonal Work for Lorries.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2992] Sir,—As regular readers of your paper we were interested in a lettet from F. H. Cooke published in your issue of October 22nd (" Opinions and Queries ") and we were also interested by your remarks regarding price. During the summer months we use our lorries as spray machines and we are thinking of putting them on to journey work this winter.
We shall be greatly obliged if you can give us the name of the clearing house which quoted the rates mentioned by F. H. Cooke.—Yours faithfully, F. BRIGGS.
Barking. For " BENNINGTON " SPRAYERS. [The clearing house to which F. II. Cooke referred in the letter published in our issue of October 22nd was Walter Gammons, Ltd., Basinghall Street, Loudon, E.C.2.—En.]