Chaotic Mechanical Transport for the British Army.
Page 1
Page 2
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The parsimony of the Treasur... is beginning to bear its ill-fruits in the state of chaos whielt threatens to paralyse the mechanical transport of this country's arm.% With horse-vehicle resources dwindling each month, the importance of effective motor organization cannot be ignored, if there is to be proper regard for efficiency. What do we find ? Miserably-small and wholly-inadequate votes Irate been doled out, since the year 1901, for the annual purchase of ambulances, lorries and tractors, with the darifferous result that more than 20 different types of construction are found in fewer than 1C0 Stateowned machines—we freely admit the value of this variety frem the point of view of initial experience for the officers iii charge.. The fundamental commercial rule of interchangeable parts is not yet recognized in the mm im's seheme, and any service in the nature of a campaign must,
itness deplorable whste by reason of this (law alone. Machines of the same. make are not necessarily id one type. We know that unification of design is impossible to meet all classes of military requirements, hut the preseet haphazard ionrse of procedure must cease if effective progress is to be made. The Treasury, we repeat, is to Idame; the money has not been forthcoming, in spite of urgent. recommendations from both the Army Service Corps awl the Mechanical Transport Committee. Let us briefly examine the inevitable consequences of this niggardliness. We are concerned only with modern tractors and wagons.
Want of funds has left no alternative to the competent officers concerned. They have perforce purchased, inspect IA , passed and accepted the few machines of each pattern, as grudged appropriations were squeezed out of a reluctant Coverument. Never, notwithstanding the remarkable progress of the past five years, have more than 1.2 sister vehicles or tractors been ordered, and that many
only mire! Big commercial houses, carriers, omnibus proprietors and railway companies have deemed it expedient and necessary to order hy the hundred or the score, in order to simplify the basic problems of maintenance and renewals. The Army, on the other hand, finds that itcan only gel money for a heterogeneous collection of diverse models, the employment of which calls for the impossible. They simply cannot be maintained, in regular work, for more than a few days together. The variety of attention necessary renders long and eon: immus service a matter of grievous uncertainty. Under war conditions, three-quarters of the existing State-ownsd mechanical transport would be a delusion and a handicap to any commander: each two or three units would need their own load of spares; no important parts are interchangeable throughout any division of wagons or tractors. What would he thought if this state of affairs held sway in the artillery? What if a gun-carriage or an ammunition wagon had to be abandoned because some little failure must involve long delay while a part was made and fitted on the march ? What if it were the exception for any of the gun mountings and breech fittings to be standardized? Yet, in the growing arm of mechanical transport, at least so far, the necessities of the case have been sacrificed to short-sighted considerations which are wrongly supposed to reflect great financial acumen somewhere!
A Standardization Committee should be appointed, and this should he constituted of memhsrs of the Mechanical Transport Section of the A.S.C., ILE., officers and accredited representatives of all a-rotor man-ufacturers who are prepared to produce machines, suitable for military purposes, in accordance with the Army's requirements under an adequate subvention scheme. Although it would not he in the interests of trade that one type of engine, clutch, gearbox, final drive, etc., should be adopted for all internal-combustion-engined machines, the individuality of the designer would not be smothered by the standardization of many detail parts. In the case of vehicles which are propelled by internal-combustion engines, the following are a few of the parts which might well be made to a standard specification, and, if so designed, they would he interchangeable for all makes of vehicles of the internalcombustion-engine(' class: starting handle and spring; valves, valve springs, cotters, caps, etc.; cam rollers and tappets; clutch (diameter of plates and number of key ays if of disc type, and diameter and angle of faces if rif cone type); shape, size and disposition -of the pedals; shape and size of radiator and bonnet ; working positions of change-speed and brake levers; style and position of sprag, and means for indicating to the driver whether or no it is in working position; knuckle joints for steering gear, also knuckle joints for brake gear ; brake shoes and drnms ' • pitch, type and ratio of chains and chain wheels; diameters and widths of wheels and tires; sizes of bearing springs and spring shackles; sizes of strap bolts for springs; hub caps; floating bushes for road wheels; type and position of drawbar; height of carburetter jet and size of screw thread in base of same; petrol and water strainers; petrol-tank filling caps; and bolts (one diameter only should be used, in only as many lengths as are absolutely necessary. it might be possible to standardize the diameter of the engine cylinders, and, if this were done, one size only would he needed, respectively, for the bigend bushes, gudgeon pins and bushes, and piston rings. En the cases of steam wagons and tractors, the same process of standardization might be agreed upon, and, so far as steam wagons are concerned, the following are a few of the details to which attention should be directed : wheels, caps and bushes; springs and slippers ; strap bolts; brake shoes and drums; snow shoes and spuds; working positions of reversing lever, brake wheel and steering wheel; number of teeth, pitch and type of wheels in differential gear; and funnels. Then, so far as tractors are concerned, the principal things to lie standardized are: wheels, caps and bushes; springs and slippers; strap bolts; brake shoes and drums; snow shoes and spuds; working
positions of reversing Icier, brake wheel and steering wheel; differential gears; funnels; and diameter and positions of fair leads for winding cable. There are, too, a great number of parts that could be made interchangeable either for wagons or tractors, and of these the following are a few : brake screws and nuts; steering chains and couplings; steering worm and worm wheel ; diameters of boiler tubes; fire bars; gauges and syphons; sizes of steam and exhaust fittings; valve glands and stuffing boxes; piston-rod glands and stuffing boxes; big-end bushes; diameters of eccentrics and sheaths; means of driving mechanical lubricator ; gear striking forks; smoke-box door, handles and locks; and fire doors. In some respects also, standard distances between the boiler fittings should be agreed upon, and, as a typical example, we would quote that between the top and bottom watergauge fittings. Standard templates might be agreed and employed in all works engaged on the production of subsidized military machines. Were such a Standardization Committee appointed, we are convinced that nothing but good could accrue to the industry, as well as to the mechanical-transport undertakings of the Army. The establishment of bases for repairs and renewals could then be placed on a businesslike footing.
We are ready to acknowledge that the years 1901 to 1905 were not inappropriately regarded as a period for cautious observation and trial. To-day, however, there is neither excuse nor reason--unless it is hopeless to get any large sums votedfor the repetition of the casual and odd purchases on the plea that they are of an experimental character; also, the needlessly-exacting and costly methods of inspection and trial should be altered. They inevitably add at least £10 to each £500 of sale price, and oftentimes are both unreasonable and useless. The one positive result is to dishearten a succession of constructors, who let the next maker go through the mill, the new man being willing to bear everything once in order to get on to the War-office list, each of which changes in sources of supply, whilst it temporarily and outwardly saves a paltry £50 per machine, again helps to increase the multiplicity of types. Uniformity of control and replacements will be assured, by the adoption of standardization in two far-reaching connections: (1) all War-office tenders can be based upon them ; (2) oommervial owners can be encouraged to prefer them. Thus and thus only can this country obtain interchangeable drivers and interchangeable working parts according to an intelligible and practical plan. At present, while Germany and France are both encouraging the perfection of their military-owned or State-subsidized commercial motors, we are just " muddling through." It is now clearly known what is wanted constructionally, and the prospective chaos of actual warfare may yet be avoided. Germany, to aid interest and eniformity, pays £200 down to the buyer of a military-type five-ton lorry, and allows him £50 a year subvention for a term of five years; France, in like manner, deems it worth £120 down towards the cost of a three-tonner, with £40 a year added for three years. England's patriotism is stirred by nothing down, and from tl 10s. to £2 per annum, with special terms for hiring during peace manceuvres or for compulsory acquirement. This is playing with the subject, and it cannot go on. The systematic adoption of approved types is set at naught. the spare-part difficulty is conveniently overlooked, and the country is lulled into a, sense of false security by political statistics. The truth is this: there is no regular mechanical transport and few regular drivers —there are merely some odd samples.