Easing Handling Problems for the Services
Page 57
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Heavier Military Equipment Would Mean that Tonnages to be Handled in Another War Would be WM per cent. Greater than in 1939-45
HANDLING of supplies Was one of the greatest drags on military effort and too little attention Was being paid to methods of casing it. It was possible to introduce modern handling equipment without disorganizing the Services, and its introduction would go far towards restoring the balance between manpower resources and commitments.
Maj. J. E. L. Carter, M.C., A.M.I.C.E„ R.E., made these statements in an article recently contributed to "The Royal Engineers' Journal." Bigger tanks, guns, bridges, mines and other equipment meant that in the event of another war, tonnages to be handled would be 50-75 per cent. greater than during the recent conflict. At the-same Cine, manpower availability had decreased. There was doubt whether the Services would be able to operate under the stress of war without a revolution in methods of handling stores.
He pointed out that channels of communications were disrupted in war-time and enemy action created weak links. If mechanical handling were to be applied to moving supplies, it had to be available in bad conditions as well as good. Handling problems had to be treated as tactical matters. Appliances must be common-user items, but the methods of employing them had to he varied. The first condition to be met in any handling scheme was that because of some hitch there might be no machines.
Number of Difficulties
Military stOres presented a number of difficulties because of the lack of attention paid to mechanical-handling requirements in their design, and the difficulty of loading transport to capacity by weight. It was difficult to put !CI tons on a 10-ton lorry.
One of the first principles of handling was the avoidance of double handling, but putting this principle into practice meant the gross abuse of transport. Transport would be used to hold stores and not merely to move them. A primary aim of a military mechanicalhandling scheme should be the acceptance of double handling to secure the early release of transport. A scheme should be reliable in action in combat conditions, and appliances -chosen . should be of types already available on • the civilian market so as not to dislocate ' existing industrial production. . Nlajor Carter envisaged a number of • " levels" for the use of mechanical-aids.
• The first would have a maximum lift of ' 1,000 lb., the second 3,500 lb., the third 7.000 lb.. the fourth 25,000' lb. and the firth over 25,000 lb.
Turning tothe question of' the use of pallets, he considered it questionable whether these could be economically used to cover movement along a complex line of communication in time of war. The advantage of pallets was in being able to use mechanical aids at load-transfer points, but their disadvantages were wastage of space, cost and difficulties in loading palleted stores into certain types of vehicle. However, pallets were suitable for immediate Application in certain limited conditions.
Small investments on mechanical aids at certain points, without introducing mechanical handling throughout a supply channel, would' yield great savings. He suggested that lightweight pallets be made in two sizes, 12 ft. by 6 ft. (3 tons). and 15 ft. by 7 ft. (10 tons), and should be suitable for handling by crane as well as fork-lift truck.The introduction of such equipment would allow the unloading of a 50-wagon train and transfer to 10-ton lorries by one crane and four men in about five hours, or the dumping of 100 tons of ammunition on 3-ton lorries by a 7-ton crane and four men in three hours. Mobile cranes and fork-lift trucks would be needed for operations on beaches, and Maj. Carter thought it possibre.to develop a track-laying forklift truck from the Fordson Major tractor. For field engineering purposes, the 3-ton crane should be assigned to the field squadron, the 7-ton crane held as plant by the field plant squadron, and 121and 20-ton cranes held as heavy plant. Suitable types of equipment were available and could be readily produced.
It was sometimes argued that the development of the mechanicalhandling scheme would impose a heavy load upon the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers. Maj. Carter pointed out, however, that the savings in transport resulting from faster turnround times and the reduction of stores needed to be held "on wheels" would cancel out the burden of the extra mechanical equipment involved, and little or no extra load on R.E.M.E. would be made.
Trailer-trains
To save drivers, it was necessary to use bigger vehicles. He mentioned the trailer-train system involving prime movers and trailers with equal' body dimensions, and said that it might be made practice by the Royal "Army Service Corps to move 900 tons of stores using 30 tractors each towing three 10-ton trailers. In forward areas, normaltransport would be used with palleted loads. A 'field engineer regiment's establishment of mechanical aids could be 19 2-ton cross-'country fork-lift trucks with trailers, and eight 3-ton and four 7-Jon mbile. cranes.