OPINIONS and QUERIES
Page 59
Page 60
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A Strong Protest Against Increased Taxation, A Discussion on Heavy-transport Costs. Fire Risks in Connection with the Heavy-oil Engine. Definitions of Classes of Passenger Vehicle.
Cogent Arguments Against Increased Taxation.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3321] Sir,—As operators of mechanically propelled goods vehicles, both large and small, since the earliest days of motor development, may we through your columns voice our protest against the increased taxation on heavier vehicles suggested in the final report of the Royal Commission on Transport—the more so in that the severe increase suggested is advanced as "the only means of effectively discouraging their use," and is admitted to be prominently influenced by " the ques tion of competition between road and rail.". • The Report of the Commission embodies so much that is diametrically opposed to such a suggestion that it is more than difficult to reconcile with the balance of its observations and recommendations.
Thus in Section 239 the Commission state that the "owners and users of mechanically propelled vehicles
. . should not, becatise they happen to employ a particular form of transport, be subjected to 'anything in the nature of a sumptuary tax." In Section 248 -it is stated that the Commission is "satisfied that the. users of ,meehanically propelled vehicles are not as a class paying .too much in taxation nor 00 we think that in a general way they are paying too little," and Section 241states that "the motorist, quri motorist, is paying £40,000,000 a year, equivalent to two-thirds of the annual cost of the highway system "—and in face of these statements comes the suggestion for a heavy increase in the licence duty of vehicles over four tons unladen weight. • It may reasonably be contended that the existing scale of taxation is open to criticism in that whilst the law allows of vehicles up to 11 tons unladen weight, the tax provides for a flat rate on all vehicles exceeding 5 tons, and that the scale should be revised to re-adjust the existing total of taxation as between the different classes of vehicle, but only provided that if taxation upon one class of vehicle were increased a corresponding decrease should be made on other classes.
But the Commission, having shown (in Section 513) that it is awake to the danger of restricting the normal development of one form of transport for the benefit of another, yet forgets the wisdom of its conclusion and deliberately recommends such restriction with its object clearly stated.
Let it be realized that an increase in the taxation of the heavier vehicles penalizes unfairly not only hauliers like ourselves, but the numerous ancillary users and the British motor manufacturer, whose vehicles are pre-eminent, more particularly in the classes which would be hit.
Further, any increased taxation upon transport must finally become a charge upon trade in general, and surely the present is not a time suitable for this.
Apart from this outstanding lapse, all thinking persons must appreciate the, sound common sense of the Report on the subject of competitive transport.
During the past few years so much propaganda has been released with the object of conveying that the shortcomings of one branch of transport were due to the sins of another, that it is refreshing When suth a well-informed and authoritative body as • the Royal Commission bids the various forms of transport loOk to their own shortcomings rather than 'spend their 'time talking of the advantages—real or imaginary--of their competitors. •
If road transport has in the immediate Past appeared to possess advantages as COmpared with the railways,'
let it be recognized how much suelt advantages have been due to the failure of the railways to put their own house in order and Offer to the trader and traveller that increasing efficiency which IS eipected from any great industry operating under modern conditions.
An industry in which costs are allowed to mount and progress to be retarded to the degree observable in recent years in the railways must necessarily be vulner able to any efficient competition, and in the common interest it is certainly not desirable that such efficient
competition should be artifically restricted, provided always that it is not made possible by the exploitation a some section of the community.
Had the great motor-manufacturing industry been content to progress during the past 10 years upon lines similar to the railways; it would have been the exception to meet a British-manufactured vehicle on our roads by now.
The road-transport industry asks no favours, but equally it should protest with the utmost vigour against regulation or taxation which cannot he justified upon its own merits as directly affecting the industry—but has as its admitted object the harassing of road trans port for the benefit of a competitive form of transport. Surely the time has come for our railways to realize that for industries as for individuals the only real improvement lies in self-improvement.
MAXWELL HICKS, Chairman. McNamara and Co. (1.921), Ltd.
London, E.C.2.
Lorry and Trailer or Articulated Six-wheeler ? The Editor, THE COMAIERCIAL MOTOR.
[3322] Sir,—We have recently seen "This Week's Problem" in your December 2nd issue, and would submit that the suggested solution is misleading.
Is it possible to maintain a daily mileage of 166 with a lorry and trailer for a wage cost of £6 per week? It is assumed that the driver would require a mate. In any case, the hours would probably be excessive considering the legal speed of a vehicle with trailer, and the probability of the law being enforced.
Surely the best solution to the problem is the employment of an articulated vehicle to carry the whole load. Even then it is doubtful whether or not the milQage would be run in five days without some relief work by a second driver.
Please accept our assurance that, although we criticize in this instance, we greatly -appreciate your articles. F. 1317LLEN.
King's Lynn. (For Giles and Bullen.)
[The amount, £6, quoted as wages in the inquiry to which you refer was given to me by the inquirer himself. On general grounds I agree that, in all the circumstances usually present, an articulated six-wheeler might be pre ferable for the particular contract under discussion. I advised a wagon and trailer because of the difficulty of finding suitable work for the six-wheeled outfit when the particular contract was completed. It seemed to me that it would be ,easier to find work for the lorry, keeping the trailer available for use when bigger loads offered, than to find loads to keep a 15-tonner economically employed.—S.T.R.]
The Oil Engine and Fire Risks.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3323] Sir,—I note from Major Goddard's letter, which appeared in your issue of December 23rd last, that I-have done wrong in mentioning the possible fire risk which still exists, even with oil engines. He has gone so far as to state that I mislead the public with my statements which appeared in your issue dated December 2nd last.
He states that there is no risk of fire, even if the exhaust pipe is dangerously hot. The flashpoint of the fuel oil he uses, he says, is far too high to be fired, and he says that he could pour this oil right on to the exhaust pipe of his Gardner and the Mercedes-Benz oil engines without any danger of the oil becoming ignited by reason of the heat of the pipe.
He also states that the exhaust-pipe temperature In the case of such machines as these is about 160 degrees to 165 degrees F.
In spite of Major Goddard's remarks, I still stick to my views, which are the result of over 30 years' work in connection with many types of oil engine. My researches are well known to a large circle of friends in many parts of the world, and I would be the very last person to mislead the public and to place any immaterial obstacles in the path of the wholesale application of the compression-ignition engine.
When, however, Major Goddard states that there is no danger of fire I am sure he is labouring under a delusion; there is, to be more exact, much less danger from fire with the efficient oil engine than with the dangerous petrol engine. When he calls attention, particularly, to the temperature of the Gardner and the Mercedes-Benz oil engines as being 160 degrees to 165 degrees F. I would respectfully beg to differ with him in both cases, but I will also hasten to say that perhaps he merely referred to the temperature of the cooling water, and not to the exhaust-gas temperature, which I am sure that the designers of those two excellent engines would agree is very much higher when operating under their normal rated full load and fuel consumption.
I have tested many makes of oil engine when operating under their normal rated loads, and I find that the temperature at the exhaust has been in some cases as high as 1,000 degrees to 1,100 degrees P., both of Which temperatures are well above the ignition point, at atmospheric pressure, of ordinary oil fuel and are therefore sufficient to cause fire.
At sea we have oil engines at work in which the exhaust gas (waste heat) is used in boilers to make steam at 100-lb. pressure, the temperature of the steam itself is 337 degrees F., and the major can be assured that the final discharge from the exhaust-gas boilers is ,very much above that of the steam itself, varying in some cases from 400 degrees to 600 degrees F. The facts are that with a normal oil engine it is impossible to escape this high exhaust temperature, and the only way to reduce it is to use it for producing work, and this can only be-accomplished by changing the thermodynamic conditions under which combustion takes place. The necessary conditions are obtained in the Paragon silent cycle.
u42 It was in recognition of this great exhaust-heat loss and high temperature in connection with oilengined railway locomotives that we spent quite a lot of money and valuable time in investigating the matter. This ultimately led to the invention of the Paragon heat cycle. Even with this heat-power cycle with its cool exhausts I would have no hesitation in prosecuting any of my agents if he sold one on the basis that it was "fireproof." I am well acquainted with the moral and legal position which such gross misrepresentation might lead to. The facts are that in the Paragon cycle we keep our fire where it is useful, namely, in the cylinders of the engine, and we do not let it loose until it is well below that temperature at which, under normal conditions, it may become dangerous.
When Major Goddard states he can pour oil fuel on ; to the hot exhaust pipe of any normal type oil engine, after a run at full normal load, I respectfully suggest to him that he is getting quite contemptuous. The practice should not be encouraged, or for that, even mentioned.
In the case of the Paragon cycle we take the expansion down to such a low degree before the exhaust valves open that the resulting released temperature at the terminal of the exhaust is much lower than that of a normal oil engine, and very probably would not fire even petrol. It is indeed due to much fuller utilization of the usually wasted exhaust heat that the Paragon cycle gives such a high thermal efficiency and lower fuel consumption, quite apart from the engine being practically silent as regards the exhaust, which, in itself, is a great advantage, especially for a vehicle intended for use on a passenger service.
Owing to the smaller compression space, compared with normal oil engines, there is less internal surface exposed to the influence of the cooling water, coupequently we have more heat for expansion and work, which, after all, is the very thing that we Paragon people desire. WILLIAM P. DURTNALL. London, S.E.5.
Express or Stage Carriages ?
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[33241 Sir,—We should he glad if you would give us. your advice on what appears to us to be a rather complicated matter. Reading from your issue of October 7th, page 245, we find that, under the classification of public-service vehicles, you state that in Section No. 61 the following distinctions are made:—
Stage carriage is defined by a fare of less than a shilling for a single journey. • Express carriage is defined by a fare of more than a shilling.
• Can you now tell us what p to happen to one of our services serving a country route where the fares vary
from 1d. to is. Ott. single? , Does this mean that we shall be obliged to book passengers over only a portion of .the journey, turn them into the road and rebook them to the termination' of the journey?
Quoting you again, we find that you say under (1) stage carriages, on the page already quoted, "and any other motor vehicles carrying passengers for hire and not being an express carriage."
Our vehicle, with a fare in excess of 1s., does not appear to be an express carriage, in that its stopping places are at practically every farm on the route, so where are we? PASSENGER VEHICLE. Matlock.
[If you will refer again to the definition we gave you will see that a stage carriage is a vehicle in which passengers are carried for hire at separate fares, all or any of which are less than one shilling. In order for a vehicle to be an express carriage none of the fares must be less than one shilling.
As some of your fares are less than a shilling, the vehicles to which you refer will have to be licensed as stage carriages.—En.]