IN YOUR OPINION
Page 72
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Have Women Taken Over?
WITH regard to "The Hawk's" question (April 3) "When will the fair sex take over, on the buses," this has already been accomplished. My wife has been driving coaches and double-deckers for the past three years, so far without incident.
We have three A.E.C. Reliances, a Thames, a Commer, two Daimler double-deckers and a Leyland PD2. All these she drives confidently. What chance do we poor men stand?
Holmeswood, JAMES F. ASPINALL (Engineer),
nr. Ormskirk, Lancs. Holmeswood Coaches Ltd.
Transporter length limits I THINK the attention of all road users should be drawn
to Mr. Marples" proposal to limit the length of a vehicle and trailer car transporter to 59 ft. His proposal does not affect any other type of vehicle and it astonishes me that legislation is to be sought to affect 100 car transporters. The argument put forward by Mr. Marples is "road congestion ". That means that one transporter in every 80 000 other vehicles is causing congestion!
He also states that the 59 ft. length brings us in line with E.E.C. countries. No British car transporters are used regularly between here and the Continent; in fact, French Railways take good care of that.
I had a meeting recently with the Ministry of Transport to examine the proposals and suggest alternatives. It is with regret that 1 report an inflexible attitude by the Ministry.
My company have pointed out that we shall have to build 18 per cent more smaller transporters to compensate for the shortening of the present larger models. The increased cost of delivering cars will be at least 10s. per car —and for no reason at all.
A further point requires looking into. T have been permitted to assist the chairman of the Car Transporter Section of the R.H.A. in seeking consideration for am taming present vehicle and trailer dimensions. here appears to be no direct member of the R.H.A. exec tive representing car transporter owners. I would say that they have a very good case for such representation.
Tamworth, Staffs. A. H. CARTER,
Managing Director, Carter Engineering Co. (Tamworth) L d.
Protect the Tipper Operator J EFERR1NG to the report, "Gravel Firm Wins C Test " Case" in your May 1 issue, I would like to say that we are one of the oldest tipper haulage companies in orth London and operate a fleet of 17 on A licence. Our ork is mainly carrying sand and ballast for merchants mt. the London area, and carrying rubbish from building sit s to a rubbish shoot. We pay 12s. 6d. to 15s. a load to 11 in these pits, and the owners do not appear to be alio ing for this shoot charge when quoting customers to clea the rubbish themselves on a C licence. The magistrat s at Feltham have now made it clear that pit owners arc entitled to clear rubbish on a C licence. If we plac d a fleet of tippers on the road on C licence to clear rub iish, every tipper operator in London would have us in c urt.
The very fact that pit owners are allowed to try excavated material and rubbish on a C licence is the amn reason for the very low rates in the London area. We operators have to allow for a charge for tipping ru Dish when quoting customers, but the pit owner can und rcut us by Is. 6d. to 2s. per cu. yd., as he has no tip ch rge to pay.
Surely it is time something was done to protect the tipper operator from this type of haulage.
Enfield, Middlesex. J. W. FANE,
Manager, Tankard Motors Lt [The case is discussed on page 31.—ED.)