Gas Turbine v. Oil Engine
Page 56
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
DOUBTLESS the article describing the Austin gas -"turbine appearing in your March 24 issue will be read withconsiderable interest by potential users of this type of power unit in both on and off-highway applications.
Without wishing in any way to detract from the merits of this unit, however, a number of the comparisons drawn between it and a modern oil engine would appear to be not only misleading but also contradictory in the absence of any further explanation.
It is not at all clear whether we are to regard the turbine as a stationary industrial unit or a mobile onor offhighway prime mover.
If it is the latter, which would be in line with the powerto-weight ratio given of a typical oil engine as 10 lb. per b.h.p., then the price comparison made is completely misleading. The cost of the 250 b.h.p. oil engine cited should be not much more than half the figure of 0,000 quoted.
In addition, the cost of the turbine apparently does not include that of the heat exchanger, the use of which would be vital if the specific fuel consumption is to be kept within commercially acceptable limits for this type of application.
On the other hand, if the price of £3,000 is representative, this would indicate a heavy slow-speed industrial oil engine; in which case a comparison between the life of such an engine and the turbine would be enlightening.
It should also be borne in mind that comparisons of both weight and bulk are also misleading unless the heat exchanger is included.
When all these factors are taken into account, I would suggest that the modern high-speed oil engine will remain in a very favourable competitive position for many years to come.
AS trailer manufacturers we read your article, "Will It Connect?" (March 10 issue) with great interest, but it did seem to us to give the layman somewhat the wrong impression of trailer braking generally. It seemed to us that it might have been better, and have given rise to less confusion, if the article had dealt with braking systems in general use in the United Kingdom, and then brought in later the systems in use on the Continent.
Most people, but by nomeans all, are interested in the braking systems used in this country, and we agree that there is some confusion here. We feel, however, that the trailer makers are in no way to blame for this, since in the past •they have had to follow what has been fitted to a prime mover.
As you point out both in the article and in your editorial, a large amount of thought is being given by both prime mover manufacturers and trailer manufacturers to this braking question, and we have every confidence that satisfactory results will be forthcoming in, we would go as far to say, the next five years. We feel consequently that your statement that there is little chance of an improvement in the position in the foreseeable future is much too pessimistic.
Really there are only two systems in use in this country which apply to both independent and articulated trailers c16 and these are the simple or upright vacuum system and the two-line air-pressure system.
The writer has been connected with this concern for over 30 years, and during that time we have made only a very few 'trailers with inverted vacuum, for the railway companies, and none with two-line vacuum for use in this country. So, instead of having six systems to be considered in the U.K., there are only two. Whilst the double-line vacuum has the advantage of having an automatic application should a break-away occur, it does not seem, at this stage of development, that a new system should be introduced. If simple vacuum is not considered suitable beyond a certain gross weight, two-line air should be used.
When one comes to consider the Continental systems there are, as you say, several different methods in use, but here again for international traffic various committees are considering standards which could apply to all vehicles engaged on this form of traffic. Domestically they will probably still carry on with their own existing arrangement, but we have every confidence that within the period previously stated there will be international agreement.
Just one small point about the actual article. In the second column, paragraph commencing "Finally, it can be two line inverted" . . should not "additional upright vacuum" be replaced by "additional constant vacuum "? as our understanding of this two-line inverted system is that there is constant vacuum in both lines until the vacuum is destroyed in one of the lines when the brake is applied.
We trust you will accept these comments in the spirit with which they are made, and kvould in any case congratulate you on taking the initiative in having such an article written.
Andover, Hants. H. O. DOUGHTY,
MR. P. J. CHESHIRE, Sheffield area secretary of the South Yorks area of the Road Haulage Association, has consulted me about the report published in the March 24 issue of The Commercial Motor, under the heading "Tippers Operated Illegally," of the hearing before the Yorkshire Licensing Authority of applications by XRE Transport Company, of Rotherham, and others for shortterm B licences.
According to your report, in the course of the hearing it was stated by or on behalf of the applicants that the R.H.A. at Sheffield had suggested that the granting of short-term B licences in these circumstances was purely an administrative matter, and licences would be granted automatically; and because of this vehicles had worked illegally.
Whilst it is fully appreciated that your newspaper merely reported the hearing, you will appreciate that these statements cause a serious reflection upon the R.H.A. at Sheffield.
I am instructed by the area secretary to say that neither he nor any member of his staff has ever made a statement, either to Mr. Pinchbeck, of XRE Transport, or to anybody else, that the granting of an A or B licence is a purely administrative matter, or that such licences would be granted automatically; still less that in any circumstances operators can use vehicles pending the issue of licences.
Sheffield, 1. M. B. THORNELOE, LL.M.