M1 Running Ruins Tyres
Page 45
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I DISAGREE with the views expressed by Janus (April 1) I on the use of the London-Birmingham motorway by hauliers' vehicles. He should have consulted some of the most prominent hauliers who have tried using the motorway and banned it, instead of coming to hasty conclusions without delving properly into the facts.
We lack the proper vehicles to operate on such a road. I could make many criticisms of current commercial vehicles. They are badly constructed, mainly because of unladen-weight restrictions imposed by Parliament and the Licensing Authorities, but, at the moment, I am concerned. principally with tyres.
The circumferences of the tyres used on British haulage vehicles are far too small and cannot withstand the excessive heat created by fast travel on Ml. Mercedes commercial vehicles operated on the Continent have tyres twice the circumference of those used by British manufacturers. We have found that tyre after tyre is ruined on the motorway after less than 10,000 miles of service and, as a consequence, our tyre costs have risen by more than half since the opening of MI.
I also have it at the back of my mind that the motorway provides a wonderful alibi for the driver of the commercial vehicle who is not willing to look after his tyres properly. For instance, I foresee that a driver could run on a puncture and ruin a tyre completely when he was in, say, the Potteries. When his employer tackled him on his arrival in London, he could say that the puncture occurred on the motorway and he could not pull up immediately, because the police or some other authority moved him to the nearest layby two miles away, as a consequence of which he had no option but to ruin the tyre.
I speak not only for this company, but for many of my haulier friends, who have also had to ban their vehicles from using the motorway, not so much because of accidents, as Janus said, as because of excessive tyre wear. Until the manufacturer is prepared, at economic cost, to provide the proper tool to run on motorways, the vehicles owned by this company will stay off it. In these days of keen competition it would be impossible to pass on to customers the extra tyre cost created by the use of the motorway in order to reduce the journey time very slightly.
London, S.E.8. W. A. FIEYMANN,
. . Managing Director, and H. Transport Services (Peckham), Ltd.
Small Operator Champions P.V.O.A.
IVEVER before have I seen a letter in The Commercial " Motor (April 1) that has annoyed me more than the one from A. Pearce and Co. The remarks regarding fuel tax have been heard time and again and they must obviously be the views of everyone in the coach and haulage industries.
In their last paragraph, however, A. Pearce and Co. say they hope the Passenger Vehicle Operators' Association will read the letter, and that they are not members of the Association, because the P.V.O.A. do not "truly represent the small operator, or, at best, they are out of touch with him."
What absolute and utter nonsense As a so-called small operator with four Bedford coaches, I have been a member of the Association since 1946. About five years ago I mistakenly felt dissatisfied with the P.V.O.A. and, in the same way as A. Pearce and Co., thought that the Association was being run for the "big boys" only. However, I did not complain to the Press.
Instead, I wrote my views to the P.V.O.A., and advised them that in consequence I wished to cancel my membership. After a certain amount of correspondence and visits from area committee members, when I had an opportunity to air my grievances, I was persuaded to continue my membership and subsequently was elected to the London Area committee. I have attended nearly every meeting in the past five years and cannot reiterate too much the fact that everything that takes place at these meetings is for the ultimate benefit of the whole of the coaching industry.
The amount of time and money freely spent by some of the leading representatives on committees and the national council and at various conferences is out of all proportion to the advantages they can personally gain. It is a great pity that operators such as A. Pearce and Co. do not realize what is being done on their behalf, even though they are not members of the P.V.O.A.
In industry today, it is more essential than ever for a business to belong to its own trade association. It is only by the united efforts and financial support of all that the voice of that trade can be heard.
The P.V.O.A. cannot do more than offer the opportunity of membership to all those engaged in the operation of coaches. If, however, there is a shred of truth in the statement that the Association are out of touch, it can only be because some companies dissociate themselves from the very organization that is there for the sole purpose of helping them.
This letter represents my own personal viewpoint and is not written with the permission or knowledge of the P.V.O.A.
London, E.18. L. A. WEST,
West's Coaches.
No General Sanction for Beam Carrier
A DESCRIPTION of a four-wheel-steering long beam 1-1. transporter published in The Commercial Motor on February 19 says: "The first vehicle produced has received Ministry of Transport approval and can be used on the road when steering action of one axle is locked."
This information is incorrect. The vehicle concerned [made by Simmons Engineering, Botley Road, West End, Southampton] does not comply with the Motor Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations, 1955, as amended, and its use on the roads is permitted only on the issue of a special Order by the Minister under Section 3 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930. So far, only one special Order has been issued authorizing the vehicle to be moved on the roads, subject to certain conditions and restrictions, for two specified journeys. The question of further movements by road of this and similar vehicles will receive consideration, but no assurance can be given at this stage that the necessary authority will be granted.
London, W.1. I. E. SEXTON,
Ministry of Transport.