OPINIONS FROM OTHERS.
Page 66
Page 67
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Editor invites 'correspondence on all subjects connected with lhe use of commercial motors. Letters should be on one side of the paper only and typewritten by preference. The right of abbreviation is reserved, and no responsibility for views expressed is accepted.
SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS IN THE LICENSING SYSTEM.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2559] Sir,—There is much lamentation on all sides among users of the heavier classes of commercial vehicles over the increases in taxation.
At the time of the introduction of the Budget last year the increases appeared to create comparatively little interest among those wlio would be responsible for their payment, and only thl arrival of January 1st dispelled a very general impression that the new scale would not, for some reason, be imposed at the last minute. No doubt the increases created considerable apprehension in the minds of owners, and the wish was father to the thought.
That the disturbance of the scale of taxation has produced, at the moment, a most unfortunate psychological effect in the mind of the user will, we venture to think, not he disputed.
Unless the tax increases can be passed on by the vehicle owner in the form of increased charges for transport, which time alone can show, lasting damage may be inflicted on all connected with the supply and use of commercial vehicles.
The recent announcement of higher railway goods charges, that came into force on February 1st, may provide an opportunity to some for the recovery of the extra tax on their vehicles, but, to others engaged on long-distance road transport, the revision of working arrangements between the companies for such traffic may be a serious matter.
In the present state of the country's finances, consequent on the follies of last year, it is most unlikely that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will listen to representations for a reduction of the new scale of taxation.
Modern politics do not encourage the hope that even a bad tax imposed one year will be removed the next, and it must be recognized that large numbers of people who dislike the commercial vehicle for one reason or another (as correspondence in the daily Press and motoring journals go to show), and who have not troubled to realize that a tax on transport is a tax on commodities, do not consider it a bad tax.
There is, however, one direction in which there is just a possibility of obtaining relief, and that is in the incidence of the tax and also the system.
Private-car and commercial-vehicle interests for once should be united on this question, and the weight of the whole of the motoring community should be brought to bear to remedy the present scandal, for it is nothing ,less.
Under the existing system licences are only issued for annual, quarterly, part-yearly and part-quarterly periods. As the full rate only is payable for any odd days of the month, actually the scale of taxation is much increased thereby.
At present it is only possible to obtain a licence for a month when the month is the last of a quarter. This typically bureaucratic system has most baneful results to the nation, as I am about to show.
A new system, giving more flexibility, is vitally necessary to the country and would be beneficial to the Exchequer. I would suggest that a concerted effort be made to bring about a change which does not entail the sacrifice of transport users to the system. I see no good reason why, it should not be formed on the following lines :
(a) Removal of arbitrary periods.
(b) Licences issued for one year from date of appli cation or for any less number of months re quired, and at proportional rates, subject to 044 small additional charges increasing from eleven months to one month.
(c) Licences issued for one day, seven days and fourteen days or for any other short periods to be determined.
(d) Licences could be of one colour for each year • and be heavily over-printed in large type with the first three letters of the name of each month. These would be easily visible and ample for the detection of fraud.
(e) Registration books dispensed with as being useless ; small certificates could take their place as formerly.
(f) Simplication of application forms, (g) Old licences to be surrendered in the same way as with a season ticket, and subject to a penalty if not so surrendered. No period of grace recognized.
(h) Penalties for evasion increased.
The present system, with its fixed periods, acts as a deterrent to trade and is the direct cause of substantial loss to the country.
Large numbers of new vehicles, both private and commercial, lie idle during the last 10-14 days of each month, because owners will not license hem and put them into service.
The tax for a lorry and trailer for the last day of a Month will now be £6 is., and it will be considerably more for the largest passenger vehicle. This is at the rate of £2,208 5s. per annum for a lorry and trailer. These rates are merely ridiculous and in keeping with the whole system, which has apparently been designed for the benefit of the bureaucrats.
It seems almost insane to produce vehicles which, when built, may be virtually prohibited from use for a period. These idle vehicles represent an enormous sum of money, entailing a big loss to the country's trade and, in turn, to the Treasury through the medium of income tax.
By the removal of the arbitrary period, delays by the licensing authorities in the issue of new licences at quarter days would be avoided, as the number of applications would be spread more evenly throughout the year. Applicants would not then have to wait in queues for hours, only finally to be turned away, as occurred at the L.C.C. offices at County Hall a few weeks ago.
I trust my letter will do something towards bringing about definite action to remove these obvious abuses of the present licensing system.—Yours faithfully,
H. R. HOOD BAnas, Managing Director,
London. G. Scammell and Nephew, Ltd.
Economy in Lubrication.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL Moron.
[2260] Sir,—With reference to the recent articles on "Economy in Lubrication" and the comments on same, I cannot see why to-day fleet engineers need to ask, "Where am IV' or to say that they are out in the cold.
There are at least two dozen leading oil firms to-day in Great Britain who can supply real good oil at a fair price. Let the engineer find out what suits his particular fleet, pay a fair price, instead of wanting it cheaper, and by taking samples from each delivery see that it is up to standard.
When we come to compare the lubricating systems adopted by different makers to try and find out which is the most reliable, economical and least dependent on the human element, then, I say, place reliance upon forced feed with a good pump located in the sump, the sump capable of carrying two or three gallons of oil, no external pipe to leak, no air leaks, no priming, oil in sump having a good cooling surface. The main and big-ends have an oil 111m constantly forced between the rubbing surfaces, and pistons and gudgeon pins have ample lubrication from the oil mist created by the surplus thrown from the big-end bearings.
One of the beet systems is the Dennis. In 20 years' experience I have had no trouble from leaky main bearings starving the big-ends, and if fleet engineers or mechanics in charge see that, on engine overhauls, fitters bed the main bearings properly on the crankcase housings, see that the lips of the bearing shells come tightly together and that the bearing cap is properly tightened down to bear on the sump, there will be no complaints of losing oil pressure from main bearings until all other parts are ready for the yearly overhaul.
For instance, take old Starand Napier cars of 3910 with forced feed. There was never any trouble. I know a 1910 Star running to-day as a lorry, and the bearings have only been renewed once in 16 years. I also know a Lancia 20-seater motor coach, three years on the road in Cornwall in the hands of a farmer, who only knows enough to put in petrol and oil and to use the starting handle. When I inspected it recently there was not the least sign of bearing knock, although this machine is fitted with external plunger pump and suction pipe—not what I consider ideal design.—Yours
faithfully, R. STIARPE, Fleet Engineer.
Newemay, Cornwall. HOCKINGS TouRS.
Should the Horse be Excluded from Congested Areas ?
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2261] Sir,—Nobody loves me, but I still cling to life! My only chance of crossing the terrible stream of motor traffic is when a merciful horse slows down the pace. Therefore, I say, "Long live the horse."—Yours faith
fully, A PEDESTRIAN. London.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
12262] Sir,—Your timely remarks on the elimination of the horse from congested areas opens up a subject of very great national importance and one which should be thoroughly thrashed out as soon as possible.
From a health point of view alone, the condition of the atmosphere in the streets of London, especially in warm weather, is becoming appalling, and would appear to be equally due to the presence of the horse and the petrol haze of the motors. If the congestion were removed by the elimination of the horse, and .movement accelerated, no doubt the petrol haze would be also much reduced.
We all value our time at some figure, and if the hundreds of thousands travelling through the centre of London per day only lose half an hour each at. say, 2s. per hour, through traffic delays, the resultant loss per annum runs into millions of pounds. Slow delivery of goods means a direct loss on the same, and the extra capital required on account of this and also additional transport vehicles must amount to a considerable sum. Is it too much to say that, in London alone, ten millions of pounds are lost through the congestion and slow movement of the street traffic every year? And be it noted that, because of the increase in motor licence fees this year, more horses are already being put back on to this work.
The only means of relief is to employ more electric vehicles for city work, for which they are eminently suited. Indeed, its inherent characteristics make the electric vehicle the only type of road transport for consideration under the conditions prevailing. It takes LID less space than any other vehicle on the road and has an economical speed at least twice that of the horse; there is no smell, it is easy to handle and fit for the oldest men to drive; its reliability is proverbial, it is
cheap to run and it uses home-produced fuel, viz., electricity, which is not liable to fluctuations.
Its disadvantage in the past has been high first cost. This does not now obtain to the same extent, and increasing numbers will quickly bring the cost down still further. Batteries are now guaranteed for at least three years, and long-period maintenance contracts can now be arranged.
From the point of view of national efficiency the electric vehicle must be given greater attention. Why should there be thousands in use in Germany and America for the hundreds in this country, where electricity is cheap and becoming increasing plentiful?— Yours faithfully, C. G. CONRADI, Managing Director, Otley, Yorks. Electromobile, Ltd, The Editor, TEE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2263] Sir,—It is with considerable interest that I have followed the articles re "Elimination of Horsed Transport." The problem is not only of interest to owners of commercial motors, but to owners of private vehicles. One has only to travel through any part of London to see where the delays and obstructions lay, namely, the horse vehicle, and, although not generally accepted, the tramcar. A journey to the City, which need only occupy 20 minutes, takes half an hour and sometimes very much longer through obstruction by horses and tramcars, the former very often obstructing the latter.
The tramcars in themselves are retarding progress. They are obsolete; being confined to a track, they are not mobile. They are keeping down the width and length of London's buses. The transport of the future lies with the internalcombustion-engine-propelled vehicle.—Yours faithfully,
London, N. C. V. TAYLOR.
The Life of the Taxi-sidecar Driver.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR, [2264] Sir,—I had a conversation the other day With a taxi-sidecar proprietor who told me that the taxi business in Birmingham is very much overdone. He said that, although, a few years ago, the ownerdriver with a few hundred pounds capital could put half a dozen or so of these vehicles into commission and, after deducting drivers' wages, general running expenses, insurance, depreciation, etc., could make something like 13 per week profit out of each machine, this was not the case to-day, profits actually being about one-half this amount.
To give an idea as to how the business is overdone. an example of one day's working might prove interesting. At 8.30 a.m. one arrives at a stand behind possibly six other machines. When these have obtained a fare, say, by about 11 o'clock, one takes first place and obtains a fare amounting perhaps to 2s. 6d. Although only away 20 minutes, when the driver returns to the rank again he has to take up his position behind perhaps another 20 sidecar-taxis, and then, taking the general law of averages, at 2 o'clock another small fare is obtained, the procedure being again repeated as outlined above. Unless one is prepared to wait until midnight there is little hope of obtaining a good (double) fare which might constitute a satisfactory day. An additional difficulty is the fact that the driver to do this type of work in all weathers must be paid well and be in continuous good health, so that the chance of loss due to illness is as small as possible. In such a contingency, of course, there is a very remote chance of replacing the driver, which means that the machine is out of commission, whilst the tax, insurance and general charges still go on. The proprietordriver, however, is in rather a better position, as he can keep all his tips and can possibly work in a few regular jobs as well.—Yours faithfully, Birmingham. ONLOOKER.