Make the Limit 30 m.p.h.
Page 40
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I WAS interested in the letter from Eric Cant in your issue tlated March 27. I cannot, however, understand his complaints against the proposed lifting of the speed limit for " heavies " to 30 m.p.h. The fact is that their drivers will then legally be allowed to travel at the slightly higher speed, which they have been doing for a long time.
A little while ago I noticed a report of a census on the speed of heavy goods vehicles on some of our main roads. From this it appeared that only 6 per cent. of these vehicles were keeping at near their limit of 20 m.p.h., which is a proof that this regulation is now just a farce.
Mr. Cant quotes the London-Glasgow run as a fair week's work. Of course it is, and I do not believe that many owners would expect this trip to be done any quicker if the speed limit is raised to 30 m.p.h.
Most good drivers will run their vehicles at the most comfortable working speed, which is mostly somewhere
between 20-30 m.p.h., although modern heavy lorries are fully capable of much higher speeds with complete safety.
Why should a vehicle carrying merchandise on virtually the same chassis layout as its passenger counterpart be subject to a different speed limit at all? Surely trade and industry should be allowed to take a little advantage of the highly efficient and line modern transport media which are such a great credit to their manufacturers in this country. if not, there does not seem much point in producing them.
Mr. Cant trots out the "good old days" for an airing. We all know that conditions were not as they should have been years ago, but surely it is time this matter was left in its grave and we should look forward for a change. He concludes by saying that drivers do not favour this change, but I know that a great many do.
The chief reason is that they would be able to travel along comfortably without having to keep one eye on the speedometer and the other on the driving mirror in case they are attracting the attention of a mobile police patrol.
I would mention that I can view this subject from both sides, being an employer now but having driven most types of motor vehicle since 1928.
Braintree. E. T. S ITH
Freedom of Transport ?
LEARN that a firm of coach operators on Merseyside I have been applying for licences to continue operating from the Royal Air Force station at West Kirby; to various destinations throughout the country, including London. Recruits go on special leave to visit their homes with a view to making this Service their career with the approval of their parents.
Several of the licences were apparently approved, but others, including that to London, were disallowed after a four-day inquiry at Manchester. This hearing was held by the Area Licensing Authority and his decision was reserved for several days. During the interim Crosville Motor Services, Ltd., made application for unlimited duplication of their services to London. This was granted for a further year.
Is this justice to our airmen? Crosville pick up civilian passengers outside Lime Street Station, alongside the main Liverpool to London railhead, whilst these airmen are stationed 10 miles from this point. A feeder service may be provided to Liverpool, but the airmen have to pay for this service what the railway think fit, against the much cheaper and more convenient transport by coach.
If this is the Licensing Authority's idea of justice to our young men in the Services, who daily give their lives in the air so that the defence of the country is assured, 1, with many others throughout the country, beg to differ.
Mr. Beames, solicitor on behalf of the railway which opposed the private operators' application, passed some wise remarks about the old and the young not being fit to travel by rail and that only the middle class were left to the railways. Yet, within 10 days he was appearing on behalf of Crosville Motor Services, Ltd., supporting their application to encourage the general public to travel by road to London. This against the railway with a service a few yards away—not the 10 miles which applies to the airmen.
The armed Services must do as they are told, but the general public must have choice of transport. Is this the British justice we try to uphold throughout the world?
Liverpool. Ex-R.A.F.
Light Code in Highway Code ?
CONCERNING the letter from W. V. Batstone in your issue dated April 3, I wholeheartedly agree with him in the view that if there was no light code for lorry drivers, for use both night and day, there would be moreaccidents, and conditions would be more difficult.
I am of the opinion, however, that if every road user was to take the trouble to learn the code, and put it into operation, the percentage of accidents would fall rapidly. As things are, it is only the long-distance men who appear to know and understand it, and this can be dangerous, especially at night during the summer when there are more cars on the road.
Many times I have given one long flash to say "I am coming through," and have received two short flaghes in return from the oncoming vehicle, then, thinking all was clear I have carried on, only to find the vehicle ahead still approaching and missing me by inches. Obviously, the other driver, not knowing any better, thought that I was dazzling him and rightly or wrongly flashed back.
Would it not be a good idea to have an agreed light code laid down in the Highway Code so that everyone could become conversant with it?
I think H. E. Oxnard, writing in the same issue, is wrong in his remarks on flashing. In my opinion and from experience all over the country, the driver who is giving way gives two short flashes, whereas one long flash means that he is coming through. I find that the most effective way to signal "giving way," is to flash the side lights twice. This, in turn, flashes the tail light and Warns anyone who may be following that I am slowing down.
Carshalton, Surrey. B. C. Mills.