OPINIONS and Q UERIES HAS THE INDUSTRY A COUNTERPLAN?
Page 29
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
MR. SEARLE, whose letter appeared in your issue dated January 4, would seem to have completely forgotten that, in private enterprise, there never was and never could be any set plan. So soon as there is a planned industry, then the great values of personal initiative and enterprise disappear.
If Mr. Searle thinks that, because a Labour Government decides to nationalize, private enterprise must scrap its birthright and propound some counter-plan, then disagree with him entirely. It is just possible that the counter-plan might be worse than the Government plan.
Believing in private enterprise as I do, I am fighting for it and cannot admit that it has any faults.
Stockton-on-Tees. H. L. WALKER.
NO NEED TO CHANGE LAMP-BULB CAP DESIGN RUMOURS are circulating that it is proposed to alter the design of the caps of automobile bulbs, and we believe that the reason for this is to work to greater accuracy in order to dispense with separate focussing adjustments on lamps.
However, taking into account that a departure from standardized fittings will create a great deal of confusion in the market, particularly as the effect of previous change-overs is still being felt, we think it most• important that before any alterations be made the matter should be openly discussed in the various trade journals..
We know that it is possible to construct the .present bulbs with greater accuracy without effecting any change in the design, and we would quote as an example our own particular type of lamp, which has never had any separate focussing device. In the fulfilment of our requirements the bulb Manufacturers have always worked to very fine limits, and the results achieved have been highly satisfactory.
Naturally, we do not want to stand in the way of progress, but we really fail to see any advantage which would be gained if automobile bulbs were to be differently constructed to suit one branch of the industry, whilst the rest of the industry and the market generally is thrown into confusion.
R. Hirsaas, Managing Director, Bromley. The Notek Electric Co., Ltd.
HENRY SPURRIER FUND SUBSCRIBER OBJECTS WITH interest and a certain amount of misgiving, I have read the leading article in your issue of December 21, 1945.
Mr. E. S. Shrapnell-Smith's lecture has put the "cat ate-ang the pigeons" with a vengeance, and will, I feel, cause a considerable flutter and some heartburning in ' the road transport dove-cote. In my opinion, it is extremely unfortun'ate that the Henry Spurrier Memorial should have been inaugurated by a It 're containing—as you point put—observations which I been better left unsaid at the present stage of road transport affairs, and I, for one, take strong exception to Mr. Shrapnell-Smith's remarks, feeling, as I do, quite sure that the Henry Spurrier Fund was
aa, never initiated with a view to the present-day possibility
' of the road transport industry becoming nationalized.
I. as a subscriber to the Fund, did so in good faith,
in the hope that the younger generation in the industry would derive benefit from the scheme—as was no doubt intended at the outset—and not with the possibility in view that those engaged in the road transport industry at the time were likely to be literally thrown out under the cloak of nationalization. I am firmly convinced that I will not stand alone in my present attitude to this Fund and the implications of the possible effect thereon in the event of nationalization.
I wonder how many of the numerous'subscribers will, like myself, now wish that such a fund had never been established. Had they been able to visualize at the time that they—or at least the younger generation—were not going to reap the benefit which should have accrued either directly or indirectly to road transport, undertakings, it is extremely doubtful whether they would have subscribed, or that the Fund would have reached the proportions which it did, despite the universal respect and esteem in which the late Henry Spurner was held.
Henry Spurrier was himself a pioneer of private enterprise, and I feel confident that he would have deplored most strongly any suggestion of his name being associated with a scheme, the ultimate and inevitable object of which would be to throw his many friends and clients out of business in favour of State ownership In view of the fact that other attempts to reorganize road transport on a State-owned basis have resulted in dismal failure, it is exceedingly difficult to appreciate the support so obviously given to a similar experiment on a vast and costly scale by a man of Mr. E. S. Shrapnell-Smith's standing. I feel sure, therefore, that readers of "The Commercial Motor" would be interested to learn something of hit history in relation to the road transport industry, together with a resume' of his qualifications and financial interests therein.
Evenwood, Co. Durham. W.E.
ANTI-REVERSE DEVICE FOR HEAVY VEHICLES ADVOCATED REFERRING to your editorial, "Why Not an Antireverse Device," in your issue dated December 14, 1945, I am entirely in agreement With Mr. J. Pratt, of Manley, whose letter appeared in your issue dated January 11,
Yes, the Millann free-wheel and sprag was an excellent device, and why the makers of heavy vehicles have failed to adopt it I am at a loss to understand. In view of the small cost of the fitment, I feel sure that it would more than pay for itself, as a large proportion of the accidents caused as the result of heavy vehicles running backwards would be avoided.
Such a device must be so fitted as to leave the human element out of the reckoning. It would seem that it is only after a fatal accident caused by a vehicle running backwards that an operator queries why it is that makers do not fit an anti-reverse device. It is time that this matter was looked into by the industry and a demand made that such a fitment be fitted to all vehicles over a stipulated weight. Why has the Ministry of War Transport not investigated this subject? We are always having thrust before us road-safety propaganda; here is an opportunity to prevent accidents. Mr. Barnes, what about it? I must add that I have no interest in the manufacture of the anti-reverse device which was marketed by Messrs. Millar and Lamb.
Essex. G. R. HAYWARD, A.M.Inst.B.E.