OPINIONS and QUERIES Expediting Traffic Flow and Reducing Congestion.
Page 59
Page 60
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Editor, TILE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3727] Sir,—Congratulations on your excellent illustrated article in The Commercial Moto-r on expediting traffic flow and reducing congestion.
The perspective drawing reminds me of what has been done over a period of many years in Chester, following in the footsteps of the ancient Chester Rows, also improvements which have been carried out in other cities and towns, well illustrated in the High Street, Winchester.
As I see it, the main difficulty in London is the numerous authorities who have a voice in matters relating to roads and buildings. To enumerate a few, in addition to the City and the London borough councils, there are the London County Council, the Minister of Transport (operating under the London Traffic Act, 1924), the Metropolitan and City Police, to say nothing of the numerous undertakings which have rights of way or user. All these in addition to the owners and occupiers.
Some few years ago the Automobile Association went into this question, and obtained some most useful information through the Town Clerk of Chester with regard to the provisions of the Act of 1845, which, in a somewhat remote way, might be likened to a Town Planning Act of the present day.
When, little over a year ago, the London County Council was considering building by-laws, Sir Owen Williams and others referred to the advantages of having covered footways, not merely at street level but also on the first floor, which is really a modernized method of what our predecessors• evolved in Chester some centuries ago.
There are many thoroughfares in London where considerably improved facilities, both for vehicular traffic and business people, could be provided at relatively small cost when compared with the demolition and entire reconstruction of buildings.
London, W.1. STENSON COOKE, Secretary, The Automobile Association.
How Should Horses be Carried?
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3728] Sir,—With reference to the article about motor horseboxes appearing in your issue dated March 22nd, I should like to give my views on this point.
I consider that, actually, horses travel better facing forwards than backwards, with the one drawback, as pointed out by other correspondents, that should the box have to be stopped very suddenly and the horse went forward there might be some injury to the shoulder, but this would only happen if all the brakes were applied very suddenly.
In a fairly quick pull up 1 do not think there would be much fear of any damage being done, as the animal would have free use of his hocks, but if travelling tail first any shock would be taken by the quarters, also horses are more likely to hate their quarters up against any firm partition than they are their shoulders, so that in the event of any sudden stop there is less room in which to gain any impetus.
The above remarks deal with the only disadvantake of forward travelling, and I now come to the advantages :
In the trailer horseboxes which I make I have windows a foot square in front of each horse, and with these I find horses travel better, as they can see when the vehicle is going. to turn, and be ready for when the trailer turns some fraction of a second later ; it thus gives them sufficient time to alter their balance in readiness for the turn. In most motor horseboxes it is not, of course, possible to fit windows in the front, but in any ease where it -be possible it would, I think, be a big advantage.
A point not dealt with in the previous articles is that, in the event of a sudden swerve in the case of an emergency, a horse would keep his balance better when facing forwards than when carried backwards. Mr. Hammond mentions that horses loose in the box always travel backwards if the box be fitted with windows at the back. As it probably is, this might have some connection with the position taken up.
Speaking only of trailer horseboxes, the braking is rather an important point, and to obtain the smoothest pull up the braking should be done from the rear. To get this I have a separate lever in the driving seat to control the trailer brake, and use it in preference to the brakes of the towing vehicle when carrying horses. Automatic brakes should, I consider, be avoided with heavy trailers for live stock. W. A. GREENSLADE, Bristol. (Economy Trailers).
Pedestrians Have More Rights than Motorists.
The Editor, Tan COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3729] Sir,—Apropos the letter from Mr. Foley, of the Pedestrians' Association, in your issue dated April 12th, the important fact he overlooks (in common with all others who object to motor traffic on the roads) is that, in addition to his right to use the road, the pedestrian has the sole right to use the pavement ; a heavy fine would be imposed on the motorist who attempted to drive on the latter.
If the pedestrian wishes to use the road equally with vehicles that are confined exclusively to it, why not do away with pavements altogether and thereby save a considerable sum of money?
The common usage of the roads dates from the time when there were no separate footpaths and traffic was almost non-existent. Is it not time that this "right " was revised to conform with modern traffic conditions, so that the pedestrian, whilst not being deprived of the use of the roadway, is made to do his share in helping to avoid kecidents by keeping as far as possible to the footpath or pavement expressly provided for him?
I do not know the objects of the Pedestrians' Association, but ,I suggest that it could do useful work by Impressing on all its members the axiom that the right to use the road does not carry with it the right to abuse the road. Making one's self a nuisance, or a source of potential danger to other road users by exercising one's "rights," irrespective of circumstances, is tantamount to abuse.
It is to be regretted that Mr. Foley descends to the practice of lifting one sentence from its context in order to discredit his opponent. The previous sentence in the letter from "Justice" read "As luck would have it, a bus came towards me at that moment and we almost met in a bunch." I suggest that it is Mr. Foley who is condemned out of his own mouth by such tactics.
• Coventry. P. LEWIS.
Export Trade Hampered by Exchange Restrictions.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[37301 Sir,—The Federation of British Industries has addressed a letter to the Board of Trade calling the attention of II.M. Government to the severe handl ' cap which is being placed upon industry by exchange restrictions in various foreign countries, more particularly in Hungary and Austria.
The Federation stated in its letter that, although it has hitherto been reluctant to press strongly for the negotiation and institution of clearing-heuse arrangements, owing to the objections and inconveniences attached to such procedure, it now feels that their establishment with Hungary and Austria Is the only possible solution.
The Federation added that it continues to hold its previous views as to the undesirability of clearinghouse arrangements in general. W. A. T. SYNGE, London, S.W.1. Press Department.
Certain Licence-fee Refunds Sanctioned by the Minister of Transport.
The Editor, Tug COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3731] Sir,—Further to my letter which appeared in your issue dated November 10th, my association has received the following communication, dated March 30th, from the Minister of Transport:—
The Minister of Transport has had before him certain appeals by operators of excursions and tours, against the decision of certain of the Traffic Commissioners who have required separate licences to be taken out for each of two or more zones in respect of excursions and tours starting from one place of origin. • • As the Commissioners have now decided not to apply the zone system in future licensing periods the Minister has decided, as an act of grace, without admission of legal liability, to refund fees paid in excess of the amounts which would have been payable had the zone system not been in force.
Any claim for refund must be addressed to the Commissioners concerned.
As I stated in my letter, this association considered that the action of the Traffic Commissioners for the Yorkshire area, in dividing the area into seven groups, was illegal, and on behalf of two of our members we lodged appeals with a request that such be treated as test appeals. The Minister agreed to this course. The appeals were never heard owing to the fact that subsequently the grouping system was discontinued, but we pressed the point with regard to repayment of fees paid in excess of the amounts which would have been payable had the grouping system not been in force.
C. M. DOUTHWAITE, Assistant Divisional Secretary, The Commercial Motor Users Association, North Eastern Division, Leeds.
c3S
Viscount. Selby's Views on Fairplay for Road Transport.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3732] Sir,—In common with other members of the travelling public I find thrust upon my attention in the dining saloons of trains, in hotels and elsewhere a tract distributed by the railway interests which, in view of the coming Conference on Rail and Road Transport, it seems to me it would now be a graceful act to withdraw from circulation.
I have no wish to write anything which might tend to increase the exasperation of those who have, broadcast their plea for " fairplay," but it is surely a fantastictwist of logic to say that because' the railways have to pay for the upkeep of their own tracks therefore the owners of motor vehicles should pay "the full current expenditure on roads" belonging not to them but to the community ; and anyhow motor users are already .paying, including the petrol tax, £59,000,000 a year for the privilege of being what they are.
Nobody blames the railways for failing to foresee that there would come a day when their rigid, tracks would fail to pay. These tracks remain a necessary feature of our national life, but it.is absurd to say that they must be made solvent by bleeding their more mobile rival. And that certainly will not be a solution which will appeal to the approaching Conference. ' If the railways seek fairplay they, must give' it ; and the first step in that direction is to recall this unfortu nate pamphlet. SELBY. London, W.1,
May a Motorbus Driver Ever Act as a Conductor ?
The Editor, THE COmmERCIAL MOTOR.
[3733] Sir,—I have been a regular reader for many years, and I should appreciate your advice on a matter which I have never before seen referred to in your journal.
(1) In the event of an accident to a conductor working on a bus, and inability to find a licensed conductor to take his place, would it be in order to place a driver (who is licensed to drive) in the conductor's place until a licensed conductor could he obtained, or, failing a driver, an inspector, who may, or may not, be a licensed driver?
(2) In the event of a bus driver falling to relieve another who has already completed 5i hours' driving and inability to find a licensed driver before the buz is clue to commence another journey of one hour, would it be sufficient to say that the former had to do di hours' driving continuously because the circumstances could not have been reasonably foreseen, as stated in para. 4 of Section 19 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930?
Leeds. ENQUIRER.
[It would not be strictly in order to replace a conductor by a driver, or by anyone else who did not hold a licence to act as a conductor, although it is doubtful whether any serious notice would be taken by the authorities if a person who was otherwise qualified to act as a conductor were allowed so to act in an emergency such as where the regular conductor was taken ill and could not be replaced at once.
The question of a driver who has completed 5i hours' driving being required to drive for .another hour owing to the relief driver failing to turn up appears to be one which could be dealt with under the Order which was dated March 30th, 1931, and is called " The Road Traffic Act, 1930 (Variation of Provisions of Section 19), Order, 1931," under which, in the case of a stage carriage where in any period of 24 hours one period of duty only is worked not exceeding 8I• hours in length, then the limit of 81 hours may be substituted for the limit of 51 hours which is laid down by the section, if the driver be allowed, . intervals for signing on and off and for looking over the vehicle before it leaves and after it returns to the garage,. and for lay-over to an extent which, in the aggregate, is not less than 45 minutes, or 40 minutes where the period of duty does not exceed 8 hours—En.]