OPINIONS and QUERIES The Editor invites correspondence on all subjects
Page 76
Page 77
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
connected with the use of commercial motors. Letters should be written only on one side of the paper. The right of abbreviation is reserved, and no responsibility for views expressed is accepted.
Better Protection for the Bus Driver.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[29461 Sir,—I have read with much interest the article which appeared in your issue dated November 12th, entitled "Protecting the Bus Driver." Your journal has done a lot in the past in pointing out to the authorities concerned the absolute need for adequate protection from inclement weather for London bus drivers, and in so doing you have won the admiration and gratitude of many London drivers.
The majority of them saw service overseas during the war. I myself was with the transport of the Kite Balloon Section, under the late Col. Meyler. What we went through then was necessary. Since then I hare had ten years' driving on a bus in London, and that has meant ten years of unnecessary suffering. I will go so far as to say that many men have been rendered unfit for bus driving owing to continual exposure.
Another important point, in my opinion, is that a man's eyes cannot stand, for a great many years, the incessant wind and dust, and, as you know, to wear goggles for eight hours a day is, to say the least of it, depressing.
I would like to point out that although a man may be fit there are times when he is a little below standard, and to do a day's work in the freezing cold on the front of a bus with no protection is, in my opinion, anything but beneficial to one's health. I am not by any means a hot-house plant, but I am human, and all ask for is fair play.
As you are aware, permission was given for the companies to fit windscreens, but these have proved quite inadequate to our needs. Now I hear alterations are being carried out, and at a time when another winter is already on us. I only hope that the authorities will give permission for efficient windscreens to be fitted and that the fitting of them will be carried out as speedily as possible. Meanwhile, we trust that the weather will be as kind as possible.
I may add that I have enlightened many of my colleagues as to what The Commercial Motor has done, and is still doing, for our benefit.—Yours faith fully, Bus DRIVER. London, N.
[As intimated in our issue for last week, the London General Omnibus Co., Ltd., is, at the request of the drivers themselves, removing the windscreens from its buses, the men having found that they set up draughts in the cab. The company is continuing its experiments in the hope of devising an efficient screen which will meet with the approval of the authorities.—En.]
Changing from Horses to Motors.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2947] Sir,—My problem" is to scrap my two horses, etc., and get a 30-cwt. lorry, or, perhaps, a two-tonner would be better for this hilly district. I, therefore, seek information as well as instruction, because (at 66) I know nothing whatever about machinery, and motors in particular. Mine is a small country trade, and the heaviest load would only be 1i ton weight (but the bulk, 10-cwt.), as coal, timber and builders' merchant. I do not do the bag trade as I can only employ one man.
The upkeep of my two horses and one man costs just 83s. per week (of 45 hours' work). From this c38
I make my hauling charges to be 18s. per day of eight hours. So, to compete with others I want to be up
to-date and know the profitable ways and means for carrying on. My horses are now idle, so I have to wait for trade to come in, but I am thinking that if I had a lorry it would not be eating its head off, so to speak, and my man would have the benefit of a whole day's rest once a week, as well as the half-day on Saturdays ; but does an idle lorry deteriorate in any way?
I thought that you would be the most likely advise:. to put me on my way as to the most suitable lorry for
my trade requirement. I am worrying about the 22 ft. or 24 ft. of timber I have to move sometimes, whether a trailer contrivance would be better (this would only be in use rarely), bringing timber from trucks at station and negotiating narrow streets and sharp turnings. The trolley must have drop sides
and tailboard. I recently saw a builder's trolley with a timber contrivance on the cab. What prevents planed loads from slipping back? I should require the most profitable and economical lorry on the market,
Then there is instruction necessary for upkeep, taxes, insurance (all-in), etc. Hoping that you can guide
me.—Yours faithfully, W. A. WEEKS. Chepstow.
[The best way to deal with your inquiry will be to give you figures for the weekly cost of keeping a motor lorry,
independent of mileage. Please note that the figures we give you are inclusive of depreciation and that we recommend you to put about 10s. per week away on this account towards the purchase of a new vehicle in about six or seven years, when the first one needs replacing.
A good 30-cwt. lorry will most certainly suffice for the work you have in mind. Even the fact that the district is hilly does not justify anyone to-day in „purchasing a .machine of a greater capacity than the maximum load he is likely to want to carry.
Your licence will . amount to 8s. per week ; wages of driver, say £3 • per week; garage rent (in your own
premises), say Ss. Gd. per week ; insurance, Gs. 8d.. per week; interest on fire, cost (calculated on the assump.tion that you do as we advise and put 10s. per week away on depreciation account), 3s.; total, 14 1s. 2d. per week.
Now you must add to that figure 2nd. per mile for your running cost. This is made up of 1nd. for fuel and lubricants, Id. for tyres and Id. for maintenance,
i.e., repairs and, including overhauls and sundry occasional purchases. if you cover 100 miles per week this
will amount to £1 2s. 10d., making a total cost of £5 4s. for 100 miles per week or £6 6s. 166. for 200 miles per week.
This is more than your cost for horses, but, of course, you will be able to do two or three times as much work in the time, and thus enlarge your business and profits accordingly. You will be able to acquire bodywork especially designed to accommodate long baulks of timber and similar goods, and, as you say, it will be advisable for you to have a tipping body fitted.
In the case of a timber lorry fitted with a cross-beam behind the driver's cab, it is usual to employ roping to prevent timber from slipping backward.—S.T.R.]
Horses—Led and Ridden—on the Highway.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2948] Sir,—I was very interested in a letter (No. 2936) in your issue dated November 12th regarding the rule of the road for led and ridden horses. It is generally understood that the man in charge of the horse or horses is between the animal and any other traffic, but it is quite possible to lead a horse with the left hand and to keep to the left-hand side. In a busy town one would not be allowed to ride or lead horses on the right-hand side.
I always understood that it was a privilege, and not part of the law, for a person in charge of led or ridden horses to keep to the right, but 'now that traffic is increasing every day this will soon be impossible.
It would be very interesting to hear some of your readers' opinions, as I am sure that the majority of motorists are not quite sure on which side horses should
be passed.---Yours faithfully. INTERESTED,
Replacing a Heavy Unit by a Six-wheeler Conversion.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2949] have been a reader of your journal fo,r the past 10 years, and an owner-driver working a Peerless on building baulage, within an area of 12 to 15 miles of my address for the past six years. Having just had a serious illness, I am told by my doctor that I must not go.back to heavy work again. I have been interested in recent articles in The. Commercial Motor regarding the conversion of the 30-cwt. Ford and Chevrolet models by means of six wheels, etc.,. to enable a 3-ton pay-load to be carried and still come within the £25 road tax.
I should like your experienced opinion as regards same, and their, capability to stand the continual carrying of such a load, their life, running costs, etc., and under which of your Tables you classify them (please forward me a copy). Will you also kindly tell me which type of conversion and make you think would be best for my work. I do not fancy the nonrigid, nor do I require an extended chassis. I obtain a certain number of odd lighejobs,but the.bulk of the work would be on building haulage, station and short
hauls.—Yours faithfully, HAULIER. Farnborough.
[It is usual to take it that the minimum expectation of life of the commercial vehicle is five years, and so, since neither of the six-wheeled conversion units you have in mind has been on the market so long, it is impossible for anyone to have definite data concerning the two items principally affected, namely, maintenance and depreciation. It seems likely that these figures will be rather high, since the vehicles are being used for work more arduous than that for which they were originally designed, and, in my opinion, the fairest way to deal with the matter is to take the figures given in the Tables for the cost of operation of 3-ton pneumatic-tyved machines. There is nothing to choose between the two makes of six-wheeled converted chassis that you name and, in any case, I would prefer not to 'make any discrimination as between one make and another. .
A. copy of The Commercial Melor Tables of Operating Costs has been sent to you, and, in•my opinion, with your long experience, you should be just as well able to make a living with a vehicle a this type, as has previously been the ease with the Peerless.—S.T.R.]