Let the Operator Advise the Maker The Flow of Suggestions
Page 23
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
and Criticisms Concerning This Important Subject Continues • An Institute Would be Successful
By J. H. Vincent (London Carriers Ltd.)
T"proposal to form an Institute of Road Transport Engineers appears to be supported, in principle, from many quarters.
The suggested qualifications put forward by Mr. John Hutchinson (Fred Robinson Ltd.) are interesting, but, I believe, might be better if based on number of vehicles rather than on tonnage, as an engineer in charge of, .say, 20 2-tonnurs or 30 light vans, should, I-think, qualify (the
point does not affect me).
Even engineers of smaller fleets should be welcomed, provided that they have sufficient technical knowledge. The second paragraph in Mr. Hutchinson's contribution is an excellent basis as to the functions of the suggested institute. It should cover only the engi'neers' province, and the suggestions to manufacturers woull not only concern types of vehicle; but would include suggestions for modifications to overcome difficulties experienced in maintenance.
As Mr. Geoffrey Cozens (Commer Cars Ltd. and Karrier Motors Ltd.) says: " The first steps must be taken by the operators themselves."
I feel convinced that, once fnrmed, it would be successful and become an exceedingly useful body. 'The interchange of ideas would be of great value immediately to maintenance engineers.
I am prepared to " make some time " to devote towards the furtherance of this project.
Give the Makers Due Credit
By H. M. Swift (Usher's Wiltshire Brewery Ltd.)
D EING very interested in any articles which "The Com mercial Motor" putlishes, I have read the many interesting letters from operators and manufacturers -and, frankly, I ain disappointed to see so many eminent engineers accepting, and advocating, this modern trend of sinking one's individuality, and that mass thinking which is so rife and which is eating into our vitals in every phase of-our life.
In my opinion and experience, manufacturers do try to cater for all classes of operator without losing the makers' individualism. What are we engineers, mice or men? Are we still going to keep our jobs by our enterprise or do we just want to be automatons?
In the past, when manufacturers were more conservative than now and did turn out vehicles of unsuitable design, my greatest zestin life, then, was to think out an improvement, redesign the weakness or unsuitability, and pit my conclusions, by experience, against, the manufacturer's drawing board, with results which gave intense satisfaction even to the extent of redesigning engine lubricating systems, brake layouts and gear ratios.
Heaven forbid that I shall live to see regimentation in our vehicle world. Do you remember before the war how one passed the cheap mass-produced commercial vehicles, with. themdkers' names well in evidence with such slogans as " this is another so and so "? As if an "intelligent " wanted telling, they were branded all over, like Woolworth's tin kettles, a household necessity for a mass-thinking public. I am sure that out of all our very good vehicle makers, every operator's problem can be met, provided that price be not the paramount feature, which I think is at the bottom of the assumed criticism.
Surely, the greatest thrill of the good engineer, when advising on the purchase of new vehicles, is the applied skill in dispersing high-pressure sales talk, getting down to fundamentals, and buying that chassis which he knows is really good, and which will add tone to the product it carries, with that important item, individualism.
So, here's rooting for you vehicle manufacturers, turn out vehicles as only we Britons can, because, if your vehicles be so unsuitable, why are operators still running some 12 or 14 years old? The radical changes in vehicle design since then have been so tremendous that operators have had every reason to change if -they wanted to. No! I think a good adage for some of your critics would be to remind them " that you get only what you pay for."
Road-transport Engineers Must Get Together
By Angus H. Pavis (The Cement Marketing Co., Ltd.)
WOULD like to emphasize the comments of your corre spondent Mr. John Hutchinson in your issue dated Nov ember12. Such an association of road-transport engineers would prove invaluable, not only to its members,
• but to every branch of the industry. The experience of each individual, valuable in itself, discussed at the local meetings, and passed on through the various branches, would go far towards bringing about the unity -of purpose which is so essential for the well-being and efficiency.of the road-transport engineering industry.
I am sure that the formation of such an institute would receive every encouragement from the operators. 1 wish you every success in your efforts.