1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196 
Why blame the coachbuilder?
Page 122
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I have read the Road Test report on Bedford VAL and VAM coaches (CM. January 12) and would like to add my own comments.
The writer seems to have an obsession about engine noise and places far too much emphasis on blaming the coach builder. A little more comment on the exceptionally noisy power unit would not go amiss; many chassis makers are becoming too complacent on this issue. Likewise with regard to smoke emission, the coach is hardly designed to run with smoke pouring from a fractured injector pipe! Surely some of the sound proofing would be lost because of holes required for the piping from the test fuel tank?
Curved windscreens can hardly be blamed for decreasing vision in wet weather. These windscreen wipers clear a far greater area than on a flat glass screen, which usually has far greater blind spots. Although the low driving position is far from ideal on the VAL, without having the radiator filler poking through the windscreen, what can be done?
The contention that a spare driver cannot memorize the purpose of, and position of switches applies equally well whether the switches are identical or different: at least they are together, a driver does not have to hunt around for each switch. It is ridiculous to state that the higher position of the offside driving mirror is the reason why it gets covered in dirt—it is far more likely to have been caused by passing traffic.
I would, however, like to point out that I sympathize with a number of the criticisms, including the need for a step to enable the driver to clean the windscreen, although a flat top to a light gauge decorative bumper will hardly suffice!
Most if not all of these criticisms can be found to a lesser and often greater degree on many British and even Continental coachwork. so why level this prejudiced barrage at Duple coachwork?
A. SMITH (A regular coach traveller). Stanmore, Middx.