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 
What I Think About the Beeching Report
Page 70
Page 71
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
T. G. GIBB
Chairman British Road Services
MEVER has there been a report that
. has carried such advance publicity, such speculation, and such hidden fear as the Beeching Report, to which most men's first reaction must surely have been "How does this affect me?" The answer is, of course, that it will affect everyone, man, woman and child, to greater or lesser degree. Rural communities who have taken for granted " transport-ontap " for several generations, will be without it, and the city traveller is faced with having to pay his way in full
measure 'Industry is...reniindedof the tonnages which have to be carried and is told of the railways' plan to meet their needs.
Road hauliers will not allow 1963 to go down as the year in which they were found wanting, and they will have their own views about those paragraphs which calculate the freight likely to be moved by rail in future; in particular they will sense the message that rail likes the routes where traffic is heaviest—the rail ways are not alone in that! There is no need for any road haulier to be despondent as, on the straight choice between forms of transport (and there is little likelihood of this choice being denied by any Government), road still holds a hand packed with trump cards.
Speedy Transits
it is not sufficient, though, to stick one's chin out and say only that. Dr. Beeching's railways are determined to make their presence felt, and in the field of freight their intention to offer speedy transits for wagon loads may well be of assistance to hauliers. The Report goes out of its way to make clear that the proposed Liner trains will be available to everyone, in particular hauliers and— however much one may doubt some of the estimates made—if there is a quicker, cheaper or safer method of doing the trunk journey, hauliers will be eager to use it.
The need to concentrate railheads has been obvious for years, and the reluctance to carry freight sundries, coupled with the withdrawal of facilities for passenger train parcels traffic, should bring an increasing demand on the road r)8 parcels carriers. While it is to some
extent true, as the Report says, that road carriers have limited their coverage to the more remunerative areas there is, nevertheless, very wide coverage now which increased volume can very soon make complete.
A "Beeching Report" had to come some day; primarily a document designed to show how the railways of the future must look if they are to be a commercial success. It expresses hopes and makes estimates which may well be achieved. But let it not be thought that the rural communities should be discarded at will; if by the railway's, why not by the Post Office, or by the Electricity Board? There are other services. which are costly in other places, though less fuss is made about them. Alternatives may not be readily forthcoming, so perhaps at the end of all this a transport system tempered to the country's need may one day emerge.
D. 0. GOOD
National Chairman Road Haulage Association
I N essence, there is nothing surprising about the Beeching Report. Its main proposals are on lines that we have known for a long time would be put forward and, in fact, are almost inevitable if the railways are to survive.
The astronomical load of debt they have collected over the past few years is an indication of the urgent necessity for them ta cut their coat according to their cloth. In existing circumstances they have found it impossible to compete adequately with road transport. Their aim must now be to provide a service of the quality given by hauliers and to adapt the railways to meet this requirement.
If the railways are completely successful, hauliers will be affected in different ways according to their type of operation. Some of them will find extra traffic available because the railways no longer wish to carry it, but the volume of traffic involved is not likely to be considerable. Other hauliers will be invited to use the long-distance freight trains for their trunk hauls. Yet other hauliers will find the railways bidding against them for part of their existing traffic.
They are used to meeting vigorous competition from their fellow hauliers a well as from the railways, and the riev dispensation will not necessarily come a a great change. It is also reasonable ti suppose that at least the first wave of did railway attack will be in the direction o probably several million tons of suitabli traffic that traders and manufacturers havi continued to carry themselves; no because they particularly wish to do so but simply because of the limitations o railway efficiency and on the size of till fleets of vehicles permitted to hauliers.
Railway Objections
Railway objections in the past havi undoubtedly had the effect of limitinl expansion by,Alauliers.. It seems onl] right, therefore, that when the railway launch their campaign they should begh with the traffic which, by using their righ of objection, they have prevented haulier, from carrying in the past.
Where a C-licence holder is willing ti give the railway some of the work hi has carried in the past, he will presum ably reduce the size of his fleet. If hi hesitates to take this step, the reasol may be partly that he would prefer somi of the traffic carried by those vehicles stil to go by road and partly that he does no wish to become too dependent upon t single organization.
Such a trader would no doubt be hap pier if some of the traffic he pro posed to shed from his own fleet conk be carried by hauliers. In other words the chances of the railways capturing nev traffic will on some occasions be enhance( if their approach to the customer i• made in conjunction with professiona road carriers.
Of Mutual Benefit
Here is just one example of many way in which closer road/rail co-operation 01 the lines that the Road Haulage Associa tion has been urging for some time wit be of mutual benefit as well as providinj a new service to trade and industry Great importance, therefore, is attache( to the discussions that will shortly tako place between the Road Haulage Asso ciation, British Railways and British Road Services, and to additional exchanges o opinion that it is hoped will be possibh between the Road Haulage Associatiol and the Minister of Transport.
• C. TURNER
resident Traders Dad Transport Association
'HE Beeching Report is a thoroughly businesslike document on which all ncerned are to be warmly congratued. It contains a mass of data of :alculable value in shaping the future le of British Railways. Perhaps even 3re important, the fundamental proach to the problem—the problem deciding what is potentially good iffic for the railways and then moulding a system to attract that traffic on merit is undoubtedly right. It is only in this vy that the railways can fill their true mpetitive role in inland transport.
To the trader or industrialist dispatch; goods the prospect of speedy, reliable d efficient railway service will be lcorne. I like particularly the emphasis tich the Report places on methods of ndling and the promise of a " much 3re satisfactory quality of service at sts substantially below competitive les". There is no doubt in my mind at if cost and service are both right, tde and industry will certainly put more tffic on rail.
The Report is to be commended for its mkness in acknowledging the deficien2 of present railway service. The R.T.A. survey of C-licensed vehicles rried out a few years ago, showed that eed of delivery and certainty of timing ;re the most important factors in deterfling the methoiLby which goodsivere insported. The Beeching Report says ecisely this: "Slow and variable livery times are quite unacceptable for any forms of freight in these days, ten road deliveries over comparable ;tances can be made on the day of ;patch". It is now clear for all to see iy traffic which might be considered .tentially suitable for rail has, in the eat, travelled by road.
npression of Realism
Much interest will centre upon Dr. eching's forecast of traffic potentially itable for rail. In this, as in other ;pects, the Report gives the impression realism. It states quite clearly that a -ge part of inland freight is not suitable r rail transport. This may arise cause length of haul is too short, for minal considerations, because the flow traffic is irregular or that special hides are required. Bulky and /ward traffic, traffics needing wide disbution by road, fragile goods—all these d others are wisely deemed to be Suitable for rail.
Even on long hauls, it is recognised at other considerations may outweigh advantages which rail has to offer and claim is made that all, even of the agest-hauled traffic, is potentially suitle for railway carriage.
Translating this into positive terms, it stated that traffic can only be regarded potentially good for rail if it can pass siding traffic or else is suitable to be rried over distances of not less than 70 100 miles by Liner trains. This new :vice offers some very important possi bilities, especially if the terminal handling problems can be mastered, and is one of the Report's most interesting features.
Although much detailed study will be necessary before the meat of this Report can be fully digested, I have no doubt that it will receive a general welcome from trade and industry, whose objectives in the transport field are speedy, reliable, correctly timed and competitive service.
G. 0. FIENNES
Chief Operating Officer British Railways Board
ET me make it clear that I am in I—, these columns by invitation for the persona! views of a railwayman, not Mr. Railwayman. I have a faint but not unpleasant flavour of Daniel, The document "The Reshaping of British Railways" is gener lly available and I must take it as tea . In essence it is a very simple docum nt depending for its force on a few very simple principles.
The first of these rinciples is to recognize that the horse has gone for good and to draw the cOnclusion that, therefore, the railways need no longer feed their profitable main lines from unprofitable branch railways, but can now use the roads to feed them by lorry and by bus and by ear. To succeed in this the railways have to convince the public that a service by road-rail-road is better overall than by direct road.
The second principle is to recognize that while, for passengers, to do. better the kind ofthings which we are already doing is enough, for freight nothing less than new methods will be convincing. It is no use thinking that a system by which goods on a journey are transferred twice between road and rail by hand and marshalled between trip and train at least twice can compete with direct road haulage in its present efficiency.
Hence the intention to go into the business with trains and not wagons: hence the Liner train. In Appendix Four to the Plan is a pretty detailed statement of the costs of Liner trains. They are well worth a study, particularly the se.7tion at the bottom of page 146 which scts out the costs for the trunk haul by rail including the transfers between road and rail at the two railheads. Road hauliers must, of course, do a little arithmetic to convert capacity ton to pay load ton, and after that must in order to allow us a modest profit elevate " cost " into charge. My own opinion is that in these few lines in the Plan is the basis of a most fruitful co-operation between road and rail.
The third principle—and this is one which railwaymen do not generally accept; nor for that matter do they all yet accept the first two—is that it would be nonsense nationally for the railways to put on a new fleet of Liner trains to compete for the trunk hauls without a corresponding withdrawal of comreting road vehicles and nonsense to buy a new fleet of road vehicles to compete for the distribution from railheads. To do so would add to the already large surplus of transport in the country. In this we —meaning here road hauliers and railwaymen—should set ourselves to find the right way.
pin all y „ what next? .The. .Pan deciarcS. a series of intentions. To carry it out depends partly on ourselves, partly on the road industry, partly' on public opinion, partly on the Government. Let us hope that we all recognize the advantages of action.