Frontal Styles for Buses I HAVE been most pleased to
Page 52
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
read the recent series of letters in your columns deploring the spread of the so-called " new-look " front on double-deck buses. The impression I have formed is that there are far more who dislike these vehicles, at any rate in their present farm, than there are in favour of them, among those interested in the subject_ Moreover, it seems to me that, as has so often happened before, these attempts at the " modernistic " are more likely to look dated in a few years time than vehicles of more steadily improving design.
The British private-car industry appears to be well on the way out of the "silly season," as regards appearance, into which it plunged about four years ago with imitations of Detroit "leering " frontal styles. Almost all the new models displayed at this year's Motor Show incorporated grilles of more traditional style (surely more truly functional than those attempting to disguise the shape of the actual radiator block), together with modern coachwork. This not only included large cars, such as the Bentley Continental and such models as the Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire and the latest Rover 75 (both with more orthodox grilles than previous models of their respective makes), but equally the current Austin range—much thought must have been given to the frontal design of a car to be produced in such quantity as the new Seven. Similar remarks must also surely apply to p.s.v. design, and the correct line to take would seem to be an adoption of cleaner lines in conjunction with i radiator grille of traditional outline.
Quite apart from the effect on driver's vision to the near side referred to by E. J. Smith, whose letter appeared on November 7, the " new-look " double' deckers at the Commercial Motor Show all failed even to maintain the cleaner lines of most designs in the period since about 1937, during which time styles incorporating cab fronts projecting below the windscreen had almost disappeared. The front cowl of the " newlook " style now revives this untidy effect, breaking the frontal profile with a prqnounced step instead of maintaining an unbroken curve from cab front to roof, as generally accepted in recent years, even on the earlier full-width bonnet styles.
Surely, it should be possible to follow the lead of the car makers and tidy the frontal design, for example by .adopting flush-fitting radiator grille and head lamps, without sacrificing individuality and the " character " of so .typically British a vehicle as the double-decker, or undoing the cleaning-up process carried out by coachbuilders in recent years. There should be plenty of scope amongst our designers for new ideas and true progress along such lines.
Middlesex. OBSERVER.
Time For a Change ?
r AN anyone explain to me why milk continues to be ‘-"distributed in glass bottles? In my younger days, the usual method of distribution was for the dairyman to bring the milk to the door in cans and dole out the quantity required into the housewife's own container, jug, or what have you. Naturally, this was a slow process, well suited to the period, and it allowed the milkman and housewife to have a chat while the milk was poured out.
In these high-speed days this sort of thing would never do. Hence bottled milk, but why is glass the only suitable material to use for the container? It is heavy, has to be protected in. expensive light-alloy crates, and must be washed and sterilized before it is used. Worse still, it is highly fragile and when dropped, glass milk bottles often burst, scattering small, highly dangerous particles of sharp glass. Nobody knows more about this side of the question than the milk distributOr, whose vehicles use up tyres at a rate equalled only by those on tipping work.
The whole situation is absurd. Surely modern science and technology can find a suitable alternative to glass? Plastics are expensive, but a suitably designed plastic bottle could make the crate unnecessary. What about waxed paper? Or why not take the milk to the housewife in small 80-100-gallon tankers and draw off into the housewife's container just the quantity that may be required?
London, N.20. A.W.
Dissatisfied With, the Bill ?
THE opinions of " Aucourant," in your issue dated I November 21, would be the more convincing and authentic, and his claims to "speak for a large body of trade and industry " the more ace-irately judged, if he had the courage to sign his name and give some positive information about his constituents.
Well I know the penalties of free expression of opinion in what we call a free society, but I still hold that it is better to take the risk than be forced into a spineless anonymity. It is, however, better to be silent than to make claims under a nom-de-plume which cannot be checked Northwood, Middx. FREDERICK SMITH.
Reduce That Bus Noise
wE have followed the correspondence on the noise vv of bus engines with considerable interest, for Cambridge, as well as the places mentioned by your other correspondents, suffers from noisy buses. Conversation is often difficult when travelling on then", and in the streets (which are admittedly narrow) it is sometimes difficult to make oneself heard, the clatter of their engines is so great.
On a recent visit to London we remarked how conspicuously quiet the buses were, and that if London used the same type as is used in Cambridge, Oxford Street would be unbearably noisy.
We are none of us technical people, so perhaps our remarks represent those of the average bus passenger. It seems strange that, of two buses apparently quite similar, one produces about three times as much noise as the other. Surely quietness is worth achieving; it makes all the difference between comfortable and uncomfortable travel—to say nothing of the general upset and nuisance of noise in the streets.
St. John's College, THREE UNDERGRADUATES. Cambridge.