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 
Easy as ABC?
Page 19
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Although it is the large fleet operator who appe;ars to stand to gain most from the artic classification scheme announced this week by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, the small operator is likely to welcome it the more warmly. Interchanging of trailers within fleets or between companies has not made the strides at one time forecast, but most operators who indulge in the practice have already instituted some matching scheme of their own. It is therefore the smaller haulier who now mos t often runs the risk of incurring overloading penalties or suffers vehicle damage when his tractive units are called upon to pick up other people's semi-traders; unfortunately, this is especially true in international work where the new SNIMT scheme is not likely to apply.
But the system now proposed—which is entirely voluntary—will take many of the headaches out of artic operation and it is to the credit of the Society that it resisted any temptation to rush out a less well-considered scheme. Trade associations, operators and the Ministry of Transport have all given time and thought to the system's preparation and it is now up to operators to adopt it as widely and quickly as possible. To son ie, the scheme may at first sight seem complex (and CM will shortly be devoting space to a more detailed explanation) but in essence it is as simple as the c omplicated interchangeability problem will allow.
Here at last is a system which, if widely adopted by hauliers and own-account men, can provide not only a valuable aid to traffic planning and an on-the-spot guide for drivers but a safeguard ag,ainst accidental infringements of axle and train weights—for which the pena Jties are no longer light. Not least, the "load bonus" system provides a flexib oily which should enable the most to be made of any combination's payload cap acity.
Arrows in the Air
London Transport, like many large organizations, customarily receives more brickbats than bouquets, and CM I as not hesitated to throw the occasional missile. So it is that much more of a pleasure to congratulate the LTB this week on the speed and thoroughness wi th which the first stages of its reshaping plan have been introduced once the big hurdle of a productivity agreement had been cleared.
Now that a real start has been made in reorganizing the bus system into locally centred short-distance feed er services, with linking trunk routes and short-headway city-centre facilities t .o cope with commuters in the rush hours, the process of change will almost certai nly take on a momentum of its own. Already one detects a new, purposeful spin i in the direction of London's road transport, while busmen who taste the fruit; of one-man bonuses will not take kindly to delays in achieving the much wic ler switch to new systems which is planned.
If we have one reservation ab out the reshaping it is that an understandable desire for cutting costs has resul ted in some rather plain-Jane vehicles which do not convey the immediate impr .ession of a dynamic new approach to transport in the capital. Something more ey e-catchingly in tune with the times could surely have been conceived—like the si .riking new Underground stock on the Victoria line.