Unintentional carburetter design change between the 25/30 and Phantom III models.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 131\4\ scan0229 | |
| Date | 20th May 1937 | |
| G.W.H. 113 what reply do you suggest? To Rm. {William Robotham - Chief Engineer} from Sg. {Arthur F. Sidgreaves - MD} P.III. Carburetter Flooding. Copy to Hs. {Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} Rm {William Robotham - Chief Engineer} /GWH. {George W. Hancock - Head Chateauroux} F.BY.Da. {Bernard Day - Chassis Design} Mx. {John H Maddocks - Chief Proving Officer} Hd. {Mr Hayward / Mr Huddy} Br.Sr. Referring to Rm {William Robotham - Chief Engineer} 12/R.19.5.37 I note what is said but the point that interests me most is to know why we changed from what was apparently standard and satisfactory on the 25/30 to something which was different on the P.III. Sg. {Arthur F. Sidgreaves - MD} We did not change knowingly. It is a case when one section in the D O deals with a design and when another section deals with the same unit in a new engine and there does not seem to be any cooperation between the two sections. I stated the reason in my report when the chassis Rm {William Robotham - Chief Engineer} /HHH | ||
From the Rolls-Royce experimental archive: a quarter of a million communications from Rolls-Royce, 1906 to 1960's. Documents from the Sir Henry Royce Memorial Foundation (SHRMF).