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).
Page from 'The Autocar' magazine, featuring correspondence on topics including insurance, tyres, road quality, and a parliamentary bill on mountain access.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 149\3\ scan0062 | |
| Date | 5th May 1939 | |
| File for RRU May 5th, 1939. The Autocar STATE INSURANCE Some of its Advantages [48800.]—Your correspondent [48765] writing regarding State Insurance and its snags appears to be under a misapprehension on some points. I cannot agree that at the present time "income barely equals claims." An examination of the reports of any of the largest companies will show that a handsome profit is made in every case, because the volume of business is great. How much greater would be that of the State, therefore. That competition restrains expense is only comparatively true, as competition also calls for expenditure. The State would not be required to show a profit, and would not be called upon to pay commission or maintain numerous offices in each city. Furthermore, such cover as full third-party could be issued to an individual to cover any vehicle at the same time as a driving licence. Naturally, comprehensive cover would require special rates, but this would not prove an insurmountable or expensive problem. It is true that, once the State has decided what cover any person should have, that would be the end of it; this implies that a person may be mulcted for very heavy premium, or may even find himself unable to insure at all. In such a case, surely this would help to solve a very great difficulty at present extant, for the person concerned would certainly have a lamentable record, showing him either wilfully dangerous or else "accident prone," and in either event it would be all to the good that he should be debarred from driving. RICHARD L. BRINTON. S. Harrow. SMOOTH TYRES Criticism Based on Miscalculation [48801.]—I will ignore the sarcasm in Mr. Fraser's letter [48772] and confine myself to answering the question which he asks in it. His method of calculating contact pressure is evidently erroneous, since far from that of a treaded 5.50 x 16 tyre being less than that of a smooth 6.50 x 17 tyre, the contact pressure of the smaller tyre is 50.9 lb. per square inch compared with the 45 lb. per square inch of the larger tyre. As a matter of fact, if we make an even wider difference in size and compare a new 4.00 x 17 tyre with a smooth 7.50 x 16 tyre we get the following result: Tyre. (At maximum load and pressure) | Contact area. (Square inches) | Contact pressure. (lb. per square inch) 4.00-17 (new) | 12.7 | 44.1 7.50-16 (smooth) | 45.8 | 32 That, I think, settles effectively the point which Mr. Fraser made, although it is wrong to suppose that this contact pressure is the determining factor in a tyre's resistance to skidding—it is, in fact, a relatively unimportant one. I should say that it was the action of the pattern itself, gripping and wiping away the slippery road film that was significant. E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} J.{Mr Johnson W.M.} C. WILLIAMS. Hockley, Essex. ACCESS TO MOUNTAINS BILL Criticisms are Exaggerated From Sir Lawrence Chubb, Secy., The Commons, Open Spaces and Footpaths Preservation Society. [48802.]—May I be permitted to make some observations on the article on page 702 of your issue of April 28th? The Society does not claim that the Access to Mountains Bill, in the form in which it has been passed by the House of Commons, gives the public everything that they want or that the society would like them to have; but it does claim that under it they will obtain very great advantages, and that many of the criticisms which have been directed against it by some of the open-air organisations are greatly exaggerated. Put shortly, the criticisms mentioned in the article are:— (a) That the Bill gives no general right of access but only access to particular areas under an Order of the Minister. The answer to this is that it has been found impossible to devise any watertight definition of the kinds of land to which a general right of access could apply. "Mountain and moorland" are only popular terms. It would be impossible in many cases to decide whether a particular area over which the public wished to roam was "mountain or moorland," or not, and endless disputes would result. Under the Minister's Orders, the land to which access is given will be clearly defined on maps which will be available for public inspection. This method has also enabled the classes of land to which access C19 Correspondence may be given to be extended to include heaths and downs, and one or other of these categories will often include cliffs and other coastal areas, access to which is very important. (b) That there are no limits to the restrictions and conditions which the Minister may impose. The answer is that there is one very effective limit. The Bill is an "access" Bill; that is to say, its object is to create public rights of access, subject only to such restrictions as are proved at a public inquiry to be necessary in the circumstances. It is quite unjustifiable to assume that the Minister will so limit the public rights as to make them valueless; indeed it will be his duty, if he receives an application for an Order, to give the most extensive rights that the circumstances permit. (c) That the Bill makes trespass in certain circumstances a crime. Those circumstances will be, if the Minister is satisfied that certain parts of an "access" area must be temporarily placed "out of bounds" during certain periods, and makes an Order accordingly, and a member of the public then wilfully disregards the terms of the Order. On what grounds of equity can it be claimed that the owner of the land should have no power to enforce a condition that the Minister considers necessary? Those who consider that no modification of the present law of trespass is permissible forget that the Bill itself makes a great and unprecedented alteration in the law of trespass for the benefit of the public, by enabling them to roam at large over land in private ownership. If the present law of trespass is to be regarded as sacrosanct, then any kind of Access to Mountains Bill must be ruled out. (d) That the list of offences is unreasonable. It would occupy too much of your valuable space to examine in detail all the inaccuracies in this portion of the article, and one example must suffice. The writer states that a tourist will be liable to a fine for lighting a cigarette or pipe or a picnic stove. That is not the case. What the Bill says is, "that it shall be an offence to light any fire or do any act which causes or is likely to cause a fire." It is to be feared that the public do not realise the serious injury to valuable property, and to amenities, which is caused every year by fires, most of them started by the carelessness of the public themselves. To take one example, the number of fires on Forestry Commission land during the five years 1933-37 was 2,453, and the damage done by these is estimated at £57,000. Is it not desirable that persons responsible for carelessness in this matter should be penalised? London, S.W.1. [Sir Lawrence has represented "open-air" interests in negotiations over the Bill.—ED.{J. L. Edwards}] ROADS IN THE WEST "Spoiling the Ship . . ." [48803.]—During the Easter holidays I was driving through Somerset and came across a glaring example of "spoiling the ship for a ha'porth of tar." The main road between Taunton and Bristol has been greatly improved and is now a very fine road where high speeds can be sustained over considerable distances, but one entirely new section, by-passing Axbridge, completed during the last few years, has two small bridges over streams in its length. One bridge has as it should be, leaving the road surface quite flat. The other, less than 100 yards away, is hump-backed to such an extent that the highway authorities have found it necessary to erect a large "Slow" sign. I passed over the bridge at about 40 m.p.h., luckily in a make of car renowned for its excellent springing, even so the rear-seat passengers were badly shaken. J.{Mr Johnson W.M.} C. WARE. London, S.E.10. WINNATS TARMAC Difficulties of the Mam Tor Route [48804.]—As regards the Winnats "mystery" in your issue of April 21st, I noted your sarcasm in connection with the Mam Tor road. Apparently you are unfamiliar with the difficulties that beset our engineers on this road. This mountain is composed of alternate layers of gritstone and shale. In frosty weather the strata disintegrate, causing masses of the hillside to slide. As a result a billowing of the road occurs, making constant repairs necessary. When one has observed the scarred eastern face of the hill one can fully realise the truth of this and the difficulties that arise therefrom. In such circumstances Nature is man's greatest enemy. L. A.{Mr Adams} HORNBY. R.A.F., Finningley. | ||