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).
Phantom II brakes, explaining why certain levers cannot be shortened or lengthened and questioning an objection to 35° cams.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\T\2July1929-December1929\ Scan166 | |
| Date | 23th November 1929 | |
| ORIGINAL To Da.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} from Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} c. By.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}2/AD23.11.29. x7360 x7420 PHANTOM II BRAKES. With reference to Dal/M.8.11.29. As By.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} points out, we cannot shorten the lever you suggest, as if we do the rod will foul the cross member; that is the reason we did not effect the alteration in this manner. We cannot increase the input to the servo by shortening the cam levers, actually this would decrease the input to the servo. We cannot lengthen these levers, which would give us what we want without altering the cams, because the rod from the servo levers to the countershaft then fouls the cross shaft. We should like to know what the objection is to the 35° cams. We have run 10,000 miles without trouble with 30° cams, which we presume you would consider still more unsatisfactory. Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} | ||