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).
Engine design policy, the use of Stromberg carburetters, and organisational challenges.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 148\5\ scan0063 | |
| Date | 22th February 1935 | |
| -2- The question is, in view of the fact that we are falling behind on vital requirements, might it not have been better to say we will design the engine round the Stromberg carburetter and only when we have time and we find that the Stromberg carburetter is not altogether what we want will we design and make something better. Of course this is not altogether a technical decision because previously we have had resistance from Sales to fitting anything but a Rolls-Royce carburetter on the R.R. chassis. Furthermore, it can be pointed out that the reputation and success of the Rolls-Royce Company in the past has been built up on the policy of developing and making every piece of the car in the Factory. Somebody has got to decide if the policy of the past is to be that of the future. We think it is correct to say that the Experimental Dept. is being decentralised as far as possible; that is, there are Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}, RHC.{R. H. Coverley - Production Engineer}, Lr.{Mr Ellor}, Wd.{Mr Wood/Mr Whitehead}, Lov.{Mr Lovesey}, and Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} and in each of these sections there are assistants who are being encouraged to take responsibility. We agree that the right type of assistant is difficult to find and takes a considerable time to train. We think that design could with advantage be more decentralised. If it was found necessary for E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} to go to America for three months we do not know who could be responsible for car work in his absence. With the death of R.{Sir Henry Royce} certain highly technical points are bound to arise where development and design have different opinions on what should be done. This perhaps is inevitable in the present organisation. The Committee decision is not very satisfactory because inevitably only two members are likely to know the full facts, and the best orator is likely to prevail. In spite of these criticisms of the technical organisation, if we review the results which can be achieved by the combined efforts of design and development when they have a limited fixed objective, they are almost always surprisingly good. As an example, one has only to quote the Schneider Trophy, or more recently on the car side, the Tourist Trophy. In spite of no previous experience of racing, and the Bentley running as a single car, it put up the fastest time, beating three Lagondas which were cars with 25% bigger engines. | ||