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).
Responding to Spectre Coach-Work recommendations, clarifying the use of steel over aluminium and querying a missing figure on a drawing.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 92\1\ scan0178 | |
| Date | 9th July 1935 | |
| x 304 Hn.{F. C. Honeyman - Retail orders}1/MK.{R. E. B. Meade-King} 9.7.35. Copy to Mr. [redacted] " " C. " " Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} " " By.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} " " [redacted] Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} SpectreCodename for Phantom III Coach-Work Recommendations. Your Ref: E.1/HN.{F. C. Honeyman - Retail orders} 6.7.35. In C.'s absence I have been asked to thank you for your memo., the schedule of recommendations and the blue prints. We have perused the schedule, reference E/Ev.{Ivan Evernden - coachwork}1/HN.{F. C. Honeyman - Retail orders}29.6.35, and would submit the following:- (1) In the fourth paragraph on page 4 there is a reference to a figure "F" on sheet 1. We cannot find figure "F" on sheet 1. Has it been accidentally omitted, please? (2) It occurs to us that where the intention is that the coach-builder should use steel, he should be definitely told to do so, as otherwise his past practice may lead him to use aluminium. Mention is made in various places of "sheet metal rear seat base", "sheet metal rear boot floor" and "metal sun roof tray". If, as we understand is the case, these ought to be of steel, we think steel should be specially mentioned in connection with them. For issue to the coach-builders concerned, we should like to receive, please, seven copies of the schedule of recommendations and blue prints amended as you may decide desirable in view of the above. En. | ||