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).
Secret internal memo discussing responsibility for a spring failure and clarifying the roles of the Experimental and Drawing Office departments.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 54\3\ Scan136 | |
| Date | 9th September 1924 | |
| /2628 To Wor.{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager} from Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} S E C R E T. HS{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}2/LG1.9.24. X.180 X.2628 X.9410 With reference to your Worl/M1.9.24. surely some explanation should be given showing in what manner the Experimental Dept. have not carried out this work satisfactorily. As no reason is given, we can only assume that CJ. imagines that the Expl: Dept: are not capable of making pieces to the drawing and checking to see that they are so made. If we take the case of the recent failure of the Woodhead 12 1/2% springs. Those springs were to the drawing, if they had been inspected by the D.O. at Derby, they could not have done otherwise than approved of them. If it had not been that we, on our own initiative, had not taken a Firths spring to WW., the question of the faulty design of the Firths spring would never have been seen by R.{Sir Henry Royce} There was no request from WW. to see a specimen spring; it was purely that we did not like the appearance of the design and considered it wise for R.{Sir Henry Royce} to have an opportunity of examining it. All parts made and fitted to Expl: cars are made to D.O. instructions. You are aware that when fitting up new parts, the Expl: Dept: have always made it a practice to consult the D.O. on every point. We consider it is not fair to the D.O. to attempt to make them responsible - it is only the men who actually make the pieces or fit them up who can take that responsibility. The only effect the suggestion will have, is that contd :- | ||