Revolutions Needed on Railways
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE subject of the short paper by Mr. H. R. Caulfield Giles, traffic manager, Newton, Chambers and Co., Ltd., Sheffield, is essentially construc tive criticism of the railways. He states that he is not unappreciative of the change of mind and attitude of the railway companies during the past few years, and of their efforts to meet trade needs. In talking of change of mind, however, he suggests a further advance. There is a great deal of talk of traders being rail-minded or road-minded, but the author thinks this is invidious, and that the proper expression is "transport-minded!' It must surely be agreed, he says, that road and air transport have come to stay and that there is room for all. Further, that co-operation between them would better serve the interests of railways and traders.
The railways might have realized, long before they did, that much short-haulage work would pass out of their hands, but could they not have been a little more progressive, and could they not still be so in regard to longdistance work? Is it fantastic to imagine a train of crocodile wagons running each evening from various centres in the North of England with 50 or so laden lorries and a coach for the drivers? Such a train could run South when passenger traffic is light and the lines are not congested. At the destination the lorries could move off under their own power and the goods be delivered to their various destinations during the day. It seems to him that a low rate for this service would pay the railways.
Are the railways treating the roadtransport companies fairly, asks the author. It is most unlikely that the railways will be superseded. They have given valuable service to the heavy industries of the country in con.
nection with raw materials. Road transport is giving equally valuable service and the recognition of this important fact must benefit all concerned.
It seems to be taken for granted by the railways that passenger services should be fast and goods services slow, but need this be so?
The author has in mind what seems lately to have given traders food for thought—the railway "Green Arrow" service. He thinks that it is generally considered that this arrangement has fallen short of traders' expectations, and of those of the railway companies.
He suggests that the power to make agreed charges under the Road and Rail Traffic Act, 1933, might be made use of to benefit those concerned in our export trade, by helping to secure to this country business which veould otherwise be lost.
There is the vexed question of timekeeping. There have been occasions recently when the various railways have embarked on an intensive campaign for a few days to encourage every individual concerned to do everything possible to maintain train times—a laudable object, but need it be confined to days or weeks—why should it not be a consistent effort?
As to railway stations, can we not all visualize many that we know and what we would like to do with them? Cannot waiting-rooms be made pleasant resorts, rather than gloomy cells to which the draughty platform is preferable? The author can think of towns, mostly overseas, where an individual wanting a really first-class meal instinctively goes to the railway restaurant, Is there anywhere in this country, with rare exceptions, where one would do the same?