The French Scheme—Notes on French Vehicles—Benzol and Alcohol Fuels—The German Scheme, Difficulties and Results—Austria, Italy, and Russia.
The French subvention scheme, for reasons already explained, has to be more comprehensive in its financial clauses than that in force in Great Britain. Without going into details, it may be summed up in the general statement that the subsidy paid in respect of a lorry of about 3 tons capacity aggregates about £300, spread over a period of four years.
“The Autocar” photograph.
A GERMAN LORRY FITTED FOR REPLENISHING THE SUPPLY OF GAS IN THE ENVELOPES
OF ZEPPELIN AIRSHIPS.
The French Government have specialised for many years past in machines of this and somewhat lighter load-carrying capacity, and more recently they have made serious and fairly successful efforts to encourage the employment of powerful vehicles in which the engine power is arranged to drive all four wheels, and which can be used either as lorries or as tractors, or as a combination of the two. The genius of the French motor engineer, in the opinion of the writer, expresses itself better in the high-speed touring car than in the industrial vehicle. There are excellent examples of the latter to be found, but the average quality of the products of well-known manufacturers is almost certainly not equal to that of corresponding British firms. A comparison of the relative importance of the two national industries was possible to those who had opportunities of visiting the Industrial Vehicle Show in London in 1913, and subsequently of inspecting the exhibits in the annexe of the Paris Motor Salon later in the same year. On these occasions, as well as during previous opportunities of watching French subvention vehicles undergoing trial, the writer formed the opinion that in many cases the various features of design in any particular vehicle of French origin are peculiarly unequal. In some portions of the chassis we find adequate or even unnecessarily great strength; in others, unduly light construction and a certain disregard of details making for safety in operation. In many instances the steering mechanism is unnecessarily exposed, and placed very far forward so as to be liable to injury in the case of slight collision or passage over any considerable obstruction. The chain drive is very popular among French manufacturers. The chains are usually not protected by cases, and in very many instances an attempt is made to obtain through the medium of the chain a very large gear reduction, resulting in the use of absurdly small chain pinions, which will certainly need frequent renewal under the conditions of rough service. In some instances again, the chains themselves are too light for durability. There is also a certain disregard for accessibility of the engine and clutch, and a tendency to employ pneumatic tyres on vehicles designed for heavy loads which would be carried with far less risk of roadside trouble on a rather more substantially constructed solid-tyred vehicle with a good springing system.
Admitting that the French Government could not stipulate any degree of standardisation until they had first obtained a numerically adequate supply of vehicles, one would have thought it possible at least to do something towards standardising the driving control. In some French subvention models, the hand-brake lever is nearer to the driver than the change-speed lever; in others, the opposite arrangement is adopted. Frequently, both levers are of equal length and almost indistinguishable to the touch, which must make it far more dangerous to put a new driver on to a subsidy car when required urgently for night work.
The French subvention trials have been held annually, usually in the months of August and September, and have not been as a rule of a very arduous character. While accompanying the competing vehicles, the writer has been forced to the conclusion that the object of the authorities was rather to pass for subvention any reasonably efficient machine, than to weed out a considerable number and depend only on the most durable. As a rule, during these trials, the competing lorries are parked at Versailles, from which centre they run out daily over a limited number of routes, generally of a very easy character so far as gradients are concerned. An interesting and potentially valuable feature of the annual French trials has been the compulsory use on all the cars of a variety of fuels. On some days petrol has been used, on others benzol, and on others again a half-and-half mixture of benzol with denatured alcohol, which latter for practical purposes may be regarded as the same thing as methylated spirits. In this way, the French Government have endeavoured to make themselves at least partially independent of any temporary stoppage in the imports of petrol, though so far as we can see at present no such stoppage is in the least degree likely during the present war. Benzol can of course be produced in limited quantities in this country and in France, and if the emergency arose, the supplies of benzol could be greatly increased at the expense of simultaneously laying up stocks of other products not at the moment marketable.
As regards alcohol, a considerable quantity of beet is grown in France, from which either sugar or alcohol can be produced. As a rule, this beet is used mainly for sugar manufacture, since this is the more profitable method of employing it, but in emergency it could be utilised for the production of a very fair quantity of commercial alcohol, thus, roughly speaking, doubling the available stock of home-produced fuel.
The results of these tests have been, on the whole, very interesting. In almost every case, benzol has given better results than petrol, while the benzol-alcohol mixture has given results in some cases rather better than petrol, and in other cases not quite so good. On the average, the mixture has shown itself approximately equal to petrol, so far as consumption is concerned. By visiting Versailles in the early hours of September mornings when the temperature was fairly low, the writer satisfied himself that the use either of benzol or of the mixture did not constitute any serious difficulty in the way of starting up the engines. Moreover, the general absence of offensive smell or smoke seemed to indicate satisfactory combustion of the fuels.
As to the results of the French subvention scheme, the fact that the regulations have recently been made more severe, and certain restrictions as to horse-power, weight, etc., introduced, seems to indicate that the number of vehicles available at the time of the outbreak of war must have been at least approaching the number estimated as required. The last series of trials were only just over when war broke out. In these trials some sixty vehicles competed, representative of a considerable variety of makes and types, including a small number of Colonial lorries of special design, and one or two tractors. On the whole, the vehicles went through the trials well, and the opinions of experts who were present were all to the effect that great improvement was noticeable in mechanical details as compared with previous years.
Incidentally, it may be mentioned that the big fleet of the Paris General Omnibus Co. forms a very useful and conveniently concentrated supply of substantial cars available either for the rapid carriage of troops, or—by the substitution or conversion of bodies—for the transport columns. Numerically, however, the Paris omnibus fleet falls very far short of that of London, while from the mechanical point of view the vehicles are of heavier construction, and one would imagine less easily handled on narrow and winding country roads.
In Germany, a motor transport subvention scheme was inaugurated in 1908. At that time a limited number of German manufacturers were producing considerable quantities of heavy motor vehicles, more especially for export, but it was becoming evident that some very substantial encouragement would be needed to make the home market sufficiently active to be of any real utility to the War Office. Consequently, a scheme was got out which was openly stated to be “a scheme for popularising the use of mechanical transport,” or, in other words, a scheme for persuading business houses to adopt a species of transport which, without Government aid, would represent an uneconomical and consequently undesirable feature of an industrial concern. The German Government decided in favour of heavy motor lorries, capable of carrying 4 tons and hauling an additional 2 tons on a trailer. These trailers, contrary to usual commercial practice, are fitted with rubber tyres, since this addition is found to ease the work of hauling by some 25 to 30 per cent. The total subsidy for a subvention train consisting of a power lorry and rubber-tyred trailer amounts to something in the neighbourhood of £450 spread over a period of five years. The choice of a heavy type of vehicle was probably justified by the need for limiting the length of the transport columns destined to accompany enormous armies. At the same time consideration has evidently shown that there are grave disadvantages to the use of such heavy cars, and recent regulations have provided more stringent stipulations as to maximum weight.
When the subvention scheme had been in operation for five years, figures were got out indicative of its results up to the end of March, 1913. During this period 825 army trains were subsidised, namely, 743 in Prussia and the other states whose armies are under Prussian control, and 82 in Bavaria. In addition, some 400 lorries of very similar types were sold in Germany outside the scheme, making about 1,200 trains available for use at that time. Allowing for increase in the interval which has since elapsed, we may perhaps put the total available at the outbreak of war at about 1,600. Captain Davidson estimates that the German Army requires for transport purposes about 2,000 of its trains, but this figure presumably does not take into account the needs of the whole of the Landwehr and Landsturm. It is admitted that the normal British Expeditionary Force requires about 1,000 3-ton vehicles, which would correspond in capacity to about 500 of the German trains. Consequently, 2,000 of the German trains would apparently only be about sufficient for an army four times the size of our Expeditionary Force. Similarly, the estimate that France needs about 5,000 vehicles of the 3-ton type apparently does not take into account the complete mobilisation of reserves.
The manufacturing concerns which have figured most largely in the German scheme are the German Daimler, the Büssing, the N.A.G., and the Gaggenau. These four have all been participating in the scheme from the start, and about ten other manufacturers have more recently fallen into line, while in Bavaria only three manufacturers have been building to official requirements. The states the industries of which have enabled the strongest support to be given to the scheme are Brandenburg, Saxony, the Rhine Province, Würtemberg, Westphalia, Baden, and Alsace-Lorraine. No less than 41 per cent. of the total machines enrolled are normally used in the brewing trade. In this connection, an official report from Bavaria is rather instructive and amusing:
“There are so many breweries in Bavaria, and these are so densely distributed, that there is no need anywhere to convey beer for long distances. Hence there are practically no vehicles employed.”
This seriously expressed implication that beer is the only really essential commodity seems to show that lack of humour which appears to be a national characteristic of the German race.
Next after the brewing interests, but far behind in their practical support of the Government scheme, come concerns engaged in the transport of goods for export, followed by those concerned in brick transport, flour manufacture, carriage of building materials, agricultural work, and haulage of iron and steel goods.
In endeavouring to estimate how far the existing fleet meets the requirements of the Germany Army, we have to remember that it consists, at least partially, of machines that have been in service for several years, and that consequently may not be equal to any long strain under peculiarly difficult conditions. It must be presumed that the German Government has made provision for the continued manufacture of considerable numbers of heavy motor lorries throughout the war, and has not permitted the leading motor works engaged in this class of production to be too far denuded by the mobilisation of their men.
The Austrian subsidy scheme is along the same lines as that in force in Germany, but favours a lorry of slightly lower carrying capacity, probably in view of the mountainous nature of many of the frontier roads. The total amount of subsidy payable is in the neighbourhood of £360 spread over a period of five years. The scheme was inaugurated some time after those of France and Germany, the first trials being held towards the end of 1911. Certain parts of Austria are well provided with roads, so that there is a fair field for the commercial use of motor transport. A large number of vehicles, not of subsidy type, but no doubt capable of being made useful for light work in time of war, are used for the carriage of mails in Hungary. In the Austrian Tyrol, there are numbers of motor services for the carriage of mails and passengers, but on the whole Austria is probably not very well provided with mechanical transport. Her manufacturing industry is limited, and she imports in fair numbers from her neighbour, Germany.
Italy can only find very small use for heavy motor vehicles in commercial service, and consequently it would be futile as yet for the Government to depend upon anything in the nature of a subsidy scheme. During the Tripoli campaign, a considerable number of rather lightly built lorries were obtained by direct purchase and proved very serviceable. Probably they are not of a type which would be by any means ideal in a European war, though they were doubtless the right thing for work over loose sandy tracks where heavier machines might well have become inoperative.
Russia also has no subsidy scheme on account of its comparatively poor industrial development, and also the very inadequate quantity and quality of its roads. For such vehicles as are used, the country is dependent upon import, while the army must depend solely on direct purchase from foreign manufacturers. It is rather interesting to note that out of about 2,000 industrial motor vehicles exported by Germany during the year 1913, no less than 25 per cent. went to Russia, practically the whole of these being known to represent Government orders. Russia has been buying motor lorries for military use from British firms for many years past. An engineer who accompanied one of the first vehicles supplied from this country, describes the roads over which the car had to work during its official trials as follows:
“The road was covered with fine sand, banked up a few feet above the level of the surrounding country, in which the wheels of peasants’ carts had cut ruts about 12 ins. to 14 ins. in depth. The gauge of these ruts being narrow, it was necessary to drive with one pair of wheels in the ruts, the other pair meanwhile cutting ruts of their own. At intervals planked bridges had to be crossed. These were old and unsafe; therefore, it became necessary to lay down a temporary track of boards to distribute the weight over as many planks as possible.”
At first sight it would appear that under such conditions the purchase of motor lorries by the Russian Government represents a waste of money, but the facts are explained by a credible story circulated within a few days of the outbreak of war to the effect that the Austrian military attaché a day or so before leaving Petrograd expressed surprise that so many motors were being mobilised. “Your roads are so bad,” he said. “Yes,” was the reply, “but yours are good.”