Luton Corporation – Daimler COG5 – CNM 43 – 68

Copyright John Barringer

Luton Corporation Transport
1938
Daimler COG5
Willowbrook L26/26R

Probably the only surviving picture of fleet number 68 registration CNM 43 chassis number 10337 taken just after withdrawal in 1952. Luton Corporation Transport purchased a fleet of Daimlers in the early 1930’s to replace the tramway system that had served the town for a number of years. I suppose the thinking was that ex tram drivers would be able to come to terms much easier with semi automatic pre-selector gearboxes and fluid flywheels than the crash gearboxes offered by other manufacturers. These were mated to Gardner 5LW engines which on the face of it seemed rather small to haul these machines up the steep inclines each side of Luton town. Many of these old Daimlers soldiered on into the 1950’s despite sketchy wartime servicing and the Luton bus garage receiving a direct hit from a Nazi bomb.
The low bridge Willowbrook coachwork had much character with the unusual feature of an upstairs with one gangway each side of a raised dais giving each bench seat only three places instead of the usual four. This meant that whichever side you sat downstairs you would still risk banging your head.
The drivers cabs were also a bit claustrophobic and had a small box section let into the roof to accommodate tall drivers.
For some reason the Gardner 5LW engines were much quieter in these compared to the Eastern National Bristol’s that also ran into Luton. Perhaps the fluid flywheel had a cushioning effect or maybe they had flexible engine mounts. In any case one characteristic of the Bristol’s was that each window would vibrate in turn as the engine revs gathered pace.
One notorious hill that tested these Daimlers to their limit was Crawley Green Hill to the east of Luton. I worked for Vauxhall Motors in the 1950’s and would sometimes wait at the top of this hill to catch a bus to Stopsley. The water supply in Luton contains a high proportion of chalk and no doubt this was used to top up their radiators. This resulted in a well laden bus boiling at about halfway up this hill and the driver having to switch on his wipers to clear the screen of condensed water. You will notice that number 68 has the engine side panel leaning against the wing in the time honoured way to give an extra cooling effect. Despite this the drivers cab would be writhed in steam at the top and a short wait would be required to cool them down.
At tick over and in neutral they would emit a ‘wind in the willows’ whine that would stop abruptly as first gear was engaged. As the driver put his foot down the bus would shake slightly as the fluid drive began to bite and to the sound of creaking coachwork the bus would slowly move forward like a dowager duchess perambulating at a garden party.
Happy days!

Photograph and Copy contributed by John Barringer

A full list of Daimler codes can be seen here.

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.


17/02/11 – 08:59

I love John’s wonderful literary description of the characteristics of these most interesting vehicles – a batch which, incidentally, I’ve never encountered before. While three window upper saloon windscreens were fairly common before WW2, this particular arrangement is most unusual and has the suggestion of the bay windows in many houses. The phenomenon of “each window vibrating in turn” was also frequently evident in the Leyland TS and TD diesel models, particularly when setting off in second gear. Sadly there are few, if any, such controlled acoustic delights in today’s “sophisticated” offerings.

Chris Youhill


17/02/11 – 09:49

Come on, Chris. Yorkshire folk tell it as it is.
…..in today’s characterless sewing machines!

David Oldfield


18/02/11 – 07:27

John Barringer Great to see these old photos surfacing even when not my ‘location’ I must explore more of the website.
Thanks for this one.

Ian Gibbs


18/02/11 – 07:29

A very evocative description that takes me back, too! Luton dabbled with Willowbrook bodywork for much of the 1930’s, but these were the last of the breed. They all went between 1950 and 1954. The double gangway certainly restricted the seating capacity, the full code being L26/26R!
I’d say that these buses were about the last of the bay-windowed breed, too, although Dublin were still ordering such fronted buses in the late 1940’s, if not a little later. Personally, I rather liked this style of front.
The Bovril adverts are ones I’ve never seen before, and don’t make outrageous claims, either!

Chris Hebbron


18/02/11 – 07:30

I’m very pleased to see this as I was about to post a question regarding pre-war Willowbrook bodies with the upper deck arrangement which John describes. In an article about Mansfield Independents in Buses Extra in 1985, Roy Marshall recalls that Ebor had some of these, with a continuous sunken gangway which allowed the conductor to work round the top deck in a circle. Now, try as I might, I just cannot imagine how this was configured, how would it have been continued under the front canopy or over the rear platform? Do any plans or diagrams or even photos exist? In the same article, Mr Marshall mentions that Trumans of Shirebrook bought a Guy Arab in 1946 and fitted it with a 1931 Park Royal lowbridge body on which the sunken gangway had been built up to normal height forward of the front bulkhead to meet postwar certification regulations, an accompanying photo clearly shows the area above the cab and canopy screened off by a series of handrails. My point is that on every lowbridge vehicle I’ve ever been on, the sunken gangway stops at the front bulkhead (i.e. back of the cab). Even if pre-war construction and use regulations allowed different, how would the driver get into the cab and surely driving would have been well nigh impossible! Did any other coachbuilders have a go at this layout or was it unique to Willowbrook?

Chris Barker


18/02/11 – 10:42

Interesting that 1937 Thames Valley Leyland double deckers had a 3-panel “bay window” upstairs at the front, but were bodied by Brush, years before any business connection with Willowbrook. The small outer windows of the Brush version were less angled than those on the Luton deckers. The TV buses had a conventional single sunken gangway, but I’m fascinated to see that Willowbrook used a double gangway as late as ’37!
Chris Barker’s question exactly echoes one that’s been niggling me for years: how did you get from one gangway to the other??? A cross-gangway immediately behind the front bulkhead (front passengers downstairs Mind Your Heads!) would make sense, though it would entail a long circular tour for anyone nearside rear, but the view of seat-tops in the few surviving photos of double-gangway double deckers suggests otherwise. Another possibility might be to drop the last eighteen inches of the downstairs gangway, just aft of the axle, to platform level, so as to afford headroom for a cross-gangway upstairs over the platform, immediately forward of the stairs. This way everyone not sitting would get their allotted 5’10 1/2″ of headroom, though tall folk would need to be careful as they boarded the platform. But here again the pictures don’t point to that solution. John Cupis, a friend who spent his childhood at Staines, Middlesex, tells me that on the London lowbridge STs there was a gap in front of the rearmost seat upstairs to allow you to cross between gangways, but that “you had to stoop” as you crossed.
The Luton top decks look to be built as far forward over the cab as possible, presumably to accommodate the 9 rows of seats necessary to get 26 upper-deck seats.
Thanks for the photo and detailed account of this very unusual and characterful batch. Luton Corporation always seemed to go for something different!

Ian Thompson


18/02/11 – 11:35

A rare commodity indeed was the BET “Federation” style double decker. Single deckers were common, but there were few double deckers, the 3 window front top deck being a feature.
Common with East Yorkshire, built by Brush and ECW. Also Thames Valley?
YWD had a few. Who else?
The Willowbrook body here has more of a bay window effect, as Chris points out, but perhaps was influenced by the BET ideas, although by no means a regular Willowbrook feature.

John Whitaker


19/02/11 – 06:47

That front upper-deck window seems particularly appropriate to the symmetrical double-gangway layout. Front seat passengers must indeed have felt as if they were sitting on a sofa looking through a bay window!
The Daimler COG was years ahead of its time in terms of refinement. They did indeed have flexible engine mountings, and John’s description (apart from the creaking bodywork) could equally well apply to a Daimler CVG built many years later. Manchester bought COGs and CVGs from 1940 to 1963, and there was hardly any difference in the riding experience at all.

Peter Williamson


20/02/11 – 08:21

I’m grateful to John Cupis for sending me photos, taken 60-odd years ago by the late John C. Gilham, of London Transport lowbridge STs, both outside and INSIDE! To read the rest of my comment and see the great shots click here.

Ian Thompson


25/05/11 – 06:33

I suspect that this vehicle was already being used for spares as it has already lost one headlight. Did these buses ever have the engine side panel closed. I can imaging some of the drivers cursing the 5LW engine on Crawley Green as not only is it very steep, it is also lengthy and had a bus stop at the foot. A dead start on a Saturday lunch time outbound with a full load of seated passengers and probably another half dozen standing would mean 5 minutes climbing in first gear with speed probably in single figures.

David Manning


25/05/11 – 16:58

The pre-selector boxes made a wonderful, tuneful sound with variation of pitch, especially on overrun: and when stationary, they would have a distinctive “hunt” as a reminder to get a move on!

Joe


26/05/11 – 07:29

Joe, unless I’m mistaken (I’m no engineer) I believe that the delightful symphony while standing, and it WAS delightful – in neutral – emanated from the fluid flywheel rather than from the preselctor gearbox.

Chris Youhill


27/05/11 – 08:40

I’m sure you are right Chris- I should have said “transmission”!

Joe


05/08/13 – 17:48

My father worked as a conductor for many years with Luton Corporation buses he received a gold watch for 25yr service but died shortly after receiving it.

Walter Gunning

Courts of Nuneaton – Daimler COG5 – FOF 269


Copyright Victor Brumby

Courts of Nuneaton
1939
Daimler COG5
BRCW H30/24R – 1949 English Electric H28/26R

Another fine shot from Victor with the following comment which was hand written underneath the photograph.

“FOF 269 – Ex. Birmingham Corporation Daimler highbridge ‘sit-up-and-beg’ body. Birmingham no 1269. Operated by Courts of Nuneaton.
JVO 230 – Barton Leyland lowbridge no 507.”

Interesting information I have come up with for Birmingham 1269 is that in 1949 it received an English Electric H28/26R body from No.765.
765 was a 1935 Daimler COG5 registration AOP 765 with a B R C W H26/22R body but according to my British Bus Fleets 14 – Birmingham City Transport due to war damage 765 was rebodied with an English Electric (M C T D) body in 1943. I am guessing that the (M C T D) stands for Manchester Corporation Transport Department who kind of adopted what Victor calls the ‘sit-up-and-beg’ look. Hopefully someone out there will put me right if I am wrong.

With regards Barton 507 which is/was a Leyland Titan PD1 dating from 1948 which had very smart Duple L28/27F bodywork. The reason I use is/was is because there are a few shots of it on the net at various running days so it would appear to have been preserved.

Photograph and Part Copy contributed by Victor Brumby

01/12/11 – 07:31

Whatever the machinations – and whoever actually built it – that is a Manchester Corporation (style) body.

David Oldfield

01/12/11 – 07:32

The English Electric body is definitely of Manchester Corporation ‘standard’ pre-war design. The downward curving upper deck windows at the front and side-front are the main characteristics. In Manchester this design was painted in a ‘streamlined’ livery which featured swoops to match the body design features.

Philip Halstead

01/12/11 – 07:34

Coincidently, at a bus group meeting two days ago, I was talking to Trevor Brookes who was the first owner of JVO 230 in preservation. He bought it in the early 1970s, I think direct from Barton, and kept it for quite a few years before becoming an operator himself as Genial Travel of Colchester with rather more modern vehicles.

Nigel Turner

01/12/11 – 17:15

I seem to recall reading, some time ago, that the downward swoop of the front and side windows caused water to accumulate at the four low points and rot the two front pillars.

Chris Hebbron

02/12/11 – 07:25

The body was one of a batch built by English Electric for Manchester and intended for Daimler COG5 chassis. However, production of the chassis was stopped by bombing of the Daimler factory. The bodies were fully finished and lettered for Manchester as can be seen in the background of a photo in my gallery at: //davidbeilby.zenfolio.com
The finished bodies were moved to Manchester for storage and some of the surplus ones sold to Birmingham as seen in the photo above.

David Beilby

02/12/11 – 11:46

Thx, David for that info. and photo. It’s amazing what sometimes lurks in the background of photos, but it remains hidden unless someone observant/knowledgeable picks up on it, plus good fortune to see the photo in the first place!

Chris Hebbron

02/12/11 – 16:16

Some of these “surplus” Manchester Corporation bodies went on to Arab I chassis, and some went to other operators on unfrozen chassis. Examples were Sheffield, and Newport.
The English Electric variants must have been among the last bodies produced by that firm.
Alan Townsins work on the utilities outlines most of the detail.

David. The photo of the rear of the “Manchester” EEC body is absolutely fascinating! With the Aberdeen tram being a “Preston” product too, could the photo have been taken at Preston do you think, before the trams were delivered and before the Manchester storage occurred?

John Whitaker

03/12/11 – 06:44

The Sheffield bodies were MCCW and sent to Weymann’s to be finished – making them the only true MCW bodies before 1967.

David Oldfield

The photograph is definitely at Preston. This photo is part of the English Electric photo archive which I am gradually scanning and putting in my gallery for all to see. There’s some very good stuff in there and I’ll probably end up putting one or two more strategic links on this site in time.
I haven’t got the Manchester Bus book in front of me at the moment, but I believe all the English Electric bodies were fitted to either Manchester or Birmingham Daimlers. The ones you refer to were Metro-Cammell bodies, which also went to Coventry and one or two other places.

David Beilby

03/12/11 – 06:48

Well I really think that this is a Crossley body, just look at the front windows and the last two side windows by the entrance very Crossley. Manchester and Stockport used them being local near Mc vites on Crossley Road at Heaten Chapel

Nigel Ganley

03/12/11 – 06:51

1269, (FOF 269) was numerically the very last Daimler COG5 delivered to Birmingham City Transport. It entered service along with 1262-1268 on 1 November 1939 and was fitted with one of the twenty English Electric bodies surplus to Manchester’s requirements after most of their order for COG5s were destroyed at the Daimler factory in 1940. The EE body was fitted to 765, (AOP 765) on 19 May 1943 making 765 the earliest BCT bus to have a Manchester style body. The original body on 1269 was built to BCT specification by BRCW but were not as robust as the more numerous MCCW equivalent bodies. As a result BRCW bodies were disposed of early,with 1269 getting the EE body as a direct swap on 31 August 1949 with 765 going for scrap. 1269 remained in service until31 October 1953 but remained in store until sold on 4 September 1954 to W T Bird of Stratford. 1269 was sold almost immediately to Lloyd, Nuneaton who ran it until January 1956 and then sold it on to Court of Chapel End whom it is with in the photograph. It lasted with them until September 1958 and was sold to Mayfair Garage of Fazeley who broke it up.

David Harvey

03/12/11 – 08:58

Nigel. You cannot make that assumption. Crossley, like everyone else, built the bodies to Manchester’s exacting, even quirky, standards. It was almost impossible to tell the difference. [You had to look at things like rain gutters!] It just happened that Crossley occasionally “borrowed” some of these Manchester signatures when building bodies for other operators.

David Oldfield

04/12/11 – 07:49

According to Paul Collins’s book on Birmingham Corporation, 12 of the 20 ex-Manchester English Electric bodies were fitted to Leyland TD6c chassis, 4 to Daimler COG5s and 4 kept as spares. One of the TDs, EOG 231, whose original body had been damaged beyond repair by enemy action, is illustrated in the book. Another, EOG 215, later turned up with Laurie (Chieftain) of Hamilton, sporting, would you believe, an extremely natty tin front whose postwar Foden-like profile matched those prewar Manchester curves beautifully. There’s a photo on Scran www.scran.ac.uk/ but it will cost you a £10 subscription to see more than a thumbnail.

Peter Williamson

04/12/11 – 07:50

What interests me is where the location could be. We now know that the date is pre Sept. 1958 but did Court’s have any stage services? the vehicle doesn’t appear to have a destination blind. I’ll hazard a guess at Leicester because Bartons reached there with their service 12 from Nottingham and used PD1’s on it but the destination shows Private so then again it could be on a private hire job somewhere. Very interesting selection of surrounding vehicles too, what appears to be a Plaxton half cab body to the left, a single deck COG5 behind, the rear end of a Plaxton Venturer body to the right and a BMMO S type, the presence of that and a Barton in the same picture points me back to Leicester though!

Chris Barker

04/12/11 – 16:43

Sorry, Chris – I didn’t note the location of the Barton Titan and the Birmingham Corp. Daimler. They are at Kettering, at Wicksteed’s Park, a sort of antediluvian Disney World which it pleased folk to visit from round the Midlands on a weekend during the 1950s and 60s. So – a private hire, as you opined.

Victor Brumby

04/12/11 – 17:33

Wicksteed Park is still going today and is frequently advertised as a ‘day out’ destination in ‘what’s on’ tourist leaflets etc. Have to admit I’ve never been.

Philip Halstead

04/12/11 – 20:34

Ah, the hazards of guessing! but what a fabulous pair of vehicles to use on an excursion or private hire, those were the days!

Chris Barker

Spiers Tours Birmingham – Daimler COA6 – FOF 251


Copyright Victor Brumby

Spiers Tours Birmingham
1939
Daimler COG5 – re engined COA6
BRCW H30/24R – MCCW H30/24R – Burlingham FC37F

Yet another great shot from Victor of another ex Birmingham Daimler CO5G with the following note.

“FOF 251 – Ex Birmingham Corporation no 1251 rebodied and operated by Spiers Tours Birmingham. Daimler.”

Victor is defiantly correct with his rebodied comment but with the aid of my BBF 14 and Peter Goulds excellent website it would appear the body in the shot above on FOF 251 is its third.

1251 – FOF 251 received a MCCW H30/24R body from 939 – COH 939 in 1948/9. A comment in BBF says against the 919-963 batch “Many bodies interchangeable 1948-49”. This comment appears time and time again with different dates against batches of COG5s one has to ask the question did Birmingham have the same system as London Transport had with interchanging RT bodies when the vehicle were being overhauled?

After a little more research it gets more interesting and starts to dismiss the interchanging at overhaul theory because 939 was withdrawn in 1949 but what is even more interesting so was 1251, so why interchange the bodies then withdraw them both?

Photograph and Part Copy contributed by Victor Brumby

08/12/11 – 06:27

…..and that’s a Burlingham coach body.

David Oldfield

08/12/11 – 06:28

The new body is by Burlingham. Yelloway of Rochdale had a pair of identical ones on Leyland PS2/7 chassis with FC37F layout. They were HDK 801/2 of 1951.
This was probably Burlingham’s last attempt at modernising the body design for front engined chassis before the onslaught of the underfloor engine and the introduction of the Seagull.
There is a photo of HDK 802 in the book ‘The Yellow Road’ which covers the history of Yelloway from its rise, heyday to the sad decline in the post-deregulation era. But that’s another story.

Philip Halstead

09/12/11 – 10:36

Please see Harper Bros AEC Regal III posting – including comments today (9.12.11) – for the half-cab version of this body. To make life easy here is a quick link.

David Oldfield

10/12/11 – 07:23

Yet another fascinating subject! If it was withdrawn as a double decker in 1949 (didn’t Birmingham vehicles usually have longer lives?) It’s fair to assume that this body was fitted in that year or 1950. It’s always a source of wonderment to me, not living in those times, that operators did such things, presumably it would have provided a slow and loud ride, but then there were no motorways or by-passes in those days! One thing occurred to me, I know that the COG5 was a fairly common choice for coaching before WW2 but I don’t remember hearing of any examples of CVG5’s as coaches post 1945. Weren’t all Daimler coaches post war of the CVD6 variety?

Chris Barker

10/12/11 – 08:47

As far as I know, you are correct about CVD6 coaches.

David Oldfield

10/12/11 – 12:25

Was it the case then that TVD (Daimler) would only supply CV chassis with their own engines when they produced these post war? Gardner only seemed to return later with the various “tin front” CVG6’s, which then seemed to eclipse the Daimler engine & fluid flywheel. Anyone know more?

Joe

10/12/11 – 15:05

Salford certainly had a fair sized batch of post-war CVG6s (as opposed to CVDs)with exposed radiator and the quadrant-style pre-selector change.

Stephen Ford

10/12/11 – 15:07

With Gardner under pressure to supply several other bus and lorry manufacturers, Daimler sought to relieve this constraint on its output, and increase in house value by offering its own oil engine. The Daimler 8.6 litre engine was developed immediately prior to the outbreak of WW2, prototypes having being constructed in 1936. The destruction of the Radford works in the heavy air raids of 1940 and 1941 put back the production process until 1945. The design emulated the feature used successfully by Dennis (and later by Meadows also) of employing timing gears at the rear of the engine rather than a front mounted timing chain as used by Gardner and others. This resulted in a compact unit, but meant that the engine had to be removed from the chassis to allow access to the timing gears. Had the engine been as outstandingly reliable as the Dennis designs, then this would not have been a problem. Sadly, the CD6 unit soon became noted for its fuel thirst, and a marked variability in quality between individual engines, the best being good, but the worst examples being considered as bad a the Crossley HOE7. London Transport, having had experience of a batch of thirteen(!) CWD6 buses taken in 1945, refused to take any more Daimler engines, and replaced the thirteen it had with AEC 7.7s in 1950. Like the Crossley, the smooth running CD6 engine seemed best suited to coach work rather than the heavier demands of double deck or stop start stage carriage duties, and most CVD6 chassis were bodied as coaches. There were exceptions, such as the large batch of CVD6 double decks operated by Birmingham. By the mid 1950s, with bus and coach travel beginning to suffer from private car competition, the Daimler engine largely vanished as an option, one of the last examples probably being the turbocharged unit fitted experimentally in a Halifax CV ‘decker in 1964, by which time it was a rarity. Interestingly, the prototype Fleetline had a Daimler engine, and one wonders if the firm ever seriously considered this for production. The Freeline single decker also had a Daimler engine option. Gardner engines continued to be offered in CV chassis throughout the brief reign of the CD6, and, of course, beyond, where they became standard in the Fleetline.

Roger Cox

11/12/11 – 06:52

Not a lot to say after Roger’s comprehensive and knowledgeable post. The AEC was the standard war-time engine on the CW version and was popular and reliable enough to survive into CV time (as indeed did the Bristol K6A). Most CVD6 deckers were, like the Crossley DD42s, delivered because operators were desperate and they were available. [The Salford CVD6s were diverted from Chester.]
Sheffield were never a Daimler operator until the Fleetline effectively replaced the AEC Regent but their only post war Daimlers were CVD6/NCB. There were no further orders for half cab Daimlers.

David Oldfield

11/12/11 – 06:53

According to Peter Gould’s site it was 1252 and not 1251 which received the body from 939. 1252 then survived until 1954.
My (admittedly limited) experience of COG5s suggests that FOF 251 would have been far from noisy. I only had one ride on a Manchester one, but it was every bit as sweet and refined as the CVG5s built more than 15 years later, and in fact with eyes closed the riding experience was identical. Slow it might have been, though, especially as with 37 seats it must presumably have been extended beyond its original length. Prewar COG5-40 coaches had five-speed gearboxes and probably lighter bodywork.

Peter Williamson

20/12/11 – 10:24

FOF 251 was fitted with an AEC 7.7 engine some time after it received its Burlingham coach body as this would have been a much smoother unit for coaching duties. This was before it joined Spiers tours so in the photo it is, in effect, a COA6!
It was scrapped in 1964.

Steve Calder

Newcastle Corporation – Daimler COG5 – HTN 222 – ?

HTN 22_crop_lr


Photograph by “unknown” – if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

Newcastle Corporation
1939
Daimler COG5
Northern Coachbuilders H56R

What looks like a pre delivery photo of three Daimlers for Newcastle Corporation, “note the blue light to the side of the destination blind” this has been commented on before on this site. Going by the registrations I would say they were built in the late 1930s, and to be honest if I were shown a picture of one of these in a different location I wouldn’t be able to say who the bodybuilder was, but I think the name on the building may be a clue.

ncb_insert

What on earth were they thinking of with the front wing and the headlights? They look as if someone remembered them about ten minutes before they were due to leave the factory and they were stuck on as an afterthought, for me they completely spoil the look of what is otherwise a rather handsome vehicle. I don’t know anything about them, maybe someone can provide information for the “?s”. But if I’m right about the date they would almost certainly ‘or the chassis would’ have still been around until about the early to mid fifties.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye


06/06/12 – 07:50

Yes, good looking vehicles, spoiled by the apparent afterthought of where to place the headlamps. Then again, perhaps they did omit the headlamps entirely, as these are where most folk would expect the fog lights.

Pete Davies


06/06/12 – 07:51

HTN 231, 233, presumably from the same batch of 1939 NCB bodied COG5s, finished up in 1956 with the LCBER bus fleet.
See my recent post, and fleet list on the subject

John Whitaker


06/06/12 – 07:52

This picture appears in Alan Townsin’s book “Daimler”, where it is credited to the Newcastle-upon-Tyne City Libraries. The photo was taken in June 1939, and shows the first three of a batch of 18 COG5 machines with Northern Coachbuilders bodies, which were followed by two more with Northern Counties bodies. This batch of 20 brought the total number of COG5 buses in the Newcastle fleet up to 71, the highest number outside Birmingham at that time.

Roger Cox


06/06/12 – 07:52

From the registration number this looks like the same series as the two mentioned in the recently posted fleet list of Llandudno & Colwyn Bay vehicles (Nos. 1 and 2).

Stephen Ford


06/06/12 – 11:38

Bus headlamps are a fascinating topic to study. Several operators in the late thirties decided that low mooted headlamps or maybe fog lamps were more effective for smog conditions in many of the major cities. The first LPTB RT AECs had no main headlamps in the traditional place, and similarly Coventry had some Daimler COG5s with only low mounted lights similar to the Newcastle COG5s.

Richard Fieldhouse


06/06/12 – 11:38

I gather from photos published elsewhere that it was not until January 1949 that legislation specified how the headlights had to be placed. Nottingham favoured low-down “driving lamps” like this from 1935 and only modified them when the law changed. Did it improve visibility in fog? We tend to forget that headlights were not used routinely on (reasonably) well-lit city roads until comparatively recently. I wonder how practical they were when fitted with blackout shutters during the war? I have also seen (possibly on this site – not sure) buses with the two headlights mounted at different heights.

Stephen Ford


06/06/12 – 17:34

I cannot remember where, Stephen, but you are right about asymmetrical headlight siting.
Interesting to see these NCB bodies. They bear no resemblance to those I came to know post-war in Sheffield. They are quite a well balanced design and it seems a pity that they were abandoned after the war.
I have wondered, occasionally, whether the post-war design was deliberately similar to Weymann. (There is a vague similarity, and NCB’s order for about 40 bodies on various chassis was primarily to fill in for the fact that Weymann did not have the capacity to fulfil all its orders at that time.)

David Oldfield


06/06/12 – 19:42

Rather a splendid frontage to the NCB factory, which I’m rather surprised no one in this posting has picked up on.
Don’t suppose it has survived.

Eric Bawden


06/06/12 – 20:02

Long gone I’m afraid, Eric, but the Mill is still there but missing the top

Ronnie Hoye


08/06/12 – 17:15

Headlamp heights: the classic example is the early post war Morris Minor which pictures show with headlamps tucked in at the side of the radiator grille: then they had to be lifted into two fairings in the wings. The early Hillman Imp had excessive toe in on the front wheels to lift the headlamps- it is said: someone miscalculated, I assume.
Those old headlamps (CAV?) really did dip- the outer one just went out, often leaving the inner directed at the kerb. Consequently, the outer lamp was rarely used. Nowadays these would be foglamps, which was possibly the idea- or perhaps it avoided awkward brackets. The mudguards suggest quite some travel on the front suspension!

Joe


08/06/12 – 17:16

To try and answer David’s query about post-war NCB body design, one has to look-back to the war period. NCB was designated by the Ministry of War Transport to supply only re-bodies. In late 1944 the LPTB was directed to order 20 bodies for their war-damaged AEC and Leyland trolleybuses. NCB delivered a body similar to the pre-war style of LPTB trolleybus in late 1945 and all were delivered by mid 1946. These NCB bodied trolleybuses had a suffix C after their fleet number.

In June 1946 Bradford Corporation received their first of six NCB re-bodied 1934/35 AEC 661Ts (607, 614, 615, 616, 621 & 622). These bodies closely resembled the London C suffix trolleybuses and the back views were almost identical such as the emergency upper deck window and the platform window. The front windows however were more of the utility body style with opening vents and a result referred to as semi-utility. A rear view of 607 is appended. From this unique NCB semi-utility design emerged the standard NCB Mark 2 body by late 1946. This type was then seen in many towns and cities on both new and old chassis. This NCB body had an improved, more rounded front style and a reduced rear platform window but a similar LPTB rear upper -deck window shape. This may explain the link in NCB design with LPTB MCCW, Weymann and BRCW trolleybus bodies.

Richard Fieldhouse


08/06/12 – 18:00

Thanks Richard. Logical and highly likely.

David Oldfield


The links below are to comments that were updated at 18:20

Richard`s explanation is succinct and clear. It was obviously an easier design move, to develop the Bradford Mk1 “semi” design into what became the standard post war style.
What I would also like to know is whether the pre-war style, as used by Newcastle, Aberdare and others , was a metal framed design. If so, there is another reason for going down the “London rebody” route, as the post war style of NCB body, well known in so many fleets, was a composite product.
Another interesting aspect about this company, is their adoption of an “ECW” style about 1950, which superseded the standard type. Trolleybuses for Cleethorpes, and Mark 111s for Newcastle refer.
After the post war boom, aided by the failure of EEC to re-enter the market, NCB collapsed, and were wound up c.1951.
Published literature refers to the company operating in a converted aircraft hanger. Is this the same building as the one shown in the header photograph?

It may be interesting to also point out that NCB built significant numbers of Park Royal designed utility bodies on wartime Guys for London Transport.

John Whitaker


09/06/12 – 07:46

John, the building in the photo was on Claremont Road in the Spital Tongues area, and overlooked Hunters Moor and Exhibition Park, I think the aircraft hanger you refer to was in Cramlington which is about 7 miles north of Newcastle.

Ronnie Hoye


09/06/12 – 07:47

John the reason for the ECW clone – with strangely unbalanced and unequal bays – was that someone from ECW management went to NCB just before they folded. The reason that they folded was that their owner/principal shareholder died and the death duties did for the company. Interestingly, the machinery and raw materials were bought by Charles H Roe – and, one assumes, used subsequently for their own production. Doubly interesting since there is no record of Roe bodies being iffy but the NCB composites had a quite dreadful reputation – especially for the frames sagging in middle and later life. Sad since I thought Sheffield’s last batch, MWB 1950 Regent III, were quite handsome.

David Oldfield


09/06/12 – 07:48

The ‘ECW style’ Northern Coachbuilders bodies supplied to Cleethorpes on BUT trolleybuses and Newcastle on AEC Regents followed the appointment of Mr B W Bramham as General Manager at NCB. Prior to his move to NCB Mr Bramham at been at ECW since 1936 and before that he had been at Charles Roe’s.
I understand that NCB offered both wooden and metal framed bodies. Many of the wooden framed bodies suffered from poor quality timber, which caused them to look ‘down at heel’ in later life.

Michael Elliott


09/06/12 – 12:10

You are correct, David, when you refer to sagging NCB bodies!
Although Bradford`s 1947/8 regent IIIs lasted until 1962/3, I have this abiding memory of curved waist rails! Strangely though, contemporary bodies on the rebodied 1934/5 AEC trolleybuses never demonstrated this feature! But that, perhaps, is an indication of the superiority of electric traction! (half joking!)

John Whitaker


09/06/12 – 17:40

I read somewhere that someone from NCB went to work for Barnard, and that Barnard then produced a few bodies to NCB design. But when was this, and which NCB design? Or did I dream that?

Peter Williamson


11/06/12 – 15:09

Bradford also had 6 1950 Daimler CVD6s, with Barnard bodies, Peter, and I too heard from somewhere that there was an NCB connection. The body plates on Bradford`s Barnard Daimlers referred to “Barnard Norfolk Ironworks”….I remember it well, so whether they were composite or not, I have no idea.
I have not seen photographs of identical vehicles in other fleets, although I understand there were some, and there was a vague resemblance to the NCB design.
Again, I have memories of buses with curved waist rails towards the end of their BCT lives, but all 6 were sold on for further service in 1959.

John Whitaker


22/09/14 – 14:40

The reason for the very low down head lights or fog lights (often NOTEK!) on our lovely old buses was that in the 30s and 40s we had in both the north Newcastle and Leeds etc as well as London extreme smog!
This was a really lethal mixture of coal fire and industrial smoke from foundries and steel furnaces etc (all moved to China now!) with very high levels of soot in it and then heavy fog to hold it down and stop it dissipating easily!
I have experienced smog in Leeds and London where the services were stopped it was so bad and the conductors had to guide the drivers of the buses back to the depots with make shift flares and torches!
That’s the reason for the low down bus lighting to try and prevent glareback and focus what light came through on to the near side kerb!
The clean air act changed all this and then now all heavy industry emigrated to China!

Stuart Beveridge


13/10/15 – 06:38

Yesterday Purchased Geoff Burrows and Bob Kell’s book on NCB published this year, it is very good. It also answers various of the points here; the utility drawings were originally provided by Park Royal and NCB did assemble and finish some PRV frames on Guy Arab MoS for London Transport.
However the post-war series 1 design was based on NCB’s own wartime frame. When the team working on it were designing it they worked empirically by adjusting the drawings of the initial Bradford trolleybuses, lowering the lower deck waist-rail and then producing a more curved back until somebody in the drawing office realised it was looking almost identical to a 1939 Weymann; that’s when the trademark upper-deck front windows and the LT derived emergency exit were added; the rebodies for Northern were in build as the last of the Bradford trolleys were being completed and the design lasted until 1951.
All NCB bus and coach bodies with a few exceptions were composite, those exceptions being the initial Newcastle corporation Daimler COS4 single-deckers and the Guy Arabs exported to Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) although William Bramham would have moved to metal framing had the business continued.
Sam Smith who founded the company also owned Rington’s tea, Smiths Electric Vehicles and a cardboard packaging frim called Cut-Outs (Cardboard) Ltd as well as a stake in Domestos.
The company wasn’t liquidated and the name was used for mobile shops etc built at the Smith Electric Vehicles place on Team Valley as well as coachwork repairs and sign-painting at Haymarket. The Claremont Coachworks building was sold to Newcastle Co-Operative society and the stock in trade and Machinery to Charles H Roe to pay Sam Smith’s death duties; of the staff made redundant some went to Saunders Roe, most notably Mr Bramham.
The Barnard bodies were based on the NCB series one but were even more prone to degradation. The chief designer and his head draughtsman left NCB after an order for BET single-deckers ended up being badly delayed leading to a partial cancellation and also ended up costing NCB money.The Leyland Tigers for Yorkshire Traction and Stratford Blue were due in 1947 and the last did not arrive until 1949. The people concerned joined Barnard in 1948. It was not so long after the ECW was nationalised; resulting in a sales ban and Mr Bramham joining NCB.
The draughtsman ended his career as managing Director of Bus Bodies South Africa.
The low-level driving lights were also used by United and the Northern Group

Stephen Allcroft


14/10/15 – 07:15

Apologies, a slight misreading of Messrs Kell and Burrows’ book and thus an apology. The Ceylon Guy Arabs were composite but teak rather than the usual oak and ash employed by NCB which would have been eaten away in months.
They were however built in an attempt to establish an export trade which would have then given them permits for steel and aluminium.

Stephen Allcroft


15/10/15 – 07:15

The mudguards maybe something to do with brake cooling which became an obsession with Manchester post war.

Phil Blinkhorn


16/10/15 – 06:02

There was something really obscene with death duties if it forced companies into liquidation, throwing employees into unemployment! I realise it was unwise for privately-owned companies like NCB and Ledgard not to become Ltd companies, but that’s not the point, for even smaller companies that didn’t warrant becoming Ltd companies would also have suffered.

Chris Hebbron

Coventry Corporation – Daimler COG5 – EVC 244 – 244

Coventry Corporation - Daimler COG5G - EVC 244 - 244


Copyright Ken Jones

Coventry Corporation Transport  
1940
Daimler COG5/40
Park Royal B38F

This bus was new in 1940, as fleet number 244, and sold on to Derby Corporation in 1949 where it took fleet number 47. Being non-standard in Derby, it was used mainly for driver training. Passing to Derby Museums, it was off the road from 1979 onwards. In 2009 it was placed on long term loan to Roger Burdett in return for restoration, and it returned to the road in the Spring of 2012. Roger has had the vehicle immaculately restored into Coventry Corporation Transport livery both inside and out and looks as good as the day it was delivered if not better. This is the first time in 63 years that it has carried this livery.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ken Jones

A full list of Daimler codes can be seen here.


30/10/12 – 15:23

This vehicle is scheduled to be at the Lincoln rally this coming Sunday 04/11 along with Coventry Double Decker 334.

Ken Jones


31/10/12 – 08:49

Coventry = Daimler buses (well, usually!) and Roger Burdett = outstanding restoration. What more needs to be said?

Pete Davies


31/10/12 – 10:23

Bravo?

David Oldfield


31/10/12 – 17:31

What a Wonderful livery, an Excellent paint job makes you feel you could put your hand into it. The interior is just as good with a lovely clean ceiling.

David J Henighan


02/11/12 – 07:30

All of Roger Burdetts buses & coaches all excellently restored to a good finish
Also Ken Jones for his photographs he’s taken of Rogers vehicles.

Steve Jillings


05/11/12 – 15:17

An excellent event at Lincoln yesterday, despite the cloudy and sometimes wet weather.

Geoff Kerr


05/11/12 – 15:55

I meant to say I rode on it into Lincoln. Another website gives the seating as B38F, a high figure for a half-cab; 35 is more usual. but there wasn’t much legroom!

Geoff Kerr

Thanks Geoff I have filled in the ??s, it is a bit high isn’t it.
Peter


15/11/12 – 14:57

Coventry were renowned for pushing seating to the limit. The CVAs from 1947 had 60 seats and CVGs in the late 50s were up at 63.
The COG seating is tight 38 seats in a 26ft vehicle is nearly unique. Lack of seat comfort is why I am unlikely to take it to rallies outside the Midlands.

Roger Burdett


15/11/12 – 15:51

Is it not a COG5/40, the variant single deck Daimler with a very compact cab/engine section, so designed to gain maximum (40 = 40 seats) seating capacity, and only fitted with a Gardner “5”?
Coventry had finalised the design configuration for a 60 seat 4 wheel double decker by 1939, although Daimler were also developing a 6 wheel double deck chassis, the COG6/60 as a 60 seater (plus) for Leicester, when war broke out.
Back to the COG5/40 this was readily identified by its vertical radiator, when the contemporary deckers had sloping radiators, and was represented in several fleets, Lancaster being one.
One of the most attractive preserved buses I have ever seen, and I am still sorry I could not make the recent Lincoln event to see it!

John Whitaker


15/11/12 – 16:52

A good number of North Western pre and immediate post war Bristols previously with 31 and 35 seats were rebodied by Willowbrook in the early 1950s and received 38 seats in their new bodies. Though the chassis were lengthened to 27ft 6ins they were hardly the most comfortable of vehicles.

Phil Blinkhorn


16/11/12 – 15:42

In answer to John’s question it is a COG5/40 but I am not sure the 40 referred to seat numbers

Roger Burdett

I have changed the code adding /40.
Peter


17/11/12 – 07:08

John Whitaker is correct. According to the ever reliable Alan Townsin in his book on the Daimler marque, the ’40’ did refer to the potential seating capacity of the COG5/40, but this optimistic figure was achieved only by two buses built for Lancaster Corporation in 1936, which had a rearward facing seat for five at the front. Several bodybuilders achieved a capacity of 39, however, though one imagines that legroom would have been decidedly constrained. As John has accurately stated, the engine was always a 5LW behind a vertical radiator which lacked a fan (the Gardner was always a cool runner), and the engine bay and bonnet assembly was thereby reduced in length to 3ft 11.5inches, a full 8 inches less than that of the COG5 double decker.

Roger Cox


17/11/12 – 08:45

Derby Line up

I thought Roger and others might like to see the attached photograph of a vintage line-up.
It was taken at Derby’s Ascot Drive depot on 29th November 1970. We had travelled down in preserved Oldham Crossley 368 (FBU 827) – a vehicle I was to later own for some years – to collect Derby Crossley 111 (CRC 911), which had just been bought for preservation by Mike Howarth. This was, with the possible exception of Joseph Wood’s example, the last Crossley double-decker in service and also had one of the last Brush bodies built.
A small hand-over ceremony was arranged with the Fleet Engineer at Derby, John Horrocks, who was himself an enthusiast and preservationist and owned Derby Daimler 27 (ACH 627), which is the fourth vehicle in this line up after Roger’s Coventry Daimler.
Happily all four vehicles still exist today although it saddens me greatly that Oldham 368 hasn’t been on the road since about eight months after this picture was taken. Fortunately for a 1950 bus I believe it has yet to spend a first night outdoors, remarkably it has always been kept under cover. The corrosion in this case started bottom up, with combatting the effects of road salt being the main focus of all the work I did on it.
Incidentally, the chassis numbers of these two Oldham and Derby Crossleys were just three apart.

David Beilby


17/11/12 – 14:34

A splendid picture, David. I have a tremendous respect for those such as you who take on the huge task of bus preservation. Only those who have tried it can truly appreciate the effort, expense and dedication involved. We are all the richer for the results.

Roger Cox


17/11/12 – 16:05

…..and so say all of us, Roger.

David Oldfield


06/02/14 – 08:35

What a joy it was to see the photo’s of Coventry buses. As an ex employee before nationalisation, I’m now retired and moved back to COV after spending time with Midland Red and East Kent (Office & Platform) I am trying to obtain a fleet list for Coventry Transport for the period 1955 to when it became West Midland. If anyone can help I would be most grateful.
I will be posting an article on Pool Meadow in the 50’s and 60’s, which was where all bus enthusiasts of every age spent there leisure time. Anyone who was around at that time,I would be pleased to share our memories.

Scotty


07/02/14 – 06:47

You can find a complete list of every CCT bus from 1914 to 1974 at //www.cct-society.org.uk/corporation/buses.htm.

Scotty


Vehicle reminder shot for this posting


16/06/20 – 06:58

Just wondering about two Coventry buses in Bangkok, one had been converted to a tow vehicle, the other was a standard Bus. This would have been 2012 I think, we were traveling down river on a water bus and I noticed the Coventry livery as we passed. Unfortunately there wasn’t time but I have often wondered how they came to be there. As I left Coventry in 1970 it did spark my interest but since then I have never had the chance to follow it up

Bill Ballington

Blue Bus Services – Daimler COG5-40 – GNU 750


Copyright Ken Jones

Blue Bus Services
1939
Daimler COG5-40
Willowbrook C35F

GNU 750 is a Daimler COG5-40 (8485) with Willowbrook (3208) C35F body, and dates from 1939. It is preserved in the livery of Blue Bus Services (Tailby & George) who were based at Willington in Derbyshire. You’ll find more history on this company at Stephen Howarths website.

The above site includes this paragraph
Since the untimely deaths of their spouses in 1955 & 1958 respectively, the company had been run by Mr. Tailby & Mrs. George. Percy Tailby died in 1956 leaving Katherine George as sole proprietor until her death in 1965. Tailby & George Ltd. then passed to Douglas & Bunty Marshall, the latter being the daughter of the Tailbys. By the 1970’s public transport was in a state of serious decline. The railways had been decimated by Beeching and the majority of the bus industry was either nationalised (i.e. Trent) or in the hands of the local council, as in Derby and Burton. Small independent companies like Tailby & George faced fierce competition from the bigger companies. On 1st December 1973, the then proprietors of the company,
Mr. & Mrs. Marshall made the decision to retire. After much speculation the operation of the Blue Bus Service passed from Tailby & George Ltd to the Derby Corporation.

This vehicle was part of The Quantock Motors collection but Stephen Morris is down sizing and selling many of his vehicles. This one was for sale in June 2011 for £25,000. It has been sold to Lithuania. You can see pictures of it in Lithuania here //fotobus.msk.ru/ It appears that the coach will operate from central Kaunas to Urmas, which is a massive out of town shopping complex.
The above picture was taking in April 2010 when the vehicle was in service on the Quantock Motors gala weekend. It is seen at Bishop’s Lydeard entering the Quantock Motors site. Note the Blue Bus Services badge on the radiator.

Photograph Ken Jones, Copy Ken Jones & Stephen Howarth


25/01/13 – 06:59

What a gem. For English on the link, press the little union flag top right.

Joe


25/01/13 – 09:48

What a beautiful coach. Strange, though, that it only had the 5-cylinder Gardner engine. I wish it well in Lithuania, but admit to some qualms about such loving care being lavished on it. Fingers crossed!

Chris Hebbron


25/01/13 – 12:36

The CVD6 was the most common post-war coach, and then the CVG6. How common was the COG6 before the war, though? Until the Regent III/PD2 era, the 7 litre 5LW was thought adequate for single deckers. Only Tilling parsimony allowed the 5LW to flourish after the war.

David Oldfield


25/01/13 – 14:58

It seems a shame that this gem as Joe calls it is no longer in the country where I presume it spent the last sixty odd years, another loss to the UK.
Very nice shot by the way, never seen that done with a bus before.

Trevor Knowles


25/01/13 – 17:27

A couple of other shots of this coach may be found in the 1968 Halifax Parade gallery, when the livery was slightly different. The 8.6 litre Daimler CD6 engine proved to be less than dependable for double deck work, and became instead the standard option for CV saloons up to the early 1950s. Post WW2, the 5LW engine was certainly not restricted to Bristol buses. Daimler offered a CVG5 variant which was taken by several operators. The 5LW was specified for many Guy Arab III machines, single and double deck, and it appeared in Dennis and Tilling Stevens buses also. In addition, this engine was offered in several makes of goods chassis, and for marine and industrial purposes. The 5LW did not depend upon Bristol for its post war survival. In its final form as the 5LW/20 it developed 100bhp at 1700 rpm, though, by that time, it was no longer offered in bus chassis.

Roger Cox


26/01/13 – 06:44

Bullocks of Featherstone (B&S Motor Services) – taken over by West Riding in 1950 – had five of this identical model Daimler (COG5/40), but managed to squeeze 39 seats into their Willowbrook bodies. The first, BWW 475 (202) was in fact a 1936/37 Commercial Show model. They were fine vehicles spoilt by the somewhat excessive engine vibration which necessitated body rebuilds after the war.

David Allen


26/01/13 – 06:45

Bodywork was generally lighter before the war than after, and the COG5 was Daimler’s most popular model for both single and double deck vehicles. Manchester’s COG5 double deckers were very successful, and so unsurprisingly their first postwar Daimlers were CVG5s. But with an unladen weight of around 8 tons these were less satisfactory, so CVG6s were then purchased until lighter bodywork became available in the mid-fifties (together with some lightweight chassis features arising from the development of the CLG5). CVG5s were then tried again, but were beaten by changed traffic conditions, so MCTD reverted to six-cylinder engines for the final batches.

Peter Williamson


Michael Elliott

GNU 750 as an example of the COG5-40 had a more compact engine compartment and cab that the standard COG5. The 40 in the designation denoted the ability to accommodate 40 passengers. GNU also had a five speed gearbox. I drove this bus on several occasions during the early 1970s when it was in the ownership of John Horrocks.

Michael Elliott


26/01/13 – 13:57

This is a very interesting view, Ken – thanks for posting. It reminds me of the “selective” tinting of school photographs in my primary school days. They were taken in black and white but could be enhanced on payment of a supplement.
I’ve heard of – but don’t use – Photoshop. Is that program how you achieved this?

Pete Davies


26/01/13 – 15:47

There are several programs that will do this sort of task, Pete. Photoshop is the top of the range product for professional artshops and advertising agencies, and is extremely expensive – around £600. Cheaper alternatives are available, including Photoshop Elements and a free program called GIMP. I have an old Photoshop version and also the latest Serif Photoplus X6, which will do most of the things that most of us will need.

Roger Cox


27/01/13 – 08:06

Thanks for that, Roger. The program I use came with the slide scanner I bought a few years ago when converting my slides to digital. It’s called Photoimpression 6. I still use it for editing the digital photos: no point in buying one when I have one in hand!

Pete Davies


27/01/13 – 08:07

Or you could download the free program Photofiltre or use online photo editor Sumopaint, Pete.

Chris Hebbron


04/02/13 – 11:52

I was present on the 1st of May for this running day at Bishops Lydeard and was delighted to see GNU 750 being started up and brought into the ‘bus station’. The run went to Hestercombe House and Gardens but most of the gentlemen aboard (some eight or so of us) preferred to stand around the coach rather than visit the house and gardens.

GNU 750_2

There was some playing around with the destination indicator and, as my photograph shows, some details of the coach were displayed. Would it have been usual practice – by Daimler, if no-one else – to include such information at the beginning or end of their destination rolls? Much as I enjoyed the run, a ride on the ex-Royal Blue Bristol L coach HOD 30 a little later proved to be a more luxurious affair.

Berwyn Prys Jones


05/02/13 – 07:05

The Daimler message on the destination blind will almost certainly have been added during preservation. In any case, the destination blind would not have been provided by Daimler, who only built the chassis.
Mention of “GNU 750 being started up” takes me back to Battersea Park May 1969, prior to the start of the HCVC London to Brighton run. GNU’s chief supporters were up bright and early, sprucing and polishing. I was tasked with taking the ‘tender vehicle’, ex Samuel Ledgard 2-stroke Foden ONW 2, across the bridge to pick up the rest of the party from their hotel. The only problem was that ONW’s exhaust pipe was pointing straight at the now gleaming GNU, and a cold start in that position would have resulted in a large deposit of soot! So GNU had to be started up and moved out of the way first. Funny how things stick in the mind.

Peter Williamson


05/02/13 – 17:42

A couple of shots of Foden ONW 2 may be seen on the ‘Halifax Parade 1968’ gallery. Sadly, this interesting vehicle has since fallen victim to the breaker’s torch.

Roger Cox


07/02/13 – 17:03

Thanks, Peter, I half-suspected as much, but hadn’t seen anything like it on the other preserved buses in the Stephen Morris collection. One wonders why it was put there and only there.


You mentioned starting up. I happened to be inside the depot when another of the Stephen Morris collection was being fired up (almost literally). Just out of sight, a driver had started the engine of the lovely ex-East Kent Leyland Tiger. The whole of the southern half of the shed was gradually enveloped in a fog of white dust (photo attached). As there was no wind, the dust hung round the place creating a rather eerie atmosphere with only the noise of the Tiger’s engine to remind me that I hadn’t been transported to an unhealthy underworld somewhere …

Berwyn Prys Jones


08/02/13 – 06:45

This picture reminds me of Percy Main depot on winter mornings. The garage staff had a cold start technique that required two men and a diesel soaked rag tightly wrapped around a stout piece of wood. The rag would be set alight, one of the staff would then turn over the engine while the other would hold the lighted rag at the end of the canister like air filter. Gardener engines are notoriously smoky when cold, and when you have several of them ticking over at once, the exhaust fumes would be billowing out of the open garage doors giving many a passer by the impression that the place was on fire.

Ronnie Hoye


08/02/13 – 09:07

I recall, in the early ’60’s, going on a fortnight’s course in Brum and staying in digs next to Harborne Depot. Come 4.45am, every morning, there would be the cacophony of bus engines being started, ticking over, then driving out. It’s a wonder I ever succeeded at the course with lack of sleep! I lived near a trolleybus depot for some years – what bliss!

Chris Hebbron


08/02/13 – 16:23

GNU 750_4

At the risk of going severely ‘off piste’, this photo of an ex-Crosville L parked just to the right of the vehicles in my previous photo may evoke the atmosphere at the depot even more vividly.

Berwyn Prys Jones


10/02/13 – 07:45

Berwyn, GNU 750 has been in preservation for a long time under several owners. Here it is in 1979 with the same blind. www.flickr.com/photos

Peter Williamson


08/12/17 – 07:08

In 2011 bought by private person and exported to Kaunas city, Lithuania: //busphoto.ru/photo/209576/

Andrejs


09/12/17 – 07:33

A nice photograph Andrejs but I note that it’s dated 2014. I wonder if the vehicle looks the same now!

Chris Barker

Birmingham City Transport – Daimler COG – CVP 207 – 1107

CVP 207

Birmingham City Transport
1937
Daimler COG5
Metro-Cammell H30/24R

Between 1934 and 1939 Birmingham Corporation Transport, which adopted the name Birmingham City Transport from 1937, took some 800 examples of the Daimler COG5 model, which, despite its modest five cylinder Gardner power unit, was a sophisticated performer with an effective flexible engine mounting and a fluid flywheel/epicyclic gearbox transmission. Most of these buses were bodied by Metro-Cammell, though many were fitted with Birmingham Railway Carriage & Wagon (BRCW) bodywork, all to the distinctive Birmingham H30/24R design. Many of these reliable buses survived up to 1954/55, with a solitary example, No.1235 of 1939, being withdrawn in 1960. CVP 207, No.1107, was one of the 1937 batch, but in 1950 it received the Metro-Cammell body from similar bus No.1216 of 1939 vintage, which was then withdrawn. In 1954 1107 became a snowplough, but returned to passenger service in 1957 when the Corporation took over some Midland Red routes. On being finally retired in 1959 it thankfully escaped the scrapper’s torch, and now resides with the Transport Museum at Wythall. 1107 is seen above at Brighton during the 1969 HCVC Rally.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox


16/08/18 – 06:09

There were still a couple of these pre-war COG5s tucked away in the back of Moseley Road Depot when I moved to Birmingham in September 1961. Doubtless a few others elsewhere on the system.

John Grigg

Birmingham City – Daimler CL – LOG 302 – 3002

Birmingham City Transport
1954
Daimler CLG5LW
MCCW H30/25R

Although looking like a Birmingham ‘Standard’, this is one of a pair of unique vehicles ordered in 1952 – the other, 3001 – being a Guy Arab with Saunders Roe body.
Both built to a ‘lightweight’ design, the chassis of 3002 was manufactured as a chromium plated exhibit for the 1952 Commercial Motor Show. During the following two years it received its Metro-Cammell body which became a ‘model’ for the ‘Orion’ and with unique manufacturing differences. Notably, the use of ‘pop-rivets’ in place of screws, anodised aluminium replaced the usual interior wooden mouldings, a rather ugly upright rear dome, a sliding cab door (a first for BCT) and rubber window surrounds. Spending its entire life at Acocks Green garage it was not liked much by drivers being noticeably underpowered with the 5LW.
Thankfully this is now in preservation.
My photos were taken at the Aston Manor Museum in 2010.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Nigel Edwards


13/03/16 – 09:33

Interesting views, Nigel, and thank you for posting. I note that the vehicles was not liked because of its lack of power. One might have expected the balance to be similar, given that the chassis – and I suppose the body as well – had ‘lightweight’ technology. Clearly, not ‘light’ enough!

Pete Davies


13/03/16 – 10:31

Pete, Though the overall weight saving was 15 cwt, compared to the ‘standards’, I think little of this was attributed to the chassis. Added to the narrative should have been that, after bodying in the intervening 2 years, the complete vehicle was again exhibited at the Commercial Motor show of 1954.

Nigel Edwards


14/03/16 – 06:54

The CLG5 appeared in 1952 and had a 16ft 4ins wheelbase chassis with the Lockheed power hydraulic braking system and hydraulic gear change of the CD650. Some light weight components and the 5LW engine were employed to save weight. Only a 7ft 6ins width was offered and the electrical system was 12 volts. Despite all the cheeseparing, the chassis weight of 4 tons 6 cwt was identical with that of the ‘heavy’ wartime CWG5. The first CLG5 chassis was 18334 which was fitted with a prototype MetCam Orion body, and went to Potteries Motor Traction. “Thanks(!)” to the appallingly tinny body, the unladen weight was a mere 6tons 2cwts. The bus shown above was chassis no. 18335. Another of the very few CLG machines actually made was chassis 18337 which Daimler played around with for a few years before selling on as a vacuum braked CVG6 to Burwell & District in 1956 (see Burwell & District – Daimler CVG6 – PHP 220). I presume that chassis 18336 was another CLG5, but I cannot find a record of it. The Lockheed braking system was the Achilles Heel of the CD650, and operators stayed well clear of it. Did Birmingham 3002 have its hydraulics replaced by the standard vacuum system? The ever reliable Alan Townsin is the source of these details.

Roger Cox


14/03/16 – 06:54

Thank you, Nigel

Pete Davies


16/03/16 – 14:35

Roger Cox refers to (Burwell & District – Daimler CV – PHP 220)
I commented on 19/10/2013 that this bus was equipped with air brakes and gear change while with B&D, yet he still refers to vacuum brakes in his latest post!

Jim Neale


18/03/16 – 05:34

Yes, I did refer to vacuum brakes because that is how the bus left the Daimler factory. This is a posting about the Birmingham CLG5, and the comments concern this vehicle type, which is the form in which chassis no.18337 started life. It was converted by Daimler to CVG specification in order to find a buyer after the CLG type met with underwhelming indifference from the bus operating market. That conversion included the abandonment of pressure hydraulic braking in favour of vacuum. What Burwell & District later did with 18337, PHP 220, is outside the scope of this particular discussion, especially when its Burwell existence is already covered by a dedicated entry (which, incidentally, I initiated myself).

Roger Cox


09/08/17 – 17:03

Aside from these two unique vehicles, did the ubiquitous Guy, Daimler and Crossley tin-front buses that abounded Birmingham in the 1950’s have their own makers’ gearboxes, or did they all have preselective ones, as the Daimler ones had?

Chris Hebbron


10/08/17 – 05:54

The Daimlers and Guys had preselective gearboxes, built I understand by Daimler and Guy respectively, though they were interchangeable. The Crossleys had manual Crossley gearboxes.

Peter Williamson


03/08/18 – 05:57

Nigel Edwards says LOG 302 was at the 1954 Show. The chassis was without doubt at the 1952 Show but I can see no report of the complete vehicle being on either the Daimler or the MCCW stand at the 1954 one. Could Nigel have been mistaken? Maybe it made a brief appearance in the demo park but as PHP 220 was parading about there that would seem unlikely. It was certainly absent from public view for a lengthy period as the chassis went to MCCW in April 1953!

Martin Ingle


04/08/18 – 07:14

Martin, I think if you re-read my narrative I did refer to the chassis being exhibited (chromium plated), and the body being added later!

Nigel Edwards


11/08/18 – 08:01

My query about Show appearances referred to the comment in your second post. There doesn’t seem to be any trade press mention of it at the 1954 Show and I had not seen it mentioned anywhere else. That was all.

Martin Ingle


Peter Williamson

Referring to the mention of the Orion body type in the caption, I must point out that the PMT prototype Orion-bodied CLG5, which Roger referred to in his post, also appeared at the 1952 Commercial Motor Show. Therefore I would suggest that LOG302’s body, which was constructed later, benefitted from the development of the Orion rather than being a model for it.

Peter Williamson

Halifax Corporation – Daimler CD650 – CCP 603 – 83

Halifax Corporation Transport and Joint Omnibus Committee
1951
Daimler CD650
East Lancs H30/26R

Not the best photo in my collection but it is the only shot I have of one of the 6 big Daimler CD650s that Halifax owned. Halifax were one of the few or should I say very few operators who took delivery of the CD650 easily recognisable by its wider than normal fluted radiator. I think there was less than 20 double deck chassis built for U.K. operators although the single deck version sold in larger numbers but mainly for the overseas market. The CD650 had the Daimler 10.6 litre six cylinder diesel engine and the Daimler preselect gearbox. I should think the large engine was one of the main selling points with Halifax it would make those hills around it a little easier to climb. The East Lancs body was was a bit different for Halifax, during the late 40s early 50s they were more into Roe and Park Royals, they must not of been over impressed as I don’t think they took delivery of any more East Lancs bodied vehicles.


Very impressive vehicles, the 10,6 Daimler was indestructible but with a tendency to have ‘crankcase explosions’ for no known reason. The East Lancs bodies were good and favoured by the body supt Leslie Bolton who had worked for East Lancs but at this time there was a huge choice, the East Lancs was a bit pricey and new Manager Le Fevre liked the MetCam/Weyman Leyland combinations of buses bought after this date.
The early demise was due to the erratic hydraulic braking/steering system which did it’s own thing without warning making them an uncomfortable driving experience, had they had air brakes they may have been the best of all 1950’s buses for sheer toughness.
No one bothered to consider this option to convert. There was only ever one Daimler/10.6 CVG, CD650 and that was new to Glasgow, it still exists somewhere.

Christopher


If I may just correct Christophers comment re CD650’s.
There were actually two CVD650/30 chassis. The first one was shown at the 1956 commercial motor show but wasn’t bodied until 1961 when it received a front entrance 73 seat Roe body and entered service with Leon of Finningly as their number 57 with registration 432 KAL. The bus spent all its’ working life with Leon.
With a Manchester style bonnet the bus could easily be mistaken at first glance as a more common CVG6/30.

Andrew


08/07/11 – 06:24

I went to work for HPTD at Skircoat Road as a Traffic Clerk in 1964, by which time the CD650s were history, but still spoken of with awe and long lingering trepidation. As Christopher says above, the high pressure hydraulic braking, steering, gear change and handbrake system operated in a truly wayward and erratic manner, and Geoff Hilditch, in his various entertaining and enlightening writings, has given graphic accounts of the unpredictable and often frightening road behaviour of these machines. One can only wonder why Daimler did not ditch the hydraulics and go over to air pressure brakes and gear operation, but the firm continued with the hydraulic system on the Freeline for years.

Roger Cox


08/07/11 – 08:53

As far as I recall, the ten Daimler CVD6/Brush vehicles bought by Leeds City Transport in 1948, numbers 522 -531, had Lockheed hydraulic brakes. The entire batch were withdrawn early by Leeds and, via a dealer, were bought by Samuel Ledgard. This caused a near riot in the Council Chamber as they entered service alongside LCT buses on much common mileage !! I say “as far as I can recall” because all ten were at the Armley chief depot – I was at Otley/Ilkley – and so I only drove a couple of them briefly as unexpected changeovers. I do remember though that the brakes were more than adequate under all circumstances and had a tendency to “savageness” now and again without warning. Also, in place of the normal 0 – 30 vacuum gauge, there was a dial marked 0 – 2000 in some retarding commodity or other – I am not an engineer so can’t comment further on that. The Brush bodies were about half a ton heavier than normal but were superbly built and finished – we had four near identical vehicles, but with vacuum brakes, ex Exeter Corporation. For 1948 the bodies had a charming mix of vintage styling with extremely tidy and competent outline.

Chris Youhill


09/07/11 – 06:59

There are two different types of hydraulic braking being referred to here. The Leeds Daimlers would have had vacuum servo-assisted hydraulic braking, a bit like a lot of modern cars. Essentially a hydraulic system, the vacuum servo just reduces the effort needed and, I believe, means it works even if you have no vacuum. You just press harder. The gauge you refer to would show vacuum (in inches mercury) and hydraulic pressure (in psi).
The CD650 had a pumped hydraulic system, the pump being driven off the engine. This relied on oil flow. The power steering and hydraulic-assistance on the pre-selector gearbox used the same circuit. I’ve heard tales that on SHMD’s Freeline the sliding centre-doors were hydraulic also and if you opened the doors approaching a stop the brakes eased off!

David Beilby


09/07/11 – 08:23

Off topic, but the platform doors tale reminds me of side-valve Ford cars, which had windscreen wipers driven from the exhaust manifold. As soon as you put you foot down on the throttle, the wipers slowed and could come to a halt on a steep hill. Of course, you could partly overcome it by changing down, but with a three-speed gearbox, you also came close to a halt anyway! But then you needed to, if you couldn’t see where you were going in the rain!

Chris Hebbron


09/07/11 – 21:16

Chris H has brought back many “happy” memories of the side valve Prefects, Anglias and Populars of which I had several in my time. If I recall, the famous windscreen wipers were made by a wonderful supplier called “Trico- Folberth” – and another feature of these basic but tough and characterful cars was the thermo syphon cooling system – no water pump !! Back to the buses now.

Chris Youhill


09/07/11 – 21:18

Yes, Chris – been there, done that! But when you come to think of it, second gear on an Anglia 100E with the 1172cc side valve engine was remarkably flexible – it would actually take you from about 8 up to 40mph – though, of course, at the upper end the wipers would have long since come to a grinding halt!

Stephen Ford


10/07/11 – 07:44

…..and I also have family history with said 100E.

David Oldfield


10/07/11 – 07:45

Ah..memories of the side valve Ford! I spent many years enjoying these as my father had them as Company cars from 1950 until 1964! I hate to say this but may I make a small correction about the wipers? They were driven by manifold depression from the inlet manifold rather than the exhaust. Hence when the engine was under load, depression/vacuum was low and on light running or on the over run, it was high so that as you say, climbing a hill in the rain was guesswork but on a downhill stretch the things flapped about like mad! Trico Folberth also offered screen wash systems that worked in a similar way offering a weak dribble or a fire hydrant depending on throttle position!

Richard Leaman


11/07/11 – 07:30

I to had experience of the vacuum wipers on the side-valve Ford’s. I think I am right in saying that they were also fitted to the Mk1 Zephyr/Consul range and possible the Mk11’s as well.
Amazing what a discussion on Halifax Daimlers leads to!

Eric


11/07/11 – 07:32

Richard’s comment brings us back to vacuum servo-assisted brakes, because, as I understand it, the servo also works off the inlet manifold. This is sensible for brakes, because you aren’t going to want to use them when the engine is under load, are you?

Peter Williamson


11/07/11 – 10:38

I believe that only lightweight buses used manifold vacuum for the brake servos. For heavier vehicles a separate engine-driven vacuum pump exhausting a vacuum tank was the norm, so that you had full stopping-power for at least a couple of brake applications if the engine stalled! Some petrol Bedford SBs (NOT my favourite vehicle) had a very capricious vacuum-actuated 2-speed axle. I’d very much appreciate more detail on all this particularly dates of introduction of the various systems. Thanks in advance,

Ian Thompson


21/08/13 – 06:53

Evidently the “chopped off triangle” destination boxes were brought to Halifax by Scotsman Roderick McKenzie, General Manager from 1952 to 1956.
This type of box was common in Scotland but of course Ribble had them as well…

Geoff Kerr


23/08/13 – 15:31

I thought you were referring to Triangle the place as it is below Halifax on the destination display !

Roger Broughton


23/08/13 – 17:47

Well spotted, Roger, very droll!

Eric Bawden


24/08/13 – 11:48

These Daimlers were delivered the same week that I was, and when the time came for me to be returned home from the Infirmary maternity ward my father – never one to waste money on unnecessary luxuries like taxis – decided that the Corporation could do the job perfectly well enough. I, of course can’t remember the occasion too well, but he often related how the bus we travelled on – my first ever bus ride – was on a brand new CD650 with its enormous, glistening fluted radiator.
Consequently I always had a particular fascination with them, and was sad when they had to make such a premature departure to the breakers when only about 11 years old.
I know that they were too complicated and temperamental when new, and that when most of the complicated bits were removed later they became thoroughly unpleasant to drive – most of the older HPT drivers I spoke to were unanimous about that – but they were otherwise well-built, substantial and powerful machines and I can’t help feeling that something very good could have been made out of them.
One of my greatest wishes must be to one day be able to sample a ride on the sole remaining preserved Blue Bus example, and to savour those unique sound effects just one more time.

John Stringer


22/12/13 – 07:23

Further to John Stringers note about sampling a ride on the sole remaining preserved ex-Blue Bus CD650, there is one in Road Transport Museum here in Coventry, SRB 424 (?) although I believe that due to problems with the braking system it has not been anywhere recently.

John Whale


22/12/13 – 15:40

I presume the preserved Blue Bus CD650 must still be equipped with the original querky and complicated hydraulic systems and so if it has been giving problems there will be little likelihood of seeing it out anytime soon. Oh well, I’ll just have to be satisfied with my memories.

John Stringer


22/12/13 – 15:41

I remember seeing the Halifax CD650s on many trips across the Pennines in the 1950s. They were impressive and, with their East Lancs bodies, could be told apart from the rest of the fleet at any angle from a great distance. The discussion about the vacuum wipers on Fords interested me. At 18 I bought a second hand upright Popular. XNE 694 was one of the last ones built before Ford dropped the design in 1959. It had been bought new by a neighbour who had, due to his own illness and the death of wife, abandoned it on the driveway where I saw it every day until I bought it in 1965 for £35, the insurance cost me £15, 3rd party, fire and theft. Having been left out in the Stockport weather, a deal of rot had set in around the front wings, which I patched with bits of tin can riveted in place then painted. Keeping the car mobile taught me a great deal. When I bought it the car had two windscreen wipers joined by a bar above the windscreen and powered by an electric motor which was set above the windscreen on the driver’s side with a three position switch – off, slow and fast. At the fast speed the bar would often disconnect at the passenger side leading me to eventually remove it leaving one wiper -perfectly legal then! I believe this to have been a retrofit but was it a Ford extra or something cobbled up to defeat the problem of the vacuum powered wiper?

Phil Blinkhorn


22/12/13 – 15:42

PRA 388

I believe that only twenty four CD650 ‘deckers were ever made, of which fourteen went to UK operators. The Halifax fleet of six, delivered in 1951, was the largest single order ever placed. Five went to Johannesburg at the end of 1949, and Tailby & George, t/a Blue Bus Services of Willington, took two in 1951 and two more in 1953. The Blue bus examples had Willowbrook lowbridge bodies of that builder’s then standard appearance with, to my eye, a very ungainly frontal profile. Here is a picture of one of these, PRA 388, taken at a rally in 1971, though I cannot now recall the location. Sadly, the bodywork of this bus deteriorated, and the vehicle was scrapped in 1975. The engine was passed on to SRB 424.

Roger Cox


17/12/14 – 05:40

I rescued SRB 424s sister SRB 425 and over a number of years have had her wooden bodywork rebuilt as she too had suffered from the dreaded rot. There is still much to do but having lived alongside the route she traversed and travelled many many miles on her and indeed all her 3 Blue Bus sisters as well, I thought she was owed a future. There were 66 chassis constructed of which only 14 were operated in Britain. 4 for Blue Bus, 6 for Halifax 1 for Glasgow, 1 for Becketts of Bucknall, later to Browns Blue Markfield, 1 for AA Motor services Ayr and 1 for Rossie Motors Doncaster. SRB 425 became the last CD650 operated in Britain passing to Derby City Transport on 1st Dec 1973 on the sale of the company to that concern and finally withdrawn on 23rd August 1974 after a tour on that evening of which I was present, of her old haunts.

Gerald Anthony


25/12/14 – 08:34

Talking of Leon 57 (432 KAL) – which we were, near the top of this page – does anyone know what it had in common with the above CD650s? I presume it would have had, when new, the 10.6 litre engine, but perhaps nothing else. Did the fitment of that engine survive into Leon days? I suspect maybe not, since I’ve a feeling that contemporary fleet lists referred to the vehicle as a CVG6LX-30. www.flickr.com/photos/8755708

David Call


26/12/14 – 08:46

David: To confuse me, there were two sons of CD650’s around Doncaster, one being Leon as above and the other being the Rossie Motors example which features on this site and is debated there. Both seemed to arrive quite late in the day and contrary to appearances, had big Daimler engines. Anyone know any better or more clearly than me?!

Joe


27/12/14 – 05:27

Were the RA & RB Derbyshire reg marks? I seem to remember Chesterfield Corporation & East Midland Bus companies with these regs.

Andy Fisher


29/12/14 – 06:29

Unsurprisingly for a discussion that has been going on for years, some of the distinctions between models may have slipped under the wire.
The 14 British-operated CD650s were listed by Gerald above, but note that the Rossie Motors example he refers to was MWU 750, which had previously been used as a Daimler demonstrator.
The 30-foot Daimler CV chassis was first announced well before the Gardner 6LX engine, and so the only engine options were the Gardner 6LW (CVG6-30) and the Daimler CD650 (CVD650-30). As described by Andrew near the top of this discussion, only two of the latter were built, and as correctly surmised by David Call, the engine was the only thing they had in common with the earlier CD650 model. All the photos I can find of the Leon Motors example (which had the first CV-30 chassis built) are captioned CVD650, so the engine must have survived into Leon ownership, though I don’t know for how long. The Glasgow one was definitely replaced by a 6LX at some point. The other Rossie Motors vehicle, mentioned by Joe, was 220 AWY. However, this had no connection whatever with the CD650. It was a CVD6-30 with a turbocharged 8.6 litre Daimler engine. This was later replaced by a Leyland O.600, in which form by all accounts it worked rather well.

Finally to answer Andy’s question, Derbyshire marks were RA, RB and NU (and originally R). These were used by Chesterfield Corporation, Midland General and Notts & Derby, but not by East Midland. Prior to 1974 EMMS always registered their vehicles in Nottinghamshire, despite being based in Chesterfield. The best explanation I have been able to obtain is “someone knew someone”.

Peter Williamson


Vehicle reminder shot for this posting


16/06/15 – 06:47

I remember back in the 1950s getting on a Daimler CD650 Halifax to Huddersfield and I was most surprised when it climed up The Ainleys in 3rd gear with little effort at all. All the other busses would have to crawl up in 2nd. Why they weren’t kept amazes me!

Kit Coulthard


16/06/15 – 16:32

They were a maintenance nightmare, Kit, due almost wholly to the over taxed high pressure hydraulic system which powered the footbrake, handbrake, steering and gearchange mechanisms. The braking characteristics were particularly wayward and often frightening, bearing in mind the exceptionally hilly terrain of the Halifax operating area. HPTD subsequently removed power operation of the steering, gearchange and handbrake, and, because the demands on the arrangement were now reduced, a simplified hydraulic braking system was fitted, the entire job being a credit to the ingenuity and imagination of the engineering department. The modifications improved reliability, but these buses then became fiendishly heavy to drive, and the engines continued to give trouble. When the Transport Committee accepted that the CVD650s had given a proper return on their initial (and subsequent) outlay, they were sold off with a huge sigh of relief after some 11 years. The Blue Bus examples would not have faced the arduous operating conditions of the Halifax machines.

Roger Cox

Lancaster City Transport – Crossley SD42/3 -HTC 614 – 614


Copyright Roy Cox

Lancaster City Transport
1947
Crossley SD42/3
Crossley B36R

This shot is from the Roger Cox gallery contribution titled “The People’s League for the Defence of Freedom” click on the title if you would like to view his Gallery and comments.
The shot is shown here for indexing purposes but please feel free to make any comment regarding this vehicle either here or on the gallery.


12/07/13 – 08:02

My father worked for A E C Crossley from 1930 after he left the army, his colonel was a Crossley. He informed me years ago that he test drove buses and trucks until the start of the Second World War his name was Cecil Louis Fidler.

John Fidler