Category: Photos

Rotherham Corporation – Daimler CVG6 – MET 125 – 125


Copyright John Stringer

Rotherham Corporation
1955
Daimler CVG6
Weymann L27/26R

After years of handling crash gearboxed Bristols and latterly Crossleys, Rotherham Corporation’s drivers probably had mixed feelings about being presented with their first preselectors in the form of these 1955 Daimler CVG6’s. In certain respects physically easier to drive than what had gone before, they would have had that unfortunate tendency to occasionally kick back through the gearchange pedal if the driver forgot himself (or herself, as I believe the Department was unusual at the time in employing a woman driver – have I got that right?) and tried to ride the pedal like a clutch, or did not press it firmly to the floor with confidence – likely to cause a painful injury to the ankle, shin or knee. The body was Weymann’s much more pleasantly proportioned (in my opinion) alternative to the plain Metro Cammell Orion – in this case in its lowbridge form. Photographed at Rotherham’s Rawmarsh Road depot in 1968, it was withdrawn in 1971.

Photograph and Copy contributed by

A full list of Daimler codes can be seen here.

01/03/13 – 06:09

At first glance, it looks like the Swindon/Thamesdown livery (to me but my eyesight isn’t perfect!). Is it the film, the processing or the lighting? We’ve followed that route elsewhere on this site. Nice view, John!

Pete Davies

01/03/13 – 06:09

Known as the Aurora, this was far more well known as a four bay high-bridge design and, certainly by 1955, 8′ wide. This made these unusual in several respects. CVG6s figured in Rotherham orders for a good ten years – with mostly Roe, but also some more Weymann bodies. [I have not had the experience but always thought the pre-selectors with the kick back were the spring operated versions. Were these late pre-selectors spring or air operated?]

David Oldfield

01/03/13 – 06:10

John, Rotherham did have female drivers in the post war period. I can remember an article in the Daily Mirror in the late sixties about the ladies concerned .
One of these Daimlers is now preserved at the South Yorkshire Transport Museum.

Chris Hough

01/03/13 – 08:11

Strictly, not, Chris. It’s a 1954 high-bridge…..

David Oldfield

01/03/13 – 11:33

Sheffield city centre, and immediate surrounds, used to see such a wonderful variety of liveries including this Rotherham example, the old & new Doncaster, Tracky, West Riding, Sheffield United Tours, Mexborough & Swinton, East Midland’s chocolate, biscuit and cream, (later replaced by their dark red/maroon) Wigmore blue and grey, Chesterfield’s rich dark green and cream, not to mention the plethora of independent coach operators, each with instantly identifiable colours. What a tragic shame that all were washed away by either the PTE or National blandness. Sheffield’s own livery was, of course, my personal favourite. Thankfully, users of this site keep posting nostalgia! Keep ’em coming.

Les Dickinson

01/03/13 – 11:34

What exactly was Rotherham’s requirement for lowbridge vehicles? They seem to have had a mixed fleet and towards the end of their separate existence, the lowbridge or low height contingent diminished, so were the offending bridges removed?
I’m in complete agreement about the pleasant proportions, this style was a nice alternative to the Orion, particularly in lowbridge form.

Chris Barker

01/03/13 – 11:34

The livery looks about right, Pete although the cream could be lighter and the blue royaller. They also went in for Arriva-style “swerves” with the cream at the front, but probably thought these tin-fronts swervy enough.

Joe

01/03/13 – 13:47

You’re so right Les, we lost a lot with coffee, cream and white.
Lots of roads were dropped under bridges to allow more headroom for full height vehicles. Interesting, though, that Rotherham had these splendid vehicles at almost the same time as Sheffield had their monstrous low-bridge Orion Regent IIIs. What a difference a few months can make.
Just had a cataract operation, Pete/Joe. Boy what a difference in colours with “new eyes”. That could also be a factor.

David Oldfield

01/03/13 – 13:48

I well remember my first sighting of one of these, when brand new 124 showed up one Sunday afternoon on the route running through our Rotherham housing estate, which had no requirement for lowbridge buses at all, and was normally handled by Crossleys. I was seven at the time, and was so amazed by it, that I persuaded my father to take me for a ride to Canklow and back on one the following weekend, just so I could sample one of the new buses.
At the time, Rotherham needed lowbridge buses on the 33 to Treeton and the 19 service to Dinnington, joint with East Midland, but these Daimlers quite often appeared on the workers services to Templeborough (70) and the 17 to ‘Yorkshire Engine Company’!
With respect to the pre-selector gearboxes, I do recall a piece in the local Rotherham paper in the early 60’s, reporting on the fact that at least a couple of accidents had been attributed to driver inexperience with the gearbox controls, the vehicles in question having suddenly jumped ahead while stationery, one I believe knocking down a pedestrian on a zebra crossing. There were questions asked at the time about the necessity for more extensive driver training etc. I presume the pre-selectors would have been considered a lot easier to master by the drivers who were having to be retrained from trolleybus work, as a fair number of them would have moved over to the buses when the Maltby conversion took place in 1954, utilising the highbridge version of the same chassis shown here. Rotherham’s only woman driver of the period, Winifred Hallam, wouldn’t have had any trouble with the pre-selectors I’m sure; she was licensed to drive trams, trolleybuses and motor buses, the only woman in the country to hold that distinction, so I understand.
Three lowbridge Leyland TD7’s were purchased as a stopgap measure from Chesterfield Corporation in 1956, whilst delivery of three Roe bodied CVG6’s was awaited. These were already at the end of their lives, and quickly disappeared as soon as the trio of new Daimlers arrived the following year.

Dave Careless

02/03/13 – 07:21

Glad your operation was both successful and a revelation, David O!

Chris Hebbron

02/03/13 – 07:22

In answer to your question about gearboxes, David, the answer is spring-operated, if it had a kick-back. For once, this is a type of transmission I’m thankful I’ve never needed to contend with!
By 1955 an AEC with preselect could certainly be considered ‘late’ since the Regal IV & Regent III were just about to be superseded by the Reliance & Regent V – which featured Monocontrol, if they weren’t manual. For a Daimler, however. I’m pretty sure that preselects remained available in the CVG6 range right up to the end of production in 1968/9.
As to when spring-operated gearboxes gave way to air-operated (on Daimlers) I’ve always assumed it was the late 1950s, but I may be corrected on that.

David Call

02/03/13 – 09:22

Thanks, Chris, for your good wishes.
Thanks, David, re pre-selects – although I am aware that late Daimlers had moved from pre-select to semi-auto control. [Huddersfield and the route 72 Leeds models spring to mind.] Whether anyone opted for pre-selectors after this time, I wouldn’t like to say.
Spent a delightful day with an ex Morecambe 9612E a year or two ago but have also driven many miles with Scania Comfort-shift coaches – which you drive “as a pre-selector”. […..even though it’s a synchromesh box.]

David Oldfield

02/03/13 – 14:06

I believe Northampton’s Daimlers retained pre-selector boxes right up to the last batch delivered in 1968.

Eric Bawden

02/03/13 – 14:06

My recollection is that all of Derby Corporation’s Daimler CVG6’s were pre-selectors – from the initial 10 with Park Royal bodywork (115-124, i.e. KRC115-125) supplied in 1957 to the very last Roe-bodied ones supplied in 1966 (185-189, i.e. KRC185-189D). I am not sure whether the gear change layout correlates with spring versus air-operated change, but I distinctly remember that all of these had an H-gate selector under the left-hand side of the steering wheel (like the AEC Regent), rather than the quadrant under the right hand side, as on the CVD6 (and I think the earlier COG5).

Stephen Ford

02/03/13 – 14:07

David, I have established beyond reasonable doubt that preselects were available on CVG6s up to the end of production, since the very last ones (for Northampton) were themselves preselect. One thing of which I was certainly not aware (and which came as a big surprise) was the fact that these last apparently featured spring-operated gearboxes, and vacuum brakes. So not only were preselects available to the end of production, spring-operated ones were (as well as, presumably, air-operated ones).
Northampton were certainly not alone in continuing to specify preselect gearboxes, I do know that the three CVG6LX-30s delivered to Swindon in 1967 were preselect – one of these, 145 (JAM 145E), I believe continues as a heritage vehicle with Swindon’s successor, Thamesdown Transport. I would be very surprised if there were not other operators who specified preselects to the end, simply because preselects were what they were accustomed to. As you say, semi-auto certainly became the norm in later years – I think they were probably available from the start of CVG6-30 production, c1956.

David Call

03/03/13 – 07:51

Thanks for putting me right Eric, Stephen and David.

David Oldfield

03/03/13 – 07:51

PMT’s 30 CVG5 of 1956 were vacuum braked with spring operated gear change. I only got my ankle wrapped round the driver’s seat once – that was enough!! Their sole CVD6-30 of 1958 was air braked with semi automatic gear change. If the bus was vacuum braked then the gear change would have to be spring operated – no air system for any other type of operation.

Ian Wild

03/03/13 – 07:52

There were three types of selector used on Daimler CVs, but they didn’t quite correspond to the three gearbox options. The quadrant was only used with the spring-operated preselector gearbox and vacuum brakes, and was replaced by the H-gate (with horizontal lever) in the mid-1950s. This was used with both spring-operated and air-operated preselector gearboxes, the former with vacuum brakes and the latter with air. The third option was the Daimatic (direct-acting semi-automatic) transmission, which used an H-gate with vertical lever, as on the Fleetline, with air brakes obviously. All three transmission options were eventually available on the 27ft CVG6; the CVG6-30 could have either of the two air-braked options, while the humble CVG5 was only ever available with the spring-operated preselector and vacuum brakes.

Peter Williamson

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

21/03/13 – 17:24

I seem to remember preselector gearboxes on AEC IIIs in Sheffield in the 50s. With so many “vertical streets” in Sheffield. it was hard to set off on a hill start with a bus full & a crash gearbox. On the route I used to travel most, the 34 Graves Park & 35 Hollythorpe Rise, the crash boxed buses would have to set off in 1st gear, then by the time they tried to get 2nd selected, the bus had come to a stop! They then had to go back to 1st gear & repeat the process. The AEC were the standard for these routes with different coachwork of Northern Coachworks, Weymann & possibly Cravens on the 33 route, Hemsworth. Hemsworth is one of the highest parts in Sheffield with a watertower to supply our water. We also had the 36 Heeley Green at rush hours, they all took the same hilly route as far as Heeley Green. Could my memory be right on the preselectors?

Andy Fisher

Forgot to add, at most of the terminus, they had water with watering cans, for the driver to top them up when they were boiling, Many times they would still be boiling, coming down the hills to the city centre, so they must have got very hot.

22/03/13 – 07:53

1947 – 1950 all Regent IIIs were (air operated) pre-select. The PD2s were manual but from 1952 all Regent IIIs and Vs were synchromesh until 1963. From 1957 PD2s/PD3s had the new “semi-crash” box. These latter were the biggest culprits in the “will they, won’t they” hill start when full stakes.

David Oldfield

22/03/13 – 07:56

Scroll down, Andy, to 5/11/12 on the link below and the photo will show a familiar sight! www.old-bus-photos.co.uk/

Chris Hebbron

West Bromwich – Daimler CVG6 – GEA 165/159 – 165/159


Copyright John Stringer

West Bromwich (County Borough of) Transport Dept
1952
Daimler CVG6
Weymann H30/26R

Actually pictured during their final West Midlands P.T.E. days – though there is little here to suggest it – this fine pair of former West Bromwich Corporation Daimler CVG6’s with traditionally shaped Weymann H30/26R bodywork was caught taking an off-peak rest at the town’s depot on 10th August, 1971.  What a superb livery it was, and just imagine how superior a modern Gemini double decker would look in the same style, compared to the more usual stripes, swoops and general garishness.

Photograph and Copy contributed by John Stringer

A full list of Daimler codes can be seen here.

05/05/13 – 09:45

For vehicles nineteen years old these two impeccable and seemingly unblemished beauties in a classic livery are a real tribute to the manufacturer and to both operators. I agree entirely John with your triple condemnations of the modern Gemini appearance, and that of other brands too, and would add a fourth – seemingly appalling standards of construction. I would far rather take a long journey in one of the Daimlers than in any of the current offerings which routinely display more rattles and body movement after nineteen days than the old troopers would do after the same number of years – and I say that with not a trace of “rose tinted glasses.”

Chris Youhill

05/05/13 – 18:58

GEA 174

Another GEA registered Daimler is seen on its way to Aberystwyth, well outside its comfort zone! It was hired by the West Midlands Transport Circle, Easter Monday 1973.

F33 XOF

Not quite a Gemini, but this is what a Metrobus looked like in West Brom’s livery.

Tony Martin

05/05/13 – 19:02

The body design looks right, the livery looks right. The combination looks right. Thank you, John, for posting.

Pete Davies

05/05/13 – 19:03

Although the majority of modern “liveries” look like something concocted by Dali after a night on the absinthe the recent repainting of a Wright bodied Volvo of First South Yorkshire into Sheffield livery shows that the bus can look good if the right colours are applied in the right proportions.
Sadly there are too many in the industry today who see their services in terms of “product” and not public service. Consequently we are at the mercy of the marketing men who probably never catch a bus and lack the aesthetic insight into making the built environment pleasant for everybody. Sadly First’s “refreshed livery” is now so wishy washy as to lack any impact at all

Chris Hough

05/05/13 – 19:04

West Bromwich had a wonderful livery, the bottom not being unlike B’ham Corp’n, but the lighter blue at the top contrasted beautifully. Sad to say, at the time I was sculling around B’ham, in the mid-50’s, my glimpses of them showed too may of their buses looked rather sad in faded liveries.

Chris Hebbron

06/05/13 – 08:29

Well said, Mr Hough! It isn’t just the livery and the standard of production of the modern bus that is a problem. I was on one of WORST’s buses in Gosport recently. A lady in a wheelchair boarded, with assistance, but it was very difficult to move into the (nearside) marked space because of a grab rail. Had the designated wheelchair space been offside, there would have been little difficulty. The grab rail has to be where it is, apparently, because it helps to hold the roof up!

Pete Davies

06/05/13 – 08:30

I’m glad you posted the Heritage-painted Metrobus, Tony, because I recalled it after my earlier post and how smart the livery looked on a modern ‘box’. I think that several WM buses went back into their original constituent liveries at this time – mid 1990’s?

Chris Hebbron

06/05/13 – 08:31

Putting on my tin hat am I not correct in saying that some of the “stripes, swoops and general garishness” are designed by Ray Stenning, the Editor of Classic Bus. magazine.

Paragon

06/05/13 – 08:32

Thank you Pete and Chris H x 2 – its reassuring to see that, despite the modern regrettable trend, conservative appreciation of real quality and dignity in appearance is still alive and well !!

Chris Youhill

06/05/13 – 08:33

A fine livery indeed, and I’m surprised that they managed to survived into the Wumpty era. However, I’m puzzled by the reference to them having a traditional-shaped Weymann body. For me, the traditional flared-skirted Weymanns seemed to have slightly drooping eyelids (to use a technical term) caused by the louvers over the upper deck front windows. These admittedly fine looking buses lack this feature and seem to be a precursor of the Orion style of upper front windows – or have I had one too many glasses of Rioja?

Paul Haywood

06/05/13 – 11:32

When I referred to these bodies being ‘traditionally shaped’ I did not mean to suggest that they possessed exactly the features of the earlier Weymann design to which Paul refers, but just that in a general sense they were traditionally well proportioned, shapely and tasteful, as opposed to boxlike, slab-sided and ugly – as so many bodies of the period were becoming.
If anything, the shape of the front domes remind me more of the Metro-Cammell ‘Phoenix’ design as supplied to Manchester and Salford.
But then just to show how fickle and contrary my opinions can be, I realise I also have a certain peculiar liking for some of the boxlike, slab-sided and ugly buses too – certain Orions (in the right livery) for example, even Bridgemasters, and I really liked the Park Royal-bodied Renown. So I suppose I’ve now blown any credibility I had with Chris Y! (but remember Ledgard’s ex-Devon General Regents Chris – you know you liked them).

John Stringer

06/05/13 – 17:27

PDV 732

Please fear not John – your 100% credibility remains untainted at that commendably high rating !! I did indeed admire the two Devon General Regents, PDV 726/732, although sadly I never worked on them as they were always based at Armley headquarters. It would have been nice to encounter one which was just possible in only two circumstances. On Mondays to Fridays Otley depot operated one return journey with an Armley vehicle – the 4.25pm Ilkley – Guiseley – Leeds and 5.27pm Leeds – Guiseley – Ilkley. The crafty purpose of this little exercise was to facilitate the running into the correct depot of each vehicle on the route late at night.
One other remote possibility occurred on Saturdays, when an Otley depot crew took an Armley Depot Leeds – Otley – Ilkley bus from Otley to Ilkley and back while the Leeds crew had a forty minute meal break. All clever stuff, but I never encountered a “Devonian” while working these trips, but here is picture of one at West Park, Leeds from an unusual angle.

Chris Youhill

07/05/13 – 07:38

Yes, Paragon, most do come from Ray Stenning. Have you ever encountered him?

Pete Davies

07/05/13 – 07:38

Chris Hough. Have just returned from a weekend with family and friends in Sheffield. Both the tram and the bus liveried Wrights buses look superb – but this was also my first experience of the new Worst Bus livery. It’s atrocious – looks like it’s been painted in primer and then left there! The West Bromwich Daimlers are a modified form of the original Aurora – cf Sheffield and Rotherham on this forum, not to mention the famous Rochdale Regent Vs. The Aurora kept the structure and shape of the classic Weymann but with different detailing – including aluminium window pans. John, you are almost certainly correct in saying that the domes comes from the Met-Camm Phoenix. I think that these were the only Weymanns delivered to West Brom, all others ostensibly Met-Camm. (I think it was a capacity problem that led to Addlestone getting the contract but, as a result, there were several Met-Camm details.) I’m with you on the Orion, John. Sheffield, St Helens and DG had liveries which could lift the Orion from the mundane. Seems Ledgard also knew how to apply the paint as well.

David Oldfield

07/05/13 – 14:04

PS: I think some late Orions for West Bromwich were sub-contracted out because of capacity problems at Met-Camm. I believe Strachans did the work and also built some Metropolitan coaches (on sub-contract) on Ford R192 chassis. A little later, the same happened again when Saunders-Roe (still existing, but dormant in bus building at the time) built, or finished, some Met-Camm Atlanteans for Devon General (G reg.). This came about because Saunders-Roe, by then, were owned by Cammell-Laird. It was suggested in the recent second part of the Weymann story (Senior/Venture) that this was because of serious mis-calculation at Birmingham who thought that closing Weymann’s in 1966 would remove overcapacity only then to find that they were struggling to cope with orders a year or two later.

David Oldfield

07/05/13 – 14:05

Been away all weekend and just seen this thread. Weren’t the West Brom bodies 7 ft 6 in versions of the Phoenix?
As to the First Bus scheme, it generally looks dreadful but, for the first time I saw their ADL Enviro 400s in Manchester and it seems to work in fact I’d say it suits them.

Phil Blinkhorn

08/05/13 – 15:13

Pete. Never met Ray Stenning but I have seen his photograph on Google. I just find it ironical.
Good magazine though and improved under his editorship.

Paragon

08/05/13 – 17:38

I had several dealings with Ray Stenning of “Best Impressions” in my time at LCBS. He regularly turned up, appropriately bearded and garbed, on his Harley Davidson motorcycle. In the final years of NBC, when I was briefly TM at LCBS South East, I devised a new name for the new company – Kentish Bus – and a new livery of maroon and cream. My MD, with whom I had a less than cordial relationship, insisted that Ray Stenning be brought in on the act, and he added additional narrow stripes midway along the panelling, which, though attractive, added to the coach painting costs. This livery won a prize from the Commercial Motor magazine, an event that my MD graciously attended and accepted. I discovered all this later when I read about it in the magazine. Such was life at the end of NBC – anything went in the tawdry scramble for a foothold in the forthcoming privatised “future” of the bus industry. Interestingly, after I had left, when Kentish Bus was sold off to Proudmutual (aka Northumbria, part of United Auto) who installed their own management, the livery reverted to my original scheme. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose. Ray Stenning later took over the editorship of Classic Bus magazine from Gavin Booth (after a short period with another editor) and immediately changed the appearance from black print on white paper to one of coloured type against a half tone photographic background. After subscribing to the magazine for several years, I found the new format unreadable without acquiring a headache, and cancelled. All around us now, and not just in the bus industry, we see practicality subordinated to “design”. As Shakespeare said centuries ago, what we need is “More matter with less art”.

Roger Cox

09/05/13 – 07:47

At least if there’s a war the First buses are already in camouflage! try spotting one after dark. Prior to Yorkshire Rider being sold to Badgerline each district had a bus in traditional livery with the strapline proud of our heritage this included erstwhile West Yorkshire and York city service vehicles.
Marketing people always see things in terms of penetration of brand however in an industry where there is often no direct competition why not acknowledge the local nature of the service and make the local population feel its their service and they are not seen as a necessary evil who reacts in a way that only humans can awkwardly oddly and just plain humanly!

Chris Hough

09/05/13 – 07:57

Roger, l lived in East Sussex at the time and commuted regularly to Croydon as well as Central London. The Kentish Bus livery was clean, modern, attractive and sat well on both Routemaster and Atlantean bodies and came as a welcome innovation in the land of red and green, especially the NBC green. Congratulations on your colour sense and the layout.

Phil Blinkhorn

09/05/13 – 08:30

GUR 889G

David – As well as the Devon General Atlanteans, weren’t some Brighton PD3s also bodied/ finished by Cammell Laird?
I have attached my photo of a Ford R192 bodied by Strachan.
Until quite recently, I thought it was a genuine Metro Cammell, but now know better!
GUR889G was seen at Weston super Mare in July 1974, when it was operated by Crown Tours, Frome.

Bob Gell

09/05/13 – 09:41

Thanks for that, and the splendid picture. Pity it has such a big mouth. What would more attention to detail have done to the overall look?

David Oldfield

09/05/13 – 09:42

Roger – I can say in a very brief few words how I entirely admire and agree with your comments above. I am totally sick to the back teeth of how the “marketing” fraternity have inflicted their zany “supermarket” branding disease on the bus industry and have turned all the nicely designed horizontally travelling vehicles into mobile graffiti studios. A minority of honourable and proud operators have courageously bucked the trend and retained some dignity – just to cite a couple of examples, the glorious DELAINE of Bourne and PENNINE of Skipton. I’d better put up the shutters now, before a missile emblazoned with “Best Impressions” heads this way !!

Chris Youhill

09/05/13 – 11:46

An impression is when you press hard and leave your mark. Well Mr Best has certainly done that. Can’t come up with a pithy one like “Worst Bus” – unless you will accept “Deep Depressions”?

David Oldfield

10/05/13 – 06:35

“Deep depressions” accepted unconditionally David – that’s pithy enough for me !!

Chris Youhill

03/12/14 – 16:22

West Brom – probably the most agreeable bus livery of all time, with City of Brum a close second!

Phil T

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

24/03/18 – 10:59

We have an Annual ‘Local Heritage Week’ at the Christian Heritge Centre in Rowley, near Blackheath (West Midlands). We try to have a lot of old photos and books on a certain subject, this year, the focus being on ‘Transport’.
We are looking for any pictures of public transport – in your case, buses, that would be local to the area over the past 50-70 years. I notice one or two pictures of West Bromwich buses on your site, and wondered if you could give me details of who to contact re: copyright….or if someone on your site could help us in any way…….

Anne Burrows

West Bromwich – Daimler CVG5 – FEA 156 – 156

West Bromwich - Daimler CVG5 - FEA 156 - 156

West Bromwich (County Borough of) Transport Dept
1952
Daimler CVG5
Metro-Cammell B38R

To return to West Bromwich, near contemporaries of the GEA registered Daimler double deckers, a pair of which were posted on site a week or so ago, were a batch of single deckers. The chassis were built in 1948, but due to pressure of work at Metro-Cammell the bodies were not ready until 1952. By then, of course, under floor engined saloons were almost ubiquitous, so they seemed old even when new.
One of them, FEA 156, has been preserved and is seen here in 2012, in West Brom’s superb livery.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Tony Martin

17/06/13 – 06:55

Thanks for posting, Tony. I agree with your comment about their ‘old’ appearance, even from new. If the entry at the rear had been fitted with a door, or if the door had been just behind the front wheels (as with Birmingham’s Tigers, for example) it might have helped.

Pete Davies

17/06/13 – 06:56

Looks a bit old, even for 1948…. it is not helped by the slopey windscreen and rear entrance. I have never seen a Daimler radiator finished in what looks like silver paint.. is this authentic? It makes the radiator seem to project even more in front of the bodywork, which cannot be the engine length as it is a G5: contemporary Daimlers weren’t always so, I suggest. Nice looking preservation, though.

Joe

17/06/13 – 15:04

Interesting bonnet opening arrangement as well, I don’t think I’ve ever seen that before. Was this normal Daimler practice at the time?

Eric Bawden

17/06/13 – 17:30

Wonderful livery! One of the all time classics. It seems strange that it took four years to build bodies for this small batch of vehicles despite the post-war high demand for new vehicles.

Philip Halstead

18/06/13 – 07:17

I was also thinking that the four year delay was excessive and must have had some other factor. One other thing I’m not sure of is the length of this bus. I am inclined to think that it’s a thirty-foot long vehicle as 38 is a lot of seats to fit into one twenty-seven and a half feet long when you take into account the platform style which didn’t sit well with maximising seating capacity.
The thing is, I’m sure the increased length didn’t become legal until at least 1949, so why build an illegal chassis in 1948?
Having looked around the web a bit and been rather distracted by some shots of this bus’s superbly-restored double-deck sister 174 I find references to the chassis being built in 1950. Everything then makes sense.
So what is the correct year for the chassis – I have no primary sources to refer to?

David Beilby

18/06/13 – 07:19

Edinburgh bought several batches of saloons with this kind of MCW body including Guys and some similar Daimlers. The body was basically a pre war design.

Chris Hough

18/06/13 – 18:15

Yes, FEA 156 is 30′ long. The chassis was lengthened when the body was fitted, as this was legal by then.

Tony Martin

26/09/13 – 06:33

With regards to the radiator finish, the bus was restored as original as can be, as part of the 156 group we have photos in colour that show 156 had a painted radiator compared to the more ‘standard’ finish that was used with Daimler, I believe they were painted depending on the engine, but when I have found out the correct reason why I will let you all know.

Dan

28/09/13 – 17:46

It’s lovely to see one of these W. Bromwich buses looking impeccable. In my RAF service days in the late 1950’s we’d go into Brum from time to time and see a W. Bromwich bus whizzing across a junction or lurking in a side road. I honestly never saw one other than faded and tatty. It didn’t help that B’ham Corp’n vehicles were always impeccable, greatly helped by a policy of no adverts.

Chris Hebbron

11/11/13 – 09:49

GEA 174

Seen here together are 156 and the recently restored 174 at an event at AMRTM, Aldridge.

Tony Martin

11/11/13 – 15:18

They make a fine pair, tony. Thx for posting.

Chris Hebbron

23/02/14 – 15:17

Re: FEA 156. What a stunning body style this was. I probably saw all these when I worked in West Brom and I always considered them to be unique especially with the rear cut-away entrance and no door. The driver also appeared to sit up very high.
Re: GEA 174. Yet another stunning body style. The flared skirt just makes for a truly handsome vehicle. I rode these as often as I could on the 74 & 75 routes in preference to the Birmingham buses. They had the front row of seats in the lower deck turned at right angles to face each other.
Pity the Beclawat top hinged window vents to the front upper deck are missing. Most likely unable to find any replacements.

Jerry Morgan

Burwell and District – Daimler CV – PHP 220

Burwell and District - Daimler CVG 6 - PHP 220

Burwell and District Motor Services
1952
Daimler CVG6
Northern Counties H33/28R

Burwell and District was a small company based in the Cambridgeshire village of that name, just to the north west of Newmarket. Like many such operators, it began just after WW1 when Mr Mansfield, a cycle and motor agent in the village, bought a 20 seat Model T Ford and ran a bus service to Cambridge. Other routes were developed, and, by the time of the 1930 Road Traffic Act, the firm had services to Bury St Edmunds and Ely in addition to the major route to Cambridge. Further stage carriage operations were added, and excursions and tours became an important element of the business, so much so that, from 1933, apart from a solitary Dennis Ace bus bought in 1938, all the vehicles purchased were coaches. The heavy passenger loads during the Second World War brought about the reversion to bus configured vehicles, and in 1941 the first double decker appeared. Several more followed as the war progressed, including three CWA6 utilities. In the post war period, clearly impressed with the Coventry product, the firm standardised on Daimler chassis for many years, though latterly AECs, particularly Reliances, became increasingly favoured. Secondhand purchases predominated from the late 1960s onwards until 1979, when the owners sought to retire. Attempts were made, in vain, to sell to another independent operator but 6th June 1979 saw the last journey run by the brown and cream buses. The following day Eastern Counties Bristols took over, and the entire Burwell fleet was put up for disposal. A full history and fleet list for Burwell and District may be found here: www.petergould.co.uk/burwell1.htm
PHP 220 was a Daimler CVG6 demonstrator of 1952 with a Northern Counties H33/28R body bought by Burwell and District in 1956 and withdrawn in 1972. It is seen here on 26th August 1959 in Drummer Street bus station, Cambridge (nowadays altered beyond recognition from its early layout) leaving on its way to Soham. It is passing one of the numerous Eastern Counties lowbridge K5Gs. Eastern Counties had very few low bridges in its territory, but allocated lowbridge double deckers to most of the country routes, keeping the highbridge fleet employed mainly on the Norwich and Cambridge town services. The contrast in refinement between the preselective, flexibly mounted, six cylinder highbridge Daimler and the rigidly mounted, five cylinder, constant mesh, lowbridge Bristol could surely not have been greater.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

01/09/13 – 14:42

I well remember being very impressed by this lovely vehicle when, as a demonstrator, it was on loan to Leeds City Transport. I recall seeing it near the Town Hall on service 42 to Lower Wortley – can anyone recall if it was in some kind of deep purple, very dignified, or is the grey matter here really failing now ??

Chris Youhill

02/09/13 – 06:00

I was on that very last journey on June 6th 1979 and still have the ticket to prove it. It was operated by four Fleetlines and there was a certain amount of jockeying for position by the drivers in order to claim the title of the last Burwell bus to leave Drummer Street Bus Station. Our bus (9 DER) driven by Jim Neale, a relation of the Mansfield family, gained that honour although it wasn’t the last to arrive back at the depot. I recall that villagers stood at their garden gates and waved goodbye as the final service passed by.

Nigel Turner

02/09/13 – 08:00

Chris, Peter Gould gives the production date of PHP 220 as 1952, but Paul Carter, a highly respected expert on East Anglian operators, says it dates from 1954. When was it on loan to Leeds? Can anyone verify the issue date of the registration? I plumped for 1952 in the above text as the 1954 date seemed rather late for a demonstrator of such a very well established vehicle type.

Roger Cox

02/09/13 – 08:00

Volume 4 of Leeds Transport says that it was on loan from 24 August to 14 September 1954 and the livery was “maroon and cream without lining”.

Trevor Leach

02/09/13 – 16:15

Many thanks for that reassurance Trevor – at least my memory of the colour, while not 100% accurate, wasn’t too far wide of the mark. Mind you,in September 1954 I had other things on my mind, having just received from Her Majesty such a kind invitation to join her troops in blue on October 20th for a two year “event”.

Chris Youhill

02/09/13 – 16:15

Regarding the issue date of the registration of PHP by Coventry. I have two books which give details of various histories, issue dates, etc, of UK registrations. Both agree that Coventry started to issue PHP in July 1954. The next mark (PRW) followed in September 1954. So this would narrow down PHP220 to the summer of 1954. If the chassis dated from 1952 as suggested above, perhaps it was used by Daimler for it’s own internal purposes (or on trade plates?) before it’s use as a demonstrator. That’s just my speculation – I have no documentary evidence on Daimler’s use of the chassis, or when the body was built.

Michael Hampton

02/09/13 – 16:15

Bus Lists on the Web gives the date new as being 1954.
I last saw the bus in a yard in Northwich in 1972
But according to the recent PSV Circle publication regarding Daimler Chassis Numbers 16685 etc, the bus was built in 1952 as the 4th prototype CL lightweight chassis. Bodied in 1952 and first registered as a demonstrator in 1954. Sold to Burwell and District in March 1956. Re-designated as a CV by Daimler.
I also think that the shot above was photographed at Middlewich not Northwich.

Stephen Bloomfield

03/09/13 – 06:00

‘A History of Motor Vehicle Registrations in the United Kingdom’ by L.H. Newall shows that the County Borough Council of Coventry issued PHP marks from 7/54 until 9/54.

Stephen Howarth

03/09/13 – 06:00

‘Bus Lists On The Web’ gives a date new of 1954 on the Northern Counties body list, and the chassis number seems to point to much the same date. Coventry’s 1951/2 batch of CVD6s had KVC registrations, and their next delivery, CVG6s delivered in 1955/6, were RWK. So all the evidence appears to indicate that when this vehicle was on loan to Leeds, it was very, very, new.

David Call

03/09/13 – 16:30

Stephen’s account of the history of this vehicle is endorsed by Alan Townsin’s book on Daimler published by Ian Allen. If I had looked in my copy first I would have found the answer. He says that chassis 18337 was one of the CL prototype lightweight chassis of 1952, which suggests that it began life with a Gardner 5LW engine and the power hydraulic braking system of the CD650. It eventually emerged for psv use as PHP 220 with a lightweight Northern Counties body in 1954, by which time it had become a CVG6 with conventional vacuum brakes.

Roger Cox

03/09/13 – 16:30

I understood that the reason for lowbridge buses in the Eastern Counties fleet was the restricted headroom in their Ipswich depot and bus station.

Geoff Kerr

19/10/13 – 17:19

PHP 220 was acquired by B&D on 5th April 1956 and sold on 7th January 1972. While with B&D air brakes and gear change were fitted.

Jim Neale

16/03/16 – 15:34

Jim, the air-operated preselector was quite new to Daimler in 1954, having been announced that year as an option on the Freeline; according to a leaflet somebody sent me a scan of.

Stephen Allcroft

17/03/16 – 10:48

Stephen, the newest B&D Freeline with vacuum brakes was NVE 1, built in 1954. only the last 2, built in 1958/58 had air brakes and gearchange.
An amusing anecdote regarding the air-change on PHP was of a part-time driver, not familiar with the system parking on the bay in Drummer St. bus station leaving it in reverse gear. (i.e not engaging neutral by depressing the pedal after selecting). After tea-break and a slight air-leak when the engine was started the bus was stuck in reverse gear which required half of the bus station to be cleared while the embarrassed driver reversed round far enough to build up enough air-pressure to disengage reverse and then engage a forward gear to proceed.
The same P/T driver was also embarrassed a few years later when driving a Fleetline for the first time. He parked in Drummer St., opened the door with the gear selector and stopped the engine. When it was time to depart he pressed the starter button and nothing happened as the gear selector was still in the door position. After a few moments fiddling and no sign of life the Conductress was about to go to the phone box to call for assistance. I was a 16 year old passenger sitting on the back seat and knew what to do so made my way to the front of the bus, flicked the gear selector in to neutral and pressed the starter button and we were away.
I don’t think the driver liked being shown up by a teenager like that but I went on to drive many more miles in that bus than he ever did!

Jim Neale

17/03/16 – 15:19

I’ve one question from your original post info, Roger. Did the family sell the company to Eastern Counties in the end, or at least the goodwill, since EC didn’t buy their vehicles?

Chris Hebbron

17/03/16 – 15:20

Jim. Vacuum braked Freelines? I have only previously heard of hydraulic or air.

Stephen Allcroft

18/03/16 – 05:38

Stephen, To be honest I am not sure about the difference between vacuum and hydraulic brakes. I know the earlier Freelines did have a peculiar system which also involved the gear-change pedal but my experience driving them was very limited and I was only 21 at the time as most buses and coaches that I have driven have had air brakes.

Jim Neale

18/03/16 – 05:39

Yes, Chris, according to Paul Carter in his writings on Cambridge area operators, Burwell sold out to ECOC after all other approaches to independents proved fruitless. Paul’s book, “Cambridge 2”, includes some reminiscences by Jim Neale about his time with Burwell & District and afterwards – well worth a read. Turning to the Freeline braking question, I, too, can find no reference at all to a vacuum braked option. The power hydraulic braking system with which Daimler became rather besotted was the standard fitment to the Freeline, but Daimler very quietly introduced an air braked option in 1952. I cannot discover just how many Freelines had air brakes, but surely the eight that went to Great Yarmouth must have been so fitted. Geoff Hilditch is unremitting in his loathing of the brakes of the Halifax CD650 ‘deckers. He would assuredly not have ordered Freelines with the hated hydraulic system. Incidentally, the Freeline had a high driving position because the spare wheel was located beneath the floor at the front of the chassis. On the subject of the power hydraulic braking, steering, gearchange system, one wonders why Daimler became so wedded to this arrangement. The AEC Regent III had shown the way forward with air operated brakes and gearchange, and power assisted steering was always a possible extra fitment to any chassis if required. Daimler had previously adopted air brakes entirely successfully in its trolleybus chassis from 1936 onwards, so the firm was fully familiar with the system. Power Hydraulic braking was never popular with the operating industry, and apart from the special cases of London Transport’s RMs and Midland Red’s D9s, bus operating engineers elsewhere generally kept well clear. Those chassis that did have the full hydraulic system didn’t sell very well, witness the Dennis Lancet UF, Foden PVD/PVSC and the Tilling-Stevens Express MkII. No doubt other correspondents can think of some more examples.

Roger Cox

19/03/16 – 06:42

G. G. Hillditch did indeed specify air-operated brakes and gears (Daimatic) on FEX 524-5 and AEX 18-20B: he also had fitted Gardner rather than Daimler engines. He detailed the specification process in “Looking At Buses”.

Stephen Allcroft

12/05/16 – 15:53

Some pictures of the last days of Burwell & District may be found here:- //angliaandthamesvalleybusforum.com/index.php?

Roger Cox

24/08/16 – 06:03

With reference to Stephen Allcroft query re: Freeline vacuum brakes. I think what Jim meant was “Servo (vacuum) assisted hydraulic system” Lockheed called this “continuous flow system” It was also use3d on a lot of early Routemasters.

Lindsay Hancock

SELNEC PTE – Daimler CVG6 – TRJ 128 – 4017

SELNEC PTE - Daimler CVG6 - TRJ 128 - 4017

SELNEC PTE
1962
Daimler CVG6
Metro-Cammell H37/28R (Orion)

During the Selnec era, quite a number of ex-Salford buses were transferred to the former Manchester Corporation Depot at Queens Road. Most of these were Leyland Atlanteans and PD2’s, which would be quite at home among the ex-Manchester Leylands based here, although I wondered what the Queens Road crews made of the forward entrances on the PD2’s.
4017 (ex-Salford 128) was one of a handful of CVG6’s which moved from Salford to Queens Road. The latter depot had been home to Manchester’s only manual gearbox Daimlers, 4650 – 4, and occasionally elderly CVG6’s had spent their last days at Queens Road Depot on peak hour workings. However Queens Road was a firmly Leyland Depot, and I sometimes wonder how many drivers here were trained to use the preselector gearbox.
The bus is seen at Mills Hill Bridge, which had traditionally been the boundary between the operating areas of Manchester and Oldham Corporations. It was the half way point on service 59 (Manchester – Middleton – Oldham – Shaw) which was normally operated by 6 buses from each fleet. However on Sunday Mornings in pre Selnec times, the service was operated in two halves with passengers changing buses at Mills Hill Bridge. Both operators ran short workings to this point, Oldham as service 3 and Manchester as 59X.
Note the very small print on the standard Selnec destination blind. Obviously its a matter of opinion, but I thought the “Orion” body suited the Selnec livery quite well.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Don McKeown

16/01/14 – 06:23

The manual CCG6 Daimlers made sweet music after the fashion of Guy Arabs – whose gearbox they shared – but were universally loathed by both Salford and Manchester drivers. [Apparently the Daimler installation worked less well than Guy’s own.] You’re not the only one, Don, who thinks an Orion can look good with the correct livery.

David Oldfield

16/01/14 – 06:24

What an interesting view! Thanks for posting, Don. Unlike most of the new PTE operations, which simply extended the livery of the biggest constituent with little or no variation, SELNEC went for a completely new livery. Some liked it, some were appalled, but they couldn’t ignore it. More orange below the lower deck windows may have helped to placate some observers – but it might have annoyed some of them even more!

Pete Davies

16/01/14 – 06:25

Would the (ex-)Salford CVGs have had air or spring-operated pre-selector gears? And why the split in the Sunday am service? a perception for the need for differing frequencies from each municipality perhaps?? . . . but with practices like that – and Oldham giving their half of the Sunday morning shorts a different number altogether – is it any wonder passengers went elsewhere?
Now, I’ve never driven a pre-selector: does it require “training” or can it be picked up “on the job”? are there aspects of driving manual/clash/crash/synchro/whatever that need to be put aside when driving a pre-selector? I must admit that I’ve felt wary of going near a pre-selector ever since I read about that nasty “kick-back” habit of spring-change pre-selectors . . . then again, I’ve enough trouble with throttle/clutch/shift without the added complication of shift/throttle/change (am I right there?).

Philip Rushworth

16/01/14 – 08:42

As an “amateur” with about twenty years experience of using my PSV (PCV) for various things – in fact most types of operation – I would say that type training is an essential but often overlooked element of the job. In an ideal world, that includes the difference between Synchro Manual, Crash Manual, Semi Automatic and Pre Select gear change.

David Oldfield

16/01/14 – 09:02

The Orion bodied vehicles probably came out best of all with the SELNEC livery, primarily because as there were more of this style of body than any other across the fleets absorbed into SELNEC, the final livery from a number of options was actually designed around drawings and hand made models of the body style (don’t forget this was before computer graphics) and the dimensions and spacings of the colours were then adopted fleet wide to the benefit of a few other body styles and the detriment of many. The orange was, however, distinctive and, to be controversial, not dull as it appeared to be in the shades and quantities chosen for Cardiff or Glasgow.
The photo highlights a number of issues. It would have been rare for a Salford or Manchester vehicle to be out on service for long with damage as seen on the radiator housing. The blind was a lash up job and, as there doesn’t seem to be any snow around, it looks as if the bus hasn’t been through the washer for some days. These were some of the problems faced by the new entity for some time after set up as old loyalties were, as one inspector said to me, smashed and blown to the four winds and some depots had almost a rebellious attitude to the new organisation. In addition there was a range of problems when transferring vehicles from depot to depot such as blind sizes. unfamiliar position of bells on rear entrance double deckers, position of fuel fillers and different interior light bulbs and of course different gear boxes, to name a few. The appearance of many vehicles rapidly deteriorated. Those left in their original schemes with the appropriate divisional motifs added (the Central blue S flash on Manchester’s red or Salford’s green looking particularly odd) were generally left without attention to dints and paint deterioration until full repaint, some waiting two or three years for attention or for withdrawal. All this added to the debate about the orange, which was by no means confined to the enthusiast fraternity, gave the management plenty to cope wit. Much had settled by 1973, then there was another upheaval with the advent of Greater Manchester Transport.

Phil Blinkhorn

16/01/14 – 11:02

…..but as a Sheffielder who spent student and early working days in SELNEC/GMT land, Sunglow Orange and White were infinitely superior to SYPTE Coffee and Cream. Darkening the coffee didn’t improve it. Only adding the red – just before wiping it away with Mainline Yellow and Red – made it just about acceptable. If only they HAD kept Sheffield Cream and Blue – but the better Manchester/SELNEC alternative would have been Salford Green and Cream – kept up to the latter day standards of Salford. […..but then it would have been some sort of green and cream from Merseyside, through Manchester to West Yorkshire!]

David Oldfield

16/01/14 – 11:03

I fully agree with the SELNEC livery looking good on the Orion. The original orange, sunglow I think it was called, was a very intense yellowish shade which looked especially attractive when freshly applied. However, it was prone to fading so that when the fleet was rebranded it was replaced with a darker, redder version. The difference can be seen quite well on these ex SHMD Daimlers: www.flickr.com/photos/  The off-white originally used was also replaced by brilliant white at some stage. I personally preferred the former combination but as livery is often a controversial subject that is a matter of opinion. The PTE liveries are often maligned but some of them worked well and looked bright and refreshing on the right vehicles at the right time. I always liked the original WYPTE “Metro” livery with the stripe above the cab on the Roe bodied Atlanteans but on older vehicles it looked wrong. Merseyside used the same bluish Verona green which I thought looked very smart combined with jonquil yellow (a shade similar to the primrose used by East Yorkshire), especially on their Panthers. And, the final version of the Tyne and Wear livery with white rather than cream and royal blue lining has always been a personal favourite, especially on the Metropolitans. However, I would never deny that it was also something of a tragedy that magnificent liveries such as those at Halifax, Southport or South Shields were lost, and like the NBC liveries of the day, those of the PTEs were not helped by the loss of local pride that came with these huge, impersonal organisations.

Mike Morton

16/01/14 – 14:07

The question of appearance is highly subjective, but I remain an unapologetic loather of the Selnec ‘livery’ which looked particularly abhorrent when applied to front engined buses. The painting of the bonnet in orange, completely out of sympathy with the other lines of the scheme, made it look as absurdly conspicuous as a pantomime pirate’s eye patch. I have always disliked the Orion body, too. The straight taper from skirt panels to roofline, accentuated by the shallow upper saloon windows, gave the thing a gawky, ungainly, pin headed profile, which the cheap looking dome and glazing method merely compounded. Orange is a very tricky colour to adopt and maintain, as my time in Halifax revealed. HPTD buses emerging from the bodyshop with newly painted replacement lower panels resembled a patchwork quilt. Certainly, the Selnec scheme shows up body damage like a beacon. Salford would never have left the radiator cowl in that state, but even if it had, the missing slat would not have leapt so readily to the eye in that superb dark green livery. I will now don my hard hat in readiness for the onslaught from Selnec and Orion aficionados.

Roger Cox

17/01/14 – 08:25

I fully agree with Roger Cox regarding the SELNEC orange and white colour scheme it was one that was only ever going to look even reasonable when just out of the paint shop, considering the number of attractive colour schemes SELNEC inherited, MCTD’s being one of the least attractive, there were reasons to expect so much better. The Orion body was also an unattractive bus as it was unbalanced with the unequal depth windows and the inward taper from skirt to roof making it look very narrow and slab sided which looked even worse on a Regent V with a full front, the nasty tinny domes only made matters worse. Having said that if nobody had bought them how long would the design have lasted let alone been copied by Park Royal who managed to make a bad design even worse.

Diesel Dave

17/01/14 – 08:26

The livery certainly accentuates the Salford style of winding handles attached to a cumbersome-looking frame, designed to be reached without the need for the guard (sic)to climb on the radiator.

Geoff Kerr

17/01/14 – 09:19

The “tinny” domes were actually fibreglass with the outside smoothed and the inside almost always left rough so the passengers could view the fibres through the paint. They were prone to loads of condensation and vibration and used to crack to a greater or lesser extent. Manchester had many delivered with v shaped push window vents in the two front windows which helped the frontal appearance but they were removed and later orders had them omitted as, if the vents became stiff to move, the efforts of the passengers or guard to open or close them led to the whole window flexing and there were instances of major cracking and windows falling out as a result.

Phil Blinkhorn

17/01/14 – 17:53

Great to see a Middleton run featured and thanks Don for posting. Re the 3 and 59: the 3 (Oldham Corp) was Rushcroft to Mills Hill only. In 1968/9 every journey was extended to Middleton. All Sunday morning 59 runs were numbered 59x and ran only to Mills Hill until 11am, then through to Shaw. There were few passengers. Middleton had interesting routes and short workings, mostly forgotten now. Selnec livery? Yuk! Lots preferred the original liveries. These Daimlers were stunning when new teaming along the Crescent and better still if all the lights from Adelphi to Blackfriars were green.

Mike Franks

18/01/14 – 07:45

Mike, in my day as a teenager, the longer it took from Adelphi to Blackfriars the better, especially on a weekday afternoon in term time – go figure!

Phil Blinkhorn

18/01/14 – 07:46

To answer one of Philip’s questions, I’m pretty sure that all Salford CVG6s had spring-operated gearchanges. The spring operation went with vacuum brakes, whereas air operation went with air brakes. Salford stuck with vacuum brakes as long as possible, buying PD2/40s when their allegiance changed to Leyland. I would imagine their CCG6s were vacuum braked too, whereas Manchester’s were definitely air-braked.
Talking of which (David), I didn’t know the Guy gearbox behaved differently in these than in its native Arab. I wonder if it was perhaps in the wrong place. Guy always put it amidships, so if Daimler put it at the front, it would need a different linkage. Whilst it is very nearly true that they were universally loathed, there was one driver who loved them – a certain Ron Barton, whose book “Manchester Buses from the Platform” has just been published. I haven’t read it, but I should be rather surprised if he doesn’t mention the CCG6s.

Peter Williamson

19/01/14 – 08:21

There was nothing wrong with the Guy gearbox. The constant mesh box was always disliked in fleets with a preponderance of preselective, semi auto or even synchromesh transmissions. The constant mesh gearbox required a degree of familiarity and skill for clean changes that drivers in mixed fleets did not (or could not be bothered to) acquire. The staff in neighbouring Tilling or BET fleets would have wondered what all the fuss was about.

Roger Cox

19/01/14 – 09:41

I like the way this is wandering into the realms of the merits or otherwise of different gearbox arrangements!
In mid career, my duties with Southampton City Council began to involve what had been the Transport Department (by 1990 well into the deregulation era) and I encountered someone who was about to retire from that undertaking. He was telling me one day that he had started work with Provincial. All crash gearboxes. His instructor had mentioned – vaguely – double declutching, and had dismissed the idea as being for amateurs. “Listen to the engine, boy, and you can go straight through!” How would today’s drivers manage???

Pete Davies

19/06/17 – 07:14

As a former employee based at the Weaste Garage. The transfer of Salford vehicles to Manchester Queens Road due to the interest being shown by the ‘Ministry’ in the ‘presentation’ of Manchester vehicles.
To placate the ‘Ministry’ overnight Salford vehicles in good order were transferred to Queens Road and conversely Queen Road relics arrived at Weaste and Frederick Rd. To say the least engineering at the former Salford undertaking were not the least happy with the transfer.

Robert Walsh

20/06/17 – 07:19

Could someone confirm that Salford Daimlers 111-146 had spring operated gearboxes and vacuum brakes?

David Call

21/06/17 – 07:19

Selnec livery. As a student in Manchester in the early 1970’s I was recruited by SELNEC to assist with an evening survey in Wythenshawe. Being a loyal employee, I equipped myself with a felt tip pen in Selnec’s house colour, orange, to complete my survey forms. I rapidly discovered that the neon street lighting in Wythenshawe made the form itself orange which meant that it was impossible to see whether anything had been written.

Peter Cook

21/06/17 – 07:20

My early comments (16.01.14) about gearbox set-up were purely hearsay on my part. Having subsequently driven a “crash” Guy, I would say that (once one has learned to drive it properly) it was one of the sweetest gear-changes I have come across.

David Oldfield

Rotherham Corporation – Daimler CVG – CET 76C – 76

Rotherham Corporation - Daimler CVG - CET76C - 76

Rotherham Corporation
1965
Daimler CVG6LX
Roe H39/31F

It’s an August Sunday evening in 1967 at the Chapeltown terminus of the service from Rotherham. Huddersfield had batches of almost identical vehicles but these Rotherham ones were classy – they had hopper saloon windows! I never travelled on a Rotherham example but I hope they had more comfortable seats than the thin lightweight ones favoured by Huddersfield. As a bus, they were pretty indestructible in service although at 7 year recertification most had fractured rear body crossmembers. Enjoy the livery, swept away in the monolithic era of the PTE.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

19/02/15 – 15:57

Leeds City Transport also had a batch of five of these vehicles, two of which are preserved. I enjoyed a ride on one last autumn at the Skipton running day. The Leeds buses were bought specifically for a service which was operated jointly with Bradford Corporation, which used forward entrance vehicles. Leeds otherwise stuck to rear entrances until the advent of rear engined buses.
I have never worked on forward entrance half cabs, but I wonder if there really was an advantage, or was it a case of following fashion? I have heard tales of conductors not liking them because there is nowhere to stand out of the way at bus stops. Certainly from the point of view of lower deck passengers, forward entrance buses had very poor forward vision.
I’ve always liked Daimlers, and this one is enhanced by the “streamlined” livery. The service number blind looks odd, was there a large gap between the two digits?

Don McKeown

20/02/15 – 07:45

Don, Rotherham buses (certainly up to the mid 60s) always had the gap between the two numeral blinds. How could I have forgotten the similar Leeds Daimlers? Not only did I operate them at both Huddersfield and Halifax but 874 frequently operates the free Worth Valley Railway countryside tour service when the weather is unsuitable for the open top ex Southdown PD3.

Ian Wild

20/02/15 – 16:35

Derby also had separated digits to the route numbers – they even had completely separate apertures. Many Derby residents took this a bit literally. The no.11 to “Kedleston Road/Allestree Lane” often being referred to as a “one-one” rather than eleven.

Stephen Ford

22/02/15 – 07:53

Rotherham – Chapeltown was service 16, although I can’t make out what is actually being shown.

Geoff Kerr

22/02/15 – 07:53

CET 76C_2

Best I can do with what I have I’m afraid, I have sharpened it up a bit. Looks like route 2_6 to me.

Peter

22/02/15 – 14:02

My 1971 timetable and a photograph I took in 1970 at the same location both agree with Geoff, so unless the service had been renumbered the bus is showing the wrong number.

David Beilby

23/02/15 – 07:34

Leicester also had separate apertures for both numbers and a third for the destination.

Chris Hough

23/02/15 – 17:14

The 26 service was to Aston, on the other side of the town, so perhaps the driver has simply put the wrong digit up. The destination showing is ‘ROTHERHAM’, of course, which is what the corporation buses showed when working back towards town.

Dave Careless

Lancaster City Transport – Daimler CV – NTF 466 – 466

Lancaster Corporation - Daimler CV - NTF 466 - 466

Lancaster City Transport
1952
Daimler CVG5
Northern Counties B35F

NTF 466 is a Daimler CVG5 with Northern Counties B35F body, built for Lancaster City Transport in 1952. There were three of them, but 467 and 468 were withdrawn in 1958. They had B32R bodies [with door!] when new and 466 was converted in the operator’s workshops to forward entrance layout in 1958. Now restored to her original livery, she carried Trafalgar Blue and White for a time after the ‘shotgun marriage’ of Lancaster and the adjacent Borough Of Morecambe & Heysham in 1974. [The other three Councils involved – Carnforth Urban District, Lancaster Rural District and Lunesdale Rural District – didn’t seem to object anywhere near so much, but Lancaster and Morecambe & Heysham had never ‘got on’.] She was retained for so long after her sisters for a very simple reason. Her 7ft 6in body was narrow enough to fit through the gateway of Lancaster Castle. Most of the place had been used as a prison for many years and this was the last vehicle in the fleet capable of taking the inmates to the prison’s farms. She is seen in the museum in St Helens on 15 August 2012, and the adjacent information board tells us she was known – for fairly obvious reasons – as ‘the prison bus’.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

10/05/15 – 16:28

A beauty, looking good. Would have loved the big old CAV headlamps (if indeed she once had them) but you can’t have everything! I can’t spot the date she actually retired- was it a record?
Am I right to wonder if she also got one of those neck-cricking OMO “squint” windows to the cab when the door was moved?

Joe

10/05/15 – 16:49

I believe it was withdrawn in 1977 but kept as a keepsake until the end of LCT in 1993

Paul Turner

11/05/15 – 07:12

I quote from a former employee of LCT, Richard Allen, who supplied me with much information about the company which enabled me to provide a fleet list for this site: “NTF 466 was new as B36R just like NTF 467/8. It was rebuilt to B32F for OPO from 01/58 and in 06/1970 it was upseated to 35 in connection with the prison contract which it worked. It was considered too slow and laborious for OPO when underfloor engined buses were arriving, so 467/8 were never considered for conversion and were sold at the end of 1958”.
It doesn’t answer your question, Joe, about windows, but if it did acquire something different it doesn’t sound like it was used for very long!

Dave Towers

11/05/15 – 07:12

Am I right in thinking that Trafalgar blue wasn’t the first choice of the “transport department” – didn’t they plump for a maroon colour with “City of Lancaster” fleetname to start with? I think the blue livery/Lancaster City Council fleetname was the result of a decision to adopt a “house-style” across the Council.

Philip Rushworth

12/05/15 – 06:57

Philip, In the early days of the merged operation, both sides kept their old colours with CITY OF LANCASTER in Tilling style as the fleetname. I have photographs of both backgrounds with that name. Certainly, the Trafalgar blue and white appeared to be the “house style” which came in fairly quickly.

Pete Davies

14/05/15 – 07:19

There was a good article in the February-March issue of ‘Classic Bus’ on the Lancaster-Morecambe & Heysham merger. It is written by Thomas Knowles who was GM of the combined undertaking from the outset and he outlines the problems he had with bringing the two former operations together. It contains plenty of good photographs.

Philip Halstead

This bus was repainted in Trafalgar blue in 1977 as part of the Queen’s Silver Jubilee celebrations and ran a service along Morecambe seafront over that summer its prison bus replacement was a Tiger Cub with single door East Lancs bodywork.
A friend who was a management trainee with Lancaster once told me that this bus also survived so long because the prisoners could not overpower the driver in his separate cab!

Chris Hough

12/12/16 – 06:38

As a belated update on this vehicle it was also fitted with a rear facing seat at the front so the guards could watch the prisoners. It has problems with its brakes which is why it is not in current use, however there are plans for it to be repaired and returned to the road for 2017.
It is a fine looking vehicle and should be very popular on the free bus running days at the Northwest Transport museum in St Helens.

John P

13/12/16 – 07:15

Do I interpret, from your info, Pete, that the two Rural District Councils ran buses? If so, they’re the first I’ve come across.

Chris Hebbron

13/12/16 – 09:38

No, Chris. Only Lancaster City and Morecambe & Heysham Borough ran buses (trams previously). The two RDCs relied on Ribble and while Carnforth UD had no bus operations, it was the northern terminus of M&H service 73 which was operated jointly with Ribble. This was in addition to Ribble services passing through.
I meant in my original copy that the two Councils never ‘got on’. The remarks by each about the other were little short of hatred, very much like the supporters of one football club say about the supporters of their neighbours. Portsmouth and  Southampton, Aston Villa and Birmingham City, or Manchester City and Manchester United, for example!

Pete Davies

13/12/16 – 14:16

Sorry, Chris H, I must insist, the replacement for 466 on the prison work was not a Tiger Cub but one of the dual-doorway Leopards, the batch being 101-103 (101-103 UTF). I don’t recall ever seeing a Tiger Cub on prison duties.
What I can’t now remember, for sure, is whether one of the Leopards was used consistently, or whether all were used in turn, but if I had to guess, I would say it was the former.

David Call

15/12/16 – 13:55

Pete D, I think you must have rushed that last comment, since I’m sure that if you’d thought about it you would have realised that what you were saying wasn’t quite correct. Service 73 was essentially Ribble service 73, since, throughout the period of service 73’s existence, M & H did not themselves use route numbers. As to whether it being Ribble service 73 also made it M & H service 73, irrespective of M & H not making a point of using route numbers, let alone displaying them on vehicles, I wouldn’t like to say. We’d probably need a contemporary M & H timetable to determine that one.
Sometime in the mid-1960s, as part of a Ribble policy of renumbering its Northern area services as 5xx or 6xx, service 73 became service 573. Not long afterwards (I’m not sure exactly how long, though) M & H received its first AEC Swifts, 1-6 (CTJ 101-6E). These were intended to be used OPO from the word go, and one of the routes they went on was Morecambe-Carnforth, upon which they displayed the number 573. Unfortunately, because the rest of the M & H routes were at this time still unnumbered, there was no great incentive for drivers to wind off the 573 display, so M & H’s other OPO routes seemed to become ‘573’! In due course (I think it was around 1970) M & H did introduce its own route numbering system.
Interestingly, when the M & H journeys on Morecambe-Carnforth went OPO, the Ribble-operated ones remained crew-operated, and this situation remained for about twelve months. In a company/municipal situation, you would have thought it would be the company which would be the first in with OPO.

David Call

16/12/16 – 06:24

Yes, Mr Call, you are of course correct. Apologies to the readership for any confusion. I’ll go back to sleep!

Pete Davies

Huddersfield Corporation – Daimler CVG6 – HVH 472D – 472

Huddersfield Corporation - Daimler CVG6 - HVH 472D - 472

Huddersfield Corporation
1966
Daimler CVG6LX.30DD
East Lancs H41/29F

This is the last Huddersfield Corporation vehicle delivered (numerically) with a front engine and is currently preserved. It was new in 1966 to the Corporation, being withdrawn in 1980, having served 6 years with the WYPTE.
The photo was taken in 2005 at a local bus rally and shows the vehicle turned out in superb condition and displaying the old Corporation livery with the front end swoops.
It is still active and I photographed it at another local rally earlier this year.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Tim Jackson

27/06/15 – 06:40

I rode on this bus this year at Llandudno, and was surprised to be given an ultimate ticket. Perhaps the owners have a big supply of ticket rolls.
A lovely bus, Daimlers don’t get the attention they deserve. Pity about the forward entrance!

Don McKeown

28/06/15 – 05:52

Well Don, Huddersfield used Ultimate ticket machines so that added to the authenticity of riding on it. Despite having served over six years with WYPTE it somehow managed to retain its Huddersfield livery to the end.

Eric Bawden

02/07/15 – 05:45

HVH 472D_2

What’s that white(ish) circle on the offside tyre? It looks like a light to me, but can’t be original . . . and surely can’t be legal now.
I’m assuming that these had Daimatic transmission. Did that completely supersede pre-select, or was pre-select available until the end of production? if it was, then I’m assuming it would have been air-actuated . . . surely that “lethal” spring(?) system had been confined to the bin by then.

Philip Rushworth

02/07/15 – 08:34

It is a light and there should be a corresponding one on the other side. If you look for photos of the bus on Flickr you can find a selection with two, one or zero lights. I believe it is currently displaying the correct two lights.

David Beilby

03/07/15 – 06:38

Philip, Northampton’s last Daimler CVG6s delivered in 1968 had pre-selector gearboxes. For some reason it seems to run in my mind that they may have been of the thigh and knee bruising spring-operated type, as I seem to recall Northampton also specified vacuum brakes on the vehicles. Air-operated systems require the use of an air compressor, whereas vacuum brakes require the use of an exhauster, which would not be compatible with an air-operated gearbox. Ideally we need a Northampton expert to confirm this.
The Huddersfield Daimler CVG6LXs were handsome vehicles, whether bodied by Roe, or East Lancashire. I have fond memories of riding on one or two of the latter between Huddersfield and Halifax, and being impressed by their turn of speed. They sounded wonderful and were also comfortable buses to ride on. That ‘Corporation’ livery was special as well, with the extra cream and streamlining at the front, and it’s distinctiveness is sadly missed.

Brendan Smith

03/07/15 – 06:39

Philip, these did indeed have Daimatic semi-auto transmission, but as far as I know the pre-select spring operated transmission was still available. I think all the Northampton CVG’s had them right up to the last “G” reg.examples, though I doubt any other operator would have bought any for years.

Eric Bawden

05/07/15 – 07:30

I believe that Northampton specified vacuum brakes right up to their last deliveries hence with no air pressure system on the buses the pre selector spring operated transmission was the only option. Generally Operators who specified air brakes took the 2 pedal Daimatic transmission.

Ian Wild

08/07/15 – 05:42

Thanks for the various replies. Did any operator purchase air-actuated pre-selector buses in preference to the Daimatic transmission? Am I correct in assuming that the Daimatic transmission was just a CAV-actuated SCG box built/purchased(?) under license?

Philip Rushworth

Aberdeen Corporation – Daimler CV – CRG 325C – 325

Aberdeen Corporation - Daimler CV - CRG 325C - 325

Aberdeen Corporation
1965
Daimler CVG6
Alexander H37/29R

CRG 325C is a Daimler CVG6 with Alexander H66R bodywork. She entered service with Aberdeen in March 1965. This was one of only three or four Councils in Scotland still with its own Transport Department at Local Government Reorganisation in 1975 [a year later than in England] the undertaking was renamed Grampian Regional Transport, a precursor of First. We see her at Duxford on 18 September 2005.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

05/10/15 – 06:21

“Trafficators” on the mirrors? -about 40 years ahead of its time.
What’s the metal “pad” on the mudguard for? Not seen that before- and the grilles under the canopy are presumably heating…. and a ventilator in that window, too.
All together though, a very handsome bus: the tin front- perhaps plastic front- Daimler CV’s were the best looking half cabs of all (discuss).

Joe

05/10/15 – 06:22

Makes you wonder how they managed to fit 66 seats into a 27′ long decker. The Sheffield standard for buses of this length was 59 and I don’t recall the seat spacing being all that generous.

Ian Wild

05/10/15 – 09:51

I did wonder if, perhaps, the vehicle should be listed as a 30 footer, but a number of other places managed to fit sixty-odd seats in that length, cramped as it might have been. Did she start as a 58 or 59 seater and get the capacity increased for normal duties, was she for school services only in later years, or is there some other reason? Are there any readers out here who can tell us for sure?””

Pete Davies

06/10/15 – 06:31

Samuel Ledgard had several 27 footers with similar large capacities and, as far as I recall from conducting/travelling, no problem with legroom
The vehicles were :-
1949 – 1954 Regent V/Roe H37/28R
XUG 141 Daimler CVG6/Burlingham H36/28R
SDU 711 Daimler CVG6/Willowbrook LoLite H37/29RD.
The quite appreciable difference in the fairly narrow “window” of 26/27 feet is fascinating and quite remarkable.

Chris Youhill

06/10/15 – 06:32

Simple explanation for the “trafficators” on the mirrors. They are not trafficators but luminous yellow blobs as fitted to the back of the mirrors, a forerunner of the reflective yellow mirrors fitted to First vehicles. I believe that some other operators put aluminium plates on the near side wings, from memory Sheffield Regent V’s had them fitted but they did not cover the same area as those fitted to 325,and to all other Aberdeen tin front buses. Dundee buses also had fitting similar to those fitted in Aberdeen.
I presume it enabled staff to stand on the wings without scratching or breaking them.
325 was always a 66 seat bus and is only 27 ft. long. Aberdeen fitted five rearward facing seats along the front bulkhead

Further note, the luminous blobs have now been removed. At the time the picture was taken it was still owned by First, hence the luminous blobs. It is now owned by the Aberdeen and District Bus Preservation Group and is kept at the premises in Alford, Aberdeenshire.

Stephen Bloomfield

06/10/15 – 06:34

Halifax Corporation’s last five CVG6/Roe’s of 1956 had 65 seats (H37/28R) and were 27 footers. The lower deck comprised five pairs of double seats facing forwards and two sideways facing seats for four (a bit optimistic)over the rear wheelarches. The upper deck had eight pairs of forward facing seats, a double seat on the nearside opposite the top of the stairs (which were of course of the Roe straight variety) and a three seater seat at the rear, set back slightly behind the top of the stairs.
The Aberdeen example shown could have managed 66 seats using the same arrangement but with the first row of downstairs seats replaced by a five seater rearward facing seat against the front bulkhead.

John Stringer

06/10/15 – 06:34

The odd number of seats downstairs suggests that they had a reversed 5-some across the front bulkhead. Combined with inadequate leg room to the first forward facing seats (interlocking knees!) would give a “good” seating capacity there. We should not forget that even among the Scots, Aberdonians have a reputation to maintain! (An Aberdeen breakfast is said to comprise a slice of toast – no marmalade!)

Stephen Ford

06/10/15 – 06:35

65 seats on a 27-ft rear entrance double decker was fairly common. The extra seat to give 29 downstairs was usually achieved by having a rear facing five seat bench across the front bulkhead, Lodekka style. I am not personally familiar with these buses but would assume that was the layout.

Philip Halstead

06/10/15 – 07:06

The London Routemaster had 64 satisfactorily spaced seats within an overall length of 27 ft 8 ins, so I suppose the quoted figure of 66 in the Aberdeen Daimler’s Alexander body was possible, even if not entirely comfortable. On the subject of tin/plastic fronts, I thought most of them were pretty dire, and the AEC variety, often quoted by many enthusiasts as their favourite, was garish in the extreme to my eye. It was just an over inflated caricature of the contemporary Rover car front end. My own preference from the mediocre line up was the Johannesburg front on the Guy Arab, but this wasn’t offered for very long before the old Birmingham style became standard again.

Roger Cox

06/10/15 – 07:06

I would hazard a guess that the metal plate on the nearside mudguard was a canny Scottish idea to reduce damage to the paintwork by Fitters in dirty overalls whilst working on the engine (or night staff leaning over to check/top up the engine oil level). Seems a logical idea, did any other Operators fit these plates?

Ian Wild

06/10/15 – 07:07

With bodies by Park Royal and Willowbrook on a Guy Arab IV or Leyland PD2/12 chassis, the 1956/7 intake of D/D’s for the NGT group were all 63 seats, but 66 would seem a bit cosy, or should that be cramped?

Ronnie Hoye

06/10/15 – 07:07

Manchester Corporation and others had 65 seat 27 foot double-deckers. If the downstairs front seats had been turned to face backwards as a five seat bench (as on Bristol Lodekkas) they would have seated 66.

Don McKeown

06/10/15 – 09:39

Interesting information on the variations in these apparently high capacities. Of the eight Ledgard vehicles I mentioned only the Willowbrook “LoLite” body had the rearward facing seat for five behind the driver.

Chris Youhill

07/10/15 – 06:20

Chris-do tell us more about “LoLite” bodies? I tried it in Google and got a page of searches based on Lolita. At first glance, the word looks like one for a vandal-proofed body suitable for the more difficult-to-conduct routes.

Joe

07/10/15 – 06:22

Reading about these “large” capacity buses has me wondering about the “moderns”(sorry about that) that I am seeing around Lancashire.
A company called Tyrer has a 3axle DD marked on the back as a 102 seater and their company website has a picture of a similarly 3axle 100 seat executive coach.
Does anybody know what they might be.

John Lomas

07/10/15 – 15:54

Joe – the one that Ledgard had (SDU 711, later West Yorkshire after takeover, was the former Daimler demonstrator. The low height was, as far as I remember, achieved very successfully by attaching the body direct to the top of the chassis members. It was a very good looking bus, looking “comfortable” with itself, and was extremely strongly built with substantial upper saloon corner pillars.

John – the giant 100 seats plus buses that you mention sound very like some re-imported from China, possibly Dennis Dominators or Ailsa Volvos – open to correction there.

Chris Youhill

08/10/15 – 07:22

One of the views on the firm’s website shows the cab area, with something like the Volvo logo on the steering wheel.

Pete Davies

08/10/15 – 07:23

The 100+ three-axle vehicles are probably from Hong Kong where this type has been common for several years. The high seating capacity is mainly achieved by the use of three and two seating across the bus. With the population of Hong Kong being generally smaller in build than us Europeans this works over there. Think it would be a bit cramped with British bus loads though.

Philip Halstead

09/10/15 – 17:17

With a little help from Pete, these are apparently new Volvo B9TL tri-axle deckers, bodied by East Lancs. Quite a good-looking bus, but I much prefer the look of the Southdown East Lancs bodied Royal Tigers and PD2/12’s found in the 50’s and 60’s when I was a wee lad growing up in Brighton.

Anon

28/10/15 – 13:27

Growing up in Aberdeen in the 60’s I can confirm that Grampian 325 had three seats at the rear of the top deck and a rear facing 5 seat bench behind the lower deck bulkhead. Also 325 was the last open platform bus delivered in Scotland.

Danny Stephen

29/10/15 – 06:25

I notice that CRG 325C has the wider form of the so-called “Manchester front”. We’ve been discussing this subject over on the sct61 site. The conclusion so far is that the standard CVG6 had a chassis frame that tapered towards the front and used a 7’6″ front axle. When a change had to be made to the chassis frame design for any reason, a straight frame was used with an 8′ axle and the wider cowl. Examples explained this way are for 30-foot chassis, manual gearboxes and forward entrances, and also for the final batch for Northampton which was simply using up parts.
That seems to make these Aberdeen examples the last unexplained anomaly, unless anyone has any ideas.

Peter Williamson

Northampton Corporation – Daimler CV – JVV 267G – 267

Northampton Corporation - Daimler CV - JVV 267G - 267

Northampton Corporation
1968
Daimler CVG6DD
Roe H33/26R

This former Northampton 267, JVV 267G, is seen here on a running day at Wellingborough on 22/4/17.
This was the last CVG6 for the UK market, the last bus with pre-selector transmission, the last teak framed Roe body and, I believe, the last open rear platform bus delivered in the UK.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Tony Martin

01/05/17 – 07:12

What a gem!

Joe

02/05/17 – 07:19

Last time I saw 267 it was looking a bit down at heel but in this shot it looks superb. Well done to the owner(s). I was led to believe that Northampton took the first post-war CVG6 to be built and as the caption states took the last one some twenty years later. All purchases in between were of the same mark and I understand all had Roe bodies. A great tribute to the products of these two companies and to standardisation. Also the shade of red is just awesome!

Philip Halstead

09/05/17 – 07:42

Sadly the modern digital photography has played havoc with the colouring! Although 267 is indeed very smartly turned out nowadays it is nowhere near as garish as this picture suggests. The Northampton red was actually Vermilion, which is an orangy red quite unique to Northanpton as far as I know. Several preserved Ex Northampton buses sport an assortment of shades but not all successfully capture it in my opinion.

Andrew Goodwin

09/05/17 – 17:39

JVV263G

A less gaudy photo of one of the same batch!
The Drapery, Northampton.

Tony Martin

23/07/17 – 07:03

Just a small correction – the three buses in Tony Martin’s photo (09/05/17) are in fact in Mercers Row. NCT bought almost exclusively Daimler buses, there was also a small batch of Crossleys, one of which has been preserved. www.flickr.com/photos/

Norman

26/07/17 – 15:50

All the ‘lasts’ are correct except the last for which the credit goes to Stockport Corporation PD3 fleet number 91 registered on 1 January 1969.

Orla Nutting