Bradford Corporation – Daimler CVG6 – EAK 232D – 232


Copyright Brendan Smith

Bradford Corporation
1966
Daimler CVG6LX/30
East Lancashire (Neepsend) H40/30F

Captured here waiting on Park Road, Bingley is Bradford CT 232, one of a batch of fifteen Daimler CVG6LX/30s supplied to the undertaking in the latter part of 1966. It is seen still wearing BCT’s attractive blue and cream livery, but has had its classic Bradford City Transport fleet name and coat of arms replaced by West Yorkshire PTE’s ‘Metro Bradford’ fleet name and PTE logo. (A ‘2’ prefix has also been added to the fleet number, denoting former Bradford ownership). They were very comfortable buses to ride in, and most handsome buses to look at, bearing a strong resemblance – particularly at the rear – to BCT’s forward-entrance re-bodied trolleybuses delivered a few years previously. Saltaire depot had an allocation of these fine machines, and they could often be seen on the 68 service from Bradford to Edwick/Dick Hudson’s, operated jointly with West Yorkshire Road Car. The Gardner 6LX engines fitted to the Daimlers would have been well-suited to the steady climb up to Gilstead and Eldwick.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Brendan Smith

17/09/12 – 07:18

All of this batch went new to Saltaire depot, but 234-40 were passed on to Ludlam Street when Saltaire received new Fleetlines 271-85, which was of course only a matter of months later. These latter, and the remaining CVG6s 226-33 constituted the principal complement of Saltaire’s vehicle allocation for several years, although I was surprised when, around 1970, there was also an East Lancs-bodied Regent III based there. While trolleybuses were still operative on service 40 to City via Thackley there were, I think, two trolleys also kept there overnight, outstationed from Thornbury depot. Does anyone know what effect the trolleybus abandonment had for Saltaire’s vehicle allocation?
The CVG6s were standard fare (pun intended) on route 68, indeed while they were around I don’t recall seeing anything else on BCT’s share of the service. Of course Eldwick didn’t need eight buses, so they also appeared on Manningham Lane services, although heavily outnumbered by Fleetlines. Thornbury depot also had a small presence on these routes, using Regent Vs.
In the early 1970s 234-40 moved on from Ludlam Street depot to Horton Bank Top, where they replaced Regent IIIs.

I can’t vouch for when these actually arrived, but I think only two had entered service by the end of 1966, the rest doing so early in 1967.

I’ve just had a look at my copy of the Stanley King book, and he quotes entries into service of between August and November 1966 – a bit at variance with my recollection, and the vehicles he quotes as the first two in service are not quite the same two I would have said. Still, I’ll stand corrected on this point if necessary.

David Call

17/09/12 – 07:19

I think, Brendan, that these 15 buses were “la creme de la creme” with regard to Bradford`s later fleet, and I travelled on them quite regularly when they were quite new. I also travelled (more often) on the 15 contemporary PD3s with identical bodies, which appeared on my “80” route.
The Daimlers, in particular, just oozed quality, and the sound of the Gardner engine, after so many screaming Regent Vs was a pure delight.
I do remember though, that some Bradford staff were not too happy with the Neepsend bodies, which did not seem as structurally sound as the Blackburn East Lancs version. They looked a lot better though, with the full original Bradford insignia!

John Whitaker

17/09/12 – 07:20

This batch of buses only 8 years old at the formation of the PTE never received PTE livery and remained blue and cream all their lives When quite new they were often seen on the former Ledgard Leeds-Pudsey-Bradford route and were a really nice bus to ride on.

Chris Hough

These vehicles were superb. 226-33 were allocated to Saltaire Depot from new and I remember them appearing on the service to Eldwick in the autumn of 1966. I travelled on them regularly to school. Later when I worked in the Traffic Office of BCT in Forster Square we worked alternate Saturdays and I’d travel on the 07:35 hours journey from Eldwick, which was a BCT Daimler CVG working.
Later still I was a member of a small group of staff that on Monday nights used to frequent the BCT Social Club in Sunbridge Road. The bus stops outside the Club were for services 15 and 16 – West Bowling and Allerton. The bus to Eldwick stopped some distance away in John Street. The last bus from Bradford (Chester Street) to Eldwick left at 10.20pm and I used to ring the Chief Inspector’s Office at Forster Square at about 10.10pm to say that I was “ready for home”. I’d make my way the best I could to the stop for the Allerton service just outside the Club and I’d then be joined by one of the Duty Inspectors. When the Daimler CVG came round the corner from Godwin Street into Sunbridge Road the Inspector would step purposefully into the road and stop the bus for me so that I could get on it. He’d then tell the conductor: “Make sure that he gets off at Eldwick Post Office.”
Ah, happy days, or should that be daze?

Kevin Hey

18/09/12 – 07:25

Huddersfield had a contemporary batch of sixteen CVG6LX-30s, 457-472 (HVH 457-472D). Half were bodied by East Lancs at Blackburn the other half by Neepsend. They became due for initial recertification shortly after I arrived at Huddersfield. I don’t recall that the Neepsend bodies were any worse at that stage than the Blackburn built examples. I do recall that one body type all suffered from body framing fractures above the entrance doors (Neepsend I think) whilst the other all had frame fractures on the staircase side. Some of this batch were particularly hard worked being 2 way radio fitted and hence allocated to the longest duties. Yes, the dulcet tones of these Daimlers were a vast improvement on the raucous cacophony from the eight forward entrance Regent Vs which were disliked by the crews.

Ian Wild

19/09/12 – 07:16

Huddersfield also had an earlier batch, 435-440, CCX 435-440B. There were detail differences in this earlier batch, from memory, mainly colour and layout of the staircase/luggage area.

Eric Bawden

Yeomans of Canon Pyon – Daimler CVA6 – FVJ 363 – 70

 
Copyright Routeman/Pete

Yeomans of Canon Pyon, Hereford
1948
Daimler CVA6
Welsh Metal Industries L57RD

Here’s a piece of personal history. Chrome-radiatored 1948 Daimler CVA6, with a stylish Welsh Metal Industries L57RD body. No. 70 was operated from new, lasting in service from December 1948 to December 1957. One of a pair, the other one was No. 71 (FVJ 364), which I never saw. Looking fairly new, but near the end of its life, it’s outside RAF Creden Hill, Hereford, where I was stationed for three months in mid-1956. Note the tree damage to the front dome. You can see the shiny pre-selective gear lever below the steering wheel. It had no gate, merely sliding forwards/backwards, gears indicated as RN1234, like the maker’s cars of the day. Having grown up in Daimlerland, South-West London, I was entirely at home re-living old memories on the varied Yeomans Daimler CW/CV fleet, which included some austerity models.
Yeomans still exist, for a while named Yeomans Canyon Travel and now simply Yeoman’s Travel. They gave up their stage services a long time ago. As for the bodybuilders: Welsh Metal Industries, of Caerphilly, was created for aircraft production purposes during WWII, but, once peacetime came, there was a need to produce something else. Like some other former aircraft manufacturers, they turned to bus bodywork and did good trade for a while, so desperate was the need for new vehicles. Building on past experience, the WMI body was radically different in its substantial use of aluminium, resulting in a very light structure. The bodies, however, were somewhat fragile, with horror stories of windows falling out and beading strips flapping around in the breeze! I don’t recall any creaks or groans with this one, but perhaps the body had been completely rebuilt by then.
Note the large number of obtrusive rivets/screws!

Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron

A full list of Daimler codes can be seen here.


25/11/12 – 08:29

That front dome – damaged or not – reminds me of Northern Counties or Weymann styling. What livery did the operator use in those days?

Pete Davies


25/11/12 – 11:18

Dark Green and Cream, Pete.

Chris Hebbron


25/11/12 – 16:35

Thanks, Chris.

Pete Davies


26/11/12 – 08:48

The seating capacity seems rather high for a 1948 lowbridge decker. Most, of that period seem to have been L53R. I wonder if there was an additional row on the top deck or if a couple more pairs had been fitted on the lower deck. There couldn’t have been much legroom wherever they were squeezed in!

Chris Barker


26/11/12 – 08:49

Far from having “given up their stage services long ago” Yeomans Travel (note: Yeomans not “Yeoman’s” (the family name is “Yeomans”) the company still runs a wide range of local bus services based on Hereford and with its associated Leominster-based Lugg Valley Travel is the biggest LBS operator in Herefordshire.

Jim Davies


26/11/12 – 13:48

I was wondering about the seating. I have been trying to work out if the cab has been shortened to increase seating. It seems to require an athletic user, anyway: possibly the door is open, like the window vents for a hot day. The step seems to start well up: the driver seems to have this big upward step and then an unassisted leap forwards and upwards. There seems nothing to assist him. Do some have more of a panel behind the door? If you push the driver forward, then can you push the upstairs front bench seat forward too? Perhaps in that rural part of the world, they employed ex jockeys to drive?

Joe


19/02/18 – 07:02

Well, I was at RAF Credenhill in 1956 from April to late June, too and regularly travelled on Yeoman’s buses. I actually took a not wonderful picture of the Daimler CVD some three years earlier, never dreaming I would be posted there.

Michael Baker


21/02/18 – 06:56

Jim Davis’s point regarding the family name of ‘Yeomans’ brings me to ask about something that has puzzled me for quite a long time.
Why was it that the more modern day company name comprised the name ‘Canyon’ when the village where the company originated had the spelling ‘Canon’ (as in Canon Pyon)?

David Slater


21/02/18 – 15:32

Perhaps because “Canyon Travel” has a more attractive name when the company dealt with holiday tours! The 1881 census shows a Henry Yeomans family living in Canon Pyon in 1881,, so they had some history in the village.
The Omnibus Society has photos of an eclectic mix of their vehicles, including a Leyland Titanic, Sentinel and double-deck AEC ‘Q’s’. I know that the Ministry of War Transport gathered a lot of the Q’s from operators who had bought single ones of this type. They were possibly the largest operator of the type at one time. See HERE: //theomnibussociety.

Chris Hebbron


21/02/18 – 15:33

I should have mentioned that they also operated a wartime Bedford OY 3-tonner lorry with a bus body on it behind the cab! Very rare! There is a photo of it on the OS site.

Chris Hebbron


22/02/18 – 06:03

Way back when, Chris B and Joe were puzzled about the seating. Bus Lists On The Web has this bus as L30/26RD. Leaving aside the discrepancy of one, this reveals that the extra seating is in the upper deck.
Welsh Metal Industries didn’t only build complete bus bodies but also components for bus bodies, notably for Beadle. WMI being part of the same group as Sentinel resulted in the latter using Beadle body designs and patents in order to utilise WMI components.

Peter Williamson

Salford City Transport – Daimler CVG6 – CRJ 417 – 417

Copyright Peter Williamson

Salford City Transport
1950
Daimler CVG6
Metro-Cammell H28/26R

Between 1950 and 1952 Salford City Transport placed in service 195 Daimler CVG6 double deckers with Metro-Cammell Phoenix bodies, all featuring Birmingham-style straight staircases and traditional polished wood interior window frames. Apart from another 15 CVG6s with Burlingham bodies purchased at the same time (a mixture of single and double deckers and a committee coach), there were no further additions to the fleet until 1962. For ten years, therefore, the Phoenixes acted as the backbone of the fleet, and outside the rush hour they would most likely be the only Salford buses to be seen by a casual visitor to the city. To me, they – and the spirited manner in which they were usually driven – were the very essence of Salford.
Here 417, dating from 1950, is seen in Victoria Bus Station in 1968, by the end of which there were still almost 70 survivors, the last 48 being passed on to SELNEC the following year.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Peter Williamson

A full list of Daimler codes can be seen here.


19/02/13 – 15:27

Victoria bus station shown here was in Salford but long-distance services terminating there showed “Manchester” as their destination!
The only local destination which Salford City Transport buses could not show was “Salford”.

Geoff Kerr


19/02/13 – 16:01

Charles Baroth’s tweaking of the Phoenix design (straight staircase, destination screen winder assembly, and the fairing on the nearside front mudguard – not to mention the shortened radiator) made the two Salford batches distinctly different to the two batches of Daimlers with Phoenix bodies delivered to Manchester during the same period.
Whilst not looking as smart as the original scheme of green with three cream bands, black wheels and silver roof, the vehicle in the picture belies its age, especially as it is one of the first batch.
The second Salford batch was delivered in 1951 and should have been registered in then FBA series of Salford registrations but Charles Baroth persuaded the Salford City Police, who issued registration marks at the time, to issue FRJ some months early so all the vehicles he ordered would have RJ sequence marks.
The last six of the type delivered to Salford FRJ 555-FRJ 560 (555-560) were fitted with heaters and were much pursued by the enthusiast fraternity as for the first nine years of their lives they operated almost solely on all night services, retreating to the depot as the sun appeared.
Both Salford and Manchester passed substantial numbers of these vehicles to SELNEC. Given the constant all day, daily use to which both authorities put these vehicles for almost all their lives, it says a great deal about the workmanship that went into manufacture of the chassis and bodies and the standards of maintenance carried out by their owners.
When SELNEC eventually withdrew the remaining vehicles a bit of the post war character of the twin cities went with them.

Phil Blinkhorn


19/02/13 – 16:03

Having suffered these buses on the joint service 95/96 for many years I certainly wouldn’t be able to describe the way they were driven as ‘spirited. Salfords Daimlers were the slowest buses on Kingsway, Manchester by far, even slower than Birchfield Rd’s Crossleys. I well remember the groans that went up at my bus stop on Kingsway when one of these appeared over the crest of the hill at East Didsbury.

Orla Nutting


19/02/13 – 18:14

I wonder if the slow performance of the Salford Daimlers on Kingsway was down to the Salford crews “pushing” Manchester vehicles in front on the same or similar routes, i.e. allowing the Manchester crews to pick up the bulk of the passengers thus lessening the workload for the Salford men as they would have few if any passengers to pick up after the first few stops.
“Pushing” was a common practice where routes were jointly operated, some crews becoming adept at the practice. As long as the joint operation was on an equal shared income basis the practice, though officially frowned on, did not work to the financial detriment of the employers of the “lazy” crew.
Another trick was to load the bus at the first few stops so that the three bells code was given and, in rush hours, the crews would have an easy time with few stops, few fares to collect after the first trip around the bus and they could still dawdle as they had to keep to timings, yet could legitimately drive in a stately fashion past lines waiting for a bus with room.

Phil Blinkhorn


20/02/13 – 06:12

These Daimlers look decidedly odd with their short radiators, something I never was aware of until today. I used to think that LT’s STL’s looked smart, until I saw photos of some ‘unfrozen’ ones that had been given AEC’s longer radiator, which incorporated the number plate, as were the immediate pre-war Green Line T’s. Long radiators rule!

Chris Hebbron


20/02/13 – 13:35

With regard to Geoff’s comment about destination displays, Salford does not have a city centre.
Therefore if a bus in Bolton had shown Salford as its destination, where would it be going? The reason for the location of Victoria Bus Station (and the Greengate terminus across the road, where most of the longer distance services went from) was to get passengers to Manchester without the buses themselves having to cross the boundary.
Contrast this with a Manchester bus on the far side of Stockport showing “Piccadilly”. You had to know it was a Manchester bus to know it was going to Manchester. I think the worst example of this I ever came across was much more recently, when I saw a GM Buses North vehicle somewhere between Bury and Ramsbottom showing “Arndale” (Arndale being the name of a Manchester bus station at that time, never mind the fact that there were Arndale shopping centres in other locations as well).

Peter Williamson


20/02/13 – 15:39

The city of Manchester, unlike many other cities, was surrounded by a large number of historically older authorities (the Hundred of Salford outdates Manchester as an area of local government by 900 or so years and once incorporated the whole of Manchester) and these have always fought against being subsumed into what became the leading industrial, financial and legislative authority in the area whilst in many ways being dependant on the city for the provision of regionally useful services and places of employment.
This has led to a number of oddities with regard to transport. The Salford use of Manchester on destination screens for Salford buses terminating at Victoria Bus station (ditto Leigh, Bolton and LUT vehicles using the adjacent Greengate as a terminus)has already been mentioned, though this was officially restricted to Salford routes originating outside of Salford. Salford buses operating from within their city boundaries displayed Victoria, in itself totally misleading and an oddity the bus station so named was closer to Exchange Station than Manchester Victoria Station.
Salford thus capitalised on the proximity of the boundary formed by the River Irwell to Manchester’s city centre, a centre being something Salford didn’t possess.
Then there was the case of Manchester Docks. The nine docks of the Port of Manchester at the eastern end of the ship canal were basically in Salford and Stretford, only one dock being within the Manchester city boundary. Salford buses bound for the dock gates in Salford neither recognised the Manchester part of the title, nor tried to claim the docks for their city, stubbornly just showing DOCKS in block capitals as a destination.
Salford buses heading for the inner areas of Trafford Park, which was in Stretford, would display the destination as a road name, such as Tenax Rd, whereas Manchester would display both Trafford Park and the point in the Park to which they were going.
There was little love lost between the Frederick Rd Salford and Piccadilly Manchester head offices. Charles Baroth taking over a run down fleet promptly changed the livery from a very Manchester like red and white to the dark green and cream and changed the name of the department displayed on the buses from Salford Corporation to Salford City Transport – making a very definite point. He and Manchester’s Albert Neal never really seemed to get along – an antipathy that lasted from the mid 1940s to the early 1960s.
Slightly before Salford changed to the green livery, Bury changed from vermillion and cream to a light green and cream. This led to a story about the stranger heading for Patricroft, an area on the western edge of Salford’s territory, who had been correctly directed to Victoria Bus Station and told to take the Peel Green bus. Approaching the bus station from the Cathedral end where the street is above the roof level of the buses on the stands and seeing only red and white buses, he asked a woman on the street where he could get a peel green bus. The woman had noticed the green Bury bus which left from Cannon Street and and with apple peel in mind directed the stranger on a five minute walk to a bus heading nine miles at 90 degrees from the direction the stranger needed to take.

Phil Blinkhorn


20/02/13 – 18:00

I can just remember seeing these near Salford perhaps in the late 60’s: they looked – then- wonderfully vintage in their heritage green livery, a bit like the old WY-York Bible board buses in York.
Presumably the radiators look a bit forward (not only short!) because of the Gardner engine- I don’t recall seeing exposed radiator CVGs as opposed to CVDs: did they have “Daimler” preselectors?

Joe


21/02/13 – 06:28

The Salford crews weren’t pushing the Manchester crews. The 95/96 operations consisted of about an hour of Salford running followed by around the same amount of time by Manchester running throughout the day. Salford running from East Didsbury began about 9 a.m.on a broadly 10 minute headway.
There was no was route to push other than the 40 and for the most part that wasn’t taking the same passengers unless they were going to alight on Kingsway.
The situation altered completely when the Salford front entrance PD2/40’s were introduced in the mid ’60’s. Now they were lively performers and completely outclassed Birchfield’s CVG6’s for speed on the route.

Orla Nutting

Sorry about that Orla


21/02/13 – 06:29

Joe, Manchester had 90 very similar vehicles, all with long radiators and all CVG6s. They also had 100 CVG5s again with exposed long radiators. All the Manchester vehicles had preselector gearboxes as did the Salford vehicles.
Previously Salford had taken 8 CVD6s, again with short radiators and preselector gearboxes.
The shortened radiator had an advantage in as much as the lower part was purely cosmetic and, according to Baroth, suffered from damage so, a double saving was made in terms of new and replacement costs.

Phil Blinkhorn


21/02/13 – 06:30

Joe: I can’t say I’ve ever noticed the radiators on CVG6s being further forward than on other Daimlers, but I suppose it’s possible, as the 6LW was longer than other engines. There are lots of exposed-radiator Daimlers to look at here sct61.org.uk/index/chassis/dv .
Yes, they did have Daimler preselectors, with a quadrant selector under the steering wheel, just like Daimler cars.

Peter Williamson


21/02/13 – 06:31

I have distinct memories of seeing Bury buses in Bolton, on the 52 and 23T, but only vague memories of Salford buses there, as Phil B mentions above. Was that the 8?

Pete Davies


21/02/13 – 06:32

Joe – These Salford Daimlers had preselector gearboxes. I understand the short radiators were used to minimise damage to the bottom part of the radiator grill.

Michael Elliott


21/02/13 – 06:33

Have you noticed how many English cities seem to go in pairs?
Manchester – Salford
Liverpool – Birkenhead
Newcastle – Gateshead
Birmingham – Wolverhampton
Leeds – Bradford
Gloucester – Cheltenham
Southampton – Portsmouth

Jim Hepburn


21/02/13 – 08:45

Pete, Salford had two routes to Bolton. The 8 and the 12, the latter taking a circuitous route via Daubhill, Little Hulton, Walkden, Roe Green and Worsley taking a scheduled 55minutes against the rather tightly timed 38 minutes of the more direct 8.

Phil Blinkhorn


21/02/13 – 08:45

Jim, an interesting comment. I can’t answer for the other places, but the only pairings that most folk in Southampton and Portsmouth would acknowledge are that they are both in the geographical (but not administrative) county of Hampshire, and that they have the same bus company (Worst).
On the sporting front, it doesn’t happen now because they are in different leagues, but the “South Coast Derby” between the two always required an even heavier Police presence than most other matches. It’s as bad as Rangers and Celtic!

Pete Davies


21/02/13 – 11:14

Orla, you have more knowledge of the 95/96 workings than I but something must have been going on as, from a very limited personal use of the Salford CVG6s (a number of trips on the tightly timed #8 to Bolton and back and one trip to and from Warrington on the #10) I recall they were smooth, reasonably quick and in places gave a fair turn of speed.
At one period I used to have to use the Manchester versions on the #47/48 and they could certainly motor.

Phil Blinkhorn


21/02/13 – 11:15

Easter 1957 a school pal and I travelled from Reading to Grimsby and back via Salford, all on service buses.
Quite apart from the fascinating stuff we saw and rode on the way up, across and back down again, the Stockport and Manchester Crossleys made a great impression, and so did the great variety of operators working into Manchester, but I remember being especially taken by those lovely Salford Daimlers with their straight staircases, destination-winder trunnions and the no-nonsense, upright Metro-Cammell bodies. They also seemed to get a move on, but I didn’t like the way at least one of the drivers let the gear pedal smartly up between changes, without any adjustment of engine revs, resulting in a bang and a jerk. To have lasted so long with such rough treatment these wonderfully characterful vehicles must have been as solidly-built as they looked–or were the fitters kept busy?

Ian Thompson


21/02/13 – 11:17

Thanks Peter: I can spend many a happy hour now trying to work out the relationship between CVD/G/A’s , their radiators and the front dumb irons. Was it the body builders’ variable fronts, or did Daimler provide a deeper radiator tank cover to bridge the G gap. I bet someone knows! In the meantime, I’ll keep puzzling.

Joe


21/02/13 – 16:00

Interesting comments about destinations and cross-boundary rivalry. I read that Salford always put their newest buses on the 15, which ran to Piccadilly, to impress their neighbours “across the river”.
When I worked for GMPTE a few years ago, buses were using Exchange Bus Station, which was on the site of the old Victoria Bus Station (of course by then Exchange railway station was long gone).
This has now been superseded by Shudehill Bus Station, which is actually in Manchester, and the whole area around Victoria Bridge Street is being redeveloped. And yes, I agree about “Arndale”!

Geoff Kerr


22/02/13 – 06:23

I drove for Salford from 1966 to 1968, primarily on the 95/96 route to East Didsbury from Whitefield always with the Daimler pre select, they took some getting used to and, they were abused by a lot of drivers throwing standing passengers backward through their violent gear change.
On the radiator subject I only ever remember the radiator was far forward and was informed at the time it was because of the longer engine.
My first encounter with the forward entrance Leylands was on the 73 from Whitefield to Victoria, a pleasure to drive.

David J Henighan


22/02/13 – 06:24

Ian Thompson, you’ve let yourself in for it now! Your epic trip from Reading to Grimsby via Salford sounds worthy of an article, describing route, rolling stock and how long it took! Might we be hearing from you shortly? Pleaaaaase ?

Stephen Ford


22/02/13 – 09:49

David, I’m rather amazed by your remarks re driving the Daimlers. Now, first off, I’ll acknowledge I have never driven a Daimler preselect bus but I have driven preselectors on other vehicles and also, during the last 48 years, a vast range of different gear boxes, rarely with any problem.
Given that the Daimlers had not only been in the fleet for 16 years by the time you started but for the majority of those years had been the bulk of the fleet and given newer Daimlers with preselector boxes had entered the fleet in the early 1960s, I have to ask where the fault lay – bad maintenance or poor driver training after the departure of Charles Baroth?

Phil Blinkhorn


22/02/13 – 10:16

Stephen: the brains behind the Reading-Grimsby trip was Chris Bates, who planned it all to a tee and took plenty of photographs. We stayed with his relatives in Nuneaton, Hazel Grove and Grimsby, without whose kindness we couldn’t have done it. Chris repeated the trip in 1958 with Graham Low (who’s taken thousands of bus photos since the mid fifties) and that trip made the subject of an excellent presentation they gave at an Oxford enthusiasts’ society meeting. I’ll suggest to them that we do a joint article.
Delights that especially stick in my mind included the Coventry and Leicester fleets, including the Leicester 6-wheel Renown; SONs and FEDDs with Midland Red and Trent; the stone-walled Derbyshire countryside; North Western’s then fairly new Atkinson Alphas; the staggering variety of municipalities and companies that shared territory in Lancashire and Yorkshire; at Grimsby an AEC Q and mid-thirties AEC Regents rebodied with earlier piano-front centre-entrance bodies; the Cleethorpes trolleybuses; sedate progress through the flat lands of Lincolnshire in a grunting Bristol SC4LK…
Thanks for the idea: I’ll see what we can come up with!

Ian Thompson


22/02/13 – 14:06

The radiator on this one doesn’t look like a Daimler radiator at all, although I’m sure it is but there appears to be a badge on the top which I’ve never seen on a Daimler fluted radiator before. I agree it appears to be thicker too, although I don’t see why it should be, other operators specified the Gardner 6LW which was accommodated without difficulty, notably SHMD, although I wonder if in some cases, the bonnet and radiator were moved forward, whereas in others, the bulkhead was moved backwards.

Chris Barker


22/02/13 – 14:51

Charles Baroth had all manufacturers’ badges removed from all makes and replaced by a standard badge which had a green background and Salford City Transport in cream.
There was no difference in the bonnet/radiator length between the Salford Phoenix bodied CVGG6s and those supplied to Manchester.

Phil Blinkhorn


23/02/13 – 07:53

The Manchester Phoenixes had their engines derated to 100bhp at 1650rpm. From my experience of the Salford ones I would imagine them to be the full 112 at 1700.
I know exactly what David means about violent gear changes, and it wasn’t a fault with the vehicles or necessarily driver training. No matter what training you give a driver, if he wants to ignore it he will. I used the Manchester Phoenixes regularly in the rush hour, and it did seem as if some drivers took delight in seeing how many standing passengers they could catapult on to the platform when changing from first to second! This was something probably unique to the combination of 6LW engine and spring-operated gearbox, since AEC Regent IIIs had air-operated gearboxes, and other engines packed less of a punch at low revs.

Peter Williamson


23/02/13 – 10:35

Salford’s engines were left at their original rating whereas Manchester’s were originally derated to 91.5bhp being partially uprated to 100bhp with the K upgrade in 1953 which amplifies the oddity of Orla’s experience on the 95/96.

Peter Williamsons’s comments on the spring v air operated preselector boxes begs a question – from 1949 Manchester’s orders were split between Leyland and Daimler, Salford had a preponderance of Daimlers. There will always be “rogue” drivers but with large numbers of Daimlers operating in the area was the misuse of the gear change system widespread? If it was there surely would have been complaints to the Manchester Evening News Postbag – always a barometer of public opinion – and the MEN was no friend of either transport department, always willing to “have a go”, but I can’t remember seeing any reaction in its pages until complaints about snatched changes when the Atlanteans started work for MCTD from Sharston depot.

Phil Blinkhorn


26/02/13 – 05:46

I’ve noted the comments on ‘rough’ gear changes with preselector transmissions. I’ve driven both air operated and spring operated preselectors and there is still a need to match road and engine speed when making gear changes to ensure a smooth change. Admittedly preselectors, and semi automatics for that matter, are more accommodating in this respect, hence a ‘jerky’ change, than a ‘crash’ gearbox where a mismatching of engine and road speed results in a nasty noise from the gearbox. With a synchromesh gearbox there is still a need to match engine and road speed to ensure a smooth change and a mismatching results in a rough change such as can happen with a change down from, say, third to second without making sure that the road speed is right for such a change.

Michael Elliott


26/02/13 – 08:27

With reference to the above comment about MCTD’s Atlanteans (the inference being these were MCTD’s first) entering service from Northenden depot (which, of course, was actually at Sharston) I am sure I have seen another reference to this elsewhere on this forum, the suggestion being that Northendsen was chosen as the Atlanteans’ first depot since, Northenden being renowned for being the most militant depot, if the Atlanteans were accepted there they would be accepted anywhere.
It is my recollection that it was reported in ‘Buses Illustrated’ at the time that the Atlanteans had entered service on route 50 (in those days, Albert Square to East Didsbury) operating from Birchfields Road depot – which route 50 passed. Is this not correct?

David Call


26/02/13 – 10:10

The Atlanteans aka the ‘Red Dragons’ as the Manchester Evening News named them, were first employed from the Northenden garage on route 101, the limited stop service from Greenbrow Rd, Wythenshawe to Piccadilly. Their introduction there was delayed by several months until the unions were pacified. At the time, as a schoolboy in Manchester we were very jealous of the lads who used this service on these ultra modern buses as we then saw them whilst we had to content ourselves with ancient looking Crossleys (how times change).
Imagine my delight when, shortly afterwards, they were employed on the, local to me, route 40 (it didn’t become the 50 until the Wilmslow Rd corridor renumbering farce of January 1968) though I don’t recall them being fielded by Birchfields Rd garage (primarily a Crossley and Daimler depot then) but rather by Parrs Wood garage (the Leyland depot) at their East Didsbury terminus.

Orla Nutting


26/02/13 – 10:11

The situation regarding the introduction of the MCTD Atlanteans was as follows:
The Princess Rd corridor serving the various estates which made up the Wythenshawe overspill – at the time the largest local authority housing development in Europe – was MCTD’s most intense operation in the late 1950s.
In mid 1957 the Transport Committee approved an order for 110 PD2s with the revised Orion bodywork that MCW and MCTD had been working on for around 2 years. Leyland made much of the order in its advertising, particularly as there was no balancing order for Daimlers. All but 10 of the vehicles were delivered in the financial year 1958/9. The order for the remaining 10 was changed to Atlanteans with MCW bodies with the intention of running them on the Wythenshawe routes to assess the value of the extra capacity and the reduction in loading times given the driver could control the platform and doors.
When the order was announced the union asked for negotiations regarding the extra capacity and the extra responsibilities of the driver. As it was Sharston was the most militant depot so the adding of the vehicles to its stock in November and December 1959 in the absence of an agreement precipitated an official dispute. No drivers would touch the vehicles so their rare appearance on the roads of south Manchester was in the hands of inspectors or members of the engineering staff. I made a number of visits to the depot at the time and was able to have a good look around them (inside and out) due to the generosity of the foreman.
It took until April 1960 to conclude negotiations leading to an agreement covering all types of large capacity vehicles across the Department.
In April 1960 the 10 Atlanteans commenced work on the 101 from Piccadilly to Newall Green. Over the following months they were used on other Princess Rd services and also the 50 which in those days was the route number of the Piccadilly to Brooklands via Northenden service.
In 1961 they all moved to Parrs Wood and were used on the 40 Albert Sq to Parrs Wood. In 1963 they moved to Queens Rd. They were not stabled at Birchfields though they did visit the depot in 1966/7 when the BUT/Burlingham trolleybuses were withdrawn to have their uncomfortable low backed seats replaced by those from the trollies.

Phil Blinkhorn


26/02/13 – 13:35

Rough gear changing with any type of gearbox is almost invariably down to driver attitude rather than mechanical deficiency. Only when facing uphill is it necessary to start in first gear; second gear is entirely capable of level starts with quality buses. With crash/constant mesh gearboxes, it repays the driver to try to double declutch properly to make sensible progress, and voluble protests from such gearboxes are a testament to driver incompetence. With preselectors (and later with semi automatics) lazy drivers would keep the right foot down on the accelerator whilst operating the gear change pedal (or gear selector). The result With preselectors was a violent jolt to the transmission. Semi automatics would give a less severe jerk, but the fluid coupling would suffer eventually from having to absorb, totally unnecessarily, the forces of such abuse. When fully automatic transmissions began to appear, these initially incorporated extra buttons/selector positions that allowed the driver to hold intermediate gears, but misuse by a minority has now rendered this feature to history with most modern buses. Nowadays, the driver has no direct control over the gearbox in the majority of present day large passenger vehicles.

Roger Cox


26/02/13 – 15:24

Oh how I agree with you, Roger. The thing that annoys me most with modern coaches is that little notice which reminds me “ALWAYS” start in first gear. In my lessons I was taught to start in second and only use first for uphill starts or when heavily laden, and start in third when going downhill. All these I did on test and was duly passed! Are modern coaches, including Setras and Volvos, quite so bad that they must ALWAYS be started in first gear? [Mind you, I am constantly surprised when, at the end of a job, passengers on the way out commend me for having given them a nice, or a smooth, drive. What on earth do all the other drivers do?]

David Oldfield


27/02/13 – 05:56

I passed my test on vehicle with a crash box ‘1952 Weymann bodied Guy Arab III’ the instructor taught us how to go through the box from bottom to top and back down again, only using the clutch to pull away and come to a halt. When it came to semi auto, we were told to treat it the same way you would if it had a clutch, i.e. lift your foot, pause in neutral and give it a few revs if changing down. Driven properly a manual or semi auto box will ALWAYS give a better ride than an automatic, plus drivers are equipped with MKI eyeball which can give advanced warning of gear changes which no sensor ever can

Ronnie Hoye


27/02/13 – 05:58

If you were the individual who had to change a clutch due to drivers not using all the gears provided, at your own expense, I’m sure you’d be a bit more canny about your second gear setoffs.
Driving schools do have their own agendas, and perhaps taught drivers to make fewer gearchanges so that the potential for getting them wrong was reduced. Bear in mind also that vehicles generally were lower powered than they are today, had fewer gears, had a relatively low top speed, and had components that were generally over-engineered. While 2nd or even 3rd gear setoffs are clearly possible it is neither best practice nor mechanically sympathetic.
For example a Leyland PS2/PD2 could have had a choice of three rear axle ratios which, with a standard O.600 engine and four speed gearbox, could have a top speed of approx 30, 40 or 50 mph. I look after two such vehicles capable of either 40 or 50 – should any driver be seen setting off in 2nd gear in either, they would not be driving very far !
I took my test in the faster vehicle and was expected to use all gears both up and down the box.
In the past there wasn’t a minimum speed limit for a test vehicle and I know of vehicles being fitted with low speed diffs so that trainees would only need to use the top three gears – if the top two had synchromesh, how easy would they be to use. But then consider this, having passed their test in a double decker with a top speed of 30mph they could then jump in a six wheel Neoplan Skyliner and head off down the motorway to Spain. Don’t laugh, it happened regularly in Leeds in the eighties. Where was the sense in that ?
When riding in preserved vehicles of the types that feature heavily on this site it makes me cringe when novice drivers are let loose with the general public on board happily crunching gears, coasting in neutral around tightening bends, roundabouts etc, staying in top gear while descending hills etc.
We should be campaigning for quality and competence and then the vehicles we all enjoy will continue getting out & about and not lie broken in the corners of sheds or, worse still, get consigned to the breakers yards.

MikeB


28/02/13 – 05:52

In response to the above, of course you were expected to use all the gears on test. So was I, and, also, I had to show that I could bring a bus to a halt using all the gears in succession, but no brakes, in the event of brake failure. It wasn’t expected that this should be the stopping practice in normal service, though. Pulling away in a bus with clutch and conventional gearbox is entirely possible in second gear without undue clutch slip. One can feel the clutch engaging almost immediately at very low revs, and release the pedal accordingly. In many gearboxes, the first gear was a crawler, and if the bus was started in that gear, by the time that the revs had died and double declutching had taken place, the vehicle would have come to a virtual standstill. On the AEC Reliance with five speed synchromesh box, first gear could be engaged only by lifting the gearstick over a protective “ledge”. Changing down from second whilst on the move would have been impossible without removing both hands from the steering wheel. I am satisfied that the designer regarded first as a crawler only, and did not expect first to be used for moving away in normal service. Of course, clutch abuse took place in every bus fleet with conventional transmissions – we have shown above that every fleet has its rogues – but second gear starts, properly effected, would not, in themselves, have caused greater clutch wear. No doubt your view may well have been shared by some fleet engineers, but, in 43 years in the bus industry, in various roles up to management level, during which I drove a great many vehicle types, I did not hear that opinion expressed by an engineer in the undertakings that I worked for.

Roger Cox


28/02/13 – 08:03

Thank you, Roger.

David Oldfield


28/02/13 – 11:07

I’ve only driven buses under L plates or around large depot yards but I have 48 years driving experience around the world in a wide range of cars and vans/trucks up to 7.5 tonnes amassing almost 1.5 million miles in that time.
I was taught to drive by a police instructor and a bus driver who was also an instructor for his employer. They taught me that driving was both an art and a science, an appreciation sadly lacking in many of today’s motorists and so called “professional” drivers.
I was taught that correct use of the gear box and planning gear changes was paramount, especially with the 3 speed gear box – no synchro on 1st – in the upright Ford Popular I owned and learned to drive on.
Even before I learned to drive, when talking to bus drivers, it became apparent that taking off in 2nd was normal practice as the gearing and axle ratios were such that 1st was for use only on hills or when fully loaded. From the very limited driving experience I have on crash and synchro geared buses (PD2, Bedford VAM, Royal Tiger and Leopard) I was always told to start in 2nd. I once did a day’s familiarisation/assessment course in the early 1990s with a driver training school when I considered obtaining a licence to do weekend coach driving, an aspiration abandoned when my business picked up, and 2nd gear starts were advocated as the norm though the times when 1st should be used and when to use 1st on the test were outlined.
Driving today’s automatics is a doddle though collecting fares, dealing with queries and handling the public whilst safely conducting the vehicle through today’s traffic certainly isn’t. I would assume that, just as I only drive automatics when in the USA as they take some of the fun and skill out of driving, a certain amount of skill has been lost as the automatic box has taken over to balance the increased workload on the bus driver and when those boxes come into the workshop needing attention they are far more complex and expensive to repair than a clutch or a broken crash box.

Phil Blinkhorn


28/02/13 – 11:08

That’s an interesting observation about first gear, Roger. In cars of the middling yesteryear first gear often had no synchromesh and was harder to engage: my Mother always set off in second. Early Austin Westminsters only had three forward gears and I think any one would do. Bristol K’s- possibly 6A’s would rev furiously on the level for little result in first and clearly wanted to start in second.

Joe


01/03/13 – 05:55

Irrespective of how an individual might have been instructed to drive and by whom I for one cannot accept why any bus loving enthusiast would want to inflict upon any surviving classic bus of any make treatment which if even executed with care and consideration could help to shorten its already extended life.
Is it not incumbent of any genuine enthusiast preservationist to extend the working life of our current public transport heritage by treating it in a caring and considerate manner?
Consideration for me would mean setting off in first gear although not necessarily in crawler where fitted. We must not forget some of the parts which are fitted to many of our current classics will no longer be available should repairs be necessary so why treat them in a manner which could potentially hasten the demise of any preserved bus or coach.

Andrew Beever


01/03/13 – 05:56

The trick for engaging a non synchromesh first gear on a gearbox with synchromesh on the higher gears is to engage initially one of the higher (synchronised) gears to better match the speeds of the mainshaft and layshaft, and then swiftly move into the desired first ratio, keeping the clutch down all the time. There cannot be many gearboxes of this type on modern cars (or buses), but the same method is good practice for engaging reverse on today’s gearboxes. How often do we hear many motorists, who are clearly unsympathetic towards machinery, start a cold engine (which then revs at a higher speed than it does when settled) and then slam the transmission into reverse provoking audible protest from the cogs? Engaging a forward gear first makes clean engagement of reverse rather easier. I even adopted this procedure on semi automatic buses. After idling in neutral at a stop, I would engage top gear and then the starting gear to avoid the jolt that always occurred if the engine idling speed was absorbed by the low ratio.
Getting back to the first v second gear issue, I can fully understand Mike B’s concern in relation to preserved vehicles. These must be treated with a high degree of respect, and it is inevitable that some of today’s volunteer drivers simply cannot acquire the experience required to handle these machines with the level of assurance or accomplishment possessed by good, seasoned PSV drivers of the past. Every stratagem should be employed to minimise mechanical stresses on our heritage vehicles, and caution is entirely warranted. Sadly, a lack of caution is all too prevalent with historic aircraft, where over exuberance at air displays has sometimes had devastating results.

Roger Cox


01/03/13 – 08:14

Roger has succinctly laid out the proper and approved method of driving adhered to by thousands of good drivers over many years. Andrew seems to have deliberately misunderstood him. Of course we don’t treat 40, 50, 60 year old buses in the same way we would would when they were new. I am a PCV/PSV driver and advanced motorist and approach each individual vehicle I drive with sympathy. I was going to keep quiet on this one, but I can’t let these comments slip by un-noted.

David Oldfield


Your last couple of sentences are so right, Roger. It’s as bad, if not worse, with old planes where a misjudgement writes off the whole aircraft. I’ve not forgotten our sole Blenheim which had taken years to assemble, being severely damaged by a gung-ho pilot who’d had nothing to do with the restoration. It took the poor owners and enthusiasts years to put it back into flying order. How they had the courage and self-discipline to do it amazes me, after such a setback.

Chris Hebbron


01/03/13 – 08:16

Andrew, taking care and careful driving of preserved vehicles and discussing what went on/goes on in service – which is the what I thought we were discussing – are two different matters.

Mike B, in his last sentence, added in the handling of preserved vehicles. These, of course, should be driven correctly and correctly may well mean in a different manner to that which the outside observer feels is correct.
Roger’s earlier analysis of the use of second gear in normal service earlier in the thread matches my observations of the industry over a 50+ year period and I fully endorse his remarks regarding the handling of preserved aircraft at airshows. I’ve seen too many crashes and lost a number of friends and acquaintances due to such handling.

Phil Blinkhorn


02/03/13 – 07:11

Yesterday I said that I was not that worried as to why or how an individual was taught to drive a PSV in a particular way and whatever the merits of differing approaches and styles were back in the 1950’s, 1960’s or even into the 1970’s unless the style of driving back then impacts on the way the current preserved buses especially those with a conventional gearbox are driven then only best practice is acceptable.
Being active in the preservation field we are faced on an all too frequent basis when so called PSV drivers with long careers in the public passenger service come along with a driving technique which is totally unsuitable for preserved buses.
These are the ones who come along quoting that I used to drive for whoever in whenever and we had so many of these and we would always set off in second gear. Setting off in second gear might have been all well and good back then in a service bus when the speed was limited with a low ratio differential. However, today an individual with that mind set behind the wheel of a preserved bus where the differential is often of a higher ratio predominately to aid getting to and from rallies then setting off in second gear isn’t an acceptable practice. Now try as we may there is just no changing the way some of these so called experts are going to drive. So was it good practice to set off in second gear did it set an acceptable standard for me I’m afraid it wasn’t especially when this practice is then applied unilaterally by some even when in a preserved bus

Andrew Beever


02/03/13 – 14:02

Andrew, why are you using pejorative language? This is a friendly and discursive forum open to all sorts of views and sometimes friendly disagreements. To call drivers with years of experience “so called experts” is grossly unfair. They drove those often poorly equipped vehicles, often for basic pay, and learned how to get the best out of those vehicles for their employer, their passengers and themselves.
I can understand frustration IF you explain not just that you want one of your vehicles driven in a certain way but why, and then you are ignored, but it seems to me that fitting different gearing or axles to facilitate running to and from rallies is not preservation in the true sense as the vehicle is not in its original form. What you are doing is preserving the look of the visible vehicle, i.e. the body and visible mechanical parts to represent what the vehicle looked like at a particular time.
Nothing wrong with that so long as the distinction is made between a truly preserved vehicle with the original gearing/engine/performance, body (or totally accurate modern copies) and a vehicle which, to represent a type and facilitate easier handling/mobility, has been modified.
As I pointed in another thread where Orla Nutting stated that the engine and gearbox on the preserved Stockport Tiger Cub had been replaced by a Royal Tiger engine and Albion 3 speed box, it will sound very different to the original.
I’ve every respect for people who spend selfless hours and a great deal of money to represent, either in fully or partially preserved form, vehicles and machinery of all kinds from what was once a very lively industrial base. Please don’t spoil that respect by insulting those that had to use the machinery on a day to day basis and know far better than you how it had to be used. If you treat them with respect most of them will listen and give back to you in kind. Those that don’t obviously won’t drive for you again.

Phil Blinkhorn


03/03/13 – 10:55

Good point well put, Phil, its a bit like the axe in the museum that’s only had two heads and three handles, but it looks original.

Ronnie Hoye


03/03/13 – 16:46

It does appear to me that the preserved vehicle fraternity, to whom we are all extremely grateful for their tireless endeavour and commitment in maintaining our transport heritage, are rather missing the point here. All the other contributors above have drawn the distinction between the realities of everyday operation in the past and the careful preservation in the present. When vehicles such as these were in full passenger carrying service they ran out at something like 5 o’clock in the morning and toiled ceaselessly with a succession of crews all day up to around midnight, day after day, year upon year. Their drivers would handle these buses in concentrated spells of four to five and a half hours at a time, carrying very heavy passenger loads on tightly scheduled routes, often with six or more stops to the mile. These drivers acquired a degree of familiarity and skill with their machinery, together with a commensurate respect, that cannot be dismissed as “so called”. They spent more time behind the wheel of a bus in a week than the average enthusiast does in a year. This is a world away from the present day preservationist movement, where, quite rightly, discretion is the better part of almost everything else. To hark back to the aviation analogy, fully bomb loaded Stirlings, Halifaxes and Lancasters would take off in the blackness of night, often in the foulest weather, and fly far into Germany, taking evasive action against night fighters and flak before dropping their bombs and facing a similar set of hazards on the return trip. This is a far cry from a present day doddle round Duxford in a Dragon Rapide during a sun drenched summer afternoon.

Roger Cox


04/03/13 – 07:38

As I said above, Thank you Roger and Phil.

David Oldfield


04/03/13 – 07:38

Surely it is all a matter of what gear/differential ratios and what power and torque output are provided on the individual vehicle, One operator’s PD2 would be entirely differently geared to another’s PD2. It would depend on the local terrain and what type of service it was to be used on – frequently stopping or long, only occasionally stopping interurban. There is simply not a one-size-fits-all style of driving.
Mike B. suggested that Driving Schools had their own agendas and may have taught their trainees to make fewer gear changes in order that this would reduce the likelihood of making mistakes (so presumably maximising test pass results). I was a PSV/PCV Instructor for 18 years and knew all the instructors at the various depots in our region of the company as well as getting to meet many others from other companies around the country. I can assure him that this was not the case at all. We all taught trainees to demonstrate Vehicle Sympathy, appropriate to the individual vehicle and circumstances.

John Stringer


22/09/13 – 14:31

How times have changed when I started working at Fredrick Road in 1970 under Salford Corp, as a conductor it was a joy I went driving in 1972 on all the old back loaders to the newer ones in 1997 from having to push and pull the steering wheel round and now you could turn it with one finger, happy days

Tony Howard


03/11/13 – 08:58

Second gear or first gear when moving off,……part of the PCV Diving test is an exercise in moving away downhill and the correct method is to engage second gear release the handbrake holding the vehicle on the foot brake then transfer your foot to the accelerator and move away. I think anywhere a bus rolls forward when brake released can be moved away in second gear.

Michael Crofts


16/11/15 – 15:18

Back to the FRJ Daimlers that dominated the Salford fleet during my student days in Manchester. Have any of them survived into preservation? I noted the particular Salford feature of extended indicator handles, allowing the conductor to turn them while standing on the road, unlike my experience during summer holiday work with PD2’s of IOM Road Services, where in order to reach the handle, I had to place the right foot in a stirrup alongside the radiator, left foot along the top edge of the number plate and use the left hand to hold on to a handle on the cab side. I recall that , in contrast to Manchester, Salford employed a significant number of ‘clippies’, and so wonder if this feature was to save them the indignity (or even impossibility for the shorter ones) of climbing across the front of the vehicle to reach the handles. Manchester’s indicators (requiring 4 handles rather that Salford’s 2) and those of many other operators were inside the driver’s cab; I wonder why Salford didn’t do likewise?

M Jones


17/11/15 – 06:46

I am pretty sure that 511(FRJ 511) is still in preservation somewhere, but not sure where. Incidentally, the first Salford Atlanteans and Fleetlines (and maybe other operators) had a rear service number. This was changed by opening a step on the rear bustle in order to reach the handles, hopefully with the driver’s knowledge that you were there!

John Hodkinson


17/11/15 – 06:46

In answer to M Jones, FRJ 511 features in the 2012 PSVC listing, as being with the 4100 Group in Manchester.

Pete Davies


23/11/15 – 08:17

Salford city transport never had advertising on it’s buses..but just before s.e.l.n.e.c..with orange buses..did Salford advertise on Atlanteans

Harry


23/11/15 – 09:39

Salford’s Transport Committee approved the use of adverts on its vehicles and these started to appear in May 1968. There are pictures in Manchester and Salford A Century of Municipal Transport in the Glory Days series of publications of a Phoenix bodied CVG6 and an Atlantean carrying ads, the former in summer 1968, the latter in May 1969. In addition there is a photo of a PD2 with an ad at Agecroft. Undated it is in full Salford livery with its Salford fleet number and as the photos tend to be in sequence, it falls well before any hint of SELNEC.
There is an oddity in the book. A photo of 151, the first PD2, is shown at the Weaste terminus of service 3. This purports to have been taken in 1963. The photo is almost head on but the nearside between decks panels are covered by an advert of some kind which, though the content cannot be discerned, is a white background with red and possibly blue print. Page 82 of the book refers for those who have a copy.

Phil Blinkhorn


23/11/15 – 11:30

Can I please ask what a ‘Phoenix’ body is? I have never come across one of these.

Stephen Howarth


23/11/15 – 14:07

Phil, with reference to the adverts on Salford 151, the most helpful photos I could find were in Henry Conn’s part 9 of British Buses, Trams & Trolleybuses 1950s-1970s.(page 112). Other possible clues are on the cover & page117 of Eric Gray’s SCT.

Andrew Gosling


23/11/15 – 14:08

The heading photo is a Phoenix body.

Phil Blinkhorn


23/11/15 – 14:43

Andrew, please give details as I don’t have the publications.

Phil Blinkhorn


23/11/15 – 14:44

Sorry to labour the point, but is the Phoenix name then, a design name like the Farringdon, or the Orion body style names? As I said I have never heard of it. I must have been living in a vacuum for 60+ years.

Stephen Howarth


24/11/15 – 06:17

Yes Stephen, it is a design name. It has some commonality to the Metro-Cammell Birmingham standard design of the period.

Phil Blinkhorn


24/11/15 – 06:20

Phil,the two books are:

Salford City Transport, Edward Gray, TPC April 1975, ISBN 0 903839 06 7.

British Buses, Trams & Trolleybuses 1950s-1970s, ISBN 978 185794 397 9
Part 9 Greater Manchester, Lancashire & Cumbria, Henry Conn, Silver Link Publishing 2012.

The cover of the first book shows a PD2 in Selnec days with an advert for the Leek & Westbourne building society (forerunner to Britannia). This is basically red with white lettering, and also appears in the page117 view of Victoria (Green Selnec PD2). In book 2 on page 112 this advert again appears, together with a heating advert which I have failed to decipher but the colours seem right.
There is beer advert carried by MCTD 3484 on page 41 of Stewart Brown’s Greater Manchester Buses,Capital Transport 1995 ISBN185414 174 0 which looks a possible answer for Salford 151.

Andrew Gosling


24/11/15 – 06:21

Here is a superb photo of 511 (FRJ511)with the blurb also stating that it’s in the care of the 4100 group. www.ipernity.com/doc/

Chris Hebbron


24/11/15 – 08:57

Stephen, the Phoenix name came from the way this fleet of Daimlers allowed Salford to rise out of the ashes of what had been a really run-down fleet into one in which everybody could have considerable pride. I think it was only an unofficial name and would only apply to Salford due to the circumstances.

David Beilby


24/11/15 – 09:31

Stephen, you’re not alone. I’ve never heard of the Phoenix body either, and my period of ignorance extends to 70+ years.

Roger Cox


24/11/15 – 13:51

Is this a Victory Daimler with a Phoenix body raised from the ashes of war-time maintenance? ? Very poetic.

Joe


25/11/15 – 07:04

David, I doubt very much that the Phoenix name had anything to do with Salford and its regeneration under Charles Baroth.
I first came across the name in the late 1950s on a tour of Hyde Rd works when a number of Manchester’s first batch of their variation of the body type were undergoing maintenance. These differed in detail, such as stairs and radiator, from the Salford vehicles but, as Eyre and Heaps say on page 351 of the Manchester Bus, “the body design was Metro Cammell’s standard Phoenix design with only minor modifications to Manchester’s specification”

Phil Blinkhorn


25/11/15 – 07:05

I think that I would just accept that the date in M&S Glory Days is incorrect and maybe a typo for 1968. The nearside mudguard of the bus looks to be slightly misshapen which might suggest that it is a post Baroth picture. The picture of 253 on page 86 of the same book carries an advert for solid fuel fires, the strapline for which is ‘Welcome Home to the living fire that you know is cheaper to run’ This was definitely an advert borne in the early days of SELNEC, 1970, and also featured on ex-Bury buses in Henry Conn’s wonderful book as well as Salford’s 254 as noted by Andrew Gosling.

As I understand it, the term ‘Phoenix’ was used by Metro-Cammell to describe one of its designs. It’s not a Daimler term. It isn’t included under Metro-Cammell in the PSV Circle listings of body codes (though there is a ‘Phoenix’ with body code PIC which maybe no relation whatsoever). Although Met-Camm produced other bodies very similar to the Manchester and Salford bodies, most notably for BCT and West Bromwich the term ‘Phoenix’ only seems to be applied to those for the two Lancashire undertakings. ‘The Manchester Bus’, (Heaps & Eyres) makes several references to the term.

Orla Nutting


25/11/15 – 11:38

I wonder – Could the ‘brand name’ Phoenix be a fore-runner of the Orion?

Pete Davies


04/12/15 – 06:01

Like others I only came to know the Phoenix name late in life, but since then have always assumed it to be an invention of MCW, the joint marketing division of Metro-Cammell and Weymann until manufacturing was moved under its wing in 1966. MCW had a tendency to use names related to ancient mythology: Hermes was a Greek god; Orion was a huntsman; Aurora was the Roman goddess of dawn; Phoenix was a mythological bird. Leyland did likewise with Titan and Atlantean, so their combined effort to produce the Olympic was a marriage made in ancient Greek heaven (on top of Mount Olympus, where the Greek gods lived).

Peter Williamson


17/07/17 – 05:57

I remember the 56 and 57 Piccadilly to Swinton in the 1970s run by Frederick Rd depot. Both routes terminated at Swinton centre, but the drivers always wound the blind on the ‘top’ road bus to declare’ PENDLEBURY ‘as the destination which was of course wrong as the 57 ran VIA Pendlebury on its way to Swinton. The intermediate blind was 3 lines showing
Pendleton Precinct
Irlams o’th Height
Pendlebury
and of course the desti display should always have been SWINTON and never Pendlebury! The same drivers on the 64 and 66 never showed MONTON GREEN as the desti for the 66 which did precisely the same thing (Piccadilly) – Pendleton- Eccles- Peel Green with the 64 direct VIA Patricroft and the 66 ( like the 57 ) running VIA Monton Green and not terminating there. So the idle practice of showing incorrectly PENDLEBURY would never enter their heads on the 66, they always showed ‘PEEL GREEN New Lane’ on both routes. If going to be a FK garage vilain I would have said at least be CONSISTENT ! Used to look ridiculous the bus entering Swinton via Station Road having already served Pendlebury and declaring the nonsensical destination ‘PENDLEBURY’.

Frank Evans


22/07/17 – 06:40

The official practice of showing Pendlebury as the destination of the 56 (formerly the 77) goes back to Salford City Transport days, when there were no via blinds. There is nothing ‘idle’ about doing what you are told to do.

Peter Williamson


28/07/17 – 16:25

If it’s of interest, there is (or was until recently) an old ‘E’ Reg PD of Salford City being used for promotional purposes here in West Cork, Ireland.
After decommissioning from front line work, I think it went to Scotland as a training vehicle, before doing a similar function in Belgium or Holland. When I last saw it, it was parked up in Clonakilty, boldly advertising Clonakilty Black Pudding, and I can do a bit of ferretting if required or the company has its own website that you could contact for info.

Nick Turner


29/07/17 – 07:13

PS – Having now found the notes I made when I researched this vehicle before, it was JRJ 268E which I have down as Salford/SELNEC before going to E Scottish as a trainer vehicle, followed by a similar stint at Trent. No doubt those with an interest will be able to take it from there?

Nick Turner


Vehicle reminder shot for this posting


17/07/20 – 07:41

I remember these old Daimlers as my first real experience of travelling on a bus of any type. My parents lived off Lancaster Road on the western-most border of the ‘old’ Salford, and the circular services 25 & 30 were our only choice of public transport. As an 11yr old, somehow I always preferred the ‘clockwise’ 30 service to the 25.
I just remember the jerky ride and relative slowness, but was always impressed by the ‘posh’ green livery, the gold angular type-face, and the coats of arms of the City emblazoned on the flanks.

Thomas

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