Midland Red – Old bus photos

Midland Red – SOS SLR – CHA 976 – 1994

Copyright Roger Cox

Midland Red (Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1937
SOS SLR
English Electric C30C

Following on from Paul Haywoods posting of a Midland Red Regent II I thought you may be interested in a picture of one of the types of vehicle produced by the Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Company itself under its SOS manufacturing name, possibly standing for "Shire’s Own Specification" – L. G. Wyndham Shire was the BMMO Chief Engineer – though other interpretations have been suggested. This vehicle is a coach of the SLR type, which stood for "Saloon Low Rolls Royce", indicating a comparison with RR luxury rather than any mechanical involvement of that firm. The SLR coaches, of which fifty examples were produced in 1937, had English Electric C30C bodywork, and were fitted with six cylinder RR2LB petrol engines of 6.373 litres capacity, though these were replaced by Leyland E181 7.4 litre diesels in 1948. All the SLRs were withdrawn in 1955, and, although the spares availability for second hand BMMO manufactured vehicles has always posed problems, some, at least, of these coaches found further work elsewhere, including places like Cyprus and the Canary Islands. This one was photographed in Cambridge in 1959, when it was owned by Sindall, contractors. Unfortunately, on a bright, sunny day, the vehicle was parked with its front end deeply in shade under trees, which rather taxed the limitations of my trusty Brownie 127 of those days.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

20/05/12 – 12:02

I’ve never seen one of these before, in the flesh or in a photo and didn’t even know they existed. They would just have gone out of service by the time I was in the RAF in the Midlands. The radiator grill is pure Maudslay SF40 in style and you can see the follow-on post-war, in the superb lines of the C1’s. I also liked the C5’s, too.
Do you recall, Roger, if it was still in BMMO’s livery? It looks like the post-war livery of red/black, but maybe the pre-war one was different.
1937 would have been EE’s period of diversification into coachbuilding – let’s hope the bodies were sounder built than their earlier attempts with bus bodies! The chassis did not receive new bodies, it would seem, so maybe they were, although maybe they were rebuilt! Of course, coaches were often laid up for the duration of the war, or led easier lives as ambulances. Nice photo, overcoming the challenging conditions very well.

Chris Hebbron

It just so happens Chris there is a C1 and a C5 coming shortly

Peter

20/05/12 – 16:43

Splendid photo, Roger, of a delightful looking machine. It certainly looks to be in its MR black and red coaching livery as I doubt if a contractor would have "thoiled" the cost of a dual-colour repaint. It amazes me that in 1937 MR were building these almost art-deco coaches when the rest of their huge fleet of single-decker buses were little more than throw-backs to the 1920s, still using slot-in destination boards instead of roller blinds. How things changed after the war.

Paul Haywood

20/05/12 – 17:00

Unfortunately, Chris, at this distance in time, I cannot positively recall the livery, but it certainly looks like the standard post war coaching red/black, which this class certainly received – the book "Midland Red Buses" by M.W. Greenwood has two pictures of these coaches in that livery. The bodies must have proved to be reasonably sound as they lasted for 18 years with Midland Red, and then had several more years in secondhand afterlife.

Roger Cox

21/05/12 – 07:40

After their long service life a number of these old-timers were converted to dual-control and continued in the driver training roll. On leaving the RAF in 1957 I actually had my driving assessment on one at Bearwood prior to my PSV test on a D7 three weeks later. Thanks Roger for the added info I was not aware of. Just to continue the "SLR" interest, came across this interesting snippet- //www.flickr.com/photos/ -it is amazing to find these old birds still able to give useful service well after their sell-by date. Looking again at Roger’s post I think the fleet number was 2424, I stand to be corrected – or shot . . . .

Nigel Edwards

21/05/12 – 07:42

There’s a photo of one of these in its original finery in my English Electric gallery at: //davidbeilby.zenfolio.com

David Beilby

21/05/12 – 09:27

Two excellent photos at opposite ends of their lives. Interesting that David’s gleaming one shows the coach with a different grill and stylish art deco SOS badge!
Midland Red’s coaches certainly had style either side of the war.

Chris Hebbron

22/05/12 – 07:51

Nigel, there is a picture of one of these coaches after conversion to a dual control trainer at the following site, which must bring back some memories. //www.flickr.com/photos/geoffsimages/6925352463/
On the subject of the fleet number, I do not have a BMMO historical fleet list, and I deduced the number from the text of a picture I saw on the web, but which I cannot now find. However, I have since found these pictures of CHA 965 and 990 on hire to Epsom Races in 1951 at the site below. The fleet numbers are given respectively as 1983 and 2008, which tie in with the postulated number for CHA 976. //www.na3t.org/road/photo/Hu02677

Roger Cox

23/05/12 – 09:25

I did my National Service in Egypt and then Tripoli. I was amazed to see these lovely old coaches in Tripoli – I think they were conveying US Airmen to and from Wheel US Airbase. The RASC operated a rickety Morris Commercial bus service for British troops. I have always been a Midland Red enthusiast and enjoyed going to Birmingham from Wolverhampton on the top deck of a FEDD – a wonderful experience.

Eric Bannon

Eric there is a FEDD posting in the pipeline.

Peter

24/05/12 – 08:11

Roger, thanks for the link – could well have been me (1957), Navigation Street, and in fact many of the city centre streets, were the ‘standard’ route for trainees at this time. Splendid bit of nostalgia especially the ‘Moggy’

Nigel Edwards

18/10/12 – 17:20

David Beilby suggests you follow a link to his site.
I suggest that anyone that has not looked at his GEC collection of Photos has a look, some of the interiors are the best internal shots I have seen.

David Aston

07/04/14 – 08:12

Sindalls had at least ten of these CHA952/968/972/976/977/981/982/985/989/992 In a recent article it was claimed eight of these went to PVD. One in Classic Bus had Sindall Fleet no 268.
Which ones went to PVD and what registration was 268?

David Aston

Midland Red – SOS SON – FHA 472 – 472 – 2317

Photograph by ‘unknown’ if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1939
SOS SON
Brush B38F

This uncredited wartime view of Midland Red FHA 472 (472 later 2317) shows it with masked headlamps and reflective mudguards. It was one of a large batch of SON’s built between 1935 and 1940 and is seen wearing its original lined and logo’d livery.
Incredibly, Midland Red then still favoured the use of bulkhead slot-in destination boards, even though the body shell seems to have provision for a small destination screen. These smart but archaic buses were rebuilt in the late 1940s by Hooton, Nudd Bros and Lockyer, but still minus a destination screen, which extended some of their lives until the late 1950s.

Just visible in an enlarged view is the stencilled bulkhead route number X99, which ran from Birmingham to Nottingham via Tamworth and Ashby-de-la-Zouch. This long route, according to a 1962 timetable, needed 2Â¾ hours to achieve, even as a limited stop service. Was the lack of destination board a wartime security measure? Was this view taken in Birmingham or Nottingham?

Photograph and Copy contributed by Paul Haywood

06/07/12 – 07:25

What was the purpose of the nearside mirror. Certainly at the angle it was set it would have been no use to the driver for looking down the nearside of the bus.
Could it possibly have been for him to look into the saloon to see if there were any passengers wanting to alight whilst the conductor was busy collecting fares and hadn’t given the stop signal?

Eric Bawden

06/07/12 – 07:26

Paul – this shot of FHA 472 was taken in Nottingham. The location is Glasshouse Street and the building in the background is Nottingham Victoria Station.

Michael Elliott

06/07/12 – 14:28

I suspect you’ve answered your own question, Eric, as that would be my guess too; it’s only a guess, though, and there will be people out there who can give us a definitive answer.
It isn’t clear from the photo how much flexibility (if any) there was on the mirror arm: in other words, could it have been turned to give a view of either the nearside of the bus or the platform at the whim of the driver?

Alan Hall

08/07/12 – 07:52

Another "Midland Red" gem!

Pete Davies

08/12/12 – 09:44

I may be repeating information mentioned elsewhere on the site but up until the 1st January 1958 there was no requirement for buses* to have a nearside mirror fitted. Observe bus photos up until the early 50’s, almost all with no nearside mirror! By the same token, there are lots of photos showing buses loading with the vehicle, unsurprisingly, some distance from the kerb. Knowing the delights (!) of driving a Regent II, what with its crash box, minimal power, heavy steering, curious pedal actions and cramped cab, I take my hat off to the guys that used to do a full shift in such a vehicle and all that without the assistance of a nearside mirror either!
*inc Goods vehicles, dual purpose vehicles and passenger carrying vehicle with more than 7 seats.

Berisford Jones

11/12/12 – 16:08

Seeing the SOS single deckers brought back an interesting memory. Just before Christmas 1953, my father drove the family straight six Daimler into the back of one somewhere between Malvern and Worcester. The force of impact disable the emergency door, and the front of the car was wedged under the bus against the back axle. I believe a crane was needed to eventually remove the car from under the bus.
I had two journeys on FEDDs. Once with an old aunt back to Perry Barr – I don’t remember where we had been. Later, a long ride – upstairs at the front from Birmingham to Sutton Coldfield on the No 107. They were still around Smethwick garage until 1960 – just missing being preserved.

jude5097

12/02/13 – 14:55

Memories!!! I lived twixt the 107 and Birmingham 5a route with the S76 and S67 passing my front door the latter were the buses from the Beggars Bush to Erdington Six Ways, one via Court Lane and one via Goosemoor Lane. All my life until National Service in 1954 they were serviced by AHA’s, CHA’s and DHA’s, nothing newer than that. The mirror was for the driver to see the passenger position generally, my grandad worked at Caryle Road and always commented that the Birmingham idea of a) the mirror in the cab looking back through the small glass window above the b) sliding glass communication window were far better ideas, particularly as he often was criticised by some drivers for moving the mirror when he cleaned the bus. I never thought of them as being ugly apart from the very early double deckers which seemed destined to take me to school in Sutton Coldfield for ever.

Bob Davis

Midland Red – SOS FEDD – FHA 236 – 236 – 2254

Photograph by ‘unknown’ if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Omnibus Co)
1939
SOS FEDD
Brush H30/26F

Midland Red FHA 236 (2254, formerly 236) was one of their unique pre-war, front-entrance, SOS FEDD double-deckers. They were built in large numbers between 1933 until 1939 with bodies by Carlyle (1), Short Bros, Metro-Cammell and finally Brush, each batch having gradual improvements and modifications. Like their SON single-deck sisters, they were extensively rebuilt by Hooton Aero & Engineering (and others?) in the 1940s to extend their lives. This example is seen at Stourbridge bus station, probably in the late 1950s. Note the position of the fuel cap, which fed the tank positioned beneath the driver’s seat. This postcard is uncredited so if anyone knows who took it, please let us know.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Paul Haywood

10/07/12 – 18:28

It’s interesting how this forward entrance layout, used extensively pre-war by Barton and London Country area as well as Midland Red died out in the post-war period only to find popularity again in the early 1960’s. The reasons cited for the adoption of forward entrances in the sixties were greater safety by giving the driver a better view of the entrance and easing the conductor’s workload as a result particularly on 30ft long higher capacity vehicles.

Philip Halstead

11/07/12 – 08:05

Looking at this, and at the single decker posted a few days ago, without looking at the caption, the radiator grille looks remarkably AEC, at first glance. Then, you study it and see it isn’t!

Pete Davies

11/07/12 – 08:06

Dare I say, that surely must be one of the most awkward looking designs imaginable. What strange proportions giving it a very "tall" appearance and the design around the cab is very unhappy. Even the radiator looks partly buried by the flat, featureless front.
Thank goodness this was only a blip in inspiration before coming up with many superb designs not long afterwards!
I hope this doesn’t upset anyone but beauty really is in the eye of the beholder..this poor bus needed help!

Richard Leaman

11/07/12 – 12:38

You’re absolutely right, Richard, on both the points you make: first, I agree with you that the overall design just doesn’t work. The whole of the cab area is untidy; the staircase gives the impression that the front offside passenger window has just been blocked off. The ‘tall’ appearance is possibly due to the angle of the photo, but you’re right about the radiator, the location of the front registration plate exaggerates the problem, and the livery doesn’t help either.
However, as you also remark, beauty is in the eye of the beholder; unlike many correspondents, I always thought the (much later, of course), Orion looked balanced and business like, (especially on M&D’s Guys), but at the time, the message I was being taught was that appearance is secondary to operational performance any way. An ugly duckling that was economical and reliable was preferable to a good looker that wasn’t.
The choice of entrance location, (Philip’s comment), is worth an entire separate article of its own. For urban working, there was a lot to be said, (before H&S concerns), for open platforms – quick, convenient for passengers, and, provided the driver was using his mirrors as he should, tolerably safe. Doors were less draughty for inter-urban use, but manually operated doors, especially rear doors such as Lodekkas had, were a drag for the conductor otherwise and were usually left open. In moving to front entrances, I think some operators – e.g Southdown with its Queen Marys – were motivated partly just by a desire to demonstrate their modernity; officially, the conductor remained responsible for giving the ‘go’ bell however busy. Personally, I never understood why operators chose rear or centre entrances on underfloor single deckers intended for stage carriage work.

Roy Burke

11/07/12 – 18:43

Although it wasn’t my favourite, I agree with Roy that the Orion – in the right livery – could still look good. [M & D, Sheffield and St Helens being three examples.] …..but ideally have a good looking, attractive vehicle that is also reliable and economic – in that order.
Am I the only one [ducks low to avoid flying missiles] that wasn’t over impressed with looks of BMMO buses? I have a thing about balanced designs and BMMO were, to say the least, quirky and original – and early Ds (1 – 5 especially) always seemed to be a cross between Clement Freud and Eyor; mournful and unhappy. […..or is now a good time to leave the country?]

David Oldfield

11/07/12 – 18:44

While the body, as a whole, is not unattractive, the detail is very deleterious to the overall effect. Although I’m no lover of sliding windows, the arrangement of these is bizarre. It’s also mean upstairs, in such a smoking era! The driving cab windows are so small as to be useless to a driver looking out, and the front/rear side ones are non-standard lengths! At least both headlamps are the same height!
I wonder if these FHA’s had the same entrances as the earlier EHA’s, whereby the (wooden?) doors were inset and there were two steps to climb before going through said doors. I recall the latter when I was based at RAF Stafford in 1956-58. My abiding memory of BMMO at this time was the sole bus (usually a D7), which ran through the Sunday night/Monday morning from Stafford railway station the RAF Stafford. This service must have broken records for overloading, with folk standing downstairs and upstairs and sometimes three to a seat! Bends were taken very gingerly, but with no guarantee that the vehicle would right itself then! If the bus wasn’t waiting, we’d take one of the pre-war Rolls-Royce taxis which held about 7-8 and were more than capable of 70mph, even at 20+ years old and God knows how many miles on the clock! When these beauties were replaced by Vauxhall Wyverns, my last journey from camp to station involved a driver who remained in top gear for the whole journey into town, slipping the clutch with expertise when crawling through traffic – such consummate abuse! But I digress!

Chris Hebbron

11/07/12 – 18:45

This vehicle remained in service until 1960 and was one of the final 6 withdrawn in December 1960. Two sister FEDD’s – 2120 and 2247 – continued as staff and training buses, I wonder how many miles they covered in their lifetime? I vividly remember as a youngster going ‘long distance’ with my parents to visit a cousin in Halesowen (from my home of Birmingham) and the route traversed the infamous ‘Mucklows Hill’. This was used for testing new buses and the FEDD’s were the staple diet on this route along Hagley Road and the climb-returning to Brum-was in first gear for about a mile, I can still hear the howl of the poor K type engine to this day!

Nigel Edwards

12/07/12 – 07:56

The use of forward entrance double deckers in the East Midlands before World War 2 was not confined to Barton. Midland General/Mansfield District (on AEC Regents) and Trent (AEC Regents and Daimler COG5s) were users of this entrance layout for double deckers as well. Trent also had a batch of FEDDs with MCCW bodies. After the War Barton continued with forward entrance double deckers with its Leyland PD1s with Duple bodies while MGO/MDT and Trent switched to rear entrance bodies on double deckers.

Michael Elliott

12/07/12 – 11:17

David, you speak as an enthusiast, and from that standpoint, your views, (appearance, reliability and economy in that order), are the appropriate ones and few enthusiasts would disagree with you. However, expressing your order of preference in M&D’s Traffic Department would have caused major head shaking; doing so in front of the Traffic Manager, Stanley Smith, would have been to risk a reaction of life-threatening proportions! Similarly, I don’t think your views would have been appreciated by the Chatham Detailer who’d had to send out a Guy Arab at ten o’clock at night to replace a broken down Atlantean – a not altogether unknown occurrence.

Roy Burke

12/07/12 – 12:05

I was going to say the same as Michael regarding East Midlands area use of front entrance double deckers. Just to add that Trent had quite a lot of their Weymann bodied front entrance vehicles rebodied with Willowbrook rear entrance open platform bodies after the war. I can also remember travelling from Alfreton to Nottingham on a front entrance Midland General Regent about 1952. They had big single piece manually operated sliding doors. Barton’s Duple PD1s however had power operated bi-parting doors – with a set of conductor or passenger operated open/close buttons on the inside, and I seem to think an external open button.

Stephen Ford

12/07/12 – 19:24

Roy, speaking as an enthusiast, I was saying "Why not have something good looking". Only the reliable and economic (in that order) were meant to be juxtaposed – ideally they should be good looking as well.

David Oldfield

12/07/12 – 19:24

In common with David Oldfield Midland Red buses sadly leave me cold. They may have been innovative but their looks were not for the purist with the possible exception of the C5 motor way coaches. No give me an AEC preferably with Roe bodywork any day!

Chris Hough

12/07/12 – 19:25

How interesting to get the operator`s viewpoint in these posts. Roy`s comments about his M and D experiences of management attitudes just makes me realise that operators had a totally different approach. It was all about profit and loss, with a dash of "public service" thrown in.
You have the best of both worlds, Roy, as you have enthusiasm, and a knowledge of the practical issues!

John Whitaker

13/07/12 – 06:01

Chris H., that’s music to my ears (AEC/Roe).

David Oldfield

13/07/12 – 06:0213/07/12 – 06:02

Fascinating isn’t it how attitudes and priorities change. These days it is all about appearances, image, reputation and less about genuine customer service. Maybe years ago it really did not matter what a bus looked or rode like as long as it arrived at 11.38am on the dot. The even more strange thing is that very many operators combined good looking vehicles WITH service as it is well documented on this website. It is a rather rare find today though!

Richard Leaman

13/07/12 – 09:16

I must agree with David and Chris about BMMO. All my enthusiast life, I have failed to interest myself in anything Midland Red. Something about their ugliness, narrow cabs, and "totally unlike anything elseness"
Perhaps the later examples were more pleasing to look at, but something was missing for me!
It was the same when SOS buses were in other fleets such as Trent, no appeal whatsoever, and I lived on one of the BMMO routes for the last year or so of their existence too!
However, if people ARE interested, who am I to criticise them. To repeat the current idiom of this site, "Beauty really is in the eyes of the beholder"

John Whitaker

13/07/12 – 17:08

Your meaning, David, was really quite clear, and I was, perhaps, being a bit pedantic in taking you up on it. You’re absolutely right; while reliability and economy are obviously vital factors, there was, (still is), no reason why the vehicle couldn’t also be pleasing to the eye. Hence, I’d agree with you totally about AEC/Roe – a great combination that fulfilled all three requirements.
My observations were just based on personal experience. Since I was supposed to be learning about bus company management, I always tried to understand, (and acquire), a ‘management’ view about the fleet rather than an ‘enthusiast’ view. Since, also, the then Traffic Manager was very well known as a man not to mince words, I couldn’t help, as I wrote my comment, getting a mental picture of his reaction, (which would have been voluble and scathing), to the idea that operational effectiveness should in any way be compromised by considerations of what he might well have described dismissively as ‘prettiness’.
My operational training in the Medway Towns altered my opinion of Leyland, a maker who until then I’d almost revered, especially in comparison with Guy, a maker who I’d hardly come across and had never thought about much. Guys every time!
I mentioned the Orion only because that’s what we had and they were very satisfactory in service. On balance, given a totally free hand, I’d probably have stuck with (6LW-engined) Arabs, but with the Park Royal bodies that East Kent had and which were still occasionally seen at Maidstone. Not the AEC/Roe combination that you’d have chosen, David, but if I’d been a Traffic Manager, I’d have been happy.

Roy Burke

14/07/12 – 07:24

AEC/Roe was one of my favourite combinations too, David, but not quite as nice as highbridge Bristol K/ECW!
There are many other "classic" combination favourites, and it would be nice to hear what they all are.
I`m quite fond of the whole range of utility bodies too, especially Daimler CWA6/Duple (shell back dome, of course) I dare not mention the famous phrase about beauty yet again!

John Whitaker

14/07/12 – 07:25

My first encounter with Midland Red buses came when, as an ATC cadet, I went on a week’s summer camp at Shawbury, near Shrewsbury, in 1957. With memories of the Picture Post "eyes" set each side of the front destination display on London buses at that time, I always thought that the curiously miserable, droopy expression of the D5 similarly deserved a teardrop on each side of the destination box. The crude radiator slots of the tin front didn’t impress me much either. The D7 was a bit less eccentric in appearance, but the set back front wheels of the D9, apparently intended to improve engine bay access, always looked a bit odd and unbalanced to me. At least the D9 and the contemporary S14 had a decently designed radiator shape instead of the primitive slots of previous types.
The early FEDD buses up to about 1938 had the unbelievably old fashioned radiator inherited from the ON type, and this was set off centre to the nearside, with the nearside of the cab positioned in line with the offside of the radiator. The result looked decidedly antiquated, and compared poorly with contemporary AEC, Daimler and Leyland models. The introduction in 1939 of the "AEC" lookalike radiator, as shown in the picture of FHA 236, though still offset, did improve matters somewhat, but the curious disparity in the spacing of lower and upper deck window bays makes the body look untidy. Probably another reason why Midland Red failed to enthuse many of we transport aficionados was the boring, unrelieved, overall red bus livery, though the black embellishment of the coaches showed what could be done with a bit more imagination.

Roger Cox

14/07/12 – 10:52

John. If you mean KSW/ECW, I agree with you. The only thing that spoiled Sheffield’s 1957 B/C Fleet PD2s was the tin front. The four bay body was far better than the five bay on the K – but Lowestoft’s rare five bays on Regent IIs were rather special.

David Oldfield

PS: Roy. Glad we’ve not fallen out – and still agree!

Midland Red – SOS SON – GHA 335 – 2416

Photograph by ‘unknown’ if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1940
SOS SON
Brush B38F

Another image by an unknown photographer. It shows Midland Red 2416 (GHA 335), a SOS SON of 1940. Apparently seen in its final days – acting as a "Trainee Vehicle" – it still exudes an air of quaint gentility in spite of it having been rebuilt in the late 1940s. (It makes an interesting comparison with the other picture of a SON of this site in its wartime condition).
This view seems to show the driver under reversing supervision at an unknown location (help required please).
Its sister, 2418, is preserved as part of the Wythall collection.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Paul Haywood

03/10/12 – 06:19

Why is it that, every time I see one of these radiators, I think "AEC"? Maybe it’s because I’m a Londoner by birth, despite the Lancashire origins!

Pete Davies

03/10/12 – 09:56

An amusing observation, Pete, that all readers will understand. I looked at the photo, as I did at the earlier one, and wondered about the destination display. The lack of information might be explicable because the vehicle is on driver training, and the similar lack of display on the other SON might (just) be explicable in terms of wartime conditions. However, why is there no destination box at all? The roof line seems to be begging for one. What was Midland Red’s practice?

Roy Burke

03/10/12 – 17:54

Roy, did it perhaps come from the era of slipboards mounted diagonally across the bonnet?

Stephen Ford

03/10/12 – 17:55

If you look at the other wartime SOS-in-service on this site, all is revealed about the destination boards (I had to look first)…. but it still looks as if they meant to have a proper box and changed their minds!

Joe

03/10/12 – 17:55

Yes, Roy, this lack of destination screen has always puzzled me. None of the MR half-cabs had them but, as we can see, the body seems to have been designed for a very shallow one. All these buses used destination boards, positioned in slots more or less where the "L" plate is, even after they were rebuilt in the late 1940s. When we consider that, by this time, MR were one of the most progressive operators in the UK – we have to wonder why they retained this archaic arrangement.

Paul Haywood

04/10/12 – 07:33

Not just the destination arrangement but the vehicle itself looks archaic. The last operator to buy SOS chassis from MR was Trent who took their last ones in 1940. Throughout the thirties, most of the Trent ones were antiquated looking. No doubt they were sturdy, no doubt they were economical, but when compared to their neighbours, East Midland and Barton with their impressive fleets of Leylands, I’ve always thought they must have been something of a joke.

Chris Barker

06/10/12 – 07:45

I agree with Chris that Midland Red’s in house SOS designs always looked archaic in comparison with contemporary competition, and the 1920s shape of radiator that, until 1937/38, preceded the "AEC clone" type shown above made the machines look even more ancient. The destination display matter is intriguing. By 1929, the Midland Red fleet consisted entirely of single deck vehicles, and to cope with increasing passenger loadings, the company introduced its first double deck design in 1931, subsequently producing fifty in 1932/33. This design, the DD-RE (I am given to understand that the often quoted designation REDD is erroneous) had a conventional destination display at the front between the decks, yet new single deckers continued to appear with the slip board arrangement on the bulkhead behind the engine bonnet. Someone at the top of the company must have had an intransigent attitude to persevere with this system for so long.

Roger Cox

09/10/12 – 08:19

In connection with Midland Red destination boards on SON vehicles, I remember that about 1950, there used to be an open box in Leominster Bus Station in which appropriate ones were stored for use as required. Nowadays, such an arrangement would provide a ready supply of offensive weapons!
Service numbers were displayed using stencils in a back-lit box in the front nearside window. Only two stencils of each figure were carried, hence there were no BMMO routes numbered 111, 222, 333 etc.

John Hodkinson

15/10/12 – 07:53

BMMO were in the forefront of advertising their services – although it seems Donald Sinclair didn’t necessarily approve of O.C. Power’s tastes in such matters. So why the blinking heck didn’t they see fit to actually advertise clearly where each bus was actually going? – dark night, fog . . . stencil and wooden board??

Philip Rushworth

29/01/13 – 06:30

The location is Rutland Road, Bearwood. Training Instructor Grainger is watching an obviously trustworthy trainee reverse out of the back entrance to the garage, adjacent to the training school – presumably the route through the garage was blocked.
Mr Grainger took me for my driving assessment when I joined the Midland Red in 1973, which I passed with colours if not flying, then certainly flapping in the breeze!

Lloyd Penfold

29/01/13 – 10:04

Lloyd – how good to get not only the exact location, but a name as well! Thank you. The photo has a late 1950s feel to it, so Instructor Grainger would still have at least a decade of active service left. It’s amazing to think that, presumably, he would have had to be proficient in driving these arcane specimens and the C5 motorway expresses!

Paul Haywood

29/01/13 – 15:24

LLoyd, funny how a name triggers the memory (now at 78 suffering somewhat). Mr Grainger took me in Fedd BHA 453 on 13th March ’57 – I kept the record of my training from 11th-28th March 1957 – and again on my ‘pre-test accessment’ on 28th then passed me to Mr Gowan and D7 4453 (XHA 453) for the test, passed OK. Wonder if you recall any of the other instructors : Messrs Shanain, Skinner, Yardley, Callaghan, Powell, Bennett, Mynard and Birch? It was a short but happy training month as I recall.

Nigel Edwards

22/03/14 – 08:26

Midland Red managed without illuminated destination indicators because it was a system where each route was so well known and each stop so clearly marked that it was hard to get the wrong bus by mistake:if in doubt you simply asked the conductor! I was about 12 when the last SONs were in service and I clearly remember that the vehicle batteries could just cope with starting the engine, the interior lights went right out and often had to be switched off in order to start! I doubt if the system could have coped with more lights! Remember that visibility was not exactly a priority in those days, when only a dim red stop/tail light was provided, and this was in a partly rural area. The departure stops were carefully worked out,to the extent that certain stops on a road were used by certain services only. There was one Stop I used near my home in town, which was provided for just the one cross-town route only… other services along that road, and there were many, just ignored it! A couple of my family worked on the buses in that era and never had a problem with destination boards: you just carried the ones you needed on that shift, not a full set!

Michael F

20/04/15 – 07:03

Another idiosyncratic point about SOS half-cabs was the way that the radiator was always offset to the nearside of the centre line of the vehicle by various amounts – particularly noticeable on the three FEDDs that had been given the ‘full frontal’ treatment while retaining the exposed radiator! (EHA 290 / 292 / 297)

Larry B

20/04/15 – 09:25

Larry, sorry to disagree but the SOS radiator was on the centre line, the optical illusion is due to the half cab being really a third of the width of the vehicle. The lack of a balancing mudguard on the offside adds to the illusion. As far as the FEDDs are concerned, from memory, the same illusion existed. BMMO cabs of the period were renowned for being cramped and it has been said elsewhere that the SOS/FEDDs were not the company’s finest products.

Phil Blinkhorn

21/04/15 – 06:23

Phil, the earlier SOS types with the rectangular radiator certainly had the radiator offset to the nearside whilst keeping the starting handle on the centre line. The picture of an ON at this link illustrates the point well:- www.flickr.com/photos/8755708 Midland Red seemed to take a perverse delight in the jarring aesthetics of its pre war designs. As you state, the cab tapered sharply towards the front of the vehicle to line up with the radiator offside, and the mudguards (one could scarcely call them ‘wings’ on such an ugly duckling) were different on each side. Whatever their mechanical virtues, these machines looked awful and the tedious overall red livery just compounded the problem.

Roger Cox

21/04/15 – 09:42

Roger’s link well illustrates the early production offset radiator but my point was regarding the bulk of SOS production, including the illustration on this thread. Larry stated that the radiator was always offset and this myth is perpetuated by many enthusiasts looking at photos because the optical illusion caused by the eccentric design of the cab, dash panel and mudguards misleads the eye.
Measurement of this thread’s and many other photos clearly shows that the vertical chrome strip in the centre of the radiator is at the centre of the width of the vehicle.

Phil Blinkhorn

22/04/15 – 07:25

Phil That is interesting because the starting handle aperture on the original photo at the top is not on the centre line of the radiator. Does that mean that the engine wasn’t on the centreline?

John Lomas

22/04/15 – 07:26

Phil, take a look at this frontal view of a FEDD with the later centre strip radiator. The middle point of the vehicle is surely the starting handle hole, with the radiator offset right up against the nearside dumb iron. //www.classictransportpictures.co.uk/photo_9863080.html

Roger Cox

22/04/15 – 07:26

Sorry Phil but I’m not convinced. If you look at the radiator position in relation to the spring dumb irons (which unarguably are symmetrical) the rad is closer to the near side spring than the offside.

Andrew Charles

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

23/04/15 – 07:05

I have looked at Roger’s link image of the FEDD, and I traced a line down from the upper deck window centre strut, as this seemed to be fitted centrally. This links up nicely with the starting handle hole, and shows that the radiator centre strip is clearly off-set to the near side. My understanding from reading years ago was that most if not all SOS forward control vehicles had a narrow cab, but eased the driver’s position a little by having the engine (and therefore the radiator) mounted towards the nearside. Wasn’t the pre-war Dennis Lancet similarly constructed, with an engine and radiator to the nearside?

Michael Hampton

23/04/15 – 07:06

To me, the centre line of the FEDD radiator agrees entirely with the pillar between the two front windows upstairs, which appears to be in the centre of the body. The cab is certainly less that half the width of the body, which rather distorts the balance of the lower deck. It looks as if the springs are not equidistant from the centre line.

Chris Hebbron

23/04/15 – 07:08

The only pre-war SOS buses with a centrally mounted radiator were the OLR class, which were coaches converted during the war to half-cab from full bonneted normal control, which is why the radiator was fitted centrally.

Tony Gallimore

23/04/15 – 07:08

Roger, Andrew and John, please measure the distances between the centre line of the radiator and the extremities of the vehicles, nearside and offside in both the photo on this thread an the FEDD photo.
As for the position of the starting handle hole there are many examples of Leyland prewar single and double deckers where the starting handle hole is offset yet no-one seems to say the radiators are also off set.

Phil Blinkhorn

24/04/15 – 06:30

Phil It was because of your insistence that the rad is central that I raised the question of the engine being offset.
Ford definitely offset the engine from the centreline on the 83e vans(away from the driver, they even had 2 holes as standard to allow for LH and RH drive) Morris also had an offset engine in a van of comparable size to the Ford.

John Lomas

24/04/15 – 06:32

Sorry, Chris H, but I don’t buy the idea that the position of the offside front chassis member and spring was further outboard than its nearside equivalent. The handling consequences would have been rather "interesting", unless one was driving, of course. This picture proves the point, I think:- www.sct61.org.uk/ttrc3333
Phil, I concede that the starting handle isn’t centrally placed on the chassis, but I maintain that the radiator is offset to the nearside. If you check the dumb iron positions on the FEDD picture, they are definitely equidistant from the vehicle sides. It’s the radiator that’s askew.

Roger Cox

24/04/15 – 06:34

I accept the challenge and think I’ve found the perfect photo to illustrate the point.
In the TPC book ‘Midland Red’ Vol 1, page 126, is a photo of full front FEDD EHA 290, the radiator’s central filler cap is clearly to the nearside of the central windscreen pillar and the accompanying text states "….showing the radiator offset to the nearside."
There are a number of reasonable quality front end photos of both double and single deck models which highlight that the rad is mounted closer to the nearside front spring than the offside unit, the significance being that the springs are symmetrical to the centre line of the chassis.

Andrew Charles

Midland Red – Daimler Fleetline – UHA 225H – 6225

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1969
Daimler Fleetline CRG6LXB
Alexander H45/30D

Midland Red 6225, UHA 225H, is a Daimler Fleetline CRG6LXB with Alexander H45/30D body, and was new in 1969. It has been restored into West Midlands livery and I include a picture of it’s Gardner engine. Both of the shots were taken last weekend at the AMRTM (Aston Manor) running day.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ken Jones

30/03/14 – 13:08

One of the Fleetlines at Southgates Garage was fitted with a Leyland pneumatic Gear change pedestal instead of the usual electric gear shift. This made for much smoother gear changes, I don’t know if it was a one off experiment or not but it was certainly an improvement.

Tony Gallimore

02/04/14 – 16:54

As a Fleetline Fan and driver at Lancashire United in the 70’s, there was absolutely nothing wrong at all with the Fleetlines Daimatic semi automatic gearbox. Had you been a passenger whilst I was driving, you be hard put to tell any of my gear changes, upwards or downwards, apart from the revs changing.
No need to put anything of Leyland origins in any Daimler buses!

Mike Norris

03/04/14 – 07:46

Totally agree, Mike. My experience with the ‘pedestal’ Leyland Pneumocyclic box showed that it was very slow in responding to movement of the gear selector lever. Smooth gear changes required one to anticipate the action of the gearbox. To change gear upwards, one had to move the lever into neutral and only then release the accelerator, pause, then engage the next gear position, and pause again before pressing the accelerator again. Similarly, changing down meant selecting neutral whilst still holding the accelerator, blipping the engine, moving the lever into the next gear down and only then pressing the accelerator again. Lazy drivers not bothered about this would give a snatchy ride and wear out the gearbox brakebands. The SCG gearbox and its licensed versions always gave instantaneous response to gear lever movements.

Roger Cox

05/04/14 – 07:15

I have to agree that uncomfortable and unpleasant gear changes on semi-automatic gear boxes were, assuming the gearbox was properly maintained, almost certainly due to lazy driving techniques and a lack of pride in doing the job to the best of ones ability with management either unaware or uncaring of this habit plus it annoyed those who did do their very best. The Leyland direct air operated gear change did need the technique so accurately described by Roger but was by no means as difficult to master as it may sound and I came to enjoy using it perhaps because it needed that little extra thought to get the best out of it.

Diesel Dave

06/04/14 – 08:32

Midland Red had three classes of Fleetline/Alexanders. The first 50 arrived in 1963 and were classed DD11. During 1966 to 1968 a total of 149 very similar Fleetlines, class DD12. Finally, between 1969 and 1971 came the DD13s – 103 in all, including UHA 225H. The DD13s had centre exits and also Gardner 6LXB engines, which gave a rather better performance than the 6LXs in the other two classes.
Many, possibly most, DD12s were retrofitted with pneumocyclic gearboxes by the early 1970s, as described by Tony Gallimore. I have never found out why. No DD11s or DD13s were so converted as far as I know.
I seem to recall that in the 1980s a handful of Fleetlines that Midland Red South obtained from West Riding had pneumocyclic gearboxes. Was this correct or am I mistaken?

Peter Hale

20/04/14 – 16:07

I, too, liked the pedestal-change conversion on the DD12. It was located by your left hip and encouraged you to sit more upright when driving, doing wonders for back and shoulders! The DD11s were probably excluded due to age, and the DD13s because of the exit door control.
Does anyone remember DD11 5261 when it was powered by a BMMO 10.5 engine? Any facts, particularly from engineering staff, gratefully received.

Allan White

23/04/14 – 05:34

With regards to the comment on DD1 5261 I remember this vehicle during my early teens when I was a Midland Red enthusiast, it was based at Sutton Coldfield and could be seen on the 160 family of services at peak times, in my opinion it out performed the other dd11’s but was extremely noisy in the lower deck, another of my favourite buses was D9 prototype 4773 located to Sheepcote Street ( a regular performer on the above services), really miss those great days, sadly left the Birmingham area in 1967.

Steve

06/05/14 – 07:41

Re. Peter Hale 6/IV: Midland Red (South) acquired 4 of the PHL XXXK Northern Counties-bodied Fleetlines from WRAC in 1985. Unfortunately, I can’t comment on the transmission. However, I do remember travelling from Oadby into Leicester in early 1985 aboard one of Midland Fox’s ex-Yorkshire ECW-bodied LHD XXXK Fleetlines: what struck me was that gear selection was by a Leyland pneumocyclic selector, which was mounted to the side of the instrument housing (where you’ld expect to find the smaller SCG selector) . . . and selection was automatic (as the selector lever was left in the same position throughout the journey. (Trent’s Fleetlines DRC536-551J [536-551] had a similar arrangement.) And yes, my memories have been stirred by “Midland Red in NBC Days”, (Geenwood/Roberts, Ian Allan,) which I picked up at the weekend.

Philip Rushworth

25/06/14 – 08:29

A lot of the D12 class Fleetlines had the Leyland style pedestal changes, but not all. It’s never been quite clear if it was a Midland Red modification. Regardless of gear selector type, the gearbox remained the same.
The fierceness or otherwise of the gearchanges is down to the setting of a valve which regulates the pressure of the air being supplied to the gearbox, via the EP Valve.(the pedestal changes had the EP valve built in). This regulator valve was adjustable, and they were frequently set wrongly :in those days companies overhauled their own units, valves etc, and when the regulator valves were assembled, the adjuster screw would just be screwed in and locked in any old position. A test rig would have been needed to set the pressure correctly, and nobody was going to build one for something like this.
So valves were fitted to buses and the pressure would often be set too high causing fierce changes. Likewise no-one was going to go to the trouble of fitting a pressure gauge into the line on the bus to get the pressure right, so it was down to trial and error, if anybody could be bothered.
I remember when WMPTE Stourbridge Garage closed and Oldbury inherited their National 2’s – they used to leap in the air almost the gearchanges were so bad. Once they were all adjusted the difference was remarkable and it was impossible to get a bad change then, no matter how you tried.

I’ve just noticed that the engine shot of 6225 reveals it has been retro-fitted with an air accelerator, using the same make of rear cylinder as found on National 1 (510), prototype Metrobus, and others. No doubt this has been done because of a stiff throttle: the most common cause of this was the accelerator pedal heel/hinge becoming dry and seizing up over time. Seems a lot of trouble to go to, especially as you don’t have the same amount of control as with the hydraulic system normally fitted.

Mark

25/06/14 – 18:04

The comment about the transmission on the ex.Yorkshire Woollen ECW bodied Fleetlines at Midland Fox surprised me. They must have had their transmissions altered by their new owners because when they were at YWD they had normal four speed gearboxes with a 5th position on the gear lever to open the entrance door.

Philip Carlton

27/09/14 – 07:07

I am of an age where I remember the DD12 & DD13 buses running with Midland Red (later Midland Red East and Midland Fox) in Leicester. Three buses of these types that spring to mind that regularly worked my local routes were GHA 429D, SHA 870G & UHA 207H. They were nice buses but rattled well from what I can recall.

Kieron Willans

29/09/14 – 07:37

Re. Philip Carlton 25/06 (and sorry to have taken so long to have replied – I must have missed the post): it was how unusual this feature (direct pneumocyclic selection) was that struck me – I must have used vehicles from this batch once or twice in Yorkshire, but never noticed that . . . so I suspect Philip is right, that Yorkshire’s LHD XXXK Fleetlines were modified after arrival at Midland Fox. Why? it seems an awful lot of expense on already long-in-the-tooth hardware.

Philip Rushworth

01/03/17 – 06:32

Having both being a conductor and a driver for BMMO in the 60s I have driven most of the buses used during this period D9 buses I found to be very stable much more than the Leyland that were purchased, these were terrible in windy conditions especially when winds were blowing between houses, you could often be on the wrong side of the road. The Leyland National also difficult to pull onto bus laybys when there was a line of raised “bricks”/kerbstones when the road was wet no such trouble with BMMO. Having the front wheels set back as the D9s were meant a much smaller turning circle. Disc brakes fitted in 1959 for C5s etc how advanced can you get most cars of that era did not have these.4943/4 both at Stafford at the end of there life another innovation engine under the floor better balance than rear engines of Leyland Fleetline which were very light at the front.

Graham Millard

01/03/17 – 12:07

Moving away from the transmission to the bodywork, when Alexander initially designed the A style body back in 1962, it incorporated the windshield and upper deck front windows that were supplied on the Y series coach body as windshield and rear window respectively. I can understand why BMMO specified the easily fitted split windscreen as replacement of the original after damage could be costly, but why go to the trouble and expense of redesigning the upper deck window arrangement? No other BET company operating the Alexander body seemed to have trouble with that the upper deck window and none to my knowledge either followed the BMMO redesign or made changes of their own.

Phil Blinkhorn

Midland Red – BMMO S15 – 5056 HA – 5056

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1962
BMMO S15
BMMO DP40F

This was one of the second batch of S15s. Broadly similar to the S14 bus, these were designed as dual-purpose vehicles and featured bucket-seats and double rear wheels as well as, on this second batch, some chrome trim. Circa 1969 the batch was relegated to bus work after being repainted into the standard bus livery. While dual-purpose they had black roofs. In this shot 5056 is seen at the Black Country Living Museum in September 2014.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Les Dickinson

25/06/15 – 06:46

I recall 5048 HA (allocated, I think, to Coalville depot) as a regular performer on the Birmingham – Nottingham route X99 in the 1960s. Those bucket seats were pretty comfortable.

Stephen Ford

25/06/15 – 13:34

There’s something in the ‘copy’ which intrigues me, Les, and thanks for posting. There is mention of double rear wheels as if this is something of an innovation. Given the company’s leadership in so many aspects of bus design and operation, were these really the first Midland Reds to have twin wheels at the rear?

Pete Davies

26/06/15 – 05:22

Peter, As I understand it, most of the S14 class were fitted with single rear wheels as part of a desire to produce a light-weight vehicle. Unladen weight was not much over five tons according to M.W. Greenwood’s excellent book – ‘Midland Red Buses’. The S15 was a further development of the class but with modifications, including twin rears, to produce a dual-purpose vehicle.

Les Dickinson

26/06/15 – 05:23

I am no expert on Midland Red, but I suspect that the S14 had single rear wheels as an experiment. Both AEC and Leyland tried this with their underfloor-engined buses, but found that road holding suffered.

David Wragg

26/06/15 – 05:24

I think what Les meant to convey was the fact that the previous S14, built to a lightweight design, had single rear wheels.

Nigel Edwards

27/06/15 – 06:42

Nigel is quite correct regarding single rear wheels on the S14. Although I drove S15s in service (5050, 5055 and 5073 (now preserved)), I never had chance to drive an S14 so I can’t comment on their road holding.

Larry B

27/06/15 – 06:43

Thank you for filling this gap in my knowledge of Midland Red.

Pete Davies

28/06/15 – 05:54

There are 2 S15 in preservation but this one is the only one with original DP seats. It has also been retro-fitted with the 10.5 litre engine. The driving position is not comfortable and requires some getting used to given a tight cab and upright pedals. I sold it after getting a left knee problem and so did the previous owner for the same reason. It is really fast on the road and my claim to fame is 2hrs 40mins from Gateshead to Digbeth some 4 years ago after a Bus Rally.

Roger Burdett

25/12/15 – 07:54

I conducted this bus 5056 HA in 1968 and 1969 when I worked my student holidays at the Coalville garage

Wayne Robinson

26/12/15 – 06:56

Roger B- I’ve just seen reference to your record breaking run from Gateshead to Digbeth. Were you trying to recreate the glorious days of the Midland Red Motorway Expresses? Don’t let the rozzers read this, but it would mean an average speed of at least 75 mph start to finish!

Paul Haywood

27/12/15 – 09:02

Paul
In hindsight I probably meant 3hrs 40mins. It certainly was a fast trip but we would not have gone over 70. The vehicle is geared for 75 with the gearbox/engine combination.

Roger Burdett

29/12/15 – 10:46

I was ‘taken for a ride’ on the top deck of Roger’s beautiful D9 (5424) around Bewdley at a Meet. I can vouch for his spirited handling and was treated to his own version of the “tilt test”!, afterwards speaking to him he did say “I drive like a bus driver”, long may he do so.

Nigel Edwards

30/12/15 – 06:27

I travelled from home from school at Godalming to Guildford back in the ’50s and remember a couple of occasions when a bunch of us managed to get down the hill in time for an earlier bus than the usual one, we all piled up stairs but by the time we were leaving Farncombe the conductor had to come up and tell us to get down stairs because there was an insufficient number of passengers downstairs so the weight in the bus was to high for stability.
He probably didn’t use those exact words but the meaning was clear.

John Lomas

01/01/16 – 11:33

The conclusion submitted by Larry B (above 27/06/15) is quite correct as my memory of working at Redditch Garage in 1968 includes one morning with an S14, in the snow on the hilly terrain the only way to make progress was to place the rear wheels in the gutter and “sidewall” the bus along. The S14 was notorious for poor rear holding even in wet weather.

Tony Morgan

23/05/22 – 06:01

Re the BMMO S14 & S15 (speaking as a former BMMO engineer) the S15 was a slightly modified dual purpose version of the S14 and this included twin rear wheels. There is no suggestion that these were the “first BMMO vehicles with twin rear wheels” as the company had been building buses since 1923 and up till the monocoque generation they had a normal chassis and yes, twin rear wheels. The S14 however was designed with light weight in mind even to the point of single rears on many (miscellaneous) examples and it was so light it was bouncy and rattily but also very light on fuel. However it lent itself to early OMO operation with various cab layouts being tried out,both open and fully enclosed although it didn’t cope well with the rough Leicestershire country roads that these OMOs ran on! Nevertheless many S14’s including OMOs retained their single rears to the end around 1971 and one such was 4714. This feature enabled you to stand in the pit and change the rear pads without removing the wheel! Yes they did slide on wet roads. But they were running almost empty as it was a railway replacement route, the 697 along the route of the former Nuneaton to Ashby/Burton line that had closed to passenger service from 1931 to closure in 1971.

Michael Hunt

Midland Red – BMMO D10 – 943 KHA – 4943

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1960
BMMO D10
BMMO H78F

This fascinating vehicle was the first of two prototype underfloor-engined double deckers built by Midland Red in 1960/61. AEC had shown such a layout was possible, with its Crossley-bodied Regent IV underfloor-engined decker prototype of 1950, which conformed to minimum gangway headroom requirements, while remaining within vehicle maximum height limits. The AEC had a rear platform however, whereas the Midland Red D10 design took this one step further in having the entrance alongside the driver. As was expected of Midland Red, advanced features were to the fore and the D10 sported chassisless construction, power steering, semi-automatic transmission, disc brakes and ‘Metalastik’ rubber suspension. However, the most interesting feature was the offsetting of the midships-mounted BMMO 10.5 litre horizontal Diesel engine to the nearside of the vehicle. In order to avoid raising the lower deck floor level more than necessary, the highest parts of the engine, the flywheel and housing, were thus positioned to the side of the gangway (under nearside seats) rather than being directly below it. Consequently the slimmer parts of the engine, the cylinder heads, were beneath the gangway, allowing it to be lower. A second prototype was built in 1961 (4944: 1944 HA), and was originally to a two door / two staircase layout. The front entrance was of normal width but the rear exit was of a narrow design, and 4944 was converted to conventional single door/single staircase layout in 1962. (Intriguing how the HA registration followed the KHA mark, rather than the other way around). No more D10’s were built, but fortunately 4943 has been preserved, and is seen here in Harrogate at a Trans-Pennine Rally in, I think, the mid-70’s.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Brendan Smith

24/10/13 – 08:06

The D10s always appear to me to look quite tall . . . what was the overall height? and how does that compare with a Volvo Citybus or Leyland Lion DD?? Presumably, if BMMO had put the D10 into production “new bus grant” would have subsequently killed-off the under-floor design anyway (even if BMMO hadn’t been forced to cease vehicle production in 1971[?]). But here’s a thought: couldn’t the off-set engine layout have formed the basis for a lower-floor under-floor-engined single-decker – more suited to urban use then contemporary designs, and perhaps an alternative to rear-engined chassis?

Philip Rushworth

24/10/13 – 08:07

The D9 was sometimes called the Birmingham Routemaster, so this could be the Birmingham FRM. No one really mentions that the Q was a design not unlike this – but way before its time. Of course the Volvo D10M or B10DM (depending on age and in which factory it was built) was perhaps the most successful bus of this concept – but don’t forget the Leyland Lion either. Good that 943 is still with us, though.

David Oldfield

24/10/13 – 08:08

And, about 25 – 30 years later, came the Volvo D10M, as used by Southdown. Once again, Midland Red leads the field! Nice views, Brendan. Thanks for posting!

Pete Davies

24/10/13 – 09:29

Do I spy a Wulfrunian lurking in the background of the second shot.

David Oldfield

25/10/13 – 07:54

I think you did, David. Allowing for perspective look at the heights?

Joe

25/10/13 – 07:55

Have you noticed that every window bay in the lower deck and every bay except the front in the upper deck has a sliding window included (ok hinged vent in rear upper deck bay). That’s quite unusual. I worked in Stoke when the two D10s were at nearby Stafford yet I never went to look for or travel on them. Can’t believe it!

Ian Wild

25/10/13 – 12:49

Sometimes we could kick ourselves for missed opportunities, Ian.

David Oldfield

26/10/13 – 07:29

As far as I know all BMMO double deckers built from 1950 onwards, D5s through to D10s, had a full set of sliding vents both sides, with the exception of the all Leyland LD8s.

Tony Gallimore

30/10/13 – 11:52

Both of the D10’s ended their days operating from Stafford depot. One day my friend and I caught the train from Manchester to Stafford to spend the day riding on Midland Red buses; we visited Walsall and Wolverhampton. On returning to Stafford we had half an hour to wait for the train, and one of the D10’s was in service. We boarded it and travelled to the first stop, just to say we had ridden on a D10!
If the D10 had entered production, would it have been copied by other bus builders? It might have resulted in a shorter production life for the Atlantean and Fleetline.

Don McKeown

07/11/13 – 08:00

Not sure if I have put this in the correct posting.

May I add some comments on the BMMO underfloor engine? As a Midland Red engineering supervisor at a certain garage operating CM6’s and numerous other types, for many years, there are one or two points that should be mentioned. One is that having worked on these and Leyland Leopards side by side, the huge difference in engine accessibility cannot be ignored. The BMMO engine was surrounded by acres of empty space, every necessary component was easily accessed, often from under the side without need for a pit. The starter motor for example, could be changed in five minutes flat. I know, I did it many times. Alternator, water pump, fuel system etc, ditto. Jobs that would take at least twice as long on a Leopard. And this brings me to point number two: the cooling system. The BMMO system was non-pressurised, it ran cool most of the time, largely due to the large water capacity – I think 17 gal. on S17/CM6 onwards-no cooling fan, and those masses of empty space to allow air in! And a cylinder head design which would tolerate a leaky gasket for days if kept topped up, despite a radiator of oily water.., at least, in local use. A blown head gasket on a Leopard spelled trouble! Usually a cracked cylinder liner unless you were lucky. It was a great shame that the magnificent BMMO 10.44 litre engine wasn’t adopted for a new standard NBC design: I believe a top secret rear engined prototype was built and tested at the beginning of the 1970s, but the Leyland lobby won the day, and we got the dreaded National… thanks for the chance to talk of old times…great times.

Michael F

07/11/13 – 09:35

Another sad indictment of NBC and BLMC Michael.

David Oldfield

12/06/14 – 08:24

“Intriguing how the HA registration followed the KHA mark, rather than the other way around.”
Smethwick started reversed registrations in September 1955 with 1 AHA. Upon reaching 999 MHA in April 1960, they decided to start issuing 501 HA etc on cars, buses and trucks – the three-letter series continuing only on motorcycles.
They reached 9719 HA before adopting the year suffix system in August 1964.

Des Elmes

12/06/14 – 10:09

Fascinating to read Michael F’s account of the D10’s qualities and of its unfulfilled potential, and until reading Brendan’s piece I hadn’t appreciated how ingeniously the designers had positioned the engine to minimise intrusion. One question: surely such a concentration of weight on the nearside—not only the engine but the gearbox as well—must have caused problems? At least the AEC Q had an offside engine, tending to counteract the road-camber effect.

Ian T

12/06/14 – 14:15

I assume that Cleethorpes did not normally figure on Midland Red destination blinds – not double deckers at any rate?!

Stephen Ford

12/06/14 – 17:29

Ian, the location of the fuel tank on the offside would have surely contributed some weight balance to a degree. Thinking of unbalanced chassis, I wonder if the Bristol VRL might have suffered from handling problems with the concentration of so much weight in the overhung offside rear corner.

Roger Cox

17/06/14 – 06:55

Ian, Peter Nash’s fascinating book ‘Push Once – life in the bus industry’ mentions problems related to the D10’s engine being mounted off centre. Apparently this did cause brake linings and parts of the suspension system to wear unevenly, but the most serious problem appears to have been that “the engine location compromised the integrity of the frame leading to cracks in stress panels in later life”. As the vehicles were in effect prototypes, surely this problem could have been overcome with further development? That said, Bristol-ECW encountered a few structural problems over the years with the LS semi-integral design, and eventually the model was replaced by the MW, which reverted to a traditional chassis frame.

Brendan Smith

25/06/14 – 08:27

There must have been some issues with cooling as at some point 4943 had been fitted with an electric fan, presumably thermostatically controlled. I dare say for the majority of time it was not needed, but I expect sitting in traffic queues may have made a difference, not that there were many of those in Stafford.

Mark

25/06/14 – 11:12

I took these pictures of D10 4943 in 2008. It can be seen the nearside seating was on a shallow platform, with the only real intrusion into the saloon of the mechanicals, in the form of a small ‘hump’ midway down.
Otherwise the floor area was remarkably clutter free.

Mark

25/06/14 – 13:11

Thx, Mark, for the photos. The floor is commendably level and clutter-free, with a complete lack of a dwarf-only area at rear of so many current buses! Mention of Stafford brings back memories of English Electric and 16MU RAF Stafford, where I was based until 1959, thus missing seeing this vehicle! I do recall the sole, grossly-overloaded bus which ran all night on Sunday nights, ferrying returning airmen to camp. Like the King Alfred Regent V healing over, displayed recently, we often wondered if our bus was going to recover from its alarming angle! Standing passengers upstairs does NOT aid stability!

Chris Hebbron

25/06/14 – 13:11

Regarding Cleethorpes on the blind, many Midland Red garages ran summer dated Holiday services to resorts, for example the Eastern/Leicester area garages ran to such places as Skegness, Mablethorpe, etc; these services more often than not were run by Dual Purpose vehicles : the point being the destination blind would be the same one fitted to every type of vehicle (except full coaches which rarely ran on any type of stage carriage). There were also other far flung places on some garages blinds, as again the stock with comfier seating would quite often be used on Associated Motorways work where BMMO would be joint operator of a route, and such places as Bristol, Cheltenham, Glasgow, Manchester etc. would feature.

Mark

25/06/14 – 18:09

An interesting view of the underside of 4943, showing the deft positioning of the mechanicals. The engine was placed the opposite way round to the single-deckers i.e. cylinder heads towards the centre/crankcase to nearside, thus avoiding raising the floor level. Taken when new in Carlyle works – so ahead of it’s time.

Nigel Edwards

25/06/14 – 18:09

I remember seeing 16MU on the destination blinds of Stafford buses in the 80’s and wondering what it was, now I know!

Mark

23/06/15 – 06:39

The bearded gentleman leaning out of the bus is Keith Bodley, and I was probably not far away when this picture was taken.

Tony Martin

16/10/15 – 05:58

Having driven both D10s at Stafford “1965” I never found any handling problems, however one problem that did occur was with brake failure 4943 this was corrected though very quickly. One interesting point was D7 4162 was fitted with a turbo charger one could always tell the difference as with the engine under power it would have a whistling from the exhaust. Leyland Fleetline deckers were very unstable in windy conditions you were always correcting the direction of travel, also the single decker “Leyland National” would often not go over the slightly raised surface of bus stop laybys when it was raining no problem with any BMMOs though.Having travelled on many service buses throughout the last sixty years I have never found any modern PCV,s that matched the comfort quietness and lack of rattles of BMMOs.

Graham M

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

29/04/21 – 06:10

I have always been intrigued by the D10s. Mr Sinclair seemed obsessed with horizontal engines but I really feel that the design that might have worked better would be the vertical offside side engine, under a longitudinal seat near the offside front wheel as per the AEC Q. The balance of the chassis would have been better and accessibility would have been easier. Plus, a proper rear overhang, rather than that of the Q, dictated by absurd length restrictions, would have improved traction as compared to the Q. With hindsight, the front entrance maximum capacity double decker was the way forward, and a lower saloon totally given over to seating would have been ideal.

Ian Docherty

29/04/21 – 10:06

The Q was angled rather than vertical and Sinclair and his mentor O C Power developed the AEC SE4 & SE6 (I think) for Northern in the 30s both following the side angled concept. Neither were successful mainly to the need for a higher floor and convoluted drive line to the drive axle. I think the D10 was a typical BMMO move to test the envelope like so many of their previous designs.

Roger Burdett

30/04/21 – 07:02

The AEC Q had an almost straight drive line to the differential on the rear axle which carried only single tyres. Even so, convoluted drive lines did not prevent the first generation of rear transverse engined buses becoming commercial successes. I have often thought that a re-engineered Wulfrunian with the engine located behind the offside front wheel might have been practicable, but Guy ran out of money for Wulfrunian development.

Roger Cox

01/05/21 – 05:41

Am I right though that the prop came out the gearbox at an angle? From my memory of working on a Q, I do not remember a diff hump in the saloon ie high floor. Was the gearbox mounted at the front or the rear of the engine? ie rodding or cable?

Roger Burdett

02/05/21 – 06:08

Here is a drawing of the Q type chassis design. It cannot be seen here , but the differential was set close to the offside rear wheel.

Roger Cox

03/05/21 – 07:03

Thanks for the drawing Roger (C). The single rear tyres would no doubt help in keeping the driveline as straight as possible, as it would allow the diff to be further over to the offside. It’s not something I’d even thought about until seeing your posting. It would also explain why Roger (B) couldn’t remember seeing a diff hump in the floor line.

Brendan Smith

03/05/21 – 07:03

I think the offset differential was one of the main reasons for the Q having single rear tyres.
Was the diff actually mounted on the outside of the chassis frame?

Eric Bawden

03/05/21 – 07:04

Are these of any use?

Tony Fox

Midland Red – BMMO D9 – EHA 415D – 5415

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1966
BMMO D9
BMMO/Willowbrook H40/32RD

EHA 415D has the unmistakable outline of a Midland Red D9. She has the operator’s own H72RD body, built in collaboration with Willowbrook. Does this mean one designed it and the other built it, or one built the frames and the other added the panels? We see it, newly withdrawn from service and still in full NBC livery (sorry!), in the Southsea rally on 8 June 1980.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

10/11/16 – 07:07

I wasn’t aware that Willowbrook had any involvement in the bodywork of the D9, but I am open to correction if evidence is offered. My understanding is that the bodies were built in the Midland Red Carlyle Works on MetSec frames, and incorporated aluminium alloy and glass fibre panelling, as employed previously in the single deck S14 design.

Roger Cox

10/11/16 – 07:08

It’s come back! Its no good- I have lived in the Midlands in my youth, but I still cannot get fond of Midland Red. I don’t know what it is- that all over red (It was, want it?), or I can still see those single skin fibreglass domes (is that right- how much more was single skin?) or what seemed rather drab uniform interiors… or I could never get used to that sort of “Billy’s bus” front end: but steady, I’m sure they had many virtues: perhaps they were an engineer’s bus…?

Joe

10/11/16 – 09:05

Roger, The PSVC lists might be wrong: they say that the D9 has a BMMO/Willowbrook body, with H40/32RD seating, but both Jenkinson and the old “Ian Allan” BBF listings do not mention Willowbrook. BLOTW, however, mentions only Willowbrook as building the bodies. Ah, well . . .
And the ‘captcha’ code for this comment ends in D9 !!!

Pete Davies

10/11/16 – 09:05

According to ‘Midland Red’ A history of 1940 – 1970 it states “5401-45 bodies completed by Willowbrook”

Peter

10/11/16 – 13:54

The D9 was an integral vehicle, the only double decker so constructed apart from the London Transport Routemaster, which was actually semi-integral. Production of the D9 came in several batches with the following fleet nos:-
4773 : prototype 1958
4849 – 4952 : 1958 to 1961
4945 – 5044 : 1962 to 1963
5296 – 5445 : 1963 to 1966
I confess to being previously unaware of it, though a closer look at my copy of ‘Midland Red Buses’ by M.W. Greenwood confirms that the 45 “tail end charlies” were finished off by Willowbrook, possibly in part because by this time, even before the BET sell out to NBC, BMMO in house production was winding down. Certainly, the D9 design itself owed nothing to the Willowbrook company.

Roger Cox

10/11/16 – 14:37

I have looked at Steve Richards’ book on the D9/D10 classes, titled “More Room on Top”. He states that all the D9s were built at Central Works, except some of the final batch. However by the mid-sixties there was a severe skilled labour shortage at Central Works. The emphasis there was on single-deckers construction, and the final 45 D9s had only reached the part-panelled stage. It was this group which were completed by Willowbrook. They were virtually indistinguishable from the fully Carlyle-built D9s. Steve Richards records that the side lamps were positioned slightly lower, and the small “Midland” display above the destination screens was slightly different. The first four [5401-5404] were delivered in December 1965, the rest followed in 1966, finally being completed in November that year. I would say from this account that these particular ones should be described as “BMMO/Willowbrook” rather than being attributed wholly to the Loughborough company.

Michael Hampton

10/11/16 – 14:38

Although at the time I had little interest in the detail construction of buses, I do know that when I had the pleasure to drive D9’s in service in 1967 from Redditch and Digbeth garages I found them to be far superior in steering, semi-automatic gear changing, engine power, superb disc braking and general driver friendliness than anything I had driven on BCT. One slight problem I remember them to be very light and bouncy in the ride especially when empty. I certainly class them in the 3 finest double deckers to drive in my 50yrs experience with PSV’s, with the Routemaster and Neoplan Skyliner

Tony Morgan

11/11/16 – 05:44

The erroneous idea that Willowbrook constructed, rather than merely completed, the bodies on the final 45 D9s seems to have crept into all sorts of places, even on the Coventry Corporation Transport Society webpages :- //www.cct-society.org.uk/midland/buses_t05.htm

Here is a picture of an earlier D9 No.5002 (3002 HA) taken in Birmingham in the late 1960s, when the bus still wore the BET style livery and fleetname. Like its single deck counterpart, the S14, the suspension of the D9 was by Metalastik rubber units, though independent at the front. One curious feature of the D9 was the full hydraulic braking system in which the pump was driven from the output side of the gearbox, giving rather peculiar braking responses at low road speeds. In the Routemaster, the pump was driven at engine speeds. The prototype D9 originally had disc brakes at front and rear, but the first production batch had discs on the front only, with drum brakes on the rear wheels. Even these discs proved troublesome, and all the later D9s were equipped with drum brakes all round, the first batch being retro fitted accordingly. I note Joe’s impassioned plea concerning this operator, so I hope soon to submit a gallery of Midland Red buses to the OBP site for his enjoyment.

Roger Cox

11/11/16 – 08:01

Apparently this vehicle sometime in the seventies carried an all over advertisement for a ‘Do It Yourself Warehouse’ which could have been called ‘Super D’. I think it was in an all over white livery.

Also just above the top front windows a strengthening bar can be seen which was added due to front dome fatigue.

Peter

11/11/16 – 08:01

This has been an interesting exchange of views! Thanks for your comments.

Pete Davies

12/11/16 – 07:17

Attached for comparison a side image of 5395 taken in Shrewsbury bus station in 1970.
I enjoyed riding on the D9s particularly on the rural services. An unusual feature was the inward facing front nearside seats downstairs. The book ‘ More room on top ‘ is recommended although I am biased as a friend contributed a number of excellent colour photos.

Keith Newton

12/11/16 – 07:19

I’ve seen the obvious now- that the D9 had a considerable front overhang which gives it its funny look- but as Tony says it’s an Engineer/Driver’s bus… and anything comparable with a Skyliner must be OK. We’ve been here before but compare this overhang & everything else with its contemporary the Wulfrunian and you can see how folk were thinking then, especially if rear-engine to them meant Renault 10!

Joe

16/11/16 – 14:45

It was not only D9s that were finished off by Willowbrook. S17s around the same time were and I believe both Willowbrook and Plaxton were used. Serious production difficulties caused by skilled staff shortages. Interestingly outside contractors were not used for the later S21 and S22 types but Plaxton were used for S23 by which time all production was stopping. Although every D9 appears to have been modified and allegedly no two buses were the same, the Willowbrook finished ones are identifiable by the trim above the front wheel arch. MidlandRed.net is a good source of information.

Sam Caunt

01/02/17 – 17:12

I have only just seen the comments re Willowbrook completing D9s. I can remember seeing them in skeletal form travelling along the then A50 towards Coalville. Their destination was confirmed by my father who was based in the divisional traffic office in the 1960s. The drivers would have had to take the scenic route round Ashby in order to avoid two low bridges, hence their appearance in Coalville. I am unable to say which route they used onwards to Loughborough, but the M1 would have been available from November 1965!

Peter Baseley

22/11/17 – 07:31

I must comment on the subject of the BMMO D9 (and BMMO’s in general) as a former Midland Red engineering supervisor of 25 years service.The bodywork of the Willowbrook examples might have been finished by them but the chassis was certainly built at Carlyle works-the works itself did not close.The D9 was of monocoque construction and would have had the outer panel skin added by the coachbuilders.A few more facts:D9‘s were NOT disc braked,except the prototype 4773,the rest were all round hydraulic drum braked,unlike the single deckers.4773 by the way still survives,being currently restored from derelict condition.D9’s may or may not have been single skinned but they were sturdy and stable enough,as anyone who compared a ride upstairs on one with a Fleetline (DD11) on the 658 Leicester-Coventry service-the Fleetline swayed about like hell (a well known trait of Fleetlines in crosswinds.) In general BMMO‘s WERE an engineer’s bus,easy to work on and reliable,but also a driver’s bus,with excellent roadholding and braking.The 10.5 litre engine (same as CM6) was probably the finest the UK bus industry has produced.
What other PSV diesel engine (in a single decker) could get away with no cooling fan at all?

Michael Hunt

20/12/18 – 06:36

These were a superb bus. the slight setting back of the front axle reduced the wheelbase slightly and I assume this was to make the bus slightly more maneuverable or perhaps the suspension design necessitated it? I think this particular feature did incur some pitching on certain types of road surface but that aside they were excellent and likes by the drivers, which speaks volumes.
I have had the privilege of driving one occasionally and the front suspension certainly irons out road imperfections.It was only the final batches that were finished by Willowbrok just as Plaxton finished some of the saloons from the same period. There are constant references to these buses loosing the power steering if the brakes were applied, the two systems were separate and I can’t see how that could happen.

William Parker

20/12/18 – 08:52

I have 5424 and restored it from the chassis up around 18 years ago. It is a curious mis-match of technologies with extensive use of fibre glass taking weight down to compensate for the very heavy engine. They are basic and built down to a price. Mine lasted 11 years in service and only 5 in preservation before being put off the road. Midland Red had innovative engineers but their lack of resource was found out when the vehicles were in service. Many Midland Red folllowers say the reason they had so many Black Country garages combined with bus stations was to make transfer to another bus easier for the drivers when they put them off the road.

Roger Burdett

Midland Red – BMMO C1 – KHA 301 – 3301

Copyright Nigel Edwards

Midland Red (Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1948
BMMO C1
Duple B40F

This shot was taken in June 2010 at the BaMMOT Museum at Wythall. The beautifully restored example of 45 originally built represents the first post-war coaches introduced by BMMO at their Carlyle works with bodywork by Duple. Based on the service bus (S6) with underfloor engine they were years ahead of their normal control – and half-cab – competitors. Twelve more, designated C2, appeared in 1950 – modifications included an outward opening passenger door (replacing sliding) and reduced seating capacity to 26 to cater for the very popular extended tours. These vehicles gave stirling service and, even though larger coaches had been introduced in the mid 50’s, a number were retained for “coach cruises” where narrower and shorter vehicles were required, Devon, Cornwall and the Scottish Highlands, for instance. A number survived well into the mid 1960’s. Even after their revenue earning life a number of these were converted to dual-control and became driver training vehicles into 1970.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Nigel Edwards

19/06/12 – 11:46

Thank you, Nigel, for bringing this beautiful beast to our attention. Another fine example of the industry-leading designs from the Midland Red stable. These C1’s, and the subsequent C2’s with their widely-spaced seating, must have been a delight to ride in. Spurred on by this photo, I have just visited the BaMMOT museum website and note that this coach is not on their roster. Is it under private ownership?

Paul Haywood

19/06/12 – 13:37

Yes Paul, this vehicle has been in private ownership for many years – the same family I believe – and is, fortunately for us all, a regular rally visitor in many parts of the country. You and other contributors might like to know there is a ‘Midland Red Day’ in October at the BaMMOT, when I am sure this icon will be present. From past experience well worth a visit!

Nigel Edwards

19/06/12 – 16:08

A number of people now have shares in this vehicle. I saw it earlier this year under repair with panels off etc so don’t know when it will be back on the road, but a favourite wherever it goes.

Ken Jones

19/06/12 – 16:09

Thanks, Nigel – I also noticed this event and checked my diary. To my horror, I realised that I had only just booked a 2-day theatre trip for myself, wife and mother-in-law for that very weekend, so it would be suicide if I cancelled – especially for “mere buses”! Ho hum! Next year perhaps?

Paul Haywood

22/06/12 – 15:12

The vehicle repairs are not estimated to be completed before end Dec 2012 and will therefore not be at Wythall on Oct 14.
The Group who own it are about 8 persons strong.

Roger Burdett

23/06/12 – 05:36

What a very pleasant surprise to see a posting from you Roger. I am hoping your beautiful C5 (which I have submitted for a future posting) will be at Wythall when I make my ‘pilgrimage’ from Yorkshire in October – may even be able to take a ‘peek’ inside?. Thanks for the update on 3301.

Nigel Edwards

23/06/12 – 21:29

Nigel mentions the twelve successors to the C1 with Duple C26C bodies for extended tour work. Here is 3353, KHA 353, of the C2 class in May 1970 during the HCVC Brighton Rally. I cannot find any current record of this coach. Does it still exist?

Roger Cox

25/06/12 – 17:12

Nigel
C5 is unlikely to be there either as it is off by rotation i.e. when you have 18 roadworthy vehicles only a few are on the road at the same time. This was on the road until Sept 2011. If I have few problems then with everything else it might appear.

Roger
Only CL2 that still exists (and not in good condition) is 3352. It was in a garden in Wakefield till 1999 when Alan Bishop paid to bring it South. Work was started but I suspect given the size of the task it has been stopped for a few years now. I do not expect it to be restarted under the current owner

Roger Burdett

08/07/12 – 07:37

I serviced these buses at Newton Mearns bus depot (Western SMT) Glasgow Scotland in the 60,s & early 70,s on there turn around to London
The innovation of these buses was great the first heavy vehicle I had seen with disc brakes and not drums you couldn’t wait to finish it so you could go for a road test up the Ayr Road, they were great to drive. “OH” how I miss those days when buses were buses and not the junk that they call buses today.

John

09/07/12 – 07:16

3352 stood for years in the drive of a house in Stanley Road Wakefield. It had the name Ronny Storm presumably a kind of pop group.

Philip Carlton

10/07/12 – 06:38

Managed to find picture I took of 3301 under repair as mentioned in recent thread

Ken Jones

10/07/12 – 11:53

A dignified old lady – still looks amazing even when in pieces, long may she live!

Nigel Edwards

21/10/12 – 07:55

3353 was burnt out many years ago, I remember as a small lad I saw it in a yard (farm?) near Cannock with only below window line left. The coach was owned by the 3301 preservation group for spares. It went awol ie pinched by some scrappy about 30 odd years ago.
3352 is in a very bad way, the ribs of the body are all in steel & perished from water ingress so all require replacing, the floor is rotten & half removed. I haven’t worked on it for 10 years & I know nothing will have happened since. Perhaps when it gets passed on it will see the road again. Certainly not with Alan owning it.

Andy Bishop

06/12/12 – 11:56

Kens shot of 3301 under repair (above) took me down memory lane. I did my apprenticeship at Bulwark Workshop In the 1960s. I now live in Melbourne Australia. Keep up the good work.

Mike Jones

06/12/12 – 16:34

Some of us recently had a private visit to Roger Burdett’s place and my article and picture of 3301 as it is now – some 18 months into the restoration – can be seen at www.focustransport.org.uk/

Ken Jones

19/04/14 – 07:33

Many fond memories of this old bus happy hours polishing the grill happy days at rallies across the country my greatest thanks to her old owners Allan, Cliff & Les for letting me ride along so happy to see she is being looked after still may be I get to see her again one day, fond memories.

Christopher Wilkinson

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

11/05/16 – 06:37

I remember taking my drivers test in this bus in the 1970s I already held a full PSV licence having driven on Walsall transport for a number of years. Even then you had to pass the Midland Red test. When you had passed you felt on top of the world.

Trev Gibbs

Midland Red – BMMO C5 – 780 GHA – 4780

Copyright Nigel Edwards

Midland Red (Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1959
BMMO C5
BMMO C39F

A memorable spring day in in 1960, after driving for Midland Red for a couple of years, I was delivering a motor caravan to London at a steady 60 on the new M1 and looking in the mirror I saw what turned out to be a new C5 – Motorway Express – looming towards me and finally going past at 85+ and disappearing in a flash. The very interesting book by Steve Richards on these vehicles made note of the extensive work done by Dunlop to actually design, and the difficulty of producing, a tyre that would withstand the stress of these high speeds by a truly awesome turbocharged coach well ahead of it’s time. Still, today I would argue Roger Burdett’s beautifully restored C5 -780 GHA- is a fine example of a classic.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Nigel Edwards

26/06/12 – 14:18

The vehicles this operator built were always
(a) different
(b) well ahead of their time.
It was a sad day when “outside” suppliers had to be used.
Thank you for sharing.

Pete Davies

26/06/12 – 17:51

Sadly, I never experienced one of these – but I did have the Corgi toy.

David Oldfield

27/06/12 – 07:17

So did I, David, but the special Dunlop tyres couldn’t cope with Axminster carpet, but were great on lino!

Paul Haywood

27/06/12 – 10:22

…..but lino did share certain (chemical) characteristics with the surface of the M1.

David Oldfield

27/06/12 – 13:33

There were no speed limits on motorways in the early days and it’s true that these and a few other modern coaches were capable of 90mph. With soft-shoulders, no central crash barrier and inadequate tyre technology, several accidents/near-misses occurred, which swiftly caused safety features and speed limits to be introduced. I think it was 80mph to start with, coming down to 70 later, to save fuel at the start of fuel crises that bedevilled countries in the 1960’s and 1970’s.

Chris Hebbron

28/06/12 – 07:43

The juxtaposition of this posting and the previous one, about trolley buses, is particularly noteworthy because they are flip sides of the same coin: the then irresistible dominance of the internal combustion engine. Railways were unfashionable before Beeching, being viewed as 19th century technology, (there was even a Railway Conversion League), whereas Britain’s ‘new motorways’ were seen as an exciting foretaste of new travel possibilities. The C5 was a supreme example of this fashion, along with the Ribble/Standerwick/Scout Atlantean coaches. I never travelled on one, but, like Nigel, I remember being overtaken by one on the M1 at great speed.
The fashion of the period did little for trolleys. Despite the advantages in performance and silence so cherished by my friend John Whitaker and others, their need for dedicated infrastructure, extra specialist maintenance skills, additional equipment and inventory, gave the motor bus – cheaper, more flexible and by the 1950’s very reliable – an appeal that was just far more in keeping with the climate of the times.
As Chris remarks, the generally high motorway speeds of the time did quickly become of concern, (not only coaches – much of the danger was caused not only by the points Chris makes but also by large speed differentials between vehicles). That led to the introduction of the 70 mph limit, (sorry, Chris, but it was never 80; 50 temporarily during the 1973/4 fuel crisis, but always 70 otherwise). In turn, that undermined the justification for ‘ton up’ coaches. Nevertheless. I still have happy memories of getting a Maidstone & District AEC Reliance up to 70 mph on the Swanley by-pass, and I’m sure all readers will admire the subject of Nigel’s lovely posting. Happy days indeed.

Roy Burke

28/06/12 – 07:44

In my student days in Birmingham, I normally travelled home on the Standerwick service to Lancaster, being overtaken almost every time by the Western SMT coaches which moved over only for vehicles showing blue lights. They were reputed – true or not? – to do the round trip of Glasgow, London, Glasgow in the shift.
Another story of the time related to the prototype CM6T, which was said to have been tested over a measured mile of the then still to open M1, before Smith’s Industries in Basingstoke were contracted to make the speedometers. The beast did 120, apparently, and regularly overtook the train in that glorious section near Watford Gap Services!

Pete Davies

28/06/12 – 14:30

Following on from Pete Davies’s comments regarding the testing of these C5 – and later CM6’s – a recent extract from my May copy of ‘Omnibus’ (the monthly members sheet from BaMMOT) by John Morris, further illustrates the effort that went into testing. I hope John won’t mind me quoting verbatim from his excellent article!
â€œAt Central Works there was also a department known as ‘Development’ which was jealously guarded from access to strangers visiting the works”.
As the name implied any future improvements and new designs were carried out in this area. This included the road testing of the new CM6T London to Birmingham Motorway coaches.
On several occasions two young engineers, accompanied by myself would board a finished vehicle painted in green primer, without interior fittings, loaded with a number of 56Ib weights to form a second floor covering, with a large sofa placed behind the cab area (to provide luxurious comfort for the observers) and off we would go on a 1,000 mile road test. This would involve driving from Birmingham to the start of the M6 near Cannock and then going full pelt up the motorway at speeds of up to 100mph on the clock all the way to Charnock Richards services in Cumbria. I kid you not regarding the speed! Don’t forget this was in the sixties and traffic on the M6 was very light and we simply stayed in the empty right hand lane all the way! I vividly remember drivers of sports cars probably doing 80mph looking at us open mouthed as this large green machine drifted much faster past them.
At Charnock Richards we would have a pleasant lunch and then back to Birmingham. This trip would be repeated next day after minor adjustments until 1,000 miles had been covered. Once the testing was completed the CM6T would be passed fit for service and handed over to final assembly for ht out and painting.

Nigel Edwards

28/06/12 – 15:58

I have to say that the CM5T was an absolutely splendid looking machine. The red and black livery, relieved by polished trim was really classy. The windscreen arrangement was rather reminiscent of Dutch coaches of the period. The windows may have been unfashionably small – presumably it was based on the S14/S15 body shell – but it was probably a stronger structure than the panoramic coaches that were starting to appear at the same time. Maybe not strong enough to withstand a collision at over 100mph though.
I never rode on a CM5, but I did once travel from Birmingham to London on a CM6T, and must say that it was the most comfortable, smooth and quiet riding coach I have ever ridden on. The Yorkshire Traction Leopard employed on my return from the capital to Halifax came nowhere near.
I also had the Corgi model (still have, and still in its box). Its suspension was also very smooth, but it lacked the chromed windscreen metalwork that gave the real thing its distinctive appearance. It was also a larger scale than the rest of my Dinky Toy bus collection, so had to be parked well away from the others in Sideboard Street Bus Station before the long journey to Coalplace via Kitchen and Garden Path.

John Stringer

29/06/12 – 07:51

Thank you, Nigel, for your quotation from the newsletter. It confirms that at least some element of the stories circulating in my student days was correct. The run to and from Charnock Richard – it’s near Preston, by the way, not in what the political meddlers like to call Cumbria – would have given a good test of performance in “real” traffic.

Pete Davies

29/06/12 – 07:52

John,
That was the exact route I used to operate with my Dinky Duple Roadmasters and Leyland halfcab deckers but I used to get a fair turn of speed up on the long straight Bannister Way on the route to Under Mumsbed bus station!
I also had the Corgi model but never used it much because I thought it looked too big. Wish I still had it.

Eric Bawden

29/06/12 – 11:16

I remember vividly as a child of about 8 yrs sitting behind the driver of a late to depart out of Nottingham Broadmarsh bus station a Barton’s Yeates bodied Bedford Val and travelling along the A52 which is a single carriageway by Wollaton Park gates at speeds in excess of 70 mph, I thought it was great but my father was quite worried for all the passengers safety as the speed limit was 40 mph !

Roger Broughton

29/06/12 – 11:20

There was another model of the CM5T made by Budgie Toys, and it was more like 1/76th scale, but I must say I never came across one in those halcyon, carefree, childhood model bus operating days – the only Budgie Toys bus I ever had bought was a Routemaster, whose wheels were just slotted onto the ends of the axles and came off every time it went round a corner. Not all they were cracked up to be, Routemasters.

John Stringer

29/06/12 – 17:13

Just on the subject of speedo’s, I joined Armstrong Galley in 1975 an even then all our coaches were fitted with tachographs, this was about two or three years before the legislation making them compulsory came in. As we all know the primary speed register on tachos is displayed in KPH with MPH in much smaller figures, and I well remember one occasion when I was on the M6 and a small boy who was sitting about two seats back got up and came to look over my shoulder, he announced to everyone that we were doing over 110 miles per hour

Ronnie Hoye

30/06/12 – 05:20

We’ve all been there Ronnie. I was once reported by a passenger for doing 60 in a 40 limit. 60kph = 40mph (approx.).

David Oldfield

30/06/12 – 05:21

You’d be surprised at the number of drivers who have been reported to their employers by passengers peering at the speedo’/tacho’ face and mistaking KPH for MPH.

John Stringer

30/06/12 – 05:22

Thanks for that snippet, Ronnie. In case anyone was wondering what the difference in accuracy between a tacho and a speed camera, there was a case in one of the trade magazines about a year before I retired – so about 5 years ago now – where a truck driver had been zapped at about 35mph in a 30 zone, but his tacho said he was doing 28 at that time.
In court, the Magistrate agreed to send both items for test, with the result binding. Driver was cleared and they scrapped the camera!

Pete Davies

01/07/12 – 09:52

The Val was doing 70 mph not kph as it was well before tachos were being fitted.

Roger Broughton

27/09/12 – 07:08

Regarding Chris Hebbron’s comments on speed limits (27/06/12), the 70mph limit came in under Barbara Castle’s regime as Minister of Transport. After a trial period in 1965, it was made permanent in 1966 – there was no intermediate 80mph limit.
The fuel related speed limits were applied in the winter of 1973/4 as a result of the combined effects of the oil shortages following the Yom Kippur War and the Miners’ Strike/3 day week. The maximum speed limit then was 50mph on all roads previously restricted to 70mph, including motorways.
The introduction of the “fuel saving” limit coincided with a massive rise in prices and was widely resented.
Midland Red motorway services were renowned for their high speed and comfort. There were a number of accidents but 90mph on a C5 would have been much less hairy than 60mph on the top deck of a Standerwick “Gay Hostess” Atlantean.

Phil Blinkhorn

26/10/12 – 14:21

On the 14th October 2012 during Wythall’s Midland Red day, I rode on the preserved CM6, 5656. The driver took it along the dual carriageway Wythall bypass and let her go. When I asked how fast was that, he replied ‘Off the clock, mate!’ Not bad for a 47 year old coach!

Tony Martin

26/10/12 – 16:49

Thought others might like to see the CM6T referred to by Tony Martin. Thankfully the weather didn’t spoil the “Midland Red day”, great to see these restored examples at work again.

Nigel Edwards

06/11/12 – 06:40

On the subject of passengers reporting drivers for excess speed I well remember being approached by a male passenger who I had just seen get off one of our Bristol VRs who stated quite vehemently that he intended to report its driver for speeding because sitting in the O/S front seat on the top deck he had for some reason looked down the periscope tube and could see the speedo very clearly (which you could ) and it was reading 80 mph obviously dangerous on the road the bus was using. If only, 50 mph was a good speed for any VR, I pondered on telling him of the kph/mph scales on the speedo but decided to let him make a fool of himself knowing that the driver was able to easily prove his innocence.

Diesel Dave

12/09/14 – 17:40

I agree with Nigel Edwards. In late 1959 I went from B’ham to London with my father, who was running-in a new Austin Cambridge A55 Farina (718 AOG) on the M1, bouncing along merrily at 50 to 60 mph. I was 8 yrs old and vividly remember being rapidly overtaken, and left for dead, by a big red C5MT, which was rock steady – most impressive! I have read that even after the 70 mph speed limit came into force in 1966, the coach timetable from Digbeth to Victoria, still expected the original speed of c.85 mph to be maintained on the M1/M45. Yes, I did go on to become an engineer.

John Mitchell

05/10/14 – 11:02

Very interested in Midland Red C5…actually drove one when I was at Worcester Garage on X72/73 Service.
Also interesting to see that Mr Burdett owns one…he now owns my Tilling-Stevens, GOU 732…ex-Classic Coaches of Wombourne. It’s good to know she’s gone to a good home.
Bedford O.B., MYB 33, is now owned by Stuart Jones, Editor of Bus & Coach Buyer…another good home. Sadly the AEC narrow-bodied PLaxton, EUG???D was not so lucky.

Harry ‘Bob’ Harris

06/10/14 – 13:45

John, Difficult now to comprehend, the specially selected drivers had to be trained in ‘high speed driving techniques’ and never needed to resort to flashing light intimidation – the other motorway drivers (and truck drivers) saw them coming and just pulled over. What a joy to drive these coaches then, compare with today – second lane and lucky to achieve 55mph !!

Nigel Edwards

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

23/10/14 – 16:16

Now in my dotage I have been remembering some of the things when! I drove on the Midland Red late 60s early 70s out of Banbury Garage where we had a couple of C5s an ideal tool for the rural routes around North Oxfordshire, the only alteration to their Motorway work was that 5th gear was blanked off but still they had a good turn of speed in 4th! They were beautifully softly sprung and when my sister was 2 weeks overdue with her first child I would pick her up from Rollright and storm back to where we lived in Bloxham in an attempt to induce her!
Did hear tell of a driver on the Birmingham-London service being passed by a fully freighted Kew Dodge.

Charles Henderson

Midland Red (Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Co) 1937 SOS SLR English Electric C30C

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co) 1939 SOS SON Brush B38F

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Omnibus Co) 1939 SOS FEDD Brush H30/26F

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co) 1940 SOS SON Brush B38F

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)1969Daimler Fleetline CRG6LXBAlexander H45/30D

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)1962BMMO S15BMMO DP40F

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)1960BMMO D10BMMO H78F

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)1966BMMO D9BMMO/Willowbrook H40/32RD

Midland Red (Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Co)1948BMMO C1Duple B40F

Midland Red (Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Co)1959BMMO C5BMMO C39F

Midland Red (Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1937
SOS SLR
English Electric C30C

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1939
SOS SON
Brush B38F

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Omnibus Co)
1939
SOS FEDD
Brush H30/26F

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1940
SOS SON
Brush B38F

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1969
Daimler Fleetline CRG6LXB
Alexander H45/30D

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1962
BMMO S15
BMMO DP40F

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1960
BMMO D10
BMMO H78F

Midland Red (Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1966
BMMO D9
BMMO/Willowbrook H40/32RD

Midland Red (Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1948
BMMO C1
Duple B40F

Midland Red (Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Co)
1959
BMMO C5
BMMO C39F