Friends of Classic London Buses of the FiftiesFor those actively involved in or supporting the preservation of London buses, coaches and trolleybuses of the past

Here is a nice wintry shot of RT 1426, one of the Country area's Cravens-bodied examples, waiting to go to home to Windsor from Uxbridge, long ago, via the picturesque-sounding Iver Heath, George Green, Upton Lea and more mundane Wexham Road, Slough and Eton. I cannot speak for those places at the time the photograph was taken, butin more recent times it has been hard to see anything remotely rural, bucolic or delightful about any of them, and Upton Lea is nothing but a large and uninspiring housing estate on the edge of Slough. Life can be so disappointing at times! Photo by Michael Dryhurst.

Newsletter 162 February 2020

Opening Lines

First of all, many thanks to all those “Friends” who kindly sent us seasonal greetings at what is nowadays regarded as the “festive” season. These are of course warmly reciprocated. Thanks also to those many individuals who contribute to this monthly mayhem. All contributions are gratefully received and as many as possible are used. It matters not if you send a couple of lines or several pages, it all helps to keep us all in touch. I would also now ask vehicle owners to think about keeping us posted, especially in the case of those buses and coaches which rarely, if ever, appear in public. Many members like to know that these “ghost” buses still exist and are being cared for, or stored, or even under extensive restoration. We don't need to know where you keep them (we wouldn't publish it if we did) and we don't need to know every time you replace a screw or rivet but it would gladden the hearts of many readers to have some updates on the half-forgotten members of the various classes still nominally preserved but rarely seen.

1

Bus route 266 John A Gray With reference to the cover photo on Newsletter 160, the London Omnibus Traction Society informs us currently that bus route 266 replaced trolley route 666 from 3rd January 1962, but was cut back from 31st January 1976 when Brent Cross (shopping centre) opened. It was further cut back at the other end from Hammersmith to Acton from 7th December 2019.

So we're now bang up-to-date!

Corrections Hugh TaylorTrolleybus 1588. The front cover of issue 160 is of trolleybus 1588 which is quoted as a 1940 delivery. Thatis not so, it was delivered in July 1939 and available for service when the Bow Road trolleybus routes started on 5th November that year.

On page 24 of issue 161 it states that the 666 was a Monday to Friday service. That is incorrect. Until 1956it did indeed just run in Monday to Friday peak hours but with the big changes on 2nd May 1956 the 666 became an all-day Monday to Friday route. On 7th January 1959 it became a daily service. 1588 moved from Bow to Colindale on 19th August 1959 so when this photograph was taken the 666 was an all-day performer.

[The date for 1588's construction came from the 1958 Ian Allan abc, so the late E. J. Smith was responsible for that error; he dated the whole batch to 10/40. - Ed.]

Whatever Happened to Carson's Paints? Chris PowisYou ask about Carson’s Paints; my recollection is that they were based in Battersea before the war merged after the war with the makers of Copal Varnish and traded under the name Carson’s Paripan until they were bought by Hadfields in Mitcham (SW London). The company traded under the name Carson-Hadfields still producing the Paripan range in the 1970’s. My recollection is a bit hazy but I think they were bought out by Bestobell Paints which morphed into the Kalon Group based in Yorkshire. Kalon became the group holding name for the Silver Paint (and knacker) Lacquer Co Ltd that was startedafter the war by the late Lesley Silver with his £250 service demob gratuity. You might also remember Leyland Paints which also ended up under the Kalon banner. It is still going as Sigma-Kalon, one of the world’s major paint manufacturers with their own emulsion polymerisation facilities in Yorkshire. The Mitcham site was “rationalised” in the early 1980s. All was not lost though as it was acquired by a manufacturer of alkyd resins for paints and varnishes which was sold to my former employer in the 1990s but I now cannot remember the name of the Mitcham company. It was closed down because it was going to cost too much to modernise the plant and bring it into line with modern standards. Oh happy days

Incident in Regent Street December 2015 Peter GoodfellowYour cartoon in Newsletter 161 January 2020 page 4 refers to an RTL in Regent Street having to brake sharply to avoid pedestrians.

I was driving a fully laden RTL on the 159 route in December 2015 in Regent Street and was just starting to pull away from bus stop ‘T’ (southbound). It was early evening and dark. I looked in my mirror to pull away from the stop with indicator on and started moving but at the same time something caught my peripheral vision to the front left. A lady had just that second fallen into the road just in front of me. I immediately braked and managed to stop before running over her. In fact I stood up pulling upwards on the steering wheel so that I could apply maximum pressure on the brake pedal. I am sure some of my passengers were thrown forward as depicted in the cartoon.

The police were called and they took statements. Regent Street, apart from the Christmas decorations, was also aglow with blue flashing lights; an ambulance, police van, motorbike and patrol car attended. Luckily the lady was OK and declined going to hospital. The general consensus was that she would have fallen off into the road whether the bus had been there or not. It just so happened that it was there and

2

I managed to stop it before a much worse outcome occurred. The police officer I spoke with said this happens a lot at Christmas with large crowds on the pavements and some folk on their mobiles, a bit ofpushing and shoving goes on. Drivers beware.

Hemel Hempstead Bus Garage Visits Martyn HuntNumber of vehicles seen in brackets () & "family" vehicles noted.

The date was 12 August 1987 when Ken Hammond and I first visited this London Country bus garage; we travelled in my 1956 MG ZA Magnette via Luton (inspecting RFs 11 and 673) in the station yard. Stevenage garage was next, followed by St.Albans (25), Hemel Hempstead (23), Garston (38) and Potters Bar (24) where RT 1784 was seen in red whilst RT 4777 was being repainted green. Our return journey to Ipswich was via the M25, M11, A120 & A12.

My second visit to HH garage was on 22 January 1988, this time in my VW Transporter bus taking people to Luton Airport for their holidays. RFs 11 and 673 were still languishing in the station yard. The return journey being via HH garage only (42), not quite sure why I didn't call in at Hatfield and Ware garages, the journey continued via Bishops Stortford, A120 and A12.

Apart from the aforementioned RFs no other "family" vehicles were seen.

3

Editor's note: It is interesting to see that a number of the buses seen at HH were “originals” which we had new, including ANs 161-5 and 195, and SNBs 255, 256, 299, 396 and 404. Service vehicle M1 was of course our trusty 1967 AEC Mandator recovery vehicle, a former petrol company artic tractor unit converted by Wreckers International at Hertford and fitted with a very versatile Holmes 750 crane. This lorry earned me lots of money in overtime payments towing home broken-down buses to garages all over the Northern half of the LCBS area. It had a converted Routemaster engine (AV691, from an RCL I suppose) and a six-speed crash box and was really a great pleasure to use. Whatever happened to it?

Angels in Regent Street Cyril TheobaldThe Christmas time cartoon in the previous edition reminded me that I went to see the angels. They looked good, but the trouble was that when it rained their tunics filled up with water and people called them “pregnant angels”, so a man from the Council went around with a long pole with a nail in the end to pop them and let the water run out. It was Seventy Years Ago... Michael DryhurstWith the likelihood of the various “Minutes” running out, I attach some pages from the 1950 Ian Allan abc of London Transport Buses and Coaches.” Just look at the service vehicles in 1950 – ex-LS 3, 6 and 10, Dennises and ST 922. Then there is the listing of all those garages, amny of which are just memories nowand then look at the length of some of the bus routes, both Central and Country. The 134, Potters Bar to Pimlico; 27A Teddington to Archway; 301 Watford Junction to Aylesbury (paralleled also by two GreenLine routes), and 403 Wallington to Tonbridge. Man, those were the days! And did you know that apparently I am now the longest-serving (living?) contributor to “Buses Illustrated/Buses”?

4

5

I hope readers find all this of interest, but I wouldn't bother joining the Ian Allan Bus-Spotters Club as I heard a rumour that it may have closed down a year or two ago. You may also find it problematical to source a 1/- postal order and a 2 1/2d stamp. Did any of the “Friends” actually join this club?

A Couple of Reminders

Don't forget the “50 Years of London Country” Running Day at the Epping – Ongar Railway on 23 rd February, and the Transport Auctions of London sale on 29th February; both events were publicised in theprevious edition.

“RT 4826” Leon DanielsThe December annual Ensignbus Running Day always brings a surprise and this year it was the first public showing of BDJ 807, one of only a few RT type buses supplied to operators outside London. 40 of them were supplied with Park Royal bodies to St Helens from 1952. Eighteen of them passed to Hull Corporation ten years later.

BDJ 807 passed to Harper Brothers of Heath Hayes where it was the favourite of one particular driver Don Fowler and he secured it after the company was sold to Midland Red in 1974. Kept outside, its condition progressively deteriorated but Don was very reluctant to part with it. Only later in ill health did he concede and it passed to Ensignbus at Purfleet at the end of 2014. Sadly he didn’t live long enough to see it restored but there is a commemorative plaque on the platform behind the conductor’s space.

The restoration was undertaken from 2017 and involved significant work on the framing where years of outside storage had taken their toll. It was decided to retain the platform doors fitted in Harper’s days, and the air scoop on the bonnet which was a local modification to alleviate overheating. Whilst it would have been nice to have it in Harper’s livery the bus does have to earn its keep so the decision was made to restore it to St Helens livery which is considered commercially more viable.

6

To add more controversy it gained the fleet number RT 4826 coming directly after the numerically highest London Transport RT which attracted some protests amongst the purists.

7

In the end completion was right up to the wire. It secured its Class 6 certificate the week before the running day but there were numerous jobs to finish as well as the deep clean. So on the morning of 7th December it was still on the vehicle lift receiving attention to its air system. As always after years of disuse the first hours and days of being fired up cause all sorts of problems to come out of the woodwork. As problems were solved new ones emerged and meantime the cleaners were working in mid-air. [See photo on previous page.] Adding to the urgency was the arrival of Don’s family who had come especially for the event. No-one wanted that to be a wasted journey!

Once finally ready to go it was mid afternoon and there was only time to operate one journey on route X55 between Lakeside and Upminster. Ross Newman drove the outward journey and I did the return. By then it was getting dark! For the first time in decades she carried a full load and was captured hundreds of times by cameras as the news spread. Don’s family was delighted and eventually in darkness they travelled back on her to Purfleet.

After a good shakedown she has now joined the Ensignbus Vintage vehicle fleet.

Above: Steve and Ross Newman with Leon in the cab – overstaffed and overpaid!

8

From the Minutes of the Rolling Stock Technical Committee Meeting held on 15 February 1960

Modification to Rear Corner Panels and Rear Lamp Packing Blocks

Codes affected: RF3Number of Vehicles Affected: 15 (one of which has already been completed.

Nearside and offside rear compass corner panels are to be cut in four sections to facilitate maintenance.

Additional timber packings and brackets will be required, these being manufactured to approved samples. Existing pattress blocks ECW part numbers V1090 offside and V1091 nearside positioned on roof domes for tail lamps and pattress blocks ECW part numbers V1163 offside and V 1164 nearside on rear compass panels for stop lamps together with adaptor pieces are to be secured to body panels by means of woodscrews into timber blocks which will be attached to panels.

Action: Full application at body overhaul

Platform Rubber Mat – Improved Method of Fixing

Codes affected: RT3, RT3/1, RT3/3, RT6, RT7, RT8, RT8/1 RT8/2 and RT10.No of Vehicles Affected: 6,324

An earlier alteration advice is to be revised as follows:

From: As and when at body overhaul.To: Full application at Works and Garages.

The estimated rate of fitting at garages will be in the order of 170 per week and at Aldenham as the overhaul programme dictates (approximately 30 per week).

Introduction of Stronger Offside Door Stop Assembly – Rear Destination Door

Codes affected: RM5, RM5/1, RM5/2, RM5/3, RM5/4 and RM5/5 (prior to Mod 108) (Body numbers B5 to B183 inclusive)

The existing door stop assembly offside is to be removed by de-riveting it from the door framing. The stop piece together with bolt and Grover washer is to be removed from the door stop assembly and fitted to the new stronger plate to form a new assembly.

The new assembly is to be fitted to the door framing using 4BA bolts, nuts and shakeproof washers. Three templates will be required for drilling purposes. The removed plate will no longer be required and can be discarded.

Retro action of Modification 108.

Action: Full application at garages (priority)

Modification to Driver’s Seat FrameCodes affected: RM5, RM5/1, RM5/2, RM5/3, and RM5/4 (prior to Mod 12) (Number of vehicles affected -100)

Prior to the introduction of Modification 12, 100 vehicles were equipped with driver’s seats the structure of which embodied a rear crossmember made from square aluminium alloy tubing.All seat frames subsequent to Modification 12 have been fitted with steel crossmembers.

Two failures have occurred recently on service vehicles due to the aluminium crossmember having fractured at the welded joint between the crossmember tube and the end flanges.

9

As a failure of this nature could lead to serious consequences, A W Chapman Ltd have agreed to send staff to garages concerned in order to replace all aluminium crossmembers by the steel counterpart at no cost to the Executive.

The two failed seat frames have been forward to the trader to be rectified and used as a float to facilitate the changeover at garages.

Note: The above campaign change has been completed.

Rear Reflectors ReplacedCodes affected: All codes except RM

The red plastic reflector disc in the rear reflector assembly have in many instances faded from the original ruby colour and no longer conforms to MOT requirements.

All such assemblies where discs have faded to an amber colouring are to be removed and returned to CAV for free replacement by assemblies containing discs of fast colour plastic identified by a “Kite” mark on the disc.

An initial float of 2,000 new assemblies is to be provided by CAV Ltd. All existing stocks of discs are to be returned to CAV for replacement.

Buses and coaches are to have precedence over trolleybuses and due consideration is to be given to the date of withdrawal of trolleybus conversion before action is taken.

Masking Plates for Indicator Boxes

Mr Styles queried whether difficulty would be encountered in fixing PVC self-adhesive sheet to indicator boxes in situ. In reply Mr Tame thought that no trouble should arise in this respect.

Mr Stone advised that an experiment had been opened to cover the testing of PVC self-adhesive sheet for masking purposes in indicator boxes on 100 vehicles undergoing overhaul.

It was agreed that discussion on this topic could now be closed.

Reconditioning of Beatonson’s “Rapide” Type, High Level Drop Windows

Mr Stone informed the Committee that a total of 280 “Widney” rails complete with winding gear were reported to be available in stock, the majority being surplus to requirements.

He suggested that the 25 RF vehicles now fitted with experimental Beatonson’s equipment and in a worncondition should be replaced with the “Widney” counterpart plus adapter pieces. Mr Tame concurred.

Following discussion, The Chairman directed that stocks of Widney equipment should be used up for the foregoing purpose.

Mr Stone pointed out that the progress material schedules would be affected by this change and in order to overcome any difficulty that might arise in obtaining the correct material for replacement purposes he suggested that the RF vehicles in question be recoded. This was agreed.

Before introducing this winding gear on the 25 vehicles concerned, Mr Stone suggested that one window on RF 301, garaged at Garston, should be converted as a preliminary step to establish whether this changeover would present any unforeseen difficulties. This was agreed.

Fitment of Ash Trays

Mr Brewer queried whether ash trays should be fitted at overhaul on 25 coaches code RF2/3. In reply, the Chairman stated that a decision was awaited from the RSE.

10

Mr Butler thought that due to limited space, complaints would be received from passengers, if ash trayswere provided.

Discussion ensued and the Chairman requested Mr Butler to urge the fitment of ash trays on one of theabove coaches in order to obtain service experience.

Rear Frame Nearside Pillar – Interior Mouldings

Mr Tame submitted three different standard wood mouldings covered in Rexine which had distorted in storage. He pointed out that a high percentage of these items were subject to scrapping as a result of distortion. In order to overcome this difficulty he suggested that a metal moulding of 14 or possibly 16 gauge could be deployed.

The Chairman thought that an extrusion might be cheaper and requested Mr Charles to liaise with Mr Stone in this investigation.

Adhesive for PVC Leathercloth

Mr Styles stated that he wished to test the suitability of an adhesive now available for sticking PVC leathercloth the lining panels. He queried whether this test could be carried out on vehicles undergoing overhaul at Aldenham

It was agreed that it would be best to carry out this particular test on RM vehicles during construction at Park Royal Vehicles Ltd and Mr Styles would investigate whether a burgundy PVC leathercloth could be obtained for this purpose.

PVC Coated Aluminium

Mr Styles referred to a recent CME Technical Meeting at which Mr Wilford suggested that consideration should be given to the possible use of PVC coated aluminium to supersede Rexine covered aluminium. Specimen samples of PVC costed aluminium were exhibited to the Committee.

Mr Charles was satisfied with weight and colour and questioned whether panels in this material could be press-formed. Mr Tam pointed out that shrouds are beaten by hand to obtain the required shape and as such surface damage to the PVC material could result.

Finally the Chairman requested Mr Charles to investigate the suitability of PVC coated aluminium and, ifnecessary, take up this matter with the trader.

Mr Styles then passed relevant traders information to Mr Charles for his consideration.

RF Rear Door Escutcheon Plates

Mr Butler stated that the above chromed plate was being painted green on vehicles passing through Aldenham and after a short service life there was evidence of paint chipping leaving an unsatisfactory finish.

In view of the fact that most plates show signs of chrome deterioration he questioned whether the plate should be stove enamelled or given some alternative treatment.

The Chairman requested Mr Tame to investigate.

Summer/Winter Charge Switch for Control Panel

Following lengthy discussion on the stability of regulator settings, it was agreed that no change should be made to the present setting of 28.5 volts for the winter period witching to reduce to 27.5 volts duringthe summer period.

It was agreed that discussion on this topic could now be closed.

11

Plastic TubingMr Styles referred to a visit of a trader’s representative who had suggested the use of “Hypolon” lined Neoprene tubing. It seemed doubtful whether nylon tubing would withstand continuously the high temperatures encountered in the cooling system. Continuing he advised that literature has been received from Polypenco Ltd claiming that one of their products would withstand a continuous temperature of 120ºC.

Mr Higgins stated that correspondence also had been received from Mendip (Chemical Engineering Co) who advised that moulded pipes could be provided as an alternative to the present steel pipes, but from a preliminary check-up it would appear that costs were extremely high. Drawings of heater pipework had been forwarded to the foregoing firm for consideration.

Finally the Chairman requested Mr Styles to follow up these investigations with Mr Higgins.

RM Alteration Advices

Mr Stone submitted a summary of proposed and existing RM alteration advices.

The Chairman stressed that this document was for information purposes only and that no action shouldbe undertaken without express authority being obtained.

Suspension of “As and When” Alteration Advices and for RT6 Vehicles.

Mr Stone stated that a meeting had been held on 11 February to review Alteration Advices affecting thirdand fourth cycle overhauls. A summary of advices affecting 6RT6 code vehicles which recommends for deletion from the sealed list for the period 1960-62 was passed to all members of this Committee.

The Chairman stated that the foregoing summary is discussed at the next RSTC Meeting. In the meantime he requested all concerned should peruse the summary.-

Suggestions

Number Description Remarks52356 Staircase ascending rail to be made in two parts Adopted, award52572 Drivers’ mirror glasses ex-garages to be returned for re-silvering No award52633 Driver’s nearside mirror – lock nut to centre bolt No award52965 Trafficators: Clip to prevent loss of amber windows No award53219 Riveting dolly T.26563 – locating pimple (hmmmm!) Adopted, award53331 Simms fuel pump housing – oil leaks No award

From the Minutes of the Chief Mechanical Engineer (Road Services) Meeting held on Wednesday 4 February 1960

Approvals of Expenditure

Northfleet Garage – Replacement of Fuel Storage Installation (£3,750)

An examination has been made of the existing underground fuel storage installation at Northfleet garage. The installation is only 24 years old but examination has revealed that three of the existing four tanks are in a condition necessitating early replacement. The two new tanks in the proposed overground installation will provide capacity of 10,000 gallons, which on present usage will give cover of eleven days’ supply. The Operating Department confirmed that closure of this garage is not contemplated.

Authority to Withdraw Redundant Assets

(a) C16/190 – Ford Tractor No 351X – Book Value £163Surplus to requirements. To be transferred to British Transport Commission’s Museum.

12

(b) C16/191 – Bedford 5-ton Catering Van No 699B – Book Value £766Damaged in an accident beyond economical repair.

Above: 351X, dating from 1937, safely stored in what was then Clapham Transport Museum, 5th August 1964. Photo bythe Editor.

Estimates for Alterations to Buses and Coaches

By a memorandum dated 28 January 1960, Mr Wicks referred to the present practice whereby requests or estimates of the cost of alteration to buses, coaches or miscellaneous vehicles, were referred in the first instance by the department concerned to the Engineering Superintendent who subsequently obtained an estimate of the cost from the Planning and Methods Engineer and dealt as necessary with the department involved. Under this procedure the necessary consideration could not be given to planning work into production and Mr Wicks proposed that henceforth these matters be dealt with through his office.

After discussion the CME directed that no change should be made to the present general procedure butwhere the alternative involved Works’ attention, the Engineering Superintendent (Road Services) would first undertake design work as necessary after which the project would be dealt with by the Works Manager (Road Services) in conjunction with the department concerned and with due regard to all relevant factors.

Trolleybus Supervisors

The CME referred to the desirability of giving ex-Trolleybus Works supervisors reasonable opportunity to undergo special training to enable them to apply for suitable vacancies.

The general position in this regard was reviewed.

Norbiton Garage and Docking Unit

The CME said that he had drawn the attention of the Chief Civil Engineer to the necessity to provide heating in Norbiton Garage, Executive authority for which was given in November 1959, in order that Norbiton Docking Unit might be vacated and made available to new purchasers. It would evidently be necessary to install Tangye stoves in the garage as a temporary measure and that the staff’s reaction to this proposal was awaited.

13

Dorking GarageMr Williams said the sum of £40 authorised in connection with the provision of a Bulls-eye sign for Dorking Garage related only to the wiring connection to the mains. The CME said he would ask the ChiefPublic Relations Officer to authorise provision of the sign.

Steam Cleaning EquipmentProgress of the installation of steam cleaning plant at garages was reviewed and noted. The equipment already installed was working well. In this connection, Mr Shave referred to the attitude of staff in seeking enhancement of the rate paid for chassis cleaning.

Potters Bar GarageThe CME referred to a memorandum dated 29 January 1960 from the Estate Agent and Rating Surveyor in which confirmation was sought as to the position regarding payment for construction of hard standing for both the Executive and Arlington Motor Company on the western side of the grassland. TheCME directed Mr Shave to report as to the extent of the respective areas concerned.

Edmonton DepotTHE CME referred to a proposal to let a portion of Edmonton Depot, the capacity of which was considerably greater than the maximum foreseeable requirements of the Executive. The CME also said that five fuel tanks were envisaged under the conversion scheme and questioned the necessity for this number in view of the vehicles to be allocated to the garage. After discussion it was agreed that four fuel tanks would be sufficient to meet requirements and action would be taken accordingly

RM Buses Deliveries

The delivery position of RM buses was noted as follows:

Vehicles Delivered W/e 30.1.60 Cumulative PositionPark Royal to AEC 8 228AEC to London Transport 3 209

Mr Purves stated that six RM buses currently received had been returned to the manufacturers for rectification of gearbox noise.

Colour Scheme - Green Line CoachesFollowing up on previous discussion, the CME confirmed that for experimental purposes a singledeck Green Line coach would be painted in the two shades of green recommended by the Central Laboratoryas being more durable than the existing colours used for Green Line livery.

Repairs to CTC Fire ExtinguishersConsideration was given to a memorandum dated 18.1.1960 from Mr Shave regarding a proposal to repair CTC fire extinguishers centrally at Victoria Garage, where a suitable hood and ventilation apparatus would be installed. This matter had arisen because of the Medical Officer’s opinion that injury to health could arise from carbon tetrachloride fumes.

Various aspects of the proposal were considered and as a first step the CME directed Mr Shave to consult with the Director of Research as to the possibility of washing out the extinguishers with a suitable liquid before the repairs were commenced.

Regrooving of TyresReference was made to an interim report dated 22 January 1960 submitted by Mr Purves, with which the CME said that he and the Chief Supplies and Services Officer were in general agreement regarding proposals by the Goodyear Tyre Company in connection with the regrooving of tyres.

Mr Purves said that his full report in this connection would shortly be available and that it was agreed to await this before arranging further tests by all tyre contractors to determine whether tyres could, with safety and reliability, be allowed to operate on the front axle longer than was the present practice.

14

Heaters on RT Double Deck CoachesReference was made to the extent to which conductors on RT double-deck Green Line coaches and on RM buses elected to turn off the interior heating system regardless of their passengers’ wishes and comfort. The CME said he would approach the Road Service Operating Managers for their co-operation in putting a stop to this practice.

In the meantime the CME directed Mr Purves to consider the introduction of a simple but effective means of preventing interference with the heating systems.

Editorial comment: Once heaters were fitted to Country buses this became a constant source of complaint. In particular, conductors would switch off the upper saloon heaters in the misplaced belief that this would make the lower saloon warmer. Many letters were sent to LT about this, not least from my own family.

Ceilings – RM VehiclesThe CME referred to the extent to which ceilings of these vehicles were dirtied by the operation of the heating system. Cleaning of the ceilings would have to be undertaken and the CME directed Mr Shave to experiment with proprietary cleaning products and consult with the Director of Research.

For further consideration.

RFW Private Hire CoachesMr Wicks stated that the first RFW private hire coach to be overhauled had now been completed and approval of the trimming colour scheme was urgently required in order that the retrimming programme,already agreed for these vehicles, might be put in hand. The CME said that the Commercial Manager and the Publicity Officer should be invited to inspect the vehicle and, subject to their concurrence, the remaining vehicles of this type were to be dealt with similarly.

Direction IndicatorsMr Wicks stated that the Manufacturers had now resumed supply of a modified time switch and installation was in progress. Attention was drawn to the effect of the disruption of supplies of the budget estimate.

Fire – Dunlop Rubber CompanyMr Wicks referred to a recent fire at a Dunlop Rubber Company factory and said that this might affect deliveries of seat cushions to the Executive. He was enquiring into the position and would keep the CMEinformed.

Bell PlungersMr Purves said that at the previous meeting it had been stated that some of the latest experimental truncated plungers on vehicles at Peckham Garage had been sticking. In fact none of these plungers had failed during 12 months’ service. Bearing in mind the extent to which delays occurred due to sticking of the standard plunger, the CME directed that the latest design of truncated plunger be adopted as standard on RM vehicles and that all existing plungers should be replaced as vehicles passed through overhaul.

From the Minutes of the Chief Mechanical Engineer (Road Services) Meeting held on Wednesday 25 February 1960

Expenditure Authorisations

Modifications to Miscellaneous Vehicles - £145

Mr Purves submitted Request for Modifications to Miscellaneous Vehicles Form ES1 covering the fitment of cab heaters to five 7-ton AEC Mercury Tower Wagons to conform with standard fitment on similar vehicles.

15

Failures and Delays Due to Mechanical Defects

Per 100,000 Service Miles2 Weeks 26.1.60 Average of

past12 weeks

Central Buses 2.97Country Buses 1.91Coaches 1.36Trolleybuses Rolling Stock 6.83 3.94 Power distrib/ Dewirements 0.06

0.80

(a) Central Buses (Other than RM) – Fluid Flywheels

The extent of fluid flywheel failures continued to be high. Mr Purves stated that static testing of a considerable proportion of glands received from overhaul by the manufacturers had produced no failures and minor faults found, which had been taken up with the manufacturers and were not significant as regards leaks.

Mr Wicks suggested the present level of flywheel failures might originate from the Christmas period of heavy traffic congestion and Mr Shave said that he would compare the present circumstances with the position at this time in 1959.

The CME questioned whether the point had been reached at which, due to extension of life, fluid flywheels failures were at a peak which might be expected to recur in the future on a cyclic basis. All concerned were directed to explore every means of improving the situation.

(b) Country Buses

Position noted

(c) Trolleybuses

The extent and nature of trolleybus defects now arising were reviewed.

(d) Central Buses (RM Vehicles)

The position in respect of week ended 9 February was reviewed.

Throttle Failures

The CME commented upon the number of failures experienced under this heading and directed that special attention be paid to the elimination of these defects. In the meantime, Mr Shave was asked to report as to whether failures had occurred on vehicles which had received CAV attention.

Heating System, Cooling System, Gear Boxes

The extent of failures under this heading was noted.

Brakes

The CME directed that special attention be paid to brake failures particularly broken pipes.

16

Public LettersCommunication upon the following subject had received attention:

Name Comment ActionM H Harnden Poor lighting on trolleybuses Routes 628 and 630 In hand

Hammersmith Depot

Mr Shave, in referring to the proposed part occupation of the Hammersmith Depot by the Chief Electrical Engineer, expressed his concern at the cost of the proposals and the nature of some of the work which the Chief Electrical Engineer intended to undertake at the premises. The CME directed Mr Shave to pursue these matters with the Assistant Chief Electrical Engineer.

Repairs to CTC Fire Extinguishers

Following previous discussion, Mr Shave said that he was awaiting information from the Central Laboratory as to a suitable liquid which could be used for washing out CTC extinguishers before repairs were commenced

RM Buses Deliveries

The delivery position of RM buses was noted as follows:Vehicles Delivered W/e 20.2.60 Cumulative Position

Park Royal to AEC 8 253AEC to London Transport 10 234

Smoking ExhaustsWeek Ending 19.1.60 26.1.60

Number of reports received from Operating Staff Nil 4

RM Buses - Modifications

Reference was made to splitting which had occurred at the bottom weld of the front independent box section. A campaign change was being organised on a float basis to remove and replace the boxes, the old weld being cut out and rewelded by the suppliers, Messrs Thomson. It was desirable that the work should be carried out concurrently with the change of water pumps necessitated by defective spindles and replacement of an “O” ring in the front of the cylinder block which was permitting serious corrosionof the manganese alloy mounting bracket.

AEC had suggested they should modify three vehicles per week, a further six to be dealt with at garages. The CME stated it was essential the programme be based on maximum availability of convertedcross-members – stated to be 10 per week. As far as possible, it was preferable for all the work to be dealt with at one location and accordingly the CME directed:

(a) that AEC must be consulted as to the maximum extent to which they would be prepared to undertake the work, a figure of at least five per week being in mind.

(b) Mr Wicks should consider the possibility of the balance of the work being carried out atAldenham, this class of work being regarded as inappropriate for garage attention.

RM Buses – Review of Accidents

Mr Wright referred to the position in this regard. It was noted that between June and October 1959, when small number of Routemasters were operating, the number of collisions involving Routemasters was at a rate several times as great as that of other buses due, it was considered, to the lack of experience on the part of drivers, who spent only part of their time on RM vehicles.

17

Since Routemasters had operated from Poplar and West Ham only, the accident rate had fallen, althoughstill being higher than that experienced by trolleybuses in the last three months of service at these depots. It was noted that during the first three months of service with RT vehicles at Bow, the accident rate was approximately double that during the last three months of trolleybus operation. At Bexley, Carshalton and Clapton replacement of trolleybuses by RT buses appeared not to have affected the general level of accidents at these garages, possibly because many of the services operated in less congested areas.

After discussion, it was agreed to defer further consideration of Routemaster accidents until more vehicles of this type had been in service for longer periods.

Heaters on RT Double Deck Coaches and on RM Buses

Mr Purves was to consider the introduction of a simple effective means of preventing interference with the heating mechanism.

[Never happened on RT Country buses - Ed]

Above: With there having been only 76 RLHs, perhaps the type tends to be overlooked not only in the Newsletter but also, as I have commented in the past, in books about the Country area and/or London Country. Anyone would think they were unpopular, but not with us so here are a couple to redress the balance. Martyn Hunt took this shot of RLH 29 on 13th July 1980 at Crawley, where Green Line coaches were celebrating their 50th Anniversary on a rather wet day. The RLH is entering into the spirit of the day by displaying a Green Line destination, but in practice these buses would rarely have worked such routes, not least because passengers on the upper deck would not have appreciated the lack of headroom and the need to bend one's neck in order to watch the passing scenery. In the background are two former Ipswich Corporation AEC Regent V, fleet numbers 63 and 64. These Massey-bodied buses had been brought to the event from Ipswich and Martyn was one of those who brought them; No 63 now lives in the Ipswich Transport Museum, but No 64 was exported some years ago. On the next page, Martyn illustrates RLH 32 at the same event. I was there with RT 1018 and colleagues from HH (and a fewpeople who had nothing to do with LCBS) and was glad to let someone else drive home in the ongoing

18

rain. RLH 32 looks more authentic than its sister as the 436A would have been a regular haunt for these buses in their working lives.

Book Reviews Mark KirbyLondon's Bus Purchases 1946 – 1994 by Stewart J. Brown, Fawndoon Books, £24

This is an interesting book, chronicling the vehicles purchased by London Transport from the post-war period up to privatisation in the 1990s. I suspect readers will already have most of the information to hand, especially those interested in vehicle types prior to the Central/Country area split in 1970.

The author gives an initial overview of London Transport, followed by the vehicle types themselves. What is particularly striking is the number of different classes introduced in the years leading up to privatisation. Your reviewer found the section of LT registration blocks of interest, not only the buses covered, but service vehicles and cars used by senior members of LT staff. Overall a well-produced book.

GS: The London Guy Special by Peter Aves and Alan Charman, Capital Transport, £35.

It is surprising that given the esteem in which the GS class is held, this is the first book to detail the history of the type. That said it has been well worth the wait. Produced to Capital Transport's high standards, the majority of photographs have not been previously published and these are supplementedby ephemera such as engineering drawings destination blind displays, timetable panels and even a rare E-plate for route 333B.

Beginning with the search for a replacement for the Leyland Cubs, the authors ponder which vehicles London Transport may have considered, the Bedford OB and Dennis Falcon among them. LT settled for Guy chassis and ECW bodies, and the authors chronicle the construction phase and the relationship between LT and the manufacturers in the development of the GS, with delivery details and route allocations.

The next four chapters take us on a clockwise journey through the Country Area starting in the South-East detailing the routes and initial vehicle allocations including the transfer of services to London Country in 1970.

19

The service cuts of the 1960s marked the start of the demise of the class. It is nice to see the authors describing the overhaul process and engineering aspects of the GS through their working lives. The lesser-known aspect of their use as staff buses is also covered together with sales and initial disposals.

The book is clearly a labour of love and the authors are to be commended on producing a definitive history. Highly recommended.

…....and Review part two by the Editor:

I have to declare an interest here. Following my review of Peter Aves' previous work, “Green No More”, I established contact with James Whiting of Capital Transport, as described in previous editions of the Newsletter. Jim asked me if I would be interested in looking through the page proofs of this book, publication of which had been delayed by a technical problem, and I was delighted to do so. I read the book carefully several times on two levels, firstly as a simple proof-reading exercise, and then with a view to eliminating any errors of which I was aware of and adding additional information if it would helpthe story. Jim did explain that the book was at a very advanced stage in the production process and that on cost grounds, it was not practical to re-set type to rectify some typos or odd errors – apparently book pages are printed on sheets of 8 at a time so clearly a minor change resulting in scrapping a whole section was not financially justifiable. There are therefore some few things that perhaps could have been amended at an earlier stage but had to be left unchanged, including one or two slightly garbled sentences whose meaning is less clear than might be ideal. I was in excellent company in this work as Tony Beard, Ken Blacker and Laurie Akehurst were well-known experts among those with an involvement.

How do you fill a 200-page book on a class of vehicles which had only 84 members? The answer is by incorporating a huge amount of detail, which of course would be impossible if the GSs had been purchased by the hundreds. Just about everything you could possibly want to know about the buses hasbeen fitted in, although a curious omission is individual chassis numbers. We learn why there were 84 buses – everyone knows LT could have managed with fewer – the dates when they were built, delivered and put into service, what modifications were carried out on them (not that many, as readers of Tony Beard's extracts from LT's Minutes will know), when they were overhauled and/or fitted with saloon heaters, transfers between garages and, inevitably, withdrawals, storage dates and then disposals. There are equally detailed accounts of exactly how they were utilised, with selected Vehicle Running Records for the various running numbers on which GSs were used (VRRs are the bus equivalent of what our friends in the railway world would call 'diagrams'). Photographs show the buses from almost every anglepossible, and with the few livery variations they exhibited – usually just changes to the cream round theradiator grille and painting-over of wheel trims and in some cases, bumpers. It is hard to think of anything about the GS class that cannot be found in these pages apart from the chassis numbers, of which only the first couple and the last appear.

The last chapter deals with their lives after LT. The authors concede that a full description of what happened to all 83 (one was scrapped by LT) would fill another volume, but they have taken a look at firms who operated several members of the class, the obvious one being Tillingbourne Valley whose entire fleet at one point was GSs, as well as Corvedale Motor Company and Southern Motorways. Other firms receive a mention, there are colour and monochrome photos of buses after leaving LT and a full list of initial purchasers is supplied. This is in order of date of sale rather than fleet number and reveals that some buses were sold at a very young age indeed. The authors have indicated which of the buses have survived into preservation, and they make the total 28. This accords with the PSV Circle's view. Some years ago, I reckoned there were 32 or 33 possible survivors, but of course some do disappear from view, and as the authors themselves say, there may be others still in existence about which no information has come to light.

For many years I have maintained a couple of notebooks containing details of the class. I have not troubled to compare my records fully with the published material here but I have done some random checks and I can't find anything wrong at all; indeed, this must be the most detailed and accurate class history ever produced. It still doesn't answer one question, though, the one that always interested me: why did LT elect to use the Briggs Pressings front end from the Fordson Thames lorry on the vehicle? As the authors point out, this reduced access to the engine in particular for routine servicing. It is possible, of course, that the reason for the use of this assembly is not recorded and long forgotten but it did produce a very attractive little bus and one that, as I remember from my teenage bus-spotting days, even non-bus enthusiasts knew about and liked. The normal Guy Motors front end was

20

much more basic but did provide easier access. Apart from LT, only Douglas Corporation used this Briggs front on the Guy chassis, in their case on Otters with Mulliner bodies, but then Douglas also had two RT chassis, and used Gibson ticket machines, so maybe their General Manager liked to follow LT's lead. Oh, remember the time, long ago when GS 67 in preservation with Roy Gould was painted into red Central area livery “to show people what a red GS would have looked like”? This prompts the obvious question, did LT itself ever think of doing that? Buy the book andfind out! I can only endorse Mark Kirby's opinion above – highly recommended.

Above: The Editor photographed GS 25, by then Tillingbourne Valley's No 5, in Onslow Street Bus Station, Guildford on 11th June 1965. They had purchased it from LT the previous October and sadly, it has not survived.

Below: Rover Bus Services' KVW 878 was a 1946 Guy Vixen, and therefore a close relative of the GS. This example has a Thurgood body but shows the front end that was customarily used by Guy Motors. Photographed by Alan B Cross, the bus stands in Chesham Broadway on 5th March 1953. It was sold in 1954 after only two years in Rover's ownership, just prior to the advent of the GS – what did Rover know that LT did not...?

21

Finally, just to protect myself (!), I must mention that I did not receive the last 7 pages of the text to check because the original intention was to have something different in place of what was finally published.

NEWS FROM THE FEDERATION OF BRITISH HISTORIC VEHICLE CLUBS

Legislation & Fuels Dave Daniel

GeneralThis is my first article and one which follows on from a period where my predecessor Bob Owen was faced with a range of legislative challenges.

Although I am sure there will be new challenges to come, there is nothing new on the skyline… at the moment.

On that basis, it is a good time to review the current situation.

DVLA & Registration This is a subject that Ian Edmunds will be directly involved with, and Ian provides a comprehensive report later in this newsletter. We remain very much in the position where we are working to improve communications with the DVLA on this topic and ease some of the issues in obtaining registrations. Whilst we may at times struggle to understand the decisions taken by the DVLA, it is also true to say that not all applications are entirely clear or complete. DVLA follow a set procedure in reviewing applications and clear, consistent and well-evidenced applications which follow DVLA guidelines will always have a better chance of success.

TyresBob reported in detail on the issue of the proposed ‘10 year tyre ban’ in Issue 5. The FBHVC did submit aconsultation response opposing the proposal and pointing out the discrepancies in the justifications made to support the proposal. We also had the opportunity to discuss these directly with Department of Transport officials.

We believe that understandably, given the current political turmoil, the responses and course of action have still to be considered by the Minister. At this stage the DfT cannot comment on likely outcomes. One response passed to us suggests that there will be further consultation if a new draft Regulation is proposed (the original consultation did not include any draft texts).

We have also seen responses from the commercial bus and truck communities. These seem to show that very few modern vehicles are using tyres even approaching 10 years old, which begs the question why have legislation if hardly anybody will be in breach of it. It also seems the Historic Vehicle community would be possibly the largest group affected, although the proposal did include an exemption for historic vehicles, albeit an incomplete one.We wait to see developments.

Clean Air Zones & Low Emission ZonesWe continue to see initiatives to propose charging or banning zones in city centres. The latest is Bath, and we have just submitted a response to their consultation.

In Scotland, where there is a proposal to establish several bans, including one covering the whole of Edinburgh and its suburbs, efforts have been aimed at getting a general exemption for Historic Vehicles into the primary legislation, so that it applies regardless in any zone established. This has not been successful, and like other interest groups, it seems that each and every zone will need to be considered individually. Bob Owen, continues to take particular interest in this area.

In England, the various zones have made mixed progress. The two most advanced – Birmingham and Leeds – have both been deferred over software development and changes in the proposed funding of the charging system. Progress is not likely until the end of 2020. Other councils have made proposals, including Greater Manchester, but these will it seems have the shared software development issues.At this stage, we will continue to respond to proposals as they emerge.

22

RoadworthinessThere have been no changes in Roadworthiness testing arrangements, nor any apparent issues arising. When the testing exemptions for historic vehicles were originally published, last-minute Government change meant that some historic lorries were not exempted, and this remains the case. Efforts by the Historic Commercial Vehicle Society (HCVS) to get this changed have been unsuccessful. This has causedfurther difficulties in that for example, where the exemptions for the ‘10 year tyre ban’ were based on Roadworthiness Testing regulations rather than exemptions from Vehicle Excise Duty, so potentially capturing some historic vehicles in the tyre ban proposal.

Legislation & Fuels James Fairchild

DVLA Ian EdmundsUnfortunately, despite our best efforts, I cannot report any progress on our outstanding problems with DVLA. The Federation is in close contact with the APPHVG but at the time of writing the situation in Westminster makes it very difficult to progress anything. We have a regular liaison meeting with DVLA scheduled but that is likely to be postponed due the election. We will persevere!

Recent events reported to me by members and, indeed, in one case by a Federation colleague, indicate that it may be beneficial to recap on some information that I have provided previously concerning registration, licensing and insurance.

Some years ago Department for Transport introduced a system of continuous vehicle licensing and of continuous insurance. The entirely praiseworthy objective was to reduce the number of unlicensed and/or uninsured vehicles in use. I believe that it has been successful in doing so.

Inevitably the system was designed for the majority of road users with modern vehicles and, equally inevitably, there are some particular aspects for our minority of historic vehicles.

Before proceeding further it might be worthwhile to be clear on the meaning of the terminology. The process of entering a vehicle on to the DVLA record and issuing a registration number is known as registration. Licensing is the process of obtaining the right to use the vehicle on the public road and paying the appropriate VED. For most of our vehicles the VED payable is nil but the process remains thesame.

The basic principle of continuous licensing is that every registered vehicle must be either licensed (taxed) or on SORN. However, this is where the first of the historic vehicle quirks appears. Vehicles which were not licensed when the SORN procedure was introduced in 1998 and have not been licensed since are not part of this system and are not subject to the continuous licensing regime. This group are often referred to as pre-SORN. Once such a vehicle is licensed it immediately becomes subject to the continuous licensing requirements.

Following from these licensing arrangements was a further requirement that every licensed vehicle must be insured, whether or not it was actually in use. This is policed by a process known as ContinuousInsurance Enforcement (CIE). Regular and frequent comparisons are made between the DVLA database of licensed vehicles and the MID (Motor Insurance Database) of vehicles which are insured. The registered keeper of any vehicle shown to be licensed but not insured will receive a standard Insurance Advisory Letter (IAL) which warns that the vehicle is not insured and offers a number of options. If no action is taken the registered keeper will receive a fixed penalty notice.

The provisions described above are long-standing and I believe well understood by most vehicle owners but there is a more recent development which unfortunately does appear to be catching people out.DVLA now state that the act of registering a vehicle is inseparably linked to licensing it. I do not believe that has always been the case but I cannot persuade DVLA to confirm that or to tell me when it changed or why. Nevertheless it is now the case. This link is not made clear in the published guidance, either on gov.uk or on the forms involved.

Thus a first registration of a vehicle will automatically cause it to be licensed. Additionally, and cruciallyfor us, a change of tax class (typically to ‘historic’) is treated as a re-registration and will also cause the vehicle to be licensed. As most historic vehicles do not require an MoT and insurance is no longer

23

checked at the time of licensing there are instances where a vehicle has been licensed without the keeper being aware. The vehicle in question then becomes subject to the continuous insurance requirements and the keeper will receive an IAL.

It is worth repeating, if a suitable response is not provided to the IAL the keeper will receive a fixed penalty notice.

Above: Martyn Hunt writes: A photo from my collection (photographer unknown) shows RLH 69 and RT 558 withdrawn from service at Barking bus garage circa 1971. The RLH went into service at Merton bus garage in December 1952 and continued in service until April 1971, then into store before being exported to the USA. Repatriated to England in 2012 and now part of Roger Wright's collection. RT 558 was new with a Weymann body to Catford bus garage in June 1948, after several overhauls and allocations to various garages store beckoned in 1971 with a last transfer to store at Stonebridge before the one-way trip to Wombwell in June 1972.

RF 366 Mark KirbyJim Andress' early transport recollections in last month's newsletter, which evolved into him purchasingRF 366 were full of interest and I look forward to further extracts. In particular I was drawn to the photograph of RF 366 at Tilbury Docks, especially, as the vehicles surrounding it are still with us: on the left is RF 136 now superbly restored by Roger Wright. Behind is RF 444, owned I believe by K & S Austin [the PSV Circle says it's now with a Mr Gilbert of Guyhirn which is in the Wisbech area, I believe. - Ed] and at the front, the rear end of RP 90, in the livery of Smiths of Reading, now in the hands of the London Bus Museum at Brooklands, and returned to its original London Country livery.

Talking of liveries............

What Shade of Green was that? Brian CatchpoleI have received an enquiry from Richard Lewis of Arriva Maidstone, who is asking about the correct names and paint codes for London Country's “intermediate” livery in which the original Lincoln green was replaced by a lighter shade, and canary yellow replaced Chiswick cream. Can anyone help, please?

24

[Editor's note: I have sent details of canary yellow to Brian already, but the lighter green, which appeared on ANs and AFs is a mystery to me as we had no vehicles painted that shade in either of the garages where I was employed. The livery was short-lived, but the light green appeared on the SMAs as well if I remember rightly, and one RT, 3751 at GR, received a local repaint using that colour. Any help much appreciated, to me or direct to Brian – brian_catchpole@btinternet.com ]

RT Parts Wanted Nigel PittmanIn connection with ongoing restoration work on my recently-acquired RT 2291 (see previous edition), I amanxious to obtain some window pans and some of the cruciform pressings which fix the waist-rail to thepillars. Can anyone offer any assistance, please? n igel.pittman@btinternet.com

[I have told Nigel that these items are a bit rare these days, although I do have supplies of hens' teeth and excrement from rocking horses, so if anyone can help in any way, please get in touch. I think the cruciform pieces are RT 019 C5 or C6 to judge from my battered parts list. Ed]

A New Era Begins

I am pleased to tell everyone that as a result of an initiative by Leon Daniels in his capacity as Chairman of the London Bus Museum, the digital version of the “Friends” Newsletter will now be supplied to all LBM members who have provided their e-mail addresses to that body, free of charge, as part of Leon's drive to improve services for their members. As he says, we are now pioneers in the sort of co-operationwhich will have to become more widespread in the future if we are all to survive. Some “Friends” will of course already be members of the LBM and we are aware that we may lose members as there is no point paying twice for the same thing. This is not a problem as a result of an arrangement made between the two organisations, and we therefore welcome a whole lot of new readers and hope that they enjoy our sometimes quirky style, and that some of them will feel moved to contribute to this monthly production.

Arthur Henderson John WagstaffYou will be pleased to learn that the funeral of our former member Arthur Henderson, who died in December aged 93, was well attended by a good mix of Cambridge academics and some of the many souls who had the pleasure of driving Arthur’s buses over the years. At the wake afterwards, in a delightful pub on the edge of the city, we heard some amusing tales regarding Arthur’s exploits. One of these concerned the RT that broke down on the A4 some distance west of the metropolis, was left at a garage for repair, but absent-minded Arthur forgot all about the matter and the garage failed to keep his contact details. The eventual result was a despairing plea in the then “L.T. News” house magazine asking if anyone had left their bus at a Wiltshire garage and would they be kind enough to collect it as itwas now ready (and no doubt beginning to incur hefty storage fees!).

Incidentally, your recent appeal on behalf of Arthur’s executors to try to locate the whereabouts of all the buses which Arthur probably still owned at the time of his passing prompted fellow-member Barry Monk to send me a helpful email which I have duly forwarded.

“Are You Going Straight?” - an offer you can't refuse John WagstaffMy book “Are You Going Straight? John Wagstaff looks back on 50 years with London buses” is still selling well – many thanks for your kind review! – and is about to go for a second reprint. In view of thissuccess I am now willing to offer it to fellow “Friends” by post at just £14.95 with no additional charge for packing and postage. Not bad for an attractive hardback! My address remains as 182 Devonshire Way, Croydon, CRO 8BX. Cheques please to be made out to J. S. Wagstaff.

[Great to know that a second reprint is necessary. If anyone has yet to buy this book, don't hesitate as itgives a different view from the usual of LT and its successors, and is well-written and very readable. - Ed]

25

Membership Renewals

February renewals are: Alan Charman, Andy Cornell, Mike Godfrey, Richard Jones, Bob Martin, Bob Stanger and David Wilkinson.

March renewals will be: Bob Bailey, Steve Griffin, Mark Hughes, Paul van der Hulks, John Huxford, Richard Jones, Peter Larkham, Peter Legg, John Lobb, and Norman Wain.

Above: Following the publication of my photo of service vehicle 1138F in the previous Newsletter, Bob Martin sent this shot of the former 770F, a 1949 Fordson Thames 10cwt van after sale by LT and apparently about to make the short trip to New Zealand. Whatever happened....?

GGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

Editorial Matters: Mike Lloyd, 42A Moss Lane, Platt Bridge, Wigan, Lancs. WN2 3TL I am always pleased to receive notes, news, comments and corrections as well as complete articles, etc., for the Newsletter and these should be sent to me at the above address or by e-mail to bream.coaches@talktalk.net Please do not use any other address for Newsletter contributions.

Membership enquiries and subscriptions (but not Newsletter material) to:Robin Hood, The Grange, 61, High Street, Northwold, Norfolk, IP26 5NF. Home phone 01366 728761Mobile for messages only, 07767 898789 E-mail, rhood@arrowpak.co.uk

Subscription rates are U.K. £20 per annum, EU countries £30 per annum and overseas, non-EU countries £40 per annum. UK e-mail only £5 per annum with overseas e-mail customers free because of costs to collect this small amount; subscribers to the paper copy are entitled to a free e-mail copy if required.

Cheques should be made payable to “Friends of Classic London Buses of the Fifties” (IN FULL) and not to individuals.

Subscriptions may be paid by bank transfer, saving postage and time, but please ensure that we know who you are ifyou use this method. Bank details are: International bank account number GB21MIDL40452472223309Sort code 40-45-24; Account number 72223309; Branch identifier code MIDLGB2112F

And now we continue with Jim Andress' tales of owning RF 366:

26

The takeover or absorption of so many operators meant that London Transport came into being with aroad services fleet of many types and makes. The majority of motorised road vehicles came from theLondon General Omnibus Company, fleet name “General”. In addition there were around 2000 Trams andsome 60 Trolleybuses.

Since General had the largest proportion of road vehicles they, based at their works at Chiswick in west London, soon took over responsibility for overhauls and maintenance as well as future vehicle design. Their short term need was to get all the miscellany of vehicles they had taken over, up to a reasonable standard: a task which took several years.

Up to the time of the formation of London Transport, General had taken most of its vehicle needs from the Associated Equipment Company normally referred to by its initials “AEC”. AEC was part of the Underground group of companies to which General belonged having operated as General’s own manufacturing unit, since 1912. AEC was not included in the companies incorporated into London Transport and remained as an independent company leaving LT free to buy on the open market. Naturally enough in practice LT still turned to AEC for most of its vehicle needs through the 1930s as they worked to create a standardised fleet of buses. They had decided on their long term requirements having created the AEC based RT type double deckers and started on the Leyland based TF single deckers and CR small rear engined single deckers when World War Two broke out, stopping all development for some six years.

During the mid to late 1940s the decisions were made to continue with the RT class of which 151 had been built by 1942 and also not to continue with the TF class but instead to use the new AEC Regal IV chassis to create the RF class of under-floor engined single deckers and to use a modified Guy chassis for a new GS class of small single deckers.

TF coach, predecessor to the RF 1939. Photo R Marshall collection

The RF class

RF 366 is one of 780 single deckers placed in service by London Transport in the early 1950s, using RegalIV chassis built by AEC, after trials with a prototype, UMP227, now resident at the London Bus Museum.

There were three LT classes of Regal IVs; 700 RFs, with bodies by MCCW (Metropolitan Cammell Carriage and Wagon Works), 15 RFW Touring coaches with Eastern Coachworks bodies and 65 airline coaches with handsome one and a half deck Park Royal bodies operated by LT on behalf of British European Airways.

27

The 700 strong RF class was originally split into four versions, 25 Private Hire and Sightseeing Coaches with glass roof panels, 263 Green Line coaches for the limited stop cross London services, 225 Central (red) buses for use in the inner suburbs and 187 Country (green) buses for use in rural outer London.

All RFs were 7 feet 6 inches wide (2.28 mtrs), and 30 feet long (9.14 mtrs), except the first 25, the PrivateHire version, which were only 27 feet 6 inches long (8.38mtrs). This difference arose because LT needed the Private Hire version in time for the 1951 Festival of Britain and could not wait any longer for the Government to authorise the increase in length, which they did when it was just too late! What’s new?!

By the time the RFs were coming into service, 1951-53, most London bus drivers were familiar with the RT family of double deckers, that is to say the RT, RTL and RTW types. These all had identical driving cabs and the RF driving cabs were designed to be as near identical as possible to allow drivers to switch from one type to the other without any difficulty; in fact the only differences were minor. The RTs werehalf cab buses with the engine alongside the driver so the cab door was on the right; but the RF, with itsunder-floor engine had the cab door on the left inside the body of the bus. This resulted in the horn button and headlight dip switch being switched to the right of the RF cab but apart from this all the other driving controls were identical.

The History of RF 366

The history of London buses that were overhauled at Aldenham Works between the 1950s and the 1980s,is never simple; this is because of the special authority granted to LONDON TRANSPORT to give the identity of a bus arriving for overhaul, to one just completed overhaul so as to replace it immediately in service, using the same licence and insurance. Thus each time an RF was overhauled it came out with a different identity. Fortunately LONDON TRANSPORT allocated each body, and each chassis, a unique number. RF 366 which, when new, was identified as RF 390, carries body number 7908, and the chassis carries unit number 9429. Although the bodies were removed from the chassis during overhaul, most

28

RFs, unlike the contemporary RT family of double deckers, kept the same body and chassis throughout their lives, as did what is now RF 366 and the changes of identity made during its’life with LT are detailed later.

RF 366 during a visit to Kingston Garage October 1995. Photo J Andress

Remarkably, its entire London Transport service life was spent in the Kingston area of south west London, starting with route 213, Kingston-Belmont, working from the then brand new Norbiton Garage inKingston, now a DIY store, and subsequently at Kingston, the original early 1920's LGOC garage, now closed, famous in the 1960's for having an entire allocation of RFs.

RF 366, like all Central London buses of the time, both double-deck and single-deck, was intended for operation with a crew of two, a driver and a conductor, and was built without doors on the entrance, at the insistence of the Metropolitan Police who were, at that time, the London Stage Carriage licensing authority. Air operated entrance doors were fitted on conversion for one person operation in 1965 and removed during 2000 as part of its restoration to original configuration.

Bringing it Home

Having purchased RF 366 at the beginning of July 1989, we had to get it to Wiltshire from its then home at Tilbury Docks where it shared a shed with several other preserved buses, most of which had been involved in the ill-fated Docklands Museum Project. It was not immediately apparent but time was to reveal that although it looked in pretty good condition externally, mechanically it was in a barely running state. The first thing to do was to drive it to a local garage to get some diesel. With this initial experience of pouring 100 litres down the filler neck came the realisation that it could still take more; clearly it was going to cost a lot to run.

Having given the credit card a bashing, we set off from Tilbury, accompanied by a chase car, not that there was any difficulty keeping up with 366, for as we went around the M25 and down the M4, she boiled every time we went over 30 mph for more than a few minutes. After a long slow ride we eventually got her back to Wiltshire and parked her up for the night in a barn owned by a friend who happened to be a farmer.

29

RF 366 ready to depart from Tilbury 1st July 1989. Photo J. Andress

In order to drive the bus home we had, in addition to arranging insurance, had to book an MOT test sinceit had not been licensed for a year or two. We therefore spent the next day, Sunday, preparing for the MOT test which was booked for the Monday morning. Amazingly the only item that obviously did not work was the horn, and after totally stripping and rebuilding it I was able to get it to bleat! Bright and early Monday morning I set off for the local HGV testing station, expecting to come away with a list of defects to work on for the remainder of the summer. Imagine our surprise when she passed, with only afew recommendations of items needing attention! Needless to say she has been extensively renovated since.

The previous lives of RF 366

Before continuing with the story of our almost twenty three year partnership with RF 366, it might be useful to give some details of its earlier life.

As mentioned earlier, RF366 was originally identified as RF 390 when delivered in December 1952 from the Metropolitan Cammell Carriage and Wagon works at Birmingham where its body had been built ontothe chassis, which had been made by AEC, at Southall in west London, and delivered to MCCW at Elmdon, Birmingham, in July 1952. For non-mechanically minded readers I should perhaps explain that the chassis is a steel frame to which all the items needed to make the bus travel along the road are mounted. These items include the wheels, springs and axles as well as the engine and gearbox, steering mechanism, brakes, fuel tank, etc, etc. The body is the upper part including the seats for passengers, thedrivers cab, windows, roof and front and rear destination indicators.

Note: We shall continue the story in the next Newsletter, subject to space, so keep subscribing – you won't want to miss an instalment. I have been deliberately publishing these at the end of the Newsletter so that anyone who wishes to do so can separate them from the main publication and make a little booklet, like those part-works they used to do years ago.

30